Globalization in the Early Phase - Essay Example

Globalization in the Early Phase Introduction During the nineteenth century, the world came to experience the advent of globalization. People at the time were convinced with the idea of free trade because it allowed them to make more profits and good money which helped them to earn livelihood with greater benefits and prosperity. This paper is making a review of globalization of how this trend entered the world’s most developed economies “America” and how it evolved in such economies’ system, people and society. The objective here is to understand globalization in the early development phase when different commodities got involved in the idea of free trade. How globalization affected commodities’ trade and business is the question to be addressed in this paper (Brown). Globalization during the Nineteenth Century and later History asserts that every market, which sees a boom, has to face the fall one day. No market is everlasting or ever sustaining as depicted by the trade historians. Every market has the tendency to change and to transit with the aspect of time. It was during the mid nineteenth century, when United States became the pioneer in the cotton industry. Later the leading position in being pioneers shifted to Japan, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, which were later successful producers of cotton and wool. Similarly, it was consumer electronics segment in which US first dominated in the 1990s (Rivoli 1). Later the success of this market got shared with other Asian competitors such as Taiwan, China and Japan, which after US established a great name and worth in the consumer electronics segment. It showed the world that every market went to transition after some point of time and after some point of growth and succession (ORourke and Williamson). Actually, it was uncertainty that got attached to every market segment, and when a new market started moving up, the old market got replaced automatically and undisputedly. This was the first trend of globalization, the trend of market capitalism, which the early commodities faced in the nineteenth century era. It was the trend that was attached and associated with every moving commodity. Whether it was cotton or wool, coffee, or grains or consumer electronics every market faced the fall and the rise after some point of time (Topik, Marichal and Frank 60). However, it is a time-tested history that US dominated the cotton segment for more than two decades (DeWitt). Historians write that US managed a great name and position in the cotton world during the 1990s. Historians project that the cotton industry was the open door of globalization in US (Rivoli 1-3). The aspect of globalization entered in the country with the emergence of the successful cotton industry. It was cotton segment that introduced and familiarized the concept of globalization in American people in the prior nineteenth century. American traders, suppliers, and vendors acknowledged globalization with the emergence of the successive cotton and wool segment (Rivoli 5). This induction took place at the beginning of the nineteenth century era, when cotton growers, producers and suppliers all went together in America to deal in the cotton trade. At that time, globalization was something new to understand, but once it got to the American people, it became the culture of the developing society. Hard work, determination and compassion became the principles of early cotton producers. Their sole objective was to dominate the world, dominate the globalized world, which was carrying international market competition (ORourke and Williamson 10). The success of American cotton segment was not at the cheapest price as it involved a lot of sacrifice and patience of the American people. The US economic historians depict that slavery was the first “public policy” that enabled cotton production in the country (Topik, Marichal and Frank). It was the hard work of the captives and the slaves that enabled cotton producers to achieve market success. The real comparative advantage was achieved through the work of labor slaves, who produced maximum cotton in the lowest price. The presence of the captives made the early companies profitable and gave them the reason to compete and progress. They made the companies expand with real market success (Topik, Marichal and Frank 54). It was the single-minded concentration of the capital that enabled the American cotton segment to expand and to rise with growth. The early literature depicts that without slavery, cotton was just another lost wheel of the American economics. Those were the captives who dedicated their lives to cotton fields and were the slaves whose families devoted themselves to cotton production. The history recalls about the farmers’ role who eventually enabled the cotton segment of America to flourish and expand in the global market (Rivoli). Those were organizations like the Farmers Cooperative Compress (FCC) that eased the operation of cotton export in the late 60s. America exported cotton in the magnificent amount to China, Hong Kong, and other Asian regions, which utilized cotton for T-shirts and apparel manufacturing. This brought major income returns to America, expanding the economies of scale and the market opportunity to invest. A lot of investors got involved in the American stock exchange after they saw the country becoming the giant exporter of cotton to the world (Topik, Marichal and Frank). Conclusion The historians criticize the master narrative, which is actually US’s trade and protectionism policy for cotton and textile segments. It is a policy that has remained unquestioned since 1960s. It is a policy, which has hardly favored the developing countries, but most benefited United States of America. The historians ask the question that why this master narrative cannot be changed, only because it favors the rich economies and sidelines the poor. The master narrative needs to be changed because it is a policy that only suffocates the liberalization of developing countries’ trade. The history asks the same question of the underprivileged world that why this trade policy cannot be amended. It should be amended to make globalization work for the whole world and not for the specific segment “the already developed nations”. Works Cited Brown, Deward Clayton. King Cotton in Modern America: A Cultural, Political, and Economic History Since 1945. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2011. Print. DeWitt, John. Early Globalization and the Economic Development of the United States and Brazil. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002. Print. ORourke, Kevin H. and Jeffrey G. Williamson. Globalization and History. New York: MIT Press, 1999. Print. Rivoli, Pietra. The Travels of a T-Shirt in the Global Economy. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2009. Print. Topik, Steven, Carlos Marichal and Zephyr Frank. From Silver to Cocaine: Latin American Commodity Chains and the Building of the World Economy, 1500–2000. Durham: Duke University Press, 2006. Print. Read More