Intros, Chp 28 & 30, NYT

Pages 220-223 discusses the topic of political globalization. It begins by describing a few terms we have learned already, like what "the state" is and sovereignty. I found it much more interesting when continuing reading, especially when the author begins to touch on the WTO and the IMF. Lechner talks about the differences between these NGOs and others, as these two specifically help manage the world economy. I also was interested when he was talking about how many of these TNCs have become larger economic forces than certain entire countries. I might be the crazy one here, but how does this sound like a free market trade? That certain corporations have gained so much money and power that they rival and routinely overpower countries? Lechner goes on to describe how Susan Strange, a British international relations scholar, argued that technological change was forcing states to do the bidding of corporations. Yeah. I do not really know what insightful comments to add to this, because she is completely right. We have seen this and talked about it in discussion, particularly when discussing the sweatshops and textile industry in certain Asian countries that depend on this industry for economic purposes. 

Pages 300-303 discusses NGO's like Doctors Without Borders and how they are organized, what they plan/hope to do, and how they go about it. I really liked this excerpt from the reading, "Barlow challenges the oft‐repeated claim that the international human rights regime was a Western creation, pointing out that the original proposals for a UN Charter barely mentioned human rights and both the United States and Britain resisted the establishment of a human rights regime. Many non‐Western countries pushed successfully for an explicit rights declaration, and non‐Western countries were a majority of the members of the first Human Rights Commission," as it challenges the earlier part of the textbook where it discussed how many people see globalization as essentially "western cultural dominance"

Chapter 28 presents the idea that companies and corporations have taken over the idea of the state. As the corps. grew more powerful, the state lost its power. This has continued until, as the book states, "Where states were once the masters of markets, now it is the markets which, on many crucial issues, are the masters over the governments of states," This chapter is a great, if not slightly hefty worded, description of the power that these corporations now hold. Lechner goes on to mention cold war stuff with puppet states, which we have covered pretty extensively. I found the section on mutually assured destruction particularly interesting. The idea that technology has gotten so good that its mere existence is threatening the existence of the state as the existence of the bombs themselves have simultaneously guaranteed/prevented nuclear destruction... it's like the world's most stressful example of Schrödinger's Cat. And we get to find out whether the cat is kicking or not within our lifetimes. How fun!

Chapter 30 finally addresses what I have been wanting to get to all along. We have talked about all the ways globalization is bad for us, the economy, and the world, but there have been no solutions or remedies discussed until here. I think the second to last section, "Do not use 'competitiveness' as an excuse for domestic reform" is really insightful, and that certain politicians should have a read. Any economic issues can not be traced back to a separate country as the issue, and they should instead have reform within their own economy to instead promote domestic production. People are stubborn. Many will not want to change their ways if it is simply to show up another country. 

The final part, the NYT article, was an insightful read. It may not have been the main focus of the article, but I enjoyed reading about Nunur, the farmer and taxi driver (who did not want his last name included for safety reasons, but approved his first name, face, occupations, and general location...) Anyways, the article discusses the Belt and Road Initiative in China, which is a plan to connect many of the already established economic corridors that run through the three major continents over there, with the goal of improving trade times, cost, and safety through the region. This idea is still mostly just an idea, but the proposed scale of the plan is impressive. If this was able to be pulled off, and if it was able to stay productive, it would make trade much easier in those regions. Of course, this does not come without its drawbacks. Would it be China if there were not egregious human rights violations? I don't think so! I have heard for years of China's violations against the Uighur people, and seeing here that it is still talked about so nonchalantly is heartbreaking. It is another scenario where the curse of technology is present, where we see horrible things happening to people on the other side of the world, with no way to improve their situation. Many such cases arise in pursuit of the reward of a dollar. The greedy simply do not realize how much a dollar can cost.

Chs. 28, 30, & NYT

Chapter 28 discusses the processes that have led to the state losing more power and authority over time. One point that I found interesting was when the author explained how advances in technology have made people less reliant on the state for defense. Since the weapons development carried up to the point of the creation of atomic bombs, parties on either side of a conflict hit a celing when it comes to how much destruction they can cause. The idea of mutually assured destruction also prevents them from actually using the weapons, which means that advances in technology essentially crippled the state's ability to defend us as much as they used to be able to. 

Chapter 30 offers explanations as to why globalization can cause issues and how those issues can be avoided through government actions. There have been chapters in the past that leaned into the concept that globalization may not be all that great, but this is the first time where an author actually addresses solutions to those problems. The last paragraph in this chapter talks about countries having to conform their practices to fall under an abstract definition of "fairness" that actually seems to make things a little unfair in circumstances. I think this can be tied back to our recent discussions about economic fairness in the cotton and garment industries, where "fairness" was a concept that was used to strengthen imbalances.

The NYT article discusses China's Belt and Road Initiative, or B.R.I. This is a proposed plan to connect multiple economic corridors throughout Asia, Africa, and Europe, with the goal of imporving trade and other conditions. The actual details of China's plan are not available to the public, but Khorgos port in Kazakhstan will play a major role in it. This is an example of a scenario in which globaliztion could hypothetically drive economic connections into the future, but as with all of the other example we've discussed, there are drawbacks. The level of human rights violations that have been linked to this project and China's policy of detaining people who speak out against them give the project a negative light.

Ch. 28,30 NYT Article

 Chapter 28 discusses how nation states are losing their authority to the market. Government intervention in people’s daily lives is increasing, while more and more societies want their own nation state. Tech is creating major changes previously unseen, and politics is becoming a common activity practiced by people other than just politicians. I can definitely say that my entire life seems to be surrounded by political conversations — it’s almost entirely unavoidable. Although, I feel like people have more power than ever in politics as well. Something I see a lot is activism that follows the saying, “put your money where your mouth is.” Boycotting brands that support political endeavors you disagree with and focusing your money and brands that you do feels like the most effective way to initiate change. Chapter 28 mentions that power over outcomes is exercised by the market, specifically who buys and who sells. This, I couldn’t agree with more. I’ve been a participant in “buy nothing” days I’ve heard about over social media, and subsequently read the articles that say the brands boycotted had their lowest 24 hour revenue period in history. In a world defined by money, the common person’s main source of power is where they spend their hard earned cash.

Chapter 30 discusses the drawbacks of globalization on laborers. While the chapter makes sense to me, I find myself asking a lot of questions that start with “why.” We can’t really undo globalization. We can discuss the downsides all we like, but why aren’t we discussing how we can change things? What actions can we realistically take to make things better? I read so much about the goods and bads of globalization it just feels repetitive. What can people, or governments actually do?

The NYT article has me questioning whether consumerism on the BRI is worth the safety risks. It doesn’t seem like anything sold in the market is a once-in-a-lifetime buy, so why do people who are at risk shop there? If there is a chance that you could be taken and imprisoned by the Chinese government, why would you even think about going there? Although, for the people who go there because it is the only place that they can see their family on the other side of the border, I completely understand the risks. 

