Suchergebnisse

What is generally called globalization is a vast social field in which hegemonic or dominant social groups, states, interests and ideologies collide with counter-hegemonic or subordinate social groups, states, interests and ideologies on a world scale. Even the hegemonic camp is fraught with conflicts, but over and above them, there is a basic consensus among its most influential members (in political terms, the G-7). It is this consensus that confers on globalization its dominant characteristics. The counter-hegemonic or subordinate production of globalization is what is called insurgent cosmopolitanism. It consists of the transnationally organized resistance against the unequal exchanges produced or intensified by globalized localisms and localized globalisms.

Globalization is a process of global economic, political and cultural integration and unification.

This article highlights some facts and fallacies about globalization, with a particular reference to the global economy. To explain what is globalization and what it is not is critical both theoretically and practically for nations, corporations, and communities to benefit from it and avoid its negative consequences. Some historical antecedents of globalization and the interactive nature of its structures and processes are highlighted in this article. The analysis is expected to benefit scholars, practitioners, and agents of social change interested and involved directly or indirectly in the impacts and processes of globalization.

The multivariate technique of factor analysis is used to combine several indicators of economic integration and international transactions into a single measure or index of globalization. The index is an alternative to the simple measure of openness based on trade, and it produces a ranking of countries over time for 23 OECD countries. Ireland is ranked as the most globalized country during the 1990?s, while the UK was at the top during the 1980?s. Some of the most notable changes in the rankings are the decline of the US, Canada, and to a lesser extent Japan. Norway also receives a lower ranking. There are notable improvements in the ranking for Finland, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. For Portugal and Spain the changes seem to follow EU membership in the mid 1980?s.

This paper addresses a complex of globalization issues: the effect of globalization on the skill premium; the effect of globalization on unemployment; the relative importance of globalization and exogenous technical change; the effect of globalization on the ability of national governments to conduct independent social policies. Thinking about these topics has been dominated by a large empirical literature concluding that trade has played a relatively minor role in the rise of the skill premium, while exogenous skill-biased technical change has played a major role. This paper replaces the focus on inter-sectoral substitution at the heart of the Stolper-Samuelson theorem with attention to intra-sectoral relations between inputs. Specifically, I assume that out-sourcing and unskilled labor are highIy substitutable and that equipment and skilIed labor are complementary , that production methods are flexible, and that the country undertaking out-sourcing has a significantIy different structure from that providing it. Globalization then offers a simple and immediate possible explanation for the prominent stylized facts regarding the emergence of the skill premium and for the presence of skill-biased technical change. Trade vs. technology remains as an empirical issue, though, because exogenous neutral technological change offers an alter-native possible explanation.

Globalization economies have grown significantly but the level of response to social problems of a global nature does not exist to that extent. The interactions between companies, states, and ordinary people are complicated. Economic globalization has allowed companies to improve many of their businesses. Economies can produce social differences, and states resources are sometimes scarce to solve all the problems. Governments have limitations when attempting to improve services to the population in different parts of the world. It creates needs of all kinds with inequalities that arise according to the purchasing power of the person who has that need. We see inequalities concerning humanitarian aid, displaced refugees, and medical treatments among others. Solidarity movement: Finding that solidarity group that puts a whole aid mechanism at the disposal of the person who needs it will be the key to help those in need.

The process of interaction and integration into a single open system of socio-political, economic and cultural ties on the basis of modern computer and telecommunication facilities is known as globalization. It has effects on the environment, culture, political systems, economic development and prosperity and human well-being in all the societies around the world. It is supposed to be one of the most important features of the modern humankind's development. Most studies of globalization tend to focus on changes occurring in the economic and political spheres.

This paper describes how the forces of the United States Empire are key elements in describing the most recent process of globalization. Empires have always been the key actors in the waves of globalization throughout history. The Empire of the United States of America is not an exception to this history. Military, economic, cultural, and political integration and control from an imperial center are key elements in understanding the forces of globalization in the past and today. This paper describes these forces of globalization as they pertain to the largest and most powerful empire in world history.

Globalization, which covers every aspect of life, has become one of the most debated phenomena in recent years. The concept means freedom and interaction; and for others inequality and exploitation. The effects of globalization are felt extensively in the technological, cultural, sociological, economic and political areas. Despite the widespread literature available, there is not yet a consensus on what the concept of globalization is. For this reason, the aim of this study is to clarify the concept of globalization and to examine the concept with its economic, political and cultural dimensions.

