What do you think?
Rate this book
Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives
'This little book is full of insights about who we are and where we are going.' - Financial Times The most accessible book yet by one of the most influential thinkers of our time, Runaway World evaluates the ever-increasing impact of globalization today. Extending his arguments beyond the merely economic, Giddens shows how our growing interdependence directly affects our everyday lives. Neither a cheerleading endorsement of emerging markets, nor a fearful rant on the growth of terrorism or loss of American jobs, this is a book about a world that grows smaller every day, and how those changes are affecting our culture, our traditions, our families, and our politics. Identifying globalization as a true cultural force, this eloquent and important volume is the starting point for anyone concerned about our increasingly interconnected world.
124 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
About the author
Anthony Giddens
172 books440 followersAnthony Giddens, Baron Giddens (born 18 January 1938) is a British sociologist who is renowned for his theory of structuration and his holistic view of modern societies. He is considered to be one of the most prominent modern contributors in the field of sociology, the author of at least 34 books, published in at least 29 languages, issuing on average more than one book every year. In 2007, Giddens was listed as the fifth most-referenced author of books in the humanities.
Three notable stages can be identified in his academic life. The first one involved outlining a new vision of what sociology is, presenting a theoretical and methodological understanding of that field, based on a critical reinterpretation of the classics. His major publications of that era include Capitalism and Modern Social Theory (1971) and New Rules of Sociological Method (1976). In the second stage Giddens developed the theory of structuration, an analysis of agency and structure, in which primacy is granted to neither. His works of that period, such as Central Problems in Social Theory (1979) and The Constitution of Society (1984), brought him international fame on the sociological arena.
The most recent stage concerns modernity, globalization and politics, especially the impact of modernity on social and personal life. This stage is reflected by his critique of postmodernity, and discussions of a new "utopian-realist"[3] third way in politics, visible in the Consequence of Modernity (1990), Modernity and Self-Identity (1991), The Transformation of Intimacy (1992), Beyond Left and Right (1994) and The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy (1998). Giddens' ambition is both to recast social theory and to re-examine our understanding of the development and trajectory of modernity.
Currently Giddens serves as Emeritus Professor at the London School of Economics.
Three notable stages can be identified in his academic life. The first one involved outlining a new vision of what sociology is, presenting a theoretical and methodological understanding of that field, based on a critical reinterpretation of the classics. His major publications of that era include Capitalism and Modern Social Theory (1971) and New Rules of Sociological Method (1976). In the second stage Giddens developed the theory of structuration, an analysis of agency and structure, in which primacy is granted to neither. His works of that period, such as Central Problems in Social Theory (1979) and The Constitution of Society (1984), brought him international fame on the sociological arena.
The most recent stage concerns modernity, globalization and politics, especially the impact of modernity on social and personal life. This stage is reflected by his critique of postmodernity, and discussions of a new "utopian-realist"[3] third way in politics, visible in the Consequence of Modernity (1990), Modernity and Self-Identity (1991), The Transformation of Intimacy (1992), Beyond Left and Right (1994) and The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy (1998). Giddens' ambition is both to recast social theory and to re-examine our understanding of the development and trajectory of modernity.
Currently Giddens serves as Emeritus Professor at the London School of Economics.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews
July 14, 2025
هو فعلا عالم جامح لا تستطيع أفكارنا و خيالاتنا أن تسايره أو حتى تحدد اتجاهه
هل مر ربع قرن بالفعل على نهاية الألفية الثانية؟!
يبدو أن ذلك هو ما حدث بالفعل بالرغم من تذكري بمنتهى الوضوح ماذا حدث في تلك الليلة التي سبقت بداية الألفية الثالثة.
أتذكر جلوسي على مكتبي للمذاكرة حيث امتحان منتصف العام في مادة التحليل الإنشائي بينما كل أصدقائي في حفل الألفية الذي أحياه محمد منير تحت سفح الهرم
شارك في احتفال ما يزيد على 250 متخصصا في مجال الصوت والضوء بإضافة الى عمال مسرح جاءوا الى مصر من فرنسا والمانيا وسويسرا والولايات المتحدة وبلجيكا وبريطانيا، هذا الى جانب الف من المغنين والراقصين والموسيقيين
قبل هذا الحفل العالمي الذي أقيم مثله و أضخم منه أو أقل حسب العواصم المختلفة عشرات الاحتفالات التي صورت لنا أننا في عالم واحد بالفعل. لم يتبق على حلم تحويل العالم لقرية صغيرة إلا انتهاء الاحتفالات أو انتهاء اختبار منتصف العام أيهما أقرب.
بالطبع كان الحقد يأكل قلبي على زملائي في سائر الكليات النظرية اللذين يتمتعون بتلك المسخرة و قلة الأدب بينما أنا منحني الظهر استعدادا للامتحان ممسكا على استحياء بالريموت كنترول متجولا بين القنوات التلفزيونية القليلة حينها لمشاهدة ما يعيشه غيري.
لندع هذا الحقد العالمي جانبا و نرى ما شأنه بهذا الكتاب الذي كان عبارة عن مجموعة مقالات نشرت قبل نهاية الألفية بعام واحد فقط وسط تفاؤل دولي بتقارب دول العالم و توافقها أو سيطرة المعسكر الغربي على مجريات الأحداث و استعداده لفرض قوته و قيمه و مثله العليا على الأخرين.
خمسة فصول و ملحق واحد.
الفصول تبدأ بالعولمة و مظاهرها و حتميتها و تطورها التاريخي ثم بتعريف المخاطرة كمفهوم حديث بتنا نعيش معه و نخطط له سواء لاستثماره أو تجنبه كمظهر من مظاهر العولمة و بعد ذلك يأتي للتقاليد ليبين أنها في غالبيتها ليست تقاليد راسخة بالمعنى المفهوم و أنها ليست عصية على التغيير و النسف إن لزم الأمر. يأتي بعد ذلك فصل عن العائلة و مفهومها التقليدي و بوادر انهيار الشكل المألوف للأسرة و تكون أشكال أخرى من التعايش بين الأزواج أو لنقول الشركاء حيث أنه بات المصطلح الأكثر دقة و تعبيرا عن الارتباط في عصر العولمة. و يختم بالديموقراطية التي يلزم تطويرها و جعلها هي نفسها أكثر تعبيرا عن الشعوب لا المؤسسات و رحال الأعمال و الإعلام و المتنفذين. ثم أخيرا خاتمة اجتهدت كثيرا في قراءتها و محاولة فهم مضمونها دون جدوى.
ابتسامة السخرية لم تفارقني طوال قراءة الكتاب رغم حجيته و منطقيته إلا أنه كان متفائلا بصورة كبيرة لأننا إن دققنا النظر على الوضع العالمي الآن بعد ربع قرن فسنجد صعود اليمين في الدول الديموقراطية و الديكتاتورية على حد السواء هو المهيمن على الساحة. لا لوم على الكاتب أبدا و لا على الكتاب الذي كان جيد في مجمله تأليفا و ترجمة فقد عودنا هذا العالم دوما إن محدش يقدر يتوقعه.
October 26, 2020
نجح جيدنز في هذا الكتيب الصغير في اثارة مجموعة من التساؤلات الهامة عن تفاعلات العولمة مع الاديان والتقاليد والعائلة..لقد قرأته من سنين مع مجموعة من الاصدقاء وكان ارضية مثيرة لنقاشاتنا
January 30, 2011
Compared to Zygmunt Bauman's book about globalization this one is very light, indeed Gidden's books seems to have become shorter and shorter after his rise to prominence as one of the persons that shaped the third way politics of Tony Blair's regime.
The chapter about risk can be seen as a short introduction to the work of Ulrich Beck on Risk society and the chapter about the transformation of family and relationships is just a condensed version of Gidden's book The Transformation of Intimacy.
Giddens is a bit vague in presenting empirical evidence for his views here since the book is a transcription of his Reith lectures and one could easily critique him for the fact that many of the transformations he mentions are not necessarily connected to globalization per se.
But it is a short read and a very basic introdution to globalization studies but one should remember that this is the political Giddens speaking, rather than Giddens the sociologist. Read it and then move on to other, more advanced stuff if you like.
The chapter about risk can be seen as a short introduction to the work of Ulrich Beck on Risk society and the chapter about the transformation of family and relationships is just a condensed version of Gidden's book The Transformation of Intimacy.
Giddens is a bit vague in presenting empirical evidence for his views here since the book is a transcription of his Reith lectures and one could easily critique him for the fact that many of the transformations he mentions are not necessarily connected to globalization per se.
But it is a short read and a very basic introdution to globalization studies but one should remember that this is the political Giddens speaking, rather than Giddens the sociologist. Read it and then move on to other, more advanced stuff if you like.
December 16, 2016
این کتاب مجموعه پنج سخنرانی با عنوان چشم انداز: نظم جهانی , دولت - ملت , نابرابری جهانی , خانواده , دموکراسی از آنتونی گیدنز است که در مدرسه اقتصادی و علوم سیاسی لندن ایراد شده اند.
