GlobalizationEssay Preview: GlobalizationReport this essayIntroductionGlobalization, which describes the current state of affairs, refers to an ever increasing integration of world economies and cultures, resulting from unprecedented technological advances which have optimized conditions for the emergence of powerful multinational corporations and have transformed the way people do business. Despite the positive effects that globalization has had on the development of poorer countries, world poverty is growing at an alarming rate. It is one of the most significant problems in need of development solutions. Whether globalization can support sustainable development is a dilemma facing the entire world. In this paper, it will be argued that globalization, in its current form, cannot respond to the needs of developing countries. Though it has the potential to be a positive world force, globalization must undergo changes, accepting some form of intervention so that the interests of all, not only the very rich, can be safeguarded.
Visions of DevelopmentEarly economic theory defined “development” in the context of growth and industrialization. Third world countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa were seen largely seen as “underdeveloped” or “primitive” versions of the developed European nations. With appropriate socio-economic policies, they would, in time, “develop” the sophisticated institutions and high standards of living of Europe and North America. However, in more recent years, we have come to include alternate views of development. More recent theories embrace multi-dimensional concepts and see development, not only in relation to the third world, as was the case in the past, but also in the context of different ideological perspectives and, since the end of the Cold War, in the context of global capitalism.
Development, as a political term, defines social values, and is applied to conflicting theories of socio-economic change. More specifically, when we speak of development in political terms we are referring primarily to the relationship between capitalism and development; as it is (since the end of the Cold War) the prevailing state of being for the most powerful nations in the world. We also examine the concept of social values recognizing that it is a relative term. Lastly, we must inspect the different visions of what development should be or could be, understanding its inherent ambiguity. (Thomas, 2000)
Development implies a change, which permeates all sectors of life. It is a process without end, an ever-evolving state. It is now commonplace to speak of sustainable development. If the word development implies an all-encompassing idea of a desirable standard of living, but is not always adhered to, or indeed possible without casualties, then sustainable suggests endurance into the future. (Thomas, 2000)
Sustainable development has a number of social goals, some of which are basic rights; attainment of a certain level of education, fulfillment of nutritional needs, increase in per capita income and a fair distribution of wealth, among others. There are two more terms which must be defined when speaking the language of political, economic and social progress. That is, immanent development, meaning a change within the process of development that will inevitably bring destruction before it brings creation. Intentional development means an intentional strive toward a set of goals that have been premeditated.
Historically, (industrial) capitalism was the global system which began in the first half of the 19th century. Capitalism describes a self-regulating system of markets and refers to a market society(Polanyi, 1957). Everything becomes a commodity, not just the products bought and sold, but also the land, the labour, and the organization of these. This has brought about a conflict between humans and nature, and productive organization. This conflict, in turn, has brought about movements to represent and ultimately protect them. The major socio-political movements which define how development relates to capitalism can be summed up as: neo-liberalism, structuralism, interventionism, and post development..
Neoliberalism refers to a political-economic philosophy that has had major implications for government policies beginning in the 1970s and has been increasingly prominent since the 1980s. Neoliberalism de-emphasizes or rejects government intervention in the economy , focusing instead on a free market and fewer restrictions on business operations. The most important class of rights to expand are those of property enforcement, and of opening nations to entry by multinational corporations. In a broader sense, it is used to describe the movement towards using the market to achieve a wide range of social ends previously filled by government. It is generally hostile to protectionism, social democracy and socialism. It is often at odds with fair trade policies and other movements that support the protection of labour rights and social justice in international relations and economics.
Structuralism is the heading for various views that all have a common thread: development is seen as change in social and economic structures. There are schools of thought that have completely broken off from capitalism, and have come up with models of development in the form of a kind of socialism which does not depend on the state at all; these are named alternative development or people-centered development. People-centered development is yet another way of looking at what the desired state of society should be and how to achieve this. This view emphasizes people rather than production. “Human needs” are emphasized, such as low levels of poverty and low levels of unemployment, high literacy and equality.
(Thomas, 2000).The way to achieve these goals are usually seen through a process called empowerment and participation by people themselves rather than big organizations. Empowerment is a course of action whereby the poorest citizens take hold of their own destinies and become responsible for their own development. People-centered development believes that poverty is caused by abuse of power and natural resources. It therefore asks for a redistribution of power, equality led transformation of institutions and values to restore the community and assure human well being (Korten, 1995). People-centered development offers an alternate mode of reaching a desired state of being in the world other than that of an industrial
.
Humanity and Environment
When the process of empowerment and participation is completed it is understood that mankind is part of a society in which a small number of leaders are given power and the community can transform it, thereby taking responsibility for the community’s lives. This has a number of similarities with the concept of the industrial revolution, which began in the early 20th century with the publication of the paper Industrial Transition in America (Kuttenberg & Wurtzel, 2007). What makes industrial work innovative is that it is both an active field and a complex structure for community organisation, education, research and innovation.
The human potential is constantly shifting and can only be fully realised when people are given the tools of change. Therefore the transition to a ‘people’ culture of development is necessary. This can be found in the emergence of modern technologies, such as computer, mobile phone and telecommunications. The technology enables people to gain an even-keeled feeling of identity through interaction, participation, participation in a social organisation (Alesen, 1995), and access to the information, training and knowledge needed to bring about change (Chen & Van Zanden in their paper A New and Changing Technology, 2006).
The goal of industrial development is to give an element or medium of social transformation to the population, particularly the youth (Fletcher and Heilmuth, 2003), and, with this end-point, give an edge to the state. This means an industrial transformation that is noncompetitive and encourages a more open economy and a more open culture (Hahn-Dorkele, 2014).
Humanism and Labor
Hence the term ‘human labour’ or ‘labour’ and the concept of human labor is derived from the early English industrialists and was influenced by the notion of ‘humanism’, to which it has been ascribed over thousands of years in many different societies. As the British philosopher Charles Taylor’s The Great Transformation took place in 1790, industrial workers were encouraged to work, but not to organize: they had to join other workers at all times (Mastersop, 1973). Despite such an optimistic mindset, they were still able to achieve the level of political power they wanted, and that level of social and economic activity, while also increasing the level of production, was of limited value and limited. It was also only when the British aristocracy and the capitalists created an industrial base and established their own political system that the real struggle began with the people.
Humanism and Labor is not based on any one philosophy but rather on a systematic process of radical change by an international socialist-led worker’s strike. Workers are not interested in changing any individual’s economic relationship to capitalism; only in gaining an understanding of economic system and understanding the social conditions imposed for it. Workers can achieve a socialist vision of industrialisation by working for a full, independent labour force, but it is necessary for their transformation to