A Brief History of Globalization - Essay Example

Globalization can be conceived as a process (or set of processes) which embodies a transformation in the spatial organization of socialrelations and transactions, expressed in transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction and power (Held and McGrew, et al, 1999). Globalisation is perhaps the most overused and least understood word, and one can easily see that the meaning and scope of the word has transformed and evolved dramatically over the past few years. The controversy associated with it proves how complicated scholars on both sides have made it. In this backdrop, here is someone with a rational approach who seeks to clarify the concepts. MacGillivray’s ‘A Brief History of Globalization’ (London, Robinson) covers globalisation from all angles; from 15th century explorations to the rise of the multinational corporation; from the Great Wall of China to the birth of the football World Cup. He acknowledges the role of technology and culture, politics and war in shaping the process of globalisation. Alex MacGillivray’s views are wry and balanced, replete with historic anecdotes and high quality analysis of each aspect and implication of globalisation. He litters his writing with speckles of benign humour when referring to the steady growth in the number of countries over the last few decades according to membership of the UN, recognition by FIFA or entries in the CIA’s World Fact Book. His observations are woven logically into the fabric of first rate primary data analysis. For instance, a new data set showing that much of the reputed growth of an international trade over the past two decades arises from regional (intra trading block), rather than truly international movement of goods and services. This idea contrasts what organizations like WTO and World Bank acclaims as the benefits of globalisation. MacGillivray challenges the popular notion that globalization is imperialism, colonisation or Americanisation, and that the British and the Americans initiated this. Instead, he goes deeper into History and tries to find the roots. The historical context of his observations is further substantiated in his article, “Wonderful Shrinking World”, published in Open Democracy web site, where he states, “the pundits who embrace or reject globalisation too often live in an eternal present and ignore the lessons of the phenomenon’s deep past (Open Democracy). In the same article, commenting about Thomas Friedman (The World Is Flat) and John Ralston Saul’s (The Collapse of Globalization) writings, Mac Gillivray states, “Both writers do indeed approach globalization with a memory that goes back beyond last week’s headlines. But neither addresses what in my own explorations of the topic, I have found to be its most compelling aspect: the reality that globalization is less a decades-long sprint than a centuries-long marathon – with many detours, reversals and rest-stops along the way.” Historical relevance of globalization becomes more evident when we consider that the Portuguese ventured into Asia and especially India, for trade purposes, as long back as the fifteenth century. The career of Vasco da Gama as an explorer began after his father was chosen to lead an expedition to open the sea route to India and to outflank the Muslims, who enjoyed a monopoly of trade with India and other eastern states. Vasco took command when his father died and sailed from Lisbon in July, 1497. He arrived at Calicut the following year via Natal, Mozambique and Mombassa. History holds abundant proof of trade or cultural interaction between people of different nationalities. Travellers like Huen Tsang from China who went to India for trade purposes, and Ibn Battuta who toured through an itinerary of Morocco, Mecca, Turkey, China, India and beyond, are only a couple of examples. Again, his mention of the French traveller monsieur de Vogue who, driven by a passion for the sensory experiences offered by exotic lands, embarked on a tour of different locations, seems to underline the fact that commerce is not the only force behind globalization. While organizations like WTO, World Bank etc focus on the role of trade in promoting globalization, Alex MacGillivray explores other aspects and provokes his readers to meander beyond the conventional realms of the word. Apart from the historical roots, he also dwells deeper into the origins of the concept, and emerges with evidence that contrary to the propaganda by many, globalization is not necessarily the invention of the Americans or the British. Again, the mention of the Frenchman corroborates MacGillivray’s theory that others as well could be involved in spearheading the process. Thus, his findings give a new dimension to the origin of this idea. and explode as myths some traditional beliefs. The controversies on globalisation always seem to revolve around its evils at the risk of ignoring its benefits. Organizations like International Monetary Fund do acknowledge the fact that globalization has generated significant international opposition over concerns that it has increased inequality and environmental degradation. And while some of the claims of WTO and World Bank tend to slant towards being hyperbolic and propagandist, Alex MacGillivray offers a balanced view of both the advantages and disadvantages of globalisation. While citing instances where American corporate has misused the situations to some extent, he still holds up the idea that using globalisation as shorthand for US capitalism was