Essay
The issue of globalization is widely and expressively discussed by millions of people - from outstanding scholars to hard-working miners, from firefighters to Hollywood stars – all over the world. No surprise, this phenomenon is extremely controversial and ambiguous, as it is complicated to define whether its benefits outweigh its disadvantages, or vice versa.
Moreover, globalization is not only a popular issue, but also inevitable reality, which overfills our existence like an overwhelming avalanche, the influence of which grows significantly with every single day. The point is that if this is resistless and imminent, then we are to research globalization in all possible aspects, including not the most obvious ones, in order to understand how to cope with its impact.
Information is not the only resource, which easily “travels” from country to country. Actually, flows of money, workforce, traditions and influences belong to those, which states share with each other. Obviously, such process is truly estimated as the demand of contemporary times, when quickness of reaction values great price, when successful business is to be conducted in international scope. No doubt, globalization is the natural phenomenon, which has stemmed from contemporary technological opportunities, which are aimed at the making of people’ lives more convenient.
Naturally, globalization process is rich in indisputable advantages, which could not have been reached by any other means. For instance, it facilitates the development of international trade, which has all chances to be effective in globalized world. In fact, first supporters of globalization have emphasized exactly on the importance of international trade as key to survival and subsequent flourishing of any country, which due to globalization can easily produce some goods, which are unique to its conditions, while importing those that are not common for it. Really, such consequence of globalization as simplified procedure of global trade becomes indeed a solution for economies of many developed and developing countries.
Co-working within the borders of globalization also allows scientific community to work more efficiently, as the unifying of their efforts turns out into the integration of greatest minds, which has more chances to create groundbreaking upheavals in our world. In addition, to the advantages of mentioned all-round integration belongs also the increasing of familiarity with world differences and tolerance towards international distinctions. Becoming global, our minds expand their inner sight to broader lines, and such open-mindedness favors global peace.
No wonder, the list of above-mentioned advantages of globalization process can be easily continued with numerous facts. Nevertheless, the coin has two sides, and it is rather hazardous to look at globalization exclusively through rose-colored glasses.
In other words, globalization is not a panacea for all economic, social and cultural challenges, it simultaneously has an impressive list of drawbacks. To begin with, peoples have always struggled for the foundation of separate states not accidentally; we all tend to unite in special groups under particular common criteria, contradistinguishing our group to others. Therefore, globalization, which is likely to transform unique states with own history and traditions into the one melting pot, it naturally causes some objections.
Furthermore, the global integration may easily become a serious threat to free enterprising, as the biggest world’s capitals may flow into the hands of the same people, which run universal corporations with enormous incomes, leaving no chances for the development of some smaller private structures, headed by intelligent, but no so influential people. Actually, there is even research data that 20 percent of people own 80 percent of world wealth, whereas the rest possesses this miserable remainder in 20 percent.
Apart from aforementioned possible disadvantages, there is also the one con, which, to my mind, represents the most negative influence of globalization. It is well-known that globalization is said to be beneficial for different social layers, especially penniless ones. This was proven by famous theory of comparative advantage, under which well-qualified and low-qualified workers of developed and developing countries interact. Theoretical researches allegedly prove than in such case low-skilled employees of poorer country will benefit, as due to the increasing of open vacancies, they receive a marvelous opportunity to get a job in other country, where wages perhaps would be more suitable for them.
This theoretical deduction as well as relieving indicators of life rate, GDP and other indexes, which show the increase of average income per capita in countries – active participators of globalization process cause suggestions on positive impact of globalization on employment situation.
In fact, there hides rather paradoxical consequence, namely – inequity, which indeed gets more and more visible dimensions. Frankly speaking, aforementioned theoretical construction on positive dependence between globalization and wage balancing is mistaken in its essence. It is because that if considered more scrupulous, with actual examples, it becomes clear that in fact mentioned low-qualified workers will not get any benefits, as there is a significant difference between their interaction with more professional workers within their country and their external interaction with qualified foreign employees.
Consequently, such situation cause intranational inequities. Supporting this statement with American example, I am eager to provide the following illustration. For instance, if mentioned low-qualified people cooperated with their more professional countrymen, their co-work would eventually become successful (at least for those less-qualified employees). However, when international borders are open for American professionals, who can be enticed by foreign companies, they may stop caring about internal hopeless projects, hence their compatriots would become unemployed. It is the first example, which vividly explains how globalization implicitly contributes to poverty in America, when professional people leave their country for foreign fortune, whereas less skilled workers are deprived of their previous workplaces.
Of course, you may object that due to globalization those poorer employees are given the chance to sale their services abroad. However, this is the second example, which advocates the direct relationship between globalization and inequality. In fact, those workers apparently may find such work, but it will not be highly demanded, so their payment would be rather low. The reverse situation also deserves our consideration: American employers would be more likely to hire rather foreign employees than national ones on common posts, where special knowledge or skills are not required, as they would agree for lower wages. Anyway, this also is the step to poverty.
Obviously, such comparatively disappointing conclusions are not enough in order to refuse from globalization policy, as it would be too harmful and unjustified. The point is that any global policy rarely allows curing internal issues; hence it is up to each state to establish educational programs, aimed at the increasing of workforce efficiency.
.