Read
September 7, 2025Read for uni. I guess it was fine?
January 16, 2026
Do the anti-globalists have a point or not? The author reveals the fact that when considering the poorest countries, those that have opened their economies to external markets have recorded a growth rate of barely 5%, while those countries which have barred their economies from such a 'global' marketplace have achieved a growth rate of 0%. From this state of affairs it may be cogently argued that globalization is essentially an ideological subterfuge that has currently come into fashion in order that the rich countries are to obtain a greater share of market dominance and to bulwark their positions as the vital testaments to their economic and cultural superiority.
When I started reading this book, I was more on the cynical side of the equation, seeing globalization as opening up the path of prosperity for a select few well-reared capitalists, acknowledging them under the rubric of sainthood while condemning the vast majority to lives equally filled with the despair and misery that comes with impoverishment and isolation. However, Giddens gave me some food for thought when he says that the number of Chinese living in poverty in the 1960s was many hundreds of millions, perhaps a billion, while today China has largely eradicated extreme poverty by international standards (e.g., $1.90 per day), though it remains true that millions still face poverty by national or multidimensional metrics; nonetheless there was a massive reduction of over 700-800 million people lifted out of extreme hardship over recent decades. Similarly, Vietnam, too, has lifted approximately 40 million people out of poverty since the early 1990s. For instance, in the mid-1980s, an estimated 70-80% of the population lived below the poverty line, while today the multidimensional poverty rate is only around 5.71%. In the mid-1980s, the poverty rate was estimated at 70-80% of the population. With a population of around 60 million people at the time, this translates to roughly 42-48 million people living in poverty. As of 2023, the national multidimensional poverty rate is approximately 5.71%, representing about 1.58 million poor and near-poor households. In terms of the total reduction of poverty from the 1980s to today, the total is in the range of tens of millions. The average rate of economic growth for a family in these countries increased by a massive amount from the moment the neologism of globalization came to be bandied about on college campuses, lectures and academic quorums since the 1980s to its veritable inescapability in the early 2000s.
In my opinion, it is the ultra-mundane and very centrist idea that has at its crux the idea that the very ideal of American plurality, and this is the spirit of the republic for which it stands, under the guise of American capital, is in a sense an issue that the extreme ends of both the Left and the Right refuse to touch upon and continue to abstain from broaching upon. As it appears to me, this concerns the very essence of the ideals of American plurality and the "spirit of the republic" that, under the guise of American capital, appears to be under the influence of large-scale private capital on democratic decision-making, which can lead to an oligarchic system and undermine the potential for a truly pluralistic society dedicated to the common good. While the exact phrasing of the question is philosophical in nature, the underlying tension points to a systemic issue where both extremes leverage the general principles of the republic (like liberty or justice) for their specific agendas while avoiding a direct challenge to the fundamental structures of concentrated economic power.
Regarding the Ideal of American Plurality, while this concept is rooted in the idea of "E Pluribus Unum" ("Out of many, one"), emphasizing that diverse groups can coexist and contribute to the national identity while maintaining their unique characteristics, all generally protected by constitutional rights like the First Amendment, it must be said that this vision relies on the ongoing, vigorous, but civil, encounter of different viewpoints in a public square. Regarding the "Spirit of the Republic", this refers to the idea of a society dedicated to the public good (res publica), governed by and for the people, with an emphasis on civic virtue, individual liberty, and justice for all, as expressed in documents like the Pledge of Allegiance and the Constitution. The Problem "Under the Guise of American Capital": The issue is that in contemporary America, decisions about the flow of capital and investment are primarily made by private actors and asset managers with little to no public input. This system can function as an oligarchy, where the immense accumulation of private economic power can influence policy and shape society in ways that sideline the public interest, individual liberty, and true democratic pluralism.
Both the extreme left and right may avoid a direct critique of this underlying system of capitalistic power for different reasons: The Extreme Left might focus on specific inequalities (racial, gender, etc.) and social justice initiatives, but may avoid a total rejection of the established economic framework due to a fear of being perceived as anti-nationalist or too radical, which could alienate potential working-class allies. The Extreme Right often champions free markets and capitalism as essential to American liberty, focusing instead on cultural issues, immigration, or "woke" ideologies. A critique of concentrated capital would conflict with core tenets of their economic philosophy and potentially challenge their corporate donors or the existing power structure they often seek to defend. Ultimately, the unifying issue they both tend to sidestep is the extent to which unfettered private capital accumulation and its resulting power are subverting the principles of a true republic and limiting genuine democratic pluralism, instead leading to a system where economic considerations consistently trump public deliberation and the common good.
What is my final verdict? I fear such opinions have been invalidated not only by the intellectuals of the right, but by the intellectuals of the left too, as I recall that, in the early-moments of the television aftermath broadcast while the events of September 11, 201 were still happening and TV coverage was come to center on the events of this fateful day for a full 24-hour a day network coverage on all channels all the time and without commercial interruptions, one talking head called in to say that it will not be until we resolve the Israeli problem with the Palestinians that we will solve the problems of Al Qaeda and the radical Islamic fundamentalism then emergent in the Middle East, but this voice was quickly pushed off the air and hung in the galleries, for we had too much to mourn before America could bear down and face the political realities their elected officials had a hand in making. Perhaps we are just coming around to addressing these stark and untelegenic realities now.. Three stars.
When I started reading this book, I was more on the cynical side of the equation, seeing globalization as opening up the path of prosperity for a select few well-reared capitalists, acknowledging them under the rubric of sainthood while condemning the vast majority to lives equally filled with the despair and misery that comes with impoverishment and isolation. However, Giddens gave me some food for thought when he says that the number of Chinese living in poverty in the 1960s was many hundreds of millions, perhaps a billion, while today China has largely eradicated extreme poverty by international standards (e.g., $1.90 per day), though it remains true that millions still face poverty by national or multidimensional metrics; nonetheless there was a massive reduction of over 700-800 million people lifted out of extreme hardship over recent decades. Similarly, Vietnam, too, has lifted approximately 40 million people out of poverty since the early 1990s. For instance, in the mid-1980s, an estimated 70-80% of the population lived below the poverty line, while today the multidimensional poverty rate is only around 5.71%. In the mid-1980s, the poverty rate was estimated at 70-80% of the population. With a population of around 60 million people at the time, this translates to roughly 42-48 million people living in poverty. As of 2023, the national multidimensional poverty rate is approximately 5.71%, representing about 1.58 million poor and near-poor households. In terms of the total reduction of poverty from the 1980s to today, the total is in the range of tens of millions. The average rate of economic growth for a family in these countries increased by a massive amount from the moment the neologism of globalization came to be bandied about on college campuses, lectures and academic quorums since the 1980s to its veritable inescapability in the early 2000s.
In my opinion, it is the ultra-mundane and very centrist idea that has at its crux the idea that the very ideal of American plurality, and this is the spirit of the republic for which it stands, under the guise of American capital, is in a sense an issue that the extreme ends of both the Left and the Right refuse to touch upon and continue to abstain from broaching upon. As it appears to me, this concerns the very essence of the ideals of American plurality and the "spirit of the republic" that, under the guise of American capital, appears to be under the influence of large-scale private capital on democratic decision-making, which can lead to an oligarchic system and undermine the potential for a truly pluralistic society dedicated to the common good. While the exact phrasing of the question is philosophical in nature, the underlying tension points to a systemic issue where both extremes leverage the general principles of the republic (like liberty or justice) for their specific agendas while avoiding a direct challenge to the fundamental structures of concentrated economic power.
Regarding the Ideal of American Plurality, while this concept is rooted in the idea of "E Pluribus Unum" ("Out of many, one"), emphasizing that diverse groups can coexist and contribute to the national identity while maintaining their unique characteristics, all generally protected by constitutional rights like the First Amendment, it must be said that this vision relies on the ongoing, vigorous, but civil, encounter of different viewpoints in a public square. Regarding the "Spirit of the Republic", this refers to the idea of a society dedicated to the public good (res publica), governed by and for the people, with an emphasis on civic virtue, individual liberty, and justice for all, as expressed in documents like the Pledge of Allegiance and the Constitution. The Problem "Under the Guise of American Capital": The issue is that in contemporary America, decisions about the flow of capital and investment are primarily made by private actors and asset managers with little to no public input. This system can function as an oligarchy, where the immense accumulation of private economic power can influence policy and shape society in ways that sideline the public interest, individual liberty, and true democratic pluralism.
Both the extreme left and right may avoid a direct critique of this underlying system of capitalistic power for different reasons: The Extreme Left might focus on specific inequalities (racial, gender, etc.) and social justice initiatives, but may avoid a total rejection of the established economic framework due to a fear of being perceived as anti-nationalist or too radical, which could alienate potential working-class allies. The Extreme Right often champions free markets and capitalism as essential to American liberty, focusing instead on cultural issues, immigration, or "woke" ideologies. A critique of concentrated capital would conflict with core tenets of their economic philosophy and potentially challenge their corporate donors or the existing power structure they often seek to defend. Ultimately, the unifying issue they both tend to sidestep is the extent to which unfettered private capital accumulation and its resulting power are subverting the principles of a true republic and limiting genuine democratic pluralism, instead leading to a system where economic considerations consistently trump public deliberation and the common good.
