Globalization the Tide of Globalization

¶ … Globalization

The tide of globalization has impacted every aspect of life and modern endeavor. Theorists however are divided in the ways they attempt to explicate this phenomenon. There are two fundamental cleavages in the theoretical landscape, theories that are economic in orientation and those that are cultural (Flynn 2007). This is entirely possible since by nature globalization captures multiple facets of the modern experience (Kenneth 2006, p. 51). This paper will critically discuss two, global capitalism and global polity.

Global capitalism is an economic theory of globalization which draws from Marxist conceptions of the economy. Global capitalism is sometimes considered a 'hyper' capitalist theory (Martell 2007, p. 172). It is a prescriptive theory that focuses on the "triumph of capitalism," the success of the market economy and the establishment of new transnational ruling elites (Kenneth 2006, p.55, Sklair 2001).

Global capitalism advances the concept of a new global empire (Sklair 2001). This new capitalist empire conjures new forms of "sovereignty, economy, culture and political struggle" (Kellener 2002, p.286).The proponents of this theory assert that capitalism has entered a new age of accumulation. This new wave a global accumulation is purported to engender international development and, reduce inequality and poverty.

For the global capitalist the transnational corporation (TNC) generates the substantive change in the global environment. TNC's are not fettered to a particular country and operate globally, thus the relationship between capital and labor becomes transnational (Flynn 2007). The role of the state also morphs from focusing on local capital accumulation to global capital accumulation. The rise of the TNC' is thought to weaken the power of the local state, reducing the state's role to merely implementing global policies initiated by the TNC's.

Steigliz (2003), asserts that this accumulation of capital is not without risks and negative fallout for international development. The reality is that "globalization has impacted different groups differently: some have benefitted enormously, others have borne more of the costs (Steigliz 2003 p.505). For Kiely (2005), this vapid inequality means that far from reducing poverty, globalization may have worsened the situation a widening the chasm between the wealthy and the poorer countries.

The weakness of the global capitalist theory centers on its failure to see beyond the economic dimension, and the reduction of the state to the position of a pawn in a world largely dominated by large corporations. This conception fails to consider that states have unique histories and variant "institutional capacities" (Flynn 2007, p. 12). Kellener (2002) asserts that, it also fails to see the complexity of globalization and adequately explain the "complex relations between capitalism and democracy" (Kellener 2002, p. 289)

Hay and Marsh (2000), add to the critique by contending that the evidence itself is tainted with selectivity, and ignores critical data that supports adverse positions. Claims of the flow of foreign direct investment to all participants are overrated. These flows also tend to be concentrated within the core which is more evidence of "regionalization, triadization or internationalization" not globalization (Hay and Marsh 2000, p.9).

The cultural dimension of globalization theory accepts many of the positions of the economic theories, however it places greater emphasis on "values, ideas and identities" (Flynn 2007, Befu 2003 p.4) The major plank for the cultural theorist is that globalization is really an expansion of western ideals through the rest of the world (Flynn 2007). In contrast to economic theorist they view political power as vested in the civil society rather than state structures and emphasize the "meaningful and interpretative aspects of social life"(Holton, 1998:15).

World polity theory is framed along those lines; its particular focus is on other transnational actors like INGOs, who act independently of powerful states or transnational corporation. These actors produce and spread global values that influence states and other transnational actors. World polity theorists concur with global capitalist that the nation state is weakening as global entities become stronger. However, for them development, which is development of ideas, has been "decentralized to substate groups and organizations" (Flynn 2003, p. 10).