to what extent does technology and globalization have benefited society as a whole?

Question

i really need this for my homework for english class can u help me please

Answer 1

Globalisation/internationalisation has become identified with a number of trends, most of which may have developed or accelerated since World War II. These include greater international movement of commodities, money, information, and people; and the development of technology, organisations, legal systems, and infrastructures to allow this movement. The actual existence of some of these trends is debated.[citation needed]

* Greater international cultural exchange,
o Spreading of multiculturalism, and better individual access to cultural diversity, for example through the export of Hollywood and Bollywood movies. However, the imported culture can easily supplant the local culture, causing reduction in diversity through hybridization or even assimilation. The most prominent form of this is Westernization, but Sinicization of cultures also takes place.
o Greater international travel and tourism
o Greater immigration, including illegal immigration
o Spread of local consumer products (e.g., food) to other countries (often adapted to their culture)
o World-wide fads and pop culture such as Pokémon, Sudoku, Numa Numa, Origami, Idol series, YouTube, and MySpace.
o World-wide sporting events such as FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games.
o Formation or development of a set of universal values
* Technical/legal
o Development of a global telecommunications infrastructure and greater transborder data flow, using such technologies as the Internet, communication satellites, submarine fiber optic cable, and wireless telephones
o Increase in the number of standards applied globally; e.g. copyright laws and patents
o The push by many advocates for an international criminal court and international justice movements.

Positive and negative effects

The term "globalization" is used to refer to these collective changes as a process, or else as the cause of turbulent change. The distinct uses include:

* Economically, socially and ecologically positive: As an engine of commerce; one which brings an increased standard of living — prosperity — to Third World countries and further wealth to First World countries.

* Economically, socially, and ecologically negative: As an engine of "corporate imperialism;" one which tramples over human rights in developing societies, claims to bring prosperity, yet often simply amounts to plundering and profiteering. Negative effects include cultural assimilation via cultural imperialism, the export of artificial wants, and the destruction or inhibition of authentic local and global community, ecology and cultures.

It is often argued that even terrorism has undergone globalization, with attacks in foreign countries that have no direct relation with the attackers' own country.[4][5]

Since World War II, barriers to international trade have been considerably lowered through international agreements such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Particular initiatives carried out as a result of GATT and the WTO, for which GATT is the foundation, have included:

* Promotion of free trade
o Of goods:
+ Reduction or elimination of tariffs; construction of free trade zones with small or no tariffs
+ Reduced transportation costs, especially from development of containerization for ocean shipping.
o Of capital: reduction or elimination of capital controls
o Reduction, elimination, or harmonization of subsidies for local businesses
* Intellectual property restrictions
o Harmonization of intellectual property laws across nations (generally speaking, with more restrictions)
o Supranational recognition of intellectual property restrictions (e.g. patents granted by China would be recognized in the US)

Supporters of democratic globalization are sometimes called pro-globalists. They consider that the first phase of globalization, which was market-oriented, should be completed by a phase of building global political institutions representing the will of world citizens. The difference with other globalists is that they do not define in advance any ideology to orient this will, which should be left to the free choice of those citizens via a democratic process [citation needed].

Supporters of free trade point out that economic theories of comparative advantage suggest that free trade leads to a more efficient allocation of resources, with all countries involved in the trade benefiting. In general, this leads to lower prices, more employment and higher output.

Libertarians and other proponents of laissez-faire capitalism say higher degrees of political and economic freedom in the form of democracy and capitalism in the developed world are both ends in themselves and also produce higher levels of material wealth. They see globalization as the beneficial spread of liberty and capitalism.

Critics argue that the anti-globalization movement uses anecdotal evidence to support their view and that worldwide statistics instead strongly support globalization:

* The percentage of people in developing countries living below US$1 (adjusted for inflation and purchasing power) per day has halved in only twenty years,[10] although some critics argue that more detailed variables measuring poverty should instead be studied.[11]

* Life expectancy has almost doubled in the developing world since WWII and is starting to close the gap to the developed world where the improvement has been smaller. Infant mortality has decreased in every developing region of the world.[12] Income inequality for the world as a whole is diminishing.[13].

* Democracy has increased dramatically from almost no nation with universal suffrage in 1900 to 62.5% of all nations in 2000.[14]

* The proportion of the world's population living in countries where per-capita food supplies are less than 2,200 calories (9,200 kilojoules) per day decreased from 56% in the mid-1960s to below 10% by the 1990s.[15]

* Between 1950 and 1999, global literacy increased from 52% to 81% of the world. Women made up much of the gap: Female literacy as a percentage of male literacy has increased from 59% in 1970 to 80% in 2000.[16]

* The percentage of children in the labor force has fallen from 24% in 1960 to 10% in 2000. [17]

* There are similar trends for electric power, cars, radios, and telephones per capita, as well as the proportion of the population with access to clean water.[18]

However, some of these improvements may not be due to globalization, or may be possible without the current form of globalization or its perceived negative consequences, to which the global justice movement objects.

Some pro-capitalists [citation needed] are also critical of the World Bank and the IMF, arguing that they are corrupt bureaucracies controlled and financed by states, not corporations. Many loans have been given to dictators who never carried out promised reforms, instead leaving the common people to pay the debts later. They thus see too little capitalism, not too much. They [citation needed] also note that some of the resistance to globalization comes from special interest groups with conflicting interests, like Western world unions.

Others, such as Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., simply view globalization as inevitable and advocate creating institutions such as a directly-elected United Nations Parliamentary Assembly to exercise oversight over unelected international bodies.

Answer 2

So you need a thesis statement? If this helps, go about it like proving a theory or hypothesis, like in science. Just start by picking your theory--any theory, it really doesn't matter, as long as you can support it. Keep it simple, like "Technology and globalization have benefited society as a whole greatly" [then prove it by giving examples]. Examples you could use: "allowing for better communication between nations" you could support this by using examples like e-mail, telephones, video phones, and satellite, and then explain how better communication is good for society (supports better dispute resolution; gives us a better understanding of other cultures; facilitates faster aid to those in need during epidemics or natural disasters, etc.) Or, you could say that they have not benefited society very much: "Technology and globalization have had much benefit with regard to society as a whole." Then you would go on to support that. You could say that most of the result of technological development have been entirely negative (biological warfare, the atomic bomb, etc.). Or you could say that technological development has been a waste of money that has diverted funds from those in third-world countries. Theses aren't too hard: just be sure to stay on track and answer the question: have that stuff benefited society a lot, a little, or not at all? Hope that helps!

Answer 3

Globalization benefits society more extensively. While it is affected by technology, globalization IS the good side of technology, and therefore to hardly any imaginable extent is bad. Globalization is the bringing together of the global society under a common sun, a common moon, a common veil of a sky and sheet of stars. Globalization is society's making. Globalization makes the Great Society of the people of the earth. Globalization is society's glue.
http://allewaste.com/