World into winners and losers Essays

World into winners and losers Essays World into winners and losers Essay World into winners and losers Essay Globalisation, simply put, refers to the process by which the world is said to be transformed into a single global system such that events in one part of the world more and more have effects on peoples and societies far away. (Baylis Smith 2001, p. 7) However, to use the phrase simply put when giving a definition of globalisation may be misleading as there is no simple or agreed definition of what constitutes globalisation, nor any consensus about how far the process has advanced. About all that can be said with confidence about globalisation is that it represents a major site of contestation. The contestation that this essay will focus on is neither whether globalisation in fact exists nor whether it is a new phenomenon. Rather, the focus of this essay is on the impact that globalisation has had on the world. Is globalisation a savior that is uniting the globe? Or is it curse that is dividing us all into winners and losers? The first part of this essay will focus on the question of unity. That is, is globalisation unifying the world around common interests? This question involves looking at the increase in technology and thus the increase in global mass media and communications alike. While the biggest transnational corporations (TNCs), such as General Motors and Ford, have revenues larger then many states, the Internet has allowed small businesses to also offer their services worldwide. Music tastes, and fashions shape life across borders, as do economic practices such as Fordism (mass production techniques plus mass consumption). Even brand names such as Coke can move people (Clemens, Jr. 2004, p. 15). For example, in post-Communist Albania many people viewed their first Coca-Cola plant as a sign of good life to come. Cricket may unite the Commonwealth more than any speeches, and The Beatles and Coke may well have done more to subvert the Soviet realm than did the CIA. (Clemens, Jr. 2004, p. 15) Thus, it seems that as the world becomes globalised, it is also unified around common interest and values. This is also demonstrated in religious movements which, although have operated for millennia across borders and oceans, have increased since the onset of modern technology and have united millions of believers across borders. (Clemens, Jr. 2004, p. 14) A similar story can be found in governmental and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) which unite millions across the globe around common goals. For example, Greenpeace has united parts of the globe around environmental concerns. This exemplifies that the globe is not just unified around cultural interests, but also political ones. In fact globalisation has three dimensions: cultural, political and economic. Looking at the advantages globalisation has to offer in these other realms, one would see increased free trade between nations, and increased liquidity of capital allowing investors in developed nations to invest in developing nations. There is also now a greater ease and speed of transportation for goods and people, as well as a spread of democratic ideals to developed nations. Certainly, it seems a valid argument that globalisation is uniting the world around common interests. However, many sceptics of globalisation would find flaws in this assertion. Many would argue that globalisation has not united the globe as it is uneven in its effects and thus only applies to the developed world. As Baylis and Smith commented, to pretend that even a small minority of the worlds population can connect to the World Wide Web is clearly an exaggeration when in reality most people on the planet have probably never made a telephone call in their lives. (Baylis Smith 2001, p. 10) Thus, not everyone is a winner in regards to receiving the benefits of globalisation. And what about the interests that are unifying the world? Some non-Western countries, such as Singapore, Taiwan, Malaysia and Korea, enjoy economic success but subscribe to Asian values. As discussed earlier, globalisation unites many around Western values and thus, there is a somewhat paradox here: how can these countries continue to modernize without successfully adopting such values? Moreover, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan announced recently that the same open borders, free markets and technological advances that are the hallmarks or globalisation can also be exploited by terrorists, drug traffickers and other criminals. (Annan 2004) Thus, while the world may be uniting around common interests, it may lead to a conflict in values, crime, and the anticipation of possible disputes. This brings this essay to the question of winners and losers, and it seems that there are not as many winners as what first appears. In fact, critics have noted that there are very considerable losers as the world becomes more globalised. These critics may refer to the fact that globalisation symbolises the success of liberal capitalism in an economically divided world, which consequently allows less well off nations to be more effectively exploited. For example, there is an increased flow of skilled and non-skilled jobs from developed to developing nations as corporations seek out the cheapest labor. TNC managers look worldwide for settings that promise lower costs and higher profits. If their global outlook calls for a move to greener pastures, local workers and governments may be left high and dry. A recent article in the Age newspaper drew on this very problem. The sub-headline said it all: Global change will take jobs away from some people, with no guarantee of new ones. (Colebatch 2004) Economics Editor, Tim Colebatch, gave the example of Germanys global tyre maker Continental setting up a factory in Transylvania because Romanian workers cost $A2. 40 an hour, whereas German workers cost $42 an hour (Colebatch 2004) The winner/loser debate is incomplete without also looking at the global free trade market economy. In this system, states with smaller economies must compete against each other as well as the powerful countries. This creates a situation described as a race to the bottom as nations attempt to underbid each other in the competition for foreign markets and foreign investment. Moreover, when developing nations open up their own economies, local producing industries must compete against well-resourced and aggressive foreign companies in battles they rarely win. These same states are also faced with problems with the rapid expansion of Western companies into their economies, forcing out local producers and distributors. Certainly, it seems quite a strong contention that globalisation is dividing the world into winners and losers. Globalisation is a unifying force that is now, more than ever, connecting societies. Different peoples and societies are rallying around certain interests and values, and different cultures and political and economic systems are shaping lives across borders. The result of this has been great benefits, but benefits that are not shared by the whole globe. Not only are millions of people excluded from the benefits of globalisation, but also the worlds strong economies are using globalisation to exploit the economies of developing states. Therefore, this essay concludes that while globalisation is a unifying power, it is certainly also a tool that divides the world into winners and losers.