Reviews | What I am learning from globalization and why I believe in a world without borders

Lately, I have actively fought for the Palestinian liberation movement while resisting the rise of anti-Semitism. It may seem like a juxtaposition, but fighting for the justice of all and not the injustices of some makes this challenge unmistakably standard. Thinking of Israel and Palestine, as well as COVID-19 and globalization, I begin to imagine a world without borders; rid of the imaginary lines that keep nationalism and inequality disguised, rather than one with free movement and global governance supporting global citizenship.

Borders have not always existed; they are a rather modern phenomenon as discussed by Bridget Anderson and Reece Jones. Anderson in a TedTalk historically discusses the function of borders and their function today as a dystopian structure supporting inequalities. Anderson traces the earliest forms of identity papers used to control the working poor in England to later forms of border control among migrants, expanding the context of how modern border control operates in a discriminatory setting, belittling individuals. of a shared and equal humanity. Jones in an interview with Stephen Lurie defines the border system in the same way, and as “primarily a system of controlling resources, a system of controlling people, and in particular a system of excluding other people from the access to these resources. This [borders] protects some kind of privilege that has accumulated in a particular place, whether it is control of resources, wealth or a set of cultural or political practices in that place, and it excludes other people from the possibility of having access to it. These imaginary lines only seem to reinforce a hierarchy that keeps some people inside (as defined by nation states) and others outside, while allowing the movement or expansion of businesses within the framework. the promotion of neoliberal free trade. Not to mention the inequality and privilege attained by certain national identities in terms of freedom of movement.

Not only is the concept of a world without borders at the forefront of a new vision of immigration, but a world without final nation-states would require a comprehensive global effort and a formal agency. One with balanced power, far from the likes of the UN. A world without borders is what can be found in the aftermath of a global pandemic if we take the time to properly analyze the current structures defining our normal or pre-existing conditions of neoliberal and capitalist development. COVID-19 did not reveal anything new, rather it exacerbated the pre-existing conditions of exploitation existing in a neoliberal, capitalist and globalized economy.

Why is it easier for some to spend two weeks at home away from work than for others? Why is this health care unaffordable? Why do governments still seem to fail to understand the importance of childcare, maternity leave and equal pay in terms of female labor? Why is there more than enough housing in the world for people to live there when we still have homeless people? Why are some of the biggest companies taking advantage of the pandemic, still putting people out of work and still receiving stimulus? Why is Big Pharma preventing global vaccine production? Why have we witnessed the positive effect of foreclosure on our emissions and yet somehow we still insist that the required unregulated and exponential growth of capitalism will not ultimately doom our planet? There are so many structures that COVID has made some people question, but obviously not enough. Naturally, we are focusing on the urgent and direct protections required from the pandemic. By no means should we act quickly, but a comprehensive and comprehensive response requires us to analyze the many questions raised above. Imagining a world without borders during COVID can provide a unified, global response. For those who can, thinking of COVID in terms of not only the safety of people in the present, but also of how we can ensure the safety of all to live dignified lives in the future, can mark this moment as a turning point in the course of history. “We cannot be isolated from the idea of ​​sociality – that our lives must be in touch, that our sense of responsibility must involve solidarity, reciprocity and reciprocity.”

With our increasingly globalized economy and culture, it is not difficult to understand the need for a global political framework or global governance. How can we deal with the social and environmental consequences of free trade and fast fashion, without collectively addressing those responsible both locally and globally? Chowdhury cites Daisaku Ikeda’s three key principles for forming global citizenship. The list is “first, an awareness that all life and all living things are interconnected; second, to embrace the difference rather than deny or fear encounters with the other; and finally, cultivating compassion and “imaginative empathy” for others. These three principles will be important to consider or exploit in a perspective of global citizenship and a world without borders.

There is an argument that I always find immediate awakening. There is no doubt that if we share, there is more than enough for everyone. We need to be imaginative and think of a world radically different from the one we live in now. Vince Raison mentions that John Lennon’s famous song Imagine was not the first hope of a world without divided nation states “but that his dream of a world without conflict or division was one of the most popular songs in the world. world because it reflected the natural human desire for peace. “I believe there are few who truly desire social injustice, exploitation, violence and war. Perhaps my opinion for the borderlessness and global governance stems from my experience of a transitional education, inhibiting strong nationalist ties or belonging. Nonetheless, expanding our imaginations on what the world might look like to encompass our global / collective and local struggles / individuals will be important to fight against a pervasive culture of conquest as defined by Dunbar-Ortiz: violence, expropriation, destruction and dehumanization.

Source link

Estelle D. Eden

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *