About Us


Harmony Forum

Peace from Harmony
Globalism and antiglobalism of TetraSociology

To contents

2.16. TetraSociology's globalism and anti-globalism

The world is becoming global, integrated, all its parts are inter-linked. The social world's globalization results from informatization. The social world is global because of a common communicational- information network, rather than by nature. TetraSociology, as we demonstrated above, is a global sociology in every sense: in its scale, cohesion, integration of its parts, and information technologicalness. It meets the criteria distinguishing it from traditional sociology, defined by G.Therborn: 1. It recognises plurality of globalization (plurality and multi-dimensionality of globalization processes), 2. Substitution of the global for the universal, 3. Substitution of space for time, 4. Openness and sensitivity to global changes, 5. Integration into world networks, 6. Empirical stock-taking of international communications in the different parts of the social world[1]. Certainly, globalism's "substitutions" shouldn't be interpreted literally as "discarding, destruction", but rather as a priority ranking, expansion, inclusion. For example, " substitution of space for time" does not mean repudiation of space, but rather understanding it through time, an approach allowing to interpret globalization as "modernity's flight into space," as "oriented toward spatial extension"[2].

G.Therborn stresses globalization's ambivalence, the ambivalence of its effects. He argues that globalization is not necessarily fair, causing as it does a lot of injustice and having not o­nly positive, but also negative results[3]. He formulates three challenges to globalization at the millennia's threshold: 1. Cognitive: an adequate conceptual explanation of globalization, 2. Civil, aimed at benefiting from globalization and coordinating o­ne's actions in it, 3. Managerial: the problem of a new world order. A world government remains an utopia, while world management becomes a practical challenge[4]. (These globalizational challenges correspond with three non-material spheres of the social world).

Globalization is not new. Therborn refers to six historical waves of globalization and de-globalization, starting with Christianity's and other world religions' globalization. Globalization combines in itself the global (universal) and plural (diverse), world-wide and local, macro- and micro-social. Correlating with these trends, TetraSociology, both as theory and technology, corresponds with globalization trend. It creates not o­nly global (integrated and pluralistic) SST parameters, but also forecasts the coming of a global language (Esperanto), global religion (plurotheism), global sphere classes, global sphere democracy and global tetraharmonious person. However, if Therborn's theory sees the essence of globalization in " tendencies to a world-wide reach, impact or connectedness of social phenomena or to a world-encompassing awareness among social actors"[5], TetraSociology sees this essence in the formation of new, truly global, sphere social actors, operating throughout the world, and making their appearance in all its parts and at all its levels. Sphere understanding of the globalization essence, certainly, is hypothetical, but it is no less significant that other hypotheses.

Network society is global, therefore its sociologies should be global. TetraSociology is o­ne of these. But its globalism is different from the globalism of industrial society's monistic, essentially imperialistic, sociologies. Based o­n sphere structures, TetraSociology's globalism, or tetrar globalism is harmonious and fair. It repudiates modern civilisation's disharmony and injustice caused by branch structures, including transnational corporations. Globalization often progresses along the old lines today: the poor became poorer, the rich became richer. This is the result of domination by branch structures. It is disharmonious and unfair. Such globalization is the source for the powerful antiglobalist youth movement, whose claims are essentially legitimate. TetraSociology REPUDIATES such a globalization. In this sense, TetraSociology is antiglobalist. It champions a harmonious and fair globalization, a balanced distribution of globalization-engendered wealth among nations and groups. "Globalisation's wealth for everyone, not for the choice few," this principle is shared by antiglobalists and TetraSociology alike. o­nly sphere classes and groups, o­nly sphere democracy can ensure the fair globalization. Antiglobalists and TetraSociology are not against globalization as such; they are not against the internet, information technologies, mass communications, etc., but rather against profits concentration in TNCs and individual countries. TetraSociology hypothesises that sphere classes and groups and sphere democracy represent the major mechanism able to remedy this modern civilisation's defect. Such is the essence of TetraSociology's globalism and antiglobalism.

[1] Therborn G. Globalisations are Plural. Globalizations: Dimensions, Historical Waves, Regional Effects, Normative Governance // International Sociology, 2000, 15 (2), p.149-179. Let us note, that Therborn widely uses such concepts, as " resources, processes, structure, dynamics, structuration, multidimensionality, plurality " etc., which are key for a TetraSociology, truth, in another paradigm. The similarity paradigms of both globalization and TetraSociology consists in them multidimensionality and plurality. Therborn's theory of globalization, constructed o­n system of two coordinates, also is an example of transition from traditional, "dimensionless" pluralism to dimensional postpluralism. The truth, transition this is carried out by the author faster intuitively than consciously.

[2] Ibid., p.150

[3] Ibid., p.154

[4] Ibid., p.153,173

[5] Ibid., p.154

To contents

© Website author: Leo Semashko, 2005; © designed by Roman Snitko, 2005