"The old geopolitical order has left the stage and a new world order
has been born".
Jacques Atalie
T
he central issue is what will replace the two-bloc world order based on
the dominance of the superpowers. Other similar periods of transition in
history have lead to geopolitical chaos, conflicts, wars and huge loss of
human life. The first years after the overthrow of the totalitarian regime
in Eastern Europe seemed to bear out this sad truth. Today the dangers have
not yet passed and seem to confound those who are optimistic of a new world
order.
There is no single or single group of powers capable of establishing
this order. It will have to be created through a amalgamation of local and
regional resolutions and the renunciation of ideas associated with the
domination of one country or nation. This is the main feature of the New
Civilisation. During the entire period of the outgoing civilisation monarchs
were engaged in struggles for power, conquering and losing territory and
making plans on how to expand their dominions. In the 19th and 20th
centuries the idea of world domination arose and the revival of the huge
empires of Caesar of Fredrich Barbarossa. The greatest empires of the Third
Civilisation were the two political and military blocs which dominated the
world for 50 years.
I believe that the era of imperialism will be replaced by a new world
order based on the principle of polycentrism, the alternative to imperialism
and monocentrism. This principle is a rejection of the monopolism and
imperial aspirations of any single nation or ideology. Polycentrism is that
level of international relations which is the most concomitant for the
opening up of the world and its globalisation.
Polycentrism will not appear overnight. However, I am more than
convinced that it is inevitable and part of the logic of historical
development. The alternative is new confrontation, new violence with the
accompanying threats of thermo-nuclear conflict. There are two basic
conditions without which polycentrism and the natural competition between
nations and countries cannot develop:
Firstly, the inevitable, albeit gradual, disappearance of the super
power phenomenon.
Secondly, the evolutionary nature of the development of polycentrism as
a system of international relations. The natural replacement of the bi-polar
model with polycentric structures will pass through a number of phases, each
of which will take differing lengths of time.
We are already experiencing the first of these phases. The world is
undergoing transition from the bi-polar model of confrontation to a
multi-polar world. It is quite realistic to assume that in the next ten or
so years we will pass into a transitory phase of a tri-polar world. This
tri-polar world began to emerge based on the existing framework of the
bi-polar world as early as the 1970's and 1980's. This model is based on the
USA and a number of states which gravitate around it, Europe and the Far
East lead by Japan. These three economically integrated poles have been
developing gradually over the past 25--30 years. They are economically very
compact and consist mainly of the economic interdependence of the individual
countries. At the same time these three economic centres are strongly
dependent on and open to each other creating one of the greatest
opportunities for the peaceful development of the world. The tri-polar world
is the closest alternative to the bi-polar world but is not an easy way out
of the current crisis. The tri-polar model is to a large extent conditional
on the development of common global trends.
At the very beginning of the 21st century both Russia and China will
aspire to become involved in the three large centres of economic power. All
the most sensible politicians in the world believe that without Russia and
China the world cannot develop successfully. This has been a clear feature
of US policy during the Clinton administration. During the next 20--25 years
we shall no doubt witness the development of a five-six-polar world in which
the three main centres will be joined by a number of other new ones. China's
rapid economic development and Russia's enormous resources of raw materials
and its strategical capability will exert significant influence on this
process. The triangular community of the USA, EC and Japan has quite quickly
replaced the bi-polar model the development of a multi-polar model will take
at least 15--20 years. Russia will need time to stabilise its economy and
China will need to consolidate its reform process and balance out its levels
of development.
There is, however, a question of principle here. Will this not take us
back to the beginning of the modern age, to a situation where five or six
great powers dominated the world creating a series of conflicts which may
develop into regional or even world wars? May this not also lead to the
grouping of these powers into two or three political and military groups and
a repeat of the Third Civilisation? It is here that the difference between
the outgoing civilisation and the new era lies. The new powers will not
arise only on one continent, Europe or America. They will develop in all the
continents and within the framework of a single global economy.
I, therefore, believe that the second phase, the transition to a new
world order will be characterised by the gradual transition from five or six
centres to a multi-polar or polycentric world structure. Even at the
beginning of the transition period countries like Brazil, India, Australia,
South Africa and others will increase their geo-political roles. They will
be balanced between the other "great powers" and with their geographical
position and size and increased economic potential they will gradually begin
to assume greater geo-political significance. When speaking of the
polycentric structure of the world, I am not concerned only with the
political aspect but also with the economic and cultural sides of the issue.
At the same time global integration will take place simultaneously in all
countries but will lead to the creation of a number of regional formations.
I also believe that we can expect that the poles of the new world
structure will be defined via the development of a number of economically
integrated blocs which of necessity will be open to one another and will
autonomous units within an expanding integral entity. L.Thorou forecast that
the 21st century would be a century of "quasi-commercial blocs applying
managed trade". This is true to a certain extent but only in the initial
stages since I believe that with the emergence of polycentrism the
autonomous economic regions and commercial blocs will gradually become very
interwoven and to lose their primary borders.
The principle of polycentrism is at the heart of the new world order.
However, these are not the same world centres which existed in the 13th and
the 19th centuries and whose monarchs and presidents went to war every
10--15 years to re-distribute their dominions. They will not be the same
centres which colonised the entire world and imposed their will on other
nations. Polycentrism is the principle of balance between the world's
powers, the umbrella under which new centres will develop and a bridge
leading to a more complete integration of the world. The essence of the
Fourth Civilisation is in the gradual formation of this new world order.
3. THE FATE OF THE NATION STATE
Do not be in a hurry to destroy the nation state. It will not die
suddenly of cardiac arrest but will gradually fade away...
T
he functions and the borders of the nation state depend directly on the
economic maturity of societies. Historically the nation state is a
transitory category. It appeared when nations were being created and the
economic conditions of life were imposing certain certain types of
government and regulation. There were different versions of statism and
state government during the First Civilisation and the Second Civilisation,
more commonly know as the Middle Ages. Nation states, however, are a typical
feature of the Third Civilisation.
The reduction in their role and changes in their functions is a result
of the same phenomena which created them. The globalisation of modern
economies and culture, the media invasions, transnational corporations and
everything else which has been mentioned in other parts of the book are
leading to changes in the borders and the essence of the concept of nation
state as well as in the structure of government and economies. For a number
of decades the inhabitants of the most developed nations have become
growingly aware that the governments for which they may have voted are not
the only centres of power and that the promises of politicians seem to have
little in common with realities and that the implementation of policies
depends on other factors and phenomena.
P.Drucker frequently speaks of a new pluralism. In this he is
absolutely correct. Pluralism does not mean competition between parties and
their leaders. It is a very diverse pluralism of economic, government,
cultural and lobby groups. What is even more significant is that this new
pluralism is becoming more and more international. Corporations and
political parties, foundations and association, information groups and
trans-national media have transformed pluralism in to an universal concept
and the nation state into an annoying but not insurmountable barrier.
It is quite evident that as society develops governmental restrictions
decline along with the significance of national boundaries. For this reason
open societies are a symbol not only of democracy but progress in general. I
believe in the truth of this argument but it is not so simple. Openness
which is inevitable and necessary means nothing in isolation from the
economic processes. Many underdeveloped, ex-colonial countries are both
absolutely open and absolutely poor. Progressive and stable openness comes
about as a result of economic and political progress, the attainment of a
certain level of economic balance. This is not a political whim but a result
from the accumulation and maturity of a given society.
We should not, therefore, be in a hurry to depose the role of the
nation states. They will not disappear overnight but will fade slowly in the
process of the development of relative economic balance. During the Third
Civilisation state power was absolute. During the Third Civilisation state
power was absolute. Ludwig 14th, Napoleon, Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin and
Stalin were themselves incorporations of the state. Today, however, this is
impossible. Dictators such as Idi Amin Dada in Uganda, Boccassa 1st in the
Central African Republic or Pol Pot in Cambodia have been condemned to
historical oblivion and hatred. However, many other democratically elected
government have felt obliged to "protect" the national output and to isolate
themselves with restrictive import duties and other protectionist barriers.
Those who feel threatened and isolated as a result of their backwardness
rather than integrated have to pay a high cost in terms of armies and
weapons.
Therefore in the under developed countries the nation state will
preserve its traditional functions for a relatively longer period of time.
This will be both natural and progressive if the relevant governments make
efforts to open and adapt their economies to the global market. Adversely,
their countries will continue to vegetate within the conditions of the Third
Civilisation and will begin to lag behind in universal world development.
This issue has another side to its. The movements towards world
openness and integration is a resource of progress. No government will
succeed in the modern world to integrate its people into processes of world
progress if it does not affiliate itself with the World Trade Organisation
and the international financial markets. The decline of the role of the
nation state is a universal process which is taking place more rapidly in
the developed countries and more slowly in those who are still aspiring to
become affiliated with them and slowest of all in those countries who feel
themselves obliged to defend their frail national identity. Nevertheless, no
one country will be able to ignore the common processes of the globalisation
of the world, markets, manufacturing and the media.
