Globalization As the Worldwide Blending - Essay Example

Globalization Globalization is the worldwide blending of social, cultural, economic, religious, and political systems. Developed countries encourage glabalization, because underdeveloped countries have natural resources needed for expansion and needs of the developed countries. These developed countries benefit, but the countries not as develop do not want to change their ways for larger countries. These Middle Eastern countries are the position I would take. America tends to westernize countries that are perfectly fine with their culture, just because America is uncomfortable with their ways. The developed country of choice is America. The Middle Eastern country, which is not underdeveloped, only isolated, will be Iran. America practices freedom of religion and democracy. Iran is an Islamic Republic. America feels that equal rights for religions and women is a basic right. Iran disagrees, feeling Islam is the true way. Americans want to impose their beliefs, by globalization with all nations, including Iran. Americans have become so obsessed with freeing and liberating the whole world, true freedom is being trampled. Where is the freedom of the Islamic Iranian? Why do they have to conform to Americas rules? America should respect the differences between cultures, not try to globalize the whole world for their benefit. If I were an Iranian, I would be upset at American interference before the Islamic government was put into place. The Shah, former leader of Iran, was considered westernized by Iranians. Islam is not just a religion, but a way of life. When Iran became more westernized, with looser dress codes and less Islamic, Iranians became mad. I would have felt betrayed by America and my government. I might have wanted to fight for my religion and traditions. Given the right circumstances, I could have been a freedom fighter that took American embassy hostages in the Islamic revolution. Americans should not think their ways are more superior to mine. True freedom comes from letting all cultures live in peace, without trying to change them to your ways. America can benefit from Irans natural resources. Oil is Irans major natural resources. In return for that oil, America wants to control the whole country. The more America can westernized Iran, the more oil America gets. America wants to westernize my country to get my oil. Since America did not come abiding my customs and laws, I do not think my government negotiate with them at all. Why should every country have to play by Americas rules? Because of their military might? That is not working out too well in Iraq. America should not use so much might and use more negotiations. They should spend more time learning about my culture. If America does not care about my culture, I do not care about America. Globalization only benefits the country needing the natural resources. The only countries wanting globalization is countries trying to impose their will upon different cultures. Western countries need more natural resources for their growing population. This makes countries like America to care more about oil than about Iranian culture. America should have the live and let live policy. If America wants oil so badly, then they need to negotiate with Iran on Irans terms, not their own selfish needs. They deal with Saudi Arabia on Saudi Arabias terms. Does Iran deserve less respect than Saudi Arabia. Respect for diversity on both sides is needed. Until everyone respects diversity, cultures will clash, just like America and Iran. Imperialism Imperialism is when a country aggressively expands influence on a weaker countrys economic and political sphere in the effort to gain territory. Imperialism can be colonization or totally influencing a weaker countrys path. Imperialism goes against traditional American values, yet America has been imperialistic. America started out as a colony, then grew stronger taking over the current North America states from Native Americans, Mexico, and Hawaii. Although American tradition is anti-imperialism, the stance is hypocritical. Imperialism has been asserted by most major world players, including Russia, England, France, Spain, and the United States. A good example of imperialism is Russias influence over Eastern Europe after World War II. Although Russia controlled most of the Eastern Bloc, each country had its own communist government. Romania had Ceauşescu as a political leader. Yugoslavia was led by Tito. Even though these countries practiced independent communism, Russia exerted influence over these countries along with the rest of Eastern Europe. Influence can be effective imperialism, just like outright colonization. Colonization can also be a form of Imperialism. The expansion of European countries into Africa in the 1600s is a perfect example of colonization imperialism. The Dutch created Cape Town in South Africa. Rwanda was taken over by Belgium. England had interests in Uganda. France took over Algeria. These are just a few examples of the imperialism in Africa. The Americas were also colonized. North America by England and France. Spains conquistadors wiped out the Mayans with their colonization. Aruba is still a Dutch