UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION

ALBERT EINSTEIN (1936) ONCE OBSERVED THAT THE CATEGORIES ARE NOT INHERENT IN THE PHENOMENA. IN OTHER WORDS, CONCEPTS SUCH AS “GLOBALIZATION” AND “INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY REVOLUTION” ARE HUMAN CONSTRUCTS WE HAVE DEVELOPED IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND BETTER THE COMPLEXITIES OF WHAT WE BELIEVE IS HAPPENING IN THE WORLD. THEORIES ARE SIMPLIFIED MODELS OF REALITY, AND THE FIRST STEP IN THEORY CONSTRUCTION IS CATEGORIZATION OR CLASSIFICATION.

OVER THE PAST FEW DECADES, RESEARCHERS AND SOCIAL COMMENTATORS HAVE COINED THE TERM “GLOBALIZATION” IN ORDER TO FOCUS ON WHAT THEY BELIEVE ARE INTERRELATED PROCESSES WHICH ARE HAVING TREMENDOUS IMPACTS ON OUR LIVES IN THE LATE TWENTIETH AND EARLY TWENTY-FIRST CENTURIES (HEDLEY, 2004: 5). CONSEQUENTLY, THERE IS NO ONE CORRECT DEFINITION OF GLOBALIZATION; IT HAS MANY DIFFERENT MEANINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS, DEPENDING UPON WHO IS DISCUSSING IT AND IN WHAT CONTEXT.

THE TERM GLOBALIZATION ENCOMPASSES EVERYTHING FROM DOWNSIZING AND DEREGULATION, TO THE FREER MOVEMENT OF GOODS, IDEAS, AND CAPITAL ACROSS RATHER THAN BETWEEN BOARDERS, WITH INFORMATION HIGHWAYS THROWN IN FOR GOOD MEASURE. RELATED PROCESSES ARE ENCOMPASSED AS WELL, INCLUDING THE INTERCONNECTEDNESS ASSOCIATED WITH A GLOBAL VILLAGE .... (FLERAS, 2004: 365)

HOWEVER, THERE ARE ELEMENTS OF AGREEMENT AS TO WHAT GLOBALIZATION MEANS.

WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS?

THEY INCLUDE: ECOLOGICAL, ECONOMIC, POLITICAL (INCLUDING MILITARY), AND SOCIOCULTURAL DIMENSIONS.

THE DERIVATION OF THE TERM “GLOBALIZATION” IMPLIES THAT IT INVOLVES WORLDWIDE PROCESSES THAT ARE RELATIVELY NOVEL AND STILL UNFOLDING. THESE MULTIDIMENSIONAL PROCESSES ARE BEING EXPERIENCED UNEVENLY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD AND IN DIFFERENT SECTORS OF SOCIAL LIFE.

GLOBALIZATION IS A COMPLEX SET OF HUMAN FORCES INVOLVING THE PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION/TRANSMISSION, AND CONSUMPTION OF TECHNICAL, ECONOMIC, POLITICAL, AND SOCIOCULTURAL GOODS AND SERVICES WHICH ARE ADMINISTRATIVELY AND TECHNOLOGICALLY INTEGRATED ON A WORLDWIDE BASIS

{ASIDE: “GLOBALIZATION” AND “GLOBALISM” DIFFER. GLOBALIZATION REFERS TO A PROCESS OF TRANSFORMATION, WHEREAS GLOBALISM REFERS TO A NEOLIBERAL MARKET IDEOLOGY THAT ENDOWS GLOBALIZATION WITH THE FOLLOWING VALUES AND NORMS =====> PRIMACY OF ECONOMIC GROWTH, IMPORTANCE OF FREE TRADE FOR PROSPERITY, UNRESTRICTED FREE MARKET, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, REDUCED GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION, AND A MODERNIZATION MODEL OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (STEGER, 2002)}.

THIS DEFINITION OF GLOBALIZATION HIGHLIGHTS THE POINT THAT GLOBALIZATION COMPRISES TECHNOLOGICAL, ECONOMIC, POLITICAL (INCLUDING MILITARY), AND SOCIOCULTURAL DIMENSIONS. TOGETHER THESE DIMENSIONS MAKE UP THE (HUMAN) GLOBAL SYSTEM WHICH OPERATES WITHIN THE BROADER GLOBAL ECOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT.

1. PRELIMINARY PROCESS LEADING TO GLOBALIZATION == INNOVATIONS IN TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING WITHIN THE PAST THREE OR FOUR DECADES HAVE PERMITTED THE CREATION OF A TECHNOLOGICAL INFRASTRUCTURE THAT FACILITATES THE OTHER (THREE) DIMENSIONS OF GLOBALIZATION.

