Sei sulla pagina 1di 11

Globalization (or globalisation), although often described as the cause of much turbulence and change, is in fact the umbrella

term for the collective effect, t he change itself. Globalization (i.e. the aggregate change we observe in our fac tories, storefronts, indeed generally across our economies and lifestyles) is ca used by four fundamental forms of capital movement throughout the global economy . The four important capital flows are: Human Capital (i.e. Immigration, Migration, Emigration, Deportation, etc.) Financial Capital (i.e. Aid, Equity, Debt, Credit & Lending, etc.) Resource Capital (i.e. Energy, Metals, Minerals, Lumber, etc.) Power Capital (i.e. Security Forces, Alliances, Armed Forces, etc.) Most of the stresses and complexities confronted in the general macro affairs of countries, communities, and the interactions between them, can be traced to the se four flows. Connectivity available via cheaper telecommunications and modes o f travel-- made more accessible to more people, facilitates these interactions a t a rate unprecedented in history. Cultural and political frictions at all level s can thus be explained as arising from the difference in opinion between two or more parties about the origination, treatment, timing, ownership or value of on e or more of the capital flows. Meaning and debate: The International Monetary Fund defines globalization as the growing economic in terdependence of countries worldwide through increasing volume and variety of cr oss-border transactions in goods and services, free international capital flows, and more rapid and widespread diffusion of technology. Meanwhile, The Internati onal Forum on Globalization defines it as the present worldwide drive toward a g lobalized economic system dominated by supranational corporate trade and banking institutions that are not accountable to democratic processes or national gover nments. While notable critical theorists, such as Immanuel Wallerstein, emphasiz e that globalization cannot be understood separately from the historical develop ment of the capitalist world-system the different definitions highlight the ens uing debate of the roles and relationships of government, corporations, and the individual in maximizing social welfare within the globalization paradigms. None theless, it is clear that globalization has economic, political, cultural, and t echnological aspects that may be closely intertwined. Given that these aspects a re key to an individual's quality of life, the social benefits and costs brought upon them by globalization generate strong debate. The economic aspects stressed in globalization are trade, investment and migrati on. The globalization of trade entails that human beings have greater access to an array of goods and services never seen before in human history. From German c ars, to Colombian coffee, from Chinese clothing, to Egyptian cotton, from Americ an music to Indian software, human beings may be able to purchase a wide range o f goods and services. The globalization of investment takes place through Foreig n Direct Investment, where multinational companies directly invest assets in a f oreign country, or by indirect investment where individuals and institutions pur chase and sell financial assets of other countries. Free migration allows indivi duals to find employment in jurisdictions where there are labor shortages. Critics of free trade also contend that it may lead to the destruction of a coun try's native industry, environment and/or a loss of jobs. Critics of internation al investment contend that by accepting these financial schemes a country loses its economic sovereignty and may be forced to set policies that are contrary to its citizen's interests or desires. Moreover, multinational companies that inves t in a country may also acquire too much political and economic power in relatio n to its citizens. Finally, migration may lead to the exploitation of workers fr om a migrant country and the displacement of workers from a host country. Critic s of globalization also contend that different economic systems that either augm ent or supplant globalization may maximize social welfare more efficiently and e quitably. The political aspects of globalization are evidenced when governments create int ernational rules and institutions to deal with issues such as trade, human right s, and the environment. Among the new institutions and rules that have come to f ruition as a result of globalization are the World Trade Organization, the Euro

currency, the North American Free Trade Agreement, to name a few. Whether a gove rnment is to consciously open itself to cross-border links, is the central quest ion of this aspect. Social activist and non-profit organizations such as Amnesty International and G reenpeace are also becoming more global in scope. Some of these organizations ta ke issue with the economic and political aspects of globalization as they fear t hat economic interests either subvert the nation state in its ability to protect its citizens from economic exploitation, or support governments that violate th e human rights of their citizens. Cultural global ties also grow through globalization as news ideas and fashions through trade, travel and media move around the globe at lightning speed. Global brands such as Coca-Cola, Nike & Sony serve as common reference to consumers al l over the World. An individual in China enjoys the same soft drink as an indivi dual in Puerto Rico--at opposite ends of the globe. However, these ties may also cause strains: for example Western Ideas of freedom of expression may clash wit h Islamic views on Religious