providence. Countries that have been under imperialistic rule are numerous all over the world. America is a unique. Once a colony of England, America fought for freedom against England, and won. Americans believe in freedom, but have practiced imperialism in the states interests. From expanding into New Mexico, California, and Arizona, America went on to practice colonization in Guam, Hawaii, the Philippines, and Alaska. All of Central and South America has been affected by Americas imperialistic influence. America invaded Puerto Rico, Cuba and the Philippines in 1898. During the Cuban Revolution in 1959, the United States issued an embargo. Current examples in the Northern Hemisphere are the 1983 invasion of Grenada, the 1989 invasion of Panama, and the take down of Manuel Noriega. All of these actions were inspired by the Monroe Doctrine and the Roosevelt Corollary. These acts stated that the United States could interfere with any country threatening their sovereignty in the Northern Hemisphere. Originally the Monroe Doctrine was formed to prevent European countries from colonizing countries in the Americas. Although imperialism goes against American traditional values, the United States has engaged in imperialism. This engagement of imperialism has not just been limited to the Americas, but all over the war. Currently America is exerting its influence in Iraq. Imperialism can be colonization, but more than likely influence over a weaker country is exerted. America has engaged in both colonization and influence over weaker countries. Imperialism is still be practiced today. The only difference is imperialism has become known as humanitarian efforts. Nationalism Nationalism is a nations right to constitute an independent political community based on shared history and common destiny and the devotion to the interests of that nation. The significance of nationalism can be summed up with one word; pride. Pride in ones country causes a national fever to back a political candidate, issue, or even war. Nationalism can win or lose a war for a country. This emotion can sweep a nation, creating panic, cooperation, or the urge to become a soldiers. Nationalism can make or break, not only a nation, but a government as well. Fundamental values of nationalism are national pride, patriotic fever, and national unity. These fundamental values are important. National pride is an element of a successful country. When individuals feel national pride, they take pride in their work, environment, and community. Patriotic fever can allow manpower for solider during wartime and even peacetime. Volunteers make the United States army. Lastly national unity is important to keep a country together. Unity allows citizens to get along harmoniously. Nationalism is a barrier to effective collective security, because of patriotic pride. Patriotic pride makes soldiers want to fight for their country. Nationalism at the beginning of the 20th century fluctuated. At the beginning of the century, until the end of World War I, nationalism was high. When the Great Depression struck, nationalism fell. World War II fuel nationalism to an all time high. The Cold War also made Americans feel nationalism. Russia was bad, America was great according to citizens of the United States. Competition between Russia and America raised nationalism to an all time high. Generally, nationalism grows more intense during a war or outside threat. After 9/11, all Americans rallied together in the aftermath. All politicians, despite party, wanted to catch the terrorists. As the search for Osama bin Laden grew cold, nationalism started to wan. Nationalism is at an all time low today. An endless war with no end in site has made the American people not feel proud of their country. Nationalism today is dividing the country. Democrats, Republicans, and other political parties have tried to rally nationalism to their side. The Iraq war has divided everyone. Some think America should stay, others think of immediate withdrawal. The debate is dividing the country down the middle. Half of the country wants one thing, the other something else. The mudslinging between parties knows no boundaries. In the meantime, around three thousand Americans have died in combat. Without national pride, patriotic fervor, and unity, American nationalism is at an all time low. This trend will not last. History tends to repeat itself. Thus the United States will regain high levels of nationalism. Another war or terrorist attack will draw Americans together again. Americans can fight amongst themselves and their parties, but threatened by outside forces Americans always pull together. Nationalism depends on the nation. National pride, patriotic fervor, and national unity is unique to the country experiencing nationalism. The United States has fluctuating nationalism. Depending on the era in history, the United States can have high or low nationalism. Wars, terrorist, and competition brings out the high nationalism of Americans. When the threat is not specific, nationalism in America tends to wain to all time lows. It is a cycle destined to repeat itself. U.S. Senate Vote on the Treaty of Versailles The 1919 Treaty of Versailles was not ratified by the United States