What is my final verdict? I fear such opinions have been invalidated not only by the intellectuals of the right, but by the intellectuals of the left too, as I recall that, in the early-moments of the television aftermath broadcast while the events of September 11, 201 were still happening and TV coverage was come to center on the events of this fateful day for a full 24-hour a day network coverage on all channels all the time and without commercial interruptions, one talking head called in to say that it will not be until we resolve the Israeli problem with the Palestinians that we will solve the problems of Al Qaeda and the radical Islamic fundamentalism then emergent in the Middle East, but this voice was quickly pushed off the air and hung in the galleries, for we had too much to mourn before America could bear down and face the political realities their elected officials had a hand in making. Perhaps we are just coming around to addressing these stark and untelegenic realities now.. Three stars.
December 11, 2017
استمتعت بالكتاب كثيراً... ملهم وزاخر بالافكار
ربما لان هذه الافكار نعاصرها ونعيشها حالياً
واعجبتني جداً فكرة (دمقرطة الديمقراطية) التي يتبناها انطوني جيدنز وذلك بعملية اعادة تدوير وتنظير الديموقراطية بما يتناسب مع مريديها ولتجنب اخفاقاتها في عموم العالم
ربما لان هذه الافكار نعاصرها ونعيشها حالياً
واعجبتني جداً فكرة (دمقرطة الديمقراطية) التي يتبناها انطوني جيدنز وذلك بعملية اعادة تدوير وتنظير الديموقراطية بما يتناسب مع مريديها ولتجنب اخفاقاتها في عموم العالم
March 25, 2021
Never regret an academic's book recommendation..
This was my case with this book...
It took me a year to go back to this author's books..
Honestly, it felt as if it was written in the 21st century not before...
The content is relevant, and tackles salient themes that are still up to date nowadays.
Democracy, Family, Risk,... And sums the total essential turbulence that the world is going through in a few 100 pages.
Originally, these were lectures Giddens gave on the BBC 4 Radio.
This was my case with this book...
It took me a year to go back to this author's books..
Honestly, it felt as if it was written in the 21st century not before...
The content is relevant, and tackles salient themes that are still up to date nowadays.
Democracy, Family, Risk,... And sums the total essential turbulence that the world is going through in a few 100 pages.
Originally, these were lectures Giddens gave on the BBC 4 Radio.
November 20, 2013
اختلفت كثيرًا و اتفقت مع الكاتب في نواحٍ عدّة , لم أجد الوقت الكافي للكتابة و التدوين عن الكتاب , أفضّل أني أزيد قراءاتي عن الموضوع ثمّ أكتب عنه
..
توطئة : احتوى هذا الكتاب على محاضرات للمؤلف أذيعت عبر محطة BBC اللندنية عام 1999م.. عَرَضَ من خلالها خلاصة تجربته الفكرية ونظرته الفلسفية والتحليلية لجوانب من إشكالية (العولمة) فلا يصنف هذا الكتاب بالتالي ضمن الكتاب الدراسية، أو تلك الملتزمة بالمنهجية العلمية في الإعداد والطرح.
عرض الكتاب : يعالج (أنطوني جيد نز) في مؤلفه هذا إشكالية العولمة (وهي صناعة تدار من الغرب وتحمل بصمات القدرة الاقتصادية والسياسية والأمريكية وتقترن بعدم المساواة الشديدة فيما يتعلق بالعواقب) وتأثيراتها المباشرة على مجموعة من التغيرات من خلال إعادتها لتركيب الأنماط البيئية والاجتماعية (الاختلاط الثقافي).
إنَّ العولمة ثورة جذرية على كثير من الأصعدة.. بل إنها ظاهرة سياسية وتكنولوجية وحضارية.. كما هي ظاهرة اقتصادية.. والتغيرات المصاحبة لها.. وتحديداً (المخاطرة التقاليد العائلة الديمقراطية) التي تشكل مادة الكتاب، سوف تتفاقم بما قد يؤدي إلى تشكيل مجتمع عالمي يشوبه الفوضى، ومحفوف بشتى أنواع القلق، وملئ بندوب الفرقة والانقسام.
فمفهوم (المخاطرة المصطنعة) التي أوجدها تأثير تطوير الإنسان للمعرفة (الميزة الرئيسة لحضارة المجتمعات الصناعية الحديثة) متأثرة بشكل مباشر بظاهرة العولمة.. بل إنَّ الأخيرة تختبئ خلف التغيرات الحرارية والمناخية والبيئية لكوكب الأرض.. وكذلك التغيرات في الدواء والطعام.. خاصة في ظل السياقات العلمية، والمعلومات التقنية المتغيرة والمتناقضة.. بل وفي عدم العلم بها أو التيقن منها في العديد من الأحوال إلا بعد فوات الأوان.
وإذا كان التعايش مع العولمة يعني التعايش مع خليط من مواقف المخاطرة إلا أنه يمكن وضعها تحت السيطرة من خلال تعاون الحكومات، وإنشاء مؤسسات لمراقبة التغيرات التكنولوجية.. سواء على المستوى الوطني أو العالمي.
أما (التقاليد) وقرينتها (العادات) وهما المادة الخام لحياة الناس على مدى التاريخ الإنساني، ومستودع الحكمة المختزنة، وفقاً لرأي حرَّاسها، فقد تصدع بناؤها في المجتمعات الغربية، وترسخت مظاهر العولمة، بما يثير القلق بصورة مطردة بشأن الثقافة وطرق الحياة التقليدية في العديد من بقاع العالم (دخول النساء في مجالات العمل بأعداد متزايدة والمطالبة باستقلالية أكثر لتحقيق المزيد من المساواة).
ولقد ترتب على هذه التحولات العولمية أن ظهرت الأصولية (الدينية أو العرقية أو القومية أو السياسية) كمبدأ نقيض للعولمة، ومواجهة إشكالية الأصولية يتمثل في إبداء تسامحٍ وحوارٍ يمكنهما أن يؤديا إلى قيم من نوع شامل، خاصة في ظل عدم إمكانية العيش في عالم خالٍ من القدسية.
وفيما يخص الحياة الاجتماعية، ومؤسستي الزواج والعائلة.. تتقدم ثورة (عولمية) وبشكل متفاوت في مناطق وثقافات متباينة، وتواجهها مقاومات عديدة، ففي المجتمعات الغربية تصدَّعت إلى حد كبير (أنظمة القيم العائلية التقليدية) وأوضحت أشبه بالمؤسسات (القشرية) إذ اتسعت دائرة النشاط الجنسي خارج نطاق مؤسسة الزواج، وبرزت ظاهرة (المساكنة أو التعايش كالزواج) وفُصل بين النشاط الجنسي والتناسل (مفهوم الثنائية) وكنتيجة منطقة لذلك ازداد قبول المجتمعات الغربية لظاهرة (الشذوذ الجنسي).. ويخلص المؤلف إلى اعتبار استمرار نظام العائلة التقليدية أو مظاهره في أصقاع عديدة من العالم أكثر إقلالاً من تدهوره.
أما الديمقراطية (وهي نظام يشتمل على التنافس الفاعل بين الأحزاب السياسية من أجل الحصول على مناصب في السلطة عبر الانتخابات الحرة العادلة) فهناك نوع من خيبة الأمل بشأن العملية الديمقراطية في الدول ذات الأنظمة الديمقراطية العريقة، عكسه انخفاض معدلات الثقة بالسياسيين لمعالجة قضايا مثل (الاقتصاد البيئة حقوق الإنسان) وانخفاض معدلات التصويت تبعاً لذلك، ويمكن إرجاع هذا الأمر إلى عامل (ثورة الاتصالات العالمية) إذ أنتجت مواطنين يمتلكون المعلومات نفسها التي يمتلكها أصحاب السلطة، ومن ثمَّ أكثر نشاطاً وأكثر استعداداً للتعبير عن رد فعل من أي وقت مضى.
إن مرحلة العولمة تستلزم تعميق الديمقراطية (دمقرطة الديمقراطية) عبر تقليص حقيقي لمركزية السلطة، ووضع قوانين فعَّالة ضد الفساد، وإجراء إصلاحات دستورية، وتبني المزيد من الوضوح والصراحة في الأمور السياسية (جعل عملية صنع القرار السياسي قريبة من اهتمام المواطن) وأن تتعود الأحزاب السياسية أكثر من الماضي على التعاون مع المجموعات (أحادية الاهتمام).
