Globalization Threat or promise?
Globalization is the enhancement of collective measures among countries to save environment, stop violence and eliminate poverty, and economic inequality among Third World through developed investments, communications, aid, and trade. There have been arguments between proponents of globalization and opponents. The arguments revolve around two factors namely; dehumanization of science, technology, and industry and massive-reckless industrialization.
In dehumanization mode, the concentration of the world is on innovations and industrialization for profit and economic power, while fore going human health and physical, economic and intellectual well being. While in massive industrialization, the world is centered on massive supplies of energy sources, trade, raw materials, market and capital (Wood, 2002). All these ingredients lead to exploitative system in the society and further leading to reckless and massive expansion of colonialism.
It results into frequent world wars, oppression of the colonies and the struggle to defend, maintain or expand colonies leading to inter-colonial wars, and militarization. While developments in transport network helps in traveling and in the movements of goods on the positive side, it also helps in fast movements of soldiers and war machines to every corner of the world on the negative side.
Developments communication networks leading to emergency and use of satellites and
Need essay sample on "Globalization Threat or promise?"? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $ 13.90/page
Mass production and mechanization is very positive when considering returns and profits but has a negative effect of creating unemployment stresses and strains economic-political system. King & Buchert (1999), points out that proponents of free trade and investments formed NAFTA, free trade zones, WTO etc. while their opponents doubt if free trade is profitable to developed nation which constitutes the G7 and G8 who are the donors to the developing nations and its usefulness to third world countries (developing nations) is dubious.
The money lenders/investors/ rich countries proclaim cubing the problems of in poor countries while working for their own benefits. NAFTA was set up by Canada, Mexico and USA. It gives an indication of potential impact that a world wide agreement can have for instance; Canada attempted to protect its citizens from the effects of a fuel additive was deemed as an obstruction under NAFTA’s agreement (Robert, 2001).
In other cases where trade agreements exists more food is exported and imported without first considering the plight of farmers, implying that that the priorities of development and aid combined with trade agreements can promote hunger. According to Hunderson (1999), there is need to have a balance so as to necessitate harmony of both developing and developed nations for it to be a promise otherwise it is a threat. It is evident that the answer to globalized pollution, exploitation militarization and ecological disaster and to wars, poverty and inequality, is not in more globalization but in less of it and in its eventual elimination.
Globalization is deepening the crisis in contemporary world hence the remedy is found in de-globalization of investment, dehumanized trade and aid schemes, hence re-humanization of industry and science-technology. Word count: 550 References Hunderson, H. (1999). Beyond globalization: Shaping a sustainable global economy. West Hartford: Connecticut, Kumarian Press. King, K. & Buchert, L. (1999).
Changing international aid to education: Global patterns and national contexts. Paris: UNESCO. O’Rourke, K. H. , Taylor, A. M. Williamson, J. G. (1996). Factor price convergence in late nineteenth century. USA: International Economic. Robert, C. F. (2001). Integration of trade and disintegration of production in global economy. California Davis: Department of Economics. Rodrik, D. (1999). The new global economy and developing countries: Making openness work. USA: Johns Hopkins University Press. Wood, A. (2002). Globalization and the rise in labour market inequalities. USA: royal Economic society.