171
edits
Justifiable Risk or headless Fear? The Difference between experienced and factual Disadvantages of a Process called Globalisation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Justifiable Risk or headless Fear? The Difference between experienced and factual Disadvantages of a Process called Globalisation (view source)
Revision as of 18:50, 22 November 2009
, 18:50, 22 November 2009→Body: Arguments and Analysis
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
In the Lisbon Contract however, is for the first time a petition for a referendum for all Euopean citizens possible. Also the parliaments of the several representation of people are sustained and enhanced. Yet, the concern of each member of the European Union is the basal foundation for the success of such a confederation of states and therefore vital. | In the Lisbon Contract however, is for the first time a petition for a referendum for all Euopean citizens possible. Also the parliaments of the several representation of people are sustained and enhanced. Yet, the concern of each member of the European Union is the basal foundation for the success of such a confederation of states and therefore vital. | ||
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“ (Globalization: What‘s New? What‘s Not? (And So What?), comes along the movement of people and therefore the movement of culture and religion. Oftentimes the integration of one culture into another does not proceed without conflicts. 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 in the own language leads to the concern about the loosing the own culture. While on one hand one standardised language helps to exchange knowledge, 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. People rather feel a radical elimination of their culture rather then a symbiosis with other cultures. This radicalness of oppression of culture could in addition be one reason for terror. | |||