The institutionalization of international society as a political response to competing proto-institutions of world society

The world society has not been real yet. Society is defined as a set of institutions, which simultaneously enable and restrict social actions (Wagner 1994). With regard to that definition it should be clear, that such institutions didn’t exist on the global level. However, different approaches of cultural sociology examine the constitution of a world culture by processes of diffusion and hybridization of social practices (Pieterse 1995; Lechner, Boli 2005). The results of this interconnecting process are cultural frames. In a pluralistic world culture those frames appear as a set of proto-institutions. These proto-institutions regulate the transformation of societies and the emergence of a world society. In contrast to these processes of bottom-up regulation, the institutions of international society also try to steer this transformation, however, they are a part of top-down politics. Thus, there is a situation of competition between two different approaches of regulation, what systematically will lead to conflicts. In this paper I develop a theoretical and conceptual reconstruction of this social situation with the utilization of a general theory of practice (Reckwitz 2002). By the utilization of a theory of practice it is possible to conceptualize the problem in three ways: First, theory of practice shows how a fragmented world culture emerges from the globalization of different social practices. In absence of an accepted theory of globalization the practice theory explains the circumstances of a starting worldwide organization of social practices. These global connections of social practices act as basic foundations of an emerging world society. Second, the theory of practice offers a specific concept of institutions – in this they are social practices to follow a rule (Knobloch 2006). These practices must be very dense, so they could provide practical knowledge, symbolic orders, and techniques which allow the repeating of social action. Every social order is based on these practices, however, they exist simultaneously as non-formalized proto-institutions or as formalized social conventions. Third, a practical approach of politics gives a conceptual framework for the analysis of the process of institutionalizing. Using categories and levels of the theory of practice it is possible to describe the different knowledge, practices and power resources that affect the process of institutionalizing. The ‘practice’ of institutionalizing explains the rules under those the rule-makers act and these insights will stimulate the political theory (Freeden 2010). References Freeden, Michael (2010), Thinking Politically and Thinking about Politics: Language, interpretation, and Ideology, in: Leopold, David; Stears, Marc (Ed.), Political Theory: Methods and Approaches, Oxford, 196-215 Knobloch, Jörn (2006), Hybrid Systems: Political Practice and Theory by using the Example of Russia (in German), Münster. Lechner, Frank Jr.; Boli, John (2005), World Culture: Origins and Consequences, Malden. Pieterse, Jan N. (1995), Globalization as Hybridization, in: Featherstone, Mike; Lash, Scott; Robertson, Roland (Ed..), Global Modernities, London u.a., 45-68. Reckwitz, Andreas (2002), Toward a Theory of Social Practices: A Development in Cultural Theorizing, in: European Journal of Social Theory, 5.2, 243-265. Wagner, Peter (1994), A Sociology of Modernity: Liberty and Discipline, Routledge.