The Current and the Old Era of Globalization - Literature review Example

Running header: Globalization. Client’s inserts his/her name Client inserts tutor’s name Subject of Study Date The current and the old era of globalization The term globalization according to Grondin (1999) refers to the ability of international integration in terms of political, social and cultural aspects of various countries, through enhancing information and material exchange, via the developing modern transport and communication. Globalization is a term that has been in existence for some times now, since the early 18th century. It date back to the agrarian revolution when the Europeans land owners, were outsourcing for slaves across the world. It later become very prevalent again during the great industrial era, as the manufacturing industries sought market for their readily manufactured goods across the world. This made it necessary for the companies to network with various potential customers, in the process, expanding their market and maximizing their gains. Today the world has become one big village. This is in the sense that, people, can move from one place to another with little or no restrictions at all, trade across the borders, exchange ideas freely as a result of technological advancements in both the transport system as well as communication system. This research paper contrasts the existing social, political, religious and cultural differences that have taken place in as far as both current era and the first age era of globalization is concerned, the differences that have arisen, the advantages and disadvantages brought about by globalization. Looking at the first age era of globalization, Grondin (1999) state that, human interaction has been around for years. He cites the Silk Road being an example of such a possibility. The latter is claimed to have connected Asia, Africa and Europe and is cited as one of the oldest sign of international integration to have ever taken place. This was not just an opening for trade and sharing ideas, but was an avenue for cultural, social-economical, political and religious aspects of life, to be integrated. The discoveries of the oceans and its shores further opened the outside world for social economic integration. This was made possible through the inventions made in the 1980s and the early 1900, which were enhanced by the invention of steamships, railroads and communication technology. These inventions have enhanced distance, speed of travelling and relaying messages as well as speedy global integration. This is the era that saw the birth of mobile phones, speedy internet, telecommunication and advancement in the road transport. With the advancement of these facilities by the year 1820 and 1850, the real face of international integration was starting to the new face. This was the case since most countries could easily transport goods from one place to another more cheaply and speedily, as well as opening the unexploited shores of Asia and Africa. Most countries started embracing the inter-national commercial business, more so the shipment of goods and labor across the borders. In the modern world, globalization is taking all shapes of life ranging from trade, political, social, cultural, religious, justice as well as impacting in every dimension of life. This new face of globalization is seen to have impacted both negatively and positively upon different countries that are involved in sharing ideas and other materials. Some regions and people are taking very stern measures to shield themselves from the latter, as others take with much enthusiasm; thus citing the following positive and the possible negative outcome of the whole globalization issue. Globalization according to Grondin (1999), has brought about great economic growth. This he further claim to be the case considering it has enabled countries and companies to expand thus the emergence of many multinational companies and trading blocks. The latter have been realized following the trade agreements signed by various trading countries. This is claimed to have opened wider markets for these companies and countries to explore, thus increasing their profitability and boosting the economy of their respective countries. Critics have not failed to point out the great health risks that are brought about by globalization. According to Matthew (1997), ever since the movement of people around the world was eased and made more convenient, people not only are travelling long distances within very short time. This he claims is not only transporting people but has made it impossible to control the spread of communicable diseases. The diseases are not only transported via people but, foodstuffs; both animal and vegetation products, that are exported across the world markets. Matthew (1997) points out that, the emergence of most challenges brought about by globalization such as international terrorism, spread of communicable diseases has created a room for the advancement, in terms of technological innovations to counter the latter challenges. He further claims that this is not only good for the innovation, but creates international research networks that ease the burden of research funding, benefiting both the developed and the developing countries. Considering the joint research ventures undertaken by the inter-national research facilities, one sees the benefits of globalization in terms of sharing of ideas. He states that, one of the greatest impacts of globalization and the most criticized is the cultural erosion as opposed to diversification of the cultural activities. This is seen from the food people are taking today, the mode of dressing, the languages emerging as others get absorbed; a result of different people interacting closely together. Most of the critics of cultural erosion liken the latter with the dominance of the western culture, or what they refer to as Americanization. Matthew (1997) argues that the reason behind such an argument is the aggression in which the American companies are moving at towards establishing in all the nations. These critics observe that, the American products are dominating almost every world market; thus the term Americanization, as opposed to globalization. To counter this, Grondin, points out that the benefit brought by westernization across the world nations surpasses some cultural practices eroded as a result. This claim christens westernization to have made greater inputs towards globalization. According to McCorquodale & Fairbrother (1999), the developing countries, are exploited as they compete in the capital market with those developed nations. He further observes that the above observation make the developing countries to become overly dependent on the developed countries, to a very alarming point. For instance, he observes that most of the developing countries depend on the support of the developed countries during international conflicts. This overdependence especially during warfare, depend mostly on how beneficial the developing country is, in terms of market, availability of raw materials and strategic position in terms of transport. Globalization according to McCorquodale & Fairbrother has brought equality in terms of employment opportunities, education, political protection and justice delivery in terms of human rights protection by various governments and nongovernmental organizations. This has acted as an eye opener in as far as human right awareness is concerned and can be seen through various revolution movements witnessed to have emerged across the world as a result of communication globalization. The gap between the haves and have not has always been an issue. McCorquodale & Fairbrother observes that, globalization, will benefit those who are well educated thus disadvantaging the ill educated. This will further widen the different as opposed to helping the realization of equality. Matthew (1997) observes that, as a result of globalization, apart from competitive prices for various commodities, the market provides people with variety in terms of goods bought. This to a greater extent has brought a level of equality in terms of market provisions. The negative side of it being that, when the multinational companies are reaping the benefits of globalization in terms of supply of various commodities, the smaller business ventures is faced with capital problems and is limited when it comes to competing in the large international market. This highlights the challenge that, only few companies are set to gain from the global market at the peril of other smaller ventures. Globalization according to Grondin (1999) has disadvantaged most people who are not well versed on matter information technology, thus threatening their job. This is so since; most of the manual jobs are being replaced by computers. He further cites that the latter has created lesser jobs than has created. According to Matthew (1997), one clear thing in as much as globalization is concerned is that, the recent growth and development in technology has changed the ancient beliefs that, wealth is measured in terms of the labor and size of land one has. He asserts that in the global world today where sharing of ideas is encouraged, what matters is the relevance of the idea and not the size of land or available labor. Conclusion The above argument does not either offer any concrete conclusive argument either in support of or against the argument. Most of the researchers are leaving it as an open to discussion topic or taking a wait and see stance. Either way, one clear thing is that globalization is here to stay, since it has been and seems to be getting more complicated with every passing day. Only the future can tell. References Grondin, D. (1999). Global Migration and Infectious Diseases; Presentation at the Institute of Medicine Workshop on the Impact of Globalization on Infectious Disease Emergence and Control: Exploring the Consequences and the Opportunities; Washington, D.C. Institute of Medicine Forum on Emerging Infections, Matthew, J. (1997). Power Shift: The Rise of Global Civil Society. Foreign Affairs, pp. 50-66. McCorquodale, R. & Fairbrother, R. (1999). Globalization and Human Rights. Human Rights Quarterly, pp. 735-736.  Read More