Globalisation or global apartheid? Boundaries and knowledge in postmodern times
Globalisation or global apartheid? Boundaries and knowledge in postmodern times
复制标题
全球化还是全球种族隔离？
DOI：
10.1080/14650049808407611
复制
发表时间：
1998
期刊：
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Simon Dalby
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Simon Dalby
通过对比全球化和全球种族隔离的模式来解释后现代世界的全球政治形势，本文认为边界最好是在其运作的更大的地缘政治框架中得到理解。全球种族隔离文献谴责当前全球经济中的不平等，并将南非的家园与不发达世界的较贫穷国家类比，这些国家既是劳动力的来源，同时又被其劳动力的受益者视为一个问题和政治威胁和破坏稳定的人口流动的来源。跨边界流动的重要性以及空间限制文化和经济的不可能性表明，全球化和全球种族隔离模式都有一些解释性的有用性，可以作为启发式手段，挑战试图理解当代社会进程的非反思性空间思维的持久性。
Contrasting the models of globalisation and global apartheid as explanations of the global political situation in the postmodern world this paper suggests that boundaries are best understood in relation to the larger geopolitical frameworks within which they function. The global apartheid literature condemns the inequities in the current global economy and analogizes the homelands in South Africa with the poorer states in the underdeveloped world that are both a source of labour, and simultaneously viewed by the beneficiaries of their labour, as a problem and source of politically threatening and destabilising population mobility. The importance of flows across boundaries and the impossibilities of spatially constraining cultures and economies suggests that both globalisation and the model of global apartheid have some explanatory usefulness as heuristic devices to challenge the persistence of unreflective spatial thinking in trying to understand contemporary social processes.