Globalisation encompasses makes
Furthermore, globalisation may induce democracy where it is practiced. Nations governing democratically have laws that respect the people’s rights, opinions and freedom. Globalisation is, in effect a practice of democracy free trade and freedom. Countries led by dictators are the least open and have the least freedom. These countries, like Sudan, Zimbabwe, Liberia, Cuba and so on, are also the most hostile to globalisation, openness and trade in goods and services. And for good reason – these dictators or those with authoritarian power fear that their power may be undermined as the people begin to realise and long for the freedom of democracy.
Openness in trade and communications would ultimately expose these countries to democracy. These iron-grip leaders may utilise illegal means to dispose of their opposition or to keep things tightly under control. Iran, for example, has the Basij, who terrorize people and whose actions are seemingly beyond the law. However, lately Iran faces protests by students – who demand reform and democratic ideas through the Internet and satellite television – demanding for changes that might affect the future of a country. And not just any country, but Iran: one of three of the ‘axis of evil’. Consequently, change in Iran may tilt the sides to favour the global anti-terrorism movement. Thus, through this example we see that globalisation and its agents – the Internet, satellite television – are unstoppable. And further on, globalisation may actually help make the world a more peaceful, safer place to live in.
Globalisation should not be resisted because it is a waste of time and effort. Globalisation comes hand-in-glove with advancing technologies. The advancement of telecommunications allows one to reach virtually anywhere around the globe. A country needs to advance in its technology in order to keep up with the rest of the world. Globalisation is happening. To resist it is impractical, as sooner or later we would have to open ourselves to the world.
China embraces globalisation with the proper procedures, and it is now a growing power in East Asia. Even North Korea is openning up by having trade agreements with Japan. Many argue that globalisation brings with it negative effects like Americanization and exploitation. However, these would be due to the failure of the State to properly embrace globalisation. If correct and effective steps are taken by creating a stable, fundamental platform at home, then globalisation may bring more benefits than troubles. Thus, globalisation should not be resisted; it should be welcomed after preparations are made.
However, the results of globalisation could have unwanted effects. The freedom of trade and ability to set up bases around the globe could mean that large MNCs may end up more powerful and more influential than democratically-elected governments, placing the importance of clients and shareholders over the interests of local communities. This may lead to a power-struggle concerning only power-wielding giant companies, with countries that depend heavily upon their investments lying at their mercy. Although one may argue that this ‘corporate war’ may benefit people, like having dirt-cheap products and providing attractive offers and services to woo customers, it all basically boils down to this: companies are set up for the sole purpose of profit. What may be profitable may not be right. Putting our future in the hands of all-too-powerful companies is a gamble too risky to take. Unfortunately, this may be one of the results of globalisation.
Some people worry that as the tide of globalisation surges, the environment will be disregarded in the stampede for mega-profits and marketplace supremacy. As growth of populations and businesses continue, a need for raw materials must definitely arise. Thus, in desperation, forests and wildlife sanctuaries would have to be sacrificed to allocate the ever-growing numbers of people. Space will then be at a premium. However, it will be the large companies and the rich that will benefit as they have the money and model to invest and buy land for their purposes. This then leaves no room for the poor, who would consequently remain so as they cannot compete with those with larger amounts of money. Thus, the abuse of globalisation may benefit only the rich and not the poor.
It is true that globalisation has its negative effects. However, if integrated with care, it may well prove to be a boon instead of a bane. Globalisation can benefit nations politically, economically and culturally. Ideas of resistance would ring a nation nowhere, as globalisation is needed for a nation to compete at the international stage. Globalisation could lead to the triumph of democracy over autocracy. In the end, it is happening now, if not already. The large scope that globalisation encompasses makes it an unevitable process. What is ironic is that while protesters fight against globalistion efforts in the name of Africans and the world’s poor, Africans themselves may well want it to go their way. Thus, I strongly believe that globalisation should not be resisted, but should be embraced as its advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