2. WHILE TECHNOLOGY MAY BE SEEN AS THE FACILITATING MEANS TO MODERN GLOBALIZATION == THE PRIMARY MOTIVATION HAS BEEN ECONOMIC — THE HARNESSING OF NATURAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES AND THE ESTABLISHING OF MARKETS AND INVESTMENTS WORLDWIDE BY CAPITALIST ENTERPRISE TO ACHIEVE GREATER CORPORATE CONTROL.

3. IN PART, TO COUNTER THE FORCES OF TECHNOLOGICALLY ENHANCED GLOBAL CAPITALISM, AND TO REPRESENT CIVIC INTERESTS, GOVERNMENTS AND NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS HAVE ALSO GLOBALIZED THROUGH THE FORMATION OF INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCES == [HOWEVER, THESE COALITIONS HAVE BEEN INSUFFICIENT TO MODERATE THE EFFECTS OF ANOTHER IMPORTANT DIMENSION OF GLOBALIZATION — THE WORLDWIDE CULTURAL OVERLAY OF WESTERN VALUES, NORMS, INSTITUTIONS, AND PRACTICES. (BECAUSE GLOBALIZATION WAS INITIATED IN THE WESTERN WORLD, INEVITABLY, WHAT IS PRODUCED, TRANSMITTED, AND CONSUMED IS MONOCULTURAL. THUS, GLOBALIZATION AS A MULTIDIMENSIONAL CONCEPT INVOLVES A WORLDWIDE TECHNOLOGICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN WHICH WESTERN-STYLE CAPITALISM PREDOMINATES == “GLOBALZATION HAS RAISED THE HUMAN STAKES AND HEIGHTENED HUMAN ANGST -- THE CHALLENGE OF INCLUSION”]

4. FINALLY, IF TECHNOLOGY FACILITATES GLOBALIZATION, THE ECOLOGICAL BIOSPHERE WITHIN WHICH WE ALL LIVE REPRESENTS ITS OUTSIDE LIMITS. DURING THE LAST FEW DECADES, MOUNTING EVIDENCE ON A VARIETY OF FRONTS SUCH AS CLIMATE CHANGE, POLLUTION, OZONE DEPLETION, CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION, AND POPULATION GROWTH INDICATES WE ARE NEARING THESE LIMITS. CONSEQUENTLY, GLOBALIZATION ALSO INVOLVES A CRITICAL TENSION BETWEEN OUR TECHNOLOGICAL ABILITY TO MODIFY THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND THE ULTIMATE ECOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS BEYOND WHICH HUMAN EXISTENCE IS IMPOSSIBLE.

FLERAS ======>

1) ECONOMIC PHENOMENON: HIGH VOLUMES OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE AND INVESTMENT.

2) POLITICAL PHENOMENON: DIMINISHING STATE SOVEREIGNTY BECAUSE OF INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONS AND REGULATORY BODIES.

3) CULTURAL PHENOMENON: POTENTIAL HOMOGENIZE CULTURES BECAUSE OF MARKET FORCES THAT DISRUPT LOCAL CONVENTIONS.

4) SOCIAL PHENOMENON: DISRUPTION OF COMMUNITY PATTERNS – E.G. URBANIZATION (DISPLACEMENT OF TRADITIONAL PRACTICES AND LIFESTYLES) AND GLOBAL MIGRATION.

5) COMMUNICATIVE PHENOMENON: NEW AND RAPID INFORMATION NETWORKS.

{FOR MORE ON THE DIMENSIONS OF GLOBALIZATION AS THE PRESENT STAGE OF CAPITALISM SEE CHANGING CANADA – MEL WATKINS “POLITICS IN THE TIME AND SPACE OF GLOBALIZATION” (PP. 8-9)} =====>

