This article from The Economist reviews the book "World 3.0" by author Pankaj Ghemawat. In in, Ghemawat argues that the world is a lot less globalized than most people believe or want to believe. He uses a number of statistics, most of them from the economic sphere, to demonstrate that "global integration is surprisingly low." Immigration trends and the affects of the September 11th are also used to illustrate the idea that "globalisation [sic] is reversible." Having not read the book, it is difficult to assess Ghemawat's position; however, I think that it is a position worth considering. Would "reversing globalization" be a good thing? In class, we mostly focused on the negative effects of globalization; yet, I don't think that being "de-globalized" is possible, especially in terms of foreign policy and communication. I did find Ghemawat's argument that, by adapting to local cultures, McDonald's and MTV also prove that the world is less globalized to be a little shaky. In my opinion, accommodating local consumers is an adept marketing move and actually proves that these companies have taken the time to understand how people in other countries will spend their money. The fact that McDonald's and MTV can exist in cultures whose values seem directly opposed to what these companies offer seems to be an argument for globalization, not against. What do you think of Ghemawat's argument? Is the world less globalized than we think? Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
Having lived on a remote island (Santo Antao, Cape Verde) for two years during Peace Corps, I can tell you that the world is more globalized than I ever imagined. I thought that I would be cut off from the world during those two years, but the newspapers would report on U.S. news and the internet was slow and expensive, but available. The Capeverdean teenagers in my classrooms would ask me about my favorite pop stars or rappers, and they would be referring to U.S. musicians. Their culture is dwindling because of the influence of Western culture. How could this ever be undone? You would have to smash all of the computers, take out all the phone lines, confiscate cell phones, block every TV channel that was not purely Capeverdean, close down airports, and confiscate mail from the outside world in order to stop the flow of information between the U.S. and Cape Verde.
ReplyDeleteThe world is not less globalized than we think. I think it is more globalized than we know.
I think in order to evaluate this argument, we must look at it from a deeper level than simply how "culture" permeates into other places. Globalization is something that affects the grand paradigms that cloak our lives in ways that we can't even know at times. I think that the world is absolutely globalized, and this has transformed the way economies work, the way politics work, and essentially, how people operate and function in their everyday lives.
ReplyDeleteThe saturation of a culture into another has not always been a good thing if one thinks about colonization and the dominance of the colonizer over the colonized, robbing people of humanity, diversity and identity. Even then, the effects of globalization and the creeping in of others' values has altered the state of the world to this day in a way that we can't even know.
Another point: many of the religious and ethnic conflicts of the world have been exacerbated by the economic polarization the globalization has induced. This polarization has been superimposed onto the existing inequalities of societies, creating far-reaching effects that have enabled corrupt power/governments to maintain control over populations with little to no say-so in the matter.
Furthermore, the rules of globalization have created an agricultural shift that has been a detriment to the lives of peasants, women and local farmers who are absolutely unable to keep up with the corporate models that dominate the market. It is these huge corporations who have begun to influence small farms internationally; similar to the "butterfly effect," I think that shifts in the market in one place can have drastic effects on local farmers in another. We saw this today in the case of Haiti and rice....
Finally, one of the biggest reasons that I think globalization is absolutely a prevalent and significant factor in the world is its effect on women. Globalization has created a contest between a woman-centered viewpoint, one that breeds integrity of creation, compassion and resiliency--to the dominating force of patriarchy. From sex trafficking to education to agriculture to health-- you name it-- globalization has affected women far more than it has affected men. Women suffer the consequences of corporate expansion, greed, consumerism-- even in ways that we do not see on a daily basis. Capitalism and fundamentalism are rooted in patriarchy-- and those two things are primary elements in globalization. The effects on women can be seen everywhere, and even if it doesn't "look" like the work of globalization, it absolutely is.