Globalisation

Résumé du document

« Globalisation » is a word that comes up much more often than others in debate topics. For some, nothing better than globalization (and the liberalizing process that comes with it) could happen to us. On the other side, globalisation's detractors hold it responsible for a great number of the planet's problems such as poverty or underdevelopment and they also believe it will lead us to a disaster if we continue that way.

First of all, we must shortly define what is meant with globalisation : it is the process of creating one world where everything is interconnected, where one country better be in contact with the rest of the world in order to achieve good living conditions. That is attained through different kinds of globalisation: news, ideas, culture, transports and the goods and tertiary markets; all these sectors have undergone a globalisation process. It implies, that at the end stage of this process, there will be no rivalry anymore, that everyone will work hand in hand with his « neighbours » and that we will have attained a stage of global peace and prosperity. And already, « all » the states work together in world organisations such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Extraits

[...] In 1983, the Grameen Bank was officially recognized as a bank. Since then, it has helped a lot of people (mostly women) to buy livestock and primary resources helping people that started with almost nothing to make some decent and respectable earnings. That bank has changed people's lives even though it did not eradicate poverty. Therefore, I think we should keep in mind that even though globalisation is an unavoidable process, there are many possible ways to diminish the harsh transition stages and these solutions are not necessarily conveyed by the official structures whose it is their main task. [...]

[...] These documents tell us that we have to adapt, think about what globalisation really is before saying that it will harm us. Even if it does, a fairer world might come out of it and if the process really goes till its end, it could even mean the end of all wars because we would have attained an unprecedented level of unity. Until then, we have to wait and reflect on globalisation as well as try to make it a more bearable, or even just easier, stage. [...]

[...] However, if that is what globalisation aims at, the process in itself might not be that pleasant. In the Newsweek special issue of December 2005, Tony Blair has written a column on globalisation where he speaks his mind out. To him, globalisation is an unavoidable process and we should therefore adapt to the new conditions it creates rather than fight against it. His main point is that we have to become more adaptable, more flexible because the developed countries are not the only ones able to produce services and goods with the high added value anymore: China and the Asian tigers are able to do so as well. [...]

[...] Bhagwati methodically takes all the assumptions that are made about globalisation and shows that they are false i.e. that it does not worsen poverty or women's right, nor that it erodes democracy (and so on). His book is very powerful because he does not say that everything is perfect, that the existing institutions should be held as omniscient, he does in fact recognize some of the anti-globalist arguments but looks at the big picture and shows that in the end, globalisation is rather an improvement. [...]

[...] These two articles, as well the first one on Wolfowitz “Wolfowitz's new make it clear how one man can alter the process and make it harder as what it already is. As a matter of fact, Mr Wolfowitz asks for a liberalisation of markets to which all countries are not quite ready yet. One example, which was given in one of the short documentary that we looked at, is the case of the restructuring of an industry in Mozambique: after it had been privatised, the industry went bankrupt, it was a total failure. [...]