Before reading these chapters, I mostly saw globalization in the cultural/immigration aspects, and not the trade and commerce sides. In chapter 1, it mostly talked about how globlization helped start taking power from the government and giving it to its people through free trade. We can now get the best products and not just what the government is pushing on you. Elites dislike globalization, since the more world that is accessible to people the less power you hold over them. Companies have the power in globalization, which brings both negatives and positives.
In chapter 2, it talks about how globalization is mistakingly seen as westernization, which while bringing certain benefits, is seen in a negative light. This association causes misconceptions about globalization as a whole. Most of the arguments against globalization is from local factors, not globalization itself. Capitalistic societies want the money from globalization, not the benefits like education.
And lastly in chapter 3, the book introduces the concept of neoliberalism, which is the concept that states should guarantee freedoms like free markets and free trades, but not to interfer with these markets beyond that. Most states adopted a form of neoliberalism, but usually not fully in every aspect.
1 comment:
I find it really interesting that you thought of globalization originally as mostly immigration and culture because I though of it mostly from an economic and imports view point. I also don't know how much I would agree that elites dislike globalization as I see it as something that can really help the rich get richer if done in a certain way. Overall, I personally don't think globalization inherently helps one group more than another I think its the way globalization is implemented that decides these things.
Post a Comment