Anti-Globalization Protesters - Essay Example

ANTI-GLOBALISATION PROTESTORS by Student's Name Course Code and Name Professor’s Name University Name City, State Date of Submission Anti-Globalization Protestors Since the invention of wheel technology in Mesopotamia a couple of thousand years ago, transport and communication have made tremendous steps. From invention of telephone by Graham Bell, to that eventful first flight by the Wright brothers or discovery of internet all these steps have great impact on our world. Movement of information, goods and services has reached the pinnacle of our world today. This has led to exchange of ideas, culture and other vital things from one country to another. It has eliminated boundaries and transformed the whole world in to a global village. This has brought unprecedented interdependence and it is impractical for any single country to survival on it own. This is what has since been coined by scholars as globalization. For the last two decades, after the end of cold war and the dismantling of Berlin wall. The leftist have started a new war front based on the idea of globalization. To them, globalization has become a new form of colonization. They argue just as Karl Max had claimed more than a century ago that globalization is driven by accumulation of wealth by using unscrupulous means. They argue that few people have used devious means to continue exploiting the weak as they maximize their profits which to some extent is the main ideology of capitalism. Conversely, is paramount to distinguish ant-globalization activists from the communists, the latter contest capitalism economic model while the latter oppose the means and power which multinational companies command. Globalization in essence means movement of goods and services from one country to another. Although there existed trade in recent human history that involved movement of goods in large scale such as Silk Road and Trans Atlantic trade; globalization picked after industrialization in Europe in the nineteenth century. With emergence of large companies that were controlled by bourgeoisie class; who held enormous political power, they embarked on profit maximization. In their quest, they employed exploitive tactics that include child labor, poor working conditions, meager pay and overworking the workers for over twenty hours. This made them to accumulate unprecedented capital and there was an automatic need for an expansion. With expansion there was always surplus production, need for more raw materials and market for their goods. These triggered European superpowers to colonize new world in order to acquire inputs and at the same time have markets for their out put. In the process some started to outsource because of several economic factors. Firstly, the rise of democracy led to advocacy for human rights which meant that the elected governments had obligation to protect their citizens from exploitation. Secondly, the rise of trade unions to fight for workers forced these companies to spend more in terms of salary and working conditions. Thirdly, there was emergence of green movements who advocated for conservation of the environment. This made these companies to move to other in order to cut these costs. For more than a hundred years, they have been fierce debate about the suitability of globalization with opposing school of thoughts. One of the dominant forces is anti-globalization who has opposed the idea because of what they term as subjugation and exploitation of the third world countries or vice versa. According to them, globalization in international level is a mere pool of countries brought together by hypocrisy rather than cooperation where each country pursues their self interests. In the economic, political and social fronts each country tries to articulate for what suits them at the expense of the others. This has led to several injustices and some of them are discussed here below: On the economic front, multinational companies have immersed enormous resources. Unfortunately, they have used wealth to coerce governments. This has led to exploitation of workers, environmental degradation and wiping out local small companies through iniquitous playing field. The most vulnerable countries are third world countries who are intimidated by there sheer economic force. These companies are notorious for using their mother country governments in coercing their host countries. Although, they create employment and some times provide social amenities such as health care they invest little in preserving environment. In fact most of these countries move to these countries because their laws are lenient when it comes to labor and environmental laws (Roberto & William, 2007). Ant-globalization proponents argue that these multinationals are using lobby groups to articulate for trade agreements which favor them; make sure their governments negotiate for them market for their goods and services. In the developed world they articulate their agendas by funding political campaigns in exchange for favor which includes government contracts. These companies have been accused for influencing their governments on issues that include foreign policy, environment and labor laws. Some ant-globalization activities have accused some for even pushing their governments to go to war in order to gain military contracts. There supporting evidence is countries like Spain, Italy and United Kingdom who went to Iraq war against the will of their people. They argue their governments have been taken hostage by these large corporations because war simply brought business opportunities especially for the gas and weapon industries. These anti-corporations activists argue that the multinationals are big tax payers and they have great influence on the economy of their mother countries. The fact that we live in a world where markets are harmonized and foreign exchange come in handy in determining the country purchasing power; the military capabilities and technology advancement, their governments are always prepared to support them. The states therefore lack political will and mechanisms to control them. This has made them to control markets which they have tried to impose themselves to monopoly status (Susan, 1996). Multinational companies are also accused of moving to the third world countries and acquiring massive land for growth of cash crops such as coffee, tea and flowers. The usage of land for growing of crops for export at the expense of food production promotes hunger and starvation in these countries. The most affected industry is the flower industry which involves dangerous chemicals. They take advantage ignorant populace and poor laws by the local governments to advance these atrocities. This has led increase of diseases like cancer, tuberculosis and other respiratory disease. In the long run the damage supposed some benefits such as employments they offer. They also over utilize soil by applying massive chemicals in terms of insect sides and fertilizers to the limit leaving a barren land in there wake (Davis, 1998). The supply of products to other countries have led to diminish or assimilations of some culture. For example, the ant-corporate argue that multinational companies such McDonald have altered the acting habits of local people making them to shift to even the crops they grow. This has led to starvation as people move from their traditional staple foods which are well adapted to their climate in order to conform to the popular culture. The change of preference and test have gone to kill the local industries and at the same time expanding the market place of the multinational companies. The fact that some continents like Africa are richest in terms of minerals; yet they remain they lag behind in terms of developed places in the world speak volumes. In most cases it is this multinational who