ولمواكبة تسارع وتيرة العولمة، وفي ظل عالم يتكل بعضه على بعض بشكل متزايد، وقضايا مشتركة (المخاطر البيئية والتذبذب في الاقتصاد العالمي والتغير في التقنية العالمية) يمكن تبني ديمقراطية على مستوى أعلى من الدولة (المؤسسات العالمية) لأن عالمنا الجامح هذا لا يحتاج إلى حكومة أصغر، بل إلى حكومة أكبر، والمؤسسات العالمية (الأمم المتحدة الاتحاد الأوربي على سبيل المثال) كفيلة وحدها بتوفير هذه الحكومة.
ويخلص أنطوني جيد نز إلى أن عواقب العولمة ليست بالهينة، خاصة بالنسبة لأولئك الذين يعيشون خارج (أوروبا وأمريكا الشمالية) فقد يرون فيها مسألة تخص العالم الصناعي في الشمال.. أما بالنسبة إليهم فهي أداة لتدمير الثقافات المحلية، وتكريس عدم المساواة..
إنَّ المعالجة لا تكمن في رفض العولمة واتباع سياسة (العزلة الاقتصادية) فتلك خطوة في الاتجاه الخاطئ للدولة الغنية والفقيرة على السواء.. بل في إعادة بناء المؤسسات الحالية، أو إنشاء مؤسسات جديدة، وقد يكون من الأمور الإيجابية مستقبلاً اطراد تحول العولمة نحو اللامركزية.. الأمر الذي يجعل تأثيرها ملموساً في الدول الغربية والبلدان الأخرى على حد سواء.
عرض الملحق: يحلل أولرتش بك حالة (النزعة الفردية) و(حمى الأنا) أو (الأنانية الوبائية) التي أضحت الأكثر حضوراً في (الثقافة الغربية) ويعرض الكاتب لنحو (15) نقطة يسرد من خلالها مظاهر هذه النزعة الفردية المصاحبة لعالم جامح من التحولات والعولمة وتقهقر النظام الاجتماعي والطبقي والعرقي.. واتساع الدولة القطرية (تجَّوف السيادة الوطنية وتداعي علم الاجتماع المؤسس على فكرة الدولة).
* المجلة الثقافية
..
توطئة : احتوى هذا الكتاب على محاضرات للمؤلف أذيعت عبر محطة BBC اللندنية عام 1999م.. عَرَضَ من خلالها خلاصة تجربته الفكرية ونظرته الفلسفية والتحليلية لجوانب من إشكالية (العولمة) فلا يصنف هذا الكتاب بالتالي ضمن الكتاب الدراسية، أو تلك الملتزمة بالمنهجية العلمية في الإعداد والطرح.
عرض الكتاب : يعالج (أنطوني جيد نز) في مؤلفه هذا إشكالية العولمة (وهي صناعة تدار من الغرب وتحمل بصمات القدرة الاقتصادية والسياسية والأمريكية وتقترن بعدم المساواة الشديدة فيما يتعلق بالعواقب) وتأثيراتها المباشرة على مجموعة من التغيرات من خلال إعادتها لتركيب الأنماط البيئية والاجتماعية (الاختلاط الثقافي).
إنَّ العولمة ثورة جذرية على كثير من الأصعدة.. بل إنها ظاهرة سياسية وتكنولوجية وحضارية.. كما هي ظاهرة اقتصادية.. والتغيرات المصاحبة لها.. وتحديداً (المخاطرة التقاليد العائلة الديمقراطية) التي تشكل مادة الكتاب، سوف تتفاقم بما قد يؤدي إلى تشكيل مجتمع عالمي يشوبه الفوضى، ومحفوف بشتى أنواع القلق، وملئ بندوب الفرقة والانقسام.
فمفهوم (المخاطرة المصطنعة) التي أوجدها تأثير تطوير الإنسان للمعرفة (الميزة الرئيسة لحضارة المجتمعات الصناعية الحديثة) متأثرة بشكل مباشر بظاهرة العولمة.. بل إنَّ الأخيرة تختبئ خلف التغيرات الحرارية والمناخية والبيئية لكوكب الأرض.. وكذلك التغيرات في الدواء والطعام.. خاصة في ظل السياقات العلمية، والمعلومات التقنية المتغيرة والمتناقضة.. بل وفي عدم العلم بها أو التيقن منها في العديد من الأحوال إلا بعد فوات الأوان.
وإذا كان التعايش مع العولمة يعني التعايش مع خليط من مواقف المخاطرة إلا أنه يمكن وضعها تحت السيطرة من خلال تعاون الحكومات، وإنشاء مؤسسات لمراقبة التغيرات التكنولوجية.. سواء على المستوى الوطني أو العالمي.
أما (التقاليد) وقرينتها (العادات) وهما المادة الخام لحياة الناس على مدى التاريخ الإنساني، ومستودع الحكمة المختزنة، وفقاً لرأي حرَّاسها، فقد تصدع بناؤها في المجتمعات الغربية، وترسخت مظاهر العولمة، بما يثير القلق بصورة مطردة بشأن الثقافة وطرق الحياة التقليدية في العديد من بقاع العالم (دخول النساء في مجالات العمل بأعداد متزايدة والمطالبة باستقلالية أكثر لتحقيق المزيد من المساواة).
ولقد ترتب على هذه التحولات العولمية أن ظهرت الأصولية (الدينية أو العرقية أو القومية أو السياسية) كمبدأ نقيض للعولمة، ومواجهة إشكالية الأصولية يتمثل في إبداء تسامحٍ وحوارٍ يمكنهما أن يؤديا إلى قيم من نوع شامل، خاصة في ظل عدم إمكانية العيش في عالم خالٍ من القدسية.
وفيما يخص الحياة الاجتماعية، ومؤسستي الزواج والعائلة.. تتقدم ثورة (عولمية) وبشكل متفاوت في مناطق وثقافات متباينة، وتواجهها مقاومات عديدة، ففي المجتمعات الغربية تصدَّعت إلى حد كبير (أنظمة القيم العائلية التقليدية) وأوضحت أشبه بالمؤسسات (القشرية) إذ اتسعت دائرة النشاط الجنسي خارج نطاق مؤسسة الزواج، وبرزت ظاهرة (المساكنة أو التعايش كالزواج) وفُصل بين النشاط الجنسي والتناسل (مفهوم الثنائية) وكنتيجة منطقة لذلك ازداد قبول المجتمعات الغربية لظاهرة (الشذوذ الجنسي).. ويخلص المؤلف إلى اعتبار استمرار نظام العائلة التقليدية أو مظاهره في أصقاع عديدة من العالم أكثر إقلالاً من تدهوره.
أما الديمقراطية (وهي نظام يشتمل على التنافس الفاعل بين الأحزاب السياسية من أجل الحصول على مناصب في السلطة عبر الانتخابات الحرة العادلة) فهناك نوع من خيبة الأمل بشأن العملية الديمقراطية في الدول ذات الأنظمة الديمقراطية العريقة، عكسه انخفاض معدلات الثقة بالسياسيين لمعالجة قضايا مثل (الاقتصاد البيئة حقوق الإنسان) وانخفاض معدلات التصويت تبعاً لذلك، ويمكن إرجاع هذا الأمر إلى عامل (ثورة الاتصالات العالمية) إذ أنتجت مواطنين يمتلكون المعلومات نفسها التي يمتلكها أصحاب السلطة، ومن ثمَّ أكثر نشاطاً وأكثر استعداداً للتعبير عن رد فعل من أي وقت مضى.
إن مرحلة العولمة تستلزم تعميق الديمقراطية (دمقرطة الديمقراطية) عبر تقليص حقيقي لمركزية السلطة، ووضع قوانين فعَّالة ضد الفساد، وإجراء إصلاحات دستورية، وتبني المزيد من الوضوح والصراحة في الأمور السياسية (جعل عملية صنع القرار السياسي قريبة من اهتمام المواطن) وأن تتعود الأحزاب السياسية أكثر من الماضي على التعاون مع المجموعات (أحادية الاهتمام).
ولمواكبة تسارع وتيرة العولمة، وفي ظل عالم يتكل بعضه على بعض بشكل متزايد، وقضايا مشتركة (المخاطر البيئية والتذبذب في الاقتصاد العالمي والتغير في التقنية العالمية) يمكن تبني ديمقراطية على مستوى أعلى من الدولة (المؤسسات العالمية) لأن عالمنا الجامح هذا لا يحتاج إلى حكومة أصغر، بل إلى حكومة أكبر، والمؤسسات العالمية (الأمم المتحدة الاتحاد الأوربي على سبيل المثال) كفيلة وحدها بتوفير هذه الحكومة.
ويخلص أنطوني جيد نز إلى أن عواقب العولمة ليست بالهينة، خاصة بالنسبة لأولئك الذين يعيشون خارج (أوروبا وأمريكا الشمالية) فقد يرون فيها مسألة تخص العالم الصناعي في الشمال.. أما بالنسبة إليهم فهي أداة لتدمير الثقافات المحلية، وتكريس عدم المساواة..
