Is Globalization fast becoming a double-edge sword esp in LEDCs(e.g.China)?

Globalization has been causing the loss of many traditional jobs of the citizens of developing countries through the entrance of multi-National Companies (MNCs) which are able to sell their products at a lower price at better quality, which the locals are definitely unable to accomplish, with their lack of economies of scale.

The ever-pervading influence of globalization has made the youths of many developing countries reach out for the cities and abandon their traditional way life and their culture for a 'better' lifestyle of developed countries. The influencing of their personal and national identities may make them reject both identities and thus be neither what they were born as, not what they aspire to be.

Irrefutable economic laws do not drive globalization, nor do ineluctable market forces govern it. And, by the same token, it has not happened by an accident of nature or divine intervention.The adverse effects of globalization have long been apparent to those on the ground in poor countries. Richer countries are now also beginning to feel their effects more widely, with the recent fall in the values of stock markets and the resulting decline in consumer confidence bringing rising unemployment and insecurity, as jobs disappear, share values are destabilized and pensions shrink.

so what are your views on this issue? do u agree that globalization is indeed a double-edge sword that carries more negative impact than positive ones? p.s most noticeable example would be China

 

Globalization as it is now is probably a double edged sword like you say. I think it could work though, if there were international labor/descency laws that would be enforced to all countries. The UN Declaration of the Rights of Man is almost laughable, since there are violations of that thing going on all over the world and they do nothing but impose "sanctions" which only end up hurting the people, not the leaders (look at how much good sanctions hjave done for North Koreans) responsible for the fuck-ups. So yeah, getting back to the point globalization as it stands is a double edged sword. Sorry about the little off topic rant.

 

A global economy,a global church,a global government,a global society,so you get what we have today,which is the way he wants it,well he gets it.I don't like it anymore than the rest of you men!

 

I have no idea how to respond to this.



What are you talking about? China is driving the global economy now. It is consuming more tin, steel, and cement than any other nation in the world. It is the second largest consumer of aluminum and oil in the world. Do you think China is producing these things for itself? And what is it doing with all these things?



It is not producing those things itself. It is importing them. That means more money to the countries it buys from. Importing. It is building with those materials. And you wonder if the jobs lost in little mom and pop shops can come close to weighing against the amount of skilled and unskilled work this mass building brings?



Obviously (from your post) you have no idea what is happening in China. But you got your post from somewhere. Let me guess, a lefty.



The problems of globalization should not be asked about in China. An economy that expands 9.1% in a year has no problem selling out the mom and pop stores. Only the fuzzy warm, caring and sharing leftys have a problem with it.



The real world, the market, the economy laughs at them.



I guess to put it simply, the millions and millions of jobs and dollars ‘globalization’ has brought into China far outweigh the thousands and thousands of jobs it has cost at the expense of small business owners. To call it a double edged sword is to give WAY too much credence to what has been lost. It is almost laughable.

 

Except for the fact that Chineese workers make next to nothing for all the backbreaking work they do. Union workers who make $8 an hour plus benefits over here do the work that Chinnese workers do for half the price, no benefits and no unions. Just because a country has a high GDP dosen't mean that globalization isn't a double edged sword. There are things that can't be measued in dollars and cents that contribute as well.

 

Oh you poor soul. You are comparing a Chinese construction worker with a unionized (insert field here) worker.



You compare the two and wonder how anyone can be so unfair to the poor Chinese worker.



I compare the two and wonder how the fat unionized slob manages to get eight an hour (plus benefits!?) for as little work as he can do!



You mean to tell me that the Chinese electrical workers aren’t going to get a pension and a dental plan for learning to work as slow as they possibly can like the Americans?



Oh no, better call greenpeace or someone!



The funniest part is that I will be in the bubble, not you.



What a fucking joke. You’re ruining the world.

~OSF

 

First of all, keep your insults to yourself. If you're going to change my mind, do it by persuasion, not being a dick.

I never said union workers are working for what they get, I personally feel that unions have way too much power in the workplace. All I did was point out the drastic differences that exist between American and Chinese working conditions, and what is acceptable to one society is unrealistic to another.