tolerance. And if not strains, critics contend this is really an imposition of cultural imperialism in order to preserve economic i nterests. The other aspect of globalization is the revolutionary change in technology, par ticularly in transport and communication, which ostensibly creates a global vill age. In 1850 it took nearly a year to sail around the World. Now you can fly aro und the world in a day, send an email anywhere almost instantly, or be part of t he 1.5 billion viewers watching the final match of the World Cup. Transportation costs have come down as result of technological advances that make foreign mark ets more accessible to trade. Tuna caught in the North Atlantic may be served th e next day at a Sushi restaurant in Japan. Finally, billions of dollars in asset s and currencies are exchanged daily around the globe by electronic means at vir tually no cost. Globalization spreads everything. History: Since the word has both technical and political meanings, different groups will have differing histories of "globalization". In general use within the field of economics and political economy, however, it is a history of increasing trade be tween nations based on stable institutions that allow firms in different nations to exchange goods and services with minimal friction. The term "liberalization" came to mean the acceptance of the Neoclassical econom ic model which is based on the unimpeded flow of goods and services between econ omic jurisdictions. This led to specialization of nations in exports, and the pr essure to end protective tariffs and other barriers to trade. The period of the gold standard and liberalization of the 19th century is often called "The First Era of Globalization". Based on the Pax Britannica and the exchange of goods in currencies pegged to specie, this era grew along with industrialization. The the oretical basis was David Ricardo's work on Comparative advantage and Say's Law o f General equilibrium. In essence, it was argued that nations would trade effect ively, and that any temporary disruptions in supply or demand would correct them selves automatically. The institution of the gold standard came in steps in majo r industrialized nations between approximately 1850 and 1880, though exactly whe n various nations were truly on the gold standard is contentiously debated. Globalization in the era since World War II has been driven by trade negotiation rounds, originally under the auspices of GATT, which led to a series of agreeme nts to remove restrictions on "free trade". The Uruguay round led to a treaty to create the World Trade Organization or WTO, to mediate trade disputes. Other bi - and trilateral trade agreements, including sections of Europe'sMaastricht Trea ty and the North American Free Trade Agreement have also been signed in pursuit of the goal of reducing tariffs and barriers to trade. Nature and existence of globalization: There is much academic discussion about whether globalization is a real phenomen on or only an analytical artifact (a myth). Although the term is widespread, man y authors argue that the characteristics attributed to globalization have alread y been seen at other moments in history. Also, many note that such features, inc luding the increase in international trade and the greater role ofmultinational

corporations, are not as d Some authors prefer the term internationalization rat her than globalization. In internationalization, the role of the state and the i mportance of nations are greater, while globalization in its complete form elimi natesnation states. So, they argue that the frontiers of countries, in a broad s ense, are far from being dissolved, and therefore this globalization process is not happening, and probably will not happen, considering that in world history, internationalization never turned into globalization (the European Union and NAF TA are yet to prove their case). Some maintain that globalization is an imagined geography; that is, a political tool of ruling neo-liberalists, who are attempting to use certain images and dis courses of world politics to justify their political agendas. Writers of books s uch as No Logo claim that by presenting a picture of a globalized world, the Bre tton Woods institutions can demand that countries open up their economies to lib eralization under Structural Adjustment Programmes that encourage governments to fund privatization programmes, ahead ofwelfare and public services. Characteristics: Globalization / internationalisation has become identified with a number of tren ds, most of which may have developed since World War II. These include greater i nternational movement of commodities, money, information, and people; and the de velopment of technology, organizations, legal systems, and infrastructures to al low this movement. The actual existence of some of these trends is debated. Economically o Increase in international trade at a much faster rate than the growth in the world economy o Increase in international flow of capital including foreign direct inves tment o Creation of international agreements leading to organizations like the W TO and OPEC o Development of global financial systems o Increased role of international organizations such as WTO, WIPO, IMF tha t deal with international transactions o Increase of economic practices like outsourcing, by multinational corpor ations Culturally o Greater international cultural exchange, o Spreading of multiculturalism, and better individual access to cultural diversity, for example through the export ofHollywood and Bollywood movies. Howe ver, the imported culture can easily supplant the local culture, causing reducti on in