I have never really sat down and thought about what globalization means on a personal level. After watching the PBS documentary, Commanding Heights: The New Rules of the Game, I thought like most people that globalization is essentially Americanization. Why else did my friend eat McDonald's in every major Italian city when she was abroad? It is impossible for the world economy to grow and prosper without being unified and unfortunately the process of globalization began without this thought in mind. Jeffrey Sachs stated that only one-sixth of the world achieved "modern economic growth" while the remaining five-sixths of the world was still "developing." It is impossible to achieve a stable world economy when the majority of the world cannot compete with Western countries. How can we expected countries that do not even have basic property laws (meaning that the people cannot obtain loans, mortgages, or credit) in their legal systems to function in the Western world of representation (e.g. the Internet)? In order for globalization to succeed, we need to get everyone on the same playing field or there will be turmoil. This also influences how communication is dealt with on a global level. If the gap between "developed" countries and "third world" countries is so vast, how does that affect communication between the two? Can communication even be equal? In order for globalization to be successful, we all have to dive into it full force or put up the barriers once again.
How can there be a fair global economy when even in American, 42% of the wealth is controlled by 1% of the population?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'd like to continue on your discussion and what you've mentioned in your post. One thing you mentioned Brian really got my attention on big aspects of globalization, language and culture. These aspects are key in building upon globalization because as you said, if there are any sort of gaps whatsoever, whether by economy, language or culture, it will be impossible to build any sort of global rapport, or worse yet may even put up more barriers as you said because others will be changing while others won't, segregating nations even more. Here's a link to a book I read about "Chinglish", a great example of a globalizations mishap, http://www.amazon.com/dp/1423603354/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=4124911545&ref=pd_sl_93od0d6tvj_e#reader_1423603354. While perhaps not a severe topic, it does show the clashes and misunderstandings between East and West. Unfortunately, at least to myself, it is not possible to completely overall and create agreable terms on globalization without exact copies of a nation's own set of structures and values already elsewhere. Therefore, nations with similiar values, culture, language, e.t.c will probably grow well together, while others may not. Thus, globalization (in my opinion once again) will most likely continue to be a painful and rough sort of process with both pros and cons, but this is not unexpected. However keeping it a civil process and using respect and "kid gloves" is a better approach to globalization than perhaps using methods such as dumping large amounts of financial aid into a nation with no type of logistical or infrastructural support, or by invasion or martial law, as these can be very messy forms of trying to make the world "globalized".
ReplyDeleteVery true Ian. I am also wondering how can we effectively communicate to poorly developed countries to begin with? It is a very overwhelming process. Dumping money into a country or invading a country does not work. How do we begin to bridge the gap?
ReplyDeleteWe are often asked to accept that globalization as irreversible and inevitable, and made to believe that globalization is synonymous with unregulated capitalism. A country with an economy based on sustenance farming cannot be expected to compete with highly developed countries in anything other than cheap natural resources and labor, which always comes with a high environmental and social cost. There is a natural economic progression that countries must go through before they can compete with the rest of the world.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to your comments, may I also add that each country has its own unique circumstances and factors to consider. Why do countries like India and China benefit the most from globalization while countries in Africa, for example, seem to be negatively impacted the most? Because we do not live in an ideal world, we must consider the best possible solution. Often times, globalization is associated with "Americanization," something that works for some, but not all. It is difficult to completely integrate one country with another without there being some sort of cultural or economic clash.
ReplyDelete