"Ruing the world," eh? Well I think you're ruining the forums with that obnoxiously large font and generous spacing, but I'm not going to tell you to change it. You really think that American union workers and Chinese workers gat the same dental and health benefits, or anywhere near the same health and dental benefits? Do you think Chinese workers can just go out on disability after 15 years and still get a descent pension? Or get [good] health insurance for thier children? No. Pull yourself out of the bubble. While China's economic policy is great for building a high GDP, it's terrible for the people. Don't try to say that just because an economy expands 9.1% in a year, it means that the people are any better. They aren't.

 

With all due respect to your point of view on the beneficial effects of globalization in china. Sadly to say, i find it preposterous and derisive, to think that you only look at it on one side of the 'ball' rather than the other side of it. You only bother about how it is benefitting its people and its economy. But have you ever give a thought of how globalization can cause the loss of traditional lifestyle and the monopoly of the country's economy by foreign companies as well as how globalization is implemented in the different countries also effects the degree of the locals being affected?

did you? of course you didn't!

The ever-pervading influence of globalization has made the youths of many developing countries reach out for the cities and abandon their traditional way life and their culture for a 'better' lifestyle of developed countries. The influencing of their personal and national identities may make them reject both identities and thus be neither what they were born as, not what they aspire to be.

Irrefutable economic laws do not drive globalization, nor do ineluctable market forces govern it. And, by the same token, it has not happened by an accident of nature or divine intervention.The adverse effects of globalization have long been apparent to those on the ground in poor countries. Richer countries are now also beginning to feel their effects more widely, with the recent fall in the values of stock markets and the resulting decline in consumer confidence bringing rising unemployment and insecurity, as jobs disappear, share values are destabilized and pensions shrink.

An example would be the : Free trade doctrine

The ever-pervading influence of globalization has made the youths of many developing countries reach out for the cities and abandon their traditional way life and their culture for a 'better' lifestyle of developed countries. The influencing of their personal and national identities may make them reject both identities and thus be neither what they were born as, not what they aspire to be.

In the 19th century, Britain, a nation of shopkeepers who lived on exports, peddled the doctrine of 'free trade' all over the world and reaped all the benefits from it. Now, America's over-insistence on 'free trade' is looked upon by developing countries as what it was in the 19th century - where developed countries should have no restrictions placed on their products penetrating developing country markets. Hence, their doctrine of 'free trade' is often only a one-way 'free flow' as the industries of developing countries are unable to challenge the giants entering their markets. Seneviratne. K. (1998:2)

So just to recapitulate what you have said earlier on "To call it a double edged sword is to give WAY too much credence to what has been lost. It is almost laughable."

Of course i won't deny the obvious fact that globalization has indeed benefit china to a very large extent. BUT! The negative effect that resulted through globalization is equally inambiguous and simply irrefutable


P.S *Bursting into guffaws* To me i think Obviously (from your post) you have no idea what is happening in China. But you got your post from somewhere. Let me guess, a lefty. :sunglasse

 

What the heck are you talking about? I haven’t insulted you. Believe me that you would know beyond a shadow of a doubt if I had. But of course an internet forum is no place to insult someone. I save my insults for face to face meetings. I am sorry if you have taken something I have already said as an insult. Nothing was meant as one. Please feel free to quote the “insult” so that I know for future reference that the way I write is offensive.



The other formalities that must be moved aside before we continue Max:

First, I am not trying to change your point of view. Your opinion is yours. If it was mine for the changing I would worry about you.

I am terribly sorry that I have to write in such a big font. I wish everyone else did. You see, I have bad eyes. I can’t focus on the little things some people write here. I write big so I can re-read what I write and correct any errors I find. I also do it because I know that not everyone has 20/20 eyesight and those that do are going to realize that not everyone is perfect and put up with the little inconveniences for the sake of the weak few.

So from that I am led to believe that difference = bad. Yes there are poor working conditions in China. But there are poor working conditions in America. To take it a step further, there are poor working conditions in Canada. I would be willing to wager that there is not a country in the world (with the possible exception of Germany) in which working conditions are entirely good!



But because the Chinese are tolerant to ‘poorer than we are used to’ working conditions are they wrong? Please argue if they are! That could be an interesting and long debate.

No, ruining it. Ruing means feeling regret for.

