Customer Reviews

Global Communication and World Politics: Domination, Development, and Discourse

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Majid Tehranian's Global Communication and World Politics: Domination, Development, and Discourse is an ambitious attempt to map the new world order which has arisen since the fall of the Soviet union and to forecast the direction the world might be taking into the next century. The book enlists highly plausible theories and convincing evidence to support an illuminating model of what is possible as the new millennium is thrust upon us. There is a tremendous need for a book such as Global Communication. Competing volumes such as Samuel P. Huntington's The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, John B. Thompson's Media and Modernity, and William Greider's One World, Ready or Not simply do not do justice to the complexity that has arisen since the cold war divided the world into three camps. Huntington's Clash asks us to replace the 1960's view of world politics as the ideological conflict between eastern communist nations and western free market capitalism with another equally comfortable dichotomy --the clash of the Platonic western civilizations with Confucian and Islamic eastern civilizations. Edward Said and others have pointed out that Huntington's idea is not original . Said traces the idea and wording to an article by Bernard Lewis on Muslim Rage which appeared in the September 1990 Atlantic Monthly. Most agree Huntington has gotten too much mileage out of his simplifying assumption. Thompson's Media and Modernity shows a much greater appreciation for "the complex interaction" of four types of power, military power, symbolic power, political power, and economic power in the world arena. Unfortunately, Thompson fails to note the dominance of economic power in today's world. Thompson deals with the media and communication aspects of globalization but largely ignores the economic and structural (international relations) aspects. William Greider's One World, Ready or Not deals with economic aspects of globalization while ignoring largely the socio-political aspects. In truth Dr. Tehranian's book abstracts away from some of the complexities of the real world in order to build illuminating models of reality ; however, unlike Huntington, Thompson, and Greider he does not cast new light by repackaging the old dichotomies of Marx and Hegel. Unlike Fukuyama, he does not pronounce "the end of History." Fond of illuminating alliterations such as domination, development and discourse, Tehranian also makes use of endless explanatory matrices such as the chart "Seven Modernizations and Democratizations: Tsunamis in Human History," to help us get our bearings in time and space.. A supporter of Tehranian's work Richard Falk insists that Tehranian maps (rather than reports) the global situation. Falk likens the book to a "new cartography of conflict and resolution."(iii). Falk's other phrase "interpretive mapping" is an appropriate metaphor for a research methodology that is intended as an antidote to the strategy of many other writers who according to a reliable source dichotomize, demonize, dramatize, and distort in order to come up with a publishable manuscript (interview with Majid Tehranian, December 9, 1998). Rather than take a narrow view of possible causes for the state in which we find ouselves. Tehranian searches the regions of both time and space to get the big picture.

Tehranian's understanding of how the world works doe not ignore its complexities and contradictions. Models which were useful in describing the Cold war relations between nations and peoples simply do not serve to describe the world in which we now live. Thus there is a need for a new cartography of the world situation. With his numerous charts and diagrams, Dr. Tehranian is our map maker. The professor began the effort to describe how today's world works with his books Technologies of Power: Information Machines and Democratic Prospects (1990) and Restructuring for World Peace: At the Threshold of the 21st Century (1992). Now Global Communication and World Politics (1999) breaks new ground by presenting convincing theory and evidence to support the notion that the world is entering an era of "informatic imperialism" dominated by Transnational Corporations (TNCs). The author makes a persuasive case that the power of the nation states is now subordinate to the power of the TNCs. Other non-state actors such as inter-governmental organizations (IGOs) have also become important players on the new landscape. The Pancapitalist regime as Tehranian calls it has adopted a strategy of flexible accumulation. Tehranian succeeds as no other author has in putting the current world situation in context with the orders that came before and the order that may reasonably be expected to follow.

It proved that women and men of goodwill, coming from different ideological perspectives but engaging in sincere dialogue, could in fact agree on some essential principles for human decency and cultural diversity. - Majid Tehranian, "Global Communication & World Politics"

This narrative provides infinite challenge to me. One that requires more than the few days reflection I managed while drafting a commentary to it for a class. How is it possible to provide salient comment on a text, which is essentially a compilation of seven separate academic papers - each published in its own right between 1982 and 1999? Daunting as it seems I set to the task.

Three points of interest will be the focus of this review.

First, this book is written from a non-Western perspective. Recently, I watched the film Gandhi. I had seen this movie before but, this time, I watched with new eyes. Gandhi also had a non-Western perspective. And, while I could not understand fully his experience, or that of his India, I could see Gandhi as a spiritual leader to his people. His beliefs in non-violent resistance in order to secure an India independent of British rule and representative of the hundreds of millions of Indian people were powerful, and likely quite threatening to the Indian elite who proposed to replace the British rulers with their own.

Tehranian approaches the ideas of international relations today with passion and a repertoire of ideas that are no less controversial than I would imagine Gandhi's were in his time. Tehranian challenges the Western definition of globalization and the hyperbole and negativism of the media. He proposes that we find some form of balance between the rich and the poor. He argues for just treatment of and serious attention to vulnerable and oppressed civilizations. With sympathy, he presents the historical battle between Islam and the West, recognizing the fear with motivated the Christians tried and acknowledging a legacy of misunderstanding that added fuel to a prejudicial fire.

