enigma2517
5th October 2006, 17:51
Recently, I have been racking my brain about this question, so I just wanted to know what everybody else thinks.
A pretty common sentiment around the leftist community is that globalization is undesireable and that it leads to increased exploitation and worsened living conditions.
On the other hand, there are a good number of examples that show how globalization has improved the living standards and economies of many countries and has begun to create a "middle-class", which I believe is actually urban proletarian wage workers.
On one hand, it might be very easy to say that "Boo, no, we don't want more capitalism", but others might say that in order to pass this stage in history we have to let it develop to its fullest before it can burn out. Not to mention, the more countries become interconnected, the easier it will be to strike, as these actions will be felt everywhere.
While it may seem counterintuitive, perhaps the best solution is to let globalization happen? To be quite honest, its development has been growing at such an astonishing rate that I think its current course would be hard to turn around...although maybe not to alter.
The other thing I think worth considering is that globalization in the contemporary sense is actually a very narrow method dictated by various organizations such as the WTO, IMF, and World Bank, which of course are very non-transparent and controlled largely by the US and other major western powers. Is he possibility for a more consenual globalization a realistic one?
A pretty common sentiment around the leftist community is that globalization is undesireable and that it leads to increased exploitation and worsened living conditions.
On the other hand, there are a good number of examples that show how globalization has improved the living standards and economies of many countries and has begun to create a "middle-class", which I believe is actually urban proletarian wage workers.
On one hand, it might be very easy to say that "Boo, no, we don't want more capitalism", but others might say that in order to pass this stage in history we have to let it develop to its fullest before it can burn out. Not to mention, the more countries become interconnected, the easier it will be to strike, as these actions will be felt everywhere.
While it may seem counterintuitive, perhaps the best solution is to let globalization happen? To be quite honest, its development has been growing at such an astonishing rate that I think its current course would be hard to turn around...although maybe not to alter.
The other thing I think worth considering is that globalization in the contemporary sense is actually a very narrow method dictated by various organizations such as the WTO, IMF, and World Bank, which of course are very non-transparent and controlled largely by the US and other major western powers. Is he possibility for a more consenual globalization a realistic one?