In this article we analyze processes and scales of global integration in historical perspective, starting with the Agrarian Revolution. We connect the main phases of historical globalization with the processes of the development of the Afroeurasian world-system. In the framework of the Afroeurasian worldsystem the integration began several millennia BCE. In it the continental and supracontinental links became so developed long before the Great Geographic Discoveries and thus they could well be denoted as global (albeit in a somehow limited sense). Among some researchers there is still a tendency to underestimate the scale of those links in the pre-Industrial era; thus, it appeared necessary to provide additional empirical support for our statement. It also turned necessary to apply a special methodology (which necessitated the use of the world-system approach). We analyze some versions of periodization of globalization history. We also propose our own periodization of the globalization history basing on the growth of the scale of intersocietal links as an indicator of the level of globalization development.

In this paper, we propose a political-economic approach towards globalization and economic theory. We dialectically arrive to the conclusion that globalization is a process of transforming territorial (national) states into a market state dominated by transnational (or mega) corporations and international (or mega) financial institutions. This represents a new stage in the development of capitalism, a stage we call cybernetic mega-capitalism or capitalism III (Adam Smith's free market capitalism would be capitalism I and Keynes's state interventionism would be capitalism II). Within such a context, we suggest that the existing economic theory is lost in the labyrinth of such a transition. We are afraid that the dynamic of globalization might transform the existing neoclassical economic theory into neuro-neoclassical economic paradigm that might raise many outstanding issues for both economists and politicians such as the issue of global governance or the issue of democratic deficit.

The essay refers to the relationship between globalization and citizenship rights. In the first part, the author presents an approach to the concept of citizenship and then discusses the cosmopolitan theories which assume globalization as the advent of the global civil society. In the last part, the author points out the world levels of inequality to conclude on the restrictive character of some of the new rights in the society of information. ; El ensayo trata sobre la relación que existe entre la globalización y los derechos de ciudadanía. En una primera parte el autor presenta una aproximación al concepto de ciudadanía y enseguida polemiza con las teorías cosmopolitas las cuales interpretan la globalización como el advenimiento de la sociedad civil global. En la última parte, el autor muestra el crecimiento de los niveles de desigualdad en el mundo para concluir sobre el carácter restrictivo de varios de los nuevos derechos de la sociedad de la información.

The essay refers to the relationship between globalization and citizenship rights. In the first part, the author presents an approach to the concept of citizenship and then discusses the cosmopolitan theories which assume globalization as the advent of the global civil society. In the last part, the author points out the world levels of inequality to conclude on the restrictive character of some of the new rights in the society of information. ; El ensayo trata sobre la relación que existe entre la globalización y los derechos de ciudadanía. En una primera parte el autor presenta una aproximación al concepto de ciudadanía y enseguida polemiza con las teorías cosmopolitas las cuales interpretan la globalización como el advenimiento de la sociedad civil global. En la última parte, el autor muestra el crecimiento de los niveles de desigualdad en el mundo para concluir sobre el carácter restrictivo de varios de los nuevos derechos de la sociedad de la información.

The essay refers to the relationship between globalization and citizenship rights. In the first part, the author presents an approach to the concept of citizenship and then discusses the cosmopolitan theories which assume globalization as the advent of the global civil society. In the last part, the author points out the world levels of inequality to conclude on the restrictive character of some of the new rights in the society of information. ; El ensayo trata sobre la relación que existe entre la globalización y los derechos de ciudadanía. En una primera parte el autor presenta una aproximación al concepto de ciudadanía y enseguida polemiza con las teorías cosmopolitas las cuales interpretan la globalización como el advenimiento de la sociedad civil global. En la última parte, el autor muestra el crecimiento de los niveles de desigualdad en el mundo para concluir sobre el carácter restrictivo de varios de los nuevos derechos de la sociedad de la información.

In this paper, we propose a political-economic approach towards globalization and economic theory. We dialectically arrive to the conclusion that globalization is a process of transforming territorial (national) states into a market state dominated by transnational (or mega) corporations and international (or mega) financial institutions. This represents a new stage in the development of capitalism, a stage we call cybernetic mega-capitalism or capitalism III (Adam Smith's free market capitalism would be capitalism I and Keynes's state interventionism would be capitalism II). Within such a context, we suggest that the existing economic theory is lost in the labyrinth of such a transition. We are afraid that the dynamic of globalization might transform the existing neoclassical economic theory into neuro-neoclassical economic paradigm that might raise many outstanding issues for both economists and politicians such as the issue of global governance or the issue of democratic deficit.