diversity through hybridization or even assimilation. The most prominent f orm of this is Westernization, but Sinicization of cultures also takes place. o Greater international travel and tourism o Greater immigration, including illegal immigration o Spread of local foods such as pizza, Chinese and Indian food/Pakistani F ood to other countries (often adapted to local taste) o World-wide fads and Pop Culture such as Pokemon, Sudoku, Numa Numa, Orig ami, Idol series, YouTube,MySpace, and many others. o Increasing usage of foriegn phrases. Example... "Amigo" and "Adios" are Spanish terms many non-speaking spanish people in the US understand, Most Americ ans understand some French, Spanish or Japanese without actually knowing the lan guage. Development of a global telecommunications infrastructure and greater transborde r data flow, using such technologies as the Internet, communication satellites a nd telephones Increase in the number of standards applied globally; e.g. copyright laws and pa tents Formation or development of a set of universal values The push by many advocates for an international criminal court and international justice movements (see the International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice respectively). It is often argued that even terrorism has undergone globalization, with attacks

in foreign countries that have no direct relation with the own country. Barriers to international trade have been considerably lowered since World War I I through international agreements such as theGeneral Agreement on Tariffs and T rade (GATT). Particular initiatives carried out as a result of GATT and the WTO, for which GATT is the foundation, have included: Promotion of free trade o Of goods: Reduction or elimination of tariffs; construction of free trade zones with small or no tariffs Reduced transportation costs, especially from development of containerization fo r ocean shipping. o Of capital: reduction or elimination of capital controls o Reduction, elimination, or harmonization of subsidies for local business es Intellectual property restrictions o Harmonization of intellectual property laws across nations (generally sp eaking, with more restrictions) o Supranational recognition of intellectual property restrictions (e.g. pa tents granted by China would be recognized in the US) Anti-globalization: Critics of the economic aspects of globalization contend that it is not, as its proponents tend to imply, an inexorable process that flows naturally from the ec onomic needs of everyone. The critics typically emphasize that globalization is a process that is mediated according to elite imperatives, and typically raise t he possibility of alternative global institutions and policies, which they belie ve address the moral claims of poor and working classes throughout the globe, as well as environmental concerns in a more equitable way. In terms of the controv ersial global migration issue, disputes revolve around both its causes, whether and to what extent it is voluntary or involuntary, necessary or unnecessary Incr ease in international flow of capital including foreign direct investment Criti cs of the economic aspects of globalization contend that it is not, as its propo nents tend to imply, an inexorable process that flows naturally from the economi c needs of everyone. The critics typically emphasize that globalization is a pro cess that is mediated according to elite imperatives, and typically raise the po ssibility of alternative global institutions and policies, which they believe ad dress the moral claims of poor and working classes throughout the globe, as well as environmental concerns in a more equitable way. In terms of the controversia l global migration issue, disputes revolve around both its causes, whether and t o what extent it is voluntary or involuntary, necessary or unnecessary; and its effects, whether beneficial, or socially and environmentally costly. Proponents tend to see migration simply as a process whereby white and blue collar workers may go from one country to another to provide their services, while critics tend to emphasize negative causes such as economic, political, and environmental ins ecurity, and cite as one notable effect, the link between migration and the enor mous growth of urban slums in developing countries. According to"The Challenge o f Slums," a 2003 UN-Habitat report, "the cyclical nature of capitalism, increase d demand for skilled versus unskilled labour, and the negative effects of global isation "in particular, global economic booms and busts that ratchet up inequali ty and distribute new wealth unevenly" contribute to the enormous growth of slum s. Various aspects of globalization are seen as harmful by public-interest activist s as well as strong state nationalists. This movement has no unified name. "Anti -globalization" is the media's preferred term; it can lead to some confusion, as activists typically oppose certain aspects or forms of globalization, not globa lization per se. Activists themselves, for example Noam Chomsky, have said that this name is meaningless as the aim of the movement is to globalize justice. Ind eed, the global justice movement is a common name. Many activists also unite und er the slogan "another world is possible", which has given rise to names such as altermondialisme in French. Economic arguments by fair trade theorists claim that unrestricted free trade be