ECONOMIC OR CORPORATE GLOBALIZATION [FREE TRADE, UNLIMITED MOBILITY OF CAPITAL – TECHNOLOGICAL GLOBALIZATION [THE WIRED WORLD] – IDEOLOGICAL GLOBALIZATION [NEOLIBERALISM; FUNDAMENTALIST MESSIANIC CHRISTIANITY] – CULTURAL GLOBALIZATION [THE MONOCULTUAL AMERICANIZATION OF EVERYTHING AND ETHNIC FRAGMENTATION] – MILITARY GLOBALIZATION [THE AMERICAN MILITARIZATION OF EVERYTHING; HIGH-TECH WEAPONIZATION OF LAND AND SPACE; WORLD MARKETS FOR ARMS AND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION] – POLITICAL GLOBALIZATION [THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND{IMF}; THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION {WTO}; NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION {NATO}; EMPHASIZING THE ANALYTIC HUB OF LIFE IN “TRANSNATIONAL PROCESSES” BEYOND THE LEVEL OF THE NATION-STATE] – SOCIAL GLOBALIZATION [GLOBAL APARTHEID AND GLOBAL MIGRATION AND DISPLACEMENT] – THE GLOBALIZATION OF DISEASE – [PAN-EPIDEMICS OF AIDS MAD COW, FOOT-AND-MOUTH, ETC.,] - THE GLOBALIZATION OF DISSENT [WORLD-WIDE MOVEMENTS AGAINST GLOBALIZATION FROM CHIAPAS TO SEATTLE TO QUEBEC CITY TO GENOA]

THE GLOBAL CITY

ACCORDING TO KEIL AND KIPER [IN CHANGING CANADA – “THE URBAN EXPERIENCE AND GLOBALIZATION”] =====>

THE GLOBAL CITY IS THE ANALYTIC UNIT AND FOCAL POINT OF THE ERA OF WORLD CAPITALISM, CHARACTERIZED DEMOGRAPHICALLY AND IDEOLOGICALLY AS THE CONTEMPORARY GATHERING PLACE (1) TRANSNATIONAL & NATIONAL IDENTITIES, AND (2) DIVERSITY AND COSMOPOLITANISM =====> THE IMPLICATIONS HERE FOR SCHOLARSHIP IS PROFOUND: THE CENTRAL FEATURE OF THE IDEA OF GLOBALIZATION IS THAT MANY CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS CANNOT BE ADEQUATELY STUDIED AT THE LEVEL OF NATION-STATES, THAT IS, IN TERMS OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, BUT NEED TO BE THEORIZED IN TERMS OF GLOBAL {TRANSNATIONAL} PROCESSES, BEYOND THE LEVEL OF NATIONS STATES (SKLAIR 1998) =======> SOME SCHOLARS SEE GLOBAL CITIES AS THE PRIMARY UNIT OF ANALYSIS WHERE THE GLOBALIZED PROCESSES INTERSECT WITH TRANSNATIONAL (GLOBAL) COMMUNITIES {INCREASING DIVERSITY AND COSMOPOLITANISM AND THEIR LOCATION WITHIN THE CIRCUITS OF CAPITAL, COMMODITES, SERVICES, AND PEOPLE} =======> THESIS: GLOBAL CITIES AS THE GATHERING PLACE OF THE 21ST CENTURY SOUL SEARCH FOR ECONOMIC VIABILITY, POLITICAL GOVERNANCE, SOCIAL JUSTICE, CULTURAL ENRICHMENT, AND ECOLOGICAL STUSTAINABILITY.

CONTRADICTIONS OF GLOBALIZATION

{GLOBALIZATION IS OPERATIONALIZED BY WORLD-WIDE, COUNTERVAILING FORCES OF CULTURAL PLURALISM AND CORPORATE CAPITALISM, FOR WHICH CANADA IS BOTH A MICROCOSM AND LABORATORY}

1) S ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION BECOMES MORE ENTRENCHED AND EXPANSIVE — ETHNO-RACIAL TRIBALISM (TRIBALIZATION) INCREASES AS A COUNTERVAILING FORCE.

CONSOLIDATING CULTURAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL BOUNDARIES “MENTAL TERRITORIALITY”==> “ETHNO-RACIAL REVIVAL”.

2. P 527} “TO DATE GLOBALIZATION IS AN EXCLUSIONARY FORCE, DENYING ACTIVE PARTICIPATION TO PARTICULAR REGIONS, CULTURES AND CLASSES ... IN TURN THIS CAUSES BACKLASH. FOR MANY NATIONS AND CULTURES IN THE WORLD, MODERN GLOBALISM CONSTITUTES AN ELITIST, NORTH-BASED, WESTERN FOCUSED TECHNOLOGICAL SUPPORT FORM OF ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL IMPERIALISM.”

