The world today has undergone tremendous transformation. There are many issues that distinguish the world of today from the world of past years. Globalization is among these issues. Essentially, globalization is concerned with the elimination of borders and the enhancement of cross-cultural and international engagement (Boudreaux 2008). Today, virtually all nations engage with others in such issues as trade and scientific pursuits. Globalization has presented a wide range of benefits. For instance, thanks to globalization, it has become possible for a firm in the United States to offshore its manufacturing to a plant in China. Globalization is not a new phenomenon. Even in past years, nations and communities extended interactions and collaboration beyond their borders. While it is true that globalization has been a constant feature of human life, there are clear differences between contemporary globalization and the globalization of the past.
Nationalism
There are various theories which explain the emergence of globalization. The theory of eclecticism is among this. This theory recognizes a number of forces which set the stage for globalization (Scholte 2005). National interests, class struggles and the desire to outdo other nations are some of these forces. The theory of eclecticism helps to explain how globalization is linked to nationalism. Individuals tend to develop strong and deep attachments to their countries. This is the essence of nationalism. In past years, nationalistic sentiment was a key feature of globalization. In his book, Benedict Anderson explores the role that nationalism played in defining relationships among nations. He notes that the pursuit of selfish national interests was the primary force that drove international relations (Anderson 2006). He offers the example of the establishment of the Americas. This land was created out of nationalistic fervor. Anderson adds that nationalistic sentiment inspired nations to invade other people and to establish colonies (Anderson 2006). Anderson also notes that nationalism inspires people to make sacrifices for their nations. Essentially, Anderson makes it clear that the globalization of the past was a manifestation of nationalism. Instead of pursuing common interests and shared objectives, nations pushed for their agendas.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
It is true that nationalism continues to define how nations relate with one another today. However, the pursuit of common interests has replaced nationalism in international relations. Peter Dicken (2015) offers an interesting discussion on the transformation that the international landscape has undergone. He argues that as opposed to the situation in previous years, states are now joining forces in such common issues as trade and economic development (Dicken 2015). The situation today contrasts sharply with the state of affairs in the past where the pursuit of selfish goals was the primary motivation. Dicken is careful to make it clear that while globalization has enhanced the pursuit of shared interests, it has not killed the state. Basically, these means that globalization has allowed nations to collaborate without losing their unique identities and heritage.
For greater clarity regarding the issues discussed above, it is important to illustrate using examples. It has been noted that in the past, nations pursued selfish and nationalism-inspired objectives. For example, in its invasion of the Americas, Britain did not wish to benefit the local communities. Instead, the invasion was intended to provide access to raw materials and create a market for British goods. On the other hand, globalization of today has inspired cooperation and collectivism. For example, countries today collaborate in such programs as space exploration, humanitarian assistance and poverty eradication.
The examples and the discussion above make it clear that the globalization of today is better. This is because it has inspired nations to consolidate their effort and focus on issues of common concern. The world is achieving more progress as a result of cooperation. In the past, selfish nationalism was the main driver of international relations. Nations violated and hurt their neighbors in their quest to obtain resources and to further their agenda. For example, the British colonizers invaded communities and robbed them of their freedom and resources. Contemporary globalization reminds the world that greater progress can be made through collaborative effort instead of vicious competition.
The Global Economy
The theory of liberalism is another model that attempts to explain the origins and development of globalization. This theory holds that the extension of markets and modernization are the main forces that drive globalization (Ritzer 2010). Essentially, the theory posits that in seeking partnerships with other countries, nations aim to grow their economies and derive financial benefits. The theory of liberalism accounts for how globalization has transformed the world economy. The global economy is another issue that distinguishes contemporary globalization from the globalization of past years. In the past, nations traded with one another. However, the scale of trade was rather limited and small. Nations tended to trade with a few trusted partners instead of extending an open invitation to any country that wished to establish trade ties (Iokibe et al. 2008). The strong financial institutions such as the World Bank that exist today were absent. There were no formal guidelines that regulated international trade. Basically, the globalization of the past placed little emphasis on the need for formal structures, trade agreements and international institutions. As a result, the globe lacked a unified economy that brought together all interested countries.
In his article, Paul Hirst (2009) explores the tremendous transformation that the world economy has undergone. His discussion allows one to understand how the global economy is different from its state in past decades. He highlights the emergence of transnational companies. These are firms which have achieved a global presence through investments in different countries. He also points out that foreign direct investment is making the globe even smaller. Through globalization, countries are entering into trade agreements that are eliminating barriers. Contemporary globalization is challenging companies to move beyond the borders of their home countries. Furthermore, thanks to globalization, nations are relaxing trade restrictions, thereby facilitating free trade. Anthony Smith (1995) echoed Hirst’s argument that globalization has facilitated trade and the creation of a global economy. In his article, he notes that nationalism is on the decline. He offers the example of the European Union whose members are working together to build their economies through free trade. Overall, the global economy has become more sophisticated as nearly all countries trade with one another.
