The impact of globalization on international trade and culture

The Continuum of Globalization
Discourse on globalization has flourished in contemporary scholarship, even though the actual forces and phenomena shaping patterns of world trade and the interchange of ideas and culture have extended deep into human history. Technology has invariably shaped the new wave of globalization, with public policy and international interdependency creating formal, legal pathways of global integration. Even as information sharing and intercultural communication have created the means by which to engage in universal, shared discourse on ethics, human rights, and social justice, destructive forces like racism and prejudice threaten to undermine the benefits globalization presents to the modern and future world. In spite of the resurgence of xenophobia and protectionism in some regions, globalization has overall led to the inevitable and unavoidable dismantling of prejudice and racism worldwide.
Discursive Shifts
Discourse on race and ethnicity has undergirded public perceptions, points of view, policies, and practices. The modern era and the rise of the secular nation-state as the fundamental building block of the geo-political landscape brought with it a newfound interest in race, ethnicity, and other rather arbitrary boundaries between societies that had throughout history maintained continuity or cohabitation within the same geographic and temporal fields (Bosworth, Bowling & Lee, 2008). This is not to say that barriers between races, socioeconomic classes, language groups, and subcultures did not define the social order; of course such hierarchies existed and created systematic stratification and formalized oppression and subordination. However, the brand of globalization that flourished in the post World War Two era had a means of showcasing human unity and universal human norms. Perhaps it was the horrors of the First and Second World Wars that first alerted the human public as a whole to the dangers of fragmentation and prejudice. Likewise, technology in fields like transportation and communication created newfound pathways of social and cultural exchange that never before existed. Resulting discursive practices changed, changing the ways people perceived themselves and their role in the world.
The concept of race and ethnicity in the context of globalization can actually be traced to the sixteenth-century and the first real wave of globalization that occurred as the result of exploration and later, imperialism, colonialism, conquest, and subsequent othering (Thomas & Clarke, 2013). Othering was not just iterated in negative means, but also in equally as problematic concepts like Orientalism and the myth of the noble savage. Instead of viewing other cultures as being potential partners in achieving mutual goals, globalization often led to the imposition of power upon societies for exploitation and dominion. Colonization was also grounded in religious and political discourse and its presumed superiority—European colonization but also colonization by other globalizing regimes such as the Ottoman Empire. Therefore, racial discourse and globalization have gone hand in hand for centuries, at least since the first wave of globalization.
Racist discourse flourished in the nineteenth century, especially as it became insidiously fused with the principles of science and empiricism (Thomas & Clark, 2013). The misappropriation of Darwin’s evolutionary theories provided the sinister underpinnings of ardent, radical nationalism and racist political practices—the most obvious of which is Nazism. As anthropology and other social sciences since revealed the spurious connection between biology and race, globalization became much more about economic policy and labor economics than about race or ethnicity.
Migration and Movement
Globalization is partly defined by human population migration, to promote economic interests. Population migration and immigration have dominated recent discourse on globalization and race. Starting in the nineteenth century especially, mass migration movements characterized the modern and post-modern worlds. With increased mobility due to advanced transportation networks, people from around the world viewed the borders of the nation-state as being far more fluid than they had been a generation or two before. Rather than lead to more openness and border fluidity, though, world trade and free market capitalism have actually fuelled anti-immigrant and anti-immigration sentiments (Kaya & Karakoç, 2012). Anti-immigration sentiments and their corresponding manifestations in public policy and law have particularly flourished in Europe and North America, in spite of the latter having long been a bastion of immigration policies that have emphasized migration as a means of economic development and social empowerment.
The paradoxes of immigration as being both the means by which to eradicate prejudices and barriers, as well as the means by which to stir animosity and resentment, have become more evident than ever before. Now, anti-immigration sentiments and racism have become threats to national, regional, and global security (Bello, 2014). Racism and prejudice have the potential to influence domestic and foreign policy, as well as to fuel terrorism and sectarian violence. By the same token, interdependency, collaboration, and cross-cultural communication are the pathways by which critical negotiations and economic policies can promote peace.
Intersectionality: Gender and Class Inequalities
Trade openness and border fluidity to bolster labor markets has in some ways exacerbated socioeconomic class tensions regionally and globally (Kaya & Karakoç, 2012). In fact, those nations that have stronger free trade policies and neoliberal political cultures have correspondingly higher rates of anti-immigrant sentiments due to perceived threats and scapegoating (Kaya & Karakoç, 2012). These ancillary problems to world trade and globalization cannot be seen as direct consequences of open markets. Rather, anti-immigrant sentiments reflect underlying issues related to wealth disparity and the lack of ethical public policies.
In some ways, free trade and globalization have actually fostered social equity and justice. For example, global firms have less of an opportunity to discriminate with the strongest results being in the realm of gender parity (Black & Brainerd, 2004). Universal social norms and ethics have promoted both ethnic and gender equality as goals, but policies and programs still do need to recognize the value of promoting diversity in the ongoing discourse on globalization. Globalization is inevitable, and policies and programs need to start incorporating social justice norms and ethics. Scientific research on the inconsistencies in racialized discourse, and critical race theory can provide the tools by which to create more sensible public policies in the realm of economics and social justice.
A Path Forward
Globalization has not eradicated racism through the perceptual magic of homogenization and commingling, of urbanization and cosmopolitan unity. Neither has globalization created a world totally hostile to the principles of social justice and respect for diversity. The means by which globalization continues to impact the lives of individuals includes domestic and foreign policy, as well as the practices of multinational enterprises. Shifting the dialogue on globalization to promote equality should start to stress intersections between race, class, gender, and power rather than to presume ethnicity is the fundamental building block of human identity. Many of the patterns of crime and violence that exist are due more to class conflict and strain theory, and faulty application of neoliberal policy, than to globalization itself.
References
Bello, V. (2014). Why prejudice is a global security threat. United Nations University Institute on Globalization, Culture, and Mobility. https://gcm.unu.edu/publications/articles/why-prejudice-is-a-global-security-threat.html
Black, S.E. & Brainerd, E. (2004). Importing equality? The impact of globalization on gender discrimination. ILR Review 57(4): 540-559.
Bosworth, M., Bowling, B. & Lee, M. (2008). Globalization, ethnicity, and racism. Theoretical Criminology 12(3): 263-273.
Kaya, Y. & Karakoç, E. (2012). Civilizing vs destructive globalization? A multi-level analysis of anti-immigrant prejudice. International Journal of Comparative Sociology 53(1): 23-44.
Thomas, D.A. & Clarke, M.K. (2013). Globalization and race. Annual Review of Anthropology 42(2013): 305-325.