nefits those with more financial leverage (i.e. the rich) at the expense of the poor. Many "anti-globalization" activists see globalization as the promotion of a corporatist agenda, which is intent on constricting the freedoms of individual s in the name of profit. Some "anti-globalization" groups argue that globalizati on is necessarily imperialistic, is one of the driving reasons behind the Iraq w ar and is forcing savings to flow into the United States rather than developing nations; it can therefore be said that "globalization" is another term for a for m of Americanization, as it is believed by some observers that the United States could be one of the few countries (if not the only one) to truly profit from gl obalization. Some argue that globalization imposes credit-based economics, resulting in unsus tainable growth of debt and debt crises. The financial crises in Southeast Asia, that began in the relatively small, debt-ridden economy of Thailand but quickly spread toMalaysia, Indonesia, South Korea and eventually was felt all around th e world, demonstrated the new risks and volatility in rapidly changing globalize d markets. The IMF's subsequent 'bailout' money came with conditions of politica l change (i.e. government spending limits) attached and came to be viewed by cri tics as undermining national sovereignty in neo-colonialist fashion. Anti-Global ization activists pointed to the meltdowns as proof of the high human cost of th e indiscriminate global economy. The main opposition is to unfettered globalization (neoliberal; laissez-faire c apitalism), guided by governments and what are claimed to be quasi-governments ( such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank) that are supposedly not held responsible to the populations that they govern and instead respond mos tly to the interests of corporations. Many conferences between trade and finance ministers of the core globalizing nations have been met with large, and occasio nally violent, protests from opponents of "corporate globalism". Some "anti-globalization" activists object to the fact that the current "globali zation" globalizes money and corporations, but not people and unions. This can b e seen in the strict immigration controls in nearly all countries, and the lack of labour rights in many countries in the developing world. Another more conservative camp opposed to globalization is state-centric nationa lists who fear globalization is displacing the role of nations in global politic s and point to NGOs as encroaching upon the power of individual nations. Some ad vocates of this warrant for anti-globalization are Pat Buchanan and Jean-Marie L e Pen. The movement is very broad, including church groups, national liberation faction s, left-wing parties, environmentalists, peasantunionists, anti-racism groups, a narchists, those in support of relocalization and others. Most are reformist, (a rguing for a more humane form of capitalism) while others are more revolutionary (arguing for a more humane system than capitalism). Many have decried the lack of unity and direction in the movement, but some such as Noam Chomsky have claim ed that this lack of centralization may in fact be a strength. Protests by the global justice movement have forced high-level international mee tings away from the major cities where they used to be held, into remote locatio ns where protest is impractical. Pro-globalization (globalism): Supporters of democratic globalization can be labelled pro-globalists. They cons ider that the first phase of globalization, which was market-oriented, should be completed by a phase of building global political institutions representing the will of world citizens. The difference with other globalists is that they do no t define in advance any ideology to orient this will, which should be left to th e free choice of those citizens via a democratic process. Supporters of free trade point out that economic theories of comparative advanta ge suggest that free trade leads to a more efficient allocation of resources, wi th all countries involved in the trade benefiting. In general, this leads to low er prices, more employment and higher output. Libertarians and other proponents of laissez-faire capitalism say higher degrees of political and economic freedom in the form ofdemocracy and capitalism in the developed world are both ends in themselves and also produce higher levels of m

aterial wealth. They see globalization as the beneficial spread of liberty and c apitalism. Critics argue that the anti-globalization movement uses anecdotal evidence to su pport their view and that worldwide statistics instead strongly support globaliz ation: the percentage of people in developing countries living below US$1 (adjusted for inflation and purchasing power) per day has halved in only twenty years, althou gh some critics argue that more detailed variables measuring poverty should inst ead be studied. Life expectancy has almost doubled in the developing world since WWII and is sta rting to close the gap to the developed world where the improvement has been sma ller. Child mortality has decreased in every developing region of the world.Inco me inequality for the world as a whole is diminishing. Democracy has increased dramatically from almost no nation with universal suffra ge in 1900 to 62.5% of all nations in 2000. The proportion of the world's population living in countries where per-capita fo od supplies are less than 2,200 calories (9,200kilojoules) per day decreased fro m 56% in the mid-1960s to below 10% by the 1990s. Between 1950 and 1999, global literacy increased from 52% to 81% of the world. W omen made up much of the gap: Female literacy as a percentage of male literacy h as increased from 59% in 1970 to 80% in 2000. The percentage of children in the labor force has fallen from 24% in 1960 to 10% in 2000. There are similar trends for electric power, cars, radios, and