Globalization: Difference between revisions

Globalization (or globalisation) describes an ongoing process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through a globe-spanning network of communication and exchange. The term is sometimes used to refer specifically to economic globalization: the integration of national economies into the international economy through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, and the spread of technology.^[1] However, globalization is usually recognized as being driven by a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural, political, and biological factors.^[2] The term can also refer to the transnational circulation of ideas, languages, or popular culture.

An early description of globalization was penned by the American entrepreneur-turned-minister Charles Taze Russell who coined the term 'corporate giants' in 1897.^[3] However, it was not until the 1960s that the term began to be widely used by economists and other social scientists. It had achieved widespread use in the mainstream press by the later half of the 1980s. Since its inception, the concept of globalization has inspired numerous competing definitions and interpretations.^[4]

The United Nations ESCWA has written that globalization "is a widely-used term that can be defined in a number of different ways. When used in an economic context, it refers to the reduction and removal of barriers between national borders in order to facilitate the flow of goods, capital, services and labour... although considerable barriers remain to the flow of labour.... Globalization is not a new phenomenon. It began in the late nineteenth century, but its spread slowed during the period from the start of the First World War until the third quarter of the twentieth century. This slowdown can be attributed to the inwardlooking policies pursued by a number of countries in order to protect their respective industries.. however, the pace of globalization picked up rapidly during the fourth quarter of the twentieth century...."^[5]

Saskia Sassen writes that "a good part of globalization consists of an enormous variety of micro-processes that begin to denationalize what had been constructed as national — whether policies, capital, political subjectivities, urban spaces, temporal frames, or any other of a variety of dynamics and domains."^[6]

Tom G. Palmer of the Cato Institute defines globalization as "the diminution or elimination of state-enforced restrictions on exchanges across borders and the increasingly integrated and complex global system of production and exchange that has emerged as a result."^[7]

Thomas L. Friedman has examined the impact of the "flattening" of the world, and argues that globalized trade, outsourcing, supply-chaining, and political forces have changed the world permanently, for both better and worse. He also argues that the pace of globalization is quickening and will continue to have a growing impact on business organization and practice.^[8]

Ray Tapajna Chronicles forecasted our current global economic crisis years ago based on many experts like Sir James Goldsmith who wrote The Trap and led populist movements in both England and France; Manuel Castells who wrote several books about globalization and who predicted the coming of the "Bewildered New World" and more. These chronicles challenges Thomas Freidman's "flattening" of the world and Freidman's "flatteners" which he says are certain periods in history that changed the course of trade and economics. Freidman leaves out some very important parts of history with as the Lend Lease Act which ramped up the local value added economies that won World War 2. This created the most awesome industrial might the world has ever known. This industrial might supported the Marshall Plan which demonstrated how successful local value added economies could be duplicated across the world. This industrial might also supported the massive GI Bill that boosted a new educated middle class that never existed prior to its initiation. The economic models following World War 2 still represent the best models in history. See a review at http://tapsearch.com/flatworld and a demonstration of what our real "flatteners" were.

In addition, globalization has used what is calles free trade as its tool. However, free trade today is not trade as historically practiced and defined. It is primarily based on moving production from place to place anywhere in the world for the sake of cheaper labor. This process is never mentioned in any definitions relating to globalization. The main question of our times is this: Why did the U.S. Federal Government sponsor the moving of factories outside the USA starting in 1956 and why did this temporary program never end with the government augmenting new programs outside any democratic process including the maquiladora factory programs in Mexico. It is obvious that globalization and free trade did not evolve in any natural economic fashion and were driven by powerful forces in government, business, the media - e.g. Freidman's Flat World and in the academic world with the economists graduating from places like Harvard and Yale with a restrictive view of the global economy. Why did they foster making factories portable and caused the deflation of the value of work and workers itself. It was obvious then as it is now, it is impossible to compete in a global economy where the bottom line is impoverished workers and even child labor. Most definitions related to globalization and free trade do not include any of this process that was driven by elite forces outside the will of the people. See http://tapsearch.com/tapartnews http://tapsearch.com/globalization and http://linkbun.ch/aztb as further resources.

