Justifiable Risk or headless Fear? The Difference between experienced and factual Disadvantages of a Process called Globalisation: Difference between revisions

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 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. Transnational corporations, global capital and the Third World,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.  

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.

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.  

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.