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 ÐNIC 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 19TH 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.