The world is composed of many countries or states, all of them having different forms of government.

Some scholars of politics are interested in individual states and examine the internal politics of these
countries. For example, a scholar studying the politics of japan may write about the history of its
bureaucracy. Other scholars are more interested in the interactions between states rather than their
internal politics. These scholars look at trade deals between states. They also study political, military,
and other dsplomauc engagements between two or more countries. These scholars are studying
international relations. Moreover, when they expi,ore the deepening of interactions between states,
they refer to the phenomenon of internationalization.

Internauonali7„ation does not equal globalization, although a mayor part of globalization. As we

explained in Lesson l ' encompasses a multitude of connections and interact '00% that cannot be
reduced to the ties between governments. Nevertheless, it IS important to study internati0nal relat•ons
as a facet of globalization. because states/governments

are key Of global In • .1

politics. Although this cour'+e about the we cannot avoid history. What largely defined by event' that
occurred far years ago. IDon't worry, we Will eventuaJJy ccR.•æ.• world politics. But to do that, we need
first to Th)' lesson wall begin With Identifyjnq the contemporary gjobaj politic s and then proceed to e..%
this system emerge? In dcnng so. you WJil have a v,i.d to understand the major issues of global
governance tae lesson.

The Attributes of Today's Global System

World politics today has four key attributes. F i"? , countries or states that are Independent and gmern
Second, these countries Interact With each diplomacy. %ird, there are international organ: Umted
Nations (UN), that facilitate these beyond Simply facilitatjng meetings between stateq, organizations
also take on lives of ther own- The C S, for exar.-/.e. apart from being a meeting ground for presidents
and other heea,h Of state, also has task-specific agencjes like the Wort,d Orgamzauon (WH()) and the
International Labour ( (ILO).

W hat are the origins of this system> A good start unpacking what one means when he/she says a
•country.• or academics also call the nattorwtate. Thi' concept ig not a' Slrn€e as It seems. The nation-
state is a relatively modern phenomenon in human history, and people did not always orgamze
themse:ve• as countries. At different parts jn the history of humanity.

in various regions of the world have identified exciusave;y With units as small as their Village or their
tribe and at (Rher tltnes. they see themselves as members of larger political c-a:egorses like
Christendom" (the entire Christian world).

The nation-state is composed of two non-interchangeable terms. Not all states are nations and not all
nations are states, 'J he

nation of Scotland, for example, has its own flag and national culture, but still belongs to a state called
the United K Ingdom. Closer to home, many commentators believe that the Bangsamoto is a separate
nation existing within the Phlltppmcs but. through their elites, recognizes the authority of the Philippine
state Meanwhile, if there are states with multiple nations, there are also single nations with multiple
states. The nation of Korea divulcd into North and South Korea, whereas the "Chinese nation" may refer
to both the People's Republic of China (the mainland) and Taiwan.

What then is the difference between nation and state?

In layman's terms, state refers to a country and it', government, i.e., the government of the Philippines.
A state has four attributcq, First, it exercises authority over a specific population, called its citizens.
Second, it governs a specific territory. Third, a state has a structure of government that crafts various
rules that people (society) follow. Fourth and the most crucjal, the state has sovereignty over its
territory. Sovereignty here refers to internal and external authority. Internally, no individuals or groups
can operate in a given national territory by ignoring the state. This means that groups like churches, civil
society organizations, corporation q • and other entities have to follow the laws of the state where they
establish their parishes, offices, or headquarters. External l y• sovereignty means that a state's policies
and procedures arc independent of the Interventions of other states. Russia or China. for example,
cannot pass laws for the Philippines and vice versa .

On the other hand, the nation, according to Benedict Anderson, is an "imagined community." It is
limited becauge It does not go beyond a given "official boundary," and because rights and
responsibilities are mainly the privilegc and concern of the citizens of that nation." Being limited rneanv,
that the nation has Its boundaries. I his characteristic is in stark contrad to many religious imagtned
communities, Anyone. for example can become a Catholic if one chooses to. In fact, CatholiO

more people to )0in their community; they refer to it as the call to discipleship. But not everyone can
simply become a Filipino. An American cannot simply go to the Philippine Embassy and •convert" into a
Philippine citizen. Nations often limit themselves to people who have imbibed a particular culture, speak
a common language, and live in a specific territory.

