Globalization: Key Concepts

zationQuestion 1:

In the last decade, globalization has become one of the most frequently mentioned phenomena in the world. We hear about globalization almost everyday through the means of mass media, text books, research projects and so on. Thus, the term “globalization” is quite familiar to us, and we all acknowledge that we are in the era of globalization. However, globalization itself is a very wide, abstract, and at times even contradictory concept. Therefore, in this essay, my discussion will only focus on one of the key concepts of globalization, interconnectedness, which is the most important feature in the process of globalization.
Thomas Eriksen, in his book, explains that interconnectedness is a result of globalization. Most of the world is becoming more interconnected in terms of economy, politics, culture, technology and environment. He concluded that ‘interconnectedness is a way of measuring success in a globalized society’ (Eriksen 2007:88).
Firstly, in terms of economy, free trade and open markets today play the key roles in creating the network of our global economy. Transnational enterprises, multi-national companies, international banks, etc. are all actors in this network. Let’s take as an example the World Trade Orgnization (WTO); The WTO itself is evidence of economic interconnectedness. It was founded with the aim of dealing with regulation of trade; sometimes solving problems with the global market; and mostly, to negotiate and formalize trade agreements among nations. As a result, all the participating nations automatically interconnect through this process of interaction, and help each other achieve their mutual goals, including the development and unification of the world economy.
The growing number of multi-national companies and their subsidies around the world is also a trait of our interconnected economy, where goods and services are consumed transnationally. Unilever, BP, McDonalds, Toyota, IKEA…are typical examples. In his book, Scholte writes that Unilever, one of the largest multinational companies, had more than 500 subsidiaries in 100 countries in 2004 (Scholte 2005:178); CNN Money ranked Toyota as the 8th largest multinational corporation in 2011, when the company marketed vehicles in 140 countries, and had revenues of $221,760 million (CNN Money, 2011).
Likewise, consumer payments by credit card in the last decades also represent the interconnection of the world financial market. Instead of carrying a bundle of cash to go shopping, nowadays people can simply bring their small credit card (the two biggest multinational finacial services companies in the world today are Visa and MasterCard) which allows them to make purchases anywhere, anytime, as long as a credit card is accepted; not only in shops or supermarkets but also online. Futhermore, possessing a credit card makes it much safer and easier for its users to manage their spending, in addition to being more convenient.
These are only a few of the myriad examples of transnational and multinational corporations in the world. We cannot deny that they are becoming more and more powerful today. Eriksen asserts that it suggests a tighter integration and closer networking in the global economy than before. (Eriksen 2007:75). As a result, it makes the world more interconnected and solidary, especially in economic development.
Secondly, in term of politics, researchers indicate that the number of international organizations has grown immensely since the beginning of the 20th century. In 1909, there were 37 international non-governmental organizations (INGOs); by 2000, the number of INGOs had risen to 47,098 (Held, 2000:11-12). International co-operation in globalized society is an important instrument not only in social development, but also in diplomacy, or international relations. Disputes over political issues should be solved and discussed among nation-states in a peaceful manner. Sometimes, to gain mutual benefits, some coutries have to give up their interests temporarily and use their diplomatic and military power to resolve the conflicts (Eriksen 2007:77). This is very similar to ‘normative power’, a concept in international relations, which is the main strategy in the foreign policy of the European Union. It concerns the sacrifices of all actors to achieve mutual goals, which are relied on in the negotiations, persuasion, and argument, called ‘soft power’. Therefore, interconnectedness, in this case, also can be seen as a feature of world politics in the era of globalization.
As far as culture is concerned, I think interconnectedness in culture is also an indisputable factor. Eriksen, in his book, gave an example of translation, which implies the diffusion of language. English, apparently, is the world’s dominant spoken language. According to his research, most books now translated are translated into English, and a smaller amount are translated from English into other languages (Eriksen, 2007:79). This is a clear example of language exchange, or culture exchange.
And in my opinion, interconnected culture should be differentiated from mixed culture. According to my own experience, interconnected culture refers to culture links, which means that in a globalized society, we have a chance to approach and experience a variety of new cultures. For example, we had an international dinner a few days ago in the university cafeteria, where people from each country brought a dish they cooked from home, representing their own country’s traditional cuisine. It was a very nice opportunity and was the most interesting experience I’ve ever had; the kind that gives one a broader view of other cultures you haven’t had before. Therefore it is different from mixed culture which combines all the refinements of cultures around the world. Technology, in many ways, is a fundamental tool to interconnect the world. Mobile phones, internet access, media, etc are all the products of technology. As the world is more interconnected, “not only goods but information and ideas flow across borders constantly and (for the most part) freely as near universal access to Internet-enabled communications moves closer to reality” (Amelio, NYTimes). As a consequence, remittances and cheap calls, examples given by Thomas Eriksen, are becoming more and more popular. Remittances indicate the extent of interconnectedness between migrants and the people who have left in their home countries by transnational massive transfer (Eriksen 2007:80). Cheap calls, similarly, enable people to make international phone calls more easily. Thus, they connect people interpersonally, throughout the globe.
Football is also mentioned in Eriksen’s book. Despite my indifference to this subject, I must admit to the popularity of football throughout the world, and that it partially contributes to the interconnectedness of a globalized society.
Last but not least, the environment has been the hottest topic to raise concerns alongside issues of globalization. Although the environment does not directly influence the world’s interconnectedness, its effects have shown some people how close together we all are..
As a matter of fact, in recent years a lot of environmental issues have been mentioned in almost all means of media. People’s awareness of climate change and the threat of global warming has certainly been raised. In 1997, the first official international treaty on environment, The “Kyoto Protocol”, was created. It was linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change. The major objective of the Kyoto Protocol is to set binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which are the main cause of climate change (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change). The treaty entered into force in 2005, and took effect 5 years later. And 4 years later, in November 2011, there was a new treaty, considered an extension of the Kyoto Protocol, COP17/CMP7, adopted in Durban, South Africa. The governments of nearly 200 nation-states were involved in the conference, raised their voices about climate change, and passed the resolution for the next 5-year term of the treaty.
To sum up, interconnectedness is only one of the key factors in globalization, but it is predominant among the others. Based on the analysis I did above, interconnectedness seems to include most other phenomena of globalization. To exemplify one more personal phenonmenon, I will take this essay as an example. Because it is written from my perspective, using my own opinions, it might be different from other students’ essays in terms of ideas and knowledge. Therefore, if we exchange our essays and discuss interconnectedness or globalization in our groups, there will be different opinions raised during the discussion. Thus, we can understand more about our friends’ perspectives and what they think about this matter. In this way, accidentally, our ideas and minds are interconnected, though, only on a small scale.