EX: ACCORDING TO UN HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT:

· ABOUT 1/4 OF THE WORLDS POPULATION (APPROX. 1.5 BILLION PEOPLE LIVE ON LESS THAN ON AMERICAN DOLLAR A DAY

· NEARLY A BILLION ARE ILLITERATE, AND ANOTHER BILLION GO HUNGRY

· ABOUT 1/3 OF THE POPULATION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES WILL NOT SURVIVE TO 40 (HALF THE AVERAGE LIFE EXPECTANCE IN CANADA)

THIS GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR IS DRIFTING TOWARD A KIND OF “GLOBAL APARTHEID” — EXTREMES OF POWER AND WEALTH ARE COMPRESSED INTO GEOGRAPHICALLY SEGREGATED ZONES TO CREATE AN “APARTNESS” EVERY BIT AS PUNITIVE AND PERVASIVE AS APARTHEID WAS IN SOUTH AFRICA (FLERAS, 359)

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES APPEAR TO CONSTANTLY FIND THEMSELVES IN AN ENDLESS CYCLE OF CRISIS, CONFLICT CORRUPTION, AND CATASTROPHE, WITH NO RESOLUTION IN SIGHT

CENTURIES OF EXPLOITATION UNDER COLONIALISM HAVE PROVEN PIVOTAL IN SHAPING NEGATIVE OUTCOMES.

PATTERNS OF DEPENDANCY AND UNDERDEVELOPMENT ARE NO LESS DEVASTATING — DIRECT COLONIAL RULE IS NO LONGER THE CASE, HAVING TRANSFORMED TO INDIRECT RULE (NEOCOLONIALISM) WITH ITS MINIMAL POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE BUT CONTINUED ECONOMIC CONTROL AND DEPENDENCY

CONCLUSION: CORPORATE GLOBAL MARKET MODEL — KNOWN AS GLOBALIZATION — MAY WELL REPRESENT THE LATEST FORM OF COLONIALISM BY ANOTHER NAME.

CONTRADICTIONS AND TRANSFORMATIONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER:

[[[MY VERSION AND INTEREST LIES IN]]] — “NEW WORLD BORDERS”

GLOBALISM IS A MULTIDIMENSIONAL PROCESS INTERCONNECTING POLITICAL ECONOMIC, MILITARY, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL SPHERES OF LIFE — AND IT IS INTERNATIONAL IN SCOPE

EX: FILM — MILITARIZATION OF BORDER ENFORCEMENT ====> ANTI-IMMIGRATION HYSTERIA {PROPOSITION 187 CALIFORNIA; HARMONIZATION OF BOARDER SECURITY NAFTA}

DEFENSIVE FORTRESS MENTALITY ====> GLOBALIZATION {EX: NAFTA} DESTABALIZES LOCAL ECONOMIES ====> DISPLACES POPULATIONS ====> UNLEASHES TREMENDOUS INTERNATIONAL MASS MIGRATION MOVEMENTS (TO URBAN CENTRES — URBANIZATION — GLOBAL CITIES) ====> CRIMINALIZES UNDOCUMENTED MIGRANTS FROM “THE GLOBAL SOUTH” AS PARASITES/DANGEROUS/TERROR THREATS ====> GLOBAL MASS MEDIA REINFORCES GEO-POLITICAL HEGEMONY BY CONSTRUCTING “THE GLOBAL IMMIGRANT” AS A TARGET/ FRAMING MIGRANTS AS A DANGEROUS ELEMENT/ “COLOURED BODIES” CAN BECOME “RACIALIZED” {RACIALLY STEREOTYPED} AS “POTENTIAL THREATS TO ORDER AND CIVILIZATION”.

IRONIC CONTRADICTION: THE NEW FORTRESS MENTALITY DOESN’T CURTAIL UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRATION IT ONLY CRIMINALIZES IT ====> MASS MOVEMENTS OF PEOPLE {GLOBAL MIGRATION} CONTINUES TO INCREASE CHALLENGING NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS TO DEAL WITH A “GLOBAL HUMANITY” BACKLASH.

TWO DISTINCTIVE FEATURES OF THE NEW GLOBALISM (CORPORATE TRANSNATIONALISM &ETHNIC REVIVALISM):

CORPORATE GLOBALIZATION: MONEY MOVES FREELY ACROSS BORDERS (BORDERLESS WORLD) — WHILE PEOPLE DO NOT (RESTRAINED BY DEFENSIVE FORTRESS MENTALITY AND INTERDICTIONS) ====> CONTRADICTION OR TENSION HERE IS BETWEEN — AS CAPITALISM IS MORE GLOBALIZED, PEOPLE ARE MORE TRIBALIZED.

