Scribd
Upload
177 views4 pages

Globalization - CHAPTER SUMMARY Chapter 2

This chapter discusses debates around globalization between globalists and skeptics. Globalists argue that globalization is a powerful phenomenon that has led to the decline of nation-states and the rise of multinational corporations, while skeptics contend that nation-states still dominate and that there is no single process of globalization. There are also debates around the definition, drivers, and future of globalization, with some arguing it is an inevitable process and others believing its negative effects can be addressed or the process slowed down. Different views exist on whether globalization benefits more people or increases inequality.

Uploaded by

Chilton John Duat
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
177 views4 pages

Globalization - CHAPTER SUMMARY Chapter 2

This chapter discusses debates around globalization between globalists and skeptics. Globalists argue that globalization is a powerful phenomenon that has led to the decline of nation-states and the rise of multinational corporations, while skeptics contend that nation-states still dominate and that there is no single process of globalization. There are also debates around the definition, drivers, and future of globalization, with some arguing it is an inevitable process and others believing its negative effects can be addressed or the process slowed down. Different views exist on whether globalization benefits more people or increases inequality.

Uploaded by

Chilton John Duat
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Globalization - CHAPTER SUMMARY Chapter 2

The study of globalization is home to significant debates and controversies. The major

split is between globalists and skeptics. The “great globalization debate” engages with the

question of the very existence of globalization. Globalists argue that globalization exists and

it encompasses the entire globe. Skeptics contend that there is no such thing as globalization

since a significant portion of the world’s population is excluded from the processes associated

with it. While globalists observe one broad process of globalization, skeptics point to

not one, but many globalizations.

Globalists consider globalization an increasingly powerful phenomenon, which, among

other things, has led to the decline of the nation-state. Skeptics respond by pointing out

that, in recent years, the nation-state has reasserted itself and regained its role as a key world

player. Globalists view globalization as a new process while the skeptics argue that it is

simply

a new term for an old, even ancient, process.

Economically, globalists emphasize structures such as the multinational corporations

(MNCs), the transnational economy, and the emergence of a new global division of labor.

Skeptics retain a focus on national economies and nation-state-based regional conglomerations,

arguing that there are few genuine MNCs today. Globalists maintain that while the

continuing power of nation-states is undeniable, their ability to control economic markets

is steadily declining.

In terms of the global order, globalists observe the development of various relationships

in the global world which do not involve the government. On the other hand, skeptics

contend that the world continues to be dominated by relations among and between national

governments.

Culturally, globalists tend to accept the idea of a culture common to most areas of the

world. Skeptics generally reject the idea of a common global popular culture and argue that

culture is becoming increasingly varied.

Some critics argue that we have transnationalism, rather than globalization. Transnationalism

is a more limited process which refers largely to interconnections across two, or


more, national borders. It may be more accurate to say that transnationalism and globalization

both exist today, depending on which phenomena we are analyzing.

The origin of globalization can be analyzed through five perspectives. First, globalization

can be seen as being hardwired into humans, in the form of a basic urge for a better life. This

instinct results in the spread of globalization through commerce, religion, politics,

and warfare.

Second, globalization may be perceived as a long-term cyclical process. In this view,

there have been other global ages prior to the present one, and each age is destined to contract

and disappear, after attaining a peak. Third, globalization can be viewed as a series of

historical phases or waves, each with its own point of origin. A fourth perspective argues that

the multiple points of origin of globalization are located in seminal historical events. A fifth

view focuses on broader, more recent changes in the twentieth century. It argues that the

global processes in motion prior to WW II were more limited in geographic scope and less

intensive than the global processes of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.

There exist various types of globalizations. Some major categories include economic globalization,

political globalization, cultural globalization, globalization of religion, science,

health and medicine, globalization of sport, and globalization of higher education. Rather

than a single point of origin for globalization as a whole, there are separate points of origin

for different globalizations.

The factors that drive globalization are also hotly debated. The materialist approach

tends to identify objective factors such as capitalism, technology, and multinational corporations

as the driving forces of contemporary globalization. The idealist position stresses

the role of idea systems, information, and knowledge as the prime movers in the process.