What then will become of the nation state and its power?
I believe that the main trends in world development will be as follows:
the role of the nation states will decline in significance whereas the
functions of the local institutions of authority and supra-national and
global coordinators will increase. This is taking place at the moment in
Europe and all other states whose governments are conceding more and more
power to the trans-national corporations, the world media networks or other
autonomous and influential non-governmental organisations. Louis d'Or 14th
in an expression of the absolute nature of power once said, "L'Etat -- c'est
moi". From the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th
century governments began grudgingly to concede part of their economic power
to the owners of large private enterprises. Now as a result of the
globalisation the national governments have no choice other than to give up
many of their prerogatives. This is a natural process which follows the
logic of world development. Many people find it difficult to understand and
regard national honour and pride as a priority and any suggestion to the
contrary provokes nationalistic reaction. There have always been such
governments and there, no doubt, will be for many decades to come. However,
such policies which seem to forget the need for global and humane
responsibility will lead nations into the back roads of development. Sooner
rather than later nations will realise that they have been deceived and will
seek recompense for the politicians who brought them to that state.
The borders of states in the transition to the Fourth Civilisation will
continue to narrow as a result of major technological and social changes. If
you remember the message of A.Toffler in chapter four of this book, he
predicted that the new technologies would transfer power both downwards to
the local institutions of authority and upwards to the global regulators and
the transnational corporations. On one hand many economic and social
functions will become much more effective if they are transferred from
governments to civil societies and are controlled by legislation. This is
the case with the planning and coordination of a series of macro and
micro-economic processes. This is also the case with social welfare and in
particular pension funds, health case and academic and scientific research.
ON the other hand national governments are not in a position to regulate
independently the global environment, world financial markets, the global
redistribution of resources, goods and services, information flow and the
media etc.. The more people, goods and services cross over national borders
the less significance these borders will have. This will in turn lead to
changes in the prerogatives of nation states.
At the end of the 20th century the state is too small an institution to
resolve global problems and too large to resolve its own local issues. This
is also a result of the new technology, the restructuring of manufacturing
and the market.
A typical example of such a bi-lateral change is offered by the member
countries of the European Union. According to some researchers since 1957
about half of the authority of the nation state has been transferred either
to local authority or to the European Commission in Brussels. This is
perhaps an isolated example of a regional alliance. However, the same
process seems to be taking place in the USA where the American political
system has been stretched vertically upwards by the transnational
corporations and financial markets and downwards by the individual states
and the non-governmental and private organisations. Bill Clinton would
hardly have the authority to implement such a wide ranging programme of
reform as the "New Deal" of President Roosevelt in the 1930's. Even in the
case of the states such as the USA national governments do not have the same
authority that they had 40 or 50 years ago. They have also taken upon
themselves a range of global responsibilities with which to compensate for
the decline authority and the transfer of the real power to the
trans-national corporations. The specific global role of the USA at the
beginning of the 1990's will soon have to be shared with others. It is not
fair on the American people to carry the huge burden of military
expenditure, the peace-keeping operations of the UN and so on. It will not
be long before they will also involve Russia, Japan and Europe (France and
Germany). IN this way the gradual decline in the significance of the nation
state is as true for the USA as it is for everywhere else.
A distinguishing feature of the modern nation state is its integration
and strong links with the civil society. A number of writers such as P.
Drucker and J. Lukac have written that the sovereign state will become just
one of a number of centres for identification and integration rather than
the only one and will coexist and compete with the trans-regional,
supra-national and local, even tribal structures. When this rule of logical
development is applied universally then nations attain a higher level of
enrichment. Switzerland, for example, leads all statistical classifications
on the basis of GDP per head of population and this is not only due to the
success of the Swiss banks. This is rather a result of the co-existence of
the trans-national corporations and the banks, strong local authorities and
the state (government and parliament) which fulfils the role of a bridge
between the two sectors. The lack of bureaucracy, the active role of the
local population in global business and the decision making processes is a
particulary strong feature of the Swiss political system.
The modern state will have less and less international authority.
Globalisation opens borders and the world market "erodes" sovereignty. By
transferring their authority to the new global leaders and to local leaders
the national governments will have less and less capabilities. This,
however, raises the issue of the preservation of the identity of nations and
states in the face of the emergent global culture and global awareness. It
is the "travelling peoples" which will succeed with their sustainable and
strong cultural links which not only produce avant garde technology but use
it to effect. It is not states and weapons but technological power plus
knowledge which will play a decisive role in this question.
4. AFTER THE CRISIS OF POLITICAL IDENTITY
The modern-day left is like the right undressed and the modern-day
right is like a well dressed left.
(political jokes from the end of the 20th century)
A
lthough I frequently speak of the Fourth Civilisation, the new
ideological and theoretical synthesis and balanced development I realize how
difficult it is for these new concepts to be accepted by the modern world.
This is particularly true for the smaller (albeit proud) countries such as
Bulgaria. In face of the new global changes and challenges there is no
difference between the small and the large countries. We are all part of the
same game. Some are quicker while some are slower but we are all undergoing
the same profound changes. In Eastern Europe three years were sufficient to
understand the crisis of universal political identity which the West has
long been aware of.
For more than 100 years the political left in the world has been
associated with the new role of the working class, social guarantees,
nationalisation of the basic means of production and the expropriation from
the expropriators etc.. The right has always been linked with the defence of
large and medium scale private capital, traditions and security, no state
intervention in business and non-involvement in social matters. However, in
the modern world at the end of the 20th century, with the exception of a few
fringe parties and movements, there is no country or political party in the
world which resembles these traditional concepts of the left and right.
Together with the collapse of the Third Civilisation we are also
experiencing a crisis of political identity. This is a consequence of the
new ideological and theoretical synthesis, the changes in ownership and the
social and class structure as well as the end of the traditional state
mechanisms. The object of the differences between the left and the right is
disappearing. The entire world is undergoing a process of ownership
socialisation and states are being integrated into civil societies in which
neither the old left nor the old right can preserve their traditional
status.
During the present time of chaos and the growing mistrust towards the
traditional leaders, of left-wing promises made by right-wing politicians
and the concern of the business sector for social issues we should expect
too much. The political inertia is very strong and only a minority would
take the electoral risk of trying to overthrow the traditional symbols. What
we are witness to at the moment is the adaptation of the old phraseology to
new world realities. Whether they want it or not the left and the right wing
parties in the world are intuitively moving towards a state of "balanced
development" and will fight for domination of its ideological territory. The
"left" no longer reject the concept of private capital and do not demand
nationalisation. The "right" are no longer ashamed to speak of social
programmes and the needs of the poor. The borders between the traditional
electorates are fading as a result of a process of irreversible changes in
the social and class structure of society.
As a consequence many new parties have appeared which give voice to
localised interests within a given country or region. The "success" of Ross
Perot at the presidential elections in 1992 and national independence
parties in Canada or Catalonia and Northern Italy are features of the same
phenomenon: the change in the foundations and structures and economic and
social interests is leading to changes in political doctrines and political
parties. The traditional parties which succeed in making the transition and
re-orientate themselves rapidly within the complex situation of the modern
world will survive and their traditional names will be no more than a mere
decoration. Those who delay will fade away and gradually open the way to the
new political formations.
The end of the crisis of modern political identity will come quite
quickly. Many of the parties of the Socialist and Liberal Internationals or
Christian Democratic parties are making timid steps towards changes in their
programmes. Some of them are rejecting their traditional programmes outright
with the justification of the need for a new pragmatism. The former
communist parties of Eastern Europe changed their names to "socialist" or
"social-democratic". Some of them have become so closely associated with
large-scale capital that they already resemble the bourgeois parties of end
of the 19th century.
Together with the changes in ownership and the social and class
structure, as well as the new borders of the nation state and the transition
to global polycentrism, the changes in modern political parties and
doctrines is another important feature of the changes in world civilisation.
The rapprochement between party programmes and views which is taking place
at the moment is a consequence of the new ideological synthesis. It will not
be long before political pluralism will take its stand on the new problems
of the Fourth Civilisation and the transition to it.
There are two further processes linked with the problem of political
identity which I would like to mention. The first of these is linked with
the obvious need for regional and trans-national political formations such
as the Party of European Socialists, for example. The second is the need for
new types of voting systems and the development of direct democracy. My
friend the American political scientist Theodore Becker refers to this as
"teledemocracy". The world telecommunication systems such as the Internet
provide wonderful opportunities for the direct involvement of millions and
billions of people in the decision-taking processes. Today, there are very
few politicians who are aware of this, a few others are sceptical and
concerned about preserving their own power and forces of manipulation.
For me there is little doubt that the Fourth Civilisation will lead to
enormous changes in political life and its structures, types of government,
electoral mechanisms and decision taking. These are not utopias, nor are
they long-term forecasts. These are simply the results of something which is
appearing before out very eyes.
5. THE GLOBAL COORDINATORS
The Fourth Civilisation will be at one and the same time an open,
polycentric and integrated world. This will require a more effective system
of global coordination.
W
hen analysing the system of the Fourth Civilisation, I naturally came
upon the problem of global coordination. This once again brought to my mind
the unsystematic but indicative thoughts of Lenin on the "single factory for
all workers and peasants", Stalin's idea of the "world wide victory of
communism", Hitler's thoughts on the "World Reich" and Fukoyama's writings
on the "End of History" etc.. A great number of researchers from the World
Federation for Future Studies have also written on the need for a world
government.
There is clearly some logic to this argument. Globalisation will
require much more than ever before increased global control. As the
processes develop and political polycentrism increases there will be a
growing need for world coordination. Nevertheless, I do not believe that it
will be possible in the near future to establish such a global government.
This is an element of the distant future to which neither I nor my
generation belong. Of course, the Fourth Civilisation will cover the entire
period of the 21st century and no doubt future generations of our
grandchildren and great-grand children will have to face the issue.
Today the world is faced with hundreds of global problems which lead to
collapse of the bi-polar world structures. There are a number of world
organisations involved in these problems such as the UN, the World Trade
Organisation and the IMF based on the need for compromises between nation
states and their products. Since compromise between nation states is at the
basis of the development of the world organisations their capabilities to
act in the real conditions of the modern world are seriously restricted. If
we want the world organisations to succeed, they will have to receive wide
empowerment and responsibilities for the global problems which are outside
the domain of nation states. This is the only way in which a united world of
small and large states and cultures will be able to face up to the
challenges of supra-national environmental interests. It is, of course,
absurd to speak of a world government, but it is clear that there is an
obvious need for a coordinating body which from the very outset will be able
to resolve military and ecological crises, regulate the conditions for world
finance and the fight against international crime etc..
It is, therefore, evident that the modern world needs a revision of the
Constitution of the United Nations and the expansion of the powers of the
Security Council as well as the establishment of new institutions. Many of
these have already been proposed by a number of leading world politicians
and intellectuals. These include the Council for Ecological Security of the
United Nations. A reflection of the new directions in thought are the new
structures within the United Nations and its specialised organisations
including UNESCO, INIDO, FAO and others.
This process of expansion has to be carried out very carefully with the
gradual empowerment of specialised national organisations with the rights
and responsibilities currently born by nation states. I expect that the main
priority will be global economic control and the resolution of global
environmental and social issues. The restructuring of the UN, the creation
of an effective World Bank, the increase in the prerogatives of the World
Trade Organisation and the empowerment of all these organisations to deal
with the real problems of the world is the path to balanced development.
This path will be difficult, slow and gradual but there is no other way. The
alternative is for the new communications, computers and automated factories
to dig a deeper gorge between the poor and the rich rather than a source for
democracy and freedom.
At the same time the large nations have to double and treble their
efforts to create a new climate in the world and another type of global
intercourse. This may lead to the institutionalisation of the meetings of
the G-7 and its expansion to include Russia and China and perhaps a few
other nations. It may be a good idea to hold regular meetings of the heads
of state of the whole world. There are a number of possibilities. The most
important thing is for us to realise that the new age which we are entering
requires new type of thinking and a new understanding of our own
responsibilities.
THE NATIONS WHICH WILL SUCCEED, THE NATIONS OF THE FOURTH CIVILISATION
(instead of a conclusion)
T
his book is an expression of my inner spiritual world and my thoughts
over a number of years on the present state and the potential future of our
confused world. I have been profoundly influenced by the major political
changes which have taken place since the collapse of the Eastern European
political systems and their economic structures. I am acutely aware that the
"Fourth Civilisation" will provoke a number of different reactions. During
such a watershed period in our history unanimity is dangerous and
unnecessary. Indeed, the book which I have written contains a number of
generalisations on the character of global change at the border between two
millennia, the periodisation of history and the crisis of the entire modern
civilisation. The logic of my research has lead me to a number of
conclusions on the new geo-political nature of the world and the necessity
of global economic and political regulation.
The "Fourth Civilisation" is not based on abstract proposals or
invented eloquent phrases. All my conclusions are based on experience and
suffering, on years of research and reading as well as specific practical,
academic experiments and political experience. The "Fourth Civilisation" is
not a forecast, nor futuristic literature but an evaluation of the facts as
they are. It is an attempt to overcome the academic dogma of the 19th
century which have existed for over 150 years. I am interested in the clash
of ideas and I realise that many of my conclusions merit further analysis,
something which I intend to do in the future. I can now see with delight
many new areas for creative work.
The "Fourth Civilisation" is not intended to reveal all the details of
the issues which it raises but to unify them within one general concept and
to reveal the universal character of the global change which the modern
world in experiencing. The common crisis of the bi-polar world and the
collapse of the Eastern European regimes, the modern conditions of
geo-political chaos in which we are living, the major re-structuring of the
world economy, culture and politics shows that the new realities with which
we are faced have a complex and accumulative effect. Whether we want to or
not, they will lead us to new solutions. My book is concerned with these
solutions and the new methodological approach to the evaluation of world
processes. It is also concerned with the changes in ownership, political and
economic structures and the way in which they are finding more and more
common global ground. I realise that these conclusions may be quite
controversial but I deeply believe in them as indicative proof. Everything
which proves that the old civilisation is fading and that we are entering
into a new Fourth Civilisation is based on the trends and processes to which
we are already witnesses.
I have to confess that everything which I have touched upon in this
book is a starting point for further work based on the country in which I
was born and bred. Bulgaria is now undergoing a difficult and complex crisis
caused by the transition from a totalitarian to a market and pluralist
economy. I have spoken little about Bulgaria in the "Fourth Civilisation"
but in actual fact all my conclusions concern its fate. I believe that I
have been right to keep my conclusions about Bulgaria to a separate book.
This has allowed my to concentrate on the features of global change and to
concentrate on the specific features of Bulgaria at a later stage. For this
reason there is a direct and unifying link between the "Fourth Civilisation"
and my book about Bulgaria which is soon to be published. I hope that they
will both be of interest to all my friends with whom for over ten years now
we have been discussing the fate of the changes and all my colleagues all
over the world with whom I have argued about the future of our world and all
those people with whom I have shared the good and the bad in the political
life of Bulgaria over the past seven years.
Whatever the fate of this book, on completing it I want to thank all
those without whom it would not have been possible. I owe so much to my
mother and my father who bore me and brought me up, my family who have
suffered the deprivations of my almost permanent preoccupation with work, my
teachers from whom I learnt so much, and my colleagues and my friends who
helped me with the book. Nothing in this life can be achieved without love
and I thank all those who believed in me since it was their faith, hoe and
love which inspired so much of my conclusions.
During the entire period of writing and preparing the "Fourth
Civilisation" I asked myself the question, "Which nations will succeed and
will not be lost to the chaos of the global world?". During the great
migrations of the Second Civilisation many nations and ethnic groups lost
their potential and remained on the periphery of the nation states which
were to emerge later. Some of them have disappeared. I hope fervently that
the Bulgarian spirit is not lost and that it does not become dissolved in
the waves of migration of people, information and goods which is on the
horizon. I shall work and I shall struggle for this not to the detriment of
any other nation. I shall work to consolidate the culture and the economy of
Bulgaria in the context of dignified competition.
The nations which will succeed do not live only in the great countries.
These will be the nations which will accept the laws of the new age and will
become the people of the Fourth Civilisation. These nations will not be
divided on the lines of capitalist or socialist, workers or bourgeois,
imperialist or colonial. These peoples will not allow their civic freedoms
to be usurped nor will they recognise cultural or political isolationism and
closed economies. The nations of the Fourth Civilisation will be united with
millions and billions of visible and invisible threads. They will produce
the new values which belong to the whole of humanity.
The road is long and there will be many storms along the way. The New
Civilisation does not require social engineering it requires merely the
pursuance of the logic of progress which our fathers and the outgoing 20th
century have bequeathed to us. It is a difficult but glorious legacy, a
legacy which will require us to be true to our time and those who will come
after us.
Sofia 1996.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Asenov, B. Turkisation, Sofia, 1993
Atalie, J. The Millennium, Sofia, 1992
Atalie, J. The History of Time, Sofia, 1993
Atalie, J., M.Guillaume. The Economics of Freedom, Sofia. 1994
Baeva, I. Eastern Europe after Stalin - 1953-1956, Sofia, 1995.
Bashev, V. Marvellous Independence, Sofia, 1977.