misleading. A truer picture emerges when he concludes that world globalisation looks set to enjoy an eventful second century. Whereas others seem to be focused only on where globalization has come from, Alex MacGillivray is inquisitive enough to predict where it is going next. It is easy to ponder upon what has happened and it is not much hard to figure out what is happening. But it takes the grit of rationale and the power of imagination to predict what is going to happen. This is where MacGillivray is different from all those who are for or against globalisation. He predicts with conviction where globalisation is headed to. It is his unique perspective of the phenomenon that brought him reviews like this: “Rich in detail, wide-ranging in scope, and even handed in its assessment of the benefits and dangers of globalisation, here is the full story of how a mysterious flat earth became a global village”. SHORT NOTES McLuhans concept of the global village: Once, at least a few would have brushed off as hyperbolic, the words of McLuhan, ‘Time has ceased, “space” has vanished. We now live in a global village…. a simultaneous happening.’ (McLuhan 63). Today, living in a hi-tech world, every human literally has everything on his fingertips. Information is just for anyone’s asking, and any occurrence in the world can unfold before one’s eyes with the punch of a button. It is amazing how a person could envision four decades ago the wonders that technology would bring into today’s world. His concept that the electronic media is an extension of our senses, especially those of sight and sound, proves to be realistic when we have watched the World Cup Football being played in Germany by sitting somewhere in the world. He also brings an ironic perspective to this theory when he states that we can hear or see events thousands of miles away in a matter of seconds, often quicker than we hear of events in our own villages or even families. His emphasis seems to be on the speed of electronic media which allows us to access the information with our fingertips; on the other hand it takes us more time to venture out and verify what is happening in the neighbourhood or on our own backyard. McLuhan seems to have used ‘village’ as a metaphor. His concept is that in a small community, like a village, people have information about whatever happens within that society. Each individual in closely linked with the other, and there is cooperation. Communication is easy, quick and complete. In the same manner, when the entire globe is linked with electronic communication facilities it shrinks to the size of a small village, and the interaction between a person sitting in one corner and the one on the other is instantaneous, nullifying the space between them. Physical distance and geographical barriers become irrelevant. In a broader sense, the metaphor of village conceptualises cooperation and harmony among different cultures and political beliefs. In a small community there is mutual understanding and interdependence. Similarly, the vision of a global village envisages a world community that is unified by the seamless possibilities of communication facilities offered by electronic media. Perhaps the idea of a global community has stemmed from circumnavigation, which the humans began centuries ago. The prospect of a globe rather than a flat earth seems to have meant a world without margins. The basic geometry of a globe suggests the absence of edges and it offers transcontinental interconnectivity. Thus the image of “one being connected by an electric nervous system within which the actions of one part will affect the whole”, projected by McLuhan, becomes relevant in the context of human harmony. However, the main constraint in tapping the benefits deriving from such unification is that the necessary technological infrastructure is not accessible to all. Remote places in developing or under developed nations do not have the supporting elements to involve in the process of communication with the rest of the world. Thus a major part of the purported ‘world community’ is rendered incommunicado. When part of the society does not involve in any interaction is it right to call it as a global village? Everyone will agree that the oneness of the human race, as upheld by religions like Hindu and Buddhist, is a profound concept. However, in order for it to be effective there needs to be some amount of emotional involvement. Here we confront the problem that the electronic media cannot provide the kind of personal interaction that face-to-face communication does. Similarly, there is no doubt that the internet has immense potential as a cheap means of communication. With its advent we may be laying the foundations to a global village and certainly everybody may be connected through an inclusive web, but this won’t mean that humans will come to know each other personally or will be able to solve the problems of each other. McLuhan’s vision, however, is profound and upbeat in nature. To make this vision a reality the human race has to find ways to make technology available within the reach of everyone, so that all the individuals in the so called village can interact with one another. ANTI-GLOBALIZATION MOVEMENTS: While many think that the phenomenon of globalization has been responsible for overall improvement in the quality of life, and that it is necessary for the industries to grow, there are several people who think that globalization has brought many evils also with it. The main criticism against globalization is that it