You mean the New World Order that Bush Sr referred to in 1989.
It's a combination of things
There have been a few trade and security unions among countries that have seemingly developed behind the public's back. IE, the American Union and the European Union. For details just search on both of those and you will see the what countries are in the unions and what they do.
Then there is the new global market. This actually started in the 90s with the development of the WTO, the world trade organization.
Both of those are leading us to complete globalization. That is basically where each nation's market at home will come second to the world market. That is why you are seeing the republican party not trying to control illegal immigrants... they want the cheap labor to be able to compete with other corporations on the global market.
All of those are pieces of the New World Order which leads me to the answer of your question. The New World Order is a group of nations that will control the world by means of force, monitoring actions and religion.
Force - the goal is to take control of all nations that are in defiance of this new world order.
Monitoring - civil liberties are being taken away on a weekly basis and as long as we are in 'wartime' the president of the USA has authority to disobey any law he wishes. He has also signed almost 800 executive orders since being in office. These bypass congressional approval. He has done these in order to move the world towards Christianity also.
Religion - Do a search on executive order 13397. This is a recent executive order that creates a Faith Based Initiative Center within the Homeland Security Department. I recently met a friend on here from Kashmir and he said they have actually had Faith Based I. ppl there with funding... but the funds come with stipulations that you will convert to Christianity.
The end goal of a new world order is to have one governing power or government. The problem with this is that this government is not elected officials but based on the countries involved... like I mentioned above. And basically this group of nations will gang up on any nation that doesnt agree.. either by force or by sanctions, etc...
To me the meaning of democracy is a world made up of all different types of governments. Once we have one world government, we will have lost democracy forever.
2006-08-13 14:28:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by BeachBum 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Very good question: i think your best bet is to do some reading. Anita roddick's Globalisation and powerful ways we can challenge it is probably the most comprehensive introduction, the you have Globalisation and its discontents by the chief economist from the world bank...slighty different point of view, but still intelligible and useful.
There was a show on C4 called travels of a Gringo, this is what got my interest sparked a few years ago and from then i've understood that it is basically colonialism under a new name. The process by which wealth was supposed to spread the globe, which perhaps it did, but it still remained in the hands of the elite and the poor also got poorer! The World Bank and IMF are big players and the WTO. Everything happens for corporate, big business interests and profits and people suffer under worsening work conditions and pay and less and less affordable or accessible basic human rights and amenities. I don't know what other people said but i recommend you read something, even Noam Chomsky on Globalisation, before coming to any conclusions!
Good luck...this search changed my life
2006-08-13 21:38:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
critics of globalisation define the word quite differently, presenting it as worldwide drive toward a globalised economic system dominated by supranational corporate trade and banking institutions that are not accountable to democratic processes or national governments.
Globalisation is an undeniably capitalist process. It has taken off as a concept in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union and of socialism as a viable alternate form of economic organisation.
Try this: Globalisation is the rapid increase in cross-border economic, social, technological exchange under conditions of capitalism.
Simon Reich also explores this question in a working paper for the Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame
"What is globalization? Four Possible Answers", Working Paper #261 - December 1998 - that is downloadable at www.nd.edu/~kellogg/WPS/261.pdf
A comprehensive and regularly updated bibliography on all aspects of the political economy of globalization compiled by Douglas Nelson of the Murphy Institute of Political Economy at Tulane University can also be found at www.tulane.edu/~dnelson/BIBS/GlobalBib.pdf
It attempts to characterize globalization, and its effects on poverty, the environment, gender, culture, and political structure and dynamics.
David Held and Anthony McGrew write in their entry for Oxford Companion to Politics that globalisation can be conceived as a process (or set of processes) which embodies a transformation in the spatial organization of social relations and transactions, expressed in transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction and power.
Their detailed conception of globalisation can be found at the site supporting their book, Global Transformations, at www.polity.co.uk/global/
For more extensive discussion of globalisation after September 11 see the links in http://www.globalisationguide.org/sb02.html
When did globalisation begin?
There is no agreed starting point, but understanding of globalisation is helped by considering the following.
The first great expansion of European capitalism took place in the 16th century, following the first circumnavigation of the earth in 1519 to 1521.
There was a big expansion in world trade and investment in the late nineteenth century. This was brought to a halt by the First World War and the bout of anti-free trade protectionism that led to the Great Depression in 1930. Some see this period as an interruption to the process of globalisation commenced in the late 19th century.
A sense that the world was united was generated by the establishment of the International Date Line and world time zones, together with the near global adoption of the Gregorian calendar between 1875 and 1925. During that period, international standards were also agreed for telegraphy and signalling.
The end of the Second World War brought another great expansion of capitalism with the development of multinational companies interested in producing and selling in the domestic markets of nations around the world. The emancipation of colonies created a new world order. Air travel and the development of international communications enhanced the progress of international business.
The fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union ended the cold war between the forces of capitalism and socialism with capitalism triumphant. The development of the internet made possible the organisation of business on a global scale with greater facility than ever before.
An excellent paper exploring this, and other issues relating to globalisation, is written by Mauro Guillen, at The Wharton School and Department of Sociology at the University of Pennsylvania The paper, Is Globalization Civilizing, Destructive Or Feeble? A Critique Of Five Key Debates In The Social-Science Literature can be downloaded from:
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/show_paper.cfm?id=938
2006-08-13 21:27:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by tough as hell 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Actually, smartasses, Globalisation can be spelt correctly with either an s or z. Analyz/se is another example.
2006-08-13 21:30:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Globalisation is bad for western civilisation. within 20 yrs of it, will go bankrupt.
2006-08-14 10:34:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think globalization is an attempt by the elite to have complete and uncompromised control over whatever they please. In my opinion this will only happen with the start of the third world war and the demise of several uncompliant nations.
2006-08-13 21:56:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by tdublur 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
The History Channel keeps advertising "Globalize Yourself" and they keep teaching their nonsense. I'd rather not, if you don't mind, and even if you do, thank you. God Bless you.
2006-08-13 21:28:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
To participate in the whole world.
2006-08-13 21:26:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by jc 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
You'll find out when the Globs take over!
2006-08-13 21:32:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
for world recovery..especially for the third world countries.
2006-08-13 21:27:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by Arcie 4
·
0⤊
1⤋