Abstract

In this Part III, we attempt to locate the previous two Parts, i.e., Part I: Global Social Contract and Part II: Global Quasi-Legislative Behavior, in the broader context of global politics, focusing on the post-Cold period of Thirty Years Crisis (1989–2019). Chapter 10 presents three paradigms of post-Westphalian politics, Westphalian, Philadelphian and Anti-Utopian, whose core concept is sovereignty, whether it is state sovereignty, popular sovereignty or the loss of sovereignty. This chapter gives the basis for our comparison of three post-Cold War global politics in Chap. 11 (Theory of Power Transition), Chap. 12 (Theory of Civilizational Clash), and Chap. 13 (Theory of Global Legislative Politics). Contrasting the three theories shows that whereas the theory of power transition underestimates vulnerability when hegemons’ mishaps and mistakes of exercising power over those oppressed and marginalized by merely increasing the potentials of imploding and exploding (McNeill and Carrol) and whereas the theory of civilizational clash underestimates the subtlety and complexity of culture which needs apt taxonomical minds (Foucault) and subtle and even cynical handling (Bagehot), the theory of global legislative politics presents the theory that astutely captures the essentials of the ongoing global politics by conceptualizing it as a bundle of global quasi-social contracts under digitalized globalization.