An entry for the Encyclopedia of Activism and Social Justice. Anti-globalization Movement is a disputed term referring to the international social movement network that gained widespread media attention after protests against the World Trade Organization WTO in Seattle, WA in late November and early December Varied communities organizing against the local and national consequences of neoliberal policies, especially in the global South, connect their actions with this wider effort. Movement constituents include trade unionists, environmentalists, anarchists, land rights and indigenous rights activists, organizations promoting human rights and sustainable development, opponents of privatization, and anti-sweatshop campaigners.
Population,Migration,and Globalization Population, Migration, and Globalization Globalization is not internationalization, but the effective erasure of national boundaries-opening the way not only to free mobility of capital and goods but also, in effect, to free movement or uncontrolled migration of vast labor pools from regions of rapid population growth.
The impacts on national economies could be tragic. The trend toward globalization free trade, free capital mobility is not usually associated with migration or demography.
If globalization were to be accomplished by free mobility of people, then demographers would certainly be paying attention. However, since globalization is being driven primarily by "free migration" of goods and capital, with labor a distant third in terms of mobility, few have noticed that the economic consequences of this free flow of goods and capital are equivalent to those that would obtain under a free flow of labor.
They are also driven by the same demographic and economic forces that would determine labor migration, if labor were free to migrate. The economic tendency resulting from competition is to equalize wages and social standards across countries.
But instead of cheap labor moving to where the capital is, and bidding wages down, capital moves to where the cheap labor is, and bids wages up-or would do so if only there were not a nearly unlimited supply of cheap labor, a Malthusian situation that still prevails in much of the world.
Yet wages in the capital-sending country are bid down as much as if the newly employed laborers in the low-wage country had actually immigrated to the high-wage country. The determinant of wages in the low-wage country is not labor "productivity," nor anything else on the demand side of the labor market.
You could definitely write a book of hundred of pages on the argument against or for economical globalization/ free trade. Personally I am not a fan of it for this reason: It clearly reduce the power of democracy and the population. Some of the arguments against Globalisation are as follows: 1. An agenda of the Rich States and their Multinational Corporations (MNCs): The critics of globalisation criticize it as a corporate agenda—(the agenda of the big business) and the ideology of the developed countries to dominate and. The origins and early history of nation states are disputed. A major theoretical question is: "Which came first, the nation or the nation state?".
It is entirely on the supply side-an excess and rapidly growing supply of labor at near-subsistence wages.
This demographic condition-a very numerous and still rapidly growing underclass in the third world-is one for which demographers have many explanations, beginning with Malthus. Globalization, considered by many to be the inevitable wave of the future, is frequently confused with internationalization, but is in fact something totally different.
Internationalization refers to the increasing importance of international trade, international relations, treaties, alliances, etc. Inter-national, of course, means between or among nations. The basic unit remains the nation, even as relations among nations become increasingly necessary and important.
Globalization refers to the global economic integration of many formerly national economies into one global economy, mainly by free trade and free capital mobility, but also by somewhat easier or uncontrolled migration.
It is the effective erasure of national boundaries for economic purposes. What was international becomes interregional.
The word "integration" derives from "integer," meaning one, complete, or whole. Integration is the act of combining into one whole. Since there can be only one whole, it follows that global economic integration logically implies national economic disintegration.WHY CAN'T DICTATORS ASPIRE TO BE LIKE MUSSOLINI?: A fascinating FT op-ed on what Kim Jong-Il and Saddam Hussein have in common: "On the 50th anniversary of his death, the two paramount threats to world peace today, Saddam Hussein and President Kim Il-Jong of North Korea, openly base themselves and their regimes on Stalin.
Globalization Is Increasing Inequality.
Proponents of globalization, who point to the boon that results from the trade in goods and services between countries, argue that global integration increases average income within countries, and also reduces inequality.
American trade with China and the Third World, on the other hand, is a far more uneven prospect. How can American workers compete with near-slave labor in China or other Third World nations? Perhaps American workers enjoy overly indulgent labor protections, but a nation of free workingmen that must compete with poorly paid child labor will .
Arguments Against Globalisation. Meaning of Globalisation: Globalisation is a process of increasing integration and growing economic ‘interdependence’ of countries worldwide.
It refers to “the expansion of economic activities across political boundaries of nation states.”. Stuart Anderson's stories. I write about globalization, business, technology and immigration. The evidence of globalization can be seen everywhere: in the home, in the workplace, in the discount stores, in the newspapers and business journals, in the flow of monthly government statistics.