(1) GOVERNMENTS ARE UNDER PRESSURE TO GIVE UP SOME ASPECTS OF THEIR SOVEREIGNTY TO MULTINATIONALS AND TRANSNATIONALS.

THE LEADERSHIP AND POWER EXERCISED BY THE MULTINATIONAL FINANCE AND COMMERCIAL CONCERNS IN DIRECTING NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS IN FINANCIAL AND OTHER ECONOMIC POLICIES.

THE INCREASED PROFILE AND POLITICAL INFLUENCE OF COMMERCIAL AND FINANCIAL INTERESTS.

GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD HAVE TO SHARE POWER WITH TRANSNATIONAL INTERESTS, AND THEY ALSO HAVE TO RE-TOOL POLITICAL INSTRUMENTS TO MANAGE ETHNO-RACIAL TRENDS AND POPULATION PRESSURES.

(ALSO) "THE GLOBAL SOCIETY" IS DISTINGUISHED BY,

THE SYSTEM OF COMMUNICATION AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION BY ELECTRONIC MEANS, WHERE PERSONS OF DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS CAN COMMUNICATE RELATIVELY EASILY ACROSS VAST DISTANCES, ENGAGE IN COMMON CONVERSATION AND UNDERTAKE JOINT PROJECTS.

EX: CANADA IS A MODERN SOCIETY THAT HAS A GROWING "INFORMATION ECONOMY" -- MANY VIRTUAL MARKETPLACES IN CYBERSPACE, LIKE FINANCIAL AND SECURITIES MARKETS -- TENDENCY IS TO MAKE NATIONAL BOUNDARIES OBSOLETE.

ALL IN ALL THEN) THE GLOBAL SOCIETY'S RELATION TO "CULTURAL" AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY IS SOMEWHAT PARADOXICAL.

(A) ON THE ONE HAND, CULTURAL IDENTITY AS THE ELEMENT OF DEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF SOCIETY IS ACKNOWLEDGED BUT SEEN AS AN ANTIQUATED REALITY THAT IS SUBORDINATED TO GLOBAL ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS.

EX: SLOGAN FOR MCI WORLDCOM: "THE WORLD IS OFFICIALLY OPEN FOR BUSINESS".

(B) ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEADERS OF THE GLOBAL SOCIETY CONSTANTLY DEAL WITH MULTICULTURAL DIVERSITY AND “CAN” RECOGNIZE IT AS AN ECONOMIC RESOURCE.

(EX: TOP NOTCH INDUSTRIES PROCLAIM THE VIRTUES OF MULTICULTURAL SALES FORCE).

(2) INTER-ETHNIC DIVERSTY AND CONTACTS HAVE INTENSIFIED.

THEREFORE, GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD ARE UNDER A GROWING PRESSURE TO ACCOMMODATE INCREASINGLY DIVERSE POPULATIONS WITHIN A SINGLE BODY-POLITIC -- THAT IS, TO FIND SOME POLITICAL FORM OF PLURALIST ACCOMODATION.

SOCIOLOGICAL ASIDE: ETHNIC GROUPS ARE EMERGING TRANSNATIONAL ACTORS -- (A) LARGE SCALE INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION, (B) GLOBAL PRESENCE OF RACIAL AND ETHNIC GROUPS (INTER-ETHNIC DIVERSITY), AND (C) THE GLOBALIZATION OF OLDER, PRE-EXISTING CONFLICT AMONG TRADITIONAL CULTURES.

EX: WHEREAS IN THE PAST “THE OLD PARADIGM OF IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION” ASSUMED THAT INTERNATIONAL MIGRANTS BROKE RADICALLY WITH THEIR ANCESTRAL HOMES TO START AFRESH IN THEIR NEW HOMELAND =====> IN “THE NEW PARADIGM OF IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION” IMMIGRANT AND ETHNIC COMMUNITIES RETAIN AND CULTIVATE WITH FAMILIES, INSTITUTIONS, AND POLITICAL SYSTEMS ABROAD.

IN OTHER WORDS, THE SOCIAL PRACTICES OF IMMIGRANTS AND ETHNORACIAL GROUPS SEEM INCREASINGLY TO REFLECT A TRANSNATIONAL APPROACH TO SOCIAL LIFE AND CITIZENSHIP.

THEREFORE, TO ADEQUATELY ADDRESS CONFLICT, INEQUALITY, AND DOMINATION, THE BEST SOCIAL THEORISTS (REMARKABLY INNOVATIVELY) ARE WORKING ON STRATEGIC POLICY AND (LEGISLTIVE) INSTRUMENTS TO REDRESS SOCIAL INJUSTICES -- MULTICULTURALISM AND EMPLOYMENT EQUITY— HUMAN RIGHTS MOVEMENT/STRATEGIES/POLICIES BASED ON SOCIAL INCLUSION.

