Globalization and "The Little Guy"

The era of Globalization has brought about dramatic changes in the world, and will continue to do so into the foreseeable future.  Countries like China and Brazil have emerged as global powerhouses as a result of a growing interconnectedness between nations.  As Foer notes in his theory of Globalization titled How Soccer Explains the World, Globalization is perhaps being grossly overstated as a cure for global economic and societal ills.  Arguably, Globalization has not only failed to address these ills but has also added to them through the creation of large, multinational corporate oligarchs.  These oligarchs only serve to increase the gap between the "big guy" and the "little guy", further adding to economic ills such as income inequality and poverty.  

            Globalization is the growing interconnectedness of nations throughout the world economically, socially, politically, culturally, and so on.  On the surface, this seems great – as a citizen of the United States, I love being able to buy goods from places other than the United States.  However, upon closer inspection, it becomes clear that this trade relationship is anything but fair and just.  The US-Peru Free Trade Agreement is a prime example of this.  After its passage in 2006, indigenous groups and their rights have constantly been trampled over (literally, at times) in order to make way for multinational corporations that wish to begin extracting natural resources from Peru.  Now that barriers to trade have been all but eliminated between the US and Peru, Peruvian oil, lumber, and other natural resources are the target of US firms.  In an article for The Hill, Jose De Echave notes that after the passage of the US-Peru FTA, “the FTA’s investor privileges allowed a US firm to pressure the Peruvian government to reopen a smelter that had severely lead-poisoned several hundreds of children” (De Echave).  Free Trade Agreements cater to the outside investor by lowering barriers to trade.  However, once these barriers are lowered, it is only the corporations and outside investors who prosper.  The proverbial “little guys” are marginalized and exploited because multinational corporate oligarchs become the sole providers of employment in a given area, strangling the local economy and syphoning power, money, and energy from local communities. 

            The same thing can be seen in soccer, as Foer notes.  In his introduction, Foer argues that Globalization has lead to “rise of powerful new oligarchs like Silvio Berlusconi, the President of Italy and the AC Milan club” (Foer, 5).  These oligarchs, much like their real-world counterparts, suck valuable resources from less-powerful entities.  Foer points to examples seen in the Ukraine after the fall of communism there, when “men who had seamlessly transitioned to Capitalism from their slots in the bureaucracy turn[ed] their insider ties into new wealth” (Foer, 142).  These men could then purchase the soccer clubs that were once state-owned even though they had zero wherewithal in terms of the sport of soccer.  They then began to realize that other soccer clubs in Europe had more “black faces” than those in the Ukraine.  So, they turned to Nigeria – in terms of continuing the metaphor, Nigeria is Peru and their soccer players are Peru’s natural resources.  The Ukrainian owners purchased Nigerian soccer players in order to boost their team’s chances of winning and had done so by “following the rules of globalization to perfection...the Ukrainians had tapped the global market and come back with a bargain” (144).  They successfully exploited a less powerful entity (Nigeria) for a resource (fast soccer players), which can be seen as one of globalization's most adverse effects in situations across the world.  

Sources:

De Echave, Jose. "Peru's 'Bagua Massacre' Haunts the TPP." The Hill. Web.          <http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/208892-perus-bagua-  massacre-haunts-the-tpp>.

Foer, Franklin. How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization.        New York: HarperCollins, 2004. Print.

The Impact of Globalization on Nationalism

            Foer uses different examples of different teams and nationalities, particularly the Barca Club in Spain, to prove that liberal nationalism is still relevant in a globalized society. While Foer seems to believe that globalization has not significantly weakened nationalist tendencies, there are others who argue that nationalism and cosmopolitanism are mutually exclusive and that globalization has instead resulted in a general decrease in the sense of nationalism. In reality, globalization both strengthens and weakens nationalism in different ways.

            A common argument is that the emergence of an increasingly globalized society where countries are economically interdependent has led to a blending of cultures that makes nationalism less relevant. Because globalization has made international cooperation both easy and necessary, individuals must be able to look beyond their own national identities to successfully live in a global community. The presence of international organizations, such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and the United Nations significantly facilitates this necessity. The reduction in trade barriers and the increasing presence of transnational corporations has created a global marketplace where multiple nations can reap the benefits of a new invention or idea.

Additionally, the problems we face in the 21^st century are increasingly becoming known as problems facing humanity and this planet rather than problems facing individual nations. Examples of this new reality include climate change, the economic crises, and national security threats such as terrorism and nuclear weapons. To face these issues, a cosmopolitan view of the world is necessary. There is no way to prevent (or mitigate the effects of) climate change for just the United States exclusively. Instead, collective action with other nations is necessary for everyone to receive the same collective benefit.

            In other ways, however, globalization has actually strengthened nationalism. As the world becomes interconnected and people are exposed to the identities and traditions of others, they become more aware of their own cultural identities. Whenever there is some sort of international crisis, people will turn to their own countries for safety and security. Furthermore, when exposed to new cultures and identities via either communication technologies or in-person because of migration, xenophobia can significantly increase. A result of such xenophobia is the further emphasis on the “self” vs. the “other,” which increases the need to rely on those who are of the same nationality.