Noam Chomsky argues that the word globalization is also used, in a doctrinal sense, to describe the neoliberal form of economic globalization.^[11]

Herman E. Daly argues that sometimes the terms internationalization and globalization are used interchangeably but there is a significant formal difference. The term "internationalization" (or internationalisation) refers to the importance of international trade, relations, treaties etc. owing to the (hypothetical) immobility of labor and capital between or among nations. ^{[citation needed]}

Adrián Ravier of the Hayek Foundation summarize the globalization as such the process that arises spontaneously in the market and acts by developing a progressive international division of labour, eliminating restrictions on individual liberties, reducing transportation and communication costs, and increasingly integrating the individuals that compose the “great society.” ^[12]

Finally, Takis Fotopoulos argues that globalisation is the result of systemic trends manifesting the market economy’s grow-or-die dynamic, following the rapid expansion of transnational corporations. Because these trends have not been offset effectively by counter-tendencies that could have emanated from trade-union action and other forms of political activity, the outcome has been globalisation. This is a multi-faceted and irreversible phenomenon within the system of the market economy and it is expressed as: economic globalisation, namely, the opening and deregulation of commodity, capital and labour markets which led to the present form of neoliberal globalisation; political globalisation, i.e., the emergence of a transnational elite and the phasing out of the all powerful-nation state of the statist period; cultural globalisation, i.e., the worldwide homogenisation of culture; ideological globalisation; technological globalisation; social globalisation.^[13]

The historical origins of globalization are the subject of on-going debate. Though some scholars situate the origins of globalization in the modern era, others regard it as a phenomenon with a long history.

Perhaps the most extreme proponent of a deep historical origin for globalization was Andre Gunder Frank, an economist associated with dependency theory. Frank argued that a form of globalization has been in existence since the rise of trade links between Sumer and the Indus Valley Civilization in the third millenium B.C.^[14] Critics of this idea point out that it rests upon an overly-broad definition of globalization.

Others have perceived an early form of globalization in the trade links between the Roman Empire, the Parthian Empire, and the Han Dynasty. The increasing articulation of commercial links between these powers inspired the development of the Silk Road, which started in western China, reached the boundaries of the Parthian empire, and continued onwards towards Rome. ^{[citation needed]}

The Islamic Golden Age was also an important early stage of globalization, when Muslim traders and explorers established a sustained economy across the Old World resulting in a globalization of crops, trade, knowledge and technology. Globally significant crops such as sugar and cotton became widely cultivated across the Muslim world in this period, while the necessity of learning Arabic and completing the Hajj created a cosmopolitan culture.^[15]

The advent of the Mongol Empire, though destabilizing to the commercial centers of the Middle East and China, greatly facilitated travel along the Silk Road. This permitted travelers and missionaries such as Marco Polo to journey successfully (and profitably) from one end of Eurasia to the other. The so-called Pax Mongolica of the twelfth century had several other notable globalizing effects. It witnessed the creation of the first international postal service, as well as the rapid transmission of epidemic diseases such as bubonic plague across the newly-unified regions of Central Asia.^[16] These pre-modern phases of global or hemispheric exchange are sometimes known as archaic globalization.

Up to the Age of Discovery, however, even the largest systems of international exchange were limited to the Old World. The sixteenth century represented a qualitative change in the patterns of globalization because it was the first period in which the New World began to engage in substantial cultural, material and biologic exchange with Africa and Eurasia. New sea routes initiated the sustained contact and trade between most of the world's inhabited regions^[17], having a tremendous impact on cultures, particularly indigenous cultures, around the world. This phase is sometimes known as proto-globalization. It was characterized by the rise of maritime European empires, first the Portuguese and Spanish Empires, and later the Dutch and British Empires. It begun shortly before the turn of the 16th century, when the two Kingdoms of the Iberian Peninsula - the Kingdom of Portugal and the Kingdom of Castile, sent the first exploratory voyages around the Horn of Africa and to the Americas.

Starting in the late 15th century, Portuguese established the first European trading posts (factories) in other continents, from Africa to Asia and Brazil, to deal with the trade of local products like gold, spices and timber, fixing the prices and introducing also international business centers under a royal monopoly, first the House of Guinea and then House of India^[18] 1482-1503. Global integration continued through the expansion of trade in the 16th and 17th centuries, when the Portuguese and Spanish empires colonized the Americas, followed eventually by France and England.

