Key Thinkers That Influenced Tony Blair

That this was also the decade in which globalization came into full swing is more than a minor inconvenience for its advocates” (Rodrick). If globalization is supposed to present an advantage to developing countries, why have there been so many setbacks? Indeed, both sides will have its winners and losers regardless of which side of the development coin they live on, but for the most part globalization has lifted millions out of poverty, improved the standard of living, and increased life expectancy rates all while keeping developed nations relatively competitive to their developing counterparts. Globalization’s value is that it seeks to create an economic equilibrium in the world, where parties are free from barriers and can benefit from one another through a more efficient allocation of resources. This allows all participating nations to contribute to an integrated economy and where all nations willing to embrace globalization have the potential to benefit. Regardless, the path to successful integration to the global economy has not always been easy. There is contention towards globalization as some argue that it is detrimental to developed nations, while many developing countries that were forced to hastily open up their markets and integrate failed. However, if implemented properly, globalization has proven that it can benefit all parties involved and that the potential gains outweigh the losses.

For individuals in very poor and economically unstable countries, globalization tends to do more harm than good. Through the economic, political and cultural examples stated above, globalization has not aided these countries climb out of poverty, develop an influential government or have a strong cultural identity, in fact, it has done the exact opposite. L’Huillier quotes Charles Darwin, “if the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by out institution, great is our sin” (2017 381). The business model that globalization suggests is an unattainable utopia for those in developing countries. These traits of poverty and war have always existed yet, many of today’s countries are the way they are because of the models that are favored and paraded under globalization

Eglitis implies that, “The existence of global poverty fosters access to resources in poor states that are needed in, or desired by the West.” (Eglitis 225) The economic state of these poorer nations puts them in a position where they are not even capable of putting forth the capital that would be required to utilize or benefit from their own natural resources. Poverty in the global village makes the monetary influence gained by the wealthier nations of the West have a greater impact. This economic influence ensures that any resistance to exploitation by the West would be marginalized. The underdeveloped countries are simply not in a position economically to resist. This paints for us a grim picture of how western influence fuels the continuing global class system by applying economic leverage that caters to the desires that feed western

On the contrary, taking a more critical view on the effects of globalisation, the findings seem to differ. The fact is that globalisation is pretty much centralised on only a few countries run by a handful of governments. China and India, For example, have been the only two countries to realise any advancements in terms of development and poverty eradication through globalisation, whilst trade openness has led to a rise in income inequalities and generally very uneven gains in the South American regions. And one entire continent, Africa, has actually become more marginalised (Tsikata, 2001, p. 12). The governmental and economic institutions of the developing countries, especially the latter, put them at a disadvantage where weak political, economic and legal structures led to wide spread corruption, conflict and insecurity. Whereas, developed countries already had good infrastructures coupled with high levels of skilled labour, managerial competence and advanced technology making it almost impossible for developing countries to compete. For example, the Japanese government vs. Indonesian government car industry case at the WTO (Kompas, 19 July 1999 ed.).

Globalization has been a process underway for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. From the Roman Empire, to caravans on the Spice Road, to the Transatlantic Slave Trade, the process of connecting the globe in an interdependent web has been underway for a long time. Today, it seems that this process has been quickly accelerated. Since the end of World War II and the rebuilding effort that followed it, global development has increased at an intense rate fueled by transnational corporations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. These multilateral organizations have transformed our global economy and reshaped our society.

Globalization is a phenomenon that has been impacting our world since as early as 114 BCE. Globalization refers to the assimilation of different economies, trade, and communication. Its origins can be traced back to the establishment of the Silk Road; an ancient trade route extending across from China to the Mediterranean Sea. Globalization, throughout history has had a positive effect in developing economies and creating trade. However, in light of recent events, many economists and leaders are describing it as a barrier to a utopian society. As civil servant and Nobel Peace Prize recipient Kofi Annan once said, “Globalization is a fact of life. But I believe we have underestimated its fragility” (Annan 1999). In many parts of the world, globalization

Now defining globalization has been one of the challenges that people face every day, globalization has in the past been defined as the worldwide movement toward economic, financial, trade, and communications integration. Globalization implies the opening of local and nationalistic perspectives to a broader outlook of an interconnected and interdependent world with free transfer of capital, goods, and services across national frontiers. However, it does not include unhindered movement of labour and, as suggested by some economists,

Globalization is difficult to simply define due to the variety of changing definitions that have been established over previous decades. Hamilton and Webster (2012) suggest that globalization is the connection between nations, defining globalization as a process in which barriers are reduced in order to encourage exchanges between countries. This view proposes that globalization refers very much so to the trade barriers and the improved communications between countries in order to ensure the world is unified. Globalization increases economic activity across the world and opens up markets for foreign investment.

In the book “The New Confessions of An Economic Hitman” by author John Perkins, he discusses in detail his experience as an economic hitman, and the role he played in underdeveloped and developing countries. He writes about his, various multinational corporations, political institutions, and the United States role in indebting countries to profit off them. Essentially, his book is about the United States way in expanding globalization and what can be done to stop the exploitation of other countries. John Perkins offers a new perspective on the study of international development and underdevelopment, and goes beyond numbers and graphs, to explain other factors that are a key contributor in the under development and development of some countries. In this essay, the strengths and weaknesses of this book will be discussed and compared to the perspectives of development covered in this course through the lectures and textbook. The opportunities that are presented around the world for this book to improve development outcomes, and threats around the world that may halt efforts to purse the changes that John Perkins wishes to see will also be discussed.

In this essay, I will argue that the article “The Great Divide in the Global Village” by Bruce R. Scott provides more logical and factual evidence that helps under the complexity of national economic growth and development. Scott states a catching yet quick statement about how economical promises of the world, both domestic and foreign are misleading. He states “Mainstream economic thought promises that globalization will lead to a widespread improvement in average incomes.” However the evidence throughout the article that proves this statement is not valid. Scott’s main point revolves around this idea of globalization. Globalization can be defined as the process of increasing the connectivity and interdependence of the world 's markets and businesses. Globalization is the foundation of Scott’s article it lays the groundwork for countries to succeed or fail as explained by Scott in great detail. On the other hand, in the article “Why Nations Fail” by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson they paint an extremely different projection that I will contrast and eventually show why it is inferior to Scott’s work.

The theory of globalization today is a field of intensive debate as the efforts towards defining globalization most often highlight its individual aspects. According to Held and McGrew (1999), “globalisation is an idea whose time has come, yet it lacks precise definition”. Despite the ambiguity of the term “globalisation,” the use of the term, according to Held and McGrew, reflects increased interconnectedness in political, economic and cultural matters across the world creating a shared social space. Given this inter-connectedness, globalisation may be defined as: “a process which embodies a transformation in the spatial organisation of social relations and

‘Globalization: What’s new? What’s not? (And so what)’, portrays the speed in which globalism has increased through many different factors; economically, military, environmentally and socially. This is an idealist analytic approach, not set in stone. This leads on to

The concept of globalization is a complex and peculiar one, failing to be definable by a single, precise definition. Centrally, globalization involves information and goods being exchanged amongst different countries. These interactions and interchanges among countries globally over time is due to an increase in communication and transport networks. Globalization is often divided into three main areas being economic globalization, cultural globalization and political globalization. All three are vital areas to one’s life and globalization is said to have a large impact on each. Although globalization is controversial in the aspect that it cannot be declared just how much of an influence the notion has in the world. Political scientists such as Muhammad Ijaz Latif, Anton Pelinka and Martin Wolf all discuss this issue in their respective pieces as well as differing aspects of globalization such as the role the European Union plays in relation to globalization, the different perspectives of globalization and the challenges of the nation-state in regards to globalization.

The rise of globalization following WWII generated three important factors that define today’s world. McNeill and McNeill agree with Pollard, Rosenberg, and Tignor that multiple economic changes, such as the creation of financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) contributed to the globalization of the world economy. Carter and Warren further this argument by claiming that globalization has caused shifts in the modern economy, namely the rise of Asian economic powers. However, all three historians agree that the rise of globalization goes hand in hand with the rise of inequality in today’s world. Gaps in power, wealth, and access to information have only widened due to the trend of globalization. The final key factor defining our world today are the ongoing processes affecting development countries. McNeill and McNeill argue similarly to Carter and Warren that the end of imperialism generated new nations who quickly realized the free market was a pathway to stability. However, Pollard et al. and McNeill and McNeill place importance on financial institutions like the IMF forcing developing nations to reform their economies to be subservient to the world’s economy. Together, these historians argue that the trend of globalization following WWII caused factors like the modern global economy, the rise in inequality, and the development of new, decolonized nations to be key determiners in the world today.

“Globalization is not just one impact of the new technologies that are reshaping the economies of the third millennium” (Thurow 19-31). When speaking of globalization, most people will not have a complete understanding as of what it actually means or what aspects of the world it affects. Globalization promotes free trade and creates jobs. The capital markets attract investors, resort cheap labor, and leads to job losses in some areas of higher wage. While all of this is happening, the world economy is being effected: economically, culturally, socially, and politically.