Senate for two reasons. The first was Woodrow Wilsons refusal to allow the Senate to change even one of his fourteen points. Secondly, some of the fourteen points went against the United States Constitution. This expression of nationalism causes division in the country. The division comes along political lines. A hostile congress, or in this case senate, against an unbending president. It seems like history is repeating itself today with President Bush and the Democratic government. Nationalism and the United States citizens are the only losers when the Senate and the President argue. Woodrow Wilsons twelve points are as follows “(1) open covenants openly arrived at; (2) freedom of the seas in peace and war; (3) removal of economic barriers between nations as far as possible; (4) reduction of armaments to needs for domestic safety; (5) adjustment of colonial claims with concern for the wishes and interests of the inhabitants as well as for the titles of rival claimants. The next eight points referred to specific questions: (6) evacuation and general restoration of conquered territories in Russia; (7) preservation of Belgian sovereignty; (8) settlement of the Alsace-Lorraine question; (9) redrawing of Italian frontiers according to nationalities; (10) the division of Austria-Hungary in conformance to its nationalities; (11) the redrawing of Balkan boundaries with reference to historically established allegiance and nationalities; (12) Turkish control only of their own peoples and freedom of navigation through the Dardanelles; (13) the establishment of an independent Poland with access to the sea. The last point (14) was a provision for “a general association of nations … under specific covenants.” (Schwabe) These points were too involved with European affairs for the United States Senate. Before World War I, the United States were isolationist content to only interfere in the affairs of North, Central, and South America. World War I broke the United States out of that rut, but the Senate still had isolationist attitudes. Thus they rejected the fourteen point plan. When the United States Senate rejected the fourteen points, they did not even sign the Treaty of Versailles, even after Woodrow Wilson promised the other nations he would sign. The Senate made him look like a liar and a promise breaker. This was not good for foreign relations, or nationalism. In the end, Woodrow Wilson and the others agreed that states should be based on the principle of national self determination and the formation of the League of Nations would be formed. The Senate still refused to ratify the treaty, and the United States declared the war over in 1921. Even the League of Nations, which is based on Wilsons last point, was not approved by the Senate. The European countries had to ratify the treaty without the Americans. Nationalism was hurt by the Senates refusal to ratify the Versailles Treaty. The Senate made the President look bad, thus America looked bad. The involvement that Woodrow Wilson started by negotiation the Versailles Treaty in European Affairs has dictated how Americans deal with world policy today. Reference Schwabe, K. Woodrow Wilson, Revolutionary Germany, and Peacemaking, 1918–1919 (1985). Islamic Fundamentalism In the past twenty-five years, Islamic fundamentalism has been on the rise. The reasons are globalization, technological, social, and economic changes. Another reason is the lack of the Western countries to understand or even tolerate Islamic views. These changes and misunderstanding have frustrated fundamental Muslims. This has led to extreme actions, like 9/11. If the United States and other Western countries would have been more considerate of Islam, 9/11 would never have happened. Globalization, technological, social, and economic changes have impacted fundamental Muslims. Globalization and technological have forced Western ways on Islamic countries. Oil has made these countries richer. Social changes have came about when dealing with Westerners. All of these changes have made fundamental Muslims more resistant to Western ways. The West does not seem to acknowledge that fundamental Muslims do not want to change. The lack of understanding all Muslims amongst the Western countries is appalling. An example of how fundamental Islam can go wrong is Osama bin Laden. Before the USS Cole was ripped in half, United States Embassies bombed, and 9/11, Osama bin Laden was a deeply religious man from Saudi Arabia. When the United States attacked Iraq in the first Gulf War, Saudi Arabia allowed Americans to have bases in their country. Due to the gender equal army of the United States, women came onto Saudi soil with no head veils, driving (Saudi women must be driven by a male relative or bodyguard.), and traveling without male companions, Islamic fundamentalist were upset. Saudi women decided they wanted the same rights. This was quickly quashed once the Americans were gone. However, Osama bin Laden wanted Americans out of his country. He considered them infidels that corrupted his country. This led to the first bombing of the WTC and 9/11. If Americans would have approached the Islamic country differently, by allowing women to serve, just not in Saudi, maybe Osama bin Laden