extract this minerals and those workers who work in those mines work in deplorable conditions and are poorly paid shows the form of exploitations. The environmental damage coupled by meager pay that doesn’t lift people from poverty raise more questions than answers. In they post exorbitant profits and there balance sheets post turn over of billion of dollars yet the countries they mine are still held hostage by international monetary in order to get loans to fund their recurrent budgets. On the issue of trade agreement and the trade organization such as world trade organization they argue these tools have been used to promote their own interest rather than fight for the local’s plight. They hold that bodies like World Trade Organizations are controlled by developed countries who act on their multinational companies’ mercy. This has led to unmerited trade agreements and formulation of trade laws that favor them at the expense of the poor countries. With unequal playing ground in the international markets it becomes impossible for the developing countries to compete. Developed countries are also are held responsible for offering subsidies to their farmers. This they argue promote inequality because it makes there products to be cheaper than goods from other countries and therefore give there farmers an edge. We can argue that is true, multinational companies hold economic power and some extent political. However, it will be ridiculous to blame inequality and other social problems entirely on multinational History has shown that exploitation of people and inequality even in the medieval ages when human being chained others and drove them to their land to work as slaves. The feudal system when million of serfs worked for the nobles across Europe. In fact men and land were literally owned by the rich or those who by chance happed to have the blood lineage of political class. The bourgeois who exploited the proletariats just because they owned means of production. In fact the breaking of bastilles in the late eighteenth century was not triggered by factories looking for cheap labor but by men who wanted to free themselves from the chains of oppression which involuntary working for the endowed and not by hard work but by birthright (Patrick,2005). In a capitalist world which is a reality even to former adherent of communism such as China and Russia dictates business to behave such way. Multinationals being companies and business entities apply the principle of business which is to maximize the profits and minimizing the cost of production. They therefore venture in to countries where labor is cheap in order to maintain there competitive in the international market. In fact they just don’t employ locals as casual laborers but they also employ thousands in managerial and other high ranking positions. The reality in the ground especially in the third world countries they are the best in terms of payment of workers. Although activism against corporations is rampant, it rarely comes from the third world countries. This raises a myriad of questions considering these are the same people whose rights are supposedly infringed. In the third world countries unemployment is in double digits and poverty levels are incredible. It is usually a challenge to get casual jobs due to high number of people seeking the same. International corporations therefore offer opportunities for them in terms of employment and variety in the market. In fact they perceive ant –globalists as inconsiderate and people who are not in touch with reality. To them to eliminate multinationals is to take away their livelihoods and their governments view this issue as a matter of national security. This can be demonstrated by recent demonstrations due to the cost of basic commodities especially in Africa. On the environmental degradation, though some of these companies have contributed to environmental destruction to some extent it remains minimal. In fact in developing countries, environmental degradation has been cost by other issues emanating from poverty and population. High growth rate has adverse effects in environment. To begin with, there is no proportionate growth in social amenities such as education system, this means that most people end up relying on subsistence farming for their livelihood. This means they clear more forests to make space for housing and cultivation, use firewood’s as their main energy, overstocking of animals and burning of charcoal. In the long run this affect environment. With creation of formal employment and improvement of technology at least this can lead to sustainable development (Quincy, 1992). Third world countries are mostly ruled by dictators and corrupt officials who turn their countries in to private entities. It therefore becomes difficult for the revenue that is derived from mining having an impact in terms of improving the lives of ordinary citizens. It is the government in place that is responsible in formulated policies that advocate for accountability in terms of using public funds and it will be responsible to blame corporate world for under Devopment of some countries. In fact the political leadership of these countries should take initiative that promote the welfare and protect the working force. In terms of preference it is hard to control human beings to choose one thing over another. It remains an individual decision to choose the culture which suits them based. In most cases it is common for business to try to win consumers by advocating for their products. This always happen even in the developed world and it has no exemption even in the world countries. In fact these types of competition only benefit consumers who get a variety to choose from. It improves the living standards of people generally (Jean, 2004). If the debate was about establishment of economic systems or if it deals with improvement of working conditions and promotion of human rights then ant globalization can have some credibility. Unfortunately, their constant connection between exploitation to large companies raises various questions. Some industries like large scale production and some need to move near raw materials or market order to cut transport cost. This means multinationals are often driven by market forces rather than obsession for control in terms of influence. In conclusion, we can argue that innovation and improvements of goods and services always require enormous resources. These companies spend some substantial amount in research and other noble things which generally improve the lives of mankind at large. Instead of trying to eliminate the multinational companies, the stakeholders should embark on campaign in sensitizing the host governments about their roles in protecting their citizens and environment. On the other hand with growth of telecommunication and movement of information means we are living in a global village. These multinationals their brand of reputation is always on line and they should always avoid circumstance that can compromise their standings in the business world (Martin 2005). Reference List Davis, C. (1998) Multinationals and Exploitation: Case Study of Mining in Congo. Journal of Africa Development Centre. P.9-17. Jean, Z. (2004) social, Economic and Cultural Rights. London: Oxford. Joseph, S & A. Charlton (2005) FairTrade for All: How Trade Can Promote Development in Opposition to the Development, Economic Journal p. 20-67. Martin, O. (1987) Food Security Challenges Facing Africa. Dublin. Park. Patrick, G. (2005) logistics of a Successful Multinational .New York: Penguin Quincy, M. (1992) Hunger in the Midst of Wealth. London: Cambridge University Press. Roberto, K. & William, S. (2001) and Protest and Collaboration: Transnational Networks Politics .Summitry and Free Trade in the Americas, pp.2-16. Susan, S (1986) Casino Capitalism. Blackwell: Oxford. Read More