Chapter 7 Globalisation

The Concept Of Globalisation

Globalisation is evident in various aspects of modern life. Consider Janardhan, who works in a call center, adopting a new identity and accent to communicate with overseas clients during their daytime, which is his night. This illustrates the **globalisation of services**. Ramdhari buying a bicycle manufactured in China and a Barbie doll from the US for his daughter exemplifies the **movement of commodities across borders**. Sarika seizing a job opportunity previously unavailable to women in her family reflects the changing social norms and **cultural shifts** influenced by globalisation.

The term ‘globalisation’ is used in diverse contexts, encompassing both positive and negative outcomes:

• **Negative Examples:** Farmers committing suicide after buying expensive multinational seeds whose crops failed; an Indian company buying a European rival despite protests; local shopkeepers fearing loss of livelihood due to large international retail chains; a film story being copied from Hollywood; militant groups threatening women wearing Western clothes.

These examples highlight that globalisation can have negative consequences, impacting people and industries. They also show that globalisation is not limited to economic issues, and influence can flow in various directions, not just from rich to poor countries.

Precisely defining globalisation is important due to its varied usage. Fundamentally, it involves **flows**: ideas, capital, commodities, and people moving across the world. The core element is the **‘worldwide interconnectedness’** created and sustained by these constant flows.

Globalisation is a **multi-dimensional concept** with political, economic, and cultural manifestations. These dimensions need to be distinguished. Its impact is highly **uneven**, affecting different societies and segments within societies differently. General conclusions about its impact should be drawn cautiously, considering specific contexts.

Causes Of Globalisation

Is globalisation a new phenomenon? The flow of ideas, capital, commodities, and people has occurred throughout much of human history. However, contemporary globalisation is distinct due to the **scale and speed** of these flows, which are significantly greater than in earlier periods. Globalisation has a strong historical basis, but current flows are unprecedented in their intensity and reach.

While not caused by a single factor, **technology** is a critical element driving globalisation. Inventions like the telegraph, telephone, and the microchip have revolutionised communication, enabling faster and easier movement of ideas, capital, commodities, and people across borders. Just as printing facilitated nationalism, contemporary technologies influence how we perceive our individual and collective lives.

The speed of flows varies; capital and commodities move more quickly and widely than people. However, technological advancements alone don't fully explain globalisation. It's also crucial that people worldwide recognise their increasing **interconnections**. We are now acutely aware that events in one part of the world can significantly impact other regions, demonstrating this interconnectedness (e.g., the global spread of diseases or the impact of major economic events).

Political Consequences

Globalisation has generated debate about its political impact, particularly on the traditional concept of **state sovereignty**. We can consider three aspects:

First, globalisation can lead to an **erosion of state capacity**. The traditional 'welfare state', which provided extensive social and economic support, is often giving way to a more minimalist state focused on core functions like law and order and security. The market increasingly determines economic and social priorities. The growing presence and influence of multinational companies (MNCs) worldwide can reduce governments' ability to make independent decisions.

Second, globalisation does not universally diminish state capacity. The state remains the primary basis of political community, and rivalries between countries persist. States continue to perform essential functions (law and order, national security) and can consciously withdraw from domains they choose to. States remain important actors in world politics.

Third, in some ways, state capacity has been boosted by globalisation due to advancements in technology. States have access to enhanced technologies to collect information about citizens, improving their ability to govern effectively. This suggests that new technology can make states more powerful, not less, in certain aspects.

Economic Consequences

The economic dimension is central to debates about globalisation. While not fully understood, it significantly shapes contemporary discourse. Defining economic globalisation is complex, going beyond the role of international institutions like the IMF and WTO. A broader understanding involves examining the **distribution of economic gains** – who benefits most and who loses.

Economic globalisation typically involves increased economic flows (commodities, capital, people, ideas) among countries, some voluntary, some driven by institutions or powerful nations. There's been greater trade in commodities due to reduced import restrictions. Restrictions on **capital movement** have also lessened, allowing investors to seek better returns globally. The flow of **ideas** (e.g., internet, computer services) has increased significantly.

However, the movement of **people** across borders has not increased to the same extent. Developed countries often maintain restrictive visa policies to protect domestic jobs.

The same economic policies adopted globally under globalisation can lead to vastly different outcomes depending on the specific context. Generalizations are often misleading.

Economic globalisation has sharply divided opinion. Critics concerned with **social justice** worry about state withdrawal, arguing it benefits a few while harming those dependent on government jobs and welfare. They call for institutional safeguards or 'social safety nets' to protect the economically weak. Some movements argue these are insufficient and demand an end to forced economic globalisation, seeing it as leading to ruin for weaker countries and the poor, even describing it as re-colonisation.

