When thinking of globalization, we are generally faced with the challenge of seeing the economical, social, geographical unification of the globe, without looking at the strictly economical context in which globalization was born. Historically the royals of the various powers on the European continent sought to establish their presence on the globe and sought to conquer in order to expand their territories of influence. In so doing they contributed to a fragmentation of the world into spheres of influence, which have remained in reality purely economical.
According to Karl Marx globalization is a result of an economical expansion, “the need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the burgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, establish connections everywhere. … It has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old, established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilized nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw materials, but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of the globe.” Dominating the periphery leads to an increased production of goods that are furthering the economic goals of the colonizers, and the expansion is part of the heavily debated Empire of Hardt and Negri, who argue that power has been fragmented into so many parts, leading to an inability to name its source.
The neoliberal global mentality, seeking to integrate various cultures and cultural backgrounds seems to almost represent a forced inclusion focusing mainly on increased profits; therefore, explaining the continued hybridity and relevance of the us and them differentiations. Think about it… in being environmentally united, are we, as many developing nations protested, engaging in the oppression of the other, since change is more difficultly enforced in the West? It makes me wonder about the veracity of the global integration of various cultures. I am an idealist, but the more I think of globalization, the more I see the developing world remaining in the developing stages.
I think a good example of how globalization has enabled developed countries to exploit developing countries can be found in Lisa Parks article. The ability to transport electronic waste to developing nations points to the way in which developed countries take advantage of the minimal regulations that have been put in place in other countries. In turn, Corporations can continue to manufacture their products without receiving any flak.
ReplyDelete