What is globalization?

Noam Chomsky quoted an economist, Gerald Helleiner, for his definition of globalization –“the poor complain, they always do, but that’s just idle chatter. Our system brings rewards to all, at least to all who matter.” (1) But, the PBS special asks a debated question, should the world’s wealthiest people really dictate how the economy is going to run? Who should write the new rules of the game for the global economy? Globalization has brought prosperity but it has also brought risks and issues that are only slightly understood, it has unleashed a worldwide debate about wealth and poverty—about the “rules of the game” for this new era of globalization. The narrator of the PBS video explains that we are living through a revolution, the 1990’s saw a new kind of global economy where everyone has a stake, yet no one has control. This new era of globalization was tied together by flows of investment, trade, ideas of culture, but it happened so quickly that everyone was not able to catch up and understand the change.(4)

In a different video Chomsky states more simply than before, that globalization is a specific modality of international integration on the most neutral of levels, because everything changes when viewed from the people’s perspective versus the capital movement. (2) Chomsky goes on to explain that with globalization, a country must open their borders to free imports which wipes out domestic needs, hurting poor farmers. The farmers can choose to flee to cities and join a massive labor force which lowers wages and in turn, manufacturers (the U.S., Europe, Japan) abroad benefit from cheap labor while the economy boosts; so a positive for economists, a negative for the people. (1)

This can be seen in the U.S./Mexico relation in 1994 when NAFTA was put into order. NAFTA called for the border to be militarized in order to stop the movement of people, in essence, to cut back on international integration, or, globalization. NAFTA claims to increase globalization between U.S. and Mexico, however, when measured by the people, it cuts back all of the flow (hence the militarization of the border). The reason for NAFTA was because it was predicted that its effect would be an economic miracle, which looked great to the small group of secular wealthy people and foreign investors. However, NAFTA was clearly devastating to the majority of the population, as wages dropped, people were driven off their land, and investments declined.(2) The labor movement in the U.S. outwardly opposed NAFTA. They saw it as a “corporate dominated trade and investment agreement, one that served the interests of multinational corporations” while doing nothing to protect the rights of workers or to give them a true voice in the political system.(4)

According to Park and Curran, globalization is “extending the basis of communication and cultural exchange.” In a sense, a “global village”, as they called it, is formed as new communication and technology compressing time and space is made available. Globalization, though it may have its downsides, is increasing global communication. People are better connected to each other through international channels of communication, which betters international understanding and reduced national division. Do you want to learn how to make a traditional Chinese dish? I am most positive if you search on YouTube a ton of videos will be available, from China, not from America, showing you how to make the traditional dish just like the Chinese do. Globalization opens up new lines of communication between different groups which enables mutuality between people, without removing individuality and “suggesting that the world is shrinking into a single, harmonious village.” (3)

Along with the global communication, global culture has increased through globalization. In Park and Curran, Ien Ang states “the transnational communication system…offers opportunities of new forms of bonding and solidarity, new ways of forging cultural communities.” These new cultural communities are seen as globalization promotes ethnic, cultural, religious, and linguistic diversity all over the world. My father is from Israel and is able to listen to his favorite Israeli radio stations on his computer all day long, as if he was in Israel, much like Korean American can watch Korean television from their homes in California. Cultural globalization is seen as a positive because it is thought to weaken the nation. However, the political economy literature feels it corrupts the legacy of nationalism. (3)

So, there are at least two sides to every story. Dick Cheney feels “millions of people today are better off than they would’ve been without globalization and very few people have been harmed.”(4) While others feel globalization (as seen mainly through political and economic issues) is bringing the world to its demise. Though cultural theorists are enthusiastic about globalization as seen as a building a progressive society and political economists believe it is weakening progressive movement, both sides believe that the nation is in dire trouble.(3)

(1) Chomsky, Noam. What Is Globalization? YouTube. 26 Mar. 2007. Web. 06 Jan. 2011

(2) Chomsky, Noam. Discussion on Globalization. YouTube. 30 Oct. 2006. Web. 06 Jan. 2011.

(3) Curran, James, and Myung-Jin Park. De-Westernizing Media Studies. London: Routledge, 2000. Print.

(4) Commanding Heights: Storyline on PBS. PBS: Public Broadcasting Service. Web. 06 Jan. 2011.