            The argument that is most relevant to what Foer presents is the idea of people turning to nationalism as a way to combat the changes that occur due to globalization. A historical parallel to this argument is the industrial revolution, where groups that ended up being displaced in their old careers and forced to move into the cities turned to nationalist aspirations to maintain their identities.  A modern example would be the recent Scottish independence movement. Although the referendum ultimately failed, some in Scotland were turning to national pride as a way to reclaim their identity, which they viewed as lost due to the decline of industrialism that largely held the main institutions of Scotland in place.

            Ultimately, globalization and nationalism are complex topics used to describe a complex world. Foer uses soccer teams and matches on a microcosmic level to explain that nationalism is not incompatible with globalization.  As to whether one believes that Foer is correct or that nationalism is on the decline completely depends on both the context and level of analysis they use. I don’t think there is one concrete answer as to the impact of globalization on nationalism. As more countries develop and the global community grows, it will be interesting to examine the significance and presence of nationalist ideas and movements.

Sources Consulted:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gordon-brown/scotland-independence-globalization-uk_b_5836500.html

http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/conversi/Globalization.pdf

Foer, Franklin. How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization. New York: HarperCollins, 2004. Print.

The Failure of Globalization to Eliminate Regional Conflicts

            The rapid globalization of the 1990s greatly changed the way states and individuals interacted with each other. As communication became faster and easier, trade increased, and domestic conflicts became internationalized, states and individuals became increasingly interconnected and in many ways interdependent. This processed posed the question, how would the world change in the face of such interconnectedness? In his book, How Soccer Explains the World, Franklin Foer says that globalization enthusiasts of this time believed “that once a society becomes economically advanced, it would become politically advanced – liberal, tolerant, democratic” (Foer, 2010), thereby eliminating many causes of conflict. In addition to economic forces, cultural globalization would also act upon societies to reduce conflict, and eventually “everyone would assimilate into a homogenizing mass entertainment culture, where TV comedies and cinematic romances bind together different races into a new union of common pop references” (Foer, 2010). However, in the past twenty years, the world has not seen this predicted decrease in conflict. Rather, regional conflicts have continued and intensified because globalization does not address the true cause of these conflicts, as seen in the rivalry between Glasgow Rangers and Celtics fans.

             The Old Firm rivalry is built on long-standing hatred between Protestants and Catholics in the United Kingdom. For hundreds of years, these groups faced state-sanctioned discrimination, violence, and even ethnic cleansing at the hands of the other. Today, while the effects of this tension are less extreme, they are still apparent. Foer writes that Rangers fans sing anti-Catholic songs and chant  “F--- the pope” at matches (Foer, 2010). After a Rangers victory over the Celtics, fans “stabbed, shot, and beat senseless three young Celtic supporters,” murdering one and leaving another in critical condition (Foer, 2010). In Northern Ireland, Rangers fans would be “instantaneously mauled” in areas of IRA activity (Foer, 2006). Economic and cultural globalization alone do nothing to ease these tensions. These tensions do not threaten the economic wellbeing of either club or fan base; in fact, both teams profit off the vicious rivalry (Foer, 2010). Similarly, this hatred rarely hurts either team, Glasgow, the UK, or the Scottish Premier League politically. It’s possible that nothing could abolish the deep-seated animosity between these two groups on which the Old Firm rivalry is built. But it is clear that globalization alone cannot eliminate regional conflicts.

(A video demonstrating the Old Firm rivalry and its political and religious background.)

Robert J. Samuelson writes that the effects of globalization are very contradictory. “One the one hand, we are being drawn closer together by the explosion of low-cist digital technologies, cheapening transportation and expanding trade,” he says. “On the other hand, we’re being pulled further apart by deep and durable ethnic, religious, historical and nationalistic schisms” (Samuelson, 2014). He explains that achieving prosperity is not life’s central goal or what fundamentally defines people. Rather, “they had other competing beliefs, traditions and ambitions that qualified and limited the power of economic growth” (Samuelson, 2014). Because of this, the world is not the place people imagined it would become in the 1990s, and political leaders should rethink the power and limits of globalization (Samuelson, 2014). A new type of thinking must be employed to adequately deal with regional conflicts such as the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, Israel and Palestine, ethnic groups in Africa, and even different classes and races within the United States.

Sources:

Foer, F. (2010). How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization. New York: Harper Perennial. 

Samuelson, R.J. (2014, August 17). Global prosperity is no panacea: the post-euphoric world. The Washington Post. Retrieved on December 1, 2014 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-j-samuelson-global-prosperity-is-no-panacea/2014/08/17/388b1eb8-24d3-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html

Globalization: How Soccer Explains the Growing Economic Divide

            Globalization is the growing interconnectedness of the various nations in the world. Whether it is through economic, cultural, or strategic ties, the world is steadily becoming more intertwined. Although a lot of the growth can be considered beneficial to all parties involved, there are some cases in which globalization is actually hurting some nations. In his book How Soccer Explains the World, Franklin Foer uses the analogy of soccer to gain a better understanding of the effects of globalization on various nations. I believe that as globalization continues to rise, a greater disconnect is created between the “haves” and the “have-nots”. The economic divide leads to a decrease in equality and growth of polarization.