telephones per ca pita, as well as the proportion of the population with access to clean water. However, some of these improvements may not be due to globalization, or may be p ossible without the current form of globalization or its negative consequences, to which the global justice movement objects. Some pro-capitalists are also critical of the World Bank and the IMF, arguing th at they are corrupt bureaucracies controlled and financed by states, not corpora tions. Many loans have been given to dictators who never carried out promised re forms, instead leaving the common people to pay the debts later. They thus see t oo little capitalism, not too much. They also note that some of the resistance t o globalization comes from special interest groups with conflicting interests, l ike Western world unions. However, there are also many anti-capitalist who are a gainst the World Bank and the IMF because they believe they are too capitalist a nd only in interests for profit. Others, such as Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., simply view globalization as inevit able and advocate creating institutions such as adirectly-elected United Nations Parliamentary Assembly to exercise oversight over unelected international bodie s. Other uses: "Globalization" can mean: Globalism, if the concept is reduced to its economic aspects, can be said to con trast with economic nationalism andprotectionism. It is related to laissez-faire capitalism and neoliberalism. It shares a number of characteristics with internationalization and is often use d interchangeably, although some prefer to use globalization to emphasize the er osion of the nation-state or national boundaries. Making connections between places on a global scale. Today, more and more places around the world are connected to each other in ways that were previously unima ginable. In geography, this process is known as complex connectivity, where more and more places are being connected in more and more ways. Arjun Appadurai iden tified five types of global connectivity: o Ethnoscapes: movements of people, including tourists, immigrants, refuge es, and business travellers. o Financescapes: global flows of money, often driven by interconnected cur rency markets, stock exchanges, and commodity markets. o Ideoscapes: the global spread of ideas and political ideologies. For exa mple, Green Peace has become a worldwide environmental movement.

o Mediascapes: the global distribution of media images that appear on our computer screens, in newspapers, television, and radio. o Technoscapes: the movement of technologies around the globe. For example , the Green Revolution in rice cultivation introduced western farming practices into many developing countries. Although Appadurai's taxonomy is highly contestable, it does serve to show that globalization is much more than economics on a global scale. In its cultural form, globalization has been a label used to identify attempts t o erode the national cultures of Europe, and subsume them into a global culture whose members will be much easier to manipulate through mass media and controlle d governments. In this context, massive legal or illegal immigration has been al lowed, mainly in European countries. The formation of a global village closer contact between different parts of the world, with increasing possibilities of personal exchange, mutual understanding and friendship between "world citizens", and creation of a global civilization. Economic globalization there are four aspects to economic globalization, referri ng to four different flows across boundaries, namely flows of goods/services, i. e. 'free trade' (or at least freer trade), flows of people (migration), of capit al, and of technology. A consequence of economic globalization is increasing rel ations among members of an industry in different parts of the world (globalizati on of an industry), with a corresponding erosion of national sovereignty in the economic sphere. The IMF defines globalization as the growing economic interdepe ndence of countries worldwide through increasing volume and variety of cross-bor der transactions in goods and services, freer international capital flows, and m ore rapid and widespread diffusion of technology (IMF, World Economic Outlook, M ay, 1997). The World Bank defines globalization as the "Freedom and ability of i ndividuals and firms to initiate voluntary economic transactions with residents of other countries". In the field of management, globalization is a marketing or strategy term that r efers to the emergence of international markets for consumer goods characterized by similar customer needs and tastes enabling, for example, selling the same ca rs or soaps or foods with similar ad campaigns to people in different cultures. This usage is contrasted with internationalization which describes the activitie s of multinational companies dealing across borders in either financial instrume nts, commodities, or products that are extensively tailored to local markets. Gl obalization also means cross-border management activities or development process es to adapt to the emergence of a globalized market or to seek and realize benef it from economies of scale or scope or from cross-border learning among differen t country-based organizations. In the field of software, globalization is a technical term that combines the de velopment processes of internationalization andlocalization. Many, such as participants in the World Social Forum, use the term "corporate gl obalization" or "global corporatization" to highlight the impact of multinationa l corporations and the use of legal and financial means to circumvent local laws and standards, in order to leverage the labor and services of unequally-develop ed regions against each other. The spread of capitalism from developed to developing nations. "The concept of globalisation refers both to the compression of the world and th e intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole" - Benedikt Kiesenhof er Measurement of globalization: To what extent a nation-state or culture is globalized in a particular year has until most recently been measured employing simple proxies like flows of trade, migration, or foreign direct investment. A more sophisticated approach to measur ing globalization is the recent index calculated by the Swiss think tank KOF. Th e index measures the three main dimensions of globalization: economic, social, a nd political. In addition to three indices measuring these dimensions, an overal l index of globalization and sub-indices referring to actual economic flows, eco nomic restrictions, data on personal contact, data on information flows, and dat a on cultural proximity is calculated. Data are available on a yearly basis for

122 countries. According to the index, the world's most globalized country is th e USA, followed by Sweden, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Luxembourg. The least globalized countries according to the KOF-index are Togo, Chad and the Central African Republic. Global Falsehoods: How the World Bank and the UNDP Distort the Figures on Global Poverty: According to Professor Michel Chossudovsky ,until the 1998 financial meltdown (" black September" 1998), the World economy was said to be booming under the impet us of the "free market" reforms. Without debate or discussion, so-called "sound macro-economic policies" (meaning the gamut of budgetary austerity, deregulation , downsizing and privatisation) continue to be heralded as the key to economic s uccess and poverty alleviation. In turn, both the World Bank and the United Nati ons Development Programme (UNDP) have asserted authoritatively that economic gro wth in the late 20th Century has contributed to a reduction in the levels of Wor ld poverty. According to the UNDP, "the progress in reducing poverty over the 20 th century is remarkable and unprecedented... The key indicators of human develo pment have advanced strongly." The Devastating Impacts of Macro-economic Reform are casually denied: The increasing levels of global poverty resulting from macro-economic reform are casually denied by G7 governments and international institutions (including the World Bank and the IMF); social realities are concealed, official statistics ar e manipulated, economic concepts are turned upside down. The World Bank framework deliberately departs from all established concepts and procedures (eg. by the US Bureau of Census or the United Nations) for measuring poverty. It consists in arbitrarily setting a "poverty threshold" at one dollar a day per capita. It then proceeds (without even measuring) to deciding that pop ulation groups with a per capita income "above one dollar a day" are "non-poor". The World Bank "methodology" conveniently reduces recorded poverty without the n eed for collecting country-level data. This "subjective" and biased assessment i s carried out irrespective of actual conditions at the country level. The one do llar a day procedure is absurd: the evidence amply confirms that population grou ps with per capita incomes of 2, 3 or even 5 dollars a day remain poverty strick en (ie. unable to meet basic expenditures of food, clothing, shelter, health and education). Authoritative" World Bank Numbers: These authoritative World Bank numbers are those which everybody quotes, --ie. 1 .3 billion people below the poverty line. But nobody seems to have bothered to e xamine how the World Bank arrives at these figures. The data is then tabulated in glossy tables with "forecasts" of declining levels of global poverty into the 21st Century. These World Bank "forecasts" of povert y are based on an assumed rate of growth of per capita income, --ie. growth of t he latter implies pari passu a corresponding lowering of the levels of poverty. Its a numerical game! The UNDP Framework: While the UNDP Human Development Group has in previous years provided the intern ational community with a critical assessment of key issues of global development , the 1997 Human Development Report devoted to the eradication of poverty broadl y conveys a similar viewpoint to that heralded by the Bretton Woods institutions . The UNDP's "human poverty index" (HPI) is based on "the most basic dimensions of deprivation: a short life span, lack of basic education and lack of access to public and private resources". Based on the above criteria, the UNDP Human Development Group comes up with esti mates of human poverty which are totally inconsistent with country-level realtie s. The HPI for Colombia, Mexico or Thailand, for instance, is of order of 10-11 percent (see Table 1). The UNDP measurements point to "achievements" in poverty reduction in Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and India which are totally at odds with country-level data. The human poverty estimates put forth by the UNDP portray an even more distorted and misleading pattern than those of the World Bank). For instance, only 10.9 p ercent of Mexico's population are categorised by the UNDP as "poor". Yet this es