The readings this week have me feeling really nihilistic about capitalism. We put consumption over safety and security.

Ch 28, 30, NYT

 Ch 28 discusses the idea of the power of the nation-state is slowly waning as the power of global organizations start to increase, even overtaking the power of certain nation-states. While nation-states used to control the markets, global organizations are starting to make decisions for nation-states. These international organizations have so much economic power they have gained in turn strong political power, which depending on who you ask could have very scary consequences.

In Ch 30, the main idea is the consequences of globalization and if the negatives have started to outweigh the positives. An example is how workers can be subsituted for workers with lower wages in other countries, causing workers to get less benefits and wages because of how low their competition is. Trade also causes conflict from differing cultural views and social norms and causes governments to start to be have difficulties giving social insurances. Unfortunatly, many countries are not combating these negatives which cause globalization to be seen as a bad thing and making it hard to see any postive benefits for most people.

The NYT talks about the border between China and Kazakhstan and how important it actually is. While seemingly insignifigant, it actually is the connection between China and the rest of Eurasia as it houses roads, railways, and other forms of transportation to create a massive market hub. However, this area also houses concentration camps and forced labor, which to me conflicts with the idea of mass economic growth, as the ones working don't see that money. 

Ch. 28, 29, & NY-Times

 In "The Declining Authority of States," Susan Strange argues that nation-states are losing power to global markets, technology, and international finance. She points out that businesses and investors can move resources across borders quickly, forcing governments to adapt their policies to attract investment rather than fully controlling their economies. Technology, including computers, satellites, and AI, further weakens government control by enabling instant movement of information, trade, and financial flows. This shift of authority from states to markets and global systems presents challenges for governments in regulating global activity.

Dani Rodrik discusses the tensions that arise from globalization, noting that while it can bring economic growth and increased trade, it also creates winners and losers. Skilled workers and large companies often benefit, while low-skilled workers may struggle with job losses and lower wages due to increased competition between workers across different countries. Globalization can also lead to conflicts between economic goals and social values, as countries with different labor laws and environmental standards compete. Rodrik argues that globalization needs to be managed carefully to ensure that its benefits are shared more fairly across societies.

The NY Times article highlights China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its impact on Kazakhstan. The BRI aims to connect Chinese factories with countries in Europe, Asia, and Africa through infrastructure projects like railways and ports. In Kazakhstan, the construction of the Khorgos "dry port" facilitates the transfer of goods from China to Europe. While the BRI has the potential to create jobs and promote economic growth in Kazakhstan, it also raises concerns about unstable employment and unequal distribution of benefits. The article also touches on the political and human rights implications of China's influence in the region, mentioning the detention camps in Xinjiang and the trial of Sayragul Sauytbay, who spoke out about them. This illustrates that China's presence in the region extends beyond trade and business, encompassing political and human rights issues as well.

Chapters 28, 29 + NYT Article

Ch. 28 --    "Where states were once the masters of markets, now it is the markets which, on many crucial issues, are the masters over the governments of states." This sentence right here pretty much summarizes the future of governments. This also somewhat explains the ideas behind the Neoliberalism push that had started in the 1900s. The climbing dominance of markets over the government has both its benefits and detriments; for benefits, it can improve economic growth and can reduce trade barriers between countries. A big con of this is that it can create massive inequalities due to the privatization of public goods.
The paradox involving the decline in authority in the more powerful countries/states, as well as the growing amount of "states-to-be" as I'll call them, seemed initially very confusing to me. But as I read on, I understood more about what Strange was saying in their statement. There is an ever-expanding want of statehood among states-to-be, but at the same time, the value of a state being a state is declining, government and all.

Ch. 29 --   The focus of this chapter, (clearly) is crime; more specifically organized crime. As the article shows frequently, organized crime groups have to adapt to the globalizing world. In the adaptation to the newly emerging systems, crime groups had found ways of "exploiting the growth mechanisms of globalization."

--Unfinished--

28, 30, NY Times

Chapter 28 the argument against the idea of the nation states holding full control of the global system is brought up. Nation states’ power is declining with the rise of multinational corporations gaining larger influence on global powers. These multinational corporations are making decisions that in the past governments would have been making. With the interconnection of governments and international corporations, governments are not fully independently acting on global decision making. 

Chapter 30 points more towards offering explanation to the impact these international companies and markets have. Even though there are positive impacts surrounding globalization, more often than not the negatives are not put into thought. With a main point being the labor industry, we see many labor industries pushed around to where it can be done the cheapest, completely destroying communities that allow cheaper labor. There are also forces acting making governments dependent on their export labor industries to keep these prices low even if it comes at the cost of their own citizens. 

The New York Times article explains the importance of the China and Kazakhstan border, because this border is the separation between China’s different political structure and the rest of the world. The Eurasian Pole of Inaccessibility is the furthest place from any ocean in the world, but is extremely important for the connection of Asia and Europe through land. The town of Khorgos which is there has become a major zone for processing shipments from Asia to Europe. I think this gives a good example to how globalization can completely change an area that may be seemingly useless to the world, building it in a place that the global economy would struggle without.

Chapter 28,30 & New York Times Article

Susan Strange’s article “The Declining Authority of States” argues that governments are not as powerful as they used to be. In the past national governments had a lot more control over their economies and societies. However today, global markets, technology and international finance often have more influence than politicians themselves. One idea in the article that stood out to me is that markets now have a huge amount of power. Businesses, multinational companies and investors are able to move money and resources across borders very quickly. As a result of this, governments often have to adapt their policies in order to attract investment rather than fully controlling their own economies. In my opinion, this makes sense because companies today operate worldwide while governments are limited to their own countries.

I think another important aspect highlighted within this chapter is the use of technology. Over the last century, advances such as computers, satellites, global communication networks and most recently AI have helped to connect the world more than ever before. These changes make it harder for governments to control information as well as trade and financial flows because money, data and business transactions can now move instantly across boarders through digital systems. This means governments have less time and ability to monitor or regulate what is happening within their own economies. I think technology has definitely made life easier but it has also made it more difficult for governments when it comes to regulating global activity.

Overall, Strange argues that authority is shifting away from states and towards markets and global systems. I think this is a convincing argument. Governments still play an important role, but they clearly face new challenges in a globalised world where economic power often crosses national borders in an instant.

