July 11th  2020 By the end of last year, I have tried to formalize as a local association the INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR STUDIES AND LOCAL GLOBAL ACTIONS, think tank and popular university. The project was unsuccessful.

At the global level it could arise instead qualified interest. And this is the reason why here I am driven to briefly elucidate about the reflections I have been developing as the base for the project, at the moment to relaunch it as an informal offer for those interested in giving it ongoing contribution for debating  online, and till times will be ripe for a more stable approach.

I do ultimately believe the global local pertains to the formation, existence, existence’s ambition, theoretical reconstruction of more or less stable social grouping and sets upon the basis of difference and identity criteria particularly marked by the accent some among such behavioral criteria are quantitatively more spread then other or intensely affirmed and implemented by powerful super structural agencies as standards to be generally fulfilled as opposed to different practices to be singled out and localized.   

It seems to me, in other words, pretty evident as there is not exactly and always an overarching global and a submitted local (those who travel a lot they know how much ferocious some locals can be!) in like manner as it cannot be stated the interplay among global and local it always unfolds in terms of opposition and divide. If  there may be indeed powerful localization, specificity and weak generality and globality (just easy for instance to imagine an area specially reach in water surrounded by areas instead completely deprived, as it could be the special accent of such difference identity relation, till, just put it, those deprived do not violently react so as to achieve water distribution or do not learn how to survive without drinking water), it there can also be, as there is actually,  the constructive, institutional, more or less consensual format based upon the converging patterns.

The global local relation, like any other relation, it is ultimately matter of power interactions and it may ultimately be anarchical, or more or less framed till the point of becoming system and regime, and also constrictive, reductive as systems and regimes at times may actually be.

Once again, it seems to me,  the very often mixed outcome ongoing may be the local is relevant upon the global, the global is relevant upon the local, the local set itself as a by structure, the global too may happen to find set itself as a by structure into local realities.

And the boundaries then: when and how local comes to be singled out with reference to other local formats and the global, when and how several locals set them with reference to global or multiple globals, when and how different global structures competitively affect local realities, when instead they collude.

 And of course, if there are the boundaries, at some point first, there are also the different subjects and the environments which create them. There are individuals, groups, communities, countries, cities, regions, peoples, economic organizations, states, nation states, international organizations, but also global individuals, global societies, global organizations and global kinships, a whole set of subjects which create the global and the local and the local global.

All this debate, so as to be contemporary, may be significantly traced back to the End of the Second World War, at the moment the right  of nation states to be, so to say, sovereign local global entities was enshrined accompanied by the overarching atomic bomb world order.  But of course the substance of the local global has been relatively changing over time, passing through the Cold War, and the American Imperialism in its disguised forms of an extreme globalism, nonetheless also accompanied, according to me, by an authentic positive economic social growth, and till the current time we are leaving  and into which it is still not exactly clear if there is a  synthesis ongoing and  which kind of.  

And finally, the Little Actions then that such little think tank I am trying to set up may realistically afford to outline, far more than implementing.

By temper, particularly pragmatic I am. I like the idea of setting actions, after theories follow up. And further, more generally, if I actually know myself as particularly moral, I am also firstly oriented to physiocracy. Once a French chap he said me “ La drogue c’est pas vie, mais la vie c’est pas vie!”

So that if I can, I would address the scope, in developing the works of such really non demanding project, of receiving contributions, aimed at reviewing relevant individual and collective behaviors all of us can enact or in turn be enacted, so as to lucidly, honestly single out their inner impulsions and address solutions into which honesty, morals, physiocracy and welfare they can actually meet up all together for each and all, and as they actually impinge the local global dimensions.

I wish then all those have already expressed authentic and qualified interest, and whoever else of the kind, might like interacting, evidently also critically, upon such brief project outline (to be however always coupled with the principles expressed into draft of the statute), and that they might like sharing articles, news, positive contributions of any kind in such working perspective.

Thank You very much and many greetings!

Fabio De Siati