timate contradicts the situation observed in Mexico since the mid-1980s: collaps e in social services, impoverishment of small farmers and the massive decline in real earnings triggered by successive currency devaluations. A recent OECD stud y confirms unequivocally the mounting tide of poverty in Mexico since the signin g of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Double Standards in the "Scientific" Measurement of Poverty: "Double standards" prevail in the measurement of poverty: the World Bank's one d ollar a day criterion applies only to the "developing countries". Both the Bank and the UNDP fail to acknowledge the existence of poverty in Western Europe and North America. Moreover, the one dollar a day criterion is in overt contradictio n with established methodologies used by Western governments and intergovernment al organisations to define and measure poverty in the "developed countries". In the West, the methods for measuring poverty have been based on minimum levels of household spending required to meet essential expenditures on food, clothing , shelter, health and education. In the United States, for instance, the Social Security Administration (SSA) in the 1960s had set a "poverty threshold " which consisted of "the cost of a minimum adequate diet multiplied by three to allow f or other expenses". This measurement was based on a broad consensus within the U S Administration. Conversely, if the US Bureau of Census methodology (based on the cost of meeting a minimum diet) were applied to the developing countries, the overwhelming majo rity of the population would be categorised as "poor". While this exercise of us ing "Western standards" and definitions has not been applied in a systematic fas hion, it should be noted that with the deregulation of commodity markets, retail prices of essential consumer goods are not appreciably lower than in the US or Western Europe. The cost of living in many Third World cities is higher than in the United States. Moreover, household budget surveys for several Latin American countries suggest that at least sixty percent of the population the region does not meet minimum c alorie and protein requirements. In Peru, for instance, following the 1990 IMF s ponsored "Fujishock", 83 percent of the Peruvian population according to househo ld census data were unable to meet minimum daily calorie and protein requirement s. The prevailing situation in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia is more serious where a majority of the population suffer from chronic undernourishment. The investigation on poverty by both organizations take official statistics at f ace value. It is largely an "office based exercise" conducted in Washington and New York with few insights or awareness of "what is happening in the field". The 1997 UNDP Report points to a decline of one third to a half in child mortality in selected countries of Sub-Saharan despite the slide in State expenditures and income levels. What it fails to mention, however, is that the closing down of h ealth clinics and the massive lay-offs of health professionals (often replaced b y semi-illiterate health volunteers) responsible for compiling mortality data ha s resulted in a de facto decline in recorded mortality. The IMF-World Bank spons ored macro-economic reforms have also led to a collapse in the process of data c ollection. Table 1 THE UNDP'S HUMAN POVERTY INDEX Selected Developing Countries Country Poverty Level (percent of the population below the poverty line) Trinidad and Tobago 4.1 Mexico 10.9 Thailand 11.7 Colombia 10.7 Philippines 17.7 Jordan 10.9 Nicaragua 27.2 Jamaica 12.1 Iraq 30.7 Rwanda 37.9 Papua New Guinea 32.0

Nigeria 41.6 Zimbabwe 17.3 Source: Human Development Report 1997, table 1.1, p. 21 Table 2 POVERTY IN SELECTED G7 COUNTRIES, BY NATIONAL STANDARDS Countries Country Poverty Level (percent of the population below the poverty line) United States (1996)* 13.7 Canada (1995)** 17.8 United Kingdom (1993)*** 20.0 Italy (1993)*** 17.0 Germany (1993)*** 13.0 France (1993)*** 17.0 Source: *US Bureau of Census, ** Centre for International Statistics, Canadian Council on Social Development ***European Information Service. Beyond globalism and antiglobalism: This essay has aimed to refute many of the arguments put forward by the anti-glo balization movement and has tried to show that globalism is not a reactionary pl ot by powerful sharks but the revolutionary activity of many small fish, navigat ing the oceans and freely communicating with each other. The arguments of the anti-globalization movement lead us back into the crushing embrace of Big Brother the nation state, which has never been the defender of th e local community and the protector of the individual person. The "think globally act locally" message has been turned upside down by the anti -globalizers who act globally (from Seattle to Prague, from Gothenburg to Genova ) while thinking along very narrow and short-term lines. The main focus should not be on the MacDonalds outlets of this world but on the MacArthur (the generals ) and the McCarthy (the politicians); otherwise they will always prevail with th eir nefarious interventions even after hamburgers and fast food have gone out of fashion. Globalism is, for many people, the only way to escape political oppression, econ omic poverty, cultural alienation. However, even this grand vision of emancipati on and progress connected to globalism does not represent the core of the matter , being still full of limitations and distortions linked to a discourse based on globalism versus antiglobalism. The real issue is not globalization vs. anti-globalization but liberation vs. su bjection, especially with reference to the nation state with its protected cohor t of monopolistic producers and parasitic consumers (the bureaucracy, the army, etc.).What is at stake is not globalism or localism but freedom and nothing else than freedom. We do not need to pile up data or