Dani Rodrik discusses the problems that can come with globalisation. While it can bring economic growth and more trade between countries, Rodrik argues that it can also create tension within societies. Some people benefit a lot from global markets, especially skilled workers and large companies but on the other hand, other individuals such as low-skilled workers often struggle to compete and may lose jobs or face lower wages. One key idea is that globalisation has the ability to increase competition between workers across different countries. This is because companies can move production or outsource jobs abroad meaning that workers in wealthier countries may find it harder to negotiate higher wages or better working conditions. In my opinion this is one of the biggest challenges of globalisation itself because it can make people feel insecure about their jobs and futures. Rodrik also explains that globalisation can create conflicts between economic goals and social values. Countries have different labour laws, environmental standards and social protections. When trade increases, these differences can cause disagreements especially if people feel their country’s standards are being undermined by global competition.

Overall, Rodrik does not say globalisation should stop, but he argues it needs to be managed more carefully. Globalisation has clear benefits such as economic growth and international cooperation but governments must make sure that the gains are shared more fairly so that entire societies are benefiting and not just a small group of people.

NY times article:

The article explains how China is expanding its influence through the Belt and Road Initiative, which focuses on building new roads, railways and trade routes across Asia and Europe. In Kazakhstan, China has built a huge “dry port” called Khorgos. This is where goods from China are transferred onto trains and sent toward Europe. The believe the goal is to create a modern version of the Silk Road and make it faster to move products between countries. I thought it was interesting how this project could help Kazakhstan grow and create jobs but it also raised some concerns for me. Some of the jobs around the border are official, while others are unofficial and not very stable which creates risk and shows not everyone benefits equally.  I found it particularly interesting about the young boy who was a senior in high school deciding which job he should take. The article also talks about the trial of Sayragul Sauytbay who was a woman that fled China and spoke about detention camps in Xinjiang during a court case in Kazakhstan. Her story made me realise that China’s influence in the region is not only about trade and business, but also about politics and human rights. Politics is present so much more than I had ever realised. 

28,30, and NYT Article

    What chapter 28 is looking at is how confused some of the political leaders and heads of governments about how much they influence things such as economies and national societies.  Artists and illustrators have pointed out flaws such as these in political figures as of recently with an increasing amount of bitterness.  It also says that states used to be the masters of markets, although that has changed as of recently, with markets gaining increasing authority over states.  How I see this happening is that some larger markets have a more global reach than some states do, as well as a larger economic standard in some circumstances as well.

    Chapter 30 talks about the possible harm globalization has caused, and if its outdone the good factors.  The issue that stood out the most to me was how globalization has made it much more difficult for governments to provide social insurance.  This isn't saying that the government is the sole provider of this.  What I do think is that globalized markets shouldn't negatively impact to this degree the social insurance that should be supplied, and heads of government should be able to create alternate plans in order to give most people this opportunity.  Having a global institution impact an entire country in terms in social insurance standards is incredibly concerning.

The New York Times article discusses the border between China and Kazakhstan, and the importance it carries for China.  It's part of what's called the 'new Silk Road', one of China's premier efforts to increase global reach and overall economic stability.  The author of the article discusses stories about his experiences with locals, including a driver named Nunur.  He discussed that in order to provide for himself, he was forced to work in tractor repairs, becoming an expert mechanic.  While this may not seem like low-tier work to the naked eye, his parents had to work on a collective farm.  The article implies that there are serious political and human issues regarding globalization, one issue being human rights.  The new Silk Road promises prosperity, but hardly delivers on it.

Chapter 28 and Chapter 30 in The Globalization Reader both talk about how globalization affects economic development and the balance of power between countries. Chapter 28 starts by explaining how globalization can change places that used to be fairly isolated by connecting them to the global economy through trade, investment, and industrial growth. Governments and corporations often try to bring development to these regions by building infrastructure, factories, and new industries. The idea is that this will attract businesses and create jobs for people living there. In theory, this kind of development should improve living standards and bring more opportunity. At the same time, the chapter makes it clear that the results are not always equal. Some areas grow quickly and benefit from new investment, while others struggle or end up depending heavily on outside companies. One thing the chapter points out is that globalization is not just something that naturally happens on its own. It is often shaped by decisions made by governments and businesses that are trying to guide economic growth in certain directions.

Chapter 30 focuses more on the power behind globalization. It explains that global trade and financial systems are often influenced by the countries and institutions that already have the most economic power. Wealthier countries and large multinational corporations tend to have more control over trade rules, investments, and markets. Because of this, it can be difficult for poorer countries to compete or build strong economies on their own. The chapter also talks about how globalization does not always reduce inequality between countries. In some cases, it can actually make those gaps even wider. Some countries end up mainly providing cheap labor or raw materials while wealthier countries capture more of the economic benefits. After reading this chapter, it seemed like globalization can help economies grow, but it can also keep the divide between richer and poorer countries pretty wide.

The New York Times article “Can China Turn the Middle of Nowhere…” connects well with these ideas. The article looks at China’s attempts to develop remote regions by building factories, infrastructure, and even entire cities in places that previously had very little economic activity. The goal is to create jobs and encourage companies and workers to move there so that economic growth is not concentrated only in the biggest cities. However, the article shows that these projects do not always succeed. In many cases, businesses and workers are hesitant to relocate to remote areas, which can leave factories underused or create what people sometimes call “ghost cities.” This example reflects a lot of what the chapters talk about. Even when governments invest huge amounts of money into development, the results are not guaranteed. Economic growth still depends on whether companies and people actually see a reason to move there and build their lives in those places.

Chapter 28, 30 & NY Times article

 Chapter 28 goes against the idea that nation-states are in control of global systems. Susan Strange argues that as time moves on the balance of global powers of a nation-states decline as more international corps continue to join the global markets. Decisions that nation-states would normally make, are being dictated by international corps that make decisions for that nation-state. With this, Strange implies that economic power is shifting from the states to corporations meaning that because of globalization the economic power of a nation transferred from the government of that state to the corporations that decide to come into those states. Susan's argument highlights how interconnected financial and political systems can limit a government’s independent authority.

Chapter 30 dives deep into the topic of if the rapid growth of if the international market has more negatives than positives. The author looks towards the US and Europe as an Example. International trade between the US and Europe had some complications, but also over time, established stronger cooperation between the two nations. Another point this chapter brings up is that nations would constantly change labor laws for sweatshop workers to stay commutative in the global market at the expense of that nations people. With nations constantly changing labor laws at the expense of their people, this shows that the nations economy cannot act freely because they have to react to the international competition from other countries. Ultimately, the chapter suggests that unchecked globalization could undermine the very advantages it is supposed to provide.

The New York Times article describes the remote border region between China and Kazakhstan, near the Eurasian Pole of Inaccessibility, and explains its importance to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Although the area appears isolated, it has become strategically significant due to infrastructure projects designed to connect Chinese factories to markets in Europe, Asia, and Africa through railways, ports, and highways. The town of Khorgos in Kazakhstan has developed into a major transportation hub, illustrating how quickly globalization can transform overlooked regions. At the same time, the article discusses Xinjiang, a Chinese region under strict government control where minority populations have faced serious repression. Despite the seemingly quiet landscape shown in images, the political realities behind the development are complex. Additionally, Kazakhstan has faced economic challenges in managing its growing relationship with China.