would have found another Holy War. The rise of Islamic fundamentalism is due to the Wests treatment of Muslims. The United States expects to go into Islamic countries acting like Christian or even Atheists. For Americans God does not have anything to do with negotiations, wars, or other international affairs. God is a concept to be worshiped in church on Sunday, not to be mixed with government; due to separation of church and state. Fundamental Islam does not want a separation of church and state. Religion has everything to do with their government. When these points are ignored, Muslims get angry and react. Then Americans shake their heads at the terrorism and other means used to capture their attention. An appreciation of diverse cultures needs to be introduced into the American state of mind. If Americans learned what Islam is really about, maybe a greater understanding could be developed. Most Muslims know about Christianity. In fact Jesus is mentioned as a prophet in the Koran. In is not fair to expect the whole world to cater to America, because of her military might, or status as a world power. When Americans learn to appreciate other cultures, not just arrogantly pushing their own beliefs, then maybe a discourse can be opened between them and Middle Eastern countries. The rise of fundamental Islam can be stemmed with understanding. Role of the US as the Sole Super Power in the World Today After World War II, due to the fear of spreading communism, the United States became the sole super power in an effort to prevent another World War. This means the United States has taken an active role world wide to protect its interests. Some of the United States interference has had positive effects, but some has had negative effects. The perception of the United States as savior of the world has become common place. This is not always true. The reality is the United States acts globally in the interest of the United States. An example of the United States super power status is the first Gulf War. Kuwait was invaded by Iraq. America came to the rescue. The United States might have been more interested in the oil, but saved Kuwaits sovereignty. This is an instant of good. An instant of bad influence or action was Vietnam. The war in Vietnam did not change anything, except to take away young American soldiers, civilians, and South Vietnamese soldiers. The North Vietnamese also suffered losses. In the end, communist Vietnam was a reality. Some instances can be good and bad. Iraq is one of these situations. Saddam Hussien was a brutal dictator. Hussien and his sons would rape wives in front of their husbands, then kill the husbands in front of the wives. It was good that Saddam Hussien was overthrown. The bad is the civil unrest and violence caused by Hussiens departure from power. American influence as a super power does not always manifest itself in war. The CIA operates everywhere, from Afghanistan, during the Russian war, to Columbia. CIA operatives were working in Russia in hopes of placing a democratic president, like Yeltsin, in power. Imelda and Ferdinand Marcos was flown out of the Philippines on an American jet after they were overthrown. Columbia has had drug lords snatched by the CIA. The CIA works behind the scenes, influencing global events. The United States only plays at being a super power for their own benefit. In Russia, when communism collapsed, that only meant that another super power becomes weakened. Capturing drug lords helps on the American war on drugs. Helping Kuwait stave off Iraq, let America have access to the oil. The same goes with invading Iraq. If Bush thought there was weapons of mass destruction, then he was protecting America from a nuclear attack. If not, the once again oil was the reason for war. Not only does the United States act like a super power, but picks its battles. For example, after the Black Hawk Down in Somalia, America refuses to send substantial troops to Africa. Substantial troops have been needed in Sierre Leone, Rwanda, Somalia, and the Sudan. Genocide is running rampant on the African continent, but America does not have an interest in Africa for two reasons. The first is Africa American response and lack of natural resources to be stripped. African Americans might get upset if a white government decides what goes on in Africa. The diamonds and gold coming out of Africa is steady. There is no need to conquer Africa in the name of American interest. If the same situation was going on in Europe or the Middle East, America would have already intervened. The United States is a super global power. However, America always acts in its interest. Whether waging war with soldiers or the CIA, the United States will always manipulate global affairs; good or bad. Genocide/Ethnic Cleansing Genocide or ethnic cleansing is when a government or people systematically kill a particular race, religion, or political affiliation. Genocide in the 20th and 21st centuries have been more efficient, carried out by civilized people, and murdered millions of individuals because of their race, religion, or political affiliation. Although the Jewish Holocaust perpetrated by the Germans is the most widespread and organized, genocides have occurred in Cambodia