Can Globality Bring a Good Society?
Is globalization a good thing? For its proponents, this contemporary social trend has opened the way variously to worldwide liberal democracy, huge efficiency gains, enhanced consumer satisfaction, increased environmental consciousness, enabled greater intercultural communication, and brought an end to warfare. In contrast, critics have faulted contemporary globalization for in one way and another impeding democracy, imposing a post-colonial imperialism, deepening social inequalities, suppressing vulnerable cultures, undermining every fabric of community, massively aggravating ecological degradation, and compromising every claim to knowledge. With such claims and counterclaims, the stakes in globalization debates are clearly high. The arguments can understandably become passionate.
KeywordsCombustion Migration Ozone Income Marketing
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.C. Gamble, Timewalkers: The Prehistory of Global Colonization (Cheltenham: Alan Sutton, 1994).Google Scholar
- 3.Cf. P. Hirst and G. Thompson, Globalization in Question: The International Economy and the Possibilities of Governance (Cambridge: Polity, 1996);Google Scholar
- R. Wade, ‘Globalization and Its Limits: Reports of the Death of the National Economy Are Greatly Exaggerated’, in S. Berger and R. Dore (eds), National Diversity and Global Capitalism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996): 60–88.Google Scholar
- 4.R. Robertson, Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture (London: Sage, 1992): 58.Google Scholar
- 5.Cf. W. Shakespeare, A Midsummer Nights Dream (London: Methuen, 1979 [1595–6]): 38;Google Scholar
- D. Hancock, Citizens of the World: London Merchants and the Integration of the British Atlantic Community, 1735–1785 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).Google Scholar
- 7.Union of International Associations, Yearbook of International Organizations 1997/98, Volume I (Munich: Saur, 1997)Google Scholar
- D. Held, Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance (Cambridge: Polity, 1995).Google Scholar
- 9.United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 1997 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997): 9.Google Scholar
- 10.Cf. J. Agnew, ‘Global Hegemony versus National Economy: The United States in the New World Order’, in G. J. Demko and W. B. Woods (eds), Reordering the World: Geopolitical Perspectives on the Twenty-First Century (Boulder: Westview, 1994): 270–1;Google Scholar
- D. Ghai, ‘Structural Adjustment, Global Integration and Social Democracy’, in R. Prendergast and F. Stewart (eds), Market Forces and World Development (New York: St Martin’s, 1994): 30–2.Google Scholar
- 11.Cf. B. Einhorn, Cinderella Goes to Market: Citizenship, Gender and Women’s Movements in East Central Europe (London: Verso, 1993);Google Scholar
- P. Sparr (ed.), Mortgaging Women’s Lives: Feminist Critiques of Structural Adjustment (London: Zed, 1994).Google Scholar
- 14.J. Harrod, Labour and Third World Debt (Brussels: International Federation of Chemical, Energy and General Workers’ Unions, 1992): 106.Google Scholar
- 16.N. Myers, Ultimate Security: The Environmental Basis of Political Stability (New York: Norton, 1993): 179;Google Scholar
- German Advisory Council on Global Change, World in Transition: The Threat to Soils. 1994 Annual Report (Bonn: Economica, 1995): 32.Google Scholar
- 17.U. Beck, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (London: Sage, 1992 ): 166.Google Scholar