إنَّ المعالجة لا تكمن في رفض العولمة واتباع سياسة (العزلة الاقتصادية) فتلك خطوة في الاتجاه الخاطئ للدولة الغنية والفقيرة على السواء.. بل في إعادة بناء المؤسسات الحالية، أو إنشاء مؤسسات جديدة، وقد يكون من الأمور الإيجابية مستقبلاً اطراد تحول العولمة نحو اللامركزية.. الأمر الذي يجعل تأثيرها ملموساً في الدول الغربية والبلدان الأخرى على حد سواء.
عرض الملحق: يحلل أولرتش بك حالة (النزعة الفردية) و(حمى الأنا) أو (الأنانية الوبائية) التي أضحت الأكثر حضوراً في (الثقافة الغربية) ويعرض الكاتب لنحو (15) نقطة يسرد من خلالها مظاهر هذه النزعة الفردية المصاحبة لعالم جامح من التحولات والعولمة وتقهقر النظام الاجتماعي والطبقي والعرقي.. واتساع الدولة القطرية (تجَّوف السيادة الوطنية وتداعي علم الاجتماع المؤسس على فكرة الدولة).
* المجلة الثقافية
don-t-want-to-read-anymore
October 15, 2008Having trouble getting through this book as it is heavy handed in approach and often obvious. Also difficult to read many books about the world that were written before September 11th.
April 6, 2023
As expected for a book so short, there isn't much depth here and more of a generalized background of the issues facing globalization. The points the author makes are well put, though heavily biased. The chapter on the evolution of the nuclear family is fantastic, but the rest of the book is pretty bland.
Read
November 24, 2020كتاب لطيف ومفيد جدًا يتحدث فيه عن أثر العولمة على الواقع (سواءً في الأحداث العالمية أو حتى للإنسان العادي) احتوى على تنبيهات لطيفة في تاريخ العولمة وأماكن إدارتها في الغرب(أمريكا) تحدث عن أثرها على الفرد من جهة الزواج والعائلة، وذكر لفتات عن الديمقراطية مفيدة جدًا الحقيقة.. كتاب لطيف ويقرأ في جلسة
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 23, 2023
طرح متواضع ل عالم اجتماع و مستشار ل توني بلاير و كلنتون و يتبع المذهب البروتستانتي بتشدد…
دورها في دماغك و انت بتقرا الكتاب
تحياتي
دورها في دماغك و انت بتقرا الكتاب
تحياتي
May 21, 2026
Fundamentalism originates from a world of crumbling traditions. – pg. 22
The battleground of the twenty-first century will pit fundamentalism against cosmopolitan tolerance. In a globalizing world, where information and images are routinely transmitted across the globe, we are all regularly in contact with others who think differently, and live differently, from ourselves. Cosmopolitans welcome and embrace this cultural complexity. Fundamentalists find it disturbing and dangerous. Whether in the areas of religion, ethnic identity or nationalism, they take refuge in a renewed and purified tradition- and, quite often, violence. – pg. 22-23
The era of the nation-state is over. Nations, as the Japanese business writer Kenichi Ohmae puts it, have become mere 'fictions'. – pg. 26
Globalization thus is a complex set of processes, not a single one – pg. 30-31
Globalization not only pulls upwards, but also pushes downwards, creating new pressures for local autonomy. The American sociologist Daniel Bell describes this very well when he says that the nation becomes not only too small to solve the big problems, but also too large to solve the small ones. Globalization is the reason for the revival of local cultural identities in different parts of the world. If one asks, for example, why the Scots want more independence in the UK, or why there is a strong separatist movement in Quebec, the answer is not to be found only in their cultural history. Local nationalisms spring up as a response to globalizing tendencies, as the hold of older nation states weakens. – pg. 31
More importantly, nations have to rethink their identities now the older forms of geopolitics are becoming obsolete. – pg. 36
We continue to talk of the nation, the family, work, tradition, nature, as if they were all the same as in the past. They are not. The outer shell remains, but inside they have changed. – pg. 36
'shell institutions'. They are institutions that have become inadequate to the tasks they are called upon to perform. – pg. 37
Our society lives after the end of nature. The end of nature doesn't mean, obviously, that the physical world or physical processes cease to exist. It refers to the fact that there are few aspects of our surrounding material environment that haven't been in some way affected by human intervention. – pg. 45
Our age is not more dangerous — not more risky- than those of earlier generations, but the balance of risks and dangers has shifted. We live in a world where hazards created by ourselves are as, or more, threatening than those that come from the outside. Some of these are genuinely catastrophic, such as global ecological risk, nuclear proliferation or the meltdown of the world economy. – pg. 52
Much of what we think of as traditional, and steeped in the mists of time, is actually a product at most of the last couple of centuries, and is often much more recent than that. The case of the Scottish kilt comes from a celebrated volume by the historians Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, called Hie Invention of Tradition. They give examples of invented traditions from a variety of different countries, including colonial India. – pg. 55
The term 'tradition' as it is used today is actually a product of the past two hundred years in Europe. Just like the concept of risk, which I talked about in the previous chapter, in medieval times there was no generic notion of tradition. There was no call for such a word, precisely because tradition and custom were everywhere. – pg. 57
The idea of tradition, then, is itself a creation of modernity. That doesn't mean that one shouldn't use it in relation to premodern or non-Western societies, but it does imply that we should approach the discussion of tradition with some care. By identifying tradition with dogma and ignorance, the Enlightenment thinkers sought to justify their absorption with the new. – pg. 57
All traditions, I would say, are invented traditions. No traditional societies were wholly traditional, and traditions and customs have been invented for a diversity of reasons. We shouldn't suppose that the conscious construction of tradition is found only in the modern period. Moreover, traditions always incorporate power, whether they are constructed in a deliberate way or not. Kings, emperors, priests and others have long invented traditions to suit themselves and to legitimize their rule. – pg. 58
It is a myth to think of traditions as impervious to change. Traditions evolve over time, but also can be quite suddenly altered or transformed. If I can put it this way, they are invented and reinvented. – pg. 58
But it is simply wrong to suppose that for a given set of symbols or practices to be traditional, they must have existed for centuries. The Christmas address by the monarch, which is broadcast every year in Britain, has become a tradition. Yet it started only in 1932. Endurance over time is not the key defining feature of tradition, or of its more diffuse cousin, custom. The distinguishing characteristics of tradition are ritual and repetition. Traditions are always properties of groups, communities or collectivities. Individuals may follow traditions and customs, but traditions are not a quality of individual behavior in the way habits are. – pg. 59
What is distinctive about tradition is that it defines a kind of truth. For someone following a traditional practice, questions don't have to be asked about alternatives. However much it may change, tradition provides a framework for action that can go largely unquestioned. Traditions usually have guardians- wise men, priests, sages. Guardians are not the same as experts. They get their position and power from the fact that only they are capable of interpreting tradition s ritual truth. Only they can decipher the real meanings of the sacred texts or the other symbols involved in the communal rituals. – pg. 59-60
After all, this is basically what conservative philosophies have been, and are, all about. Tradition is perhaps the most basic concept of conservatism, since conservatives believe that it contains stored-up wisdom. – pg. 60
A further reason for the persistence of tradition in the industrial countries was that the institutional changes signaled by modernity were largely confined to public institutions- especially government and the economy. Traditional ways of doing things tended to persist, or be re-established, in many other areas of life, including everyday life. One could even say there was a sort of symbiosis between modernity and tradition. In most countries, for example, the family, sexuality and the divisions between the sexes remained heavily saturated with tradition and custom. – pg. 60
This is a society living after the end of nature. Few aspects of the physical world, in other words, are any longer just natural- unaffected by human intervention. It is also a society living after the end of tradition. The end of tradition doesn't mean that tradition disappears, as the Enlightenment thinkers wanted. On the contrary, in different versions it continues to flourish everywhere. But less and less- if I can put it in this fashion- is it tradition lived in the traditional way. The traditional way means defending traditional activities through their own ritual and symbolism- defending tradition through its internal claims to truth. – pg. 61
Yet traditions also often succumb to modernity, and are doing so in some situations all over the world. Tradition that is drained of its content, and commercialized, becomes either heritage or kitsch- the trinkets bought in the airport store. As developed by the heritage industry, heritage is tradition repackaged as spectacle. The refurbished buildings at tourist sites may look splendid, and the refurbishment may even be authentic down to the last detail. But the heritage that is thereby protected is severed from the lifeblood of tradition, which is its connection with the experience of everyday life. – pg. 62
However, it is part of academic life continually to explore the limits of such traditions, and foster active interchange between them. Tradition can perfectly well be defended in a non-traditional way- and that should be its future. Ritual, ceremonial and repetition have an important social role, something understood and acted upon by most organizations, including governments. Traditions will continue to be sustained in so far as they can effectively be justified- not in terms of their own internal rituals, but as compared to other traditions or ways of doing things. – pg. 63
As the influence of tradition and custom shrink on a world-wide level, the very basis of our self-identity our sense of self- changes. In more traditional situations, a sense of self is sustained largely through the stability of the social positions of individuals in the community. Where tradition lapses, and lifestyle choice prevails, the self isn't exempt. Self-identity has to be created and recreated on a more active basis than before. – pg. 65
When he initiated modern psychoanalysis, Freud thought that he was establishing a scientific treatment for neurosis. What he was in effect doing was constructing a method for the renewal of self-identity, in the early stages of a detraditionalizing culture. – pg. 65
