Taking Globalization Seriously: Towards General Jurisprudence (Book Review of \u3ci\u3eGlobalization and Legal Theory\u3c/i\u3e by William Twining)

Part II provides an account of the jurisprudence of Globalization and Legal Theory. Due to the novelty of many of the issues discussed in the book, as well as their importance to the understanding of Twining\u27s recommendations, I have provided a longer than usual account of several chapters. Part II touches upon one of the central jurisprudential dichotomies introduced by Twining—the distinction between general and particular jurisprudence. Twining compares different accounts of the distinction using pairs of canonical jurists. In particular, he compares H.L.A Hart\u27s Postscript with Dworkin\u27s Law\u27s Empire. In this part, I juxtapose Twining\u27s record of this exchange with seemingly conflicting accounts provided by other commentators and suggest resolving the apparent conflict. Part IV brings to the fore the concept of general jurisprudence in the age of globalization. Placed in that context, I will suggest that a new general jurisprudence should respond to the challenges posed by globalization. I first identify the driving forces behind globalization, mainly new economic markets, the Internet, and the trend towards democracy. Then, I suggest that some of the current American schools of thought may respond to these very phenomena. Economic analysis of law, feminism, and critical race studies may all have something interesting to say on globalization. My last step is to propose that a transnational version of these theories should form the main body of a new global jurisprudence