Global Nationalism and Violence: Limitations of Global Civil Society مقاله

خلاصه ماشینی:

What this article considers is the question of the violent conflicts prevailing over fundamental issues of identity and group values, which form part of what I must call postmodern political violence. My argument is that civil societies, like the legal and political institutions of government, can only be suspended without the need for violence if a preceding public domain of communication exists. This is completely different from the issue of civil society as a political and legal form of transnational government, because here the issue of cultural transformation in the values and norms of urban and social relations is at stake. Although a global civil society is based on a cosmopolitan political sphere — which can also be based on national, transnational, and sub-national levels — there is nonetheless a danger that it remains unrecognized in the form of new shapes of violence. Therefore, international law was ultimately based on a moral force and the existence of a legal-normative order present in the nation-state. It is an undeniable reality that the prevailing reality of political violence destroys the assumptions of modernity, especially the possibility of resolving conflict through dialogue based on a common normative system within the national order of states and within the international order. For this reason, the theory of the public sphere holds special importance, in such a way that it refers to a level of discourse that goes beyond civil society and purely normative issues related to law and politics to address the cultural institutions of values; for example, questions related to self and other, such as a broader ethnographical explanation of the limitations of violence.