831
edits
Justifiable Risk or headless Fear? The Difference between experienced and factual Disadvantages of a Process called Globalisation: Difference between revisions
Justifiable Risk or headless Fear? The Difference between experienced and factual Disadvantages of a Process called Globalisation (view source)
Revision as of 10:49, 30 August 2017
, 10:49, 30 August 2017no edit summary
Jana Dlouha (talk | contribs) m (moved Svea Wehling: Justifiable Risk or headless Fear? The Difference between experienced and factual Disadvantages of a Process called Globalisation to [[Justifiable Risk or headless Fear? The Difference between experienced and factual Disadvantages ) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
== Body: Arguments and Analysis == | == Body: Arguments and Analysis == | ||
"Globalization in its current speed overwhelms the adaptability of many people" (Fabian Siggemann, [[ | "Globalization in its current speed overwhelms the adaptability of many people" (Fabian Siggemann, [[Students:2009/2010_student_themes]]) and therefore fans fear and concern. In order to examine the research question, which of the major concerns are synonymous to the actual risks during the process of globalisation and which result of individual environment or lack of information and accordingly the disregard of important aspects, several facets and aspects need to be pointed out related to the different sections of concern. | ||
One of the most spread concerns at this is the fear of losing the own job. The globalisation of human capital leads to heated discussions and negative associations with the whole process of globalisation, especially in the Western civilisation, since the production in Asia and Latin America is in almost all cases cheaper, occasionally better and more and more often better and cheaper. Often the fear of losing the job to a competitor from abroad superposes all other effects, notwithstanding whether they are reckoned to be positive or negative <ref>for further reading see: "Global-labor, Risk or Opportunity?" by '''Irmawan Rahyadi''' [ | One of the most spread concerns at this is the fear of losing the own job. The globalisation of human capital leads to heated discussions and negative associations with the whole process of globalisation, especially in the Western civilisation, since the production in Asia and Latin America is in almost all cases cheaper, occasionally better and more and more often better and cheaper. Often the fear of losing the job to a competitor from abroad superposes all other effects, notwithstanding whether they are reckoned to be positive or negative <ref>for further reading see: "Global-labor, Risk or Opportunity?" by '''Irmawan Rahyadi''' [[Global-labor, Risk or Opportunity%3F]]</ref>. In this case, the boundaries between negative consequences and personal dismay become blurred, though. To actualise the discussion of the globalisation of human capital it is essential to consider one aspect accessorily. To understand the coherency within the whole idea of the development of globalisation, it is crucial to evaluate who is affected by this change on the employment market in fact. In relation to the Stolper-Samualson-Theorem (''"Samualson, 2007, part 4, chapter 15-19 or'' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolper-Samuelson_theorem]) one awareness can be concluded - the globalisation of human capital only refers to the low educated level, while executives and tasks with a high educated basis of knowledge are almost unaffected. Maybe the new "losers" of the globalisation therefore are, provided that the direction of this process continues, the unlettered and not inevitably the 3rd world countries anymore. Hence, this system for chances of success, which basis lies in the education of people, not in their origin or place of birth, might even be a fairer system than the one we are living in right now. | ||
This idea leads to a second global concern. When discussing about globalisation often the word fairness appears, especially in relation to the 3rd world or more precisely to the least developed countries (LDC, for more information and criteria see [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries]]). The general opinion claims that the so-called “losers“ of the globalisation would suffer from this process. There is a huge concern existing in prospects of the development of these countries. However, in this case causes and effects are mixed, since the process of globalisation did not impoverish a once successfully acting country. Hence, the question comes whether the political, economical and/or social situation of countries like Burkina Faso, Cambodia or Sierra Leone really did change to the worse since the globalisation process started to accelerate. Those countries never took the step towards the development to an industrial country. Therefore the globalisation process did not narrow any of the countries‘ chances to improve their situation; otherwise the Asian tigers for example would not be existing ([[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Asian_Tigers]]). Not clear, though, is the question whether globalisation ''will'' do this. One argument for that is the frequently cited increasing gap between the rich and the poor (''cf. Kiely, 1998, p. 45–66''). Albeit this argument surely describes a serious phenomenon of the contemporary era, there are more aspects which need to be considered. To start with, it is of the utmost importance to stress the influence of education in order to improve a countries‘ welfare. As above already pointed out, the chances of improving the individuals‘ situation and consecutively the countries‘ welfare by education increase. Additionally another consequence of globalisation has a positive impact: by emphasising not only local but global problems financial means from foreign countries help improving the educational system in case the LDC country itself does, for whatever reason, or can not afford investing. | This idea leads to a second global concern. When discussing about globalisation often the word fairness appears, especially in relation to the 3rd world or more precisely to the least developed countries (LDC, for more information and criteria see [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries]]). The general opinion claims that the so-called “losers“ of the globalisation would suffer from this process. There is a huge concern existing in prospects of the development of these countries. However, in this case causes and effects are mixed, since the process of globalisation did not impoverish a once successfully acting country. Hence, the question comes whether the political, economical and/or social situation of countries like Burkina Faso, Cambodia or Sierra Leone really did change to the worse since the globalisation process started to accelerate. Those countries never took the step towards the development to an industrial country. Therefore the globalisation process did not narrow any of the countries‘ chances to improve their situation; otherwise the Asian tigers for example would not be existing ([[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Asian_Tigers]]). Not clear, though, is the question whether globalisation ''will'' do this. One argument for that is the frequently cited increasing gap between the rich and the poor (''cf. Kiely, 1998, p. 45–66''). Albeit this argument surely describes a serious phenomenon of the contemporary era, there are more aspects which need to be considered. To start with, it is of the utmost importance to stress the influence of education in order to improve a countries‘ welfare. As above already pointed out, the chances of improving the individuals‘ situation and consecutively the countries‘ welfare by education increase. Additionally another consequence of globalisation has a positive impact: by emphasising not only local but global problems financial means from foreign countries help improving the educational system in case the LDC country itself does, for whatever reason, or can not afford investing. | ||