Alternatively, we can see globalization as being driven by both material and ideal factors Some scholars
have noted that in spite of greater liquidity and ever-more flows of various

types, flows do not necessarily go everywhere. Even when they do, they affect different

places with varying degrees of intensity. Using another metaphor, it could be argued that

globalization “hops” from one locale to another, rather than flowing evenly through all

locales. While globalization flows more easily through the developed world, it bypasses
many locales in the less developed world.

Disputes exist regarding the future development and expansion of globalization. Some

view globalization as an inexorable process. Here, it is important to distinguish between

globalization from above and globalization from below. Globalization from above is a

process

that is created and controlled by centralized and powerful actors, such as wealthy

elites or MNCs (especially in the North). Globalization from below, which involves marginalized

groups and social movements that struggle to make globalization benefit more

people and for global processes to be more democratic, can serve to make the process less

inevitable.

A difference of opinion exists between globaphiliacs and globaphobics. Globaphiliacs

emphasize the positive aspects of globalization. They argue that globalization leads to great

economic growth and a contingent spread of democratization and civil society. Globaphiliacs

tend to deemphasize its negative aspects, particularly the people who have not been beneficiaries

of the process. The globaphobics’ critiques of globalization are diverse, emerging not

only from left and liberal quarters, but also from the conservative right. These critics

emphasize the negative impact of globalization on the less well-off portions of the world’s

population. They contend that globalization leads to greater inequality. Some scholars

adopt a middle ground in this debate.

Large groups of people feel disadvantaged by various aspects of globalization. Some are

of the opinion that globalization is an inexorable process. Others argue that not only can the

process be slowed down, it can be stopped completely. Another view is that the problems

existing in globalization are being addressed by major players as well as International Non-

Governmental Organizations (INGOs). However, many activists feel that NOTES


1 The title of this chapter is derived from an anthology
the first author edited many years ago. See
Ritzer (1972).
2 Immigrants can be thought of as “transnational”
when they are involved in a variety of relationships
(e.g. social, economic, political) that cut across the
nations of settlement and origin creating a new
transnational field (Basch, Schiller, and Blanc-
Szanton 1994). While there are certainly many
immigrants who fit into this category and their
number is likely growing, there has been a tendency
to overestimate their number and to conflate
transmigrants and immigrants. Thus, Portes (2001a:
183) concludes: “It is more useful to conceptualize
transnationalism as one form of economic, political
and cultural adaptation that co-exists with other,
more traditional forms [e.g. assimilation].” He usefully
limits the idea of transnational activities to
“those initiated and sustained by non-institutional
actors, be they organized groups or networks of
individuals across national borders. Many of these
activities are informal, that is they take place outside
the pale of state regulation and control… .
they represent goal-oriented initiatives that require
coordination across national borders by members of
civil society. These activities are undertaken on their
own behalf, rather than on behalf of the state or
corporate bodies” (Portes 2001a: 186).
3 As globalization accelerates, ever-greater portions
of the planet will be encompassed by it.
4 Others include, for example, the oceans in terms of
the development of the trans-Pacific cable.
5 By the way, this idea of such a basic “urge” is quite
controversial and is critiqued by postmodernists
(and others) as being suggestive of “essentialism,”
or the notion that there is some fundamental characteristic
of humans that lies at their essence and
explains much of what they do. See Ritzer (1997a).
6 Robertson’s analysis ends at this point since his
essay was published in 1990.
7 Or as an end to at least a phase of globalization,
see James (2001).
8 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-22/russia-
opens-north-korean-rail-link-for-iron-silkroad-.
html.
9 Not surprisingly, this discussion of types overlaps
somewhat with the discussion of types of flows in the
preceding chapter. This is the case because types of
globalization are, to a large degree, types of flows.
10 To take another example, Wolf (2005: 19) says:
“Globalization is defined in what follows as integration
of economic activities, via markets.” See
also Rodrik (1997).
11 On the North–South distinction, see, for example,
Arrighi, Silver, and Brewer (2007); Persaud (2007).
12 See Chapter 4 for a discussion of Friedman’s work
in the context of neoliberalism.
13 Goffman (1961: 81). The quotation: “To be awkward
or unkempt, to talk or move wrongly, is to be
a dangerous giant, a destroyer of worlds. As every
psychotic and comic ought to know, any accurately
improper move can poke through the thin sleeve
of immediate reality.”
14 This is also true of de la Dehesa (2006).

You might also like