Anti-Globalization Movement
“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 1999. Activists and scholars debate whether it constitutes a single social movement or represents a collection of allied groups, a "movement of movements." (Engler, 2007).
The Anti-globalization movement opposes different types of social, economic, and ecological injustices that are believed to be the consequence of globalization which are against globalization.
Participants of the Anti-globalization movement oppose political powers of large MNCs, and the powers of trade agreements. Corporations have been accused of seeking to maximize profits at the expense of undermining labor standards, environmental conservation principles and the integrity of national legislative capacity. Activists of the Anti-globalization movement seek global integration that provides better democratic representation, advancement of human rights and more egalitarian states.
Anti globalization is argued from several points of view, the environmental aspects of globalization, human rights, nationalism (mostly economics), and heterogeneous. Allowing that many of the groups that anti globalization are single focus groups, the different groups do band together to create interest in their causes.

The environmental aspects of globalization
The environmental aspect would be the opposition to multinational corporations who are move between countries and resources, assets and human labor. This movement can ruin the natural resources on a state and leave the locals to reap the outcome of lost resources. Some corporations will place manufacturing in places close to resources and cause environmental havoc with the area.
International banks also fall under this opposition because they support the capital investment of MNC's without requiring them to show they are respecting the human element and protecting natural resources. Also, these same banks may agree to finance capital projects for nation-states with strict guidelines about improving the economy and often in the view of the borrowing government, creating more problems for the economy.
The human rights aspect of globalization
The Anti Global Movement is also concerned with human rights. Some oppose the giant corporations spreading their operations to nations that desperately need to grow economies and then create circumstances that do not meet the needs. Low pay, long hours, child labor are all focuses of this movement. Many companies, such as Walmart have been targeted for unsafe and unfair labor practices. Hiring people to do work at the most minimum pay is helping people survive in many countries, but offers no opportunity to improve and they do not receive enough pay to improve their living conditions. Companies also do nothing to improve the living conditions of their workers or the regions they live. (Haiti and Walmart is a good example to put in here)
Another area of discontent is the places where MNC's set up facilities are often targets of human rights organizations for their own human rights abuses. Countries in Africa such as Chad, Sierra Leone and others such as China are countries where human rights organizations would like companies to force changes in the way people are treated. As a capitalistic world advances, some MNC's actually have influence that exceeds some countries. It is these companies or organizations such as the WTO that the human rights organizations would like to see help their cause. (Sierra Leone is currently in the news because of the blood diamond trade...DeBeers or South African American Company[I think])
Nationalism (mostly economics)
Another would concern nationalism. The ability of a company to move people and facilities from place to place including outside the national borders is not acceptable. This is one of the things of major concern for member states of the European Union for years. Those with nationalistic tendencies do not see the free movement of people within the Union as acceptable. The people involved in this movement see the sovereignty of the nation at risk when they do not have complete control of their country. This includes rights to the territorial mission of the country, who may enter or exit the country and the criteria for both, and the ability to control and regulate business within the borders of the country.
Additional nationalism is argument concerns the flow of aliens into the country and dangers of allowing so much access to the country. Companies and entities in some of these globalization arguments provide good reason to fear their admittance to countries. Also, without strict and verifiable restrictions, it is more difficult for countries to track foreigners as they come and go. This is a fear reason as much as an economic, but economics does play a part as well.
Heterogeneous
Some countries do not like globalization for the reason of new ideas. Many regions still do not want to be involved with different ideas and ideologies. They see globalization as interfering with the ability of their country to control the population.
When globalization conflicts with culture, there is a natural tendency of the people to oppose the changes. Cultural and societal norms are ignored by globalization.

Reference
Engler, M. (2007, April). Anti-globalization movement. Retrieved from http://www.democracyuprising.com/articles/2007/antiglobal_def.php