Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Neoliberalism, Globalization and Resistance: The Case of India

  • Chapter
The Globalization of Liberalism

Part of the book series: Millennium ((MILL))

  • 310 Accesses

Abstract

In the post-Cold War context, liberal international theory appeared to have re-emerged as a powerful explanatory instrument of global change. Traditional liberalinternational theory had lost ground due to challenges from both Realist and Marxist theories. The inability to account for the configuration and deployment of state power and interest and their mutations in an international framework, on the one hand, and the incapacity to explain structural inequalities within nation-states and at the international level, on the other, kept liberal theory away from the centre-stage of academic international relations for a long period of time. I wish to argue that the return of liberal international theory is not based on any considerable recent advancements in liberalism’s conceptual and methodological apparatus. The problems of traditional liberalism continue to mar its explanatory possibilities. It is the contemporary assertion of neoliberalism that is often viewed as the return of liberal internationalism. What we see today is a shift from conventional liberal internationalism to what I call ‘neoliberal globalism’.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1. See Mark W. Zacher and Richard A. Matthew, ‘Liberal International Theory: Common Threads, Divergent Strands’, in C. W. Kegley Jr. (ed.), Controversies in International Relations Theory (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995), pp. 107–50.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2. Christian Bay, ‘Conceptions of Security: Individual, National and Global’, in Bhikhu Parekh and Thomas Pantham (eds.), Political Discourse: Explorations in Indian and Western Political Thought (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1987), p. 129.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 4. See Arthur A. Goldsmith, ‘The State, the Market and Economic Development: A Second Look at Adam Smith in Theory and Practice’, Development and Change, Vol. 26, No. 4 (1995), p. 634.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Noam Chomsky, ‘World Order and its Rules: Variations on Some Themes’, Scandinavian Journal of Development Alternatives, Vol. 13, No. 3 (1994), p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Richard Gardner, ‘The Comeback of Liberal Internationalism’, The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3 (1990), p. 23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 9. Scott Burchill, ‘Liberal Internationalism’, in Burchill, Andrew Linklater etal., Theories of International Relations (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996), p. 28.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mary Durfee and James N. Rosenau, ‘Playing Catch-up: International Relations Theory and Poverty’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 25, No. 3 (1996), p. 539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 11. Maria Mies, ‘The Myth of Catching-up Development’, in Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva (eds.), Ecofeminism (New Delhi: Kali for Women, 1993), p. 60.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 13. Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (London: Penguin, 1992), p. 125.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 15. William Ryrie; First World, Third World (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1995), p. 107.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 19. For an exposition and critique of the ‘Washington consensus’, see T. Krishna Kumar, ‘Silent Consensus against Washington Consensus’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 32, No. 13 (1997), pp. 657–62.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sukhpal Singh, ‘Structural Adjustment Programme and Indian Agriculture: Towards an Assessment of Implications’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 51 (1995), p. 3311.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 23. S. N. Mishra, ‘Agricultural Liberalisation and Development Strategy in Ninth-Plan’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 32, No. 13 (1997), p. A-19.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 24. Sucha Singh Gill and Jaswinder Singh Brar, ‘Global Market and Competitiveness of Indian Agriculture: Some Issues’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 31, No. 32 (1996), p. 2176.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 16. Kripa A. P., ‘Raitha Sangha’s Political Dilemma’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 3 (1995), p. 140.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 30. Vandana Shiva, ‘Environmental Impact of Economic Globalisation’, Manorama Yearbook 1996 (Kottayam: Malayala Manorama Company, 1996), p. 100.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 31. See Jeremy Seabrook, Notes from Another India (London: Pluto Press, 1995), p. 75.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 32. For details, see Wishvas Rane, ‘Farmers’ Rally against GATT Proposals’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 28, No. 44 (1993), p. 2391.

    Google Scholar 

  19. John Kurien, ‘Impact of Joint Ventures on Fish Economy’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 6 (1995), p. 300.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 37. ‘Fishworkers Showing the Way’, NAPM Bulletin, Vol. 1, No. 3 (1996), p. 4. See also Ashish Kothari, ‘Environment and New Economic Policies’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 17 (1995), p. 926.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 38. For details, see Mukul, ‘Traditional Fisherfolk Fight New Economic Policy’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 29, No. 9 (1994), p. 475.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 40. The impact of market-oriented economic policies on marine ecology and fish economy is discussed in Saritha Acharya and Niru Acharya, ‘Structural Adjustment and Small Producers: Reflections from Case Studies’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 1 (1995), pp. 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 41. See A. K. Ramakrishnan, ‘The State should be Responsible to our Resources’, Passline, Vol. 2, Nos. 19–20 (1997), p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 47. See Ramakrishnan Korakandy, ‘Managing World Fisheries: Third World’s Loss’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 31, No. 34 (1996), pp. 2289–91.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 51. See Sulabha Brahme and Sharayu Mhatre, ‘Enron: Neo-Colonialism in Action’, Frontier, Vol. 29, No. 3 (1996), pp. 4–8; Amulya K. N. Reddy and Antonette D’Sa, ‘Enron and Other Similar Deals vs New Energy Paradigm’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 24 (1995), pp. 1441–8; and Girish Sant, Shantanu Dixit and Subodh Wagle, ‘Dabhol Project PPA: Structure and Techno-Economic Implications’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 24 (1995), pp. 1449–55.