In the 17th century, globalization became also a private business phenomenon when chartered companies like British East India Company (founded in 1600), which is often described as the first multinational corporation, was established, as well as the Dutch East India Company (founded in 1602) and the Portuguese East India Company (founded in 1628). Because of the large investment and financing needs and the high risks involved with international trade, the British East India Company became the first company in the world to share risk and enable joint ownership of companies through the issuance of shares of stock: an important driver for globalization.^{[citation needed]}

The 19th century witnessed the advent of globalization in something approaching its modern form. Industrialization allowed the cheap production of household items using economies of scale, while rapid population growth created sustained demand for commodities and manufactures. Globalization in this period was decisively shaped by nineteenth-century imperialism. After the Opium Wars and the completion of the British conquest of India, the vast populations of these regions became ready consumers of European exports. Meanwhile, the conquest of new parts of the globe, notably sub-Saharan Africa, by the European powers yielded valuable natural resources such as rubber, diamonds and coal and helped fuel trade and investment between the European imperial powers, their colonies, and the United States.^{[citation needed]}

It was in this period that areas of sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific islands were incorporated into the world system. The first phase of "modern globalization" began to break down at the beginning of the 20th century with the first World War. Said John Maynard Keynes^[19],

The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea, the various products of the whole earth, and reasonably expect their early delivery upon his doorstep. Militarism and imperialism of racial and cultural rivalries were little more than the amusements of his daily newspaper. What an extraordinary episode in the economic progress of man was that age which came to an end in August 1914.

The novelist VM Yeates criticised the financial forces of globalisation as a factor in creating World War I.^[20]

The final death knell for this phase of globalization came during the gold standard crisis and Great Depression in the late 1920s and early 1930s. ^{[citation needed]}

Globalization in the middle decades of the twentieth century was largely driven by the global expansion of multinational corporations based in the United States and the worldwide export of American culture through the new media of film, television and recorded music.

In late 2000s, much of the industrialized world entered into a deep recession.^[21] Some analysts say the world is going through a period of deglobalization after years of increasing economic integration.^[22][23] Up to 45% of global wealth had been destroyed by the global financial crisis in little less than a year and a half.^[24]

Globalization, since World War II, is largely the result of planning by politicians to break down borders hampering trade to increase prosperity and interdependence thereby decreasing the chance of future war^{[citation needed]}. Their work led to the Bretton Woods conference, an agreement by the world's leading politicians to lay down the framework for international commerce and finance, and the founding of several international institutions intended to oversee the processes of globalization.

These institutions include the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank), and the International Monetary Fund. Globalization has been facilitated by advances in technology which have reduced the costs of trade, and trade negotiation rounds, originally under the auspices of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which led to a series of agreements to remove restrictions on free trade.

Since World War II, barriers to international trade have been considerably lowered through international agreements — GATT. Particular initiatives carried out as a result of GATT and the World Trade Organization (WTO), for which GATT is the foundation, have included:

• Promotion of free trade:
  • elimination of tariffs; creation of free trade zones with small or no tariffs
  • Reduced transportation costs, especially resulting from development of containerization for ocean shipping.
  • Reduction or elimination of capital controls
  • Reduction, elimination, or harmonization of subsidies for local businesses
  • Creation of subsidies for global corporations
  • Harmonization of intellectual property laws across the majority of states, with more restrictions
  • Supranational recognition of intellectual property restrictions (e.g. patents granted by China would be recognized in the United States)

Cultural globalization, driven by communication technology and the worldwide marketing of Western cultural industries, was understood at first as a process of homogenization, as the global domination of American culture at the expense of traditional diversity. However, a contrasting trend soon became evident in the emergence of movements protesting against globalization and giving new momentum to the defense of local uniqueness, individuality, and identity, but largely without success.^[25]

The Uruguay Round (1986 to 1994)^[26] led to a treaty to create the WTO to mediate trade disputes and set up a uniform platform of trading. Other bilateral and multilateral trade agreements, including sections of Europe's Maastricht Treaty and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have also been signed in pursuit of the goal of reducing tariffs and barriers to trade.

World exports rose from 8.5% in 1970, to 16.1% of total gross world product in 2001.^[27] (broken lnk) ^{[citation needed]}

Looking specifically at economic globalization, demonstrates that it can be measured in different ways. These center around the four main economic flows that characterize globalization:

• Goods and services, e.g., exports plus imports as a proportion of national income or per capita of population
• Labor/people, e.g., net migration rates; inward or outward migration flows, weighted by population
• Capital, e.g., inward or outward direct investment as a proportion of national income or per head of population
• Technology, e.g., international research & development flows; proportion of populations (and rates of change thereof) using particular inventions (especially 'factor-neutral' technological advances such as the telephone, motorcar, broadband)

As globalization is not only an economic phenomenon, a multivariate approach to measuring globalization is the recent index calculated by the Swiss think tank KOF. The index measures the three main dimensions of globalization: economic, social, and political. In addition to three indices measuring these dimensions, an overall index of globalization and sub-indices referring to actual economic flows, economic restrictions, data on personal contact, data on information flows, and data on cultural proximity is calculated. Data is available on a yearly basis for 122 countries, as detailed in Dreher, Gaston and Martens (2008).^[28] According to the index, the world's most globalized country is Belgium, followed by Austria, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The least globalized countries according to the KOF-index are Haiti, Myanmar, the Central African Republic and Burundi.^[29]

A.T. Kearney and Foreign Policy Magazine jointly publish another Globalization Index. According to the 2006 index, Singapore, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada and Denmark are the most globalized, while Indonesia, India and Iran are the least globalized among countries listed.

