Friday, January 17, 2014
Cultural Globalization
This portion of the paper is
discussing cultural globalization which means sameness.[1]
Dr. George Grant would argue that the Liberal doctrine was about universalism
and sameness. In 1970s Coca Cola was an international brand name.[2]
In 1980, McDonald became an international fast food.[3]
Today, clothes, and hair styles “are only one form of cultural expression that
permits a blending of ethnic themes and individual choice.”[4]
Foods are no longer belonged to one part of the world. Sushi which is a
Japaneses food, it can be consumed in most part of the world.[5]
Hollywood plays a major role to
spread western culture around the world. Young people watch Hollywood movies
and listen to western music that the above entertainment give them source of
inspiration to become like western world.
Music is another vital tool to bring
diverse people in a common ground. Most people around the world know who
Michael Jackson is. His music is available in iTunes for a small fee.[6]
The Internet provided social Medias like YouTube, FaceBook and blogs that
people can post a video clip of an event on YouTube in order to share it with
others around the world, and create concept of globality or global village. If
a person feels like to express her/himself online can use a blog and
contributes to world of thinking and creating social cohesion among people.[7]
The globalization is facing
challenges from Castells “network society and its “systematic disjunction
between the local and the global for most individuals and social groups …
search for meaning takes place then in the construction of defensive identities
around communal principles.”[8]
The above ideas are difficult to believe because it is lacking ingenuity impart
the real culprits that causes chaos are politicians and corporate that they act
behind the scene and causing unrest around the world. It was during June 2010
summit in Toronto, Ontario Canada people who went on protest, and authority
responded with iron fist and CBC aired a program “You Should Have Stayed Home”
that how people lost their civil liberty in light of globalization.
[1] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 60
[2] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.13. Print.
[3] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.13. Print.
[4] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.19. Print.
[5] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.19. Print.
[6] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 66
[7] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 67
[8] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 67
Modern Governance: The Challenges for Policy Analysis
Karl Marx experienced the capitalist
system in terms of exploitation of working class in hands of a few owners of
means of production, and dedicated his life to analysis capitalist system and
how it forced people to live their lives according to terms and condition of
capitalist system. He asserted that the French Revolution of 1798 triggered by
bourgeoisie class to move away from conservative ideology to liberal ideology
that social status would not be ascribed, but it would be achieved status.[1]
Today, people are facing mighty alternative version of capitalism or liberalism
which is neo – liberalism or globalization. The concept of globalization is
presenting itself at two sides of a coin. It can appear as a natural phenomenon
or it is creation of human ingenuity to shape the way we live. According an American
journalist Thomas L. Friedman argued that globalization is not a phenomenon.[2]
It is product of international system which is shaping domestic and
international affairs of a nation.[3]
There are academic scholars that they adamantly would argue that globalization
is a phenomenon. I would argue that globalization is not a phenomena but it is
pioneered by neo liberal entities for world domination against developing
nations, and former conservative premier of Ontario Mike Harris destroyed
social fabric of Ontario and there is nothing praise worthy to say about him.
In this portion of the paper it is
exploring concepts and ideas that how globalization is not a phenomenon, but it
is pioneered by neo liberal entities for world domination against developing
nations. According to George A. MacLean and Duncan R. Wood book “Politics an
Introduction” “the end of World War Two, and the period following it that
came to be known as the postwar era.”[4]
Dr. Robert Brym from University of Toronto in his book “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century” argued that it was during Cold
War Era that the “Western powers to overcome the communist regimes of the
Soviet Union and its allies – had been the dominate structural feature of world
politics.”[5]
There was a war of economic between East and West rather than an actual
military conflict between East and West. It was a well known fact that after
World War Two European nations did not have strong economy and needed flood of
money to rebuild their economy from ashes of war. According to George A. MacLean, in 1944, there
was a conference at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire to discuss new monetary
arrangement,[6] and gold became a standard
for currencies and US currency became a standard.[7]
It was during Bretton Woods conference that the US and Britain decided not to
wage war against each other.[8]
The US and Britain created International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the
International Bank of Reconstruction and Development (World Bank).[9]
The IMF “enforced a regime of fixed exchange rates, and lend money to states
experiencing balance of payments difficulties.”[10]
The World Bank was providing funding to rebuild Europe from ruin of war that
endured during World War Two.[11]
The US came with policy of Marshall Plan which provided financial assistance to
Western European nations to rebuild their nations.[12]
It was during these critical moments to prevent spread of communism in Europe,
and making commerce more lucrative for Multinational Corporations, the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and later on the World trade Organization
appeared to remove tariffs and other trade restriction among friendly nations.[13]
According to Dr. Robert Brym, in 1989, the Berlin Wall brought down as a symbolic
sign that former Soviet Union was on verge of collapsed.[14]
In 1991, it became official for Soviet Union to lose its power in Eastern
European nations.[15]
“Almost overnight, it seemed, a new world order had appeared.”[16]
Now, let's watch George Bush Senior's September 11th, 1991 speech
about New World Order.
CBC: The Lies That Led to War
This idea of new world order may
appear as a utopian world vision of peace. The idea of peace has many different
meaning for different nation. The idea of peace for ancient Rome meant that
other nations were posing security threat to sovereignty of Rome and had to
surrender to Rome. Today, this idea of new world order means that all nations
must submit to will of the US.
In 1997, a New American Century think
tank organization issued a manifesto called “Rebuilding America's Defense”.
It is clearly promoting agenda of regime change around the world so that the US
would become a global constable.
