This is a globalization perspective that serves as a global justice movement by creating multifaceted sets of ideological frames and transnational networks that oppose the globalization of contemporary neoliberalism. These movements have been proved efficient when used as political antitodes to alleviate dominion systems especially which are effectual in maintaining and sticking to power. This system gives a good documentation of political clout and membership of transnational social movements. This has increased their power to seize oppositional imagination framework.
This is a retalioratory movement geared at taking the advantage of capabilities of technology in its generic globalization. In the efforts to bring reforms, it anticipates to turn the organizational and ideological structure of neoliberal globalization against itself. This will inurn subvert rules of governance exclusionary and allocation of resources logically. Analysis of counterhemogenic movement is essential in understanding the dynamics taking place in contemporary politics for it gives a clear distinction between domestic and international politics (Roberts, Hite, Bellone, 2007, 421).
Counterhegemonic globalization has not received an equal reaction from all ends of the world. It therefore doses not apply in all global justice movements. It has been rejected by groups which have a vision of equity, sustainability in environment and human dignity. These communities prefer generic globalization in which values and power are defined on pure local basis. Some form of counterhegemonic globalization has been incorporated in accessing and installing local power and culture.
The efforts of this kind of globalization to fight political oppressions require local connections and strategies. This is because for it to survive, the ordinary people should promise to redress their former grievances. A successful strategy to streamline this transnational poetical movement should encompass social structural foundations and local political motivations as well as transnational actions, structures and strategies. It should recognize the fundamental difference in local life from the rest of the world.
Dispassionate skepticism should be well balanced with the desire to create social change through potent new agents (Roberts, Hite, Bellone, 2007, p. 425). Before adopting this political movement, it is important to view it from both perspectives. Groups building antisystemic global networks from dignity and equity vision should not exaggerate their transformative power. This is because the movement of antiglobalization can not be said innocent of reactionary and sinister projects.
Local citizens expecting to be relieved from neoliberal globalization disappointments and transnational movements can be disserviced if power is exaggerated. Sometimes hard domination can be countered by soft power. However, current corporate globalization hegemony is fully supported by ideological machinery and cultural machinery of full array and sets of coercive elements that are very solid. To impact really, these transnational movements should powerfully generate normative change cascades and apply the ideological advantage in transformation of economic power and hard structures of established politics.
This is generally a focus of bringing another world which is free of oppression (Roberts, Hite, Bellone, 2007, 427). Transnational social movements aiming at counterhegemonic globalization consists of three families; environmental movements, women’s movements and labor movements. Each family confront emerging dilemma through transnational networks. The international bodies that are involved in making omnibus networks to bring difference respecting mirror image, market subordinating and social protection oriented world are the World Social Forum and ATTAC.
One of the most interesting feature of counterhegemonic globalization is the blend of persistence and novelty. This feature combines the elements of existing conceptualization and theoretical frameworks and also a substantive analysis of such movements (Roberts, Hite, Bellone, 2007, p. 431). Labor has not yet become promising candidate in transnational social movements. The geography of jobs perspective has dominated the current framing of transnational politics.
According to this perspective, workers of the world compete which in the neoliberal mantra, replace the admonitions for transnational solidarity. This perspective captures the increasing ease with which capitalists drive technologies of high productivity, intensifying cross border competition. The challenge in, labor market can be addressed through democratic governance, social contract and basic rights. The efforts to built global environmental movement have been challenged.
This has risen because of the formidable gap separating environmentalism of the poor and conservationist agenda of traditional environmental groups. In the environmental arena, integrating global and local concerns is more daunting. This is because various perspectives on global warming, ozone layer and toxic dumps divide the world. Despite these structural challenges, this is the most successful social movement around the globe (Roberts, Hite, Bellone, p. 438)). The political clout depends on the rate with which universalistic ideology affirmation diffuses.
The interpretation of universality has challenged the political stout not only in subsidiary nations but also in the north south divide. Democracy has variously been defined by people of different gender, social status, economic power and geographical characteristics. Capitalists promote the democracy that promotes equitable ownership of resources whereas socialists promote democracy of accumulation of resources by the bourgeoisies. The poor promote democracy that can bring resources close to them and reduce the strain in getting their daily living.
The perspective of democracy and difference in religious beliefs has challenged the globe and seemingly, it may take long before a consensus on political aspects is reached. According to the above analysis and discussion, counterhegemonic globalization is a transnational tool that promotes equity, justice and transparency in social, economic and political spheres around the world (Roberts, Hite, Bellone, 2007, p. 441).
Reference: Roberts Timmons, Hite Amy & Bellone Amy (2007) The Globalization and Development Reader: Perspectives on development and Global Change. New York: Blackwell Publishers