            In the beginning of his book, Foer discussed the benefits of the growing globalization from a soccer standpoint. Foer points out the fact that the best players in the world can now be seen on a global stage on a regular basis (rather than just during the World Cup). These players benefit from the increasing reach of technology that allows their talents to be broadcasted around the world. Foer then briefly touches on the idea that these players are now moving from playing in their home country to play in the “major” leagues, such as the Barclays Premier League, La Liga, and others. Globalization has caused the talent to become congregated into smaller sects, where the best players in the world are all playing against each other on few stages. This is different from the past, where teams in each region may have one or two really good players on each team. Now, these powerhouse soccer clubs are sucking all of the talent from the smaller clubs that do not have the ability to compete in the market. Without the buying power that these major clubs have, the small soccer clubs are left in the dust. The smaller clubs in countries such as those in Latin and South America, famous for their phenomenal soccer talent, have lost prominence and regard in the soccer community because of the growth of globalization.

            The congregation of power seen in the soccer world is a small-scale reflection of the polarization of wealth that affects various nations thanks to globalization. As discussed in class, many of the countries of the world are becoming more and more economically intertwined with one another. While it is commonly viewed that trade makes everyone better off, some can look at what has happened in the soccer world as an example of the exploitation of smaller countries. Many of the larger countries of the world cannot specialize in everything, so in order to keep costs down, they outsource much of the materials they need. Through connecting with other countries, their prices stay lower and in the end they make more money. However, the smaller countries in the world are not any better off from trade, because they are at the mercy of the bargaining power of larger countries. Much like soccer, the smaller countries now find themselves exporting many of their prized resources with little compensation. Globalization is in essences making these countries worse off and creating a greater economic divide on a global scale.

            Globalization has been the result of growing technology and increased means of communicating between nations around the world. Foer would agree that this exchange of ideas and resources has many benefits, as seen in the growth of popularity of soccer around the world. However, not everyone is a winner on the global scale. Many of the smaller nations, who do not possess the brokering abilities of established enterprises, are often left worse or the same as how they were before globalization. This growing economic division can have catastrophic effects of millions of people if measures are not taken to prevent them from happening. Globalization has opened the doors for so many opportunities around the world, yet it is important to understand that some extent of equality is lacking.

Globalization in Soccer: Good or Bad?

Saria Rudolph

11/26/2014

There are both pros and cons of globalization that are expressed throughout the different themes of Nationalism, Racism, and power of influence, within Foer’s book How Soccer explains the world. There was a gradual increase in terrorism especially considering historical interactions between the different states mainly Serbia and Yugoslavia.

Soccer is used as a tool for terrorism and/ or intimidation in the forms of racially influenced beatings or shouting of insults during games, threatening soccer players lives if they scored for their team. Globalization also leads to an easier spread of information through the media and other forms of technology (Globalization lecture slide 6, Shirk) increasing one’s influence on different states. (pg 14) “An ethos of gangsterism- spread by movies, music, and fashion conquered the world.” “It (Red Star hooligans) borrowed heavily from African American gangster rap, a favorite genre of Serb youth.” (pg 26) “Arkan threatened to shoot a rival striker’s kneecap if he scored against Obilic…At games, they would chant things like, “if you score, you’ll never walk out of the stadium alive...”

There was also the internationalization of domestic conflict and a loss of cultural diversity (Globalization lecture slide 8, Shirk) because they sought to assimilate Nigerian players into dominate culture of the state. As stated one page 25, when Red Star wouldn’t sell the club to him. Arkan set out to create his own Red Star. Dirst, he bought a team in Konsovo and purged its largely ethnic Albanian lineup.”

Racism was always present and there was continuous pattern presented in the book where when a new ethnic group the ethnic group that previously was the main focus of racism was replaced with the newly introduced ethnic group. For example, as stated on page 71 “...One not nearly as likely to kill that has been made less pernicious by globalization’s transformation of Europe. Thanks to the immigration of Africans and Asians, Jews have been replaced as the primary objects of European hate.”  This is eerily similar to the beginnings of the United States when at first Irish immigrants were mistreated by British immigrants who were in the United States longer. Years later the same process continued except during the second “round” of immigrants Italian immigrants who were in the exact same place as the Irish immigrants were mistreated by some of the Irish immigrants who now took on the British immigrants’ place.

One of the pros of globalization is the improvement of global economies. As stated on page 120, “some Brazilian players have flourished in the global economy.” There is also an easier transfer of information and cultural exchange. As stated on page 155 “Without a fight, the easterners had exchanged the Ukrainian language for Russian, intermarried, and embraced the Soviet system.”

When Nigerian players were made additions to the Red Star’s soccer team that have develop a sense of pluralism as the state was becoming less homogeneous however, eventually racism evolved against these new players beginning within their own team. Therefore, although there are both pros and cons to globalization it essential to the improvement of the world.