One might think that fundamentalism has always existed. This is not so- it has arisen in response to the globalizing influences we see all round us. The term itself dates from the turn of the century, when it was used to refer to the beliefs of some Protestant sects in the US, particularly those who rejected Darwin. Yet even in the late 1950s there was no entry for the word 'fundamentalism' in the large Oxford English dictionary. It has come into common coinage only since the 1960s. – pg. 66
Fundamentalism is not the same as either fanaticism or authoritarianism. Fundamentalists call for a return to basic scriptures or texts, supposed to be read in a literal manner, and they propose that the doctrines derived from such a reading be applied to social, economic or political life. Fundamentalism gives new vitality and importance to the guardians of tradition. – pg. 66
Fundamental ism is beleaguered tradition. It is tradition defended in the traditional way- by reference to ritual truth- in a globalizing world that asks for reasons. Fundamentalism, therefore, has nothing to do with the context of beliefs, religious or otherwise. What matters is how the truth of beliefs is defended or asserted – pg. 67
Fundamentalism isn't about what people believe but, like tradition more generally, about why they believe it and how they justify it. It isn't confined to religion. The Chinese Red Guards, with their devotion to Mao's Little Red Book, were surely fundamentalists. Nor is fundamentalism primarily about the resistance of more traditional cultures to Westernization- a rejection of Western decadence. Fundamentalism can develop on the soil of traditions of all sorts. It has no time for ambiguity, multiple interpretation or multiple identity- it is a refusal of dialogue in a world whose peace and continuity depend on it. – pg. 67
Fundamentalism is a child of globalization – pg. 67
Whatever form it takes- religious, ethnic, nationalist or directly political- I think it right to regard fundamentalism as problematic. It is edged with the possibility of violence, and it is the enemy of cosmopolitan values – pg. 68
Yet fundamentalism isn't just the antithesis of globalizing modernity, but poses questions to it. The most basic one is this: can we live in a world where nothing is sacred? I have to say, in conclusion, that I don't think we can. Cosmopolitans, of whom I count myself one, have to make plain that tolerance and dialogue can themselves be guided by values of a universal kind. All of us need moral commitments that stand above the petty concerns and squabbles of everyday life. We should be prepared to mount an active defense of these values wherever they are poorly developed, or threatened. Cosmopolitan morality itself needs to be driven by passion. None of us would have anything to live for if we didn't have something worth dying for. – pg. 68
There is a global revolution going on in how we think of ourselves and how we form ties and connections with others. It is a revolution advancing unevenly in different regions and cultures, with many resistances. – pg. 69
The paradox of democracy is that democracy is spreading over the world, as I have just described, yet in the mature democracies, which the rest of the world is supposed to be copying, there is widespread disillusionment with democratic processes. – pg. 89-90
On an economic level, they don't believe that politicians are able to deal with the forces moving the world. As everyone understands, many of these go beyond the level of the nation-state. – pg. 92
The democratizing of democracy also depends upon the fostering of a strong civic culture. Markets cannot produce such a culture. Nor can a pluralism of special interest groups. We shouldn't think of there being only two sectors of society, the state and the market-place or the public and private. In between is the area of civil society, including the family and other non-economic institutions. Building a democracy of the emotions is one part of a progressive civic culture. Civil society is the arena in which democratic attitudes, including tolerance, have to be developed. The civic sphere can be fostered by government, but is in turn its cultural basis. – pg. 95-96
On the one hand, as I have stressed, the emergence of a global information society is a powerful democratizing force. On the other hand, television and the other media tend to destroy the very public space of dialogue they open up, through a relentless trivializing, and personalizing, of political issues. Moreover, the growth of giant multinational media corporations means that unelected business tycoons can hold enormous power. – pg. 96-97
As practiced up to now, democratic politics has presumed a national community that is self-governing and able to shape most of the policies that concern it. It has presumed the sovereign nation. But under the impact of globalization, sovereignty has become fuzzy. Nations and nation-states remain powerful, but there are large democratic deficits opening up- as the political scientist, David Held, points out- between them and the global forces that affect the lives of their citizens. Ecological risks, fluctuations in the global economy, or global technological change, do not respect the borders of nations. They escape democratic processes- one of the main reasons, as I said earlier, for the declining appeal of democracy where it is best established. – pg. 97
The battleground of the twenty-first century will pit fundamentalism against cosmopolitan tolerance. In a globalizing world, where information and images are routinely transmitted across the globe, we are all regularly in contact with others who think differently, and live differently, from ourselves. Cosmopolitans welcome and embrace this cultural complexity. Fundamentalists find it disturbing and dangerous. Whether in the areas of religion, ethnic identity or nationalism, they take refuge in a renewed and purified tradition- and, quite often, violence. – pg. 22-23
The era of the nation-state is over. Nations, as the Japanese business writer Kenichi Ohmae puts it, have become mere 'fictions'. – pg. 26
Globalization thus is a complex set of processes, not a single one – pg. 30-31
Globalization not only pulls upwards, but also pushes downwards, creating new pressures for local autonomy. The American sociologist Daniel Bell describes this very well when he says that the nation becomes not only too small to solve the big problems, but also too large to solve the small ones. Globalization is the reason for the revival of local cultural identities in different parts of the world. If one asks, for example, why the Scots want more independence in the UK, or why there is a strong separatist movement in Quebec, the answer is not to be found only in their cultural history. Local nationalisms spring up as a response to globalizing tendencies, as the hold of older nation states weakens. – pg. 31
More importantly, nations have to rethink their identities now the older forms of geopolitics are becoming obsolete. – pg. 36
We continue to talk of the nation, the family, work, tradition, nature, as if they were all the same as in the past. They are not. The outer shell remains, but inside they have changed. – pg. 36
'shell institutions'. They are institutions that have become inadequate to the tasks they are called upon to perform. – pg. 37
Our society lives after the end of nature. The end of nature doesn't mean, obviously, that the physical world or physical processes cease to exist. It refers to the fact that there are few aspects of our surrounding material environment that haven't been in some way affected by human intervention. – pg. 45
Our age is not more dangerous — not more risky- than those of earlier generations, but the balance of risks and dangers has shifted. We live in a world where hazards created by ourselves are as, or more, threatening than those that come from the outside. Some of these are genuinely catastrophic, such as global ecological risk, nuclear proliferation or the meltdown of the world economy. – pg. 52
Much of what we think of as traditional, and steeped in the mists of time, is actually a product at most of the last couple of centuries, and is often much more recent than that. The case of the Scottish kilt comes from a celebrated volume by the historians Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, called Hie Invention of Tradition. They give examples of invented traditions from a variety of different countries, including colonial India. – pg. 55
The term 'tradition' as it is used today is actually a product of the past two hundred years in Europe. Just like the concept of risk, which I talked about in the previous chapter, in medieval times there was no generic notion of tradition. There was no call for such a word, precisely because tradition and custom were everywhere. – pg. 57
The idea of tradition, then, is itself a creation of modernity. That doesn't mean that one shouldn't use it in relation to premodern or non-Western societies, but it does imply that we should approach the discussion of tradition with some care. By identifying tradition with dogma and ignorance, the Enlightenment thinkers sought to justify their absorption with the new. – pg. 57
All traditions, I would say, are invented traditions. No traditional societies were wholly traditional, and traditions and customs have been invented for a diversity of reasons. We shouldn't suppose that the conscious construction of tradition is found only in the modern period. Moreover, traditions always incorporate power, whether they are constructed in a deliberate way or not. Kings, emperors, priests and others have long invented traditions to suit themselves and to legitimize their rule. – pg. 58
It is a myth to think of traditions as impervious to change. Traditions evolve over time, but also can be quite suddenly altered or transformed. If I can put it this way, they are invented and reinvented. – pg. 58
But it is simply wrong to suppose that for a given set of symbols or practices to be traditional, they must have existed for centuries. The Christmas address by the monarch, which is broadcast every year in Britain, has become a tradition. Yet it started only in 1932. Endurance over time is not the key defining feature of tradition, or of its more diffuse cousin, custom. The distinguishing characteristics of tradition are ritual and repetition. Traditions are always properties of groups, communities or collectivities. Individuals may follow traditions and customs, but traditions are not a quality of individual behavior in the way habits are. – pg. 59
What is distinctive about tradition is that it defines a kind of truth. For someone following a traditional practice, questions don't have to be asked about alternatives. However much it may change, tradition provides a framework for action that can go largely unquestioned. Traditions usually have guardians- wise men, priests, sages. Guardians are not the same as experts. They get their position and power from the fact that only they are capable of interpreting tradition s ritual truth. Only they can decipher the real meanings of the sacred texts or the other symbols involved in the communal rituals. – pg. 59-60
