Introduction
Globalisation involves integration of global production, international trade and foreign direct investment that all interconnected each other. It is an inevitable process that enables people, capital, products, information and services to move easily across the world because of the further advancement in information, communication and transportation technology (Morrison, 2011).
Although it continues to integrate countries uninterruptedly in a different pace around the world, each location where TNCs operate internationally will have variances in histories, structure of economies, social, cultures, politics, educations, natural resources, geographic conditions and markets. It forces both nation-states and transnational corporations (TNCs) to compete intensely to get a high degree of competitiveness. Hence it allows them to acquire almost all the available resources through either its competitive and/or comparative advantages. The interconnectedness of globalization fosters important opportunities as well as policy challenges both for firms as well as for nations through the governments.
The role of government will be closely related with the types of economic system. Variety of capitalism will determine institutional structure of political economy, social structures, cultural values and national business systems. ‘Institutional structure of particular political economy provides firms with advantages for engaging in specific types of activities’ (Hall and Soskice 2001:37). Scholte (2010) underlined that social life will still exists over globalization that orchestrates regions, nations and also local or sub-nations specific to synergise. According to Bryson (2010),
‘National economy composed by many sub-national econ...
... middle of paper ...
...Princeton, N.J. ; Oxford: Princeton, N.J. ; Oxford : Princeton University Press.
22. Scholte, J. A. (2010) Governing a more global world. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, 10 (4): 459-474.
23. Soskice, David W. (2001), Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. [online]. Oxford Scholarship Online. Available from: 6 November 2013
24. Sun, S. (2008) Organizational Culture and its Themes, International Journal of Business and Management 3 (12): 140
25. Varieties of capitalism electronic resource] : the institutional foundations of comparative advantage / edited by Peter A. Hall and David Soskice. (2001) Oxford England] ; New York: Oxford England] ; New York : Oxford University Press.
26. The Global Competitiveness Index 2013–2014, World Economic Forum
Capitalism continues to be a revolutionary form of social organization. Modes of production, the ordering of daily activities, and the material practices and processes of social reproduction have undergone numerous changes since capitalism’s inception. Mapping a history of capitalism’s different stages and forms – both social and institutional – would be an arduous task, complicated by the fact that in each of capitalism’s stages, features and characteristics of past and future stages abound. Nevertheless, the current form of capitalism marks a unique departure from previous stages. Euphemisms and catchphrases concerning late 20th century capitalism have become all too common. "Globalization" has become a catchphrase for academics, journalists, and citizens alike. However, many of the claims about a new, distinguishable form of capitalist organization – a "post-Fordist" or "flexible" system of accumulation – are overstated. Despite the dominance of Neoliberalism following the collapse of Fordism, the current epoch does not occasion an economically, environmentally, or socially sustainable regime of accumulation. In this paper I will explain, drawing from the Regulation School, the shift from Fordism to what many have termed "post-Fordism," and use this analysis to suggest future routes for capitalist organization. Indeed, until a socially reproducible compromise to Neo-liberalism is found, aggressive competition and regulatory undercutting will further amplify destructive business cycles, abject poverty, and environmental destruction.
In this type of capitalist system, many Neo-Marxists had strayed from the strict economic materialism of Karl Marx to a form of cultural and social evaluations of Marxism that diluted the objective analysis of the capitalist system. More so, Marx made the assumption that cultural and social aspects of the means of production and labor had come from the “outside”, which had ignored the possibility that the “competitive advantage” had become the new mantra of the post-WWII era. In this manner, the modernity of Marxist thought had become diluted by the variability of social and cultural analysis of Marxist values, which had been somewhat diluted in the “church” of capitalism that Marx interpreted as being an outside issue in terms of the means of
Capitalism as an economic system has not been around for a very long time. Stanford indicates that this economic system began in the mid-1700s in Europe . For a considerably young system, it almost seems impossible to imagine a different way of living. Capitalism has become deeply embedded in our social structures; it is naturalized as a way of doing day to day things. If this is the case, then we as humans have a long way to go if we are to achieve social and economic justice. The question I aim to explore is whether capitalism is capable of achieving socio-economic justice. I am arguing that it cannot achieve justice because there is too much focus on profit rather than people and it dislocates the consumers from the modes of production which indirectly promotes social inequality. Our current economic system which I will be interchangeably using as capitalism throughout the paper will examine why the focus on profit is detrimental to the social well-being of people and explain how capitalism is divisive and why this can pose negative outcomes for individuals and communities. It is with these arguments that outline the need for a fundamental change to how our economy is structured and managed.
...erican Capitalism." Introduction to Political Economy. 7th ed. Cambridge, MA: Dollars and Sense, Economic Affairs Bureau, 2005. 147-76. Print.
do”. There are also many types of capitalism such as free market capitalism, state capitalism, welfare
Not only was slavery connected to the growth of capitalism in America but also Britain. As Britain’s industrial capitalism was mainly based upon slavery. The British bourgeoisie became rich from the sugar trading in England which was rooted in slavery. Therefore, it is evident that capitalism evolved in the concrete and slavery was central to the development of the capitalist system ...
...gence of The Economy in Hall and Gieben (eds) 2001 Formations of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press
...e several different types of capitalism he further assumes that each of these have its own suitable spirit here are the most important ones ‘booty capitalism, pariah capitalism, traditional capitalism, and rational capitalism’ ( Parkin, 1982, p41).
Burnham, Peter Burnham. Capitalism: The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics.(Marx). Ed. Unk. Oxford UK: Oxford University, 2003. Print.
Lynn Harsh (Nov. 2002). ‘Capitalism – A Deal with the Devil?’. Retrieved on Mar. 23 from:
Throughout the chapters assigned, Dicken focuses on the patterns and processes of global shifts, on the forms produced by the globalization of economic activities and on the forces producing those forms. He builds his arguments around three interconnected processes, which in his view are the reasons for reshaping the global economic map. Those are Transnational Corporations (“TNC”), States, and Technology.
Introduction to this work was written as, discontent with existing Marxist analysis of monopoly capitalism .
Extractive institutions are used throughout this book to explain that the upper class extracts resources and goods from the lower class. They don’t allow growth or competition, but rather they just exploit the rest of society into doing their labour. It’s used to please a few, rather than the majority, and can still be seen in most places in the world. Whereas, inclusive institutions are the ideal way nations should be run, allowing for fair economical systems, property ownership, educational facilities and allowing all citizens to participate in the growth of the economy. Acemoglu and Robinson argue that this is the main factor in distinguishing the rich countries from the poor and, moreover, how they treat their citizens. This system is relatively used in North America and Western Europe.
Shawki, Ahmed, Paul D’Amato (2000), “Briefing: The Shape of World Capitalism,” International Socialist Review, [http://www.isreview.org/issues/11/world_capitalism.shtml], accessed 19 May 2012.
As a conclusion international business best described as a Globalization. A globalizing business sector advertises viability through rivalry and the division of the work it permits individuals and economies to keep tabs on what they specialize in. It also allows people to go globally. Globalization has stretched the assets, items, administrations and markets accessible to individuals. The increasing set of reliant connections around individuals from distinctive parts of a world that happens to be separated into countries