is promoting capitalism and causing environmental deterioration. Some accuse that all countries, places and communities are not equally enmeshed in global flow or network while others conclude that globalization only serves the vested interests of the corporate. Following are some of the basic issues that the activists regularly bring up against the concept of globalisation: Global programs have increased overall aid very little Voices of developing countries are inadequately represented Global programs reveal gaps in investment and global public policy Independent global program oversight is needed The anti-globalization movement includes individuals, groups, and coalitions from everywhere. They have joined in demonstrations like the ones in Geneva, Seattle and elsewhere against the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank. There are several organizations that promote anti globalization. The International Forum on Globalisation (IFG) is the most prominent among these. It “is an alliance of sixty leading activists, scholars, economists, researchers and writers formed to stimulate new thinking, joint activity, and public education in response to economic globalization. Representing over 60 organizations in 25 countries, the International Forum on Globalization associates come together out of a shared concern that the worlds corporate and political leadership is undertaking a restructuring of global politics and economics that may prove as historically significant as any event since the Industrial Revolution. This restructuring is happening at tremendous speed, with little public disclosure of the profound consequences affecting democracy, human welfare, local economies, and the natural world.” (http://www.ifg.org/). Some others are: AFL-CIO (promoting of labour’s interests), People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) (animal-rights support groups), Rainforest Action Network, Earth First!, and the Sierra Club (advocate environmentalism) and Global Exchange, Direct Action Network, Nader’s Group, Radical Roots, and Global Trade Watch (uphold the human-rights banner). Alleged abuse of corporate power by multinationals is the basic focus of the anti globalisation campaign. They accuse the large corporations with international undertakings of social injustice, unfair labour practices as well as a lack of concern for the environment, mismanagement of natural resources, and ecological damage. Anti-globalisation demonstrations have achieved worldwide support and its effects are global in nature. Major brand names like Nike, Starbucks, McDonalds, and Shell Oil have been some of the principal targets. The anti-globalisation activists consider institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organization (WTO) and the World Bank etc as the servants of corporate interests. They argue that these agencies are exercising more power than elected governments, and are motivated by profit. Underlying the anti-globalization theme is criticism of the capitalist philosophy, a stance promoted once again by left-of-centre activists and militant anarchists. The anti-globalisation activists are now mobilizing against the Free Trade Area of the Americas. Apart from the anti-corporate movement, their protest envisages propagandas against sweatshops, and destruction of natural environments, and focuses around a range of other issues. These groups oppose trans-national corporations and neo-liberal governments. Activists such as Campaign for a Living Wage on university campuses, also consider themselves part of the anti-globalisation movement. Recently it becomes apparent that the post-September 11 developments and the reality that globalisation has indeed benefited a majority of countries and their citizens poses a core challenge to anti globalisation movement. The activists need to appreciate that times have changed. There also exists a tendency to stay away from radical elements and some think it is better to seek negotiations with the establishments rather than confronting it. LAISSEZ FAIRE The Oxford dictionary defines Laissez Faire as, “the theory or practice of governmental abstention from interference in the workings of the market etc.” It is a French term which literally means “to leave alone”. In economics the phrase is used to indicate a situation in which the government exercises little or no control or interference in the affairs of business. It is believed that the United States of America operates under an economic policy known as ‘Laissez Faire’ (let the people do as they choose) economics. Under this economic system there is room for free enterprise to operate according to its own laws, as the governmental intervention is minimal. If one looks at the history of American economy, it becomes evident that because of a Laissez Faire approach, which is based on the American acknowledgement of individual rights, the country has prospered and is now one of the wealthiest nations in the world. We can easily see that countries that recognize individual rights and responsibilities without unwanted governmental intervention or regulations on trade, have recorded overall development in all areas especially in commerce. Such countries offer a suitable environment for the industries and encourage investors. There are no barriers for a person to open up any business in the country. The main idea is to allow people to generate their own wealth, which in turn will benefit the nation by providing it adequate revenue in terms of tax etc which can be used for developmental