Contemplating the issue today, Tehranian presents a coin. For Islam, exposure to the West now means heads (external domination) or tails (internal decay). To fight the West means heads (external defense) or tails (internal reform). After reading this text, I no longer see us and them. Those divisions simply do not exist. Hence, my first observation of this book is that it should have been more widely read prior to September. Perhaps its perspective may have helped to shape the perspectives of others. That it is crafted from a non-Western perspective is probably a key source of its value.

Second, I particularly liked the repeated theme of communication and its role in history. While reading this book a picture emerged. Communication is the thread in a complex fabric of international relations and global development. Modernization, the ultimate goal of progress, may not be the ultimate end, at least from a global perspective. Tehranian addresses this issue nicely. Modernization occurs, when logic and progress supersede history and tradition. In a modern world, the rational people make decisions that have preferably nothing to do with historical ties or relationships of proximity. Rather, logic and modernity prevail and drive the appropriate decisions. Throughout this process of modernization (and indeed throughout all historical events) is communication. It is shaped and interpreted and also shapes and prompts interpretations. It spurs advancement and holds it back. It unites and aligns ideas and isolates and alienates. To me this duality is a rich and relevant view of the process.

My third of observation of this text point to my own naïve perspective of world events. On September 11th, at five a.m. in Hawai'i my Mother called from Canada. Still asleep, I listened to her frantic statement and then stumbling downstairs to the television I watched horrific images, repeated over and over. I could not believe that these images were real. I could not believe such horrible acts could possibly be planned. Could anyone hate us that much? I've begun to understand.

I do not condone the attacks nor do I fully comprehend its aftermath (can anyone?). However, I do understand that prior to September 11th, like so many, I lived in a fairytale world built on a naïve belief in modernity.

Communication (from CNN) caused many millions to see airplanes differently. It also introduced us to the Taliban, the al-Qaida nework and biological warfare. But, nothing in the media explained why. From Tehranian, I discovered some of the history and context necessary to help place into perspective this terrible time. This act was infinitely less random than initially presented to be. Right or wrong, September 11th had been building for years (perhaps centuries). Although I did not know what was coming, others were not surprised. Many had suspicions. Some had even made predictions. Tehranian in this text, appears as though a soothsayer, but in a manner that is compelling not corrupt. As Richard Falk wrote in the forward to this book:

[Tehranian] points a normative finger at the future, and he manages to do so without either sentimentality or blueprints. It is this quality of tentativeness that makes him credible and trustworthy as a guide. Because the texture of the guidance is loose, and sensitive to the unevenness of circumstance and perception that exists around the world, each reader will derive her or her own perspective.

I conclude with an amended motion on cultural diversity from the 1997 UNESCO-sponsored conference on dialogue between European and Islamic civilizations:

We believe that the postglobalization era can enhance humankind's diverse cultures and develop common ground for global human rights and responsibilities. To achieve these goals, rules of civility in dialogue, tolerance in practice, and protection of vulnerable communities must be observed and specific mechanism must be created and put in place now.
In 1997, if the spirit and intent of this motion been embraced globally and significant progress toward achieving respect for and safety of humankind's diverse cultures might we have avoided the tragic events of September 11th ?

Tehranian marshals a very large set of materials in some very interesting and inspiring pieces of writing. He skillfully examines the consequences of combined globalization and fragmentation of the world. The fragmentation of the world is obvious in former Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and some African and Asian states. However in Europe and all over the world there is global trend in regionalization and globalization of trade and communication. The most apparent of that are NAFTA, ASEAN, APEC and EU.

Teharanian¡¦s proposal on global dialogue for a global system with Assembly of People and Assembly of States is reasonable. However, it will take a lot of time, relentless effort and continuing dialogue. One justification for this is in the war to peace like the civil war of Cambodia ended with the dialogue not with the fighting. The war in China in which Chinese Republic (Taiwan) and Communist China (China Mainland) seek to eliminate each other doesn¡¦t seem to have a happy ending yet. It is also true for the world at large. I think the fragmentation of the world is not necessary bad. According to Mao¡¦s theory of identity the world will gain identity through the differences between fragmentation and globalization.
Tehranian argues that the latest phase of domination in world politics is ¡¥informatic imperialism¡¦, in which the control of knowledge industries and information channels are keys to power. He also reveals the fact that this powerful mean of domination is distributed unevenly among the countries in the world, only rich industrialized countries possess it. This is the fact of our world. Is there any way out? Can information be used to free people mind and help them get their voice out?
The author argues that global communication offers means of ¡¥cultural and political resistance against globalist hegemonies¡¦, so there is a recognition of the contradictory nature of media transformation. On one side of the coin the control of information and media helps ¡¥informatic imperialism¡¦ to extend the power and global reach. But on another side of the same coin, the democratization of information helps to inform people and bridge the informative gap between the poor and the rich ghettos. Ong argues in his book ¡§Literacy and Orality,¡¨ that the alphabetization of Greece and proliferation of printing press democratize the literacy. In the same token the globalization of communication technology ¡§informate¡¨ the world¡¦s poor as well as the world¡¦s rich. Tehranian is aware that in order to redress the imbalance among economic, political and cultural globalization to avoid global apartheid international communication should turn from the discourse of mutual exclusive and recrimination into a dialogue for mutual engagement.