REFERENCES

1. Amelio, Willian J. Interconnected we prosper, The New York Times, [online] Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/opinion/25ihtedamelio.1.13979245.html?pagewanted=all (Accessed 5th February 2012) 2. CNN Money, Global 500 : Our annual ranking of the world 's largest corporations 2011 [online] Available at http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2011/full_list/index.html (Accessed 5th February 3. Eriksen, Thomas H. (2007) Globalization : The Key Concepts, Burg Publishers 4. Held, David and Anthony McGrew (2000) ‘The Great Globalization Debate: An Introduction’, in D. Held and A, McGrew (eds), The Global Transfornations Reader, Cambridge: Polity 5. International Institute for Environment and Development , United Nations climate change negotiations: COP17 [online] Available at: http://www.iied.org/climate-change/key-issues/climate-negotiations-capacity-building/united-nations-climate-change-negot (Accessed 5th February 2012) 6. Scholte, Jan Aart (2005), Globalization: A Critical Introduction, 2nd edn. London: Palgrave 7. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC], Kyoto Protocol [online] Available at http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php (Accessed 5th February 2012)

Question 2:

As a global phenomena, the issue of globalization is becoming more and more controversial nowadays. There have been so many arguments about this subject, no one can assert whether globalization is a myth or a fact. Therefore, other questions raised about globalization also have myriads of answers, and are likely disputable in every discussion.
In the last few years, there have been some people wondering whether or not spatial reconfiguration is the core of globalization, and whether globalization makes distance less relevant or not. In fact, this is a very frequently asked question when we talk about globalization. In 2007, Thomas Eriksen, in his book, also mentioned distance and time-space compression. He said that globalization includes all the contemporary processes that make distance irrelevant (Eriksen 2007:16); and he used the coined term ‘disembedding’, which is defined as ‘the “lifting out” of social relations from local contexts of interaction and their restructuring across indefinite spans of time-space’ (Giddens 1990:21).
To clarify this definition, first, concerning the “lifting out” of social relations period. It is obvious that our relationships in society today are not like they used to be in the past. Many years ago, or more precisely, in pre-modern societies, social relationships were very much limited to the individuals ' immediate surroundings, and social relations at that time, might be entirely determined by a small community, in which people in that society lived together. Usually, they communicated to each other, innitially face to face, and then, through writing. However, today, in modern society, social relations are no longer confined to the "local context” (that is why he said they are ‘lifting out’ from it). The location of individuals and the time frame in which they interact has become indefinite and relative.
To explain this phenomena, Symes, in his review of 'Global Village ' by Marshall McLuhan, pointed out that the ‘rapidity of communication through electric media echoes the speed of the senses’, meaning that people in the globe now are more interconnected, and contacting people on the other side of the world can be done in the wink of an eye, as quick ‘as to converse with those who inhabit the same physical space’ (Symes, 1995). That is why we have feeling that time and space are shrinking, and even feel indifferent sometimes about their existence.
For example, in 1970s, my parents lived apart from each other. My father worked and studied in Czechoslovkia, while my mother lived in Vietnam. The sole way they could stay in touch with each other was writing letters, but it took several weeks for a letter to be delivered back and forth. My parents said that they could feel the length of time and they missed each other. However, today, when I come to Sweden, no one at home tells me that they miss me, because I keep in touch with them everyday, not only via email but also via many other social networks such as Facebook, Skype, etc which allow me to respond in a flash. As long as the internet connection is not lagging, I can speak to them as if I am actually beside them, despite the fact that I’m living in another continent which is very far away from home.