Bell, D. The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism, Sofia, 1994
Brzezinsky, Z. The Great Failure. Sofia, 1991.
Burlatski, F. The New Thought (Dialogues and Thoughts on the
Technological Revolution and our Reforms) Sofia, 1993.
Buholtz, T. Live Ideas from Dead Economists. Sofia, 1993.
The Culture of Entrepreneurialism. Edited by Bridgette Burcher. Sofia,
1994.
Varzonovtsev, D., H.Tomov, M.Georgieva, N.Obrikov, V.Lichev. The
Chronicle of a Failed Revolution. (Bulgaria 1990-1993) Sofia, 1994.
Gardner G. The power of money, the secrecy of power and how citizens
can stand up to it. Sofia, 1993.
Genov, N. The Rise of the Dragon. Sofia, 1994
Grey, G. Liberalism. Sofia. 1991.
Grigulevich, J. The Papacy in the 20th Century. Sofia, 1982.
Galbraith, G. The Anatomy of Power. Sofia, 1993.
Davidkov, Ts. The New Entrepreneurs (Results of an empirical social
study - "Private Business in Bulgaria" Sofia, 1993).
Darendorf, R. Thoughts on Revolution in Europe. Sofia, 1992.
Jane, J. Handbook on the Essence, Priciples and Activities of the UN.
Sofia, January 1993.
Geffkins, F. An Introduction to Marketing, Advertising and Public
Relations. Varna, 1993.
Zeiffer, I. The World Revolutionaries (From Bogomil through Huss to
Lenin) Sofia, 1994.
Karanjulov, R., V.Milandinova. State Property in the People's Republic
of Bulgaria. Sofia, 1987.
Kennedy, P. Preparations for the 21st Century. Sofia, 1995.
King, A., B.Schneider. Sofia, 1989.
Kuzadjian,L. Ideological Campaigns in China, 1949-1970. Sofia, 1971.
Kuzadjian,L. Maoism in the West - The Myth Revealed. Sofia, 1978
Labruyere, J. Characters. Varna, 1976.
Levi, T. Thoughts on Management. Sofia, 1994.
Lukac, J. The End of the 20th Century and the End of the Modern Era.
Sofia, 1994.
Mazovetski, T. Report on Human Rights on the Territory of the Former
Yugoslavia. Sofia, 1992.
Minkov, T. Maoism and the Agrarian Question. Sofia, 1979.
Nikolov, I. The Long Waves of Kondratiev. Sofia. 1985.
Nikolov, L. The Structures of Human Activity. Sofia, 1982.
Newland, R. Electoral Systems (Relative analysis). Sofia 1993.
Pantev, A. B.Gavrilov. The Path of the Modern World. Sofia, 1994.
Peters, T., R. Waterman. Towards Perfection in Company Management.
Sofia, 1988.
Polimeridis, G. Modern Right Wing Revisionism in Greece. ISST, Sofia,
1979.
Psevorski,A. Democratisation and the Market (Political and economic
reforms in Eastern Europe) and Latin America) Sofia, 1994.
Radev, R. Ancient Philosophy. Sofia. 1994.
Radoslavov, S. The Fate of Our Times ( essays on the ideological
development of social democracy) Sofia 1994.
Rowning, H. Hitler Said (Confidential conversations with the Fuhrer on
his plans for the domination of the world). Varna, 1992.
Raich, R. The Labour of Nations (How to prepare ourselves for the
capitalism of the 21st century), Sofia, 1992.
Rostow, W. The Stages of Economic Growth (Neo-Communist manifesto)
Sofia, 1993.
Rumyantsev, A. Socialist Reality and the Theories of Comrade E.Kardel.
1957.
Rumnyantsev, A. On the Contributions of Mao to Modern Socialism. Sofia,
1974.
Savov, S. The Dethroned Idols of America, Sofia, 1976.
Semov, M. Politics. Sofia, 1994.
Sepetliev, D. The Theoretical Mistakes of Karl Marx. Sofia, 1994.
Stalin, I. On the Socialist Economy. Sofia, 1955.
Sulitzer, P. The Rich. Sofia, 1992, 1992 (two volumes).
Tikhvinski, S. The History of China and Moderntiy. Sofia, 1979.
Toynbee, A. Selected Works, Sofia, 1992.
Toynbee, A. Studies of History (The Rise and Development of
Civilisations). Volume 1. Sofia, 1995.
Toynbee, A. Studies of History (The Fall and Decay of Civilisaitons)
Volume 2. Sofia, 1995.
Toynbee, A. Studies of History (Universal states and universal
churches) Volume 3, Sofia 1995.
Tomov, A. Socialism and Self-Management. Sofia, 1989.
Toffler, A. The Third Wave (Man and his Labour). Sofia, 1991.
Toffler, A. Forecasts and Pre-conditions. Sofia, 1992.
Toffler, A. The Shock of the Future. Sofia, 1992.
Toffler, A. H. Toffler. The New Civilisation. Sofia, 1995.
Trendafilov, T. Capital, Man, Time (Critique of Adapting Capital).
Sofia, 1977.
Turen, A. What is Democracy? Sofia. 1994.
Fotev, G. The History of Sociology (in two volumes). Sofia, 1994.
Friedman, M. The Irreconciliability of Money. (Episodes from monetary
history). Sofia, 1994.
Frovain, E. The European Convention on the Rights of Man as the Social
Order in Europe, Sofia, 1994.
Fukoyama, F. The End of History and the Last Man. Sofia. 1993.
Schweitzer, V. Modern Social Democracy, Sofia, 1990.
Shishmanov, D. The Elysian Palace during the Fifth Republic. Sofia.
1984.
Shu Su. Notes from an Eastern Slope. Sofia, 1985.
Yakovliev, N. The CIA against the KGB. Kieve, 1983.
IN RUSSIAN
Abalkin, L. At the Crossroads. Moscow, 1993.
Armetiev, P. The Problems of the Developing Countries and Maoist
Diplomacy in the UN. Moscow, 1978.
Afanasiev, V. Society, Sytems, Knowledge and Management. Moscow, 1981.
Bagrov, V. Modern Capitalism and Nature. Moscwo, 1976.
Bernon, S., L.Teplov. The Warsaw Pact and NATO: Two Courses, Two
Policies. Moscow, 1979.
Vologonov, D. The Triumph and The Tragedy. (J.V. Stalin)(Four Volumes).
Moscow, 1983.
Galbraith, G. Life in Our Times. Moscow, 1986.
Ermilov, A. MacroEconomic Forecasting in the USA. Moscow, 1987.
Zelenev, S. The Giants of British Business. Moscow, 1971.
Cleer, E. Global Economy (The Logic of Development). Moscow, 1979.
Klow, A. Multinational Corporations and Imperialism. Moscow, 1979.
Kono Toekhiro. The strategy and structure of Japanese enterprises.
Moscow, 1987.
Kosolapov, V., A. Gonacharenko. The 21st Century in the mirror of
Futurology. Moscow, 1987.
Krechel, Yan, E. Mantser, Ch.Graber. The Shock of the Market (Materials
form the Agenda Group). Moscow, 1992.
Kulpin, E. The Technical and Economic Policies of the Chinese People's
Republic and the Working Class of China. Moscow, 1975.
Kusmin, V. China in the Strategy of American Imperialism. Moscow, 1978.
MacDOnald, D. The Game Called Business. Moscow, 1979.
Melnikov, D., L.Chernaya. The History of Death. Moscow, 1987.
Mocherniy, S. The Essence and Evolution of Capitalist Ownership.
Moscow, 1978.
Nikitich, L. Labriola. Moscow. 1980.
Nixon, R. In the Arena. Moscow, 1992.
Plimok, E. The Political Legacy of V.I. Lenin. Moscow. 1988.
Popper, K. The Open Society and its Enemies. Moscow. 1993.
Porter, M. International Competition. Moscow, 1993.
Seligmen, B. The Major Trends of Modern Economic Thought. Moscow. 1968.
Simon, V. The Might of The Union of Entrepreneurs. Moscow, 1979.
Snegurov, A. The Relationship between Political Parties and the
Institutions of State Power in the Russian Federation. St. Petersburg, 1994.
Trotski, L. The Stalinist School of Falsification. Berlin. 1932.
Fyodorov, E. The People of Ancient Rome. Moscow, 1987.
Hikks, G. R. Value and Capital. Moscow, 1987.
Yakovliev, A. Foreword, Collapse, Epilogue. Moscow, 1992.
Journal. "The Reference Bulletin" Ed.1/1971, Institute for Modern
Social Theories.
The Foreign Policy Conception of Maoism, Sofia. 1978.
Global Changes in Modernity. Institute of Global Economics and
International Sciences of the Academy of Science of the USSR, Sofia, 1982.
Bulgarian International Agreements. Vol. 1 and 2, Sofia, 1994.
