Globalization is difficult to define precisely. It certainly transcends economic relations, including social, cultural, and political processes that are enmeshed in a larger “global” order – forms of social, political, and economic organization beyond the pale of the state. Globalization is a transition from a world ordered geographically, in which the basis for economic and political organization was sovereign territoriality, to an aterritorial, networked mode of organization whose present and evolving form is not yet clear. Control over space, national markets, and nation-states is no longer sufficient to ensure control over economic and political activities. The new forms of governance just beginning to emerge lack legitimacy and are poorly understood. Old and familiar modes of governance are becoming problematic, and new institutions more suited to a global age are just beginning to evolve.

THE ISSUES AND PREMISES OF THE ANTIGLOBALIZATION MOVEMENT

Much of the opposition to globalization today is itself a function of globalization led by individuals and groups from disparate geographic locations tied together through electronic networks and common objectives. A sign held by antiglobalization protesters at Davos in 2001 read “Our resistance is as global as your oppression.” The emergence of an aterritorial, networked global system is at the root of the problem of legitimacy and power of international institutions and inexorably links both multinational corporations (MNCs) and the anticorporate movement in interwoven, global electronic webs.

The relative importance of MNCs in the world economy has increased dramatically since the 1970s.