Globalization in World System Theory Globalization refers to "the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the

world as a whole" (R. Robertson, Globalization, 1992: 8). In thought and action, it makes the world a single place. What it means to live in this place, and how it must be ordered, become universal questions. These que stions receive different answers from individuals and societies that define thei r position in relation to both a system of societies and the shared properties o f humankind from very different perspectives. The confrontation of their world v iews means that globalization involves "comparative interaction of different for ms of life" (Robertson: 27). Global interdependence and consciousness of the world as a whole precede the adv ent of capitalist modernity. Yet European expansion and state formation boosted globalization since the seventeenth century. The contemporary shape of the globe owes most to the "take-off" decades after about 1875, when international commun ications, transportation, and conflict dramatically intensified relationships ac ross societal boundaries. In that period, the main reference points of fully glo balized order took shape: nation-state, individual self, world-system, of societ ies, and one humanity. These elements of the global situation became "relativize d"; national societies and individuals, in particular, must interpret their very existence as parts of a larger whole. To some extent, a common framework has gu ided that interpretive work; for example, states can appeal to a universal doctr ine of nationalism to legitimate their particularizing claims to sovereignty and cultural distinction. Such limited common principles do not provide a basis for world order. Global consciousness does not imply global consensus. By the end of the twentieth century, if not before, globalization had turned wor ld order into a problem. Everyone must now reflexively respond to the common pre dicament of living in one world. This provokes the formulation of contending wor ld views. For example, some portray the world as an assembly of distinct communi ties, highlighting the virtues of particularism, while others view it as develop ing toward a single overarching organization, representing the presumed interest s of humanity as a whole. In a compressed world, the comparison and confrontatio n of world views are bound to produce new cultural conflict. In such conflict, r eligious traditions play a special role, since they can be mobilized to provide an ultimate justification for one's view of the globe; the resurgence of fundame ntalist groups, innovative traditionalists with a global agenda, is a case in po int. A globalized world is thus integrated but not harmonious, a single place bu t also diverse, a construct of shared consciousness but prone to fragmentation. Analysis Definition. World culture theory is a label for a particular interpretation of g lobalization that focuses on the way in which participants in the process become conscious of and give meaning to living in the world as a single place. In this account, globalization "refers both to the compression of the world and the int ensification of consciousness of the world as a whole"; in other words, it cover s the acceleration in concrete global interdependence and in consciousness of th e global whole (Robertson 1992: 8). It involves the crystallization of four main components of the "global-human circumstance": societies (or nation-states), th e system of societies, individuals (selves), and humankind; this takes the form of processes of, respectively, societalization, internationalization, individuat ion, and generalization of consciousness about humankind (Robertson 1991: 215-6; 1992: 27). Rather than referring to a multitude of historical processes, the co ncept above all captures "the form in terms of which the world has moved towards unicity" (1992: 175). This form is practically contested. Closely linked to the process of globalization is therefore the "problem of globality" or the cultura l terms on which coexistence in a single place becomes possible (1992: 132). Wor ld culture denotes the multiple ways of defining the global situation, conceived as responses to this shared predicament. Key feature. As a process that both connects and stimulates awareness of connect ion, globalization dissolves the autonomy of actors and practices in contemporar y world order. In this process of relativization, all units engaged in globaliza

tion are constrained to assume a position and define an identity relative to the emerging global whole (1991: 216; 1992: 29). Origin. Globalization has been occurring for centuries, in tandem with rather th an as a consequence of the rise of modernity (1992: 8). In a "germinal" European phase (1992: 58), starting in the fifteenth century, ideas about national commu nities, the individual, and humanity began to grow. In the following "incipient" phase, lasting until the late-nineteenth century, these ideas took more concret e form; for example, unitary states now took part in "international" relations. In the critical "take-off" phase, from the 1870s to the 1920s, the main "referen ce points" of contemporary world society fully crystallized. World culture encom passed increasingly global conceptions of the correct kind of national society, thematization of individual rights and identities, inclusion of non-European soc ieties in international relations, and greater formalization of ideas about huma nity (1992: 59). Globalization in this period also included the growth of many o ther transnational linkages and standards. A "struggle-for-hegemony" phase laste d from the 1920s until after World War II, giving way to a period of "uncertaint y" since the 1960s. Structure. Analytically, globalization comprises the set of dynamic relationship s among the four core units--societies, international system, individual selves, humankind. Empirically, globalization involves the "conjunction of different fo rms of life" (1992: 27). This is expressed concretely in the interaction between actors or groups holding different views of world order. How it works. Relativization. Each unit in the emerging world order takes shape relative to th e others that surround it. For instance, as nation-states become subject to univ ersal standards derived from a common conception of humankind, citizenship in th ose societies become relativized. Similarly, the Realpolitik common in the inter national system also becomes relativized as humanitarian principles invade this arena. The relativization of societies as part of the inter-state system occurs concretely in revived concerns about national identity. Emulation. Although globalization does not create a common culture in which ever yone holds the same beliefs and values, it does create a single arena in which a ll actors pursue their goals by deliberate comparison with others, using at leas t some common standards as yardsticks. Early cases are Peter the Great's Russia and Meiji Japan (Nettl and Robertson 1968; Robertson 2000). Emulation takes the form of selectively incorporating ideas from a global arsenal (Robertson 1995a: 41; 1995b). Glocalization. The universal ideas and processes involved in globalization neces sarily are interpreted and absorbed differently according to the vantage point a nd history of particular groups. In some cases, this is done strategically, for example when global marketers create local traditions on the assumption that dif ference sells (1995a: 29). More generally, glocalization captures the way in whi ch homogenization and heterogenization intertwine (1995a: 40). Interpenetration. Specifically, universalism and particularism have become part of a single nexus, united "in terms of the universality of the experience and, i ncreasingly, the expectation of particularity, on the one hand, and the experien ce and, increasingly, the expectation of universality of the other." In globaliz ation, the universal must be made concrete (e.g., state sovereignty embodied in particular forms of government), the particular becomes endlessly diffused (e.g. , all peoples can and must have their distinctive identity). Hence globalization is "a form of institutionalization of the two-fold process involving the univer salization of particularism and the particularization of universalism" (1992: 10 2). Contestation. Globality is contested: "we are . . . in a period of globewide cul tural politics (1992: 5), involving "explicitly globe-oriented ideologies" (1992 : 79). Some of these advocate a tightly integrated world, others defend differen ce; some envision global gesellschaft, others gemeinschaft (1992: 78-9). Since r eligious traditions and movements are prominently involved in producing competin g "world images," religion is a critical site for these contests (cf. 1992: 1-2) .

How it changes. Inherent dynamics of globalization. World culture theory portrays the process as ongoing and open-ended. All features of world culture, discussed above, entail continual change. Cultural conflict is the most common mechanism. Movements of de/reglobalization. Globalization provokes reaction/resistance. Cas e in point: Islamic fundamentalism. While opposed to the form of globalization t hat produces a world of equal cultures, fundamentalism substitutes its own globa l vision. Fundamentalists attempt to define global fundamentals and operate in t erms of globally diffused ideas (1992: 178, 166). Multiple sources. While world culture theory emphasizes the role of reflexivity and worldviews in globalization, in principle change can originate anywhere. Wor ld culture theory is causally agnostic.