28, 30, nyt article

     The first thing I noticed while reading is the power that nation-states seem to have. The author really gives them this appearance that they are all powerful, and have the ability to control so much of the global market. This, to me, is a scary thing to think about, as it leads to many of these nation states being able to have this feel that they are above the law, allowing them to basically do whatever they'd want. This can lead to these companies circumventing the laws and regulations that are in place to protect the workers and products that get sent through the factories within these nation-states. Again this is scary and there needs to be some way to prevent this from happening.

    When I think of all the good globalization has done, I think of how it connects us in ways we have never had the ability to be connected, and gives everyone on the planet the ability to experience cultures and ways of lives that they would never see or experience if it wasn't for globalization. Even with that the harm it has done might completely eclipse the good it has done. It has forced many smaller economies to force harsh and inhumane conditions on it's workers to attempt to cut costs, allowing them to stay in this globalized economy. This is a horrible thing that comes out of it, and is an extreme, many of the negatives come from economic tensions and political rivalries that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for this increasing competition over chasing an increase in your market share.

    The boarder between China and Kazakhstan is so much more important than I have every thought. Because of the political differences between China and most of the world, specifically Europe, I always kind of assumed all trade coming out of Chine was through ships, as it would leave a sort of buffer between China and the rest of the world. But it makes a whole lot of sense that its not the case, and that a land based shipping super center on the boarder between China and Europe exists, as it must lead to a much cheaper and easier solution to the mass of products coming out of China. 

Chpts 28, 30, & NYT article

In chapter 28 of The Globalization Reader, readers learn about the power of nation-states and why the author, Susan Strange, is arguing against it. She describes nation-states as a dominant source that is weakening globalization at its core. Global institutions have now begun to take over the role that was once controlled by the state's government. It made me realize that the government isn't always the one with the most power. Nation-states have begun to weaken other countries and institutions globally. 

Chapter 30 provides readers with a question: has the rapid expansion of international markets given us more harm than good? The author addresses the question by bringing up social and political tensions between other countries (such as the US and Europe). I didn't know governments felt pressured to bring labor costs down to stay in the global economy. It never occurred to me that there are limits to governments' competitiveness. The author argues that if this is pushed too far, it could undermine the true benefits of globalization. 

The NYT article presented me with what the border between China and Kazakhstan looks like. It's a very remote area alongside the Eurasian Pole of Inaccessibility. The EPI has been a major benefit for the BRI. I was shocked that this place was characterized as "the middle of nowhere" when there are over 1,000 concentration camps and centered as a big foundation project. Khorgos, a small town in Kazakhstan, has now become a major shipping hub connecting China to European countries and beyond the Atlantic Ocean. The BRI movement focuses on connecting Chinese factories with other countries in Europe, Asia, and Africa. This could be done through trains, ports, and highways. Later on, I read about China's Xinjiang, an area that's controlled by the government and has targeted minorities. In the pictures provided, the small town didn't look like much of a harm or threat. I also learned that Kazakhstan, at the time of the article's publication, was experiencing economic struggles in its relationship with China. 

T Shirt — Ava Guglielmi

Part 3 of the book discusses what happens after the shirt is made and makes it way back to America, and part 4 is about the life of a t shirt once it is no longer worn by American consumers. One of the things that really stood out to me was all the rules about how to get clothing to fall under the duty-free category of imports. The rules are so specific, it’s insane. I have no idea how they came up with these or the logic behind it. I was also surprised to hear that politicians routinely make promises that they don’t intent to keep when it comes to the textile industry. I know with politicians lying is a tactic used often, but the fact that it’s so common place is wild.

Part 4 really has me thinking about just how much Americans over-consume when it comes to fashion. We donate so many clothes that there aren’t even enough people in the US to buy it all, so we have to ship it overseas. One interesting thing to me was that people in Africa prefer the clothing that is wrinkly and musty, because it means it was worn a lot and was liked by the previous owner. If the clothes are too clean or smell nice, they get passed over. This is definitely the opposite of what I would expect.

Travels of a T-shirt - Part 2

 For the second part of the book, the author continues the path of a t-shirt, now back to the U.S. Rivioli explains that the retailers like Walmart are the powerful, not the factory owners. They can buy more supplies and request for lower prices, once they can always relocate to other factories if the price is not good for them, and the factories tend to accept since they can't lose big companies like that. She talks about the end of the Multi-Fiber Arrangement, a system that used to regulate the textile market. I feel that this type of initiatives can turn the global market more fair, and when it ended, China became the most concentrated production, making it harder for other nations. She emphasizes that this is another example of how politics influence the flow of goods, and not just the "free" market forces. 

Then, she brings the argument of the re-utilization of clothes, and how the West it is not only a villain, but donates tons of clothes to other countries, especially in Africa, and encourage small markets, instead of just burning the used clothes. It's a opportunity to have what to wear, to create trade, and to make a good thing, even if these countries lack money for clothes because of the West's policies, sometimes. 

To end, she talks about the IMF and World Bank, and how they encourages liberalization and contribute to the decline of Africa's textile markets. She offers a dual vision, showing that is not simple to say who is good or bad, but reaffirming that in globalization, some will loose and some will win. 

Reading Travels of a T-Shirt in a Global Economy

 Part 1 of The Travels of a T-Shirt in a Global Economy starts with the beginnings of how a t-shirt is made. Rivoli travels to a cotton farm in Texas to see where the cotton is grown that is then later turned into the t-shirt. This turns into a discussion as to why the U.S. has led the cotton industry for so long. The main reasons why the U.S. has managed this according to Rivoli are slave labor, subsidies, and governance. The U.S. used slave labor as a way to avoid market risks and was the reason they could produce enough cotton to meet British demand, subsidies after slave labor helped to keep cotton farmers income high to allow them to keep farming, and the way other countries governed allowed for the U.S. to take the role as the world's main cotton supplier instead of someone else.

Part 2 of the book focuses on what happens to that cotton when it is sold and taken to China. Rivoli also talks a lot about China in general, the politics, and the secrecy they have over what they do. The race to the bottom talks a lot about how different countries are trying to buy and sell the products for as cheap as humanly possible in less and less ethical ways. Then Rivoli covers the poor working conditions in Chinese factories and how China makes working there so desirable for its citizens. I think this book is very interesting and I enjoy how Rivoli shares the differences between when she wrote the first edition of the book compared to the most recent edition. I can't wait to read the epilogue to get more information about the biggest changes between now and then. I wish she had more plans to continue editing it because I would love to revisit this topic in ten years and see what's happening now with seemingly China overtaking the U.S. in many ways. 