SOME RESEARCHERS EQUATE “GLOBALIZATION” TO AN EXERCISE IN “SOFT HEGEMONY,” THAT IS A TOOL BY RICH SOCIETIES TO GAIN DISPORPORTIONATE ADVANTAGE (CHAN AND SCARRITT, 2002). OTHERS ARE LESS SANGUINE: IN A STRONGLY WORDED CRITQUE, WILLIAM ROBINSON (1996) COUCHES GLOBALIZATION IN APOCALYPTIC TERMS AS A PLANETART STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE COSMOPOLITAN RICH AND THE PAROCHIAL POOR FROM WHICH THERE IS NO ESCAPE. THE IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON HUMAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL WORLDS IS COMPARABLE TO PREDATORY SCALE TO THE RAVAGES OF 19^TH CENTURY COLONIALISM. IN THAT CORPORATE GLOBALIZATION IS SIMPLY AN EXTENSION OF A COLONIALISM AND CAPITALISM WITH ITS COMMITMENT TO EXPLOIT CHEAP LABOUR UNDER INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES AND TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS ... (FLERAS, 2005: 366)

I SAY ======> THIS PLANETARY STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE COSMOPOLITAN RICH AND THE PAROCHIAL POOR FROM WHICH THERE IS NO ESCAPE BREAKS DOWN ALONG RACIAL LINES EUPHEIMIZED IN THE GEO-POLITICAL TERMINOLOGY OF — “THE NORTH-SOUTH BIFRUCATION”

HAS AIDED IN THE RECONFIGURATION (RE-COLONIALIZATION?) OF THE WORLD POLITICALLY AND ECONOMICALLY INTO THE “GLOBAL NORTH” AND THE “GLOBAL SOUTH”---- EX: IMMIGRATION FLOWS// MARXIAN RESERVED ARMY OF INDENTURED WORKERS FROM THE SOUTH OFTEN “WITHOUT PAPERS” AND EXPLOITED {NEO-COLONIALIST COMMITMENT TO EXPLOIT CHEAP LABOUR } — “THE BOAT PEOPLE” ======>

EX: TERRORISM AND SCOURGE (EVER BROWN BODY — BODY OF COLOUR ---- IS A POTENTIAL TERRORIST — EX: "FLYING WHILE BROWN" MEANS YOUR ARE SUBJECT TO GLOBAL RACIAL PROFILING)}}}

THE “BEST” SOCIOLOGISTS ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO RE-THINK CANADIAN SOCIETY AND GLOBAL-INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN TERMS OF ETHNORACIAL REALITY — FROM THE STANDPOINT OF MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE BEEN RACIALIZED AS DANGEROUS, AS ALIEN, AS POTENTIAL THREATS TO WORLD HISTORY AND PROGRESS.

IN THE PRESENT=

IN THE AGE OF GLOBALIZATION THERE ARE TWO INTERNATIONAL "KINDS OF PEOPLE" CATEGORIES:

NORTH - [DEVELOPED, RICH COUNTRIES]

SOUTH - [DEVELOPING, POOR COUNTRIES]

FOSTER ========>

MY FOCUS AND INTEREST IN ALL OF THIS – SOCIAL “GLOBAL” STRATIFICATION AND SOCIAL “GLOBAL” INEQUALITY DIMENSIONS OF GLOBALIZATION.

GLOBALIZATION WORKS ON THREE LEVELS THAT PUT A LARGE PORTION OF HUMANITY AT RISK — (1) DEVELOPMENT GAP; (2) A CULTURE GAP; AND (3) CLASS DISPARITY

****CONTRADICTIONS ABOUND AND PREVAIL, AND ARE CAPTURED IN THIS SCATHING INDICTMENT OF A THREE-TIERED WORLD =======> (1) THOSE THAT SPEND MONEY TO KEEP THEIR WEIGHT DOWN, (2) THOSE WHO EAT TO LIVE, AND (3) THOSE WHO DON’T KNOW WHERE THEIR NEXT MEAL WILL COME FROM [(KAWACHI AND KENNEDY, 2002) – FOUND IN FLERAS PP.360].

