Taking up geo-cultural challenges in the era of globalization :
Moving from cultural exception to global cultural pluralism as a political project

This concept note describes the key issues of a problematique that addresses the relationship between globalization and cultures. It is part of the ongoing thought process that led the International Organisation de la Francophonie (OIF) and later, the IberoAmerican Organisation for Education, Science and Culture (OEI), the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries (CPLP) and the Union Latine to support a permanent forum on cultural pluralism. This support was granted with the understanding of full autonomy in order to guarantees the credibility of the discussions.

This Forum aims to foster public debates between all stakeholders concerned with geo-cultural challenges (public authorities - companies - civil society - experts), in order to clarify the real issues that are at stake and formulate realistic proposals address the associated challenges effectively.

The problematique will provide a logical framework for thought and discussion be structured along five general themes. This working paper is to be used as a reference tool for choosing the topics of discussion within each theme, as well as guide the preparation of concept notes that will be produced to engage debates.

Globalization and culture: Geo-cultural challenges within a cosmopolitan approach

The globalization process has a multiplier effect. It accelerates and intensifies economic, financial, technical and social exchanges and processes on a global scale but to varying degrees and rhythms according to the various regions. Often neglected is globalization's cultural dimension in which the ifferences in values, ideas, models, lifestyles and world views are brought into focus and become more visible and meaningful. Cultural globalization changes conceptions of the world. Since social reality is by its very nature symbolic, the bearing and consequences of such an important evolution cannot be ignored.

The most important and difficult question raised by globalization is not the one generally raised by liberal thought: how do we engage in commercial exchanges at the global level? But rather: how do we live together in a world with irreducible differences that are constantly changing? These are first and foremost cultural concerns that we can longer pretend to address at the national level.

Culture is an ongoing process through which meanings are socially and historically constructed. Today, significantly, the most important values, ideas, and models are created in the globalized media realm. In comparison to the "globalizing hyperculture" built up by the global media, other cultures becomes in some way "secondary", reduced to "local" functions, and depreciated when confronted with the dream-reality presented by the media. Societies whose cultures cannot express themselves in the global media (essentially for economic reasons) risk being subjected to cultural Darwinism. This raises a fundamental cultural security issue. On the one hand, because societies' capacity to develop their identity and social cohesion is called into question when confronted with values and consumer models such as those conveyed by the global media. On the other hand, because societies whose cultures dominate the media can lose the ability to understand and accept diversity in the world.

Where does power in this globalized world come from? It cannot come from weapons which are ineffective in imposing order, but rather from the ability to produce and convey symbols through the global media which provides the main vectors of cultural globalization. The world of symbols- the cultural world - thus becomes the field for power struggles which no longer fall along territorial lines. Cultural factors have become key elements of power and have a strategic importance of the first order. Instead of snubbing culture or propping it up as a cause of "clashes of civilizations", we should consider cultural issues as geo-cultural challenges, on the same footing as security concerns (geo-political stakes) and economic power (geo-economic challenges).

The state was revolutionary in feudal times when it succeeded in imposing its exclusive authority on a territory. Globalization is just as challenging a transformation. Globalisation is not a predetermined event. It is a process that results from human decisions and that has therefore to be dealt with politically, by bringing together all concerned stakeholders.

One of the main difficulties in doing so comes from patterns of thought and political action that consider the nation state as the central, if not exclusive, political actor. This "methodological nationalism" leads to a rejection of the decline of the state and a defensive attitude towards globalization and impedes addressing global issues that are extra-national at their core in an appropriate way. It leads to a paradoxical dead end: while the liberalization of exchanges is fostered for economic development, social consequences of this process are dealt with by national policies which are ineffective in controlling the process itself. Under these conditions, inaction means allowing the strongest - notably groups large enough to act at the global level - to impose the solutions which suit their views and interests. It also leads to policy being increasingly regarded as unable to deal with global issues at the national level. States, focused on defending what remains of their power and interests, cannot solve global questions alone. Only mobilization which will follow from a renewed recognition of the risks brought on by a poorly controlled global process will push states to participate in initiatives which can provide answers to the challenges of globalization. Paradoxically, today, no organization is responsible for global challenges!

For example, can the efforts to defend "cultural diversity" lead to a managed cultural globalization? The project for a Convention under the aegis of UNESCO aims to guarantee the rights of states to adopt national cultural policies which would be protected from the free trade commitments that states themselves have made through the WTO. This approach supposes a correlation (and subordination) between cultural identities and the nation-state, without recognizing that geo-cultural entities (the Francophonie, Ibero-America, the Arab or German-speaking world, for example) are not necessarily nation states: cultural spaces, economic spaces, and political spaces no longer necessarily coincide. Will this project recognize the role of geo-cultural entities? Will it impose obligations for the global media in terms of their role as geo-cultural actors? Will it lead to measures that insure cultural exchanges proceed with a minimum of reciprocity? The "cultural exception" and "cultural diversity" represent two useful and necessary steps for a renewed consciousness and mobilization around cultural issues. From now on, however, we need to go further and make global cultural pluralism a political project that leads to managed cultural globalization.

In order to manage the process of globalization in all its dimensions - political, economic, social and cultural -, national policies and the international system must be reformed. And above all, a cosmopolitan approach must be adopted to deal with global issues which are by their very nature extra-national.

What forces will provide the impulse to such a movement? Significant changes come about only by necessity, as was the case with with human rights, the environment, food security and epidemics. Only an understanding of the nature and the importance of global issues, the consequences of political inaction and the absence of real responsibility for addressing crucial questions, can lead global actors to define and embrace objectives to respond to the challenges. Only under these conditions can global actors be forced to take on their responsibilities. Such a revived consciousness can become political only through a three-way process: the development of a renewed thought process suited to the challenges, public transnational and transcultural discussions, and the elaboration of realistic proposals through a process of "concertation", leading to the elaboration of the conditions necessary to live together at the global level. This cannot be achieved without accepting the Other, his or her differences, and putting oneself in his or her place. For the global media, this translates into a public service to give Others the opportunity to speak and become visible.

To start this process and pave the way for a cosmopolitan approach that leads to the elaboration of the means to control globalization, the Forum on cultural pluralism calls on the various stakeholders - public authorities - companies - civil society - experts - to engage in a public discussion of these challenges on the Internet and in international meetings. Such an initiative has already received the support of organizations representing three linguistic spaces (Francophonie, Ibero-America, the Community of Portuguese-speaking countries).

The debate is open to the various aspects of geo-cultural challenges with the aim of elaborating a problematique, as well as formulating and discussing proposals (www.planetagora.org). One such idea is a new kind of political space, open to all stakeholders, which could take the shape of a global council of cultures, called upon to prepare and supervise the establishment of a regime suited to the demands of intercultural exchanges and intended to insure global cultural diversity. And which would allow geo-cultural spaces to assume the role which has been brought on by globalization.

Jean Tardif

« Home
Go to the FORUM »