Calling it "imagined" does not mean that the nation is madeup. Rather, the nation allows one to feel a
connection with a community of people even if he/she will never meet all of them his/her lifetime.
When you cheer for a Filipino athlete in the Olympics, for example, it is not because you personally
know that athlete. Rather, you imagine your connection as both members of the same Filipino
community. In a given national territory like the Philippine archipelago, you rest in the comfort that the
majority of people living in it are also Fillipinos. Finally, most nations strive to become states. Nation-
builders can only feel a sense of fulfillment *len that national ideal assumes an organizational form
whose authority and power are recognized and accepted by "the people." Moreover, if there are
communities that are not states, they often seek some form of autonomy within their "mother states."
This is why, for example, the nation of Quebec, though belonging to the state of Canada, has different
laws about language (they are

-speaking and require French language competencies for their citizens). It is also for this reason that
Scotland, though part of the United Kingdom, has a strong independence movement led by the Scottish
Nationalist Party.

ation and state are closely related because it is nationalism that facilitates state formation. In the
modern and contemporary era. It has been the creation of nation-states. nationalist movements States
become that Independent have allowed andfor

cause of nationalist sentiment that clamors for this

is. thus, one of the fundamental of

Politics. Understanding how this became the case back as far as 400 years ago.
The Interstate System

The origins of the present-day concept of sovereignty can be traced back to the Treaty of Westphalia,
which was a set of agreements signed in 1648 to end the Thirty Years' War between the major
continental powers of Europe. After a brutal religious war between Catholics and Protestants, the Holy
Roman Empire, Spain, France, Sweden, and the Dutch Republic designed a system that would avert wars
in the future by recognizing that the treaty signers exercise complete control over their domestic affairs
and swear not to meddle in each other's affairs.

The Westphalian system provided stability for the nations of Europe, until it faced its first major
challenge by Napoleon Bonaparte. Bonaparte believed in spreading the principles of the French
Revolution—liberty, equality, and fraternity—to the rest of Europe and thus challenged the power of
kings, nobility, and religion in Europe. The Napoleonic Wars lasted from 1803-1815 with Napoleon and
his armies marching all over much of Europe. In every country they conquered, the French implemented
the Napoleonic Code that forbade birth privileges, encouraged freedom or religion, and promoted
meritocracy in government service. This system shocked the monarchies and the hereditary elites
(dukes, duchesses, etc.) of Europe, and they mustered their armies to push back against the French
emper r.

Anglo and Prussian a mies finally defeated Napoleon in the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, ending the
latter's mission to spread his liberal code across Europe. To prevent another war and to keep their
systems of privilege, the royal powers created a new system that, in effect, restored the Westphalian
system. The Concert of Europe was an alliance of "great powers"—the United Kingdom, Austria, Russia,
and Prussia—that sought to restore the world of monarchical, hereditary, and religious privileges Of the
time before the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars' More importantly, it was an alliance that
sought to restore the sovereignty of states. Under this Metternich system (named after the Austrian
diplomat, Klemens von Metternich, who was the

system's tnatn t), the eves power and authority lasted trotn ISIS to 1914, at the davs n ot World \Var l.

Von Vettevnech wos the ot the •concert ot Europe

Despite the challenge of Napoleon to the Westphalian system and the eventual collapse of the Concert
of Europe after World War l, present-day international system still has traces of this history. Until now,
states are considered sovereign, and Napoleonic attempts to violently impose systems of government in
other countries are frowned upon. Moreover, like the Concert system, "great powers" still hold
significant influence over world politics.

For example, the most powerful grouping in the UN, the Security Council, has a core of five permanent
members, all having veto powers over the council's decision-making process.

Internationalism

The Westphalian and Concert systems divided the world Into separate, sovereign entities. Since the
existence of this interstate system, there have been attempts to transcend it. Some,

32 1 The Structures of Globalization

like Bonaparte, directly challenged the system by infringing on other states' sovereignty, while others
sought to imagine other systems of governance that go beyond, but do not necessarily challenge,
sovereignty. Still, others imagine a system of hetghtened interaction between varjous sovereign states,
particularly the desire for greater cooperation and unity among states and peoples. Thjs desire is called
internationalism.

Internationalism comes in different forms, but the principle may be divided into two broad categories:
liberal internationalism and soctaljst internationalism.

The first major thinker of liberal internationalism was the late 18th century German philosopher
Immanuel Kant. Kant likened states in a global system to people living in a given territory. If people living
together require a government to prevent lawlessness, shouldn't that same principle be applied to
states? Without a form of world government, he argued, the international system would be chaotic.
Therefore, states, like citizens of countries, must give up some freedoms and "establish a continuously
growing state consisting of various nations which will ultimately include the nations of the world." In
short, Kant imagined a form of global government.

Writing in the late 18th century as well, British philosopher Jeremy Bentham (who coined the word
"international" in 178 0)' advocated the creation of "international law" that would govern the inter-state
relations. Bentham believed that objective global legislators should aim to propose legislation that
would create "the greatest happiness of all nations taken together."

To many, these proposals for global government and international law seemed to represent challenges
to states. Would not a world government, in effect, become supreme? And would not its laws
overwhelm the sovereignty of individual states?

The first thinker to reconcile nationalism with liberal internationalism was the 19th century Italian
patriot

Mazzjni, Mazzinj was both an advocate of the unification Of the varjous Italian speaking mtnistates and
a major critic of the

A History of Global Creating an International Order 1 33

Sletternich system. He believed in a Republican government (without kings, queens, and hereditary
succession) and proposed a system of free nations that cooperated With each other to create an
international system. For Mazzini, free, independent states would be the basis of an equally free,
cooperative international system. He argued that if the various Italian mini-states could umfy, one could
scale up the system to create, for example, a United States of Europe. Mazzini was a nationalist
internationalist, who believes that free, unified nation-states should be the basis of global cooperation.

Mazzini influenced the thinking of United States president (1913-1921) Wilson, who became one of the
20th century's most prominent internationalist. Like Mazzini, Wilson saw nationalism as a prerequisite
for internationalism. Because of his faith in nationalism, he forwarded the principle of selfdetermination
—the belief that the world's nations had a right to a free, and sovereign government. He hoped that
these free nations would become democracies, because only by being such would they be able to build
a free system of international relations based on international law and cooperation. Wilson, in short,
became the most notable advocate for the creation of the League of Nations. At the end of World War I
in 1918, he pushed to transform the League into a venue for conciliation and arbitration to another war.
For his efforts, Wilson was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1919.

Ilie I eague Into betng that satue year. Ironically and

unfot tunately tot Wilson, the United E tates was not able to join the organization due to strong
opposition frotn the Senate. The I eaguc was also unable to hinder another war from breaking out. It
was tie ally helpless to prevent the onset and intensification ot World War ll. On one Side ot the war
were the Axis Powers— Hitler's Ger runny, (Mussolini's Italy, and Ilirohito's Japan— had an instinctive
disdain who were ultra nationalists that tor internationalisrn and preferred to violently impose their
donunanee over other nations. It was in the midst of this war between the AXIS Powers and the Allied
Powers (composed of the United States, Untted Kingd011i, France, I lolland, and Belgium) that
internationalistn would be eclipsed.

Despite its failure, the League gave birth to some of the more taskspectfic international organizations
that are still around unul today, the Inost popular of which are the World Health Organization (WHO)
and the International Labour Organization (ILO). More importantly, it would serve as the blueprint for
future forms of international cooperation. In this respect, despite its organizational dissolution, the
League of Nations' principles survived World War Il.

The League was the concretization of the concepts of liberal internationalism. From Kant, it emphasized
the need to form common international principles. From Mazzini, it enshrined the principles of
cooperation and respect among nation-states. From Wilson, it called for democracy and self-
determination. These ideas would re-assert themselves in the creation of the United Nabons In 1946
(see next lesson).

One of Mazzjni's biggest critics was German socialist philosopher Karl Marx who was also an
internationalist, but who differed from the former because he did not believe in nationalism. He
believed that any true form of internationahsrtl should deliberately roect nationahsrn, which rooted
people in domestiC concerns instead of global ones. Instead, Marx placed a premtum on economic
equality; he did not divide the world into countrtes•

A History of Global Politics Creat.ng an International Order 1 35

but into classes. The capitalist class referred to the owners of factories, companies, and other "means of
production." In contrast, the proletariat class included those who did not own the means of production,
but instead, worked for the capitalists.

Marx and his co-author, Friedrich Engels, believed that in a socialist revoltution seeking to overthrow
the state and alter the economy, the proletariat "had no nation." Hence, their nowfamous battle cry,
"Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains." They opposed nationalism
because they believed it prevented the unification of the world's workers. Instead of identifying with
other workers, nationalism could make workers in individual countries identify with the capitalists of
their countries.

Marx died in 1883, but his followers soon sought to make his vision concrete by establishing their
international organization. The Socialist International (SI) was a union of European socialist and labor
parties established in Paris in 1889. Although shortlived, the Sl's achievements included the declaration
of May I as Labor Day and the creation of an International Women's Day. Most importantly, it initiated
the successful campaign for an 8-hour workday.

The SI collapsed during World War I as the member parties refused or were unable to join the
internationalist efforts to fight for the war. Many of these sister parties even ended up fighting each
other. It was a confirmation of Marx's warning: when workers and their organizations take the side of
their countries instead of each other, their long-term interests are compromised.

As the SI collapsed, a more radical version emerged. In the so-called Russian Revolution of 1917, Czar
Nicholas Il was Overthrown and replaced by a revolutionary government led by the Bolshevik Party and
its leader, Vladimir Lemn. This new state was called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or USSR.
Unlike the majority of the member parties of the SI, the Bolsheviks did not In obtaining power for the
working class through elections. they exhorted the revolutionary "vanguard" parties to

[*i..iii36 1 The Structures of Globalization

lead the revolutions across the world, using methods of terror if necessary. Today, parties like this are
referred to as Communist pa rues.

Lenn founded the Comtntern to spread soceltst revolutons across the world

To encourage these socialist revolutions across the world, Lenin established the Communist
International (Comintern) in
1919. The Comintern served as the central body for directing Communist parties all over the world. This
International was not only more radical than the Socialist International, it was also less democratic
because it followed closely the top-down governance Of tyr

Many of the world's states feared the Comintern, believing that

It was working in secret to stir up revolutions in their countneS ('h•ch was true). A problem arose during
World War Il when the Vyv•et C'mon Pined the Allied Powers in 1941. The United States and the United
Kingdom would, of course, not trust the Soviet Vmon •n thejr fight against Hitler's Germany. These cou
ntrßS

A History of Global Po%tics Creat•nq an International Older 1 37

wondered If the Sowet Umon was trying to promote revolutions In their backyards. To appease his
allies, Lemnis successor, Joseph qtaltn, dissolved the Commtern in 1943.

After the war, however. Stahn the Conuntern

as the Communist In/orrnatton Bureau (Comjnform). The Soviet C'mon took over the countries In
Eastern Europe when the Umted qtates. the Sovtet Union, and Great Britain divided the weiMorn
Vurope Into theur respect tve spheres of influence. The (Zorn inform, like the Corntntern before It,
helped direct the various communist parties that had taken power In Eastern I'.urope.

IS'lth the eventual collapse of the Soviet Umon jn 1991, vs hatevcr cxtsttng thoughts about com mumst
internationalism also practically disappeared. The SI managed to re-establish Itself jn 1951, but Its
Influence remained primarily confined to Europe, and has never been considered a major player in
international relations to this very day.

For the postwar period, however, liberal internationalism would once again be ascendant. And the best
evidence of this is the nse of the United Nations as the center of global governance.

Conclusion
This lesson examined the roots of the international system. In tracing these roots, a short history of
internationalism was provided. Moreover, internationalism is but one window into the broader
phenomenon of globalization. Nevertheless, it is a very crucial aspect of globalization since global
interactions are heightened by the increased interdependence of states. This Increased
interdependence manifests itself not just through State-to-state relations. Increasingly, international
relauons are also facilitated by international organizations that promote global norms and policies. The
most prominent example of this organization, of course, is the United Nations.