The course materials indicated that
globalization is facing local resistance due to primordial values that people
preserved can cherished their traditional community as Friedman called it “olive
tree”.[17]
In 2003, Scholte argued that globalization has been around for a long time.
Globalization – as internationalization (in term of commerce among nations),
globalization – as liberalization (removing trade restriction among nations),
globalization – as universalization (people are having same experience),
globalization – as westernization (capitalism, rationalism and urbanism).[18]
Scholte discussed the concept of globality “the sense that the entire planet is
a single social space, that people carry on conversations in that space
irrespective of territoriality, that they pay collective attention to “global
events”[19]
which is the same concept of global village that “refers to the immediate
experience of sights and sounds from anywhere in the world when transmitted by
electronic media.”[20]
Appadurai suggested that globalization has five escape elements. One, ethnoescapes
that people can move from one part of the world to another part of the world
for a brief time or long time.[21]
Two, technoescapes is the Internet and transportation.[22]
Three, financescapes that market is unpredictable.[23]
Four, mediaescapes that there is diverse media exist due to use of Internet.[24]
Last, ideoescapes that ideas are flowing from one nation to another one.[25]
Karl Marx stated that the
“capitalism respect no political boundaries.”[26] Today, there are 78 000 Transnational
Corporations (TNCs)[27]
or Multinational Corporations (MNCs) that they have employed 73 million people
around the world.[28]
In addition, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), in 1998 was $640 billion, and in
2003 the FDI was $1.3 trillion.[29]
The above achievements all good news
for the MNCs and at no time the author of this paper discussed how MNCs were
exploiting workers in developing nations. The MNCs were taking jobs from their
host countries and leaving people in their own country at state of poverty like
city of Detroit went bankrupt because the car factories moved to developing
nations due to cheap labors that these labors were not protected by any labor
laws and exposed to harmful chemicals during process of making goods in the
factories. In regard to FDI, it is the same story that how dictators in
developing nations like former Egypt President Hosni Mubbarak had assets in
Canada, and once there was a revolution in Egypt, Canadian government seized
his assets. It was not clear now who owned those assets. You may do further
reading of Noam Chomsky “The Failed
States”.
The last stage of economic
globalization is race to the bottom. George Grant in his book “Lament for a
Nation” explained that how Canada was losing its national sovereignty to
American giant business. Canada was gradually becoming part of the US. The MNCs
were using political system to sign treaties with other companies around the
world,[30]
and the MNCs were not elected by people[31]
who were making decision on behalf of people. The MNCs were interested about
their own profits and nothing else. As a
result, The MNCs were diminishing national sovereignty of nations.
This portion of the presentation is
discussing how former conservative premier of Ontario Mike Harris destroyed
social fabric of Ontario and there is nothing praise worthy to say about him.
His Common Sense revolution removed rent cap and allowed landlords to increase
house rent, and there was no longer overtime pay and people were working long
hours and could not afford to pay for their basic necessity of life and became
homelessness in Ontario. According to City of Toronto, number of homelessness
increased in Toronto because Mike Harris government removed all social safety
networks and caused a city of two million to have 5000 homeless people. The
United Nations on two different occasions condemned Canada for not doing enough
in matter of homelessness. The course materials stated that Mike Harris
government shut down hospitals and laid off nurses from hospitals. Asked
yourself where these sick people were suppose to go and what did happen to
them? Some people died because they did not receive medical attention that they
needed. In case of war on welfare which is common currency of liberal and conservative to blame every
misfortune of government on welfare recipients.
Mike Harris government caused Kimberly Rogers who had not give birth to
her child to committed suicide. While
Mike Harris and Ernie Eve were tough on vulnerable people in Ontario, there
friends gained employment with Hydro Ontario and other Crown Corporations and
made good fortunes for themselves. The course pack stated that his government
sold the liquor in Ontario to a private sector. Someone needs to ask why when
it was government liquor and was doing well sold to his friends? Why a private
sector wants to buy a business which is not making profit?
[1] McIntosh, I. (Ed.), (1997),
Classical Sociological Theory: A Reader. New York: New York University
Press. 31.
[2] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 47
[3] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 47
[4] MacLean, George, Duncan
Wood. “Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press,
2010.284.Print.
[5] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.9. Print.
[6] MacLean, George, Duncan
Wood. “Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press, 2010.285.Print.
[7] MacLean, George, Duncan
Wood. “Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press,
2010.285.Print.
[8] MacLean, George, Duncan
Wood. “Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press,
2010.340.Print.
[9] MacLean, George, Duncan
Wood. “Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press,
2010.341.Print.
[10] MacLean, George, Duncan Wood.
“Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press, 2010.341.Print.
[11] MacLean, George, Duncan Wood.
“Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press, 2010.341.Print.
[12] MacLean, George, Duncan Wood.
“Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press, 2010.341.Print.
[13] MacLean, George, Duncan Wood.
“Politics an Introduction”. Oxford University Press, 2010.285.Print.
[14] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.9. Print.
[15] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.9. Print.
[16] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.9. Print.
[17] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 48
[18] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 48
[19] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 48
[20] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.22. Print.
[21] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 49
[22] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 49
[23] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 49
[24] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 49
[25] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 49
[26] Brym, Robert. “New Society:
Sociology for the 21st Century”. N.p.: Harcourt Brace Canada, 1996.
15.12. Print.
[27] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 52
[28] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 52
[29] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 52
[30] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 54
[31] Modern Governance: The
Challenges for Policy Analysis. PG 54
Saturday, January 04, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)