[[INCREASING DISAFFECTION WITH THE PROMISES OF GLOBALIZATION — FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE SOUTH, OR THE NON-WESTERN, OR THE MASSES, GLOBALIZATION IS NOT VIEWED WITH ENTHUSIASM, AND CONSEQUENTLY, ACTIVE OPPOSITION TO IT COULD RESULT. THESE CONSTITUTE THE “COUNTERFORCES” TO GLOBALIZATION — THE GLOBAL TECHNOLOGICAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED PRIMARILY BY CORPORATIONS, GOVERNMENTS, AND INDIVIDUALS IN RICH DEVELOPED COUNTRIES FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT {THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE WORLD’S POPULATION HAS YET TO BE CONNECTED TO THIS INFRASTRUCTURE}

TO DATE, GLOBALIZATION IS AN EXCLUSIONARY FORCE, DENYING ACTIVE PARTICIPATION TO PARTICULAR RACIALIZED REGIONS, CULTURES, AND CLASSES. IN TURN, THIS IS CAUSING BACKLASH. FOR MANY NATIONS, CULTURES, INSTITUTIONS, ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS IN THE WORLD, MODERN GLOBALISM CONSTITUTES AN ELITEST, NORTHERN-BASED, WESTERN-FOCUSED, TECHNOLOGICALLY SUPPORTED FORM OF ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL IMPERIALISM.

THE CHALLENGE OF INCLUSION:

IN ORDER TO TURN THIS VICIOUS CIRCLE INTO A VIRTUOUS CIRCLE, THE PRESIDENT OF THE WORLD BANK (WOLFENSON, 997:6) HAS ISSUED A CHALLENGE OF INCLUSION “TO REDUCE ... DISPARITIES ACROSS AND WITHIN COUNTRIES, TO BRING MORE PEOPLE INTO THE ECONOMIC MAINSTREAM, [AND] TO PROMOTE EQUITABLE ACCESS TO BENEFITS OF DEVELOPMENT REGARDLESS OF NATIONALITY, RACE, OR GENDER”

IN SOME SENSE, THE CHALLENGE OF INCLUSION IS TO CHANGE THE INERTIA OF GLOBALIZATION FROM AN IMPOSITION “FROM ABOVE” BY GREEDY CORPORATE INTERESTS TO A “BOTTOMS-UP” FOCUSED GLOBALIZATION THAT PUTS PEOPLE AHEAD OF PROFITS (STAR AND ADAMS, 2003)

[AS R. ALAN HEDLEY PUT IT IN — “UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION”] WHETHER THIS CHALLENGE BECOMES REALITY REMAINS TO BE SEEN; HOWEVER, UNTIL IT DOES, THE WORLD AS A WHOLE CANNOT TRULY BE CHARACTERIZED AS GLOBALIZED.

SOLUTION: HUMANISTIC GLOBALIZATION: PRIORITIZES HUMAN NEEDS AND CONCERNS WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF GLOBALIZATION THAT SPREADS THE WEALTH AND BENEFITS MORE EQUITABLY --- IT IS ABOUT CONSERVING COMMUNITY AND PROVIDING A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE, PUTTING PEOPLE'S NEEDS ABOVE PROFIT, USING LOCAL RESOURCES, ENCOURAGING DIVERSITY (FLERAS 372)

IT IS CHARACTERIZED BY A “BOTTOMS-UP” NEO-GLOBALIZATION THAT ENSURES BENEFITS ARE EQUITABLY DISTRIBUTED, RATHER THAN A “TOP-DOWN” GLOBALIZATION THAT IS DRIVEN BY TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS PRIMARILY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CORPORATE ELITE

TOA ACHIEVE HUMANISTIC GLOBALIZATION WE NEED TO:

!SHIFT ECONOMIES FROM PRODUCTION FOR EXPORT TO PRODUCTION FOR LOCAL MARKETS

!BECOME LESS DEPENDENT ON FOREIGN INVESTMENT AND MARKETS

!DISTRIBUTE INCOME TO CREATE A MORE THRIVING INTERNAL MARKET

!DE-EMPHASIZE GROWTH TO ENURE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

!SUBJECT THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO MONITORING BY PUBICLY SOCIETY

!ENCOURAGE PRODUCTION AT ALL LEVELS TO PRESERVE THE INTEGITY OF SOCIETY

POLITICAL ECONOMY AS “TRANSFORMATION” ======> HOW" TO DEVELOP/ BECOME A TRANSFORMATIVE FORCE FOR EMANCIPATION AND EMPOWERMENT ======> HOW DO WE INTERVENE ON THE STATUS QUO????} =======>

