First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
globalization
34 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Sydney, NSW Austr...
Offline
Posted 2/21/08
i dont think it will work as of now because people don't have enough respect and knowledge for other peoples cultures
1433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 2/21/08
There are some good responses already, but I'd like to add that a single system of culture, economy, government, etc. means the destruction of options. If you don't like how the system is running but can't stop it, what are you to do? You can no longer move to another country.

Of course, it would take a very long time to actually unite all cultures as one (some would be destroyed instead of incorporated, too) if it were possible, but I don't even think it is. I certainly don't see a singular world system coming any time soon.

Also, while it makes sense that destroying difference for the sake of identity would, if completed, lead to fewer problems in many areas, I really don't like the idea of giving up the freedom to be different.
4963 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / cebu
Offline
Posted 2/21/08
globalization for us in countries with financial difficulties ain't a good thing..
Posted 2/21/08
Well it will make it easier for stupid people, I mean if lots of lesser countries join together to form one bigger country there will be less names to learn Btw, I've never heard the word globalisation used in this context before, I have only ever heard it used in economics before which was used when describing things like coca cola becoming a globally recognized brand etc are you sure it isn't the wrong word to describe what your talking about? (countries unifying)
2707 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / US
Offline
Posted 2/21/08
its good... people are connected and poor countries now have their voices heard and so on... if people are separated its bad for the economy... paper chain analogy is that..
943 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / core
Offline
Posted 2/21/08
that would be great. imagine, if it was that way the concept of economy and other international issues will be gone and. on the other hand, this could lead to war since united countries will try to increase their sphere of power.

i kinda like this thought, as long as if all the countries in the world will be united, it will not be ruled by one "global" president... that would be a sci-fi sort of nightmare..lol
13790 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / los angeles
Offline
Posted 2/21/08
For all those who like globalization.just find a guy named Hitler and i'll back you 100%
397 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M
Offline
Posted 2/21/08

Hugegnome wrote:

If they want to preserve their own culture, what is stopping them from doing what they have been doing all along? Just because they have the access and choice to eat McDonalds doesn't mean they can't eat a traditional meal. If those people don't want modernization, what is stopping them from living out their primitive life style? There are some cultures in the world that live as they did centuries ago. One of those cultures likes tying rings to their necks and limbs to enhance its length.

If they believe their way of life is so enjoyable, then why do they have to bother with the effects of globalization? Culture evolves, without evolution of culture, everyone would be still living in caves. Since that was the culture of cavemen. Does it mean that we should preserve that too? Should we still have Chinese women tie their feet or have dishonored Japanese men commit seppuku?


It's not as simple as that. Comparing "simpler" and more "advanced" cultures is just for simplicity sake. Culture isn't just "tying rings to their necks and limbs" etc. Our basic premise is already different. You assume that people change to these other cultures because it is better. I think that people from these so-called "better" cultures sell it in a way that makes it look better and that the people doing the selling necessarily believe that as truth. The "poorer" culture is then taken as bizzare at best and inhumane at worst. I'm not saying culture shouldn't change. I'm saying that the evolution of culture under a single top-down structure is a scary thought. The truth is, every culture will have its share of problems.

Capitalism as a culture, for example, is necessarily hedonistic in nature. It is also necessarily exploitative as the main goal of capitalism is profit maximization. The invisible costs of capitalism is often ignored. I would make another wild claim here and it is up to whoever to believe or disbelieve what they want. If a capitalistic coorporation is ever likened to a person, then the person would be a psychopath.
4344 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / auckland
Offline
Posted 2/21/08

toelovehan wrote:


supermalv wrote:

Well you hear this term since the 90's. And it's actually happening right now. You see the european nations forming a one united country and one united currency..

The talk of merging america, mexico, and canada. Using the new money, Amero (like euro except.. it's america, get it?)

The African union.. The soon-to-be proposed Asian union.

It'll be inevitable until we will eventually under one nation with one government and one currency.

I won't disclose my opinion yet on this.. I'm just stating the issue right now. I'll get you guys to give your opinion first.

What do you think of globalization?


Interesting point you have but the EU isn't under the same government. Just that they have one united currency and similar economies. I highly doubt that people will allow for one united government because nationalism rings strong in every nation.

Moreover, isn't globalisation more of a World Trade and no trade barriers things with the presence of MNCs and Macdonalds than unification of regions into one collective group?


lol i gotta go work now.. but i'll try to say something here..

yes the government is still diffrent. Only the world trade will be globalized. But if you think about it.. trade brings in money. And if you can control the money flow of a particular places.. then you control the people. It doesn't matter if all countries still sprout diffrent flags.

One central banking would mean.. The people that owns the central bank would own the currency. Scary thing when they control the whole currency of the world isn't it?
463 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Poland
Offline
Posted 2/21/08

cerebralking wrote:

it will only work if the new government is not going to be corrupt....


