‘People may generally be more knowledgeable but they still have few real choices.’ Discuss.

Through the exploration of globalization, this essay will show that people are generally more knowledgeable because of greater access to knowledge. It will outline how knowledge can lead to social change, thus giving people more choice. However, despite increased knowledge there are also structures that restrict said agency. Examples of this will be drawn from the course blocks of globalization and knowledge. The theories of globalists and inter-nationalists will be used, along with that of a ‘knowledge society’ and a ‘risk society’. This essay will conclude that the nation-state creates structures, backing the inter-nationalist’s argument, and will express a need for more global politics in addressing problems such as global warming.

Knowledge comes in many forms and can be delivered in many different ways. It ranges from ‘sophisticated academic knowledge’ to ‘routine practices of our daily lives, such as looking after ourselves and our children’ (Woodward et. al., 2004, p.122). Knowledge is socially constructed, empowered and transmitted with the exception of a few forms, such as internal knowledge (Woodward and Watt, 2004, p.25). However, Foucault believes that even our internal knowledge is given meaning socially through the discourse of science and medicine (Woodward and Watt, 2004, p.23). So if knowledge is socially constructed and transmitted, then the frequency at which it is transmitted is key to seeing how people are generally more knowledgeable. One of the defining features of globalization is the intensification of flows (Cochrane and Pain, 2004, P.16). Knowledge creates technology, such as television and the internet; this technology then facilitates the flow of knowledge. When looking at the global flows of knowledge in the form of culture we can see that between 1970 and 1980 ‘the value of cultural imports and exports increased nearly six fold’ (Mackay, 2004, p.49). This highlights how global flows have intensified, thereby giving people greater access to knowledge, which in turn makes them more knowledgeable. So how can this intensification of flows give people more choice?

Positive globalists see the flows of global culture as a good thing because it breaks down previous structures, such as a national culture (Mackay, 2004, p.55). The internet has been an important tool for bypassing state control. When reflecting on the internet and its impact, Rheingold talks of ‘the public sphere’ as a place for public debate free from state intervention (Rheingold, 1995, cited in Mackay, 2004, p.55). Rheingold considers the internet to be truly democratic because unlike the ‘one-to-many’ nature of television, the internet allows ‘open, interactive, access’ to all, affording ‘greater diversity or plurality of voices to be heard’; therefore it is, ‘profoundly democratizing’ (Rheingold, 1995, cited in Mackay, 2004, p.56). This highlights how there is much greater access to many forms of knowledge, giving people more choice and providing them the tools to become more knowledgeable. Positive globalists would also point to how globalization has impacted on movements such as feminism. Sassen mentions that state borders don’t necessarily define the needs and agendas of women and that ‘we are seeing the formation of cross-border solidarities and notions of membership rooted in gender, sexuality and feminism’ (1998, cited in Kelly and Prokhovnik, 2004, p.106). This one example shows how globalization is helping the transmission of the knowledge of the feminist movement, which has forced social change for years and continues to do so. When looking at medicine we can see how feminism has forced social change in Britain. A structure was created by our patriarchal society that denied women the right to study at university. This denial allowed men to hold the power of medical knowledge (Woodward and Watt, 2004, p. 27). This highlights how knowledge is interlinked with power and how it is socially constructed. However, women broke through in Britain and by 1976 twenty percent of doctors were women and by 2000, over half of all medical students were female (Woodward and Watt, 2004, p.28). Feminism challenges many of the structures in society and with globalization facilitating ‘solidarities that transcend national borders’; it can continue to challenge existing structures, giving people, women in this case, more choice. We live in a knowledge society, where knowledge gives us power and allows for social mobility. Woodward et. al., when talking of a knowledge society highlights the importance of knowledge and how this is impacted by the speed that it can be transmitted at in our globalized world (2004, p.120). But does increased knowledge give greater options to all and who decides which knowledge is valuable?