There are also many other opnions about globalization, and one of them is that the changing role of nation states as a new type of regionalism, the separation of culture and place, and terrorism may lead to a deterritorialized conflict and many other spatial issues. This idea, indeed, should be linked partly to the first one. Since distance has become irrelevant as a result of globalization, national boundaries no longer impede the flow of migration, or transnational trading. Eriksen, in his book, said that nations are effectively being deterritorialized in a number of ways through migration, economic investments and a number of other processes (Eriksen 2007:15). Therefore, the world organization and the role of nation states are changing and becoming vulnerable, and that makes it necessary for nation states to cope with global challenges.

Holton says that ‘flows of investment, technology, communications, and profir across national boundaries are […] the most striking symptom of global challenge to the nation states” (Holton, 1998:80). That means the ability of nation stats to regulate, or control their economic flow, migration and communication is gradually lessening; and it is likely that nation-state sovereignty might be threatened.

Eriksen gave an example of the 11 September attack in the United States which led to the ‘war on terror’. He said that the terrorists could be everywhere around the world, although most of them are Saudi origins (Eriksen 2007:15). It implies that the U.S government could not control the number of immigrants and migrants, so now they have to tighten the security not only inside but also outside the border of their territory. This way, the country has become deterritorialized by the effect of globalization.

In terms of the separation of culture and place, Canclini said that “Deterritorialization speaks of the loss of the ‘natural’ relation between culture and the social geographic territories” (Canclini, 1990) due to the cultural mixing, which is inevitable in the era of globalization. For example, in Vietnam, tradition is especially respected in our culture. In the past, men and women never sat next to each other, and men were more respected in society. But now, the role of men and women is entirely equal. Vietnamese people do not wear traditional costume like most Indians do nowadays. We wear western-style clothes, listen to western music and speak foreign languages. Thus sometimes the relation between Vietnamese culture and the country is ambiguous. We can find many other people from other countries who also wear western-style clothes, listen to western music and can speak foreign languages like us. That is why globalization makes us deterritorialized. However, it is only one side of the matter, “deterritorialization does not mean the end of the locality at all, but its transformation into a more complex cultural space, characterized by varied manifestations, tendencies or cultural effects” (Hernàndez, 2006). According to her explanation, local cultures were never pure or isolated (this is also similar to what Eriksen said in his book: “there is no such thing as ‘pure’ culture” [Eriksen 2007:107]), therefore deterritorialization is just relative, not absolute. Besides, the social contexts are not the same, so I think it depends on what kind of society, and to what degree that society is affected by globalization.

In conclusion, the process of globalization is just making our world more abstract. At the same time, it can help us remove the barrier of time and space and make our life become more convenient, but on the other hand, it makes our society more complex. Our culture and national identities seem to be blurred in some cases, but likely they will never vanish. That is why recently, we have heard about a new concept called ‘glocalization’. Which is believed to be a combination of ‘globalization’ and ‘localization’. The concept, for some people, refers to this slogan: “think globally, act locally”. So hopefully, ‘glocalization’ can be a solution to the issues of globalization, which is still very disputable nowadays.

REFERENCES

1. Eriksen, Thomas H. (2007) Globalization : The Key Concepts, Burg Publishers

2. García Canclini, N. (1990) Culturas híbridas: estrategias para entrar y salir de la modernidad, Mexico. Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes/Grijalbo.

3. Giddens. Anthony (1990) TheConsequences of Modernity, Cambridge. Polity Press. 4. Hernàndez, Gil-Manuel M. (2006) The deterritorializationof cultural heritage in a globalized modernity [pdf] [online] Available at http://www.llull.cat/_cat/_publi/transfer1.cfm#.TzGNteRn2Ag Accessed on 7th February 2012 5. Holton, R. J. (1998) Globalisation and the Nation-State, London: Macmillan

6. Symes, Benjamin (1995) Marshall McLuhan 's 'Global Village ' [online] Available at http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Students/bas9401.html Accessed on 6th February 2012

References: 1. Eriksen, Thomas H. (2007) Globalization : The Key Concepts, Burg Publishers 2. García Canclini, N. (1990) Culturas híbridas: estrategias para entrar y salir de la modernidad, Mexico. Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes/Grijalbo. 3. Giddens. Anthony (1990) TheConsequences of Modernity, Cambridge. Polity Press. 4. Hernàndez, Gil-Manuel M. (2006) The deterritorializationof cultural heritage in a globalized modernity [pdf] [online] Available at http://www.llull.cat/_cat/_publi/transfer1.cfm#.TzGNteRn2Ag Accessed on 7th February 2012 5. Holton, R. J. (1998) Globalisation and the Nation-State, London: Macmillan 6. Symes, Benjamin (1995) Marshall McLuhan 's 'Global Village ' [online] Available at http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Students/bas9401.html Accessed on 6th February 2012