ЛАТИНОАМЕРИКАНСКИЕ ПОДХОДЫ К ПРОБЛЕМЕ ГЛОБАЛИЗАЦИИ: ВЗГЛЯД СКВОЗЬ XXI ВЕК

Abstract

Four approaches to the globalization problem exists in Latin American global studies: apologetical, institutional, objectivist and critical, while two last of them are dominating. The apologetical one is represented by minority. Within the institutional approach, globalization appears as a function of transnational institutes’ activities, is understood as a process controlled and organized by international financial and economic authorities. The objectivist approach assumes the attitude on globalization as a fundamental objective process – specifically as an asymmetric process in some sort, a theoretical “echo” of the dependent development theory, or “dependentism”, once popular in Latin America, highlighting a structural division of the world capitalism system into center and periphery. In the Latin American authors’ theoretical discourse, great attention is paid to political aspects and consequences of globalization. In particular, there are many fears and cautions before an eventual dilution of state institutes as part of this spontaneous process. Within the critical approach, the key concept is “neoliberal globalization”. In the most explicit way, this approach is carried out by authors belonging to the Cuban school of Latin American global studies. The Cuban scientists use the “transnationalization” term as a synonym of “globalization”. The most radical variety of the Marxist interpretation of globalization assumes its understanding as the highest and last phase of imperialism. A considerable part of Latin American authors investigates an alternative searching of globalization perspectives. In this regard, it is possible to single out three directions – sociocultural, ethical and integrational. The sociocultural direction is concentrated on the Latin American identity theoretical search. The ethical direction continues the Latin American “liberation philosophy” tradition. In the politological aspect, the integrational direction is elaborated the most. A common denominator of these theoretical views is the idea that the interstate regional integration of Latin America alone will be able to amortize risks and minimize dangers connected to globalization. It is viewed as a peculiar protective barrier against the impact of multinational corporations and supranational global control institutes related to them, both seen in Latin America as new forms of the U.S. imperial domination. Specific for this approach is its reference to the real international integration practice, closely connected to the “left turn” phenomenon. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the new integration architecture has been built in the region, targeting at the state national sovereignty protection. Summing up, the author proposes the following hypothesis: in the medium term, a “second round” of the international discussion on the “globalization” conceptual contents is quite possible as a result of large political and economic shifts on the international scene.&nbsp