I am not quite following you here. Obviously (based on my previous post) I do not think they get the same benefits. I question who is closer to ‘real’. The Chinese worker making what the market dictates or the American civil servant with his health and dental plans and pension after 15 years of disability insurance (payed for by the tax payer)?

I have to disagree. Yes they are. But it isn’t only due to a higher GDP.

 

Zyong I am confused after reading your post. You have copied and pasted a part of your original post … thrice. You even pasted the same paragraph twice in your reply. Please stop cutting and pasting your posts. I am sure there are some copyright laws out there that prohibit exactly what you are doing.



Please trust me when I say that I am not mocking anyone. This is a valid opinion and is not something I just shit out and put on paper. And a ball doesn’t have sides. It is a sphere.

That sentence doesn’t make sense according to the English language. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and think that English is your second (or third) language.



I have given thought to the loss of traditional lifestyle of the country. I think about all the different cultures that have ever existed on this green earth and wonder what ever happened to the Byzantine Empire. I wonder what happened to the Romans and the Spartans. Actually I understand what happened to them. Once they existed and now they don’t. You see it is a kind of fact of life that things change. Cultures and ways of life aren’t infinite. They eventually end. Sometimes that ending is the beginning of some other culture which will itself eventually end. I have given thought and I realize how history works and how now isn’t any different than then in that respect.



As for monopoly of China’s economy by foreign companies. That isn’t happening. It is just an absurd idea. Sorry dude, but hell no. I don’t even know how you could come up with a sentence like that!



As for “ globalization is implemented in the different countries also effects the degree of the locals being affected?” Please use a better sentence. I can’t understand.



Please keep the feudalism vs. modern comparisons to a minimum. They are irrelevant. It was 200 years ago kid! LIVE IN THE NOW!



Simply put, when it comes down to it, the benefits of globalization are not weighed equally against the evils. In comparison the evils are made merely marginal.

 

For the record, you can’t really decide if your comment was innocuous or not. I suppose in the sense that you meant no offense you are correct. But generally it is left up to the receiver to decide the offensiveness of any statement. Hey, why else would there be that silly ‘reputation’ option on these forums? Further, if you wish to elaborate you should avoid repetition. Expand on what has already been said. Add different and pertinent examples. Don’t just repeat exactly what you have already said. Give us some credit here zyong, the good people of hipforums, for the most part, only need to read something once to understand it is important. Otherwise, thank you for pointing it out again.


As you can see, the paragraph that i further reiterated twice in my previous post was because of the mere fact that that was the f**king main point i wanted to elaborate on.



Again, not to sound like an ass, elaboration takes much more than copying and pasting what has been said. The same effect would be reached if you had simply referred to your first post with something like “as I have already mentioned globalization tends to lure youth away from tradition with the hegemony of global culture”. Anyway, enough of this. Let us get to the meat and potatoes!

What free trade doctrine? The general idea of free trade? Smith’s? I am going to assume that by ‘free trade doctrine’ you mean the accepted idea of free trade in the world today. I would argue that the free trade doctrine you are referring to is not a real free trade doctrine and that real free trade could not be reached in the world today unless a government that would eliminate itself as its second task was voted into place. But I could be way off in my approximation, so as a precaution I would ask that you outline and define this ‘free trade doctrine’ so that you and I and all the participants in this thread are on the same page. I assure you that you and I are not as it stands now.

My very first response has to be “coincidence does not mean cause”. If youth in a country strive for the form of culture of another country in the presence of the inevitable global culture than it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that the emerging global culture is the cause of that flight. Right zyong? Not so fast. Is it possible that there is some other cause? Could there not be some other reason? Perhaps a natural human desire for change. Perhaps these people are pre-wired to seek progression. If that is the case would you be willing to debate Mother Nature herself? Perhaps the undereducated youth of China don’t really realize that the traditional ties they have should not be broken. I ask why any child has a duty to follow the traditional lifestyle of their forbearers. Where does this duty come from? Is it justified? I always learned that each person was unique and that it was the goal of life to better the self! It seems that having to stay in the tradition for tradition’s sake is regression, not progression.