T-Shirt - Dekai Averett

 The first half of this book goes into aspect of the apparel production industry, namely cotton production for T-shirts and related items. The book begins in Texas and explains the ways that the state was incredibly important in the production of cotton, specifically in the city of Lubbock.

I find it interesting how much the US has put into subsidizing the production of cotton and other goods, particularly in Texas, as this action almost inherently clashes with Neoliberal ideals. In an ideal Neoliberal world “the invisible hand” is the ultimate decider of market value, however when large powerful countries like the US can freely subsidize certain aspects of their economy or aligned economies, it goes against this ideology. Out of all things to be critical of the United States for, I think that the cognitive dissonance around being a country that champions freedom and open trade while also being heavily involved in the matters of countries around the world is one of the most significant. While I agree that it is important to prioritize building an American workforce and industry, it often feels like US foreign policy is based off little more than what’s convenient at the moment.

In the latter chapters the book touches on societal changes in working standards and corporate control, and how historically society has eventually gotten large companies to reform aspects of their practices. This implies an optimism about the future in regard to the abusive business practices, however it must still be recognized that these reforms too don’t always remain as societal values change.

Travels of a t-shirt

     After reading the first half of travels of a t-shirt, I was very surprised to find out just how damaging a simple, cotton t-shirt can be or the environment, and how exploititive the process of making one can be for the workers who are almost forced to make them. While it starts in the u.s., where cotton famers in places like Texas receive heavy subsidies, which allow them to produce cheap and also relativity in-exploititive labor. Even with this, cotton farming can still harm the environment. I think this is such a surprising thing. I would've guessed cotton farming would have been done in countries where labor is cheap, but the government subsidies really do a lot for the labor pool in America.

    We then see the cotton get sent over to primarily places like China, where clothing companies exploit cheap labor to produce cheap and cotton t-shirts. I can see from a business perspective why companies would do this, it saves a couple extra dollars per t-shirt, but ethically this is a disgusting act, which really shows how small of morals these companies have. the people making these shirts work in in-excusable conditions and get pair an incomprehensibly small wage for doing this terrible work. In my opinion, this book really shows how terrible these companies are and how much they focus on the bottom line rather than any sort of ethics.

Travels of a T-Shirt 1-140

 Looking at things from a different perspective can often change your opinion, and looking at globalization through the eyes of a t-shirt is certainly a good example of that.  The book starts in a city called Lubbock in Texas, one of the largest cotton hubs in the world. I figured this made sense, as parts of Texas are especially flat, which are more preferrable for growing cotton and other crops.

    One other part that stood out to me was when they talk about the farmers themselves having to sell their own cotton.  Most farmers aren't properly trained in being able to market their product, but they had to anyway to make sure it got sold at all.  In the example of west Texas, it was even more difficult for farmers to sell their cotton due to its reputation for poor quality.  Reasons for this include the fiber generally being shorter and weaker.  It's generally suited to survive in Texas, not to thrive on the open market.  It makes a good transition from this to the next step, however, as most Texas cotton is exported to places such as China for production.  To me, marketing in your own general state/area seems particularly easier than marketing for foreign exports.

    The last sections of the reading cover the process of manufacturing goods with the exported cotton, specifically in China.  It was clearly hinted at throughout these sections that China was becoming one of if not the major clothing manufacturers in the world.  It cites the lower cost of labor and sheer population as the main contributor to becoming a manufacturing giant.  What saddens me is the fact that China had established things called hukous, which required one to stay within a specific region.  It was almost certainly a highly restrictive lifestyle which most would consider inhumane, but it was a major factor in China's producing income.  Although hukous have majorly slowed down, it's still difficult for people who live in rural areas to find accessible goods in urban regions, only giving them the illusion of making life work outside of rural life.

Travel's of a T-shirt - TYLER PRIVLER

In The Travels of a T-Shirt in the Global Economy, Rivoli uses a simple cotton shirt as a way to explain how global trade works behind the scenes. In the first two sections of the book, she follows the production process from cotton farms in the United States to clothing being produced in factories overseas. By looking at each step, she shows that making something as simple as a T-shirt involves a complicated mix of political decisions, economic forces, and labor systems that most people never think about when they buy clothing.

The first section, “King Cotton,” looks at how the United States became one of the most influential producers of cotton worldwide. Rivoli explains that American cotton farmers have stayed competitive largely because of advances in technology and efficient farming practices. However, she also points out that government support and subsidies play a big role in helping U.S. farmers stay ahead. Because of this assistance, farmers in the United States often have advantages that producers in poorer countries simply do not have.

Another major topic in this section is the historical connection between cotton production and slavery. Rivoli describes how early cotton farming in the United States depended heavily on enslaved workers who were forced to work on plantations. During the nineteenth century, cotton production expanded rapidly, largely because millions of enslaved people were compelled to work under extremely harsh conditions. The profits from cotton helped strengthen the American economy, but the people responsible for that labor were denied freedom, fair treatment, and economic benefits.

The second section, “Made in China,” focuses on the manufacturing stage of the T-shirt’s production. Rivoli explains why clothing companies moved much of their production to China, where factories can operate with lower wages and high efficiency. She also discusses the reality of sweatshop labor and the difficult environments many workers face. At the same time, these jobs can still provide income opportunities for workers, particularly young women who may not have many alternatives. This section shows that global trade can create opportunities for some people while creating difficult conditions for others. It also reminds readers that the cheap clothing many of us buy is often connected to the working conditions of people in other parts of the world.

Travels of a T-Shirt Parts 1 and 2

 Part 1 of the book opens with an interesting discussion establishing the United States as the cotton producing superpower of the world. This is mainly because the cotton producers receive vast subsidies from the American government, some even bigger than the entire GDP of smaller cotton producing nations such as Benin. This point is important because it establishes the beginning of the scale of this network that goes into making a t-shirt. It is also important because it demonstrates the inequalities between countries at the global scale. Smaller nations like Benin are outspoken critics of the US getting massive subsidies because it takes away their ability to compete. However, nothing changes because the US has so much power in determining the regulations. The advent of slavery in the United States allowed them to supersede other nations as Britain's top cotton supplier in the mid-1800s. The book also discusses that the US had a much higher incentive to become the dominant producer of cotton, which is also why they stayed on top as the cotton industry began to focus more heavily on mechanization and automation. 

There was a section about GM cotton that really stood out to me, and I think an analogy can be drawn from it. it discussed how Monsanto created GM cotton that could withstand their powerful herbicide. Over time, they needed to keep coming out with new cotton and new herbicides, creating an endless cycle and forcing farmers to impose new regulations to meet the criteria for their products. The analogy I'm drawing here is once again to the relationship between large and small nation at the global economic level. Monsanto created a problem so they could profit from selling the solution, just like the big nations who profit from small nations' resources in the globalizing world. Another important point is that the access to these new and constantly improving herbicides and fertilizers is primarily restricted to developed nations, which creates even more reliability and feeds into the power dynamic.