Advocates argue economic globalisation, driven by deregulation, generates greater economic growth and well-being by allowing economies to specialise in what they do best, benefiting the world. They view it as inevitable. Moderate supporters see globalisation as a challenge to be addressed intelligently, not rejected uncritically. Regardless of views, the increased interdependence and integration between governments, businesses, and people globally due to globalisation are undeniable.

Cultural Consequences

Globalisation impacts not just politics and economics but also daily life, shaping preferences in food, clothing, and thought. This leads to fears of cultural homogenization – the rise of a uniform global culture.

Critics argue this isn't a truly global culture but the imposition of **Western culture**, particularly the **soft power of US hegemony**, on the rest of the world. The popularity of items like burgers or blue jeans is seen as evidence of the powerful influence of the American way of life, leading to the 'McDonaldisation' of cultures and a shrinking of global cultural diversity, harmful to both poor countries and humanity.

However, viewing cultural consequences as solely negative is inaccurate. Cultures are dynamic and constantly absorb outside influences. While some influences might reduce choices, others enlarge them or modify cultures without overwhelming tradition. For example, a burger adds to food options without replacing traditional dishes. Blue jeans can blend with traditional clothing like a khadi kurta, creating a unique combination that has even been exported back to the West. While cultural homogenization exists, globalisation also generates **cultural heterogenisation** – making cultures more different and distinctive. Cultural exchange is rarely one-way, despite power imbalances.

India And Globalisation

Globalisation flows of capital, commodities, ideas, and people have a history in India extending back centuries. However, during the colonial period, India became an exporter of raw materials and a consumer of British finished goods due to British imperial ambitions.

After independence, influenced by this colonial experience, India adopted policies of self-reliance and protectionism to build domestic industries, restricting imports. While this achieved some progress, it also created problems, leading to slow economic growth and neglect in critical sectors like health and education.

In 1991, facing a financial crisis and seeking higher growth, India launched a programme of **economic reforms**. These reforms increasingly aimed to de-regulate trade and foreign investment. Assessing the full impact of these reforms is complex; ultimately, success lies in ensuring that the benefits of growth are widely shared. (Source on 'Gosh, an Indian again!' provides an insider's view of a call center job experience).

Answer:

Resistance To Globalisation

Globalisation is a highly contentious issue, facing strong criticism globally. Critics articulate various arguments:

Those on the **left** view contemporary globalisation as a phase of global capitalism that exacerbates inequality, making the rich richer and the poor poorer. They argue that the weakening state loses its ability to protect the poor's interests.

Critics on the **political right** are concerned about political, economic, and cultural effects. They fear the weakening of the state and advocate for a return to self-reliance and protectionism, at least in certain economic sectors. Culturally, they worry about the erosion of traditional culture and loss of age-old values.

Importantly, anti-globalisation movements themselves often operate through global networks, collaborating with like-minded groups internationally. Many are not against globalisation per se but against a specific model they see as a form of imperialism.

Protests at the 1999 WTO meeting in Seattle exemplify this, alleging unfair trading practices favouring powerful economies and neglecting developing countries' interests. The **World Social Forum (WSF)** is another global platform bringing together various activists (human rights, environmentalists, labor, youth, women) opposing neo-liberal globalisation. WSF meetings have been held in various locations, including Porto Alegre (Brazil) and Mumbai (India), most recently in Nepal (2024).

World Social Forum

The **World Social Forum (WSF)** is an annual meeting of civil society organisations, activists, and intellectuals from around the world. It provides a platform for discussing alternatives to neo-liberal globalisation and seeking solutions to global problems. It brings together a diverse coalition united by opposition to corporate-led globalisation and a vision for a more just, equitable, and sustainable world. The first WSF was held in Porto Alegre, Brazil, in 2001, as a counter-event to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. It continues to meet in various locations globally.

India And Resistance To Globalisation

India has also experienced resistance to globalisation from various segments of society. Social movements play a vital role in helping people understand globalisation's impact and respond to its challenges. Resistance in India comes from diverse quarters:

Left-wing protests against economic liberalisation are voiced through political parties and forums like the Indian Social Forum. Trade unions representing industrial workers and farmers have organised protests against multinational companies entering the country. Opposition also arose against foreign firms patenting Indian plants like Neem.

Resistance also comes from the political right, focusing on opposing certain cultural influences seen as Westernisation – foreign TV channels, celebration of Valentine's Day, and changes in dress tastes (particularly among young women).