Review: Globalization Unplugged in Globalization

Review: Globalization Unplugged

In Globalization Unplugged: Sovereignty and the Canadian State in the Twenty-First Century, Peter Urmetzer tackles the issue of whether globalization truly detracts from a country's sovereignty. While reviewing the literature and history of globalization, he evaluates the term 'globalization' from all angles to find a better understanding of what is meant by it. Although he comes to the conclusion, after careful consideration, that it is impossible to define what globalization is, he establishes that globalization is not a new phenomenon, and he backs up this point with solid evidence. Most significant, to his argument however, is an understanding of how this globalization and capitalism has affected Canada. In making his claim that globalization does not hinder the sovereignty of a nation-state, Urmetzer use strong analysis in his arguments by approaching the issue of globalization from an unbiased perspective using both qualitative and quantitative analysis. Attempting to make sense of the perception of globalization, Urmetzer tries to define the term and its historical significance. He understands the power of the term, and the effects it is perceived to have on the nation-state, but he notes that the "empirical foundations of how it has affected Canada remain largely unexamined" (Urmetzer 2005: 3). This makes Urmetzer's work a unique piece of literature in the cluttered Americanized field of globalization. In Globalization Unplugged, Urmetzer examines the effects of globalization on Canada that can be applied to other nation- states as well. This becomes increasingly challenging, because the term 'globalization' can be used to refer to "everything and anything" (Urmetzer 2005: 4). Thus before jumping into the empirical evidence, Urmetzer wisely and effectively sets out to understand the term before jumping to conclusions as the effects of globalization on not only Canada, but other nation states as well. Urmetzer is fully aware of the vast range of literature and discussion on globalization, and he makes this clear in Globalization Unplugged. Before attempting to understand the implications of globalization on Canada and ultimately the nation-state, he tries to make sense of this "catch-all term" used "to explain ever-thing from rapidly changing communications technology to increased unemployment" (Urmetzer 2005: 3). In doing so, Urmetzer understands the common perception of what globalization is believed to be, and because globalization is not an academic term but rather a term that has gained prevalence through popular usage, the notion that globalization is "undermining the power of the state" is what he accepts (Urmetzer 2005: 17). It is a true strength of his work that Urmetzer defines globalization in the best way possible in order to make his evaluation, as by defining relatively this presumably indefinable term, Urmetzer is able to make arguments as to what globalization is to Canada. More important though, in trying to understand this term of globalization, is Urmetzer's appreciation of the term as being "both new and old" according to "globalists" (Urtmetzer 2005: 31). This later becomes a key point to his argument, but in his opening chapter entitled 'The Life and Times of Globalization,' Urmetzer takes a broad approach to the issue of globalization before he narrows down to the core of what it really means. This approach lends itself to a definition of globalization without overlooking what has defined globalization in other literature and interpretations of the word. Ultimately, Urmetzer considers the arguments on globalizations then makes valid points. To Urmetzer, globalization means interconnections between nations that have increased considerably since World War II, and that nation-state's sovereignty have been weakened in this process. It is this final point, widely accepted to be a truth about globalization that Urmetzer seeks to evaluate- without political rhetoric or pretense- the truth of the matter behind globalization. Before jumping into the empirical evidence, however, Urmetzer understands this problem as it relates to history- the new and the old. He does so by comparing globalization to the problem presented in Marxism, of the eventually take over of capitalism. Because of this, globalization has been around for hundreds of years, and furthermore globalization can be linked to the days of colonialism. In a key point, Urmetzer notes that because of the prevalence of globalization for hundreds of years, its trampling on sovereignty has to be evaluated from a different angle. The "victory of capitalism" expressed in The Communist Manifesto, has been projected for years, and thus globalization must be evaluated in terms greater than the recent advances in free-market trade (Urmetzer 2005: 47). For instance, a country's relations to the periphery of the world market have to be considered because the economic history of globalization can be traced back more than 500 years. Because globalization has become more common since World War II does not mean it is a new phenomenon, and Urmetzer's review of the literature helps to illustrate this point. In evaluating the term globalization through the first third of his work, Urmetzer helps to offer a better understanding of what globalization means. As a overused term, this is crucial to helping to setting the stage for the crux