I’d like to think that at least in the beginning, when the concept of a “global economy” or “global marketplace” was introduced, whoever gave meaning and existence to the word “globalization” meant well. In layman’s terms, globalization is worldwide interdependence. In reality, however, globalization takes on a much more grim definition. In the next few paragraphs, I will strive to explain some key elements that contribute to the continuing widening of the gap between metropolitan and peripheral countries.
First, we must understand that globalization does not function as a means to pursue the mutual interests of countries. Although underdeveloped countries play a role in the international economy, their development, we can argue, is dictated by the needs of the more dominant economies. In essence, underdeveloped countries have no real autonomy of their industries; instead of an independent basis for functioning, they merely produce goods that are needed by dominant economies. This is the economic exploitation of underdeveloped countries.
There is a belief that foreign investments from multinational corporations are good for the host country’s economy. It is often forgotten that multinational corporations thrive and exist for only one purpose – to make a profit. Yes, they create job opportunities for citizens of the host nation; however, along with their emergence comes a host a problems such as environmental degradation, unjust labor practices, and the undermining of the sovereignty of host countries.
Perhaps the most celebrated outcome of globalization is the emergence and continuing growth of the internet. Nowadays, we literally suffer the luxury of having information at our fingertips, at lightning-fast speed. Western media influences how we dress, our spiritual and political beliefs, even our societal norms. There is an “Americanization” or cultural