Well it's imposible, to have righteus goverment, but I don't dislike idea about one nation
4344 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / auckland
Offline
Posted 2/21/08

Prezes wrote:


cerebralking wrote:

it will only work if the new government is not going to be corrupt....


Well it's imposible, to have righteus goverment, but I don't dislike idea about one nation


well.. power corrupts.. and absolute power corrupts absolutely..

I'd hate to be under one global government man.. that'll mean the wealth of the world will slowly siphoned to select groups of few men that controls the cash flow of the nation.

think of it this way.

Money is NOT wealth. Wealth are things like.. houses, or cars, horses etc etc.

If one government can enforce the use of common money all over the world (illegal to use anything else to trade with), and control the supply of said money.... All they got to do is print out some bogus crappy pieces of paper with a picture of dead president on it.. to pay for their expenses, buying themselves real wealth with those friggin papers. Lots of people in the lower part of the society will get screwed big time. In a form of trouble called: reccession and depression in economy. And we'll never even know what hit us or who to blame since this method is very very stealthy.

What's more scary is that..

In the U.S.. The department that controls the policy of currency? the federal reserve? They're privately owned. The government don't even control it's own monetary policy. Some friggin rich men controls it.
4344 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / auckland
Offline
Posted 2/21/08

OptimusGatts wrote:

I've found myself quite divided by the issue of globablization. On the one hand, while growing up, I always thought that it would be a good idea. I mean we have the technology and know how to make the world a much better place. We could modernize the 3rd world and bring stability to the region. The entire planet could function under a single currency, a single global government which would break down into other smaller governments (like federal, provincial, municipal). A single code of law. With the entire planet's resources devoted to improving the entire planet! Humanity would surely thrive and be merry.

On the other hand I'm not so sure. For one the planet is made up of many diverse cultures and people. And not all of them like each other, hell I would dare to say that most of the world bears a grudge or even outright dislikes the G8 nations (who basically run the planet) and that the G8 nations merely tolerate the rest of the world and each other. Would a global community really change that? I don't think so. The next dilemma is applicable to every country on the planet: what happens to your country? Does it stay the same? Does it get merged or divided with another country to fill a regional land quota and get renamed to sector 23? I don't know about you but a lot of countries are going to have a problem with what is basically a loss of their sovereignty. The loss of sovereignty is basically my biggest problem with globalization. I do not want to lose my country and national identity and neither does anyone else i would presume. How could we get everyone to agree without major armed conflict? Massive bribery? possible, but quite unlikely.

The last and not least is money. A global economy would mean a global central bank. As we all know central banks are privately owned. This would basically mean that the bankers would control the monetary flow of the entire planet. And quite frankly I dont want the richest 1% controlling the other 99% of the world.

In the end I am very against globalization. I do not see the need for the North American Union or the Asian union. I do however sort of agree with the european union as that many nations in such an enclosed space does benefit from the facility of trade it brings, I do not however agree with a single constitution that it is not agreed upon by ALL of the member nations. The concept of the NAU is simply un-needed and undesirable in my humble opinion. The Asian Union isn't really something I like to comment on since it could be a good thing for the asian community and I won't comment on it much because I just don't know enough about asia to form an educated opinion, but for the sake of choosing a side I will say nay.

The concept of globalization may be a noble one but so is communism. The flaws lie in the people in charge. How would we eliminate corruption of our global politicians? How would one sector of the world be able stop the globalist government should it choose to opress it's population? Endless questions of philosophical, religous, social, and economical nature arise and quite frankly the only one that can be easily answered is economical. Basically globalism would be the victory of money over humanity.

In my teens i thought of globalism and the good it could bring, but now it is quite obvious to me that while feasible, it is not reasonable or even logical, to be done right now. And I am against it.


dude.. you are right on the money about the central bank thing.. if you study economy.. i got shitload of question i got to ask to you.
2655 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
76 / M
Offline
Posted 2/21/08

supermalv wrote:



The talk of merging america, mexico, and canada. Using the new money, Amero (like euro except.. it's america, get it?)

never, never, never gonna happen, not in a thousand year,

1448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / pepsi vending mac...
Offline
Posted 2/21/08
i think that if the world unites enough so that everybody depends on one another on even basic levels is a good thing. if everything is more intertwined most conflics could be avoided due to selfintrest. if jingoism can be changed rather than dissolved by the propoganda that countries seem to be so effiecient at spewing out it just might work. it would definetly help immigration laws if people want to move around more, but that confidence would probably take a genration or two to build up.
1448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / pepsi vending mac...
Offline
Posted 2/21/08

Jachina wrote:


supermalv wrote:



The talk of merging america, mexico, and canada. Using the new money, Amero (like euro except.. it's america, get it?)

never, never, never gonna happen, not in a thousand year,



maybe not in your life time, but US already exudes so much influence in the hemespher anyway, enought to start wars even. if we puch them to be more open minded they may drop the isolation crud, and be less intraverted. (ok more open minded=less intraverted i know, you get the point)
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.