purposes. There is always a demand for new and innovative products and in all likelihood such business will flourish in a liberal market. Free entry of entrepreneurs generates competition and as a result the quality of products will be sustained and enhanced. In the context of globalization ‘Laissez Faire” is an ideal condition that provides a suitable environment for industries to flourish. Because of the minimal interference by government, it encourages foreign investment and companies from overseas will be willing to launch their operation in such a country. This will ensure that products are readily and abundantly available for the consumers, which in turn leads to competition and thereby assurance of quality. In the present day we see many instances of major companies investing and commanding steady markets in countries abroad because the practice of free trade aids globalisation and market flexibility. EVOLUTION OF GLOBALISATION OVER THE PAST 120 YEARS The tendency to explore is inherent in human nature. This, coupled with the quest for wealth, makes people venture into alien lands in search of opportunities. Throughout history, there is evidence of sailors and conquerors transcending borders and entering new regions. Trans-border trading can be traced as long back as early sixth century when Huen Tsang from China visited India. Similar exploits continued throughout the annals of history as can be seen from instances like Vasco da Gama, a Portuguese explorer, visiting India in the 15th century. It has taken him nearly a year to reach from one point to the other. Thus it can be seen that the process of globalisation, albeit at a snail’s pace, has begun much earlier than most of us recognize or acknowledge. The constraints that seem to have slowed down the pace originated from the shortage of transportation and the lack of communication facilities. If we contrast the conditions that existed then to the present, we can understand that globalisation has gone through several stages of evolution. Globalisation means several things to several people. For some it is a new paradigm – a set of fresh beliefs, working methods and economic, political and socio-cultural realities in which the previous assumptions are no longer valid. For developing countries it means integration with the world economy. In simple economic terms, globalisation refers to the process of integration of the world into one huge market. Such unification calls for the removal of all trade barriers among countries. Even political and geographical barriers become irrelevant. (Jain, P 30). From the above, it transpires that for globalisation to make any significant impact, communities need to be able to freely interact. However, as discussed earlier, the lack of sufficient means of transport has been a serious limitation in trans-boarder trade in early days. Despite the traders wanting to engage in business they were precluded from free movement and interaction because of several constraints. Because traders had to depend on vessels controlled and operated by men, it took them years to sail from one place to the other. The risks involved were high and communication facilities were non-existent. This prevented the process of globalisation from gaining any momentum. A major break through was achieved in transportation when the locomotive was invented in the early 1800s. With this, land transportation became easy and industries were able to move heavy units of loads in a short time from destination to destination. With the invention of telephone in 1876, communication became easy. Further, with the discovery of methods to effectively use electricity as a source of energy in 1885, manual work in some key areas was substituted machines operated by electricity. This helped to speed up manufacturing processes. In the backdrop of the surge in production in the post-Industrial Revolution era, industries were looking for newer avenues to market their products. Aided by the developments in transportation, communication and energy fields they were able to quickly tranship their products to needy markets. This enlivened the globalisation process once again. The invention of radio in the 1880s and aeroplane and automobiles in early 1900s was a timely booster shot for the process of globalisation. While the radio made the communication process fast, automobiles and aeroplanes made the movement of human and cargo much faster and cheaper. The industries now could reach a broader market base and expand their operations. In the post World War period, there were several technological advancements like the invention of computers and cell phones. Then with the advent of internet, and revolutionary changes in the Information Technology scene, the world literally shrunk to a global village. When globalization gained its full acceleration in the eighties and nineteen in the aftermath of the economic liberalisation, it invited criticism from several corners. Some equated it to capitalism while others accused it of being colonisation and Americanisation. But as we see it today, it has stood to all the tests of time, changing and evolving, and it looks like globalisation is here to stay. Works Cited McGrew, et al. Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999. Jain, Arun Kumar. Managing Global Competition. Dehradun: Competence Publishing Company, 1994 McLuhan, Marshall. The Medium is the Massage. USA: Bantam Books, 1967. “Globalization: Resources and Analysis” International Forum on Globalization, 2006, 5th Aug., 2006 Read More