Challenges of Globalization - Essay Example

Globalization Globalization is used to describe the spread of production, communication and technological connectivity across the globe. It involves the interweaving of cultural and economic activities. Globalization can also be defined as a collective effort by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and other economic organizations in their effort to come up with a free market for goods and services. In his book, Klein discusses facts about globalization in regards to poverty and disparity in income. Trade liberalization and economic upsweep are among the key issues discussed. In her discussion, the focus in laid on the implications of protests rallies among citizens in developing nations. In essence, globalization is designed in a way that is potentially damaging to developing nations. In fact it is structured in a manner that lifts wealth and knowledge from poor economies to economically and politically stable economies. In regards to economic and cultural growth it is evident that significant growth over a number of has been noticed. It is important to note that the contemporary situation is fundamental to the earlier events. This is accelerated by the speed, complexity and magnitude of communication networks that are involved. Due to this, the volume of trade, size of interaction and risks associated with globalization has virtually gone high giving globalization unimagined force. In fact, within the accelerated interconnection of world economies, deep seated political challenges have been experienced by poor nations pushing them to more overdependence on foreign aid from giant economies such as the United States of America. From such economies, poor nations tend rely for capital as well as technical assistance. Further, there has been transference in control of economy from the nation or state towards multinational corporations according to Naomi Klein (Klein 56). In addition to this shift, there has been a rise and globalization of brands. This is an indication that large corporations are not only interested in developing and marketing brands among different countries but also within their producing nations. It is important to note that multinational corporations such as the Coca Cola Company and Nike Inc. among others are fabricated companies under control of a few individuals. Leading economists argue that globalization aims at diffusing philosophies, practices and expertise among cooperating states. They consider such practices as something beyond internationalization or universalization. Moreover, it is neither modernization nor westernization but a global intensification of social relationships linking detached localities in a manner that what takes place within is subject to control by events taking place several kilometers from that location. In this way, we are made to comprehend layout and localness in different way other than the normal understanding. It also involves postponement of dissimilar relations based on ideologies, economic state, military power and political alignment across nations in the world. It is vital to note that after the Second World War, globalization was a subject of diffusion of ideologies such as liberalism and socialism. This founded capitalism manner of production as well as distant range of military striking among a few strong states. In the early decades, reform movements were focused on fighting global injustices as opposed to the contemporary movements who focus is amassment of wealth for the benefit of a few individuals. For example, within the last few decades, a new brand of economy emerged around the globe that can be likened to a new brand of capitalism. It is characterized by efficiency and keenness which is a function of knowledge creation and information processing. These firms and their territories are linked together in production, management and distribution networks whose key activities are global. The movement is a non-Zapatista because it seems to be fighting injustices for a few nations. Therefore, they have the ability to work as a single economic unit in real time plan and on a full scale. However, a major problem associated with globalization has been characterized with a decline in power of the states to direct their macro and micro economy. In addition, a slight shift in leading economic powers impacts negatively on poor nations all over the world. Globalization of fiscal markets and technology in manufacturing and service companies limits liberty of economic actions among state nations. It is also imperative to note that the emergence of financial control institutions such as the World Bank, European Union and the European central bank carry with them significant limitations. As earlier discussed, efficiency and competitiveness is a function cohort of knowledge creation and information processing. This has elicited a major shift in the manner of thinking about the economy. There has been a continued struggle in leading world economies in their attempt to balance knowledge and incomes. In fact, knowledge is far much valued than production resources most probably because of its contribution to the quality of standard of living. It is important to point out that the push by leading economies towards globalization is largely flawed. The notion that free markets so created would help improve weak economies is an illusion. In the early years economically weak nations have depended upon economically strong nations especially the superpowers. Today, the existence of stable political base is a prerequisite for a solid framework and social capital. It therefore means that the current push for globalization contributes significantly to further destruction of weak economies. It is important to note that economic globalization is engineered to undermine the present rule of the world’s noninterventionist. Globalization appears to take a democratic approach to attract acceptance of a larger population of economies towards capitalism mode of production. In fact, it over relies on shock and violence to generate economic puppet strings that has lasted for years. It is popularly argued that in order to push for implementation of often unpopular economic policies whose aim is to enrich a few individuals while impoverishing majority of populations mostly hailing from economically poor countries, the use of a collective disaster whether virtual or real is essential. It is worth noting that the contemporary economic mishaps are a creation of deliberate ancient events. Klein uses the term “disaster capitalism” in reference to shock events which were witnessed in Iraq following invasion by the U.S. and those that were witnessed in Sri Lanka after the Tsunami. It is important to note that after the said events similar events then followed but this time it was with the ill intention of depriving victims of their property. This is particularly witnessed in the affected locations where land and homes were lost to corporate makeovers. It clearly shows that current movements make use of shock and violence extremities for purposes of implementing unfair economic policies. In addition, there has been utilization of cataclysmic events to promote radical privatization in conjunction with disaster response strategies. Leading economic markets continue to capitalize on natural or man-made disasters. They consider disaster capitalism complex as a booming business for creating wealth. This happens amid the radical projects that have for the last few decades been taking toll towards the enhancement of economic recuperation. Most corporate firms have shifted focus to contracting production of business. This especially happens in the third world countries where wages are low at the expense of shifting focus onto building brand images in the host nations. In the early 80’s for example the U.S economic policy makers lowered corporate taxes. This move battered the tax base leading to a gradual reduction of the public sector. As a result, public institutions were forced to seek financial assistance from private institutions. This trend eventually leads to more demands for acknowledgement and control by the public sector. Work cited: Klein, Naomi. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, 2008. Internet resource Read More