Archive for the ‘Feb 8/Debating Globalization’ Category

Debating Globalization (Blog 1)

Thursday, February 10th, 2011

Throughout Chapters 1 and 2 of The Globalization Reader by Lechner and Boli, the authors discuss the diverse views towards globalization. Even though the authors believe that globalization is beneficial to those involved, many argue the contrary. Because globalization is often associated with the West, one may fear the process and outcome of globalization involving one’s nation.

According to the authors, globalization benefits everyone. Producers have a greater selection of the tools they need along with a free market to sell what they produce. Consumers benefit due to having an affordable variety of goods to choose from. Therefore, the power of the government is limited allowing free trade for everyone; “freedom to define our own identities.”

The process of globalization has positively contributed to many nations throughout the world. According to the authors, globalization has contributed to travel, trade, the spread of cultural influences, knowledge, and the understanding of science and technology around the world. Even though globalization is beneficial to many, there is also plenty of room for improvement.

Blog1-From the Great Transformation to the Global Free Market

Thursday, February 10th, 2011

In “From the Great Transformation to the Global Free Market”, John Gray first depicts the positive outcome of the free market in the mid 19th Century England. “The free market created a new type of economy in which prices of all goods, including labor changed without regard to their effects on society”. This Great Transformation was produced in order to replace social markets by operating independently. Similar achievement is the goal today for organizations like the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Aside from this positive example of the free market, Gray shows us the negative side of it. “U.S free markets contributed to social breakdown—families are weaker than in any other country”. This statement rules out the “Washington consensus” belief that economic culture and systems will be merged into a single universal free market. I agree with Jason Gray in that the global free market does not bring on economic modernization everywhere. “It works against the free market as capitalism arises…” Just as Utopia suffered due to the global free market, I believe we all will suffer if we soon transformed into a single universal free market, as we would fall together as a whole.

Manifesto of the Communist Party by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels describes the ruling of the bourgeoisie with its massive force so powerful and its, “clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalization or rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground”. Similar to “From the Great Transformation to the Global Free Market”, a modern bourgeois society would bring crises to society due to the epidemic of over-production. I can’t imagine a society on overload; devastation would be prominent and uncontrollable.

Judging Globalism

Wednesday, February 9th, 2011

Amartya Sen’s excerpt about his views on Globalization reflect a profound favoritism to its affects on the world.  He states globalization as not only a good but “it is also a gift from the West to the world” (page 19).  The attack against such a proclamations are from those who agree that globalization as a whole is beneficial, but the disparity of benefits between the rich and the poor are so extreme that it can be questioned whether or not you can truly call this “beneficial”.  In those cases the extremists can label globalization as a push for Western dominance and unrelenting influence on the independence of the rest of the world.

The case i found most interesting was how globalization started not from the west to east but rather the east to west.  It is easy nowadays to get lost in the medial anarchy in the world and see how the world views the U.S. as a overbearing father carrying a big stick and using the term “freedom and democracy for all” as its slogan to push their own agendas of world power and dominance on the weak.  But Sen’s point that true globalization started with the eastern countries such as China inventing and developing theories and goods for the west (in this case England, France etc.) to take advantage of.  The Silk Road and the dominance of Genghis Khan’s conquest were easy streamlines for word of mouth to travel to the east to bring simple things such as gunpowder, astronomy, medicine to fuel the fire to bring the rise to the Romans and their lustrous monuments and aqueducts and the innovative warfare tactics of the British armadas.

But whether the central ideologies are from the 1200’s or from 2011, the case is clear.  With or without technology, Globalization is an inevitable product of human beings and their psychological need for togetherness.  The difference now is the velocity in which the services and news travel, case in point, the crisis in Egypt.  It can be argued that there are negative effects and there may be parities in the effected parties, but the case is clear, Globalization benefits all whether they want it to or not.

Blog 1 on Positive Effects of Globalization

Wednesday, February 9th, 2011

Blog 1:  “The Hidden Promise: Liberty Renewed” and “How to Judge Globalism”

The authors of these chapters (John Micklethwait, Adrian Wooldridge and Amartya Sen) have made their views on globalization clear.  They believe that overall, globalization is beneficial and necessary.  The good which results from globalization outweighs the bad.  Far more people are positively influenced by globalization than negatively influenced.  Those which globalization does not influence positively need to find a way to make globalization work for them.  Getting rid of or ignoring globalization is not the answer. 

