The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy Welcome to college! You can only afford to maintain two of the next three options: adequate sleep, a social life, and good grades. In Dani Rodrik’s new book- The Globalization Paradox, a similar triangle is evinced. The author presents us with a “trilemma” consisting of Hyperglobalization, Democratic politics, and the Nation-State. You can efficiently balance two of these three triangle “corners”– but no more than two. Rodrik claims our current worldview on globalization is that the more of it- the merrier. Yet this is flawed thinking in the fact that bigger globalization isn’t necessarily better globalization, instead we need to strive for “smart” globalization over “maximum” globalization. Rodrik uses a vast amount of real world events, past and present theories, and statistics as evidence. In this essay I will first give a brief overview of Rodrik’s main argument and his evidence supporting it. Moreover, I will attempt to compare Rodrik’s argument(s) to Friedman’s. Finally, I will analyze the specific claim Rodrik makes (and one I found most interesting) concerning hyperglobalization’s hindrance on national democracies. In an interview with the Peterson Institute, Rodrik claims he is trying to create “a new narrative to shape the next stage of globalization, and to address the imbalance between the national scope of governments and the global nature of markets”, in many ways, this book does just that. As previously stated, Rodrik has diagnosed a “Political Trilemma of the World Economy”. The first point is that of Hyperglobalization, which is the ambitious agenda of “economic liberalization and deep integration” (17). In other words, it is a rapid and w... ... middle of paper ... ...one I would like to focus on, it that globalization gets in the way of national democracy. In conclusion, Rodrik is saying we must reduce our ambitions for globalization, but that that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Because to ensure a healthy global economy, every nation-state needs to do what’s best for them, not what’s best for the global economy. Rodrik also addresses a misconception, we must not think of the global economy like the ecosystem, where everything we put in affects negatively or positively on others. Whereas the things in our ecosystem, the air, water, etc. belong to no one. Global trade and finance policies are semi-private goods. Trade is good for each country, in and of itself. The trade one nation state does is for the benefit of that nation state. So fundamentally, a global economy is brought about by each individual country’s own interest.
“The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy” by: Dani Rodrik Book Review
Regarding “The Age of Globalization” by Alan Brinkley I thought that the reading selection provides good details on timeline of significant events that significantly affected the global economy. The reading selection from the American History textbook starts off with a summary of event of September 11, 2001, and the role they played in the changes within global economy. On the next page we are presented with a timeline of events that will be described later in the reading selection. The purpose of this section is to illustrate how each of those events contributed to the world we live in today, particularly their influence on the global economy.
The World is Flat is a historical and geographical journey book because of the several trips that made by Friedman around the world to be able to analyze the concept of globalization in the 21st century . The title is an allegory to image the world today as a playground of play and competition between players , where each player has equal opportunities with the others. Friedman emphasizes the need for awareness of the countries ,peoples , companies and individuals in order to continue to compete in the market. Fred calls himself "free trader" because he is a believer of that change that will happen because of globalization. In the book, Friedman goes on a trip to India to discover that globalization can bring a radical change in the economic concepts .
Criteria: What acts have actually been made to respond to the legacies of historical globalization? How have these effects been made in trying to respond to historical globalization? What has changed since then? What has not changed?
In “Globalization vs. Americanization”, Andrew Lam is explaining through personal life experiences that globalization is not the same as Americanization. Lam uses pathos, through his inclusion of his personal background, analogy, compares and contrasts Disney Animation and Ondaatje’s novels to express the vast difference between viewpoints, and logos, with the many examples of globalization and Americanization throughout the world, to explain what globalization and Americanization truly mean. Lam uses pathos-appeal to the audience's emotions- to connect to the audience's emotions through his personal history. He uses an examples from his childhood to connect with the audiences on a personal level to better explain the effects of globalization
The purpose of this essay is to examine the similarities and differences between the liberal, Marxist and neorealist approaches to globalisation theory. To coherently present the ways in which these approaches compliment and combine, this essay will focus on four points of discussion. Firstly, economic factors of globalisation in relation to liberal, marxist and neorealist approaches will be outlined and debated. In the second part, the role of the state from each perspective shall be examined. Thirdly, the way that issues of international relations are addressed will be discussed. Finally, the Eurocentric nature of these approaches will be presented. I shall attempt to maintain that although there are differences regarding the perceptions