International Trade Conventions and Codexes. Sofia, 1983.
has been born".
Jacques Atalie
T
he central issue is what will replace the two-bloc world order based on
the dominance of the superpowers. Other similar periods of transition in
history have lead to geopolitical chaos, conflicts, wars and huge loss of
human life. The first years after the overthrow of the totalitarian regime
in Eastern Europe seemed to bear out this sad truth. Today the dangers have
not yet passed and seem to confound those who are optimistic of a new world
order.
There is no single or single group of powers capable of establishing
this order. It will have to be created through a amalgamation of local and
regional resolutions and the renunciation of ideas associated with the
domination of one country or nation. This is the main feature of the New
Civilisation. During the entire period of the outgoing civilisation monarchs
were engaged in struggles for power, conquering and losing territory and
making plans on how to expand their dominions. In the 19th and 20th
centuries the idea of world domination arose and the revival of the huge
empires of Caesar of Fredrich Barbarossa. The greatest empires of the Third
Civilisation were the two political and military blocs which dominated the
world for 50 years.
I believe that the era of imperialism will be replaced by a new world
order based on the principle of polycentrism, the alternative to imperialism
and monocentrism. This principle is a rejection of the monopolism and
imperial aspirations of any single nation or ideology. Polycentrism is that
level of international relations which is the most concomitant for the
opening up of the world and its globalisation.
Polycentrism will not appear overnight. However, I am more than
convinced that it is inevitable and part of the logic of historical
development. The alternative is new confrontation, new violence with the
accompanying threats of thermo-nuclear conflict. There are two basic
conditions without which polycentrism and the natural competition between
nations and countries cannot develop:
Firstly, the inevitable, albeit gradual, disappearance of the super
power phenomenon.
Secondly, the evolutionary nature of the development of polycentrism as
a system of international relations. The natural replacement of the bi-polar
model with polycentric structures will pass through a number of phases, each
of which will take differing lengths of time.
We are already experiencing the first of these phases. The world is
undergoing transition from the bi-polar model of confrontation to a
multi-polar world. It is quite realistic to assume that in the next ten or
so years we will pass into a transitory phase of a tri-polar world. This
tri-polar world began to emerge based on the existing framework of the
bi-polar world as early as the 1970's and 1980's. This model is based on the
USA and a number of states which gravitate around it, Europe and the Far
East lead by Japan. These three economically integrated poles have been
developing gradually over the past 25--30 years. They are economically very
compact and consist mainly of the economic interdependence of the individual
countries. At the same time these three economic centres are strongly
dependent on and open to each other creating one of the greatest
opportunities for the peaceful development of the world. The tri-polar world
is the closest alternative to the bi-polar world but is not an easy way out
of the current crisis. The tri-polar model is to a large extent conditional
on the development of common global trends.
At the very beginning of the 21st century both Russia and China will
aspire to become involved in the three large centres of economic power. All
the most sensible politicians in the world believe that without Russia and
China the world cannot develop successfully. This has been a clear feature
of US policy during the Clinton administration. During the next 20--25 years
we shall no doubt witness the development of a five-six-polar world in which
the three main centres will be joined by a number of other new ones. China's
rapid economic development and Russia's enormous resources of raw materials
and its strategical capability will exert significant influence on this
process. The triangular community of the USA, EC and Japan has quite quickly
replaced the bi-polar model the development of a multi-polar model will take
at least 15--20 years. Russia will need time to stabilise its economy and
China will need to consolidate its reform process and balance out its levels
of development.
There is, however, a question of principle here. Will this not take us
back to the beginning of the modern age, to a situation where five or six
great powers dominated the world creating a series of conflicts which may
develop into regional or even world wars? May this not also lead to the
grouping of these powers into two or three political and military groups and
a repeat of the Third Civilisation? It is here that the difference between
the outgoing civilisation and the new era lies. The new powers will not
arise only on one continent, Europe or America. They will develop in all the
continents and within the framework of a single global economy.
I, therefore, believe that the second phase, the transition to a new
world order will be characterised by the gradual transition from five or six
centres to a multi-polar or polycentric world structure. Even at the
beginning of the transition period countries like Brazil, India, Australia,
South Africa and others will increase their geo-political roles. They will
be balanced between the other "great powers" and with their geographical
position and size and increased economic potential they will gradually begin
to assume greater geo-political significance. When speaking of the
polycentric structure of the world, I am not concerned only with the
political aspect but also with the economic and cultural sides of the issue.
At the same time global integration will take place simultaneously in all
countries but will lead to the creation of a number of regional formations.
I also believe that we can expect that the poles of the new world
structure will be defined via the development of a number of economically
integrated blocs which of necessity will be open to one another and will
autonomous units within an expanding integral entity. L.Thorou forecast that
the 21st century would be a century of "quasi-commercial blocs applying
managed trade". This is true to a certain extent but only in the initial
stages since I believe that with the emergence of polycentrism the
autonomous economic regions and commercial blocs will gradually become very
interwoven and to lose their primary borders.
The principle of polycentrism is at the heart of the new world order.
However, these are not the same world centres which existed in the 13th and
the 19th centuries and whose monarchs and presidents went to war every
10--15 years to re-distribute their dominions. They will not be the same
centres which colonised the entire world and imposed their will on other
nations. Polycentrism is the principle of balance between the world's
powers, the umbrella under which new centres will develop and a bridge
leading to a more complete integration of the world. The essence of the
Fourth Civilisation is in the gradual formation of this new world order.
3. THE FATE OF THE NATION STATE
Do not be in a hurry to destroy the nation state. It will not die
suddenly of cardiac arrest but will gradually fade away...
T
he functions and the borders of the nation state depend directly on the
economic maturity of societies. Historically the nation state is a
transitory category. It appeared when nations were being created and the
economic conditions of life were imposing certain certain types of
government and regulation. There were different versions of statism and
state government during the First Civilisation and the Second Civilisation,
more commonly know as the Middle Ages. Nation states, however, are a typical
feature of the Third Civilisation.
The reduction in their role and changes in their functions is a result
of the same phenomena which created them. The globalisation of modern
economies and culture, the media invasions, transnational corporations and
everything else which has been mentioned in other parts of the book are
leading to changes in the borders and the essence of the concept of nation
state as well as in the structure of government and economies. For a number
of decades the inhabitants of the most developed nations have become
growingly aware that the governments for which they may have voted are not
the only centres of power and that the promises of politicians seem to have
little in common with realities and that the implementation of policies
depends on other factors and phenomena.
P.Drucker frequently speaks of a new pluralism. In this he is
absolutely correct. Pluralism does not mean competition between parties and
their leaders. It is a very diverse pluralism of economic, government,
cultural and lobby groups. What is even more significant is that this new
pluralism is becoming more and more international. Corporations and
political parties, foundations and association, information groups and
trans-national media have transformed pluralism in to an universal concept
and the nation state into an annoying but not insurmountable barrier.
It is quite evident that as society develops governmental restrictions
decline along with the significance of national boundaries. For this reason
open societies are a symbol not only of democracy but progress in general. I
believe in the truth of this argument but it is not so simple. Openness
which is inevitable and necessary means nothing in isolation from the
economic processes. Many underdeveloped, ex-colonial countries are both
absolutely open and absolutely poor. Progressive and stable openness comes
about as a result of economic and political progress, the attainment of a
certain level of economic balance. This is not a political whim but a result
from the accumulation and maturity of a given society.
We should not, therefore, be in a hurry to depose the role of the
nation states. They will not disappear overnight but will fade slowly in the
process of the development of relative economic balance. During the Third
Civilisation state power was absolute. During the Third Civilisation state
power was absolute. Ludwig 14th, Napoleon, Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin and
Stalin were themselves incorporations of the state. Today, however, this is
impossible. Dictators such as Idi Amin Dada in Uganda, Boccassa 1st in the
Central African Republic or Pol Pot in Cambodia have been condemned to
historical oblivion and hatred. However, many other democratically elected
government have felt obliged to "protect" the national output and to isolate
themselves with restrictive import duties and other protectionist barriers.
Those who feel threatened and isolated as a result of their backwardness
rather than integrated have to pay a high cost in terms of armies and
weapons.
Therefore in the under developed countries the nation state will
preserve its traditional functions for a relatively longer period of time.
This will be both natural and progressive if the relevant governments make
efforts to open and adapt their economies to the global market. Adversely,
their countries will continue to vegetate within the conditions of the Third
Civilisation and will begin to lag behind in universal world development.
This issue has another side to its. The movements towards world
openness and integration is a resource of progress. No government will
succeed in the modern world to integrate its people into processes of world
progress if it does not affiliate itself with the World Trade Organisation
and the international financial markets. The decline of the role of the
nation state is a universal process which is taking place more rapidly in
the developed countries and more slowly in those who are still aspiring to
become affiliated with them and slowest of all in those countries who feel
themselves obliged to defend their frail national identity. Nevertheless, no
one country will be able to ignore the common processes of the globalisation
of the world, markets, manufacturing and the media.