The examples of such countries as Japan and China allow one to understand the state of the world economy in the past. These countries adopted isolationist stances and economies. They limited their interactions with the rest of the world. Overall, the globalization of the past discouraged international trade and economic cooperation. Such trading blocs as the European Union and NAFTA underscore the tremendous impact that contemporary globalization has had on the global economy. These trading blocs have created unified economies and facilitate cross-border trade. Even such countries as Japan and China which were previously isolated have become key players in international trade.
A comparison of contemporary and traditional globalization reveals that the former delivered many benefits. It has expanded global trade, providing countries with sources and markets for their products. Today, a firm is able to move its products to dozens of markets in different parts of the world. This would not be possible in the past when countries closed their borders and engaged in very little trade with the rest of the world. It is worth noting that the economic cooperation resulting from international trade is not without its drawbacks. As it has accelerated production, economic cooperation has adversely affected the environment and has raised questions over sustainability (Flechter 2010). After exhausting their resources, firms and countries move to other places where they continue to exploit the resources. Another con of contemporary globalization is that it promotes social injustice and equality. While the rich continue to grow their wealth, the poor continue to wallow in hardship. Despite its shortcomings, contemporary globalization is far better than the globalization of the past.
Politics, Diplomacy and War
The third issue which defines globalization is politics, diplomacy and war. The theory of political realism sheds light on how politics, diplomacy and violent conflict shape diplomacy. According to this theory, national interest and the need to assert power are among the factors which accelerate globalization (Ervin & Smith 2008). Collaborating with Nikita Dhawan, Shalini Randeria (2015) investigate the changes that the world has undergone as a result of globalization. These authors point out that in the past, colonial rule was the means through which nations asserted their influence and power. Using the example of India, they examine how colonial powers subjugated and violated the rights of vulnerable communities (Dhawan & Randeria 2015). India is a representation of the many nations which endured war, colonialism and subjugation. The globalization of the past had no regard for the sovereignty of nations. War and bitter politics that eroded social progress are the key features that defined international relations in the past.
The world has clearly learnt that violent conflict only causes pain and anguish. This lesson can be attributed to contemporary globalization. In modern societies, diplomacy is the first resort when addressing international conflicts. In their discussion, Dhawan and Randeria address how such organizations as the World Social Forum have challenged countries to pursue peace and resolve conflicts through diplomacy (Dhawan & Randeria 2015). These scholars acknowledge that contemporary globalization has not entirely eliminated violent conflict and colonialism. They recognize that neo-imperialism remains a serious challenge. The world today enjoys peace and stability that was absent in the past. However, wars and civil strife are still being witnessed today. These challenges indicate that globalization is simply unable to completely solve such issues as violent conflict. It could be that man is irredeemably and hopelessly evil and no efforts, however concerted, can totally eradicate war and violence.
Examples will help to illustrate the points raised in the discussion above. There are countless examples of nations that invaded others and turned them into colonies. For instance, Britain colonized India and dozens of other countries. Japan is another country that invaded and colonized its neighbors. During the occupation, the colonizing forces commit serious violations such as murder and other forms of human rights abuses (Horvitz & Catherwood 2014). The lack of such organizations as the International Criminal Court (ICC) which could hold the colonial powers accountable for their actions emboldened these powers. Today, the ICC and other criminal tribunals ensure justice and stability. They pursue criminals and violators of international law. The international community has also established strong institutions which encourage diplomacy and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. For example, through the Security Council, the United Nations continues to promote diplomacy and global peace.
That contemporary globalization possesses more pros is not in question. As the discussion above makes evident, this era of globalization has encouraged peaceful resolution of conflicts that would otherwise turn violent. It is true that the world is not entirely free of violent conflicts. In such nations as Syria, thousands of civilians have died despite the progress that the world has made in creating such institutions as the United Nations. The inability of contemporary globalization to address violent conflicts and its promotion of neo-imperialism are its main cons. Past globalization is more flawed than contemporary globalization. The main flaw of the former lies in the fact that it thrived on human rights violations and colonial tendencies.
The rise of Feminism and activism through art
Another model that sheds light on the emergence of globalization is the feminist theory. Essentially, this theory focuses on the social construction of gender (Hawkesworth 2006). It particularly examines how different societies regard masculinity and femininity. The theory also addresses how tasks are assigned based on one’s gender. Thanks to this theory, one is able to understand how the social construction of gender both facilitated and hampered globalization. Women play important roles in nation building. Globalization has redefined their lives in a number of different ways. Today, women have a louder voice and wield more influence. This situation is different from that of past years. Credit for the progress that women have made in securing greater freedoms belongs to contemporary globalization. However, it is worth noting that traditional globalization also played some role in empowering women. During the early phases of the industrialization process, women began to enter the workplace. Previously, they were confined to the home where they mostly performed such household chores as attending to the needs of their children and tending to the home. The industrial process created new opportunities and set the stage for the entry of women into the workplace. While they were limited to simple tasks, they participated in the industrial revolution.