    Google Scholar 

  26. 52. See Gary Cohen and Satinath Sarangi, ‘People’s Struggle Against DuPont in Goa’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 30, No. 13 (1995), pp. 663–4.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 53. Immanuel Wallerstein, ‘The Inter-State Structure of the Modern World- System’, in Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski (eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 89.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Michael D. Yates, ‘Does the U. S. Labor Movement Have a Future?’, Monthly Review, Vol. 48, No. 9 (1997), p. 11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 55. See Dave Broad, ‘Globalization versus Labor’, Monthly Review, Vol. 47, No. 7 (1995), pp. 20–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 56. See Frederick F. Clairmonte, ‘Transnational Conglomerates: Reflections on Global Power’, in Krishna Ahooja-Patel, Anne Gorden Drabek and Marc Nerfin (eds.), World Economy in Transition (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1986), p. 153.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 57. Dinesh Hegde and Sorab Sadri, ‘Trade Unions and the Changing Sociopolitical Environment: Their Form, Nature and Role’, Man and Development, Vol. 18, No. 2(1996), p. 111.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 58. Leslie Paul Thiele, ‘Making Democracy Safe for the World: Social Movements and Global Polities’, Alternatives, Vol. 18, No. 3 (1993), p. 278.

    Google Scholar 

  33. 59. Muto Ichiyo, ‘Alliance of Hope and Challenges of Global Democracy’, Lokayan Bulletin, Vol. 11, No. 1 (1994), p. 41.

    Google Scholar 

  34. 60. Alberto Meluci, ‘Liberation or Meaning? Social Movements, Culture and Democracy’, Development and Change, Vol. 23, No. 3 (1992), p. 75.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, ‘Imperialism and the US Left’, Frontier, Vol. 28, No. 44 (1996), p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Raymond Williams, Towards 2000 (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1983), p. 249.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Barry D. Adam, ‘Post-Marxism and the New Social Movements’, Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, Vol. 30, No. 3 (1993), pp. 316–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 66. Samir Amin, ‘Social Movements at the Periphery’, in Ponna Wignaraja (ed.), New Social Movements in the South (New Delhi: Vistaar Publications, 1993), p. 89.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lester Edwin J. Ruiz, ‘After National Democracy: Radical Democratic Politics at the Edge of Modernity’, Alternatives, Vol. 16, No. 2 (1991), p. 165.

    Google Scholar 

  40. For details, see Barry Hindess, Freedom, Equality, and the Market (London: Tavistock, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Arnaud de Borchgrave, ‘Globalization - The Bigger Picture: An Interview with Dr. Ismail Serageldin’, The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 3 (1996), p. 161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ibid., p. 43. See also Aijaz Ahmad, ‘In the Eye of the Storm: The Left Chooses’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 31, No. 22 (1996), p. 1330.

    Google Scholar 

  43. 79. Immanuel Wallerstein, ‘The ANC and South Africa: Past and Future of Liberation Movements in World-System’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 31, No. 39 (1996), p. 2699.

    Google Scholar 

  44. 83. Arun Ghosh, ‘Capitalism, Nation State and Development in a Globalised World’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 32, No. 14 (1997), p. 685.

    Google Scholar 

  45. 84. See Oliver Mendelsohn and Upendra Baxi, ‘Introduction’, in Mendelsohn and Baxi (eds.), The Rights of Subordinated Peoples (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994), p. 10.

    Google Scholar 

  46. 85. Robert Solo, ‘The Formation and Transformation of States’, in W. Ladd Hollist and F. LaMond Tullis (eds.), An International Political Economy (Boulder: Westview Press, 1985), p. 83.

    Google Scholar 

  47. 86. Eric Hobsbawm, Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914–1991 (New Delhi: Penguin, 1995), p. 577.

    Google Scholar 

  48. 88. Noam Chomsky, Powers and Prospects: Reflections on Human Nature and the Social Order (Delhi: Madhyam Books, 1996), pp. 73–5.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. A. K. Ramakrishnan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Programme for Research and Documentation, Centre for Development and Environment, University of Oslo, Norway

    Eivind Hovden (Associate Professor) (Associate Professor)

  2. School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, UK

    Edward Keene (Formerly Lecturer in International Politics) (Formerly Lecturer in International Politics)

Copyright information

© 2002 Millennium

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ramakrishnan, A.K. (2002). Neoliberalism, Globalization and Resistance: The Case of India. In: Hovden, E., Keene, E. (eds) The Globalization of Liberalism. Millennium. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230519381_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation