The Media Of Free Trade

Steven Weber believes that “evils of globalization are even more dangerous than ever before.” In his article he describes what has gone wrong, gives reasons for the instability, and provides solutions.

Globalization is the process by which the markets of different countries become integrated due to the exchange of goods, services, technology, and capital. Globalization depends on social, economic, and political factors, and continuously alters the way that the world works. All the vital components of the evolving global, political, economic and social institutions being examined seem to constantly converge and to perpetually intertwine during the day to day administration of global affairs. Diplomacy is employed to keep a measured balance between conflict and cooperation. The global guarantees of international law are placed in sharp contrast to the grim reality of human rights on daily basis and policy is dictated by the scales of political power and the urgent priorities of economic necessity. To understand how the globe functioned in the past and how it wishes to function in the future, we must study each factor separately and observe its inevitable interactivity with the other factors that occur. It is important to note that none of the dynamics can be given greater weight in comparison to the other crucial instrumentalities.

Globalization, a contested concept among leading theorists in its definition, chronology, and measurement of effects, is almost certainly of a multidimensional nature if such theorists’ perspectives are all taken equally into consideration. The broad phenomenon of globalization can therefore be scrutinised more closely by separation and analysis of individual dimensions, such as its political, economic, cultural and ecological dimensions. This approach, while allowing for a more focused examination of the causes and effects of globalization within a single dimension, serves to highlight the interconnectedness of each dimension. The following essay will expose the complex interconnection between the political, economic and cultural

Commentators contend that globalization has disintegrated national sway and has brought about an exchange of force from states to enterprises or to universal associations. Since the late 1970s, there has been a developing acknowledgment of a belief system, frequently called "globalism," that supports an open market and constrained government impedance in capital and exchange streams. Corporate hobbies have driven this motivation, which they have forced, the faultfinders contend, on the creating

The authors of “Assembling Social Space” argue that everyone, no matter where they live, is locally and globally connected to people who do not necessarily live near them through media and technology. Wiley states that we are all globally connected, but live in a local way (Wiley, 2015). Living in a technology-driven society, we are able to stay connected with people and have access to resources from all around the globe. The thesis is that as individuals, we are all locally connected within our environment and ultimately globally connected due to the interconnection of these two types of societies. This is important within the field of communication because it explains how individuals are able to be locally and globally connected with people from all over the world.

During the last decade of the twentieth century, the word ‘globalization’ has become an increasingly prominent feature of political, social, and economic discussion in academic and policymaking circles, as well as in the media. The processes and outcomes of globalization drew attention and debates that had one thing in common. The research shows that nearly everyone agrees that globalization is a trend that is changing the face of the world, and as a result the world society lives in a more ‘globalized’ world. Nearly two and a half decades passed since 1990s, and studies have been conducted to examine the causes and consequences of globalization. Moreover, nearly every person experiences some type of globalization and can testify firsthand the effects it has on their life, society, and the state. The analysis of the effects that globalization dynamics have on the world society indicates that globalization has a significant positive impact via spreading opportunities and wealth across nations, stimulating innovation and productivity, enhancing the economic development of poorer countries, and helping to improve living standards.

Globalization is a concept that we have heard for years, but is not until recent years that we had studied and analyzed the benefits and issues of this international term. During years, it has been discussed the implications that globalization has had in some countries, more or less of them in a decent way and some of them in a corrupted way. Since young, political figures have taught about the role of the United States in the world and how they promote the expression freedom and success around the globe. As the reading from “Globalization and Empire says; and quote: “Empires have had the greatest influence in determining the nature of the forces of globalization, they are the chief globalizers of the world. Throughout history it is clear that empires were the principle forces that determined the nature of integration of different societies in the world.”(Peter Iadicola, p.4). Being United States the first world superpower, it has some failures based on the documentary of John Pilger, where he demonstrates that because of the globalization, most of the U.S. companies are profiting from those wretched areas or countries where the workforce is at low-cost. This bring out a simple questions, is that the example leaders want to demonstrate? Hiding things that are happening around the world? The New Rulers of the World Documentary are presented to us that the globalization has marked on a vast scale the difference between the rich and the poor. They are controlling even what the

Globalization implies distinctive things to diverse individuals. To the individuals who support it, it speaks to less explanations behind outfitted clashes, more open doors for getting away from the bounds custom and bias, a higher expectation for everyday comforts, and more access to the great things of life; so, private enterprise and majority rules system. To the individuals who doubt it or disdain it, it implies the submersion of national power, the elimination of territorial societies, the advancement of multinational enterprises and the chapter 11 of corner stores, the undermining of religion, and the defilement of profound quality; to put it plainly, private enterprise and popular government.

In these two article globalization and the increase of globalism is described in two very different ways. Waltz arguing from a realist’s perspective; that the politics of the state is ultimately affected within globalization. R.O.keohane and J.S.Nye Jr express a liberal opinion, arguing the many different factors that affect the increase in globalism.

As a result globalisation has also undone some important cultural and psychological underpinnings of sovereignty. However, it is imperative to note that the effect of globalisation on different nation states will not be the same, because states differ domestically, historically, politically and socio-culturally. Therefore, states will make different policy choices in response to the same global phenomena (Held 1989, 237).

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.

Robert Gilpin once wrote that “the parallel existence and mutual interaction of “state” and “market” in the modern world create “political economy”; without both state and market there would be no political economy.” Hence, many academics treat state-market interactions as the core issue surrounding the International Political Economy (hereinafter referred to as IPE) due to the rapid growth of globalization. In order to assess the question, it is imperative that the definitions of IPE and globalization are provided. The former can be defined as the interaction of the market and such powerful actors as states, multinational firms and international organizations (Robert Gilpin, 2001) and the latter may be described as a process through which the world is becoming increasingly interconnected in the areas of politics, economics and culture. Globalization is fundamentally transforming the relationship between states and markets. Even as some scholars predict the retreat of the state in the face of increasingly globalized markets, others like Robinson (as cited in Joseph, 2011) posit that globalization has promoted the role of the state to serve the needs of a transnational capitalist class. On the one hand, the market is concerned with implementing economic activities that are there to be the most productive and the most profitable. On the other hand, the state’s job is to predominately capture and control the entire process of economic growth and capital accumulation

Though many argue the opposite, in a globalizing world, the nation-state still has a role to play and should continue to maintain this role. As defined by the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, a nation-state is “a form of political organization under which a relatively homogeneous people inhabits a sovereign state.” This would imply that globalization, defined by the same source as "the development of an increasingly integrated global economy marked especially by free trade, free flow of capital, and the tapping of cheaper foreign labor markets,” and the nation-state would be two contradicting ideas that cannot coexist. However, they seem to not only coexist, but work together. This almost symbiotic relationship is exemplified when globalization is examined through a cultural, economic, and international relations lens.

The world is becoming a smaller community through technological advances and international travel opportunities that make communication and interaction with others around the world a common occurrence. Some world leaders envision a global community that would lead to a one-world-order to include government and commerce. Globalization has been on the rise but is not shared and accepted by all. Nationalism continues to play a significant part in international interactions. With its goal of European unification for economic and political voice, the European Union (EU) can be used as a model for globalization. This paper will consider if using the EU as a model is a valid argument.

In today’s world, with a few notable exceptions, nearly everyone in every region of the world has access to the same products, information and services. A long-distance relationship is no longer so distant, since each party involved in the relationship can communicate through Skype, Facebook or through any of the vast amount of social media available. A person in Easter Island, one of the most remote inhabited islands in the world, can go to the other side of the world and travel to Canada. An economic crisis in Argentina could affect the economic landscape in Brazil. A person in Chile or Peru can buy an Abercrombie and Fitch t-shirt because this transnational corporation decided to expand its market to developing countries, or as you might prefer, to emerging economies in South America. Although many of these examples might be trivial, these are the consequences of globalization.