Are you familiar with the phrase “to each his own”? What does that mean to you? A person is not a failure if they stray from the path their father chose. Nor are they a failure if they do not turn out as they had in their dreams. I dreamt that I would one day orbit the Earth in an international space station. I know that is impossible now, but I have just achieved one of the highest honours I ever will. What does any of that have to do with the culture in which I was brought up? It would only matter to those banal nationalists that breed hatred towards anything different. But you aren’t one of them, cause you only hate globalization. You know the first name I think of when I think banal nationalists? Osama Bin Ladin. He is the best anti-globalization activist I can think of. He would never resort to writing on internet boards. He crashes planes into what he thinks is the epitome of the sweeping global wave. Not that I am comparing your problems with the issue to his. I wouldn’t dare.

Mark these words: Globalization is not rejected culturally.



It is only rejected by a vocal few who have read No Logo. But let me get something straight. You don’t oppose the change globalization brings as long as it happens slower than is natural? Wow, talk about nitpicking.

You are mistaking my not caring with my not thinking. I have thought about it and I could care less what culture is lost in progression. Sorry if it makes me sound evil. You can go and put negative reputation points against me if you don’t like it.



Remember that jumping to an assumption of incompetence is rash. It may only be incompatibility. Learn to accept it.

Do you believe in fate? I don’t. If the Chinese want their culture they will revolt and they will keep it. But for some reason I don’t think they will mind the growth. Also I think the propaganda you have been reading and writing misrepresents the idea of progression. It is as if the rise of global culture means the irradiation of everything else. Please refer me to a lost culture. Globalization isn’t that new. It has spread to many places and I can’t think of a single place that has lost their traditional culture as a result. Heck this thread just became a little bit funnier.

Depends where you live and what you read. Personally I think globalization is vilified. Along with anyone who doesn’t hug trees on a regular basis or thinks children in the fetal period have rights. Talk about hypocritical. Tree lovers/pro-choicers.

 

OSF,

What do you do for a living? Do you really think you'd be better off without the labor standards we enjoy in this country? Maybe you should study what life was like here 100 years ago.

Obviously, no one should expect Chinese workers to earn the same wages as American workers. However, when they have no independent unions and must compete with prison labor, I think it's fair to say that their wages are artificially low. If "competitiveness" is achieved through such blatant abuse of workers, then our own hard-fought labor protections will erode quickly. (Ditto for our environmental standards.) I suppose you think this is a good thing.

By the way, does your disdain for "inflated" American wages also apply to exhorbitant CEO salaries? Why don't those ever get cut in the name of competitiveness, before throwing workers out on the street?

 

The best part about the whole thing is that you can’t even imagine what life would actually be like without government introduced labour standards if you think it will be like it was 100 years ago.



And what is wrong with people being rewarded for hard work and having those that don’t want to work die?



You can tell by the way I spell that I don’t live in your country. But compared to Canada, your country is almost a dream. My country is a million times worse with the silly unions and labour standards.



What is wrong with someone having to compete with prison labour? You call it an evil that needs combating and I call it a fact of life. Hell if you have to compete with prison labour you is in the wrong business and are going to go bankrupt in a matter of months so the problem will solve itself anyway.



What abuse of workers? I don’t know to which you are referring.



Yes it is a good thing if labour standards along with their cause erode quickly. And environmental standards? Don’t get me started.

 

Because people working in unregulated sweatshops for 16 hours a day breathing dirty air without proper ventilation or light is a good thing as long as prices stay low right?

 

Of course that isn't a good thing. Unless you are that worker and that is what you do to make a living.


Max I think you are missing the point.

 

I think the idea here is to "save" the Chinese workers by putting them out of work. Won't they be grateful.

I thought Americans liked free markets. What happened?

 

What happened? We decided that people living in a civilized society shouldn't be ruled by social Darwinism.

And my idea is to "save" the Chinese workers by establishing basic safety and labor standards, like no 18 hour workdays for 12 year olds making 10 cents an hour with no benefits. I'm not trying to suggest socialist standards here, just a few basic reforms.

 

Americans liked free markets until they realised that everything really does go to the cheapest possible area, hence the steel tarrifs a few years back.

 

You all talk about Americans liking free markets like there actually were such things.



Sorry to tell you folks but there has never been such a thing.



You mean "Americans would like free markets". Right?