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.
I think you're absolutely right about the growing inequality that has resulted from globalization. I find the whole "race to the bottom" concept of finding the places with the lowest paid workers and the least amount of regulations disturbing. On top of that, we further degrade the environment for all those who live in the area, regardless of whether they are workers or not. It's a difficult situation to resolve. As workers get paid more in the U.S., labor regulations increase, and environmental regulations are implemented (all of which I support), more companies will look elsewhere to operate their businesses, thus increasing the inequality even further.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your observations about the growing inequality that has resulted from globalization, but I personally don't know what can be done to rectify it. I think it would be in everyone's best interest to combat global poverty, which can lead to humanitarian disasters, disease, crime, and even terrorism. But there is no turning back the clock of globalization. The world will only become more and more interconnected as time progresses.
ReplyDeleteIt would definitely be ideal and more efficient for all states' to make products that other states are unable to. Unfortunately there's not necessarily a stable way to monitor if a powerful is state is attempting to exploit a smaller state especially considering the fact that many of powerful states are the United Nations members.
ReplyDelete