Globalization and Hegemony Shift: Are States Merely Agents of Corporate Capitalism?

IntroductionWe live in neither a modern world nor a post-modern world, but a globalized world. Globalization reaches economic, financial, techno- logical, environmental, social, cultural, political, and health-related is- sues and events. The construct of globalization, by its nature, embraces every element of human life, and therefore has become a sort of jus cogens of today's world.1The process of globalization is not a new phenomenon. It was seeded at the time that explorers, merchants, colonizers, and occupiers began advancing their profit projects in different territories for the Crowns of Europe, forcing weaker peoples to accept their value systems and influence.2 This early process of globalization paved the way for today's corporate capitalism.3 Today, the inverse is true-corporate cap- italism is the locomotive force of today's globalized world.4 Corporate capitalism has created an invisible and inevitable system comprised of two primary elements: market and technology, which have become two faces of globalization-a modern Ardhanarishvara Shiva.5Individuals and states celebrate (consciously, subconsciously, or unconsciously) the invasion of market and technology, and enthusiasti- cally adapt themselves to globalization. In this process of celebration and adaptation, individuals and states accept the hegemony of corpo- rate capitalism without even noticing their acquiescence.6 States and their people, fully immersed in the corporate capitalist society, have accepted the profit motive of corporate capitalism as their political val- ue system to the exclusion of the values of welfare and social justice that were espoused by pre-globalized social democracies.7 The access to goods and services made available by globalization made corporate cap- italism a state of mind and lifestyle that forces us into the realm of mar- ket and technology while ignoring aspirational, emotional, and spiri- tual elements of human life.8 As Habermas states, the "lifeworld" is di- minished by systems-market-driven areas of life wherein the operative rationality is money and power.9 This corporate-capitalism-induced, market-driven globalization has successfully insinuated a globalist epis- temology consisting of a one-dimensional definition of Western civiliza- tion and values without reference to any social or cultural pluralism.10 The bottom line has replaced the empathic human response in the Western values hierarchy.11 As some politicians have stated, "corporate greed [has] exploded beyond anything that could have been imag- ined," thriving in an "ethical vacuum space."12We face a challenge in determining the role that law and authority should play in globalization induced and sponsored by corporate capi- talism. How can law and authority address the effects of globalization in limiting or shaping human imagination, understanding, and expecta- tions by directing the practices of law and its values toward a healthy and peaceful world? Where has humanism been placed in the world of corporate capitalism-induced, market-driven globalization? We also face the question of whether globalization is a natural process or a process manufactured for corporate benefit, since it directly helps promote free trade and corporate activities, but does not resolve the issues of poverty and hunger worldwide.13To address this question in the context of globalization, law, and power, Part I of this Article traces the hegemonic process in the crea- tion and application of international law. Part II and Part III analyze how several states became hegemons and how these hegemonic states paved the road for the incubation of corporate capitalism. Part IV ad- dresses whether these states have transformed their hegemony into corporate capitalism. Finally, Part V applies this analysis in a critical ex- amination of Libya under Gaddafi.I. Process of Hegemony: International Law, Power, and DeterritorializationDiscussions of hegemonic international law posit that interna- tional law is relatively weak, that it is nothing more than epiphenome- nal, merely a production of normative standards that mirror the inter- ests of powerful states. …