Part 2 of the book focuses heavily on the next step of creating the t-shirt: spinning the cotton into threads and creating textiles. The significant issue in the section has to do with employment and labor, and its relationship with the greater processes. Much of the labor used in textile mills in China and the rest of Asia is done through women, and it is almost always out of need rather than a free choice to work. This created a business strategy where mills could afford to pay very little for labor since these needy people would work regardless of whether they were actually paid fairly for their work. During this time period China's economy skyrocketed with the growth of the textile industry, which established a cycle of overall advantage compared with smaller-scale labor disadvantages. It also established a global cycle where the US relies on China for its cheap labor and China relies on the US for its supply of cotton to drive the economy. 

T-Shirt Blog 6

 I think that the title of this book is actually a great name for what it is telling. The first half of this book made me think about such a common thing, t-shirts in a way I never have. I think this is mostly because I figured that where they are made is where all of the process going into a shirt is done. I never knew that Texas played such an important role in the cotton industry. Texas is connected to the global trade markets for the cotton they produce. I also never realized how many steps go into making that connection happen.

There are political aspects also, the United States offers a lot of funding to these cotton farms so they can perform in the global markets. This raised the question to me, why does the United States focus so much on subsidizing these farms when the ideology behind globalization is based around free trade with limited government involvement? Now, I am not saying whether it is right or wrong for the government to support them but it is something that leaves me a little confused. Also since the government has a whole lot of money to spend on subsidizing these farmers it can play a role on the global market of cotton. Poorer regions around the globe may not have this same amount of funding which can make them struggle more to produce cotton at a lower price and fairly compete with more wealthy countries like the United States.

Travels of a T-Shirt p.1-140

    In Travels of a T-shirt, Rivoli uses an ordinary cotton t-shirt to explain the reality of globalization. Part 1 and 2  of the book show the shirt’s journey from American cotton farms to Chinese factories. It shows how economics, politics, and labor affect global trade in ways most consumers never even consider.

    Part 1, King Cotton, focuses on how the U.S. dominates in the global cotton industry. Rivoli explains how American cotton farmers have remained competitive for over 200 years with technology and efficient farming methods. She challenges the idea of a “free market” by showing how government policies protect U.S. farmers and give them an advantage over producers in poorer countries. 

    One of the more unsettling points in Part 1 is Rivoli’s discussion of slavery and its connection to the cotton industry. She explains how cotton production in the U.S. originally depended heavily on enslaved labor. The explosive growth of cotton in the 19th century was only possible because millions of enslaved people were forced to work on plantations under brutal conditions. The wealth generated by cotton helped build American industry, while enslaved people and their future generations were denied opportunities and compensation.

    Part 2, Made In China, shifts the focus to manufacturing and labor. Rivoli explains why textiles production moved to China and the availability of low-cost labor and factory efficiency. Sweatshops and their harsh work environment often provide important opportunities for economic mobility, especially for young women. This section shows that globalization can create both hardship and opportunity. It forced me to confront the uncomfortable reality that the low prices we enjoy are tied to difficult working conditions elsewhere.

Travels Of A T-Shirt First Half

 The start of the book focuses on the cotton farmers down in Texas, in which the US is surprisingly the global leaders in the cotton industry. In Texas, the farmers get lots of subsidies, more than the GDP of other small cotton-picking countries. This challenges the idea of a "free market", since unlike those poorer countries, the US farmers have a country with working government and policies which help support their buisness. Unfortunatly, this power with policies and governement assistance can go back to the time of slave labor being used on these plantations.

Not just Texas is mentioned, but also China. After the cotton is farmed in Texas, it is sent to China to make the shirt. The reason it is sent to China and not somewhere in the US is because of the cheap, usually explotative labor in China creating low production costs for companies. Cheap labor is normalized, and even seen as an opportunity in China, as many are living in poverty and these jobs give them needed income. This need for low prices and cheap options brings lots of downsides, hurting small countries, causing hazardous work enviorments, and giving advantages to certain groups. While we love spending less money, many things happen behind the scenes that we turn our eyes from to avoid thinking about.

Travels of a T-shirt 1-140

Even though the house I grew up in is surrounded by farmland, I know absolutely nothing about farming, Leaning about the history of cotton farming, especially why it prospered in the US and its relationship with the slave trade was a particularly interesting section of this book for me. It had never occurred to me to think about the reason behind why cotton plantations were so popular and profitable. I also was unaware that the US government has constantly been creating ways for cotton farmers to skirt around paying for labor. These chapters have been really eye-opening on the complex process of planting cotton. We’ve just barely touched on how the actual t-shirt gets made from the cotton. 

I have a little background knowledge on genetically modified crops from an environmental science class I took in high school, but we didn't really cover the complexities of using these crops in farming. Fixing one problem just to create another to solve seems like it might just be a never ending cycle. I fear that searching for perfection in the science of genetically modified crops will be an unattainable goal. I think the benefits of GM crops heavily outweigh any possible negatives, but that’s only covering what we know so far about them. Can you modify a crop too much, so much so that it becomes invasive? I’ve seen plenty of futuristic horror movies about what happens why humans try to control nature. Now to be clear, I think we’re a long way off from some kind of futuristic crop apocalypse, but I know human greed can lead us to invent things that we shouldn’t. With technology becoming exponentially more advanced, science needs to be clear about it’s ethics in a quickly changing world.

Travels of a T-shirt - Part 1

Having read the first half of this book, it became clear to me that the issue of globalisation is explored through something unexpectedly ordinary: a cotton T-shirt. The journey begins in West Texas, which honestly feels like a surprising starting point for such a big topic. It focuses on Lubbock, the “cottonest city” in the world, and Nelson Reinsch, a long-time cotton farmer. The description of the land stood out to me with it being harsh, flat, windy and unpredictable, a little like parts of the UK. Cotton itself is fragile, so it almost seems surprising that this region became so important globally

One of the main questions that came to my mind is why the US has dominated the cotton industry for over 200 years, especially when so many other industries have shifted to countries with cheaper labour. I think this is what makes cotton such an interesting example of globalisation. On the surface, it doesn’t seem like something a wealthy country should still lead in. It’s basic, highly competitive and far from a luxury product. Yet cotton production has remained high.

The debate over government subsidies adds another layer. Very poor countries seem to argue that US subsidies make it difficult for them to compete, which challenges the idea that global trade is fully “free.” When subsidies to US cotton farmers can exceed the entire GDP of some African cotton producing nations, it shows how uneven the system can be. At the same time, I don’t think subsidies alone explain US dominance. The wider support system including research, infrastructure, technology, and financial support seems just as important. Farmers in Texas constantly adapt to weather, pests and price changes. I think that this adaptability feels central to their long-term success. 

