Introduction
Comparative politics deal with political institutions, domestic politics and the conflicts between countries. These elements are brought about by sovereignty, common domestic problems and challenges and cultural heterogeneity in different countries. However, globalization is threatening to undermine this. With globalizing undermining these political institutions, domestic politics and conflicts between countries, there are concerns that globalization will oversee the demise of the field of comparative politics. This paper delves into these issues by highlighting the challenges that globalization presents to the comparative politics.
The challenge that globalization presented to the field of comparative politics is already visible. In the recent past, a period in which globalization has been intense; there has been a global collapse in the legitimacy of dictatorship, authoritarianism and political repression. These are some of the elements that are studied under comparative politics. In their place, there has been a coinciding increase in the global and commonly shared dialogue on democracy, human rights and individual freedom. The implication of this for comparative politics is that the sustained continuance of shared dialogues of democracy, human rights and individual freedom will erode the differences among societies, countries and cultures. It is this difference on which comparative politics thrives.
Globalization also poses a challenge to the field of comparative politics by creating a homogenized world. Over time, space becomes increasingly compressed because of the disappearance of national borders. Due to the effects of globalization, the economic, social, political and cultural differences between different societies and countries, even if superficial, will become less meaningful and less pronounced. As a result, there will be an emergence of a ‘borderless’ or single world in which the spatial barriers that hinder the cross-border transfer of capital, values, information, goods, ideas and people will disappear. In their stead, the cultural parochialisms of these will be shed in favor of global orientations. The implication of this for the field of comparative politics is that the leaning towards global orientations and the erosion of cultural parochialisms undermines domestic politics and cultural inclinations, the fodder for comparative politics.
As highlighted earlier, sovereignty is one of the elements studied under comparative politics. Globalization has an effect in sovereignty and the fluidity of its definition. Arguments have been raised to the effect that globalization will influence many sovereign states to forego sovereignty to pursue integration through the patronage of international organizations. The allure is that the international organizations will be more effective in tackling significant global issues as well as politics. Arguments have also been raised to the effect that there will be a decline in violent conflicts between sovereign states because of the ability of these international organizations to reconcile political differences between the integrated states. In addition to this, there are arguments that globalization will weaken democratic institutions because the international actors do not enjoy the electorally installed mandate, and as such may not have the direct accountability to the public that republican governance requires.
Although the effect of globalization present challenges for the field of comparative politics, they do not spell the demise of the field of comparative politics in the meantime. However, sustained globalization will oversee the demise of the field of comparative politics in the eventual process. For the moment, the differences between sovereign states, societies and cultures are significance and holds meaning. For decades to come, the forces of differentiation will continue to remain significant. However, Lim argues that these forces will fall to the endurance of globalization. The fact that globalization undermines the structures that fuel this differentiation will weaken the forces leading to their ultimate failure. Under the same mechanism, the field of comparative politics will cease to exist as separate field of study. It will require several decades for the force that is globalization to completely undermine the elements that fuel the differentiation. Nonetheless, comparative politics will ultimately lose significance.
Conclusion
Comparative politics as a field of study deals with political institutions, domestic politics and conflicts between countries. However, the concept of globalization represents a challenge to this field. It undermines all these elements, thereby threatening the relevance of the field over time. The integration of sovereign states under globalization promises to reduce the conflicts between countries. Additionally, there is a common global dialogue of democracy, human rights and individual freedom. This undermines legitimacy of dictatorship, authoritarianism and political repression, concepts that are central to the study of comparative politics. Globalization also represents a challenge in that it leads to a homogenized world in which the spatial barriers impeding the transfer of ideas, people, goods, capital and information across borders are eliminated. The result is a world that is comprised of integrated states. These challenges threaten the relevance of comparative politics, implying that the field will ultimately lose its significance.
Bibliography
Lim, Timothy C. Doing Comparative Politics: An Introduction to Approaches and Issues. Boulder, Colo: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2010.
O'Neil, Patrick. Essentials of Comparative Politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Co, 2012.
