Globalization the Medieval Travelogues of Marco Polo

Globalization

The medieval travelogues of Marco Polo and Ibn Battuta show how the world is viewed from the lens of our own culture. Polo, the Venetian trader, emphasizes trade in his descriptions of the place he visits while Battuta, the Islamic judge, emphasizes morality in his descriptions of the same places. This framing is not a fault of either writer, but rather it can lend perspective to our own view of the world -- we all see the world through our own lens. Thus, like our two ancient travelers, we characterize the world in terms of juxtapositions -- what is similar to what we know and what is different from what we know. In doing so, we create an artificial division between our culture and all other cultures. The differences and similarities define us. There is nothing inherently wrong with this -- the only important thing is that we always understand that we are guilty of this framing and that we can step back from this framing to view our positions or those of others with greater objectivity.

Appiah discusses the issue of globalization and its impact on society. As a species, all humans share the world and its finite set of resources, creating a zero sum game. The process of globalization has made clear the limits of our planet, and given access to its resources to one and all. Immediately, this frames globalization as a game of winners and losers. Appiah's optimism about the human race being able to work together despite the differences to solve problems comes from a collectivist perspective, where we recognize that survival is a mutual issue for all of us, regardless of cultural framing. We still view the issue as being characterized by multiple cultures including "ours" and "the others," but Appiah argues that perhaps such divisions can be set aside when faced with a need to do so. Polo would agree -- where there is money to be made he is far less concerned with the religion or morals of the people with whom he trades. He still has a moral framework, being Catholic, but his cultural perspective is that when there are bigger things to be accomplished cultural divisions can be set aside.

Franklin Foer makes the point that divisions created can be relatively arbitrary, but ultimately serve a purpose. The division between Americans with respect to soccer relates less to sport than it does to politics, he argues. Politics, of course, is about resources. Globalization is also about resources, their exploitation and their distribution. Foer's point can find corollary in globalization, too: different cultures are judged according to their willingness to participate in the global system. States that do not participate -- like North Korea -- are rogue and states that have a different vision of globalization are also a threat. Globalization is to the world economy today what Islam was to Ibn Battuta's travels -- it was a base constant but one that varied in each location. We see nations resistant to globalization as foolish or dangerous, as recalcitrant or terrorist, and Battuta made the same divisions when he traveled. Those less pious were foolish, those of other faiths were repugnant; his views colored by his particular school of Islam and other societies measured against his.

Appiah is correct in that the fundamental arguments we have about globalization and other facets of modern life derive from different views on issues like ethics, and Foer is correct that divisions are often political in nature, distractions from the true division that lies underneath. It is important, therefore, as the world becomes more global that we have more awareness of the different cultures that exist, and the different perspectives. There are different views of ethics, and at times it will be near impossible to reconcile those. There are political divides, sometimes obvious and sometimes obfuscated, but ultimately they still derive from a desire to partition human society along one line or another. It is only when we can step back from the surface-level premises with which we are being presented that we can truly and effectively evaluate the sources of conflict, the meaning of the divisions and use this knowledge to find the solutions that Appiah in particular believes we can find.