Globalization has various aspects which affect the world in several different ways such as:

• Industrial - emergence of worldwide production markets and broader access to a range of foreign products for consumers and companies. Particularly movement of material and goods between and within national boundaries.^{[citation needed]}
• Financial - emergence of worldwide financial markets and better access to external financing for borrowers. As these worldwide structures grew more quickly than any transnational regulatory regime, the instability of the global financial infrastructure dramatically increased, as evidenced by the financial crises of late 2008.^{[citation needed]}

• Economic - realization of a global common market, based on the freedom of exchange of goods and capital. The interconnectedness of these markets, however meant that an economic collapse in any one given country could not be contained.^{[citation needed]}
• Political - some use "globalization" to mean the creation of a world government which regulates the relationships among governments and guarantees the rights arising from social and economic globalization.^[33] Politically, the United States has enjoyed a position of power among the world powers, in part because of its strong and wealthy economy. With the influence of globalization and with the help of The United States’ own economy, the People's Republic of China has experienced some tremendous growth within the past decade. If China continues to grow at the rate projected by the trends, then it is very likely that in the next twenty years, there will be a major reallocation of power among the world leaders. China will have enough wealth, industry, and technology to rival the United States for the position of leading world power.^[34]
• Informational - increase in information flows between geographically remote locations. Arguably this is a technological change with the advent of fibre optic communications, satellites, and increased availability of telephone and Internet.
• Language - the most popular language is Mandarin (845 million speakers) followed by Spanish (329 million speakers) and English (328 million speakers).^[35]
  • About 35% of the world's mail, telexes, and cables are in English.
  • Approximately 40% of the world's radio programs are in English.
  • About 50% of all Internet traffic uses English.^[36]
• Competition - Survival in the new global business market calls for improved productivity and increased competition. Due to the market becoming worldwide, companies in various industries have to upgrade their products and use technology skillfully in order to face increased competition.^[37]
• Ecological - the advent of global environmental challenges that might be solved with international cooperation, such as climate change, cross-boundary water and air pollution, over-fishing of the ocean, and the spread of invasive species. Since many factories are built in developing countries with less environmental regulation, globalism and free trade may increase pollution. On the other hand, economic development historically required a "dirty" industrial stage, and it is argued that developing countries should not, via regulation, be prohibited from increasing their standard of living.

• Cultural - growth of cross-cultural contacts; advent of new categories of consciousness and identities which embodies cultural diffusion, the desire to increase one's standard of living and enjoy foreign products and ideas, adopt new technology and practices, and participate in a "world culture". Some bemoan the resulting consumerism and loss of languages. Also see Transformation of culture.
  • Spreading of multiculturalism, and better individual access to cultural diversity (e.g. through the export of Hollywood and Bollywood movies). Some consider such "imported" culture a danger, since it may supplant the local culture, causing reduction in diversity or even assimilation. Others consider multiculturalism to promote peace and understanding between peoples.
  • Greater international travel and tourism. WHO estimates that up to 500,000 people are on planes at any one time.^[38]
  • Greater immigration, including illegal immigration
  • Spread of local consumer products (e.g., food) to other countries (often adapted to their culture).
  • Worldwide fads and pop culture such as Pokémon, Sudoku, Numa Numa, Origami, Idol series, YouTube, Orkut, Facebook, and MySpace. Accessible to those who have Internet or Television, leaving out a substantial segment of the Earth's population.
  • Worldwide sporting events such as FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games.
  • Incorporation of multinational corporations in to new media. As the sponsors of the All-Blacks rugby team, Adidas had created a parallel website with a downloadable interactive rugby game for its fans to play and compete.^[39]
• Social - development of the system of non-governmental organisations as main agents of global public policy, including humanitarian aid and developmental efforts.^[40]
• Technical
  • Development of a Global Information System, global telecommunications infrastructure and greater transborder data flow, using such technologies as the Internet, communication satellites, submarine fiber optic cable, and wireless telephones
  • Increase in the number of standards applied globally; e.g., copyright laws, patents and world trade agreements.
• Legal/Ethical
  • The creation of the international criminal court and international justice movements.
  • Crime importation and raising awareness of global crime-fighting efforts and cooperation.
  • The emergence of Global administrative law.
• Religious
  • The spread and increased interrelations of various religious groups, ideas, and practices and their ideas of the meanings and values of particular spaces.^[41]