These results change or modify political organizations to be suitable for the needs of global capital. Regions and nations are encouraged to import and export of goods from other parts of the world rather than supplying or manufacturing them in their own homeland. Thus, seeking expensive manufactured supplies or goods from third world countries to import them to the first world corporation’s injunction with the free trade zones of globalization (Ravelli and Webber, 2015). These negotiations raises new organizations, for example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) to aid and supervise both countries to for a legalized trade. However, Neoliberalism amplifies the negative aspects of globalization’s effect on the economy. For example, deregulation, decrease of government benefits, and tax modifications (Bunjun, 2014). Nevertheless, relating these negative aspects to the documentary Made in L.A. (Carracedo, 2007) which is the main issue of increased risk of employment for both the first world and third world countries. In regards to, a switch from full time stable and secure jobs to part time unstable and insecure jobs. This reduces career growth for many employees, which they recognize, and thus switch jobs – where as they may not fit as well (Bunjun, 2014). As a result, globalization causes market inefficiency via labor market segregation and exploitation, unemployment and underemployment, unequal access to employment (Bunjun,
The case studies and examples in his book support key theoretical arguments; but the primary deficiency is it doesn’t have real life examples that elaborate on the theories. The book’s youngest audiences are undergraduates, and it is intended to educate and guide them towards the true meaning of globalization. No matter how explicate the theory is, it is very important to support it with specific examples. In chapter one Dicken points out “There is real danger of resource exhaustion in specific areas…geopolitical complication that access to localized resource (like oil, for example) may be restricted from time to time by states within whose territory it is located.”(Dicken2007 p.25) Imbedding an example such as “When the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo removed about 25% of the worlds daily crude oil from the market ─ oil prices increased significantly.” (McPherson) brings additional insight and understanding to a significant issue or event. Dicken’s writing style doesn’t emphasize on examples. They are the cornerstone of good reasoning, drawing pictures and allowing the reader to relate and receive an enhanced view of his arguments.
The topic of globalization often hashes out polarizing views from different individuals alike. To its opponents globalization has led to corruption, manipulation and greed. To its advocates globalization represents opportunity, economic progress and higher standards of living. Jagdish Bhagwati is a fervent believer that free trade benefits all nations, while realizing that sensible policies are necessary in order to reduce the possibility of such downsides from occurring (Bhagwati P. 32). Bhagwati explains to the reader however that there is an anti-globalization movement. Whose antipathy towards globalization is misplaced due to many, particularly the youth, who believe it cannot solve the world’s injustices and who cannot intellectually cope
Perhaps, I have been overly critical. Friedman deserves credit for delivering in-depth and often compelling points throughout the text. And few, I suspect, would dispute that the modern world is figuratively smaller than its historical counterpart, at least for occupants of technologically advanced regions. But should we all summarily embrace the “radical free-trade” ideology extolled by Friedman? The lack of comprehensive statistical analyses accompanying the seemingly subjective case presented by the author cannot be overlooked. With this in mind, I don’t see how any definitive conclusions regarding globalization could be drawn from the text, and would caution any reader against being swept away by the chorus of harmonious voices who
In conclusion, Dani Rodrik believes that globalization works best when it is not pushed too far. This allows domestic governments to hold on to some authority over trade alongside policy-making space. Free-market trade going unchecked through hyper globalization would present a problem because people undermine the regulations that citizens are so used to being protected by. This would lead to a problem concerning legitimacy. One solution would be to impose a set of regulations among all countries, but that would be advantageous to some and disadvantageous to others, making it an unfair solution. Creating policy-making space provides governments with some ability to keep trade legitimate as globalization expands.
...o we can achieve our dreams in life: “we are now living in a world where time and space don’t matter anymore” just like J.Mittleman said. Globalization as we just learned is relative, whether it’s an opportunity or an exploitation depends on where you sit and how you look at the world. Kent, J., Kinetz, E. & Whehrfritz, G. Newsweek. Bottom of the barrel. - The dark side of globalization (2008/March24). David, P. Falling of The Edge, Travels through the Dark Heart of Globalization..Nov 2008. (p62)
Just imagine waking up in squalor, a once prominent society, now a desolate wasteland. All because foreign interest has raped your land of its natural resources and you seen not a cent in profit. Although, globalization is unifying the worlds developed nations and is bringing commerce to nations that have struggle in past years. True, globalization has many positive effects but do the pros outweigh the cons. In this essay I will discuss Globalization ruining the integrity of many countries and also is forcing many undeveloped nations into a bind, and is causing economic distress on some developed nations. Also, due to economic globalization the nations of the world are diluting their culture, sovereignty, natural resources, safety and political system. My goal is not to change your way of thought, but only to enlighten you of the negatives of global economic expansion.
When analyzing the consequences of breaking the barriers between diverse cultures the benefits great. The fact that globalization has brought diverse cultures into greater proximity could prove to be favorable in the process of spreading democracy and human rights. On the other hand, the consequences of globalization can prove to be unproductive, giving way for the rise of autocracy due to parochial backlashes and endangering the efforts to spread of democracy and human rights into developing
Krain, Matthew (2005), “AP Comparative Government and Politics Briefing Paper: Globalization,” [http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap05_comp_govpol_glob_42253.pdf], accessed 15 May 2012.