Globalisation is a euphemism for neo-colonialism. Discuss.
Globalisation is a complex and multifaceted issue (Bayliss 2008:252). However, this essay will on the imbalance between western powers and the developing world and consequential exploitation, which, rather than being condemned as neo-colonialism, is justified as globalisation. The end of colonial rule did not mark the end of the trend of economic control and exploitation of the developing world (Manzo 2009:267). The cultural, political and economic effects of globalisation upon the developing world resemble that of neo-colonial power – an inequality that is defended by the benevolence of neo-liberalism and egalitarianism of the free market. This essay will focus on the cultural
…show more content…
Realists argue that states espouse humanitarian motives as a pretext to cover the pursuit of national self-interest (Franck and Rodley 1973). Nato selectivity of response in Kosovo (1999) failing to act in Sudan (Bayliss 2008:527) and the illegitimate intervention of France in Rwanda (1994) expose a flawed international justice, where Western powers act without restraint. In 2005 the UN adopted the ‘responsibility to protect’, giving itself legitimate right act upon human rights breaches. This is one of many examples of international institutions imposing Western political and moral ethics justified by an international responsibility (Morgan 1972:33-34); a practice widely accepted in Western public opinion (Reisman 1985:279-80). Globalization is essentially creating an international super power that transcends state borders possessing hegemony on moral and political principles with a self-legitimised right to enforce them. Defenders of globalization suggest the international community is one of shared and defended values. However, these values are presented by the West, who misuse this influence to intervene without justification. Globalization has allowed for an increased flow of culture and traditions internationally. However, this flow has not been evenhanded, media dominance of Western powers dwarfing smaller states. The advanced
As a survivor of a residential school, Theodore Fontaine withstood the ultimate extent of the human condition. In his book, Broken Circle: The Dark Legacy of Indian Residential Schools (Fontaine, 2010), Theodore narrates the horrific abusive exploitation he encountered at the residential school; his dark emotional plight for freedom; and his spiritual journey into light (Fontaine, 2010).
I am drawn to the thought that vacationing is a way of making everlasting memories, in addition to encountering many diverse cultures around the world.
The role of globalization has had a major influence on society and the world, and this essay will argue it has resulted in cultural homogenization. This can be illustrated through an introduction to globalization, the consolidation of media, ownership and vested interests, world standardization and neoliberalism, politics and the media and public service media. Examining the different views of globalization, including Appadurai and McChesney as well as other sources it can be clearly understood the negatives arising due to
Humanitarian interference positions a hard trial for an international society constructed on the doctrines of sovereignty, intervention, and the use of force. Directly after the holocaust, the society of states recognized the laws prohibiting genocide, forbidding the exploitation of civilians, and identifying plain human rights. These humanitarian values often clash with doctrines of sovereignty. Sovereign states are required to perform as protectors of their citizens’ security, but what happens if states act as villains towards their own people, treating power as a pass to kill? Should dictatorial states be recognized as valid members of international society and permitted the protection afforded by the intervention norm? Or else, most states loss their sovereign rights and be exposed to reasonable intervention if they aggressively abuse or fail to protect their citizens? Connected to this, what responsibilities do other states or organizations have to enforce human rights standards against governments that vastly violate them?
When a country encounters a catastrophic situation where human rights are being violated, it is the state’s responsibility to protect its nation. Frequently state’s shift from humanitarian intervention to responsibility to protect as a solution to human rights violations. Humanitarian intervention has been defined as a states’s use of “military force against another state when the chief publicly declared aim of that military action is ending human-rights violations being perpetrated by the state against which it is directed.”1 In order for a state to successfully protect, according to Anne Orford in the article Lawful Authority and the Responsibility to Protect, they must “prevent genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.” (pg 248, Orford) A state is responsible for protecting its population, if they fail to do so the responsibility and authority to do so shifts to the international community.
Globalization has become one of the most (hotly) debated issues eliciting both great enthusiasm and deep concern. On the one hand, it is argued that it leads to economic growth and prosperity for nations while on the other side, many argue that it only increases the “disparity between the rich and the poor,” [456] and diminishes the power of the states. In this essay, I will analyze the question: how globalization challenges the liberal and realist assumptions regarding the state and what new security concerns globalization brings with it? In other words, I will argue that globalization challenges the liberal and realist assumption of the state as being the main actor because in this era, neo liberal economic policies are being implemented
Globalization is the process by which different societies and cultures integrate through a worldwide network of political ideas through transportation, communication, and trade. Generally, globalization has affected many nations in various ways; economically, politically, and socially. It is a term that refers to the fast integration and interdependence of various nations, which shapes the world affairs on a global level. Simply put; globalization is the world coming together. In this essay I will discuss multiple perspectives on globalization through the analysis of these three sources.
Some argue that globalization will, on the long term, bring all cultures as a unique Western, if not Americanized, culture, while others argue that some cultures will persist in order to keep their own essence and therefore avoid the homogenization of all cultures. Alongside pure tradition, global conflicts, contradictory political regimes and the diversity of economic systems, some cultures are bound to face issues when trying to fully fit in a global western culture, and that is why cultures are adaptable to one another, but with some limits that we will express in this essay.
Humanitarian interventions violate the principle of non-armed intervention provided by the United Nations. Traditionally, Western states are the ones who increasingly use this medium to give legitimacy to a security plan to protect its global economic interests. The fact invoked humanitarian grounds to intervene in domestic affairs of other countries is done to protect economic interests of interveners countries. Paradoxically states most involved are precisely those that contribute more funds to the United Nations for humanitarian action. Western nations have invoked numerous moral reasons born of natural law by which an intervention is justified as such: to penalize the wrong and protect the innocent. As Nardin (P.70) argued: “The tradition of natural law or common morality, sees humanitarian intervention as an expression of the basic moral duty to protect the innocent from the violence.” International organizations based on international law such as the United Nations, the International Red Cross, UNHCR among others, when they intervene in conflicts are always faced with a moral and ethical dilemma because their interests do not coincide with the benefit of the intervenor's countries.
The notion of intervention based on humanitarian ideals is not a novel concept in the realm of international relations. Even Hitler maintained that his 1938 invasion of Czechoslovakia was conducted to protect the lives of those Czechoslovaks endangered by their government (Bellamy, 2009). However, the doctrine of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) has attracted significant mention in political discourse and academia since the end of the cold war – not least with the surfacing of state-sponsored violence during the ‘Arab Spring’. This essay, with the help of relevant examples – such as Kosovo, Darfur, Libya and Syria – will aim to debate the notion that R2P will only be utilised when it is in the interests of major powers.
Veronique Zanetti is a justice theorists who’s essay Global Justice: Is Interventionism Desirable? was include in Thomas Pogge’s collection of justice theory. Zanetti understood there was a problem with how humanitarian intervention is justified on the global scale. Her work is a direct response to the 1994 European Parliament resolution that explored a right to revolution. The parliament describes humanitarian intervention ““as the protection, including the threat or use of force, by a state or group of states of the basic human rights of persons who are subjects of and/or residents in another state.” She realized that this document expanded issues of human rights from only an internal matter to an international stage. In addition expanded the scope of jurisdiction, the resolution asserts that humanitarian intervention is not contradictory to international law. Her model of justice hinges on the need for a strong “supranational” organization” to ensure that governments are properly protecting the rights of their citizens and if they are not be able to step in and help. Zanetti attempts to establish what kind of violation of fundamental rights are a legitimate reason to intervene. She believes that intervention should not only be just for physical violence such as genocide, but that social and economic issues, such as widespread poverty, should also be taken into account.
Globalization is a process of increasing integration and the result of economic, cultural and political interdependence among countries. Globalization has been a controversial debate, since this phenomenon has affected the world in several ways. Consequently, there are plenty of economic, cultural and political arguments in favor of and against it. Some arguments in favor of globalization are that it promotes democracy, creates jobs (by dividing labor around the world), promotes knowledge and an interconnected world, and makes the world “borderless.” On the other hand, others argue that
A closer look at the changes in the patterns of development in the contemporary globalized world denotes that globalization is a reality. Globalization is mainly rooted in the theoretical concepts of liberalism and neo-liberalism, which opine that the only means through which global development can be attained is through the promotion of a laissez faire state across the globe. In this way, it becomes easy to spur development due to the opening up of states for trade and other exchanges in the political, social, and cultural realms of development. (Bertucci and Alberti, 2003, p. 17-31.) However, concerns are continuously raised about globalization, especially when it comes to the role of states in promoting development and protecting
Globalization is a mixture of events that affect all nations regardless of whether it is a developed or developing nation. Globalization presents many advantages to nations as well as disadvantages, which can inflict devastating effects on countries. The topic that will be discussed in this essay is “Globalization and the end of the nation-state”. ‘Making Globalization Work’ by Stiglitz highlights the main problem in globalization, concerning how globalization does not work well for developing nations, creating other issues. He argues how developed nations are improving unlike developing nations who are at a standstill. Similarly, ‘Democracy born in chains: South Africa’s constricted freedom’ by Klein highlights the imbalance of power in
Globalization is a major issue in our world today. But it can be seen through many different perspectives, some see it as a negative thing, but some people also see the positives within it and some people have mixed views. Globalization is the spreading of different views, this can political views, social views, and economic views being spread throughout the world where it once wasn’t present. Globalization shapes the way people live and what they do on a day to day basis, or what’s going on around them like technological advancement. Globalization affects everyone, what we do, what we eat all shapes our individual and collective identities.