Rwanda, Bosnia, Sierre Leone, and Somalia. The inhumanity of individuals toward their fellow human beings is unbelievable. The main question is how do civilized people commit genocide? The answer is the same for uncivilized people. Individuals must be conditioned to see the people being murdered by genocide as less than human; sub-humans. Germans were exposed to propaganda about how Jews were not even human, the vermin of the earth, and the cause of all German problems. Pol Pot felt threatened by intellectuals, so he had millions murdered, while putting the uneducated peasants in charge. The peasants were introduced to propaganda stating that intellectuals were evil and Cambodias problems. Rwanda had the Hutu killing the Tutsi. Although both were Rwandan, the Tutsi had been used during colonization to help the Belgium, because of their lighter skin. The Hutu felt the Tutsi had oppressed them, so in 1994 the Hutu begin killing every Tutsi in sight. The bottom line is a division between culture, race, religion, or political affiliation can help perpetrate genocide. The civilians of these societies did not stop the genocide for two reasons. The first is true belief in the propaganda. Secondly, fear of reprisal from the government. Germans believed they were better than the Jews, genetically. The Germans also felt fear. If caught hiding a Jew, the punishment could be jail or even death. There were cases in Rwanda where Belgium nuns, born of Hutu heritage, would turn Tutsi over to the Hutu death squads. In Cambodia, children would turn in parents for more food. Societal pressure influenced everyone of these cultures. It could be argued that America has had its own genocide, just not on the massive scale as other countries. Lynchings have been practiced to this day against African Americans. That fits the definition of genocide, being killed because of race. Many Americans shake their head and say lynching? Today? The Jena Six incident started with nooses being hung on the “white tree”. This genocide has been addressed individually, case by case. Ethnic cleansing is lynching African Americans in the United States. The way to combat future genocide is education. Diversity should be taught globally. Appreciation of all cultures, religions, and colors needs to be taught to every child. Once a child know what another culture is about, fear no longer rules. The culture is no longer hated because of ignorance, since the children will be educated. Teaching past genocide in schools should also be taught. Adults are normally set in their ways, but the children of the world would be receptive to this measure. Genocide can occur in any country. Civilized or uncivilized, humans have the capacity for evil. When individuals have a you against us attitude, extermination of another race becomes a necessity. A necessity that no longer seems wrong. Only education can prevent more genocide. Diverse cultures need to be embraced. Only then will genocide will no longer be a possibility. Criteria for Evaluating Primary and Secondary Sources Primary sources are direct sources. This can include original or copies of a book (with no sources), photographs, statistics, and other documents that are written without sources. Secondary sources are sources that rely on primary resources, with appropriate credit for the primary source. These can include academic papers or websites, books, and other research documents. It is very important to evaluate both types of sources for research and academic papers. Evaluating primary sources is critical to any paper. Primary sources that are good to use are books, photographs, newspapers, and magazines. Since most websites are not original, these do not make good primary sources. There are a few exceptions. E-books and photographs can be taken from the Internet as long as they are referenced properly. A good example of a primary source is Faith of my Fathers by John McCain and his ghost writer/staff member. This book is of his recollections as a pow/naval officer. He had photos in that book of his naval officer grandfather and father. Those were family original pictures. This would be a good primary source. Bad primary sources are biased websites, books, newspaper articles, or even photographs. For example, Perez Hilton runs a website of gossip. Although the writing is original, it is full of conjecture and gossip. Evaluating secondary sources is even more important than when dealing with primary sources. Many secondary sources can be biased, with primary sources used out of context. It is important to look up references when dealing with secondary sources to make sure this does not make your paper biased. Some secondary sources should never be used, like the Wikipedia website. This is an excellent tool to learn, but not every page is referenced properly or even up to date. Encyclopedias are another secondary source to avoid. Anyone can look up facts in an encyclopedia, a true scholar looks deeper. Evaluating primary sources and secondary sources is vital to creating a good paper. Without evaluating sources, a paper can be biased, flawed, or even erroneous. Making sure to have the right sources is almost as important as good grammar or correct referencing. Read More