What I found especially interesting is how far back this story goes. Cotton was central to the Industrial Revolution in the UK. Innovations like the spinning jenny dramatically increased output and reduced prices, launching a new industrial economy built on cost competition. However, lower prices definitely came with consequences. Early mills relied heavily on women and children because they were cheaper and seen as more manageable. Industrial growth and exploitation developed side by side, which I feel uncomfortable about. As wages rose in the UK, textile production shifted first to New England, then to the American South and later to Japan before eventually reaching China. Each time, the industry moved to where labour was cheaper and more controllable. Seeing this pattern repeated over centuries makes the phrase “race to the bottom” feel structural rather than dramatic. It’s not simply about one country behaving badly. It’s about how global markets reward whoever can produce goods most cheaply, creating greater profit margins.

What makes this more complicated, though, is that the same global market system that produces exploitation also appears to push economies forward. Today, that race runs through China. Cotton from Texas travels across the Pacific, where it is spun, knitted and stitched into T-shirts. Despite technological advances in farming and machinery, sewing is still largely done by young women sitting in rows, repeating the same motion. That detail stayed with me. Globalisation can sound abstract, trade flows, GDP, exports but in reality I think it’s very human.

People like me benefit from cheap clothing, and countries industrialise through textile exports. However, falling prices often rely on workers with limited alternatives. I found myself wondering whether this system is sustainable not just economically, but socially and ethically. If production keeps moving toward lower wages, does the “bottom” ever truly arrive? If we look at earlier industrial powers the answer seems more complicated. Manchester no longer produces cotton. Lowell, Massachusetts is now home to universities and technology firms. Former mill towns in the American South host logistics centres and advanced manufacturing. In Japan and South Korea, textiles helped ignite industrialisation, but they did not remain central forever. As workers become more educated and more expensive, industries built on cheap labour move elsewhere. I would say that industries who begin with low wages can act as a ladder by helping to generate income, urbanisation and experience that eventually push economies forward. This doesn’t erase exploitation, but it complicates the idea that the race to the bottom is purely destructive.China’s scale makes the situation different though. As a result of its vast rural population and systems like hukou have allowed it to maintain a large supply of low-cost labour for longer than earlier industrialisers. Despite this, wages have risen sharply in some regions, and production is already beginning to shift inland or abroad. The pattern appears to continue.

The final chapters add another important dimension: the race has never gone completely unchecked. Markets push costs downward but activists, reformers, journalists, and students have consistently pushed back. Child labour, once normal in textile production, is now widely condemned and formally banned. Factory safety standards, minimum wages, and corporate codes of conduct did not emerge automatically they were demanded. The example of Nike shows this clearly. When labour abuses were exposed, companies initially denied responsibility for conditions in overseas factories. Although, consumer pressure and student activism forced them to adopt monitoring systems and codes of conduct. What once seemed radical gradually became standard practice. The environmental discussion follows a similar pattern. It’s easy to assume factories always move to places with weak environmental laws. Though, as countries grow wealthier, people demand cleaner air and water and regulation strengthens. I was surprised to learn that how we wash and use a T-shirt can sometimes have a greater environmental impact than where it was produced. That shifts some responsibility back to consumers. The image that stayed with me most is the transformation of an old Shanghai spinning mill into an art gallery and café. A space that once depended on low-wage factory work now supports a different kind of economy. The race didn’t disappear, it moved. Wages rose, production shifted, and the region changed.

I think the ending leaves us with an uncomfortable but important insight. The race to the bottom is real and it can be exploitative. However, history suggests it doesn’t stay in one place forever. Standards rise, economies diversify and what once looked like the “bottom” becomes something else. The system isn’t simple and it is not solely good or bad. It keeps moving. After reading this, I don’t think I’ll ever look at a cotton T-shirt in quite the same way. What seems simple and inexpensive actually reflects centuries of industrial change, shifting labour systems, and global competition. It makes me more conscious of how easily I treat clothing as temporary. I’m not sure there’s a simple solution, but I do feel personally more responsible for the choices I will make as a consumer.

Travels of a T-shirt - Part 1

 In the first part of the book Travels of a T-shirt in the Global Economy we are presented the ideas of trade politics, power and development, with examples from Texas to China. The idea is that a simple product like a T-shirt can represent a complex and enormous system, with a political base, not just economic as many would believe. 

At first, we have a perspective on Texas cotton farms, one of the most productive enterprises in the world. Although they bring enormous revenue, these farms are also very subsidized, which means that they have a lot of incentives from its government, billions of dollars that allow these farms to keep thriving. When comparing these cotton farms to the ones in West Africa, we see unbalanced chances in the so-called "free" market. The author challenges the term free, indicating that this freedom does not mean that every State has the same opportunities, but their governments shape this market. She also makes the point that by having this impact in the economy, the cotton farmers have a lot of political influence, even being a small group of people. They have the advantage of being organized and influential, and this shapes their economy more than simply money. 

 Then, Rivoli brings China to the center of the discussion, once the cotton produced in U.S. is exported to China. She presents questioning, trying to answer why the cotton is sent to a foreign factories and not national ones. We are present to the process in where China became a world factory, when opened its economy and allowed cheap labor and a exportation-focused economy. Pietra talks about the difficult labor conditions, but compares to the absolute poverty in rural environments, where the situation could be even worse, then presenting that the cheap labor is for many people a good option, from their perspective. For China, this system is a opportunity to win jobs, for U.S., a opportunity to win products for a cheap price. For African farmers or U.S. producers, there is more losing than wining, in this uneven market. 

The author show that our free-market is not a natural structure, but heavily political and influenced by authors like WTO. She also expresses that it is hard to point the bad/good actors, since if U.S. stop the subsidies its population would be the group to suffer, and similarly, if the China's factories are closed, many will be devastated without jobs.  

Travels of a T-shirt in the Global Economy pgs 1-140

In the first 140 pages of the book, Travels of a T-shirt in the Global Economy, I have learned many things about how t-shirts are made and used around the world. While the clothing we see in the current period is expensive, the process all clothes go through before being placed on shelves or online stores to be purchased. They go through a massive complex system, and the author explains it by bringing it all the way back to cotton fields in West Texas in pgs 20-40. I discovered that Lubbock, Texas, is one of the largest cotton-producing regions in the country. The area Lubbock resides in is flat, wide-open land that allows easy access to produce cotton on a large-scale. 

After reading pages 45-60, it made me realize how heavily cotton farmers depend on the US government. This is so that they can remain financially stable to continue producing all their raw fiber. Now I understand how politics might tie with the cotton industry within the United States. 

