Is Globalization Doing More Harm or Good to the World - Term Paper Example

Globalizations and its Effects on International Systems Introduction Current economic trends, international investments, and businesses are on a level experts refer to as globalization. In this era, businesses have the capability to break the local market boundaries and venture into the international world (Greig: pp. 227). By doing so, they have risked losing to get the extra profits, connect people to information, expanding businesses and increasing the chances to survive in the current competitive world. According to experts, there is proof that globalization has a direct impact on most international security issues. An international system assumes the concept in international relations (Guehenno: pp. 23), which is a symbol of unifying entities using selected ideologies. However, so many debates concerning the issues of whether globalization is of any benefits to the world or if it has negative impacts on international systems. So many arguments relate structural violence to globalization. In developed countries, such a situation helps them in overcoming most economic barriers (Guehenno: pp. 28). This notion has brought “westernization” because such countries have overpowered the international markets. In this case, structural violence disrupts peace globally. In return, such violence gives birth to disparity a catalyst to major conflicts. This could be the reason as to why there is widespread social polarization in the current international system. Through globalization, there is an evidence of imbalance in power in the international systems. Such imbalances lead to suspicions among countries, which in turn increase foreign policy costs and creating new kinds of threats (Baylis, Smith S. & Owens: pp. 110). The assumptions on threats are due to the change in global security. Already, the internet, intercontinental airlines, most media houses and international companies are among the pace setters in globalization. These global landmarks have led to interdependence. For this reason, countries are less concerned with the provision of security to other countries unless where they feel threatened. Nations with a common interest seem to gang up together with the aim of maximizing on the global nature by influencing most security matters. This, according to the arguments made by the Neo-Marxists, leads to inequality. A combination of all these issues revolving around structural violence results to global instability. The status of a nation in an international system is greatly affected by globalization. Through centralization, most states are under threat of losing monopoly powers on most international affairs. In addition, a great percentage of personal sovereignty is becoming extinct. The former still explains the interdependence and its growing influence on most global matters. Through wars, setting of rules and regulations on trade and investment matters, controlling migration, defending borderlines and responding to unnecessary interference was a proof for the State’s ability to show dominance. Regarding international relations, States had to show a high degree in their political game. This could include the use of superior military operations and containing strategic issues. The introduction and widespread of very destructive weapons in most countries has since then brought an end in dominance. The implementation of corporative strategies has led to direct violence. International systems are facing asymmetric threats because of globalization (Gaan Narottam: pp. 311). This is a result of technological differences for instance in military. This will force countries with little technological advancements to capitalize on their advantages regarding non-conventional issues. This, according to experts poses as an asymmetric danger. For example, if a weak country uses international terrorism, as is non-conventional issue, they may end up engaging in the development of weapons of mass destruction. Globalization brings out two major types of distinctions in the international systems. Robertson: pp. 124). The first is evident through the economies of scale as their distribution in the production fields, distribution channels and exchange rates. High returns to scale force most units of production to be under single units that are most often integrated. On the contrary, little returns to scale will marginalize the unit of production into small but separate entities. The second aspect is the transaction costs. These refer to costs linked to negotiation, enforcement and monitoring. Through this distinctions, a concept of markets and hierarchy sprouts. In this context, markets are the involved organizations and companies. In most cases, analysts argue that globalization has led to an authoritative way of doing business. Though beneficial, the developing countries have a rough time complying with such kind of reality. International systems are a good victim of globalization in this, there is widespread uneven distribution of wealth (Aliber & Click: pp. 65). In addition, there is a growing trend in the gap of income generation between developed and developing countries. Due to this, developing countries are watching as developed countries keep growing their level of wealth by a great extent. Ideally, developed countries have the skills, a huge financial base and great governmental support. Through globalization, they are taking advantage of the readily available underutilized resources found in most developing countries. While the concept is to help the developing countries in generating revenue, the reality however is the developed countries use such opportunities to boost their economic status almost twice as those in developing countries. On issues regarding income, developed countries attach worth to a person’s skills as compared to the developing countries. This brings in the difference concerning the wage standards (Amin & Thrift: pp. 88). For instance, a person with a good technological base gets a huge pay in developed countries because there is an assurance of quality work as compared to a person with good man power in developing countries. Globalization has altered the cultural diversity in the world (Dani Rodrik: pp. 45). Media houses like CNN have revolutionized the media industry. Being among the few international media channels across the world, they have been able to limit the way people express their cultures. Among other media spheres are the music and film industries that have been so violent in culture preservation. Through their displays and superiority, people have fallen for their influence to the extent of ignoring their original cultures (Robertson: pp. 34). Even though some of them are for educational purposes, they in a way exaggerate their messages with the aim of getting attention. So far, only a few corporations that control the media sphere. This means they have the power to limit the culture of other sectors. This is because it is only through them that the world can learn and appreciate the existence of the unknown cultures. The world is under threat because of the widespread greenhouse effect. This is because of the widespread globalization effect. In the introduction bit, globalization was a reflection on the current world trends. It is through this that everybody is trying to earn a competitive advantage by being creative in production. The production process however is causing a lot of environmental damage (Hall & Biersteker: pp. 76). Companies are extending their business for search of new resources beyond their countries and continents. Already, experts say green house effect accounts for more than 30 percent of the total pollution on earth. Conclusion Globalization has been of net disadvantage to the international system. This is because it has denied users the freedom, democracy and the required level of independence. Generally what is has done is to give the current superpower countries like the US the authority in making decisions that reflect on economic issues (Isard Peter: pp. 34). This power is because of the domestic way in handling issues that range from lifestyle to political affairs. An extension of such behavior to the external world as some experts may term it is a new form of colonization. Already, such nations have a strong military base with a strong economy. Their ability to influence other countries is very easy. Globalization is the tool in use. From the discussion, it is evident globalization is doing more harm to the world. The urge to compete for economic advantage and superiority makes globalization a net disadvantage to the international system. Work cited Aliber R. Z. & Click R. W. Readings in International Business: A Decision Approach. 2008. California: The MIT Press. Print. Amin Ash & Thrift Nigel. Globalization, Institutions and Regional Developments in Europe. London: Oxford University Press. 2010. Print. Baylis J., Smith S. & Owens A. The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations. 2001. New York: Oxford University Press. Print. Dani Rodrik. Has Globalization Gone too Far? California Management Review. 39.3 (2006). 29- 53. Gaan Narottam. United States; Globalization and the International System: Economic and Political Challenges. International Studies, 46.3 (2006). 305-316. Greig J., M. The End of Geography? Globalization, Communications and Culture in the International System. The Journal of Conflict Resolution. 46.2 (2002). 225-243. Guehenno Jean-Marie. Globalization and International Systems. Journal of Democracy 10 (1999).22-35. Hall R., B. & Biersteker T., J. The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006. Print. Isard Peter. Globalization and the International Financial System: What’s wrong and What Can be Done. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2010. Print. Robertson Roland. Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. New York: SAGE. 2012. Print. Read More