What then will become of the nation state and its power?
I believe that the main trends in world development will be as follows:
the role of the nation states will decline in significance whereas the
functions of the local institutions of authority and supra-national and
global coordinators will increase. This is taking place at the moment in
Europe and all other states whose governments are conceding more and more
power to the trans-national corporations, the world media networks or other
autonomous and influential non-governmental organisations. Louis d'Or 14th
in an expression of the absolute nature of power once said, "L'Etat -- c'est
moi". From the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th
century governments began grudgingly to concede part of their economic power
to the owners of large private enterprises. Now as a result of the
globalisation the national governments have no choice other than to give up
many of their prerogatives. This is a natural process which follows the
logic of world development. Many people find it difficult to understand and
regard national honour and pride as a priority and any suggestion to the
contrary provokes nationalistic reaction. There have always been such
governments and there, no doubt, will be for many decades to come. However,
such policies which seem to forget the need for global and humane
responsibility will lead nations into the back roads of development. Sooner
rather than later nations will realise that they have been deceived and will
seek recompense for the politicians who brought them to that state.
The borders of states in the transition to the Fourth Civilisation will
continue to narrow as a result of major technological and social changes. If
you remember the message of A.Toffler in chapter four of this book, he
predicted that the new technologies would transfer power both downwards to
the local institutions of authority and upwards to the global regulators and
the transnational corporations. On one hand many economic and social
functions will become much more effective if they are transferred from
governments to civil societies and are controlled by legislation. This is
the case with the planning and coordination of a series of macro and
micro-economic processes. This is also the case with social welfare and in
particular pension funds, health case and academic and scientific research.
ON the other hand national governments are not in a position to regulate
independently the global environment, world financial markets, the global
redistribution of resources, goods and services, information flow and the
media etc.. The more people, goods and services cross over national borders
the less significance these borders will have. This will in turn lead to
changes in the prerogatives of nation states.
At the end of the 20th century the state is too small an institution to
resolve global problems and too large to resolve its own local issues. This
is also a result of the new technology, the restructuring of manufacturing
and the market.
A typical example of such a bi-lateral change is offered by the member
countries of the European Union. According to some researchers since 1957
about half of the authority of the nation state has been transferred either
to local authority or to the European Commission in Brussels. This is
perhaps an isolated example of a regional alliance. However, the same
process seems to be taking place in the USA where the American political
system has been stretched vertically upwards by the transnational
corporations and financial markets and downwards by the individual states
and the non-governmental and private organisations. Bill Clinton would
hardly have the authority to implement such a wide ranging programme of
reform as the "New Deal" of President Roosevelt in the 1930's. Even in the
case of the states such as the USA national governments do not have the same
authority that they had 40 or 50 years ago. They have also taken upon
themselves a range of global responsibilities with which to compensate for
the decline authority and the transfer of the real power to the
trans-national corporations. The specific global role of the USA at the
beginning of the 1990's will soon have to be shared with others. It is not
fair on the American people to carry the huge burden of military
expenditure, the peace-keeping operations of the UN and so on. It will not
be long before they will also involve Russia, Japan and Europe (France and
Germany). IN this way the gradual decline in the significance of the nation
state is as true for the USA as it is for everywhere else.
A distinguishing feature of the modern nation state is its integration
and strong links with the civil society. A number of writers such as P.
Drucker and J. Lukac have written that the sovereign state will become just
one of a number of centres for identification and integration rather than
the only one and will coexist and compete with the trans-regional,
supra-national and local, even tribal structures. When this rule of logical
development is applied universally then nations attain a higher level of
enrichment. Switzerland, for example, leads all statistical classifications
on the basis of GDP per head of population and this is not only due to the
success of the Swiss banks. This is rather a result of the co-existence of
the trans-national corporations and the banks, strong local authorities and
the state (government and parliament) which fulfils the role of a bridge
between the two sectors. The lack of bureaucracy, the active role of the
local population in global business and the decision making processes is a
particulary strong feature of the Swiss political system.
The modern state will have less and less international authority.
Globalisation opens borders and the world market "erodes" sovereignty. By
transferring their authority to the new global leaders and to local leaders
the national governments will have less and less capabilities. This,
however, raises the issue of the preservation of the identity of nations and
states in the face of the emergent global culture and global awareness. It
is the "travelling peoples" which will succeed with their sustainable and
strong cultural links which not only produce avant garde technology but use
it to effect. It is not states and weapons but technological power plus
knowledge which will play a decisive role in this question.
4. AFTER THE CRISIS OF POLITICAL IDENTITY
The modern-day left is like the right undressed and the modern-day
right is like a well dressed left.
(political jokes from the end of the 20th century)
A
lthough I frequently speak of the Fourth Civilisation, the new
ideological and theoretical synthesis and balanced development I realize how
difficult it is for these new concepts to be accepted by the modern world.
This is particularly true for the smaller (albeit proud) countries such as
Bulgaria. In face of the new global changes and challenges there is no
difference between the small and the large countries. We are all part of the
same game. Some are quicker while some are slower but we are all undergoing
the same profound changes. In Eastern Europe three years were sufficient to
understand the crisis of universal political identity which the West has
long been aware of.
For more than 100 years the political left in the world has been
associated with the new role of the working class, social guarantees,
nationalisation of the basic means of production and the expropriation from
the expropriators etc.. The right has always been linked with the defence of
large and medium scale private capital, traditions and security, no state
intervention in business and non-involvement in social matters. However, in
the modern world at the end of the 20th century, with the exception of a few
fringe parties and movements, there is no country or political party in the
world which resembles these traditional concepts of the left and right.
Together with the collapse of the Third Civilisation we are also
experiencing a crisis of political identity. This is a consequence of the
new ideological and theoretical synthesis, the changes in ownership and the
social and class structure as well as the end of the traditional state
mechanisms. The object of the differences between the left and the right is
disappearing. The entire world is undergoing a process of ownership
socialisation and states are being integrated into civil societies in which
neither the old left nor the old right can preserve their traditional
status.
During the present time of chaos and the growing mistrust towards the
traditional leaders, of left-wing promises made by right-wing politicians
and the concern of the business sector for social issues we should expect
too much. The political inertia is very strong and only a minority would
take the electoral risk of trying to overthrow the traditional symbols. What
we are witness to at the moment is the adaptation of the old phraseology to
new world realities. Whether they want it or not the left and the right wing
parties in the world are intuitively moving towards a state of "balanced
development" and will fight for domination of its ideological territory. The
"left" no longer reject the concept of private capital and do not demand
nationalisation. The "right" are no longer ashamed to speak of social
programmes and the needs of the poor. The borders between the traditional
electorates are fading as a result of a process of irreversible changes in
the social and class structure of society.
As a consequence many new parties have appeared which give voice to
localised interests within a given country or region. The "success" of Ross
Perot at the presidential elections in 1992 and national independence
parties in Canada or Catalonia and Northern Italy are features of the same
phenomenon: the change in the foundations and structures and economic and
social interests is leading to changes in political doctrines and political
parties. The traditional parties which succeed in making the transition and
re-orientate themselves rapidly within the complex situation of the modern
world will survive and their traditional names will be no more than a mere
decoration. Those who delay will fade away and gradually open the way to the
new political formations.
The end of the crisis of modern political identity will come quite
quickly. Many of the parties of the Socialist and Liberal Internationals or
Christian Democratic parties are making timid steps towards changes in their
programmes. Some of them are rejecting their traditional programmes outright
with the justification of the need for a new pragmatism. The former
communist parties of Eastern Europe changed their names to "socialist" or
"social-democratic". Some of them have become so closely associated with
large-scale capital that they already resemble the bourgeois parties of end
of the 19th century.
Together with the changes in ownership and the social and class
structure, as well as the new borders of the nation state and the transition
to global polycentrism, the changes in modern political parties and
doctrines is another important feature of the changes in world civilisation.
The rapprochement between party programmes and views which is taking place
at the moment is a consequence of the new ideological synthesis. It will not
be long before political pluralism will take its stand on the new problems
of the Fourth Civilisation and the transition to it.
There are two further processes linked with the problem of political
identity which I would like to mention. The first of these is linked with
the obvious need for regional and trans-national political formations such
as the Party of European Socialists, for example. The second is the need for
new types of voting systems and the development of direct democracy. My
friend the American political scientist Theodore Becker refers to this as
"teledemocracy". The world telecommunication systems such as the Internet
provide wonderful opportunities for the direct involvement of millions and
billions of people in the decision-taking processes. Today, there are very
few politicians who are aware of this, a few others are sceptical and
concerned about preserving their own power and forces of manipulation.
