Globalization and World History

July/August 2004 · Historically Speaking promisingnewinsights, particularlysince differentregional studies still applyrather divergentmethodologies to related historical phenomena . For example, historians ofEurope and East Asia tend to apply different sets of questions to 20th-centurytransformations of political cultures in bothworld regions. However , both in Europe and East Asia certain developments such as the advent of mass media, mass mobilization, and political radicalism were indeed related to similar structural transformations and influences. A methodological synthesis can thus produce more than a coherent frameworkfor a global analysis—it can lead to cross-fertilizations between area-specific research approaches. But there is a price to payfor experiments with genuine group research. For example, there is the question of historical narrative and especially the problem ofauthorship. A derivative issue, which may even be of central concern for younger scholars who have notyet established themselves, is that the academic reward system does nottrulyacknowledge collective efforts. In that way, coauthored publications can only remain a byproduct ofsome personal research project. But even strictly personal research projects can aim atsketchingoutglobal constellations byfocusing on two or three regions as probes of a wider constellation. In other words, a small number of national or cultural cases could be studied making use of primary source material and then related to other regional experiences, forwhich the historian would necessarily have to rely on secondary literature. Such studies could provide an important bridge between the disparate disciplines ofhistorical comparison and the historiography ofintercultural relations, transfers , or encounters. Theyembed the detailed analysis of a limited number of cases into a larger, global perspective. Certainly the study of global processes blurs previouslyestablished academic boundaries , and many projects with a global scope will be interdisciplinary in nature. However, different academic fields are likely to retain some aspects of their disciplinary cultures, and historiographycan certainlyadd its own elements to the rapidly expanding study of global flows and structures in the widest sense. Historiographycan contribute a narrative tradition, which tends to be filled with less academic jargon than the literature of other fields and is less captive to rigid theoretical frameworks. And it can provide meticulous source work and an appreciation oflocal details, which are essential for understanding global dynamics and constellations in their full complexity. Dominic Sachsenmaier is assistantprofessor ofglobalhistory in the GlobalandInternationalStudiesprogram at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is a member ofthe New GlobalHistory Initiative basedat HarvardandM.I.T. Hisaward-winning Ph.D. thesis, Die Aufnahme europäischer Inhalte in die chinesische Kultur durch Zhu Zongyuan (Institute Monumenta Serica , 2001), waspublished in Germany. He is abo the main editor o/Reflections on Multiple Modernities: European, Chinese, and Other Perspectives (Brill, 2002). Globalization and World History Robbie Robertson Globalization is often regarded as a very modern condition. It is not. Humans have experienced at least threeverydistinctwaves ofglobalization during the last five centuries. These waves have each transformed the context in which humans live, and the ways that humans view themselves and theirworld. In particular, they have made possible the developmentofglobal consciousness. Itis likely that human futures will be increasingly linked to the evolution ofglobal perspectives and their applications. Understanding Globalization Traditionally, historians have not engaged in debates on globalization as much as academics in other disciplines. This has been unfortunate . The lack ofhistorical depth in many studies on globalization weakens their claims to validity and limits our understanding of globalization. Ifwe are to strengthen global awareness, we must contextualize globalization historically. To contextualize globalizationhistorically is not an easymatterbecause we are still captive toways ofthinkingthatderived from earlier responses to globalization. These earlier responses stressed nationalism and the role ofthe state in national development. In addition , perspectives developed bytransnational entities increasingly now monopolize our views on globalization. Theystress that globalization is veryrecent (a result oftheir activities ) and economicallydriven. Historical perspectives , however, enable moreinclusive and richer meanings ofglobalization. In my recent book, The Three Waves of Globalization, I describe globalization as the outcome of human interconnections. Human-interconnections-as-globaUzationis a very different beast from its corporate brand. This globalization is about human empowerment and democratization, a focus that for the historian can rescue the human story from the parochialisms ofthe past and provide glimpses ofhumanity's common history and shared interests. World history can have no greater goal...