Culture is defined as patterns of human activity and the symbols that give these activities significance. Culture is what people eat, how they dress, beliefs they hold, and activities they practice. Globalization has joined different cultures and made it into something different. As Erla Zwingle, from the National Geographic article titled “Globalization” states, “When cultures receive outside influences, they ignore some and adopt others, and then almost immediately start to transform them.”^[42]

One classic culture aspect is food. Someone in America can be eating Japanese noodles for lunch while someone in Sydney, Australia is eating classic Italian meatballs. India is known for its curry and exotic spices. France is known for its cheeses. America is known for its burgers and fries. McDonalds is an American company which is now a global enterprise with 31,000 locations worldwide. Those locations include Kuwait, Egypt, and Malta. This company is just one example of food going big on the global scale.

Meditation has been a sacred practice for centuries in Indian culture. It calms the body and helps one connect to their inner being while shying away from their conditioned self. Before globalization, Americans did not meditate or practice yoga. After globalization, this is more common. Some people are even traveling to India to get the full experience themselves.

Another common practice brought about by globalization is Chinese symbol tattoos. These tattoos are popular with today’s younger generation despite the fact that, in China, tattoos are not thought of as cool^[43]. Also, the Westerners who get these tattoos often don't know what they mean,^[44] making this an example of cultural appropriation.

The internet breaks down cultural boundaries across the world by enabling easy, near-instantaneous communication between people anywhere in a variety of digital forms and media. The Internet is associated with the process of cultural globalization because it allows interaction and communication between people with very different lifestyles and from very different cultures. Photo sharing websites allow interaction even where language would otherwise be a barrier.

Globalization has been one of the most hotly debated topics in international economics over the past few years. Globalization has also generated significant international opposition over concerns that it has increased inequality and environmental degradation.^[45] In the Midwestern United States, globalization has eaten away at its competitive edge in industry and agriculture, lowering the quality of life in locations that have not adapted to the change.^[46]

It can be said that globalization is the door that opens up an otherwise resource-poor country to the international market. Where a country has little material or physical product harvested or mined from its own soil, large corporations see an opportunity to take advantage of the “export poverty” of such a nation. Where the majority of the earliest occurrences of economic globalization are recorded as being the expansion of businesses and corporate growth, in many poorer nations globalization is actually the result of the foreign businesses investing in the country to take advantage of the lower wage rate: even though investing, by increasing the Capital Stock of the country, increases their wage rate.

One example used by anti-globalization protestors is the use of sweatshops by manufacturers. According to Global Exchange these “Sweat Shops” are widely used by sports shoe manufacturers and mentions one company in particular – Nike.^[47] There are factories set up in the poor countries where employees agree to work for low wages. Then if labour laws alter in those countries and stricter rules govern the manufacturing process the factories are closed down and relocated to other nations with more conservative, laissez-faire economic policies.^{[citation needed]}

There are several agencies that have been set up worldwide specifically designed to focus on anti-sweatshop campaigns and education of such. In the USA, the National Labor Committee has proposed a number of bills as part of the The Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act, which have thus far failed in Congress. The legislation would legally require companies to respect human and worker rights by prohibiting the import, sale, or export of sweatshop goods.^[48]

Specifically, these core standards include no child labor, no forced labor, freedom of association, right to organize and bargain collectively, as well as the right to decent working conditions.^[49]

Tiziana Terranova has stated that globalization has brought a culture of "free labour". In a digital sense, it is where the individuals (contributing capital) exploits and eventually "exhausts the means through which labour can sustain itself". For example, in the area of digital media (animations, hosting chat rooms, designing games), where it is often less glamourous than it may sound. In the gaming industry, a Chinese Gold Market has been established.^[50]

Supporters of free trade claim that it increases economic prosperity as well as opportunity, especially among developing nations, enhances civil liberties and leads to a more efficient allocation of resources. Economic theories of comparative advantage suggest that free trade leads to a more efficient allocation of resources, with all countries involved in the trade benefiting. In general, this leads to lower prices, more employment, higher output and a higher standard of living for those in developing countries.^[51][52]

Dr. Francesco Stipo, Director of the USA Club of Rome suggests that “the world government should reflect the political and economic balances of world nations. A world confederation would not supersede the authority of the State governments but rather complement it, as both the States and the world authority would have power within their sphere of competence".^[53]

Proponents of laissez-faire capitalism, and some libertarians, say that higher degrees of political and economic freedom in the form of democracy and capitalism in the developed world are ends in themselves and also produce higher levels of material wealth. They see globalization as the beneficial spread of liberty and capitalism.^[51]

Supporters of democratic globalization are sometimes called pro-globalists. They believe that the first phase of globalization, which was market-oriented, should be followed by a phase of building global political institutions representing the will of world citizens. The difference from other globalists is that they do not define in advance any ideology to orient this will, but would leave it to the free choice of those citizens via a democratic process ^{[citation needed]}.