After all, this is basically what conservative philosophies have been, and are, all about. Tradition is perhaps the most basic concept of conservatism, since conservatives believe that it contains stored-up wisdom. – pg. 60
A further reason for the persistence of tradition in the industrial countries was that the institutional changes signaled by modernity were largely confined to public institutions- especially government and the economy. Traditional ways of doing things tended to persist, or be re-established, in many other areas of life, including everyday life. One could even say there was a sort of symbiosis between modernity and tradition. In most countries, for example, the family, sexuality and the divisions between the sexes remained heavily saturated with tradition and custom. – pg. 60
This is a society living after the end of nature. Few aspects of the physical world, in other words, are any longer just natural- unaffected by human intervention. It is also a society living after the end of tradition. The end of tradition doesn't mean that tradition disappears, as the Enlightenment thinkers wanted. On the contrary, in different versions it continues to flourish everywhere. But less and less- if I can put it in this fashion- is it tradition lived in the traditional way. The traditional way means defending traditional activities through their own ritual and symbolism- defending tradition through its internal claims to truth. – pg. 61
Yet traditions also often succumb to modernity, and are doing so in some situations all over the world. Tradition that is drained of its content, and commercialized, becomes either heritage or kitsch- the trinkets bought in the airport store. As developed by the heritage industry, heritage is tradition repackaged as spectacle. The refurbished buildings at tourist sites may look splendid, and the refurbishment may even be authentic down to the last detail. But the heritage that is thereby protected is severed from the lifeblood of tradition, which is its connection with the experience of everyday life. – pg. 62
However, it is part of academic life continually to explore the limits of such traditions, and foster active interchange between them. Tradition can perfectly well be defended in a non-traditional way- and that should be its future. Ritual, ceremonial and repetition have an important social role, something understood and acted upon by most organizations, including governments. Traditions will continue to be sustained in so far as they can effectively be justified- not in terms of their own internal rituals, but as compared to other traditions or ways of doing things. – pg. 63
As the influence of tradition and custom shrink on a world-wide level, the very basis of our self-identity our sense of self- changes. In more traditional situations, a sense of self is sustained largely through the stability of the social positions of individuals in the community. Where tradition lapses, and lifestyle choice prevails, the self isn't exempt. Self-identity has to be created and recreated on a more active basis than before. – pg. 65
When he initiated modern psychoanalysis, Freud thought that he was establishing a scientific treatment for neurosis. What he was in effect doing was constructing a method for the renewal of self-identity, in the early stages of a detraditionalizing culture. – pg. 65
One might think that fundamentalism has always existed. This is not so- it has arisen in response to the globalizing influences we see all round us. The term itself dates from the turn of the century, when it was used to refer to the beliefs of some Protestant sects in the US, particularly those who rejected Darwin. Yet even in the late 1950s there was no entry for the word 'fundamentalism' in the large Oxford English dictionary. It has come into common coinage only since the 1960s. – pg. 66
Fundamentalism is not the same as either fanaticism or authoritarianism. Fundamentalists call for a return to basic scriptures or texts, supposed to be read in a literal manner, and they propose that the doctrines derived from such a reading be applied to social, economic or political life. Fundamentalism gives new vitality and importance to the guardians of tradition. – pg. 66
Fundamental ism is beleaguered tradition. It is tradition defended in the traditional way- by reference to ritual truth- in a globalizing world that asks for reasons. Fundamentalism, therefore, has nothing to do with the context of beliefs, religious or otherwise. What matters is how the truth of beliefs is defended or asserted – pg. 67
Fundamentalism isn't about what people believe but, like tradition more generally, about why they believe it and how they justify it. It isn't confined to religion. The Chinese Red Guards, with their devotion to Mao's Little Red Book, were surely fundamentalists. Nor is fundamentalism primarily about the resistance of more traditional cultures to Westernization- a rejection of Western decadence. Fundamentalism can develop on the soil of traditions of all sorts. It has no time for ambiguity, multiple interpretation or multiple identity- it is a refusal of dialogue in a world whose peace and continuity depend on it. – pg. 67
Fundamentalism is a child of globalization – pg. 67
Whatever form it takes- religious, ethnic, nationalist or directly political- I think it right to regard fundamentalism as problematic. It is edged with the possibility of violence, and it is the enemy of cosmopolitan values – pg. 68
Yet fundamentalism isn't just the antithesis of globalizing modernity, but poses questions to it. The most basic one is this: can we live in a world where nothing is sacred? I have to say, in conclusion, that I don't think we can. Cosmopolitans, of whom I count myself one, have to make plain that tolerance and dialogue can themselves be guided by values of a universal kind. All of us need moral commitments that stand above the petty concerns and squabbles of everyday life. We should be prepared to mount an active defense of these values wherever they are poorly developed, or threatened. Cosmopolitan morality itself needs to be driven by passion. None of us would have anything to live for if we didn't have something worth dying for. – pg. 68
There is a global revolution going on in how we think of ourselves and how we form ties and connections with others. It is a revolution advancing unevenly in different regions and cultures, with many resistances. – pg. 69
The paradox of democracy is that democracy is spreading over the world, as I have just described, yet in the mature democracies, which the rest of the world is supposed to be copying, there is widespread disillusionment with democratic processes. – pg. 89-90
On an economic level, they don't believe that politicians are able to deal with the forces moving the world. As everyone understands, many of these go beyond the level of the nation-state. – pg. 92
The democratizing of democracy also depends upon the fostering of a strong civic culture. Markets cannot produce such a culture. Nor can a pluralism of special interest groups. We shouldn't think of there being only two sectors of society, the state and the market-place or the public and private. In between is the area of civil society, including the family and other non-economic institutions. Building a democracy of the emotions is one part of a progressive civic culture. Civil society is the arena in which democratic attitudes, including tolerance, have to be developed. The civic sphere can be fostered by government, but is in turn its cultural basis. – pg. 95-96
On the one hand, as I have stressed, the emergence of a global information society is a powerful democratizing force. On the other hand, television and the other media tend to destroy the very public space of dialogue they open up, through a relentless trivializing, and personalizing, of political issues. Moreover, the growth of giant multinational media corporations means that unelected business tycoons can hold enormous power. – pg. 96-97
As practiced up to now, democratic politics has presumed a national community that is self-governing and able to shape most of the policies that concern it. It has presumed the sovereign nation. But under the impact of globalization, sovereignty has become fuzzy. Nations and nation-states remain powerful, but there are large democratic deficits opening up- as the political scientist, David Held, points out- between them and the global forces that affect the lives of their citizens. Ecological risks, fluctuations in the global economy, or global technological change, do not respect the borders of nations. They escape democratic processes- one of the main reasons, as I said earlier, for the declining appeal of democracy where it is best established. – pg. 97
February 24, 2020
「失控的世界」談的是全球化的影響，只不過它是以社會學的觀點切入，畢竟全球化所影響到的層面本就不只有經濟活動，每一個人的生活層面或多或少都會受到這隻看不見的手所擾動，包括家庭、政治等，透過這樣一本書讓人可以用更全面的觀點來看待全球化這個議題。
書是薄薄的一本，只是也不知道是天氣太熱、題材太過嚴肅，抑或是翻譯翻得太差，雖然隱約可以了解作者想要表達的意思，然而在閱讀過程中始終無法從文字中接收到清楚的訊息，這也是讓我感到比較遺憾的地方。
December 12, 2016
I wish GoodReads gave me the capacity to give this a 3.5 out of 5. A 3 is too low and and a 4 is too high in my estimation.
Anthony Giddens "Runaway World" is a short and thoughtful little book on the influence of Globalism and the way in which this force, if we can call it that, is presently reshaping the world on both a macro and micro level. While I'm not completely convinced by Giddens strong optimism for democracy, I was persuaded by his judgments on the way in which globalism has influenced families, women, and religion. Here are some of my favourite quotes:
"Where tradition lapses, and lifestyle choice prevails, the self isn't exempt. Self-identity has to be created and recreated on a more active basis than before. This explains why therapy and counselling of all kings have become so popular in Western countries" (47).
"Fundamentalism is a child of globalization, which it both responds to and utilizes" (50).
"Marriage was never in the past based upon intimacy - emotional communication. No doubt this was important to a good marinate but it was not the foundation of it. For the couple, it is" (59).
In many ways, Giddens' insights helps us, as readers, to understand the rapidly changing world we live in today. When we reflect on the past, things are faintly familiar yet more so different. I suppose that a good first step to living in this new world in which we find ourselves is realizing how different things really are; I thank Giddens for his ability to help individuals make this first step.
Anthony Giddens "Runaway World" is a short and thoughtful little book on the influence of Globalism and the way in which this force, if we can call it that, is presently reshaping the world on both a macro and micro level. While I'm not completely convinced by Giddens strong optimism for democracy, I was persuaded by his judgments on the way in which globalism has influenced families, women, and religion. Here are some of my favourite quotes:
"Where tradition lapses, and lifestyle choice prevails, the self isn't exempt. Self-identity has to be created and recreated on a more active basis than before. This explains why therapy and counselling of all kings have become so popular in Western countries" (47).