of his argument which is how, in recent years, globalization has impacted Canada. Although he does not directly link the history of globalization to his argument, by helping the reader to understand the broad notion of the term and how misconceptions regarding globalization can lead to pre-made judgments without proper evaluation of empirical evidence, can lead to false claims about the impact of globalization on nation- states. If determining that globalization generally effects sovereignty without looking closely at the case study, misconceptions will rule the day and mistakes will be made. By first demonstrating a solid understanding of the historical process of globalization and how it relates to not only Canada, but all nation-states, Urmetzer is able to put his study on Canada in proper perspective without being bogged down by general misconceptions or predetermined notions that dominate the term 'globalization.' In the final two thirds of Globalization Unplugged, Urmetzer evaluates globalization and Canada from nearly every possible angle. Very complete and thorough, and not relying on statistics that are not biased, Urmetzer makes solid observations on globalization and Canada. For example, his note that Canada has been a long time player in globalization while the United States has not, is an interesting point because more literature on globalization has come out of the United States which has a very different history than Canada (Urmetzer 2005: 66-67). He backs up such points by showing the level of trade in Canada as being high, and he evaluates who Canada trades with. This is important, because the trading partner of Canada, whether or not they are developing, has an influence on the whether or not Canada is truly a player in globalization (Urmetzer 2005: 69). By looking at Canada's imports and exports as a percentage of their GDP, Urmetzer uses valid evidence to determine Canada's involvement in international trade. He comes to the conclusion, using this logic, that seven-tenths of "Canada's economic activity is conducted within its own borders" and thus problems within Canada are likely not attributed to international economic pressure (Urmetzer 2005: 78). While this may be a hasty conclusion to make at this point, as this correlation is highly speculative and not evident in his empirical evidence, Urmetzer develops his argument further. After evaluating Canada's trading partners, Urmetzer then evaluates who invests in Canada. While this varies from the trading partners, as the United States is coming to trade more with Canada while investments are being diversified, it still does not show an over reliance on globalization to the point that Canada's sovereignty would be jeopardized. Like with his statistical evaluation of trade, Urmetzer's evaluation on foreign direct investment is based on simple graphs and singular statistical analysis. Perhaps he jumps to conclusions too hastily based on a lack of empirical evidence, as he just used the amount of foreign direct investment in relation to GDP, however he outlines his argument convincingly. Manufacturing is an example which Urmetzer's style of analysis can be demonstrated, as manufacturing is important to the notion of globalization's impact as "the globalization argument rests on the premise that manufacturing is moving from the First World to the Third" (Urmetzer 2005: 96). His findings on this critical point, that manufacturing investment is leaving Canada while not going to Third World countries clearly refutes the general theory on the nature of globalization to cause manufacturing to trend towards the Third World. According to Urmetzer, this means that yes the borders between nations are coming down, but they are coming down within the market (between Canada and Europe for example) and not between the First and Third World (Urmetzer 2005: 98-99). This is highly indicative of the logic Urmetzer uses, and I cannot find fault in it. Although he lacks original and even authoritative empirical evidence, relying on just one statistical measure to back up his arguments, the measure he uses are illustrative of his thesis and the arguments he is trying to make. On the issue of manufacturing, Urmetzer determines through a careful review of the literature, what globalization means to manufacturing according to the predominating theories, how manufacturing relates to Canada's history, then uses statistical evidence to relate manufacturing to Canada and ultimately a nation-state. Such an example cannot be refuted without statistical research to make an argument against Urmetzer, and thus his arguments refuting the impact of globalization on eliminating the nation-state's sovereignty are strengthened. This sets up Urmetzer's primary point, and the thesis of his argument- it is a myth that because of globalization "national borders have become so porous that governments are no longer able to properly manage their own affairs" (Urmetzer 2005: 123). In the case of Canada, a welfare state, Urmetzer even maintains globalization strengthens the welfare state. To reach this point, and to prove that economic freedom does not ultimately completely eliminate political power from the economic spectrum, Urmetzter evaluates the effects of globalization on the different programs of government involvement within the economy. For example, in regards to the aforementioned welfare-state services, Urmetzer notes how this is an often overlooked aspect to globalization (Urmetzer 2005: 142). By touching on subjects typically overlooked, Urmetzer strengthens his argument. Furthermore, he evaluates welfare-state spending on education, health, and social services by noting their gradual rise in spending since World War II which coincides with the upward trend of globalization. This is largely because programs are difficult to cut and "impossible to eliminate," for reasons of political fallout for instance (Urmetzer 2005: 158). But in his careful evaluation of the welfare state, in which a government controls economics to provide services to its own people, which is in sharp contrast to the free natured capitalism encourage by globalization, Urmetzer is able to show that the government does not lose sovereignty by giving way to globalization. Change is welfare spending is largely political and slow to adapt to economic necessity, and thus globalization does not slow welfare spending. In fact, "spending is up" on welfare state services (Urmetzer 2005: 163). Ultimately, Urmetzer's argument is systematic, straightforward, and broad-based in its study of globalization- as both a term and process and its consequences for Canada. By evaluating the historical process and understanding of globalization, Urmetzer is able to define what globalization means. He then uses statistical evidence to determine how in fact Canada's economic history relates to what globalization is, and what it is not. Urmetzer's argument is particularly strong in touching on all aspects of globalization, and not just one aspect which globalization touches. He does not just make his argument for manufacturing or the welfare state, but for all areas I could conceive to be touched by globalization. His conclusion is very straightforward and backed up by his argument, which is proved by straightforward and linear means. His final conclusion is that there is no reason to believe "trade has a negative impact on national sovereignty" (Urmetzer 2005: 194). After reading Globalization Unplugged, one would be obliged to believe in his argument, at least for the case of Canada. The historical perspective he puts globalization in is particularly impressive to his argument, as Canada's rise in global trade has increased considerably, but "looks much less impressive when the time span is lengthened to include the past 133 years" (Urmetzer 2005 194). Urmetzer thinks outside of the box in making his arguments, which contribute to the validity of Globalization Unplugged. Globalization Unplugged is thus a strong work, and its final conclusion is testament to this strength. While originally appearing to appeal to the nation-state in general, and globalization, it becomes evident that Canada is a unique case. Because of its relations to the Confederation and then the United States, and the level of manufacturing, and various trading partners, Canada cannot be compared to other nation- states. An original claim, on the evaluation of the nation-state in general, cannot be made and Urmetzer realizes this point. At the end of the work, Urmetzer maintains that globalization has led Canadians to believe that what the wage earners in Taiwan, for example, earn has an impact on Canadian economic problems. Throughout his work, Urmetzer has debunked this "myth" and believes problems are part of "the political process that still primarily takes places within the borders of this country" (Urmetzer 2005: 204). He does not overstep his work and speculate and make assumptions towards exactly what political processes he is referring to, he just concludes that Canada must look inside its own borders to find solutions to its problems. A broad based term "globalization" is not and cannot be the problem of Canada, and it is a very positive finish that Urmetzer simply recommends Canada to "make progress towards solving" its own issues (Urmetzer 2005: 204). Although he does not successfully prove that the issues can be solved within Canada, he does show in numerous ways that these issues cannot be blamed on globalization. In fact, globalization at its core is a process hundreds of years old. By putting his recommendations into proper perspective, Urmetzer's work has even greater strength and its implications are more critical than they would first appear. The amount of sovereignty a nation- state believes it has compared to what it does have will go a long way towards determining how it will govern itself, and this connection was not apparent to me without Urmetzer's logical connection in his conclusion that makes his work highly relevant. Urmetzer's thesis is sufficiently proved in Globalization Unplugged. Where lacking in statistical evidence, he makes up for in using careful thought and fresh insight into the topic. It would surely take a detailed empirical study to dissuade a reader of the merits of Globalization Unplugged, and while Urmetzer does take some liberties in correlating his evidence to his findings, his argument is logical, methodical, and based on careful research and analysis. He also discusses the purpose, methods, results, and implications of his work with careful consideration and clarity which contribute to the overall strength of Globalization Unplugged: Sovereignty and the Canadian State in the Twenty First Century. A fresh look at Canada's unique place in the global capitalist market, Urmetzer succeeds in bringing truth to Canadian misconceptions on the ills of globalization.