Globalization Theory”

Feeble… and Hijacked

Dados Bibliográficos

ID12901784
AutoresA Leander (0000-0002-0237-9507, Copenhagen Business School, autor correspondente)
Ano2009
Volume3
Fascículo1
Páginas109-112
Data de publicação2009-03-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoInternational Political Sociology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1749-5679 • E-ISSN: 1749-5687
EditoraOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1111/j.1749-5687.2008.00066_2.x
OpenAlexW2048370096
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas5
Referências citadas12

Mathias Albert argued in a recent article of IPS (2007) that if systems theory could only work its magic on “globalization theory” it would no longer be “yesterday's fad” but prove “more lively than ever.” Very recently I formulated my thoughts on “globalization” (Leander 2008). The arguments were diametrically opposed to those of Albert and they also speak directly to questions raised in this forum, namely if Luhmann can provide a route away from conceptualizing the question of globalization as one of homogeneity and whether or not we can avoid being pulled back into the question of society. Globalization theory, I argued, was interesting in its undisciplined beginnings but was now by and large defunct. This, I suggested, was to be welcomed as much as the temptation to resurrect it with the help of Grand Theory was to be resisted. In the spirit of the dialogue encouraged in this forum, and by IPS generally, I will present this rather different take on globalization theory and the utility of a grand sociological theory (such as the one proposed by Albert) for making sense of it

Epistemology · Globalization · Political science · Social science · Sociology · Temptation · Theology · Yesterday · Critical Theory and Philosophy · International Development and Aid · Law · Philosophy · Political and Social Issues