Explain The Concept Of Globalisation; Briefly Discuss Its Alternative Perspectives?

Introduction:

The match ball used in the FIFA World Cup is supplied by Adidas- a TNC based in Germany. The football used in the 2010 World Cup bore the name ‘Jabulani’ in Zulu language. These balls were manufactured in China when India supplied the latex bladder and Taiwan supplied thermoplastic rubber . These plastics were generated from petroleum imported from the Middle East and Norway and carried on South Korean built ships. The world-cup held in South Africa was relayed to over 3.2 billion people (47% of the global population) who constituted the virtual global audiences. The numbers of global tourists who visited South Africa to witness the game is whopping too. (Steger 2013)

Based on this context, it can be generalized that globalisation is a set of processes rooted inthe notion of ‘interconnectedness’ in social, economic and political spheres paving way for hybridisation and glocalisation in all aspects of life. It is a dynamic process encapsulated by ensuring factors like industrialization, urbanisation, migration of technological advancements, people’s global consciousness and so on.

The afore-mentioned excerpt coalesces various facades of globalisation; political aspects, International Trade
, technological advancements, leaps in transportation, integration of activities, a community bound by love for football and cultural aspects - like the lending from Zulu language for a game on a global platform. Roland Robertson therefore defines globalisation as “a concept that refers both to the compression of the world and the intensification of the consciousness of the world as a whole.” (Steger 2013)

Implications of globalisation:

Globalization is characterised by the creation of social networks, expansion and stretching of social relations, intensification and acceleration of social exchange and activities and formation of human consciousness shaped by the ideas of ‘global community’ or ‘global village’. A glance into positive and negative impacts of globalisation would help understand the alternative perspectives of globalisation.

From the lenses of economic globalisation, it can be said that globalization has brought about capital flow, technological advancements, increased standard of living, choice of goods and economic growth. On the contrary, it is deepening poverty, widening inequality and indebtedness and swelling unemployment. This has brought a huge blow on the local economy, small-scale manufacturers and service providers. The biased policies of the international organisations like the Structural Adjustment Programme and Washington Consensus, futile efforts of MDGs and NIEO and the East Asian Monetary Crisis of 1997-98 are some examples.

Political globalisation, has fostered the establishment of international norms, ease of movement and trade, unity among nation states to tackle climate change, terrorism and other maladies confronting us. A boost to international cooperation with the emergence of regionaland global trade blocs and agreements, applause to the concept of global citizen are the other advantages. However, the twin forces of neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism unleashed by the US in the name of ‘democratising’ through armed interventions as happened in Iraq andchanging the political scenario of Third World countries to impose their vested interests is a dark side of this globalisation.

Though globalisation promotes cultural hybridization, glocalization and social changes, it is also accused of down grading local culture and identities, widening of inequalities, clash of civilizations and cultural polarization. Materialistic and inhumanitarian values, selfishness and violence breed under the garb of cultural globalisation.
The environmental threats posed by globalisation on mother earth is also imaginable. On theone hand, when global efforts are being put forth to tackle climate change, nature is beingtampered with by the forces of industrialisation forged by MNCS, TNCs and others to meet their selfish ends.

Alternative Perspectives to Globalisation:

The debates around the existence, relevance and continuity of globalisation can be traced in three positions of political scientists; the hyperglobalists, the sceptics and the transformationalists. The hyperglobalists are prophets of globalisation, who emphasise on the notion of a ‘borderless world’ triggered by economic, political, cultural and technological revolution. Perversely, the skeptics believe that an integrated global system is a myth and therefore places nation states over ‘global-village’. In between diverging beliefs, stand the transformationalists, who are widely acclaimed for acknowledging the interconnectedness in all terms, facilitated by globalisation.

The resistance movements at the local, national and global levels voice similar concerns at varying degrees of volume. The local movements generally raise their voice against their lands, resources, means of livelihood, market and indigenous culture being snatched away from them. The Adivasi-Dalit led local ressistance movement in Plachimada of Palghat district in Kerala against an MNC to conserve the sources of drinking water is an example. The national movements like that of Narmada Bachao Andolan mostly express their resistance to SEZs, MNCs and policies impacting economy and environment, are generally led by trade unions and farmers. Global movements like that of World Social Forum monitor and counter-act on the biased and partisan policies of international organisations, and keep check on the imposition of Western norms and policies carried out by MNCs and TNCs in the Third-World countries.
There are theoretical-alternatives to globalisation proposed by political scientists and economists to counter the gross impacts of globalisation. When Marx proposed a proletariat led economic administration, Lenin introduced economic - planning for an efficient allocation of resources and just distribution of total produce. In the backdrop of the Great Depression, JM Keynes proposed ‘fiscal engineering’, while ‘social welfare’ became the mantra of the Third World in the post second-world war period.