For me there is little doubt that the Fourth Civilisation will lead to
enormous changes in political life and its structures, types of government,
electoral mechanisms and decision taking. These are not utopias, nor are
they long-term forecasts. These are simply the results of something which is
appearing before out very eyes.
5. THE GLOBAL COORDINATORS
The Fourth Civilisation will be at one and the same time an open,
polycentric and integrated world. This will require a more effective system
of global coordination.
W
hen analysing the system of the Fourth Civilisation, I naturally came
upon the problem of global coordination. This once again brought to my mind
the unsystematic but indicative thoughts of Lenin on the "single factory for
all workers and peasants", Stalin's idea of the "world wide victory of
communism", Hitler's thoughts on the "World Reich" and Fukoyama's writings
on the "End of History" etc.. A great number of researchers from the World
Federation for Future Studies have also written on the need for a world
government.
There is clearly some logic to this argument. Globalisation will
require much more than ever before increased global control. As the
processes develop and political polycentrism increases there will be a
growing need for world coordination. Nevertheless, I do not believe that it
will be possible in the near future to establish such a global government.
This is an element of the distant future to which neither I nor my
generation belong. Of course, the Fourth Civilisation will cover the entire
period of the 21st century and no doubt future generations of our
grandchildren and great-grand children will have to face the issue.
Today the world is faced with hundreds of global problems which lead to
collapse of the bi-polar world structures. There are a number of world
organisations involved in these problems such as the UN, the World Trade
Organisation and the IMF based on the need for compromises between nation
states and their products. Since compromise between nation states is at the
basis of the development of the world organisations their capabilities to
act in the real conditions of the modern world are seriously restricted. If
we want the world organisations to succeed, they will have to receive wide
empowerment and responsibilities for the global problems which are outside
the domain of nation states. This is the only way in which a united world of
small and large states and cultures will be able to face up to the
challenges of supra-national environmental interests. It is, of course,
absurd to speak of a world government, but it is clear that there is an
obvious need for a coordinating body which from the very outset will be able
to resolve military and ecological crises, regulate the conditions for world
finance and the fight against international crime etc..
It is, therefore, evident that the modern world needs a revision of the
Constitution of the United Nations and the expansion of the powers of the
Security Council as well as the establishment of new institutions. Many of
these have already been proposed by a number of leading world politicians
and intellectuals. These include the Council for Ecological Security of the
United Nations. A reflection of the new directions in thought are the new
structures within the United Nations and its specialised organisations
including UNESCO, INIDO, FAO and others.
This process of expansion has to be carried out very carefully with the
gradual empowerment of specialised national organisations with the rights
and responsibilities currently born by nation states. I expect that the main
priority will be global economic control and the resolution of global
environmental and social issues. The restructuring of the UN, the creation
of an effective World Bank, the increase in the prerogatives of the World
Trade Organisation and the empowerment of all these organisations to deal
with the real problems of the world is the path to balanced development.
This path will be difficult, slow and gradual but there is no other way. The
alternative is for the new communications, computers and automated factories
to dig a deeper gorge between the poor and the rich rather than a source for
democracy and freedom.
At the same time the large nations have to double and treble their
efforts to create a new climate in the world and another type of global
intercourse. This may lead to the institutionalisation of the meetings of
the G-7 and its expansion to include Russia and China and perhaps a few
other nations. It may be a good idea to hold regular meetings of the heads
of state of the whole world. There are a number of possibilities. The most
important thing is for us to realise that the new age which we are entering
requires new type of thinking and a new understanding of our own
responsibilities.
THE NATIONS WHICH WILL SUCCEED, THE NATIONS OF THE FOURTH CIVILISATION
(instead of a conclusion)
T
his book is an expression of my inner spiritual world and my thoughts
over a number of years on the present state and the potential future of our
confused world. I have been profoundly influenced by the major political
changes which have taken place since the collapse of the Eastern European
political systems and their economic structures. I am acutely aware that the
"Fourth Civilisation" will provoke a number of different reactions. During
such a watershed period in our history unanimity is dangerous and
unnecessary. Indeed, the book which I have written contains a number of
generalisations on the character of global change at the border between two
millennia, the periodisation of history and the crisis of the entire modern
civilisation. The logic of my research has lead me to a number of
conclusions on the new geo-political nature of the world and the necessity
of global economic and political regulation.
The "Fourth Civilisation" is not based on abstract proposals or
invented eloquent phrases. All my conclusions are based on experience and
suffering, on years of research and reading as well as specific practical,
academic experiments and political experience. The "Fourth Civilisation" is
not a forecast, nor futuristic literature but an evaluation of the facts as
they are. It is an attempt to overcome the academic dogma of the 19th
century which have existed for over 150 years. I am interested in the clash
of ideas and I realise that many of my conclusions merit further analysis,
something which I intend to do in the future. I can now see with delight
many new areas for creative work.
The "Fourth Civilisation" is not intended to reveal all the details of
the issues which it raises but to unify them within one general concept and
to reveal the universal character of the global change which the modern
world in experiencing. The common crisis of the bi-polar world and the
collapse of the Eastern European regimes, the modern conditions of
geo-political chaos in which we are living, the major re-structuring of the
world economy, culture and politics shows that the new realities with which
we are faced have a complex and accumulative effect. Whether we want to or
not, they will lead us to new solutions. My book is concerned with these
solutions and the new methodological approach to the evaluation of world
processes. It is also concerned with the changes in ownership, political and
economic structures and the way in which they are finding more and more
common global ground. I realise that these conclusions may be quite
controversial but I deeply believe in them as indicative proof. Everything
which proves that the old civilisation is fading and that we are entering
into a new Fourth Civilisation is based on the trends and processes to which
we are already witnesses.
I have to confess that everything which I have touched upon in this
book is a starting point for further work based on the country in which I
was born and bred. Bulgaria is now undergoing a difficult and complex crisis
caused by the transition from a totalitarian to a market and pluralist
economy. I have spoken little about Bulgaria in the "Fourth Civilisation"
but in actual fact all my conclusions concern its fate. I believe that I
have been right to keep my conclusions about Bulgaria to a separate book.
This has allowed my to concentrate on the features of global change and to
concentrate on the specific features of Bulgaria at a later stage. For this
reason there is a direct and unifying link between the "Fourth Civilisation"
and my book about Bulgaria which is soon to be published. I hope that they
will both be of interest to all my friends with whom for over ten years now
we have been discussing the fate of the changes and all my colleagues all
over the world with whom I have argued about the future of our world and all
those people with whom I have shared the good and the bad in the political
life of Bulgaria over the past seven years.
Whatever the fate of this book, on completing it I want to thank all
those without whom it would not have been possible. I owe so much to my
mother and my father who bore me and brought me up, my family who have
suffered the deprivations of my almost permanent preoccupation with work, my
teachers from whom I learnt so much, and my colleagues and my friends who
helped me with the book. Nothing in this life can be achieved without love
and I thank all those who believed in me since it was their faith, hoe and
love which inspired so much of my conclusions.
During the entire period of writing and preparing the "Fourth
Civilisation" I asked myself the question, "Which nations will succeed and
will not be lost to the chaos of the global world?". During the great
migrations of the Second Civilisation many nations and ethnic groups lost
their potential and remained on the periphery of the nation states which
were to emerge later. Some of them have disappeared. I hope fervently that
the Bulgarian spirit is not lost and that it does not become dissolved in
the waves of migration of people, information and goods which is on the
horizon. I shall work and I shall struggle for this not to the detriment of
any other nation. I shall work to consolidate the culture and the economy of
Bulgaria in the context of dignified competition.
The nations which will succeed do not live only in the great countries.
These will be the nations which will accept the laws of the new age and will
become the people of the Fourth Civilisation. These nations will not be
divided on the lines of capitalist or socialist, workers or bourgeois,
imperialist or colonial. These peoples will not allow their civic freedoms
to be usurped nor will they recognise cultural or political isolationism and
closed economies. The nations of the Fourth Civilisation will be united with
millions and billions of visible and invisible threads. They will produce
the new values which belong to the whole of humanity.
The road is long and there will be many storms along the way. The New
Civilisation does not require social engineering it requires merely the
pursuance of the logic of progress which our fathers and the outgoing 20th
century have bequeathed to us. It is a difficult but glorious legacy, a
legacy which will require us to be true to our time and those who will come
after us.
Sofia 1996.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Asenov, B. Turkisation, Sofia, 1993
Atalie, J. The Millennium, Sofia, 1992
Atalie, J. The History of Time, Sofia, 1993
Atalie, J., M.Guillaume. The Economics of Freedom, Sofia. 1994
Baeva, I. Eastern Europe after Stalin - 1953-1956, Sofia, 1995.
Bashev, V. Marvellous Independence, Sofia, 1977.
Bell, D. The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism, Sofia, 1994
Brzezinsky, Z. The Great Failure. Sofia, 1991.