Some, such as former Canadian Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., simply view globalization as inevitable and advocate creating institutions such as a directly-elected United Nations Parliamentary Assembly to exercise oversight over unelected international bodies.

The "anti-globalization movement" is a term used to describe the political group who oppose the neoliberal version of globalization, while criticisms of globalization are some of the reasons used to justify this group's stance.

"Anti-globalization" may also involve the process or actions taken by a state in order to demonstrate its sovereignty and practice democratic decision-making. Anti-globalization may occur in order to maintain barriers to the international transfer of people, goods and beliefs, particularly free market deregulation, encouraged by organizations such as the International Monetary Fund or the World Trade Organization. Moreover, as Naomi Klein argues in her book No Logo anti-globalism can denote either a single social movement or an umbrella term that encompasses a number of separate social movements ^[54] such as nationalists and socialists. In either case, participants stand in opposition to the unregulated political power of large, multi-national corporations, as the corporations exercise power through leveraging trade agreements which in some instances damage the democratic rights of citizens^{[citation needed]}, the environment particularly air quality index and rain forests^{[citation needed]}, as well as national government's sovereignty to determine labor rights,^{[citation needed]} including the right to form a union, and health and safety legislation, or laws as they may otherwise infringe on cultural practices and traditions of developing countries.^{[citation needed]}

Some people who are labeled "anti-globalist" or "sceptics" (Hirst and Thompson)^[55] consider the term to be too vague and inaccurate ^[56][57]. Podobnik states that "the vast majority of groups that participate in these protests draw on international networks of support, and they generally call for forms of globalization that enhance democratic representation, human rights, and egalitarianism."

Joseph Stiglitz and Andrew Charlton write^[58]:

The anti-globalization movement developed in opposition to the perceived negative aspects of globalization. The term 'anti-globalization' is in many ways a misnomer, since the group represents a wide range of interests and issues and many of the people involved in the anti-globalization movement do support closer ties between the various peoples and cultures of the world through, for example, aid, assistance for refugees, and global environmental issues.

Some members aligned with this viewpoint prefer instead to describe themselves as the "Global Justice Movement", the "Anti-Corporate-Globalization Movement", the "Movement of Movements" (a popular term in Italy), the "Alter-globalization" movement (popular in France), the "Counter-Globalization" movement, and a number of other terms.

Critiques of the current wave of economic globalization typically look at both the damage to the planet, in terms of the perceived unsustainable harm done to the biosphere, as well as the perceived human costs, such as poverty, inequality, miscegenation, injustice and the erosion of traditional culture which, the critics contend, all occur as a result of the economic transformations related to globalization. They challenge directly the metrics, such as GDP, used to measure progress promulgated by institutions such as the World Bank, and look to other measures, such as the Happy Planet Index,^[59] created by the New Economics Foundation^[60]. They point to a "multitude of interconnected fatal consequences--social disintegration, a breakdown of democracy, more rapid and extensive deterioration of the environment, the spread of new diseases, increasing poverty and alienation"^[61] which they claim are the unintended but very real consequences of globalization.

The terms globalization and anti-globalization are used in various ways. Noam Chomsky believes that^[62][63]

The term "globalization" has been appropriated by the powerful to refer to a specific form of international economic integration, one based on investor rights, with the interests of people incidental. That is why the business press, in its more honest moments, refers to the "free trade agreements" as "free investment agreements" (Wall St. Journal). Accordingly, advocates of other forms of globalization are described as "anti-globalization"; and some, unfortunately, even accept this term, though it is a term of propaganda that should be dismissed with ridicule. No sane person is opposed to globalization, that is, international integration. Surely not the left and the workers movements, which were founded on the principle of international solidarity — that is, globalization in a form that attends to the rights of people, not private power systems.

The dominant propaganda systems have appropriated the term "globalization" to refer to the specific version of international economic integration that they favor, which privileges the rights of investors and lenders, those of people being incidental. In accord with this usage, those who favor a different form of international integration, which privileges the rights of human beings, become "anti-globalist." This is simply vulgar propaganda, like the term "anti-Soviet" used by the most disgusting commissars to refer to dissidents. It is not only vulgar, but idiotic. Take the World Social Forum, called "anti-globalization" in the propaganda system -- which happens to include the media, the educated classes, etc., with rare exceptions. The WSF is a paradigm example of globalization. It is a gathering of huge numbers of people from all over the world, from just about every corner of life one can think of, apart from the extremely narrow highly privileged elites who meet at the competing World Economic Forum, and are called "pro-globalization" by the propaganda system. An observer watching this farce from Mars would collapse in hysterical laughter at the antics of the educated classes.

Critics argue that:

• Poorer countries suffering disadvantages: While it is true that globalization encourages free trade among countries, there are also negative consequences because some countries try to save their national markets. The main export of poorer countries is usually agricultural goods. Larger countries often subsidise their farmers (like the EU Common Agricultural Policy), which lowers the market price for the poor farmer's crops compared to what it would be under free trade.^[64]
• Exploitation of foreign impoverished workers: The deterioration of protections for weaker nations by stronger industrialized powers has resulted in the exploitation of the people in those nations to become cheap labor. Due to the lack of protections, companies from powerful industrialized nations are able to offer workers enough salary to entice them to endure extremely long hours and unsafe working conditions, though economists question if consenting workers in a competitive employers' market can be decried as "exploited". It is true that the workers are free to leave their jobs, but in many poorer countries, this would mean starvation for the worker, and possible even his/her family if their previous jobs were unavailable.^[65]
• The shift to outsourcing: The low cost of offshore workers have enticed corporations to buy goods and services from foreign countries. The laid off manufacturing sector workers are forced into the service sector where wages and benefits are low, but turnover is high .^{[citation needed]} This has contributed to the deterioration of the middle class ^{[citation needed]} which is a major factor in the increasing economic inequality in the United States .^{[citation needed]} Families that were once part of the middle class are forced into lower positions by massive layoffs and outsourcing to another country. This also means that people in the lower class have a much harder time climbing out of poverty because of the absence of the middle class as a stepping stone.^[66]
• Weak labor unions: The surplus in cheap labor coupled with an ever growing number of companies in transition has caused a weakening of labor unions in the United States. Unions lose their effectiveness when their membership begins to decline. As a result unions hold less power over corporations that are able to easily replace workers, often for lower wages, and have the option to not offer unionized jobs anymore.^[64]
• Increase exploitation of child labor: for example, a country that experiencing increases in labor demand because of globalization and an increase the demand for goods produced by children, will experience greater a demand for child labor. This can be "hazardous" or “exploitive”, e.g., quarrying, salvage, cash cropping but also includes the trafficking of children, children in bondage or forced labor, prostitution, pornography and other illicit activities.^[67]

In December 2007, World Bank economist Branko Milanovic has called much previous empirical research on global poverty and inequality into question because, according to him, improved estimates of purchasing power parity indicate that developing countries are worse off than previously believed. Milanovic remarks that "literally hundreds of scholarly papers on convergence or divergence of countries’ incomes have been published in the last decade based on what we know now were faulty numbers." With the new data, possibly economists will revise calculations, and he also believed that there are considerable implications estimates of global inequality and poverty levels. Global inequality was estimated at around 65 Gini points, whereas the new numbers indicate global inequality to be at 70 on the Gini scale.^[68] It is unsurprising that the level of international inequality is so high, as larger sample spaces almost always give a higher level of inequality.

The critics of globalization typically emphasize that globalization is a process that is mediated according to corporate interests, and typically raise the possibility of alternative global institutions and policies, which they believe address the moral claims of poor and working classes throughout the globe, as well as environmental concerns in a more equitable way.^[69]

The movement is very broad^{[citation needed]}, including church groups, national liberation factions, peasant unionists, intellectuals, artists, protectionists, anarchists, those in support of relocalization and others. Some are reformist, (arguing for a more moderate form of capitalism) while others are more revolutionary (arguing for what they believe is a more humane system than capitalism) and others are reactionary, believing globalization destroys national industry and jobs.

One of the key points made by critics of recent economic globalization is that income inequality, both between and within nations, is increasing as a result of these processes. One article from 2001 found that significantly, in 7 out of 8 metrics, income inequality has increased in the twenty years ending 2001. Also, "incomes in the lower deciles of world income distribution have probably fallen absolutely since the 1980s". Furthermore, the World Bank's figures on absolute poverty were challenged. The article was skeptical of the World Bank's claim that the number of people living on less than $1 a day has held steady at 1.2 billion from 1987 to 1998, because of biased methodology.^[70]

A chart that gave the inequality a very visible and comprehensible form, the so-called 'champagne glass' effect,^[71] was contained in the 1992 United Nations Development Program Report, which showed the distribution of global income to be very uneven, with the richest 20% of the world's population controlling 82.7% of the world's income.^[72]

Source: United Nations Development Program. 1992 Human Development Report^[73]

Economic arguments by fair trade theorists claim that unrestricted free trade benefits those with more financial leverage (i.e. the rich) at the expense of the poor.^[74]

Americanization related to a period of high political American clout and of significant growth of America's shops, markets and object being brought into other countries. So globalization, a much more diversified phenomenon, relates to a multilateral political world and to the increase of objects, markets and so on into each others countries.

Critics of globalization talk of Westernization. A 2005 UNESCO report^[75] showed that cultural exchange is becoming more frequent from Eastern Asia but . In 2002, China was the third largest exporter of cultural goods, after the UK and US. Between 1994 and 2002, both North America's and the European Union's shares of cultural exports declined, while Asia's cultural exports grew to surpass North America. Related factors are the fact that Asia's population and area are several times that of North America.

Some opponents of globalization see the phenomenon as the promotion of corporatist interests.^[76] They also claim that the increasing autonomy and strength of corporate entities shapes the political policy of countries.^[77][78]

See main articles: European Social Forum, the Asian Social Forum,(Africa Social Forum), World Social Forum (WSF).

The first WSF in 2001 was an initiative of the administration of Porto Alegre in Brazil. The slogan of the World Social Forum was "Another World Is Possible". It was here that the WSF's Charter of Principles was adopted to provide a framework for the forums.

The WSF became a periodic meeting: in 2002 and 2003 it was held again in Porto Alegre and became a rallying point for worldwide protest against the American invasion of Iraq. In 2004 it was moved to Mumbai (formerly known as Bombay, in India), to make it more accessible to the populations of Asia and Africa. This last appointment saw the participation of 75,000 delegates.

In the meantime, regional forums took place following the example of the WSF, adopting its Charter of Principles. The first European Social Forum (ESF) was held in November 2002 in Florence. The slogan was "Against the war, against racism and against neo-liberalism". It saw the participation of 60,000 delegates and ended with a huge demonstration against the war (1,000,000 people according to the organizers). The other two ESFs took place in Paris and London, in 2003 and 2004 respectively.

Recently there has been some discussion behind the movement about the role of the social forums. Some see them as a "popular university", an occasion to make many people aware of the problems of globalization. Others would prefer that delegates concentrate their efforts on the coordination and organization of the movement and on the planning of new campaigns. However it has often been argued that in the dominated countries (most of the world) the WSF is little more than an 'NGO fair' driven by Northern NGOs and donors most of which are hostile to popular movements of the poor.^[79]

This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive or inappropriate external links, and converting useful links where appropriate into footnote references. (June 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Wikiquote has quotations related to Globalization.

Look up globalisation or globalization in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Globalization.

• Latin Business Chronicle, Dec.10, 2008 Latin America More Globalized
• Argentine Center of International Studies
• Arno Tausch (2006), ‘From the “Washington” towards a “Vienna Consensus”? A quantitative analysis on globalization, development and global governance’. Paper, prepared for the discussion process leading up to the EU-Latin America and Caribbean Summit 2006, May 11, 2006 to May 12, 2006, Vienna, Austria. Centro Argentino de Estudios Internacionales, Buenos Aires
• Arno Tausch (2007), ‘“Destructive Creation”? Some long-term Schumpeterian reflections on the Lisbon process’ Entelequia e-Books, University of Cadiz/Malaga (Spain), Munich Personal Repec Archive, Global Development Network, University of Sussex and University of Connecticut, Ideas/Repec
• Effects of globalization on online freelancers
• Embracing the Challenge of Free Trade: Competing and Prospering in a Global Economy a speech by Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke
• Globalisation shakes the world BBC News
• Inequality Project from University of Texas
• Institute for Research on World-Systems at UC Riverside
• Resilience, Panarchy, and World-Systems Analysis from the Ecology and Society Journal
• Rethinking Globalisation blog
• OECD Globalization statistics
• Globalization theories
• The Sociology of Globalization
• Mapping Globalization — globalization project with a collection of maps
• Globalization and Me Views and viewpoints on Globalization
• Globalism/Antiglobalism : a survey and a view

• CBC Archives CBC Television reports on the opening of Moscow McDonalds (1990) - sample of Western business expanding into former communist countries.
• Squeezed: The Cost of Free Trade in the Asia-Pacific 2007 film about the impacts of globalisation in Thailand and the Philippines.

Template:Link FA Template:Link FA