Proponents also believe that globalization will stimulate the spread of democracy and in turn improve the condition of human rights so intrinsic to the values of democracy. Critics of globalization see globalization quite differently, portraying it as worldwide push toward a globalized economic system under the control of global corporate trade and banking institutions that are not responsible to the democratic system or governments. Many questions surround globalization. What are the costs and benefits of free trade? Does globalization exacerbate global inequality?
Instead, the potential of globalization must be acknowledged, though one must take into account the negative impact it has had on the world and look for ways in which it can be improved as argued by Joseph Stiglitz. On the one hand, Philippe Legrain claims in the book Open World: The Truth About Globalization that globalization is not just about the increased ease of transportation of resources and capital, but rather about increasing knowledge and technology, lowering costs, increasing trade, and bringing new opportunities and jobs to both the developed and developing world. Nevertheless, with the United States as the hegemonic power of the past century, it has often implicated what Stiglitz calls American Unilateralism, which claims to be spreading ideas of democracy and the American Dream, while imposing policies that undermine it. The Unit... ... middle of paper ... ...ed to the promotion of tyrannical governments and the reduction of social welfare programs. In order to mitigate these negative consequences of the profit making ideology, global governance and treaties that aim at helping developing countries advance without undermining their democratic principles are needed.
The economic liberalization of trade globalization can reduce resource wars and civil wars influenced by natural resources. Integration would generate state interdependence preventing the risk of conflict between trading states. Independent states in the past have shown to be unstable and have been the political and economic causes of war on a global scale. Economic globalization and economic integration produces a neoliberal market, interdependent states, and stable governments reducing the probability of conflict and war. Neoliberalism opens the global market for freedom of exchange limiting government intervention preventing the government from gaining capital from corrupt means, such high taxation rates on foreign goods so that the demand for domestic goods increase leading to economic growth.
The outcomes of international trade are explained throughout this essay. Also, this essay identified how monopolies in a domestic market respond to foreign competition and how they must adapt to such situations. The measures taken by government to prevent and control foreign competition are briefly explained and as to how these can work to hinder domestic markets from competition. The positive, short-term effects of trade protectionism are increased government revenue, prevention of ‘dumping’ and an increase in domestic production. Although, the long-term effects of such actions are often the opposite to the original idea of protectionism and could lead a country to economic stagnation.
While free trade gives opportunities to large industries and wealthy corporate investors the American worker suffers job instability and lower wages. However fair trade policies that protect America’s workers do not help foster wide economic growth. The United States must then engage in economic trade policies that both protect the United States founding principles and secure for tomorrow greater economic stability. The United States free trade agenda includes policies that seek to eliminate all restrictions and quotas on trade. The advantages of free trade can be seen through domestic markets and the growth of the world economy.
In this essay I will discuss Globalization ruining the integrity of many countries and also is forcing many undeveloped nations into a bind, and is causing economic distress on some developed nations. Also, due to economic globalization the nations of the world are diluting their culture, sovereignty, natural resources, safety and political system. My goal is not to change your way of thought, but only to enlighten you of the negatives of global economic expansion. Now, before I bash globalization it is some positive I would like to discuss. Globalization is great for the American economy; we can supply the world with our goods and services, which in turn can possible, relieve the deficit we’re in.
Early empires were thriving on globalizing their countries by creating routes and trails to communicate and transport goods. Globalization has expanded boundaries for 3rd world nations who were underdeveloped to become more civilized in their governance. To understand further where globalization spreads its roots, we must go deeper into the fundamentals of free trade, the free flow of capital and advantage taken of foreign labor markets. First off, free trade has barriers from one another at different levels. In running our personal affairs, virtually all of us exploit the advantages of free trade and comparative advantage without thinking twice (Blinder).
While globalization deepens mutual dependence and further promotes this era’s trend toward peace and development, its nature of imbalance has led to the rise of power politics in the same period, complicating the process of multipolarization. The acceleration of globalization has continually deepened mutual dependence and mutual penetration among countries in various areas, including the economic realm, and increased common interests. In competitive and frictional relations among big powers, cooperation and interaction have appeared. The ability of a single country to unilaterally settle and dominate international affairs has declined. Any country that willfully employs foreign interference, sanctions and war to undermine the interests of other countries will always find itself threatened.
One of the main arguments against globalization is that large corporations take advantage of poorer nations. Opponents argue that corporations take advantage of the labor force by giving them unfair working conditions as well as having a disregard for the environment (“Economist” 2001). While this may have been the case in the past most multinational corporations are working to clean up their practices in developing countries. Regardless of the way that the standard of living is measured, there is clear evidence that economies that adopt free trade policies outperform their counterparts that maintain protective trade barriers. This economic performance has lead to clear increases in the standard of living in these countries, providing clear examples that free trade can be used to help underdeveloped economies catch up to more developed nations.
The former advocate market de-regulation as contributing to international wealth, inferring, if executed correctly, impoverished nations will benefit creating choice, communicative cohesion and promoting Westernisation as a ‘good thing’, Arguably the latter intimate the widening of the social gap between the haves and the have not’s due to capitalist exploitation. According to Steger (2009) globalisation has four key affirmations. Firstly, globalisation considers developing new social connections, widening current enterprise, considering political, economic and cultural relationships. For example, politically cohesive organisations such as NATO or the European Union have worldwide representation, affecting political decisions not only at a locally or nationally, but globally. Secondly... ... middle of paper ... ...n, C., 2008.