Whether we call it globalisation or internationalization, very few people, organisations or states stand to benefit.(TM)

Authors Avatar

Page 1                                                        

‘Whether we call it “globalisation” or “internationalization”, very few people, organisations or states stand to benefit.’

To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Globalisation or internationalization, whatever you call it, is just a different perspective of the apparent 21st century changes. It is argued that there have been major technological advances since the 1980’s giving rise to increased international communications and access to information. There is also said to be a rise in international trade, finance and multinational corporations and changes in the roles of national governments.

There are three main theories or view points of these changes which I will be discussing, these are the globalists, both positive and pessimistic, the transformationalists and inter-nationalists. Within each theoretical position there are found to be potential winners and losers, these can be divided into people, states and organisations. It is this which I will be discussing first, followed by an outline of the arguments put forward by the three theories. Using the arguments of other positions I plan to identify the possible strengths and weaknesses and the extent to which there is evidence to support or contradict a particular view.

The main winners are said to be the consumers, they now have more choice than ever with increasing competition on the market. There is instant access to world wide goods via the internet, there is no longer a need to travel to far and wide places to communicate or trade. This free market which the economic liberals see as a positive trend is also good news for drug and people traffickers whose profits are perceived to exceed that of some of the multi national corporations. However, here we see one of the down sides to the increasing efficiency of the market such as the 13yr old Glaswegian schoolboy Allan Harper who died of a heroin overdose.

Computer producers and service providers such as Microsoft play a key role in constantly working to improve information technology, enabling multinational corporations such as Sony and Mc Donalds to co-ordinate their operations across international borders. There are also companies such as Jensen and Raleigh who closed down their production plants in Britain and opened them in other less developed countries such as South Africa and East Asia. These winners also create some of the potential losers as seen from a Socialist and Marxist framework where global capitalism exploits the workers in the poorer countries and those in weaker positions such as immigrants, unskilled workers and women. The Feminist writer Saskia Sassen refers to the women in the South who work in poor paid assembly-line work as ‘offshore proletariat’, an ‘invisible and disempowered class of workers for

Join now!

Page 2                                                        

whom work is simply a dead end drudgery’. (Kelly and Prokhovnik et al., 2004, pg.101).

It is mainly the positive globalists who see globalisation as a good thing with stretched social relations which can benefit us all with an improved quality of life. This liberal attitude considers new opportunities for the rich and the poor as positive whilst the pessimistic globalists see multinational corporations swamping the minority cultures. As the globalist view holds the opinion that globalisation is inevitable, it proposes that we have little or no control over this. The inter-nationalists see ...

This is a preview of the whole essay