Hossien Salimi
Abstract
In the article two claims about the future of state have been posed. These claims have been emphasized and considered in the late prof. Golmohammadi`s writings. The first is about the future of globalization process. And the second is in about the future of state in the context of globalization, based ...
Read More
In the article two claims about the future of state have been posed. These claims have been emphasized and considered in the late prof. Golmohammadi`s writings. The first is about the future of globalization process. And the second is in about the future of state in the context of globalization, based on the Weberian definition of state. My main question in this article is what is the future of state? from contending theories of globalization`s point of views. Will Weberian state be continued or not? The main hypothesis is alongside the continuation of globalization process States will survive but the function of State will change. If we understand globalization as a deep compression of time and space, most important theoreticians believe that in spite of some backwards after Corona pandemic as well as Ukraine War, this process will be continued. Simultaneously, states will exist but their essence and function shall be changed and abandon from the Weberian meaning. At the end I will try to test the claims by come experimental data.
Hossien Salimi
Abstract
Purpose: Since the time that all social phenomena and political interactions of man formed in the framework of new nation-states and social and cultural identities defined in this new framework, notwithstanding much emphasis on the idea of peace and its value and significance, indeed the bloodiest and ...
Read More
Purpose: Since the time that all social phenomena and political interactions of man formed in the framework of new nation-states and social and cultural identities defined in this new framework, notwithstanding much emphasis on the idea of peace and its value and significance, indeed the bloodiest and the most widespread wars of history takes place in this era and by modern nation-states. This paper seeks to answer this fundamental question that, has violence and conflict been an essential element of modern nation-state? Answering this question is important because if violence and conflict in international politics rooted in nature and foundation of modern nation-state then achieving stability and peace is possible only through changing the function of this institution or replacing it with alternative institutions.Design/Methodology/Approach: Method of this research is explanatory. In order to answering this question in the format of a theoretical research, at first classical definitions of concept of nation-state will be discussed; then historical context and basis of formation of nation-state will be elucidated and in the end the fundamental dimensions of violence and conflict in modern nation-state will be discussed in the thought of five great thinkers in this field (Bodin, Hobbs, Rousseau, Hegel and Weber). This is a theoretical research that both attempts to survey classical theories in the field of studies on state and conflict and also historical studies on international relations. Also this research is based on a normative and critical approach regarding mainstream theories and those which defend status quo.Findings: This research concludes that despite of pervasive known ideas and values about peace in modern era, nation-state as a modern institution of political power contains a kind of organized violence which in its classical form reproduces it. In other words widespread violence in contemporary history of humanity somehow rooted in this modern institution. Monopoly in use of force, military power and exerting organized violence in the context of conceptualization of sovereignty alongside not recognizing an upper authority in international level and rejection of ethical commitments in modern culture of international relations as a general norm, made out breaking violent conflicts in the face of sharp conflicts and disagreements inevitable. Therefore it seems that in the course of global upheavals, establishing peace is possible only through fundamental change in the functions of modern state.Originality/Value: Hitherto peace studies have always paid particular attention to the category of state and sovereignty. But through combining theoretical and historical approaches this research presents a new attitude to this category. Also explicit results of this research is that maintaining present conditions of modern institution of nation-state made realization of peace impossible; therefore conclusions of this research can be a new window in literature of peace studies specially in the context of Iranian peace studies.
