The Complexion of Globalization

Singer is right in that we do indeed live in “one world.” Furthermore, his assessment, on whether or not the United States can remain the world’s leading power in this time of globalization being dependent upon the U.S. acting ethically in accordance with the idea of all the countries functioning as “one world,” is valid. However as Wolf, Stiglitz and Freeman point out there are other factors and actors that make this concept of being apart of “one world” virtually impossible.

If individuals expect globalization to occur smoothly then they are greatly mistaken. Every country has a different heritage, leadership and values, which will affect how countries view others actions and policies. Additionally the idea of self-interest still looms large and will forever preside in a democratic form of government. This is because in order for leaders to be elected they must do what is best for their constituents. In other words as much as the global interest is important, the fact is that the global community does not vote for the President of the United States. However Stiglitz acknowledges that globalization has the potential to work and help benefit every country through free and fair trade. In order for this occur there needs to be stronger trade protection to prevent poor countries from being exploited by a version of market economics that embraces corporations. China and India are perfect examples of success in globalization, but the developing nations of Africa are examples of where globalization has actually increased the poverty level.

Critics of globalization say that globalization is really represents Americanization of the world. Part of this is true, with much of the world’s wealth located in the Western hemisphere it is hard to see globalization occur without an exchange of cultural ideas and values. Many Americans feel that because their way of life has been so successful that it should be the developing world that embraces their lifestyle in order to taste similar success. Critics say that this erodes the culture of the developing nation and creates hostility that is most often expressed in acts of violence against the western world. The West can also be seen as a loser in the unskilled labor market. Freeman reports a positive correlation between the increase in imports from developing nations and a decrease in wages for unskilled labor in the United States. Furthermore this relationship holds in Europe as an increase in trade has shown an increase in the unemployment rate of the unskilled. However Freeman notes that as countries specialize they can actually be more successful and cause the economies that trade together to grow together.

No matter what globalization is a sticky process. On one hand with corporations, governments, individuals and ideas all conflicting with each other, it may indeed be ethics that keep the world in harmony, or the other hand could it be free markets and democracy that truly unites the world. In the short run there may be winners and losers but as technology develops globally everyone may be a winner in the long run.