Overall, I agree with the authors.  I believe globalization has many positive components.  I cannot even imagine my life without globalization.  Globalization has made my life what it is today.  As an American, I feel my life has been dramatically influenced by advances, inventions and creativity in other countries.  For starters, great shows such as “The Office” would have never made it to America if not for globalization.  This show started in the UK and has been recreated in many countries.  While doing my laundry, I noticed that none of my clothes were made in the US.  Most of my clothes were made in China, Taiwan, Vietnam and Indonesia.  Because of globalization, I am able to purchase my clothes at a reasonable price.  My watch, clock, TV, pictures frames and makeup were all made outside of the Unites States.  Globalization has allowed me to purchase many diverse items at low prices.  The food I eat is imported from all over the world.  I ate a Clementine from Spain this morning.  In the United States, it would be difficult to find clementines at this time of the year for reasonable prices.

Of course, these are just some of the minor ways in which globalization has affected my everyday life.  Globalization is the sharing of ideas.  People all around the world should share their ideas, talents and innovations.  Rejecting globalization would stop the spread of these ideas.  I acknowledge that there are problems that come along with globalization, especially for poorer countries.  However, as mentioned by Sen, if these poor countries reject globalization (technology, trade and social economics) they will never have a chance to advance.  Instead, we need to tweak globalization to make it work for these countries.

Anuj Dutt’s Memo Posting for Sept. 7th

Wednesday, September 8th, 2010

I’ve taken the liberty of posting Anuj’s memo on Debating Globalization (copying and pasting it from Blackboard).  One reason is that I need some “test” posts to make sure my categorization system is working and this one was the first one I read.  The other reason is that it’s an excellent memo that can serve as a model for others who aren’t quite sure about the expectations for this assignment.

Anuj, I hope you don’t mind!  (And when you have a chance, please try posting this to your own blog, once it’s created.)

Jihad vs. McWorld by Benjamin Barber

In this chapter the author Benjamin Barber talks about the differences and similarities between Jihad and McWorld. He talks about how one needs the other. Jihad means the Islamic term for a religious duty to Muslims. Some refer to Jihad as declaring holy war on others as some debate it means struggle for Muslims. McWorld refers to the new technology, and ecological forces such as MTV, McDonalds, music having spread to different cultures. The author discusses how both factors need each other for one to survive. A person declaring Jihad listens to music and makes music which they can add messages to relating to other members in their group or also new technology such as weapons which help them when sniping someone. The author states “Jihad not only revolts against but abets McWorld, while McWorld not only imperils but re-creates and reinforces Jihad.” By this he is saying they both operate with equal strength by one driven by parochial hatreds, and the other by universalizing markets. Jihad forges communities with blood and hatred and war, and McWorld forges the markets in other countries in consumption of goods and profits which later affects the public interests. I believe and agree with the author that both Jihad and McWorld go with each other. McWorld produces the economy even though it leads to shortages of supplies which later on develop fraud materials. In today’s world we can buy fake Coach bags, fake sneakers, which affects the producers and the real companies. Having both of these factors is like living two lives.

The Clash of Civilizations? By Samuel P. Huntington

According to the author he states his hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in the new world which is today will not be ideological or economic related issues, but it will be among humankind and clashes of culture conflicts. Nation states will still be on top and powerful while the smaller groups will starts the clashes. Clashes will occur because of the difference in cultures, traditions, languages, and religion. Every religion has its own beliefs and practices which they try to implement and spread to different societies and if that society does not accept it, hatred develops. Every culture thinks they are right and should practice the same way. Majority of Muslims believe everyone should have faith in Islam. Majority of American believes everyone should have faith in Jesus, Majority of Hindus believes everyone should have faith in Shiva and majority of Asians believe everyone should have faith in the Buddha. These differences between religions affect the economic development in other countries. For example one might stop doing business or trades with another country and another might stop producing goods for another country. The Western civilizations are having a big impact on cultures because of their western practices being spread. For example like the factor in chapter 4 McWorld, of fast foods, clothing, music, etc.