"Fundamentalism is a child of globalization, which it both responds to and utilizes" (50).
"Marriage was never in the past based upon intimacy - emotional communication. No doubt this was important to a good marinate but it was not the foundation of it. For the couple, it is" (59).
In many ways, Giddens' insights helps us, as readers, to understand the rapidly changing world we live in today. When we reflect on the past, things are faintly familiar yet more so different. I suppose that a good first step to living in this new world in which we find ourselves is realizing how different things really are; I thank Giddens for his ability to help individuals make this first step.
October 24, 2018
Although this book is a transcription of the Reith Lectures in 1999, with a 'new' preface from 2002, it seems to me remarkably prescient, and many of the issues he discusses, such as fundamentalism, are all the more relevant today. It is interesting that the reviews on Goodreads come from such a wide variety of countries and in so many languages. Giddens was clearly a global academic. Some of the criticisms (e.g. about the lack of footnotes and references) are presumably because the writers do not know the nature of the Reith Lectures, which are live broadcasts for the interested general listener. Two decades on, it seems to me that many of the trends that Giddens identifies concerning the changes to the family, the conflict between tradition and reform, the pressing problem of climate change and growing inequality both within and between nations are not only still with us but have exacerbated in the intervening 20 years. In the light of the current Brexit debate/debacle it is interesting the prominence he gives to the EU's attempt to create supra-national institutions to deal with supra-national problems.
May 30, 2016
The globalization indeed shaping our world. The way we look at world changed time by time (we refers to the people in the world as whole). This Gidden's work 're mainstreaming the idea how globalization shaping the all aspects of us like risk, tradition, family, and democracy. On risk, Globalization making the world worry more on manufactured risk than the natural ones. Making them pay their worries with insurance, and neglect the civil solidarity. Moreover, the globalization 're blurring the boundaries of nations, making the nation-state were to small to solve the complex problem and too big to solve the small one. That's how the traditionalist anti-globalization movements rises.
ps. The term Runaway World refers to the feeling all of us have, the feeling to live at a time of rapid change.
ps. The term Runaway World refers to the feeling all of us have, the feeling to live at a time of rapid change.
May 22, 2025
«جهان لغزنده است» از آنتونی گید��ز، شرحیست بر دوران معاصر؛ جهانی در حال تغییرات سریع، بیثبات و مملو از ابهام. گیدنز از جهانی سخن میگوید که سنت در آن از هم گسیخته، مرزها فرو ریختهاند و زندگی روزمره زیر سایهٔ جهانیشدن، تکنولوژی و مخاطرات جدید، شکل دیگری به خود گرفته است.
او نشان میدهد که چگونه فرد در عصر مدرن دیگر صرفاً تابع سنت یا جامعه نیست، بلکه باید مدام هویت خویش را بازسازی کند، در جهانی که قواعدش لغزان و ناپایدار است. خطرهای زیستمحیطی، نابرابری اقتصادی، نهادهای دموکراتیک بیاثر و تروریسم جهانی، همه بخشی از این وضعیت لغزاناند که گیدنز با نگاهی جامعهشناسانه و در عین حال فلسفی، آنها را تحلیل میکند.
کتاب، دعوتیست به اندیشیدن دوباره به مسئولیت فردی و جمعیمان در عصری که هیچ چیز قرار نیست مثل قبل بماند.
او نشان میدهد که چگونه فرد در عصر مدرن دیگر صرفاً تابع سنت یا جامعه نیست، بلکه باید مدام هویت خویش را بازسازی کند، در جهانی که قواعدش لغزان و ناپایدار است. خطرهای زیستمحیطی، نابرابری اقتصادی، نهادهای دموکراتیک بیاثر و تروریسم جهانی، همه بخشی از این وضعیت لغزاناند که گیدنز با نگاهی جامعهشناسانه و در عین حال فلسفی، آنها را تحلیل میکند.
کتاب، دعوتیست به اندیشیدن دوباره به مسئولیت فردی و جمعیمان در عصری که هیچ چیز قرار نیست مثل قبل بماند.
December 8, 2016
Me esperaba algo mejor de este libro; deja mucho que desea. Sentí como si le hubieran puesto un límite de páginas a Giddens, y por eso no pudo explorar más el tema. Por otro lado es un libro algo "desactualizado" podríamos decir, ya que muchas de las cosas que dijo que estaban pasando, ya son cosa del pasado o están a punto de cambiar por completo. Más bien, podríamos analizarlo como una predicción de lo que sería el mundo a partir del año 2000.
September 25, 2016
Un mundo desbocado es uno de esos libros indicados para aquellas personas que quieren entender cómo está cambiando el mundo. En este, Anthony Giddens nos expone las implicaciones y consecuencias trae la globalización en la dimensión del riesgo, la familia, la tradición y la democracia.
March 14, 2025
Interessante come questo libro sia stato scritto piu' di 20 anni fa, ma i concetti espressi siano piu' che mai attuali.
Mi e' piaciuta particolarmente questa riflessione: "I giovani sono piu' cinici e convinti che i politici perseguano il proprio interesse e sono, fondamentalmente, piu' preoccupati di problemi a proposito dei quali sentono che i politici hanno poco da dire. Per molti la politica non e' altro che corruzione, con i leader politici che curano i loro interessi personali anziche' avere a cuore quelli dei loro cittadini".
Come hanno detto altri lettori, essendo un libro di poche pagine, i concetti non sono elaborati in modo esteso, ma e' comunque una piacevole lettura.
Mi e' piaciuta particolarmente questa riflessione: "I giovani sono piu' cinici e convinti che i politici perseguano il proprio interesse e sono, fondamentalmente, piu' preoccupati di problemi a proposito dei quali sentono che i politici hanno poco da dire. Per molti la politica non e' altro che corruzione, con i leader politici che curano i loro interessi personali anziche' avere a cuore quelli dei loro cittadini".
Come hanno detto altri lettori, essendo un libro di poche pagine, i concetti non sono elaborati in modo esteso, ma e' comunque una piacevole lettura.
January 28, 2025
كتاب خفيف ولطيف، قرأته في ليلة واحدة. صراحةً، توقعت شيئًا أفضل بسبب السمعة الكبيرة للكاتب، فهو - حسب علمي - أفضل عالم اجتماع أنجلوساكسوني معاصر بلا منازع.
يُستخدم الكتاب كمرجع في العديد من الأطروحات والكتب حول العولمة، وهذا ما جعلني أتوقع شيئًا أعمق، لكنه بشكل عام جيد جدًا. ولولا الملحق الذي كتبه فيلسوف آخر، لكان تقييم الكتاب 4 نجوم.
الترجمة جيدة، الأفكار واضحة، والأسلوب سلس للغاية. تجربة ممتازة من كل الجوانب، ولكن موضوع كالعولمة، بأي حال، لا يكفيه كتيب كهذا. ومع ذلك، أعتقد أنه أدى الغرض.
أنصح به.
يُستخدم الكتاب كمرجع في العديد من الأطروحات والكتب حول العولمة، وهذا ما جعلني أتوقع شيئًا أعمق، لكنه بشكل عام جيد جدًا. ولولا الملحق الذي كتبه فيلسوف آخر، لكان تقييم الكتاب 4 نجوم.
الترجمة جيدة، الأفكار واضحة، والأسلوب سلس للغاية. تجربة ممتازة من كل الجوانب، ولكن موضوع كالعولمة، بأي حال، لا يكفيه كتيب كهذا. ومع ذلك، أعتقد أنه أدى الغرض.
أنصح به.
April 30, 2021
Compared to other Sociology books I've read, this is one of the lightest by far. It was fairly fast-paced and with an actually understandable terminology for mortals who aren't specialized in the topic or familiar with political and sociology metaphors. Although I don't usually enjoy assigned reading for the mere fact that they're obliging me to read something, I thoroughly enjoyed this and found the content absorbing. Honestly felt kind of proud of myself for appreciating it and actually learning stuff. Good for me.
January 30, 2018
Read as a quick refresher of the optimistic views of globalization and as a point from which I will contrast my next couple of readings. Good for what it was, but despite being full of potential solutions for global issues, I didn't find much concrete to hold onto.
December 5, 2025
It's good, but nothing groundbreaking. There wasn't any thought in this book that would make you pause and think. It was like a summary of the frustration about modernity and that's it. It stops when it does that.
October 9, 2018
Phenomenal takedown of many of our views on the world
October 16, 2021
Libro interessante che analizza ogni aspetto della globalizzazione e lascia spazio anche a future interpretazione
December 13, 2022
rating: 3,5
leituras académicas às vezes até são produtivas
leituras académicas às vezes até são produtivas
May 25, 2023
وجدت نفسي ضائع بين مجموعة أشياء: تكرار مزعج للأفكار بصورة مفرطة، جموح وصدام معي في أفكار أخرى بشكل أقل .. وملل؟
تناقضات جامحة.
تناقضات جامحة.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews