As we progress into the future, the reality of globalisation comes nearer especially in the aspect of economics. It is said to benefit everyone including the wealthy but, is that necessarily true? If economic globalisation occurs then cultural, political and technological globalisation will follow.
What religion would we all have to be in? What political system do we have to be under? What about those people who are uneducated or not very educated, with little knowledge of technology?If everything were to become globalised there would be no individualism, no identity and no nationalism. There would be no you! Globalisation must be stopped. I am sure that you know that globalisation can be defined in many terms. Many see it as a primarily economic aspect, “as the growing of national economies to form a single economy”.
Economics for the Real World: 2, Cronk, T. Kirkwood, L. Searle, I. Swiericzuk.
page 406 However, it can also be pointed out to be a rapid increase in cross-border social, cultural and technological exchange.Globalisation also has been defined by critics of globalisation, present it as a worldwide drive toward a globalised economic system dominated by supranational corporate trade and barking institutions that are not accountable to democratic processes or nation governments. Globalisation is an undeniably capitalist process. Basically globalisation is the rapid increase in cross-border economic, social, technological exchange under condition of capitalism.
http://www. globalisationguide. org/. The “G8” organisation must be stopped! G8 is an organisation involving the eight of the worlds most flourishing economic countries.
These include Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, United States and the European Union. These countries are trying to create economic globalisation. This is typical of the most powerful countries to do so, what about countries like Australia? What does globalisation mean to Australia? Australian corporations participate in the oppression of workers and peasants in poor countries in Asia. Australian mining and forestry companies are involved in extracting wealth from countries such as Papua New Guinea, Irian Jaya and Indonesia, sometimes relying on military support to suppress local opposition.
The Australian support for trade liberalisation, particularly in agriculture, has been used to open up markets in poor countries where Australia’s commodity exports put local subsistence farmers out of work. Australia has opened its own markets to goods made in countries that allow child labour, or forbid the formation of free trade unions. The Australian government has opposed efforts to include environmental and labour protection clauses in World Trade Organisation agreements. Australia should support reform of the WTO to make it more equitable for poor nations of the world.
Australia places few restrictions on the operations of transnational organisations, which take wealth from the country, and are not managed in the interests of Australia. Australia has a strong vested interest in further trade liberalisation, particularly in agriculture. Australia has made common cause with developing countries such as Brazil and Argentina to press for agricultural liberalisation, as this would have the benefit of opening American and particularly European markets. Globalisation definitely won’t benefit us.
There are global inequalities, critics would say that its getting worse and others would oppose, as they would say it “benefits all”. According to http://www. globalisationguide. org/ the gap between the rich and the poor nations of the world is dramatically increasing.
Stated by a web site http://www. globalisationguide. org/ over the past ten years, the number of people earning $1 a day or less has remained static at 1. 2 billion while the number earning less than $2 a day has increased from 2.
55 billion to 2. 8 billion people.The rising of inequality is the inevitably result of market forces. Given free reign, market forces give the rich the power to add further to their wealth.
Hence, large corporations invest in poor countries only because they can make greater profits from low wage levels or because they can access to their natural resources. Does this “benefit all”? Globalisation implies that national economies lose some of their independence and separate identities as they become merged into one global economy. Is this beneficial?This process of globalisation occur through a number of channels in addition to international trade. The channels include the globalisation of markets, the globalisation of production, capital mobility and technological transfers.
This can be called a ‘cat and mouse’ effect on businesses, where large companies would be able to take over smaller companies, if globalisation takes place. The free market does nothing to address re-distribution of wealth. It assumes that wealth will ‘trickle down’ to the poor. WRONG!The former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, once said, “It is our job to glory in inequality and see that talents and abilities are given vent and expression for the benefit of us all.
” Unfortunately, this is not the only disadvantage that could happen if globalisation takes place. Environmentalist groups, such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace argue that globalisation harms the environment. In general they blame global corporations for global warming, the depletion of natural resources, the production of harmful chemicals and the destruction of organic agriculture.They have particular criticisms of global investment, which they argue takes advantage of the lack of regulation in poorer developing countries.
Hence, global companies may locate polluting industries in poor countries, log tropical forests, or develop mines with inadequate controls. Globalisation is destructive. Organisations like Greenpeace correctly oppose the global trade in toxic chemicals, nuclear materials and other products of which they do not approve, such as genetically modified foods, or endangered wildlife, including fish.They oppose the existing rules of the World Trade Organisation, which do not allow countries to ban imports of goods just because their production may have damaged the environment in the country of origin.
How does globalisation affect culture? Is it ‘Americanisation’? A report by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation UNESCO, showed that the world trade in goods with cultural content almost tripled between 1980 and 1991: from 67 billion dollars to 200 billion dollars.At the core of the entertainment industry – film, music and television – there is a growing dominance of US products. World Trade Organisation rules do not allow countries to block imports on cultural grounds. It is argued that one of the consequences of globalisation will be the end of cultural diversity, and the triumph of a uni-polar culture serving the needs of transnational corporations.
Hence the world drinks Coca-Cola, watches American movies and eats American junk food.American culture is seen to be dominated by monetary relationships and commercial values replacing traditional social relationships and family values. The people for globalisation say. “It does not make sense to talk of a world of 6 billion people becoming a monoculture and the spread of globalisation will undoubtedly bring changes to the countries it reaches.
” http://www. globalisationguide. org/. As Australians, do we want to lose our own unique culture? There are no possible alternatives to globalisation.
Going global is going global! Globalisation must be stopped, and it means exactly what it says.