write long treatises to show that freedom is a human value and servitude is not, that the earth belongs to humankind for the c are of present and future generations and is not the closed territorial racket o f national rulers and their corrupt or credulous appendages. For this reason, whenever and wherever a debate on globalization takes place, af ter listening carefully to the various positions and arguments put forward and h aving worked out in our mind all the possible implications, we should sincerely ask ourselves: where is freedom? who is really advocating freedom? how can we be tter develop freedom? According to the answers we should know where we stand. Terrorism and Globalisation: According to the E-journal. ISSN 1505-1161. October 2002 by Asta Maskaliunaite, already from the 1970s terrorism has been considered one of the global problems, and, actually, almost all the states of the world have experienced terrorist at tacks in the last three decades. Although the tactics resembling terrorism is tr aced as early as the Jewish struggle against the Roman empire, it is the end of the 1960s that marks the beginning of the contemporary terrorist activities, an era of what has been called age of terrorism. Several events of that time influe

nced both the increasing usage of terrorist tactics in attempt to influence the political agenda and the appearance of the word terrorism in the everyday langua ge, especially in the media. These events: death of Che Guevara in 1967, which s howed the shortcomings of guerrilla warfare, the student uprisings of the 1968 h aving a similar influence on the view of impact of such type of revolts and the Six Day War of June 1967 that gave an impetus for an increasing use of the termt errorism by the Western media. The debate about the impacts of the terrorist network on the development of glob alization is much more controversial. In this sphere two main conflicting ideas can be distinguished: there are authors who claim that terrorism would slow down globalization processes and there are ones who argue exactly the opposite that it would speed up the processes of integration worldwide. The arguments for the strengthening of globalization received even more credibility because of the eve nts that followed the September 11 attacks and the rhetoric that president Bushs administration adopted after them. Enhancing the free trade was one of the main arguments of this rhetoric. In fact the processes of globalization seemed to adv ance after these events as United States received a possibility to both assert i ts leadership and transfer the blame over the world recession on the works of te rrorists. Such optimistic views, however, can hardly be sustained in the view of the curre nt events. While it is rather clear that the processes of economic globalization will not halt, the form it takes is far from the one that has been dreamed of b y the various activists of global civil society organizations. Hence, it is very doubtful that the terrorist attacks and the need to respond to the terrorist th reat would greatly enhance the creation and development of the global civil soci ety Conclusions: Various debates about the mutual impact of terrorism and globalization show the multifaceted relationship between the two phenomena. Summarizing briefly the arg uments exposed so far it could be said that globalization provides means for the global terrorism by its technological advances; it also gives causes for such a terrorism primarily by creating great discrepancies in the economic conditions in various countries of the world. While analyzing the relationship between glob alization and causes of terrorism, it is also perceived as a resistance to the d omination of the United States in the world. The world itself, in words of Baudr illard, resists domination. These arguments lead are connected with the idea tha t terrorism became truly a global actor, which is confirmed by the fact that suc h organizations as al Qaeda achieve truly global dimensions. It uses global netw orks and advances causes that are deeply connected with the way the politics of the world function. On the other hand, the analysts who promote the idea that because of the threat of terrorism the process of globalization will be just advanced also have import ant arguments. The process of globalization does not seem to have stopped and th e form of it is not much different from the one experienced before the September 11th attacks either. To the contrary, the assertion of hegemony by United State s has recently reached rather impressive dimensions. The world is gathered aroun d the United States in its fight against terrorism, which also means the affirma tion of its dominant position in the world. However, contrary to the more optimistic views of the global civil society activ ists and some social scientists, there is not much multilateralism and mutual co operation between the states and societies to be seen. In this sense, the proces s of globalization was not advanced by the terrorist attacks and no sense of a n eed of multilateral cooperation between the countries for countering the threat of terrorism was created. As a final point, it could be argued that terrorism has an effect on globalizati on, but exactly a reverse one than intended, that instead of weakening the posit ion of hegemonic power, it actually reinforces it. Hence, again, it could be arg ued that we are spinning in some kind of vicious circle where the shape of globa lization, which we witness, engenders terrorism and terrorism itself enforces ex actly this kind of globalization based on a hegemony of the United States.

Potrebbero piacerti anche