As a conclusion, this book is an excellent read for student majored in International Communication, International Relation or International Politics. It can be used as a good text book for graduate level course in the fields.

The New World Order
Tehranian suggests five theoretical conceptual frameworks of discourse, which are Realism, Liberalism, Marxism, Communitarianism, and Postmodernism. The theme of the discourse is international relationship, and each adds some new concpets to its prior doctrines. Tehranian argues that global communication historically broadens the discourse from the five schools of thought. However, there is inequality of teledensity between undeveloped and developing countries. Tehranian suggests that theory building in international relationships require more multicultural dialogues in order to build bridges among the competing cultural constructions of world conflicts.
In the new global order, Tehranian agrees with Huntington, who says that a Confucian-Islamic connection has emerged to challenge Western interests, value, and powers. China, as the biggest market in the 21st century, cannot be ignored economically in the new global order (p. 44). Tehranian suggests that the U.S. has a dual policy toward the problem of China, so that China¡¦s most-favored-nation status has became hostage to its human right record. To compete with the hegemony of the U.S., China and Russia are forming a new strategic alliance.
Tehranian examines the development of the process of modernism and he suggests that the conflict among the premodern, modern, and postmodern is part of the cultural landscape of a developmentally uneven, historically schizoid contemporary world (p. 53). He concludes that the future of the world depends on how modernity can be tamed to ensure a continuing production of wealth without disastrous consequences for the global, natural, social, and cultural environments.
Media policy
In the trend of globalization, it is important to examine the media policy. Tehranian argues that many dilemmas of cultural and information policies confront those who shape national media policies. He suggests that the central question how is to allow freedom of speech without encouraging hate speech.
Tehranian suggests various philosophies of media policies, which are authoritarian, libertarian, communitarian, and totalitarian. Communitarian media policy, for example, regards valuing one religion or language or ethnicity over another as an important aspect of national unity. Libertarian, on the contrary, focuses on valuing free speech above politically correct speech. Hate speech is not tolerated because it seriously threatens ethnic and racial peace.

Tehranian argues that the national policies are often formulated in the context of global forces and policies. The national policies are decided by a complex variety of players or stakeholders on the global scene. Global, national, and local discourses are required for major stakeholders such as states, markets, pressure groups, financial groups, civil societies and media in the national policy schema.
Rethinking development
The main theorists after the post-World War II period respond to the rapid technological breakthroughs in telecommunication and information processing. Three major debates were prevailing at this time. First, theorists such as Bell and Porat proposed the concepts of ¡§postindustrial,¡¨ information, or ¡§mode of information¡¨ society. Second, LDCs have railed around UNESCO¡¦s Macbride Report of its dual emphasis on freedom and equality in information flow in response to the growing international gaps. Third, the critical and neo-theorists have increasingly turned to theories of poststructuralism and postmodernism.
Tehranian proposes five normative theories of discourse, development, and democracy, which are modernization, dependency, world system, totalitarian, communitarian, and postmodernist. He argues that liberalism, communism, and communitarianism can be viewed as three faces of the general democratic movement that has characterized world history during the past two centuries.
According to Tehranian, the theoretical perspective views modernization as a dialectical process of social change. In the process of social change, the struggle for capital accumulation, social mobilization, cultural integration, and political legitimization are key phenomenon. He suggests that the media policy at this time has to be horizontal rather than vertical and involves voluntary associations and networks rather than the one-way mass media message.
Deafening dissonance
The prevailing and personalizing of the telecommunication facilities make international communication widespread. The transnational channels of communication expand rapidly. However, the media contents are not as diversified as what they should be. Tehranian argues that the hostage crisis, a dramatic illusion of the triumphs and tragedies of the new electronic age, was a pseudoevent rather than a media event. The number of pseudoevents is rising. He gives an example of the military conflicts between the U.S. and Iran to explain the problem of hostage crisis, which creates a deafening dissonance and new channels of communication between the two countries. He suggests that media have obligations to play a critical role in international conflict by deconstructing the illusion of power.
Pursuing peace
Tehranian is looking forward to all countries seeking peace; however, he suggests that it is a difficult goal to achieve. The huge income gap between nations does exist. Two new social classes, the under class and the corporate elite, have emerged at the bottom and the top of the global social structure. Under such conditions, it is hard to achieve equality. Even though it is a tough problem, Tehranian offers some suggestions to reduce world conflicts.
First, we have to realize that conflicts of interest are ubiquitous, and they can be less destructive if channeled into understanding the interests and perceptions of others. Secondly, dialogical communication can achieve peace through a variety of methods. Thirdly, the tendencies of self-hatred and other hatred raise identity anxiety and low self-esteem, while peace raises self-respect and respect for others. Fourthly, a culture of violence dichotomizes the self and others. Tehranian suggests that moral self-righteousness is the first step in descending into the fire of anger and violence.