Yet not only the LDCs and their interceders are afraid of not being capable to bear consequences other areas of the world have caused. Acid rain, genetic degeneration, loss of biodiversity<ref>for further reading see: "Loss of Biodiversity- caused and solved by Globalization?" by '''Jule Kathinka Plawitzki''' [[ | Yet not only the LDCs and their interceders are afraid of not being capable to bear consequences other areas of the world have caused. Acid rain, genetic degeneration, loss of biodiversity<ref>for further reading see: "Loss of Biodiversity- caused and solved by Globalization?" by '''Jule Kathinka Plawitzki''' [[Loss of Biodiversity- caused and solved by Globalization%3F]]</ref> and ozone depletion (''cf. Keohane & Nye Jr, 2000, p. 106f'') put countries to challenges they did not ask for. Pathogens are, in the course of the swine and avian influenza, one of the recently most discussed results of the globalisation process. These are some of the actual risks, which come along with intercultural contacts and thus increasing international travelling. Additionally, they implicate various other risks, such as political tensions, which this article will refer to later on. Here again, another positive effect of the globalisation needs to be appreciated. Due to new information and technology networks, knowledge is available all over the world and therefore the international produced and appearing hazards can be more effectually combated. | ||
Surprisingly this is exactly where another concern comes into play, since humans often do not realise the positive effects of new technology, such as the reduction of costs and international exchange of knowledge and opinions, but give concerns such as the global breakdown an important weighting and therefore an unrealistic conclusion. | Surprisingly this is exactly where another concern comes into play, since humans often do not realise the positive effects of new technology, such as the reduction of costs and international exchange of knowledge and opinions, but give concerns such as the global breakdown an important weighting and therefore an unrealistic conclusion. | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
For other countries on the contrary, the reduction of state power could be a chance, too. This applies primarily to countries, in the majority of cases LDCs, which are ruled by tyranny, arbitrary or corruption. These countries could profit from transnational regulations and guidelines. | For other countries on the contrary, the reduction of state power could be a chance, too. This applies primarily to countries, in the majority of cases LDCs, which are ruled by tyranny, arbitrary or corruption. These countries could profit from transnational regulations and guidelines. | ||
Finally, analysing one more concern is crucial for the purpose of understanding the rife fear of the globalisation process. With “the movement of ideas, information [and] images“ (''cf. Keohane & Nye Jr, 2000, p. 107''), comes along the movement of people and therefore the movement of culture and religion. The differing birth rates and policies change the old power structures [[File:Globalisierung.jpg|thumb|300px|right|''"The Process of Globalisation changes Power Structures"'', GDP in 2006 and expected GDP in 2050, distributed to the most important global players. Below the expected population 2050 in m.]] and thus oftentimes the integration of one culture into another does not proceed without conflicts<ref>for further reading see: "Integration and tolerance" by '''Josef Nový''' [ | Finally, analysing one more concern is crucial for the purpose of understanding the rife fear of the globalisation process. With “the movement of ideas, information [and] images“ (''cf. Keohane & Nye Jr, 2000, p. 107''), comes along the movement of people and therefore the movement of culture and religion. The differing birth rates and policies change the old power structures [[File:Globalisierung.jpg|thumb|300px|right|''"The Process of Globalisation changes Power Structures"'', GDP in 2006 and expected GDP in 2050, distributed to the most important global players. Below the expected population 2050 in m.]] and thus oftentimes the integration of one culture into another does not proceed without conflicts<ref>for further reading see: "Integration and tolerance" by '''Josef Nový''' [[Integration and tolerance]] and "Shaping globalization: migration in times of globalization" by '''Fabian Siggemann''' [[Shaping globalization: migration in times of globalization%3F]]</ref>. Different cultures and accordingly different religions are often in no accordance with each other, for example anent the question whether the good of the individual or the good of the collective is to be rated higher or the question of arbitrary law. | ||
Hence, the great number of people now participating in global politics does not only lead to plurality but also to the concern people with other concepts could gain too much power. At the same time, among other reasons the entering of Anglicisms into the own language leads to the concern about loosing the own culture. While on one hand one standardised language helps to exchange knowledge and at the same time increases the capacity to act in case of global crises, it leads on the other hand to the neglect of the own language and therefore the neglect of the own culture, due to influences from all over the world<ref>for further reading see: "Does the globalization of media lead to homogenization?" by '''Corinna Lohrengel''' [ | Hence, the great number of people now participating in global politics does not only lead to plurality but also to the concern people with other concepts could gain too much power. At the same time, among other reasons the entering of Anglicisms into the own language leads to the concern about loosing the own culture. While on one hand one standardised language helps to exchange knowledge and at the same time increases the capacity to act in case of global crises, it leads on the other hand to the neglect of the own language and therefore the neglect of the own culture, due to influences from all over the world<ref>for further reading see: "Does the globalization of media lead to homogenization?" by '''Corinna Lohrengel''' [[Does the globalization of media lead to homogenization?]]</ref>. People rather feel a radical elimination of their culture than a symbiosis with other cultures. This feeling of radicalness of cultural oppression could in addition be one reason for terror or nationalism (cf. reportage "Nazis in Amerika", 23rd November, 2009, 8:05pm on n-tv). Consequently, the balance of integrating a foreign culture or religion and simultaneously opening the own culture seems to be another challenge every individual is faced when adapting to the process of globalisation. | ||
== Conclusion: Review and Prospects == | == Conclusion: Review and Prospects == | ||