Your question is a good one - but far too complex to really be answered in a place such as this. Like anything - there are pros and cons.
ropoents of globalization would say that it brings an increased standard of living to developing areas of the world, and increased prosperity to those countries who already have wealth.
Critics of globalisation would say that globalization has been the caused of increased human rights violations in developing countries. That the promise of increased prosperity is greatly exaggerated, and often amounts to the exploitation of people who live in less fortunate countries. That it is, in a sense, cultural imperialism.
To gain a full understanding of this very complicated issue - make sure you really understand both sides of the argument.
As always, the Wikipedia article on globalization is a great place to start.
2006-10-03 10:02:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by captain2man 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
"Globalization" connotes the prevalence of the American capitalist system internationally since the dissolution of Soviet and Eastern European communism circa 1989. These changes include that the world now accepts that whenever a (massive) military response is necessary or desired, the United States is supposed to do it. But there are enormous problems in this political arrangement, which are only now becoming apparent. (There is no way to prove what the policeman prevented from happening by sooting the criminal suspect. Common people in such circumstances identify significantly with the guy the cop shot, and utterly revile the cop. This is contemporary international relations and popular opinion - even in European nations.)
2006-10-03 10:00:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by voltaire 3
·
0⤊
0⤋