The Physical and Virtual Fences in Different Arenas of Politics, Economy, Land and Their Correlation - Essay Example

The Physical and Virtual Fences in Different Arenas of Politics, Economy, Land and Their CorrelationIn the essay, the writer has discussed the issue of fences that are being erected in every form and the actions of people in support or opposition to these fences alongside mentioning the implications of these actions. The writer has considered both physical and virtual fences appearing in different arenas of politics, economy, land and their correlation.He begins by courting his views on the erection of various fences to physically deprive people of water, property ,resources etc and concludes by describing a higher manifestation of these fences in the form of restriction of societies or communities in their participation in development of political agendas, directives etc.

The writer considers both apparent and implied effect of the fences containing or excluding people. While the apparent effect is in the form of restlessness, financial and other materialistic losses, still deeper effect comes in terms of shaping of psychologies of people by divesting them of their freedom of expression and equality of opportunityHe employs different examples of sufferings and failures by different communities or countries on account of such policies inspired by the idea of boundary-making.

He explains their harmful effects as envisaged in the form of financial insecurity as faced by people of Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia etcHe mentions the plight of refugees from China, Romania desperate to cross the suffocating boundaries of their countries in their quest to taste the freedom.According to him, in the name of globalization, capitalism and democracy, restrictive elements are being introduced in the determining of strategies for security of countries against terrorism, economic lapse, contamination and dearth of natural resources which are overly detrimental to the moral of people and to the development of society due to their obvious adherence and propensity towards measures prescribed by prejudice, force and constraint.

The writer consciously puts the topic of ‘fencing’ on debate, with the basic flow of essay showing an inclination towards his dislike towards the concept of fencing as apparent by the name of the essay. The examples presented by the writer evidently justify his stand against fencing which, according to him, are a cause of uncertainty and distrust amongst countries and which tries to cover various selfish intentions of various societies on smaller scale, where as, of various developed countries on the larger scale through the exploitation of their weaker counterparts, by alienating them from giving contribution in deciding economical and political policies of their volition.

However, at many occasions, the views of the author seem to be stretching towards extremism, which are not observable, particularly in context of globalization and segregation of public and private sectors. Issues like globalization need involvement of different countries on very large scale and a planned detachment of many participants on many issues is inevitable. The writer has deeply generalized the concept of fencing, while describing its effects, while, in reality, in dealing with different socio-economic situations, fencing needs to be applied though in varying intensities and dimensions.

In all, the essay is well-written giving a consummate description of effects of fencing on individual as well as society and different expressions of fencing in different realms. It tells that, though the places and states of implementation of fencing differ, the basic philosophy behind it remains the same targeting inequality and selfish creed of one entity towards the other.