Politics of Globalization - Pros and Cons - Essay Example

Politics of Globalization Globalization is a process of creating strong links among different countries in the world (Lee 12). This is achieved through integration of individual state economies and their political system. Political globalization has been a subject of contention by many nations. For example, the United States of America expresses its reservations to the idea of global politics. It perceives that there are few benefits to gain from international togetherness. This is largely because the United States boasts of excellent jobs and fears that there will be an increase in the number of immigrants. Poor countries, such as Bulgaria, have benefitted a lot from globalization. Globalization from Proponents and Opponents Understanding Both proponents and opponents of globalization cite different reasons to support their stand. The controversy over divergent views on this world interconnectedness matter has been in existence since 1960s.Various movement resisted European dominance through colonization and imperialism. Some of these anti-globalization movements consists the trade unions and supporters of indigenous rights (Mendelson 17). The proponents of globalization are composed of financial institutions and other groups, such as Jubilee coalition, which advocated for debt relief for the economic weak countries in the year 2005.Their voices lead to cancellation of the debts of the concerned countries. The opponents of globalization surmise widening of the gap between the poor and the rich nations. They observe that they rich will continue to enjoy affluence and the destitute citizens will languish in abject poverty. This group senses that the influx of multinational companies might constrain the economic power of the host nations. On contrary, the proponents of globalization propose this action will strengthen the underprivileged economies of underdeveloped countries through the increase of trade activities and faster sharing of information and ideas (Lee 23). This will result in expansion of industries. Growth of industrial sectors in a given country is a sure way to create jobs and bring about improvements to the livelihoods of communities. Critics of globalization continue to register their fears in distribution of income, in and out of countries. The basis of their arguments is on variability in endowment of natural and human resources. They feel that the states with modern technological knowledge will exploit those resources for their own industries in their mother countries. In contrast, the pro-globalization sees many rewards to the poor countries (Mendelson 204). For example, they argue that through specialized skills brought by global union there will be enrichment of work force and quick economic growth. This, in turn, will do away with overdependence of these nations for reliefs or other humanitarian services and promote dependence. This will influence positively to the expansion of the economy of host countries. The supporters of anti-globalization emphasize that individual states can achieve development if they strengthen their policy and decision making systems. To attain this, governments of different states have to incorporate views of their citizens. Consolidation of individual’s viewpoints will pay fruits to these nations. The proponents think that the poor countries have a myriad of internal problems, which needs external interventions to provide solutions. Some of the hindrances bedeviling these nations include poor governance, lack of cultural diversity, improver ways of protecting workers and accrued foreign debts (Mendelson 145). The proponents of globalization feel that their opponents lack solid ideologies and their claims are baseless. They view them as toothless dogs and nothing good can come from their side. The fact that they present varied interest spells doom to their efforts to oppose globalization (Lee 54). The opponents of globalization believe that they have strong points to back up their position. They advocate for the removal of evident limitations by state governments and encourage domestic investments. Their sole aim is to promote specialization and trade. The anti-globalization perceives globalization as a serious threat to sovereignty of nations. They state that this will adversely affect decision-making in the individual states. Failure of the United States to sign international treaties, such as ICC and Kyoto, portrays a plain picture to oppose globalization. Although among the opponents of globalization have differing position, they share a convergent point (Mendelson 93). They all agree their efforts will achieve economic freedom and transform corporations. Effects of Globalization and World Economic Recession in United States Households and that of European Households The effects of globalization and world recession have received serious attention all over the world. European countries and the United States are some of the subjects hit by this world’s largest crisis. However, there is a varying degree of the impacts between the United States and Europe (Lee 109). European countries are on the receiving end of the effects of the economic recession as compared to the US. European Union, which is one of the strong unions in the world, devised strategies to curb recession. It convened several conferences to prevent economic crises in member countries. However, conflicting interest of member governments exacerbated the situation in hand. The divided positions held by the member countries have caused more harm than good. The United States has solidly shielded its economy though it still faces some challenges, such as a drastic decline in credit rating. The government of the US disregarded the warnings of the economic crisis which had widely spread in the Euro Zone. This caught the superpower nation off guard. However, the United States quickly enacted policies to solve this menace. Portugal, Spain, Ireland, and Ireland are some of the countries that bear the brunt of world’s economic recession. France has not escaped scathe free. It has had to struggle with her credit rating. This effect of recession has reduced the purchasing power of the European households (Lee 91). This is because the prices of essential commodities have skyrocketed. The United States and European household have counteracted the effects of recession by cutting down their spending in both cases. Some households in the United States responded differently from others. For instance, some increased their borrowing from banks. They anticipated the persistence of economic recession and, thus, they were not ready to suffer any further. The prices of houses increased substantially in the United States and this lead to doubling of households. European households experienced the same situation though with bigger magnitude than it was the case in the United States. Poverty index, under-employment, and unemployment rates increased. Many people lost their jobs in both Europe and the United States. This brought a lot of suffering to those who depended on these breadwinners. Those who had their savings exhausted them because the little they used the little they had to cater for the most basic needs (Mendelson 64). This disrupted the various lifestyles of household in both European countries and the United States. Globalization has had varying effects in the United States and European countries. Russia has been a big beneficiary in the European Union. This is because it is rich in energy resources and there is a huge market for its resources. This has translated to better lives and living conditions for its citizens. The United States has failed to embrace globalization. It fears that contribution of some members might be dismal. Though Britain forecast well on the impacts of recession on European Union, it did not escape the wrath of the outcomes of the recession. Positive and Negative Impacts of Globalization The supporters of anti-globalization perceive that the biggest negative effect of globalization is the creation of different social classes of people. The influx of foreign countries and ideologies will have negative effects on the cultural, political, and social settings of an individual nation. They continue to argue that globalization will create a big gap between the poor and the citizens. According to them, the three groups represent the poor, the middle class, and the ruler. The top class in this hierarchy is represented by the oppressors who are out to amass wealth and enrich their countries. This category is composed of the well educated and elite. They do not contribute positively to their societies. They leave them in desperate state to look for greener pastures elsewhere far away from their home countries. This is what many have called the brain drain. The repercussion of their action generates shortages in human resource. On the other hand, the proponents of globalization cite its positive impacts. According to this group, they believe that globalization is the only solution to bridge the evident gaps among different nations. According the only method to minimize the gaps is through harmonious sharing of information, technology, and expertise in different fields of specialization (Mendelson 113). The proponents believe that the marginalized countries need reinforcement of their weak sectors such as political, economic, and social sectors. This will help these countries to attain highest level of developments. Bulgaria has benefited a lot from the European Union. Its economy has been strengthened. The proponents of globalization propose the support of poor countries to achieve their long-term benefits but not to rely on speculations and assumption of their opponents. They state that the opponents have divided interest and their efforts will only energize the proponents’ campaigns for globalization (Lee 49). Management of globalization should be a matter of concern because of the fears expressed by opponents. Amicable solutions have to be sort before various countries embrace it. It is true that security, economic, and trade challenges might arise because of globalization. In my view, clear rules and guidelines should be set to regulate globalization. Furthermore, signing of international agreements and treaties will ensure that there is no exploitation of the wanting economies by the rich countries. Work Cited Lee, Kelly. Health impacts of globalization: towards global governance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. Print. Mendelson, Daniel, and Anthony Elliot. The Rutledge Companion to Social Theory. London: Taylor & Francis, 2010. Print. Read More