The Right amount of Globalization, Marcelo Gleiser “Globalization: Two Visions of the Future of Humanity”
Globalization has become a familiar term today. Many writers have written articles on globalization, specifically it’s cause and effect. It is no surprise that there is a scientific aspect to Globalization. Marcelo Gleiser, a theoretical physicist, wrote a post regarding Globalization on a National Public Radio-sponsored blog 13,7: Cosmos and Culture. In his post “Globalization: Two Visions of the Future of Humanity” Gleiser addresses whether it is possible to live in a Global village and not lose one’s culture simultaneously.
In the beginning of Gleiser’s essay, he introduces two contradicting perspectives on globalization. One is the …show more content…
One commonly seen traded commodities is crude oils and its derivatives. The United States of America, the country with the largest economy in terms nominal GDP, is also the largest importer of crude oil. Crude oil is an essential commodity that is highly demanded. With the lack of supply of crude oil in the United States of America, they are forced to import. Import of commodities would not be possible without the agreement of two countries. For an agreement between the countries to exist, the countries should be on good terms with each other. Thus, through trade simultaneously the prevention of war occurs. Which creates a more peaceful world, another aim of Makio Kaku’s utopian version of a true globalized …show more content…
Countries, culture and morals would all meld together into one. This, in my opinion, is an insurmountable obstacle. Starting with morals, in different places in the world, morals are strongly tied to culture. What is viewed as socially unacceptable and socially acceptable varies greatly. For everyone to have the same morals, how can it be determined which existing morals to follow when right or wrong is a subjective matter. For the joining of countries, there are two options, where one country conquers the whole world or where every country decides to disregard their independence and form one country with the rest of the world. The first method would contradict the aim of the utopia since for a country to conquer others war would occur thus disrupting peace. The second method is very unlikely to happen, if the countries meld together how would they determine who is in charge, what currency to be used or what laws to follow. They would most likely base the new laws and choose a leader based on the existing one’s today. However, due to human nature, it is unlikely that any of those leaders would want to give up their power and just conform to a new leader and follow new laws. The main problem is among all these aspects of what makes us human belong somewhere is that it cannot be defined or classified in one
Globalization has become a familiar term today. Many writers have written articles on globalization, specifically it’s cause and effect. It is no surprise that there is a scientific aspect to Globalization. Marcelo Gleiser, a theoretical physicist, wrote a post regarding Globalization on a National Public Radio-sponsored blog 13,7: Cosmos and Culture. In his post “Globalization: Two Visions of the Future of Humanity” Gleiser addresses whether it is possible to live in a Global village and not lose one’s culture simultaneously.
In the beginning of Gleiser’s essay, he introduces two contradicting perspectives on globalization. One is the …show more content…
One commonly seen traded commodities is crude oils and its derivatives. The United States of America, the country with the largest economy in terms nominal GDP, is also the largest importer of crude oil. Crude oil is an essential commodity that is highly demanded. With the lack of supply of crude oil in the United States of America, they are forced to import. Import of commodities would not be possible without the agreement of two countries. For an agreement between the countries to exist, the countries should be on good terms with each other. Thus, through trade simultaneously the prevention of war occurs. Which creates a more peaceful world, another aim of Makio Kaku’s utopian version of a true globalized …show more content…
Countries, culture and morals would all meld together into one. This, in my opinion, is an insurmountable obstacle. Starting with morals, in different places in the world, morals are strongly tied to culture. What is viewed as socially unacceptable and socially acceptable varies greatly. For everyone to have the same morals, how can it be determined which existing morals to follow when right or wrong is a subjective matter. For the joining of countries, there are two options, where one country conquers the whole world or where every country decides to disregard their independence and form one country with the rest of the world. The first method would contradict the aim of the utopia since for a country to conquer others war would occur thus disrupting peace. The second method is very unlikely to happen, if the countries meld together how would they determine who is in charge, what currency to be used or what laws to follow. They would most likely base the new laws and choose a leader based on the existing one’s today. However, due to human nature, it is unlikely that any of those leaders would want to give up their power and just conform to a new leader and follow new laws. The main problem is among all these aspects of what makes us human belong somewhere is that it cannot be defined or classified in one