Globalism Is Bad

Globalization is a term that began being widely used by economists and social scientists by the 1960s, but its definition and meaning are still debated. (McGlobalization, 2011) Generally, it means the integration of all the countries in the world, their economies, and their cultures through international trade and relations. Through this process of integration the countries become interconnected and dependent on each other. A great example of globalization that shows just how much one countries economy can affect other countries and their economies around the world is the 2008 crash of the United States financial markets. The majority of developed countries felt the effects of the crash as their own economies shifted negatively ("Globalization …show more content…
Now, to answer this question I automatically think of my current situation and how globalism has affected me and I instinctively say globalism is great! Without it I wouldn't be on the laptop I currently own as parts that are used to make it come from all over the world, such as Japan and Korea and then it's assembled in China. There would be many, many products that I wouldn't have access to without globalization (John Green, 2013). But, of course, I have also look at aspects that don't currently or directly affect me as well and when I do that I still see that its still tentatively good. The quality of life for a large amount of people has increased as first and second world countries moved some of their manufacturing jobs from high wage to lower wage countries. This shift of jobs helped because it prevented the first and second world countries from monopolizing manufacturing (John Green, 2013). I say "tentatively good" though because it still has its issues. Global capitalism oppresses some countries, can effect the sovereignty and identity of countries, and has negative effects on the environment (Hirst and Thompson, 1996; J. Mittelman, 1996). Even though up to this point I think globalism has been mostly good I also think that there needs to be improvements to the system. I believe the continuation of globalization is inevitable because history shows that it's of the nature of human beings to expand, …show more content…
Dating back to the 1500s and beginning in Europe the World-System theory focuses on core, peripheral, and semi-peripheral countries. (Lechner, 2001) After studying the different theories I concluded I agree most with this one because the organization of countries into core, peripheral, and semi-peripheral countries can be referenced in history and can be seen throughout the world today. Core countries, such as the United States and Western Europe, have a strong military, jobs that require high-skill, and capital-intensive production. Some current semi-peripheral areas include countries such as China, Mexico, and Brazil (Dunn, Kawana, Brewer, 2000) and some peripheral areas include countries such as Cape Verde off the coast of Africa (Melissa Hurst). I think focusing mainly on the capital production aspect of countries when theorizing globalization is most important because the production of capitol is what effects a countries prosperity the most. The World-System Theory may not take into consideration culture or civil government but it focuses on the effects that international trade has on the overall standing of a country and to me that is the most important. That is why I decided to agree with the World-System Theory over the World Culture Theory and the World Polity