TRANSFORMATIVE BEHAVIOUR – “CREATIVITY” – ARISES OUT OF THE CONTRADICTIONS WHICH ATTRACT BOTH THE INTERNALIZED HETEROGENEITY OF “THINGS” AND OUT OF THE MORE OBVIOUS HETEROGENEITY PRESENT WITHIN SYSTEMS. IN A DIALECTICAL VIEW, OPPOSING FORCES, THEMSELVES CONSTITUTED OUT OF PROCESSES, IN TURN BECOME PARTICULAR NODAL POINTS FOR FURTHER PATTERNS OF TRANSFORMATIVE ACTIVITY. MATTER AND NON-MATTER, POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CHARGES, REPULSION AND ATTRACTION, LIFE AND DEATH, MIND AND MATTER, MASCULINE AND FEMININE, CAPITAL AND LABOUR ETC. ARE CONSTITUTED AS OPPOSITIONS AROUND WHICH CONGEAL A WHOLE HOST OF TRANSFORMATIVE ACTIVITIES THAT BOTH REPRODUCE THE OPPOSITIONS AND RESTRUCTURE THE PHYSICAL, BIOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL WORLD (HARVEY 1996: 54)

[[[TRANSFORMATION IS ABOUT THE ENGAGEMENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY IN CHANGING CANADIAN CANADA AND ALSO ABOUT CHANGES IN CANADIAN POLITICAL ECONOMY ITSELF == IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE {IN THIS TRANSFORMATIVE REGARD} TO MARSHAL EVIDENCE AND EXPLANATION SO AS TO “HELP MOBILIZE FORCES OF CHANGE” {PORTER, 1987: 3} == AS STUDENTS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE OUR QUEST TO UNDERSTAND, EXPLAIN AND RESIST THE COMPLEX FORCES AROUND US.]]]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

CHAN, STEVE AND JAMES R. SCARRITT (2002). “GLOBALIZATION, SOFT HEGEMONY, AND DEMOCRATIZATION: THEIR SOURCES AND EFFECTS.” PP.1 33 IN COPING WITH GLOBALIZATION

FLERAS, AUGIE (2005). SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN CANADA: CONDITIONS, CONSTRUCTIONS AND CHALLENGES. TORONTO: PEARSON EDUCATION CANADA INC.

HARVEY, DAVID (1996) JUSTICE, NATURE, AND THE GEOGRAPHY OF DIFFERENCE. CAMBRIDGE: BLACKWELL.

HEDLEY, ALAN R. (2002) RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL: DILEMMAS OF GLOBALIZATION. BLOOMFIELD, CONN.: KUMARIAN PRESS.

KEIL, ROGER AND STEFAN KIPFER (2003). “THE URAN EXPERIENCE AND GLOBALIZATION.” IN WALLACE CLEMENT AND LEAH F. VOSKO (EDS.). CHANGING CANADA: POLITICAL ECONOMY AS TRANSFORMATION. McGILL-QUEEN'S UNIVERISTY PRESS.

NAGRA, NARINE (2003). “WHITENESS IN SEATTLE.” ALTERNATIVES JOURNAL, 29(1): 23-25.

PORTER, JOHN (1987) THE MEASURE OF CANADIAN SOCIETY: EDUCATION, EQUALITY AND OPPORTUNITY. OTTAWA: CARLETON UNIVERSITY PRESS.

ROBINSON, PAUL (2003). “CANADA’S EXAMPLE PROVES THERE IS A ‘THIRD’ WAY.” NATIONAL POST. JUNE 6.

SKLAIR, LESLIE (1998). “SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND GLOBAL CAPTITALISM.” IN FREDERIC JAMESON AND MASAO MIYOSHI, EDS. THE CULTURES OF GLOBALIZATION. DURHAM AND LONDON: DUKE UNIVERISTY PRESS.

STARR, AMORY AND JASON ADAMS (2003). “ANTI-GLOBALIZATION: THE GLOBAL FIGHT FOR LOCAL AUTONOMY.” NEW POLITICAL SCIENCE. 25(1): 1-18.

STEGER, MANFRED B. (2002). GLOBALISM: THE NEW MARKET IDEOLOGY. LANHAM MD: ROWMAN AND LITTLEFIELD.

WATKINS, MEL. (2003). “POLITICS IN THE TIME AND SPACE OF GLOBALIZATION.” IN WALLACE CLEMENT AND LEAH F. VOSKO (EDS.). CHANGING CANADA: POLITICAL ECONOMY AS TRANSFORMATION. McGILL-QUEEN'S UNIVERISTY PRESS.