British journalist Peter Martin addresses the issue of globalization in his article entitled The Moral Case for Globalization in an extremely biased manner. He begins by talking about how the economic side of globalization is not the only part worth covering and makes an extremely opinionated statement about the overall greatness of the ‘event’ of globalization. His article very clearly allows readers to see that he supports globalization and the continual growth of our globe into what he sees as one interconnected union.
This article relates immensely to the article written by another British journalist Martin Wolf entitled Why this Hatred of the Market?. Wolf, like Martin, feels that globalization as a whole is largely beneficial to the betterment of our globe and economies worldwide. Wolf however, addresses mainly the economic benefits rather than the moral benefits, as Martin does. Wolf writes about how globalization should be looked at. Moreover why it should be looked to as a guideline as to how governments should act, and what they should do (Wolf, 9). He feels that globalization is desirable, as does Martin, and furthermore he seems to feel that technology is the reason that globalization is so successful, and perhaps the reason that it works. Moreover, he makes the implicit statement that globalization is a political thing (Wolf, 9). He feels that it is growing, as does Martin, and feels that it will continue to grow. Wolf says that “l essons of experience” (Wolf, 9) have taught governments of the world to become open to the global economy. By this he means that history has been the main reason and teaching mechanism that has made globalization necessary and extremely profitable. Martin also agrees with Wolf’s standpoint, but in a more moral way. While acknowledging the economic upside to globalization he talks more about the moral side. They both however, do feel that globalization is a very political thing in corresponding, but all the while, different ways. Martin feels that globalization is an extension of our withering freedom. By this he means that he feels countries that are against globalization are limiting the “cross-border choice offered by globalization” (Martin, 13). Moreover he says that the extension of state power (and the prevention of globalization) is “damaging and deeply anti-democratic” (Martin, 13). Liberalization is also a key idea that Wolf talks about and he sees it as the removal of restrictions on “exchange controls affecting imports of goods and services” (Wolf, 9). Wolf, feels that liberalization is the root of globalization and that without the political freedom given by most nation states, globalization would not be possible or perhaps not even something that could ever happen. If countries and nations were unable and prohibited to communicate and interact across the border, then globalization would be a theory that would never apply to the real world. The political background that Martin and Wolf feel that globalization has is a key concept that is critical to the understanding of what globalization is, how it works, and how people or countries feel about it. Martin and Wolf have the same positive view of globalization, and both hold beliefs of it that perhaps are critical to the building of the understand of the supporting side of globalization, as there are many other standpoints and opinions on this topic.