From the discussion above, one can conclude that globalization of the past laid the ground for women to join the workforce. Contemporary globalization took the impact of past globalization even further. As a result of contemporary globalization, more and more women have found opportunities for gainful employment (Sassen 2000). Instead of being tasked with simple and gendered tasks, women are now taking part in initiatives that were previously reserved for men. For example, women today serve as chief executives and have been successful in driving large corporations.
The difference between past and contemporary globalization goes beyond the entry of women into the workplace. Contemporary globalization has also inspired women to become involved in politics and governance. This is most evident in the United States where women are taking on powerful politicians. For instance, thousands of women took to the streets to protests against the policies of the Trump administration (Bain 2017). These protests inspired other protests in different parts of the globe. That the protests spread to other parts of the world is evidence that contemporary globalization is galvanizing women to demand better treatment and justice. Protests and loud voices are not the only tools that such groups as women are relying on to focus attention on the issues that they face. In addition to these tools, women are also using art. A new style of activism has emerged as a result. Referred to as craftism, this style involves using such art as paintings to highlight the plight of women and other vulnerable communities (Clarke 2016). In the discussion below, more examples of how contemporary globalization is fueling the feminist movement are provided. The purpose of the discussion is to distinguish past and contemporary globalization and underscore the progress that the feminist movement has made.
For years, men have wielded immense power and influence over women. Through this power, they have been able to exploit and abuse women. For example, in the past, instances of domestic and workplace harassment and abuse were common. These issues are still being witnessed in the modern workplace. However, women are now able to fight back and demand respect. The #MeToo Movement is a manifestation of the power that women have found. Originating in the United States, this movement has gained traction in such other countries as South Korea. Through this movement, women are tackling sexual harassment and other forms of abuse. Coupled with such other movements as Women’s Marches, the #MeToo initiative has allowed society to make even more progress in defending women.
From the discussion this far, it is evident that contemporary globalization is more beneficial compared to the globalization of the past. While this remains true, it is critical to understand that contemporary globalization has adversely affected women and the feminist movement. In her article, Alison Jaggar (2001) contends that contemporary globalization has not been good for women. She notes that contemporary globalization has fueled conflicts and economic inequalities. Women have borne the brunt of these issues. The concerns that Jaggar raises are valid. However, they do not reduce contemporary globalization to a force that is entirely evil. In the discussion above, some of the incredible benefits of contemporary globalization have been highlighted. This phenomenon has inspired a feminist movement that has swept across the world. Compared to past globalization, contemporary globalization is far superior.
In conclusion, globalization has transformed the world in many different ways. It has facilitated trade and economic interactions among different countries. It has also eased communication and the movement of people across the world. Globalization has also facilitated the development of such institutions as the World Bank. Through these institutions, the world has been able to unite and address such challenges as poverty. The state of globalization today is different from that of the past. In general, contemporary globalization has eliminated borders and transformed the world into a global village. It is helpful to note that contemporary globalization has also presented negative impacts such as economic inequalities and social injustices. If the world is to gain fully from globalization, it must address the negative impacts.
Bibliography
Anderson, B 2006, Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism , London, Verso
Bain, J 2017, Pussyhat power – the feminist protesters crafting resistance to Trump and his
Supporters, The Conversation , available online at h ttps://theconversation.com/pussyhat-p ower-the- feminist-protesters-crafting-resistance-to-trump-and-his-supporters-72221
Boudreaux, D J 2008, Globalization, Santa Barbara, CA, ABC-CLIO.
Dicken, P 2015, Global Shift: Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy , Los Angeles, California, SAGE.
Ervin, J & Smith, Z A 2008, Globalization: A Reference Handbook, Santa Barbara, ABC-CLIO.
Fletcher K., (2010) ‘Slow Fashion: An Invitation for Systems Change’, Fashion Practice The Journal of Design Creative Process & the Fashion Industry , 2(2): 259–266
Hawkesworth, M E 2006, Globalization and Feminist Activism, Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield.
Hirst, P. (2009), Globalization in question: the international economy and the possibilities of governance , Cambridge, Polity Press.
Horvitz, L A & Catherwood C 2014, Encyclopaedia of War Crimes and Genocide, Infobase Publishing.
Iokibe, M, Rose, C, Tomaru, J, & Weste, J 2008, Japanese Diplomacy in the 1950s: From Isolation to Integration, London, Routledge.
Jaggar, A. (2001) ‘Is Globalization Good for Women’, Comparative Literature , 53(4): 298–314. Mohanty, C. T. (2003), Feminism without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity ,
Durham, Duke University Press.
Ritzer, G 2010, Globalization: A Basic Text, Hoboken, NJ, Wiley.
Sassen, S. (2000), ‘Women's burden: Counter-geographies of globalization and the feminization of survival’ Journal of International Affairs ; 53 (2): 503-524
Scholte, J A (2005), Globalization: A Critical Introduction, London, Macmillan International Higher Education.
Smith, A 1995, Nations and Nationalism in a Global Era , Cambridge: Polity Press.
