Call for papers vol 9, no. 1, 2018 is open until 30 March 2018


Attention: open in a new window. PDFPrintE-mail


trast, the advocacy of the cosmopolitan project, gobal democracy and protection of human
rights is in principle premised on the extension of responsibilites, commitments and
solidarities, transcending the classical sovereignity norm, on the responsibilities to be assumed
by (enlightened parts of) the international community. Shedding responsibility within
the economic realm and at the same time aspiring to greater levels of politica/moral
responsibility are incompatible processes and can not but result in incoherent practices.
When the question of plurality, the legitimacy of alternatives is concerned the tension
evolved from the attempts to promote neoliberal capitalism as the sole model of development
(„end of history”), to deny the possibility to devise alternatives, to excercise choices
because the historical triumph of the ultimate option has occured. The global neoliberal
consensus was projected as if there was just one form of capitalism, just one, uncontested,
right way of running the economy.8 That in itself runs counter to the essence of democracy
that presupposes first a recognition that there are different types of capitalism (plurality of
economic options) and that the specific experiences, traditions, circumstances should define
the choices of the particular societies. Second, the neoliberal consensus obscured, as J.
Stiglitz points out, that different options benefit different groups, and that the current „neoliberal
consensus” has its clear beneficiries and a great number of loosers. It has not
evolved as result of a (global) democratic political process/procedures, as a choice of the
majority. On the contrary, the attempts to implement a „pure market” system, have resorted
to authoritarian means, various forms of shock therapies, radical exclusionary divides,
disciplinary mechanisms that secure obedience9 and uniformity in the global process of
economic transformation. Efforts to transform the myth of pure market (K. Polany) into reality,
subjugates the society to the market, creating a disbalance that provides for the
„social protection of the strong”, and the social deprivation of the weak. To introduce and
uphold such a system authoritarin means in some cases have been inevitable. In other
8 Joseph Stiglitz, Making Globalization Work, London, Penguin Books, 2007, p.xv.
9 Obedience is secured by the fragmentation of work, superfluousness created by new technologies, and the
disappearance of unions and movements offering protection. Existential uncertainty, contributes to obedience,
for disobedience means risking unemployment when jobs are becoming scarce goods. Obedience and
uniformity are secured also by the growth of surveillance mechanisms utilized by states and private agencies.
A plethoria of information on citizens is gathered in the name of security, profit, giving ground for
analysts to speak of the emergence of a surveillance society. For instance, in the UK there are more than 14
million video cameras operating, i.e. one camera per 14 citizens. On the other hand, US companies like
Experion for example, boast that they have detaild economic and social data on 170 milion American
citizens. Compare: Stephen, Gill (2003), Power and Resistance in the New World Order, New York, Palgrave,
Macmillan, p. 195.

Creative Commons License
Security Dialogues by Toni Mileski is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at

Copyright © 2012 Security Dialogues. Designed by Cube Systems