Do you agree with the politics of Globalization?

Answer 1

Its a nice theory but will never work. You can not expect a country to act to its detriment for the betterment of the world. It would be nice to think that we were able of thinking that far outside of ourselves, but really we're not.

Answer 2

Globalization is inevitable. It's a much smaller world now than it was in 1945. Immediately following WWII, we were the only country that was stronger than it was in 1939, and we were the only game in town economically for most of the next 50 years. Sooner or later, other countries have to develop and prosper or we're not going to continue to grow. It may cause some temporary economic discomfort, but in the long run if Third World countries can't join the developed world, there won't be new markets to sell our goods and services to. For our standard of living to remain superior over the long term, we need for the standard of living in the developing world to increase.

Answer 3

Globalization is good for the world since it refers to increasing global connectivity, integration and interdependence in the economic, social, technological, cultural, political, and ecological spheres. Theodore Levitt is usually credited with globalization's first use in an economic context.[1] Globalization is an umbrella term and is perhaps best understood as a unitary process inclusive of many sub-processes (such as enhanced economic interdependence, increased cultural influence, rapid advances of information technology, and novel governance and geopolitical challenges) that are increasingly binding people and the biosphere more tightly into one global system with one destiny. In this context the global economy has grown rapidly, yet poverty persists, inequality increases, and global environmental degradation deepens.

Answer 4

Don't have much of a choice do we. Since the amendments to the Constitution coupled with WWI & WWII we have little choice but to pursue a global economy in an effort to keep ours moving forward and we must have influence in the rest of the world in order to achieve this.
After all is said and done....I'd prefer to return to the origonal constitution plus equality of all. Isolationist way for me.

For the Bush bashers Clinton was far more for globalization. So much so he helped China attain inter continental ballistic missile technology.

Answer 5

No, globalization takes away the worth of the individual.

Answer 6

Of course globalization will occur eventually.

What do you expect to have happen? National borders and petty bickering for all eternity?

Answer 7

What are you asking?? Do you mean what Bush is doing?? Invading countries rich in resources? Or do you mean an honest and positive approach towards trade with any country without invasion?

Answer 8

100% YES. Protecting trade in the short run may look good but in the long run it is a disaster that can destroy a nation very quickly.

Answer 9

Yes

Answer 10

Not in its present condition. If participating countries do not have labor laws, the US is screwed.