In pages 70-110, the author covers factories in China and how they collect cotton from farms like Lubbock and turn it into clothing. Once the cotton is received, employers spin it into yarn to be knitted to create pieces of fabric. Afterwards, these fabric pieces are then sewn together to create the clothing that all humans wear. Rivoli made it clear to readers that China had become the world's leading clothing manufacturer while the book was being written. This didn't surprise me at all, as China has become the world's second-largest economy today. Once these clothes are made, they are ready to be shipped out to other wealthier nations such as the US and Europe. 

While reading through the last few sections of the book, I learned what happens to most clothes once they are worn and used by many citizens. When citizens discard their T-shirts, they are shipped out to developing countries such as Africa. They go towards people who don't have the money to afford purchasing new clothes that have never been worn before. This shows readers like me that a T-shirt has a long history, even after you throw it away. I personally never realized that they are then given to other children and families in need; I thought they were just thrown in the dumpster and later burned. Overall, the first half of this book has definitely changed my perception of how t-shirts are made and where they go after I stop wearing them or outgrow them. 

Chapter 20 & 21 and TAL

Having read Chapter 20 by James Fallows I think my view on where everyday products come from has completely changed. He describes China’s factories as “the most startling and intense aspect of today’s China,” and the scale is almost impossible to imagine. I definitely found it interesting to discover that more than 100 million people work in factories across the country. In the Guangdong province alone many have more manufacturing workers than the entire United States did at one time. That statistic alone is huge. What stood out most to me though was Shenzhen’s transformation. In 1980, it was a small fishing village. After being named a Special Economic Zone nearly every rule that might restrict business development was changed or removed. Within a few decades, it became a massive city filled with skyscrapers and factories. The speed of that growth shows how powerful economic reform and global investment can truly be especially in such a short amount of time. 

Fallows also explains that behind this growth are millions of young migrant workers who are simply looking for “the new life” in cities like Shenzhen. They end up working long hours through tough conditions but for many of them, these factory jobs mean an opportunity and a way out the rural poverty they are stuck within. I think if huge misconception within this reading is that so many people often assume China’s advantage as cheap labor and we see this when a businessman simply said “People think China is cheap, but really, it’s fast.” The real strength of China’s growth and economy lies deeper within the speed, flexibility and tightly connected supply chains within its country. I think the biggest thing I have realised since reading this chapter is that I don’t think I can look at a “Made in China” label the same way. It came to light to me that China doesn’t just manufacture products, it does so much more than that. It has built a system that powers the global economy and continues to do so. I wouldn’t be surprised if over time it also continues to grow worldwide. There’s so much more we don’t see behind the “Made in China” logo. 

Reading about Nike and the global trainer industry definitely changed how I see brands. I used to think Nike’s success was mainly about simply producing stylish trainers and famous athletes. However, the chapter explains that Nike’s real strength comes from controlling design, marketing, and advertising, while most of the shoes are actually made overseas. One thing that surprised me was how quickly the trainer market grew in the 1980s. In fact, sales in the United States tripled between 1980 and 1990 reaching $12 billion. The main buyers were teenagers and trainers then started to become a symbol of ones status. By 1991, basketball shoes made up 22% of sales and it was then clear that it was no longer just about sport but was primarily about image.

Instead of owning factories, Nike focused on branding. As one executive said, “We are marketers and designers.” Most Nike shoes were made in countries like South Korea, Taiwan, China, and Indonesia, where wages were lower. As a result of this, costs were kept down while Nike were able to stay in control of the most profitable parts of their business.

The launch of Air Jordan was a major turning point. The first pairs sold out in just three days, and the partnership with Michael Jordan turned trainers into cultural icons. At this point Nike was not just selling shoes but was also selling identity and confidence for young individuals who looked up to these sport stars. However, the chapter also points out problems. Nike kept moving production to countries with cheaper labour which therefore raised concerns about working conditions. It made me realise that behind all well known brands there is always a more complicated global system.

After reading this chapter, just like China, I do not see Nike in the same way. The swoosh is not just a logo but it represents so much more such as a worldwide network. It shows that companies often make the most money not by producing goods themselves but by controlling the image and story behind them.

Overall, the readings show that globalisation is powerful and complex. Since WW2, trade and production have connected countries into one global economy but continuous growth and risk spread together, as seen in the 2008 financial crisis. China’s rise shows how manufacturing moved to fast growing industrial areas helping to lift millions out of poverty while also being able to supply Western consumers. Globalisation  itself creates opportunities but also spreads problems just as quickly as growth. In my opinion it seems to connect the world but not on fair terms. 

In the TAL episode, it is portrayed how Cambodia tried to grow its clothing industry by improving factory conditions and treating workers more fairly. After rebuilding from years of war, Cambodia depended heavily on garment factories for jobs. They hoped that by having better labor standards that big companies would choose to make their clothes there. However, something that stood out to me was how unfair the situation felt. Even though Cambodia was trying to do the right thing I think it was clear that they were still struggling. Their electricity prices are very high, which makes it even more expensive and difficult to produce clothing. Other countries can sell clothes for less money, even if their working conditions are worse. This made me realise how much the global market actually seems to focus on price over people and it doesn’t seem fair in my opinion. I also found the part about the Cambodian officials traveling to Washington interesting. They made cold calls to members of US Congress asking for a special trade deal in order to lower taxes on their clothing. This seems very desperate of them in my opinion and like they were trying everything they could to save jobs for their workers. Overall, this podcast act made me think about how complicated global trade is. Cambodia tried to be ethical by the looks of it but that alone wasn’t enough to compete. It made me question whether companies and governments truly value fair labor practices or if money usually comes first.

Chapters 20, 21, TAL Podcast

       Chapter 20 provided an interesting insight into the operations of Chinese factories. It showed how a large part of China's success as a global superpower comes from their manufacturing and their exports, which is something I knew prior to reading this chapter. However, I did not realize how dependent certain groups of people were on these factory jobs, and how they can assist in helping them escape rural poverty. This made the manufacturing industry seem all the more sinister when just a few lines later, you learn that most of the employees are young women, and that casualties in the workplace are so common that they are seen as relatively insignificant. Not to mention that the Chinese factories are praised for being fast by businessmen like Liam Casey while a description of a typical workday at one of these factories shows us that this fastness is at the grueling expense of their employees

      The bar graph in Chapter 21 analyzing the increase in revenue for athletic footwear shows the steady percentage shares of Nike through the 80s, but also the booming increase in shares of Reebok in the late 80s to early 90s. This demonstrates the shifts in consumer trends brought up in the chapter with shifting trends in the athletic footwear market, with brands like Reebok and LA Gear surpassing Nike in becoming the more effective brands at marketing to the aerobics side of the market. When I think of Nike, my mind goes to sports like basketball and track and field, so it makes sense to see that when other forms of exercise like aerobics had a boom in the 80s, Nike was unable to compete in the market and was surpassed by these other brands.