Burlatski, F. The New Thought (Dialogues and Thoughts on the
Technological Revolution and our Reforms) Sofia, 1993.
Buholtz, T. Live Ideas from Dead Economists. Sofia, 1993.
The Culture of Entrepreneurialism. Edited by Bridgette Burcher. Sofia,
1994.
Varzonovtsev, D., H.Tomov, M.Georgieva, N.Obrikov, V.Lichev. The
Chronicle of a Failed Revolution. (Bulgaria 1990-1993) Sofia, 1994.
Gardner G. The power of money, the secrecy of power and how citizens
can stand up to it. Sofia, 1993.
Genov, N. The Rise of the Dragon. Sofia, 1994
Grey, G. Liberalism. Sofia. 1991.
Grigulevich, J. The Papacy in the 20th Century. Sofia, 1982.
Galbraith, G. The Anatomy of Power. Sofia, 1993.
Davidkov, Ts. The New Entrepreneurs (Results of an empirical social
study - "Private Business in Bulgaria" Sofia, 1993).
Darendorf, R. Thoughts on Revolution in Europe. Sofia, 1992.
Jane, J. Handbook on the Essence, Priciples and Activities of the UN.
Sofia, January 1993.
Geffkins, F. An Introduction to Marketing, Advertising and Public
Relations. Varna, 1993.
Zeiffer, I. The World Revolutionaries (From Bogomil through Huss to
Lenin) Sofia, 1994.
Karanjulov, R., V.Milandinova. State Property in the People's Republic
of Bulgaria. Sofia, 1987.
Kennedy, P. Preparations for the 21st Century. Sofia, 1995.
King, A., B.Schneider. Sofia, 1989.
Kuzadjian,L. Ideological Campaigns in China, 1949-1970. Sofia, 1971.
Kuzadjian,L. Maoism in the West - The Myth Revealed. Sofia, 1978
Labruyere, J. Characters. Varna, 1976.
Levi, T. Thoughts on Management. Sofia, 1994.
Lukac, J. The End of the 20th Century and the End of the Modern Era.
Sofia, 1994.
Mazovetski, T. Report on Human Rights on the Territory of the Former
Yugoslavia. Sofia, 1992.
Minkov, T. Maoism and the Agrarian Question. Sofia, 1979.
Nikolov, I. The Long Waves of Kondratiev. Sofia. 1985.
Nikolov, L. The Structures of Human Activity. Sofia, 1982.
Newland, R. Electoral Systems (Relative analysis). Sofia 1993.
Pantev, A. B.Gavrilov. The Path of the Modern World. Sofia, 1994.
Peters, T., R. Waterman. Towards Perfection in Company Management.
Sofia, 1988.
Polimeridis, G. Modern Right Wing Revisionism in Greece. ISST, Sofia,
1979.
Psevorski,A. Democratisation and the Market (Political and economic
reforms in Eastern Europe) and Latin America) Sofia, 1994.
Radev, R. Ancient Philosophy. Sofia. 1994.
Radoslavov, S. The Fate of Our Times ( essays on the ideological
development of social democracy) Sofia 1994.
Rowning, H. Hitler Said (Confidential conversations with the Fuhrer on
his plans for the domination of the world). Varna, 1992.
Raich, R. The Labour of Nations (How to prepare ourselves for the
capitalism of the 21st century), Sofia, 1992.
Rostow, W. The Stages of Economic Growth (Neo-Communist manifesto)
Sofia, 1993.
Rumyantsev, A. Socialist Reality and the Theories of Comrade E.Kardel.
1957.
Rumnyantsev, A. On the Contributions of Mao to Modern Socialism. Sofia,
1974.
Savov, S. The Dethroned Idols of America, Sofia, 1976.
Semov, M. Politics. Sofia, 1994.
Sepetliev, D. The Theoretical Mistakes of Karl Marx. Sofia, 1994.
Stalin, I. On the Socialist Economy. Sofia, 1955.
Sulitzer, P. The Rich. Sofia, 1992, 1992 (two volumes).
Tikhvinski, S. The History of China and Moderntiy. Sofia, 1979.
Toynbee, A. Selected Works, Sofia, 1992.
Toynbee, A. Studies of History (The Rise and Development of
Civilisations). Volume 1. Sofia, 1995.
Toynbee, A. Studies of History (The Fall and Decay of Civilisaitons)
Volume 2. Sofia, 1995.
Toynbee, A. Studies of History (Universal states and universal
churches) Volume 3, Sofia 1995.
Tomov, A. Socialism and Self-Management. Sofia, 1989.
Toffler, A. The Third Wave (Man and his Labour). Sofia, 1991.
Toffler, A. Forecasts and Pre-conditions. Sofia, 1992.
Toffler, A. The Shock of the Future. Sofia, 1992.
Toffler, A. H. Toffler. The New Civilisation. Sofia, 1995.
Trendafilov, T. Capital, Man, Time (Critique of Adapting Capital).
Sofia, 1977.
Turen, A. What is Democracy? Sofia. 1994.
Fotev, G. The History of Sociology (in two volumes). Sofia, 1994.
Friedman, M. The Irreconciliability of Money. (Episodes from monetary
history). Sofia, 1994.
Frovain, E. The European Convention on the Rights of Man as the Social
Order in Europe, Sofia, 1994.
Fukoyama, F. The End of History and the Last Man. Sofia. 1993.
Schweitzer, V. Modern Social Democracy, Sofia, 1990.
Shishmanov, D. The Elysian Palace during the Fifth Republic. Sofia.
1984.
Shu Su. Notes from an Eastern Slope. Sofia, 1985.
Yakovliev, N. The CIA against the KGB. Kieve, 1983.
IN RUSSIAN
Abalkin, L. At the Crossroads. Moscow, 1993.
Armetiev, P. The Problems of the Developing Countries and Maoist
Diplomacy in the UN. Moscow, 1978.
Afanasiev, V. Society, Sytems, Knowledge and Management. Moscow, 1981.
Bagrov, V. Modern Capitalism and Nature. Moscwo, 1976.
Bernon, S., L.Teplov. The Warsaw Pact and NATO: Two Courses, Two
Policies. Moscow, 1979.
Vologonov, D. The Triumph and The Tragedy. (J.V. Stalin)(Four Volumes).
Moscow, 1983.
Galbraith, G. Life in Our Times. Moscow, 1986.
Ermilov, A. MacroEconomic Forecasting in the USA. Moscow, 1987.
Zelenev, S. The Giants of British Business. Moscow, 1971.
Cleer, E. Global Economy (The Logic of Development). Moscow, 1979.
Klow, A. Multinational Corporations and Imperialism. Moscow, 1979.
Kono Toekhiro. The strategy and structure of Japanese enterprises.
Moscow, 1987.
Kosolapov, V., A. Gonacharenko. The 21st Century in the mirror of
Futurology. Moscow, 1987.
Krechel, Yan, E. Mantser, Ch.Graber. The Shock of the Market (Materials
form the Agenda Group). Moscow, 1992.
Kulpin, E. The Technical and Economic Policies of the Chinese People's
Republic and the Working Class of China. Moscow, 1975.
Kusmin, V. China in the Strategy of American Imperialism. Moscow, 1978.
MacDOnald, D. The Game Called Business. Moscow, 1979.
Melnikov, D., L.Chernaya. The History of Death. Moscow, 1987.
Mocherniy, S. The Essence and Evolution of Capitalist Ownership.
Moscow, 1978.
Nikitich, L. Labriola. Moscow. 1980.
Nixon, R. In the Arena. Moscow, 1992.
Plimok, E. The Political Legacy of V.I. Lenin. Moscow. 1988.
Popper, K. The Open Society and its Enemies. Moscow. 1993.
Porter, M. International Competition. Moscow, 1993.
Seligmen, B. The Major Trends of Modern Economic Thought. Moscow. 1968.
Simon, V. The Might of The Union of Entrepreneurs. Moscow, 1979.
Snegurov, A. The Relationship between Political Parties and the
Institutions of State Power in the Russian Federation. St. Petersburg, 1994.
Trotski, L. The Stalinist School of Falsification. Berlin. 1932.
Fyodorov, E. The People of Ancient Rome. Moscow, 1987.
Hikks, G. R. Value and Capital. Moscow, 1987.
Yakovliev, A. Foreword, Collapse, Epilogue. Moscow, 1992.
Journal. "The Reference Bulletin" Ed.1/1971, Institute for Modern
Social Theories.
The Foreign Policy Conception of Maoism, Sofia. 1978.
Global Changes in Modernity. Institute of Global Economics and
International Sciences of the Academy of Science of the USSR, Sofia, 1982.
Bulgarian International Agreements. Vol. 1 and 2, Sofia, 1994.
International Trade Conventions and Codexes. Sofia, 1983.