This essay will determine what hyper-globalisation really is and how it should be best received. It will also look closely at the broader meaning of globalisation, how it is driven and how it is influenced. Hyper-globalisation promotes the modern concept of global integration and its rapid progression.
Globalisation is an inevitable process which can be identified by many forms such as NATO, fundamentally enhanced technologies and capitalism. Globalisation should be integrated into each nation’s political agenda, into their political future.Without encompassing this new idea, a nation would suffer in terms of their success financially and politically. Globalisation represents inter-connectedness between nations.
Interconnectedness can be defined by political relationships, trade alliances but also insignificant capabilities such as international calling and the use of an all-new ‘Skype’ program. Hyper-globalists believe that interconnectedness is a new process which has sped up in recent years, similar to the concept of expediential growth and the law of accelerating returns [ (Kurzweil, 2001) ].The acceleration of globalisation is believed to be fuelled by the development of technologies and the influence of capitalism [ (Slaughter, 2012) ]. Globalisation is current and strong in today’s world as organisations such as NATO depict.
These organisations provoke the countries desire to ‘join forces’, combining the strength of their governments and economies. Globalisation is stimulated by political movements (e. g. NATO, World Trade Organisation and the United Nations) which motivate countries to work together in some-what coalition movements.Encouraging nations to deliberate and make decisions together forms the foundation of globalisation which is happening at an ever-increasing rate.
The North-Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was initially formed with the intention of providing a means of collective security against communism in 1949 following the Cold War. Essentially, it was established to combat the potential spread of Russian Communism and prevent it from infecting Western Europe.The original member states consisted of Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the United States who ‘came together’ to form an alliance. This was a military alliance with purely involvement in 1966. There were a few tensions within the organisation, one of them causing France to withdraw military involvement in 1966. Despite this, communism did not spread to Europe which was heavily protected with the inter-governmental alliance.
The organisation encountered expansion after the Cold War and represented a general defensive system which would deal to any threat to Europe [ (NATO) ]. NATO exists today as a modern defence strategy with a standing army of 25,000, representing globalisation by uniting 26 nations under a common interest; the protection of people and their economies. These nations play a huge part in globalisation although many politicians such as Ron Paul feel as though organisations such as NATO prevent globalisation rather than promote it [ (Paul, 2012) ].Ron Paul compares supporting globalisation to losing the United State’s sovereignty. He claims that rather than unite, the United States should be (and is) more interested in extending their control over other states.
Paul also raises the issue of hypocrisy within the NATO organisation in regards to the illegal bombing of Serbia, disregarding the group’s own law. Paul goes on to state that using the United States’ money to expand NATO and therefore support globalisation is not in the country’s best interests.His most interesting point following this is that the interests of globalisation are separate to those of the United States. Globalisation does not deduct sovereignty. Instead it takes all of the sovereign power the supporting countries have acclaimed and allows the same supporting countries to access it, to share it.
Countries with little sovereignty will consequently have access to more, enabling an even distribution of power. Power will not be the only asset that is evenly distributed however; wealth, information and resources (etc) will all be equally dispersed.This will help to amend unjust issues such as poverty in third-world countries. By separating the interests of the United States from that of globalisation, Paul is portraying a very selfish, liberalist attitude. Just because the United States is a focal political power, this does not excuse the nation from sharing their power or helping other countries and participating in a world-wide movement.
Globalisation is happening now so there is really no way to avoid it. Being large and powerful does not by any means indicate that there are fewer benefits to the nation.The United States may reduce costs in areas such as weaponry (nuclear) and military resources and reduce crime and protesting by navigating their politics in the direction of compromise and progress. They could attain furtive information and help to solve universal problems such as global warming and the expediential growth of populations with the finite landmasses of the world. Globalisations rapid progress can be measured in different ways. Immigration and travel have drastically increased in recent years.
‘Nations are exporting ten times the amount they did in 1950-and more money- more than $1. trillion a day- now moves across borders.In 1973, that figure was only $15 billion’ [ (General, 2000) ]. The United Nation’s report in 200, the ‘Millennium Report’, also stated that over 3 million more people travelled overseas in 1996 than they did in 1980. This report conveys the hyper-globalist attitude that globalisation has speed up over time.
Technology has emphasized and contributed to the rapid growth of globalisation. The Law of Accelerating Returns was founded by the growth of technology though it also applies to globalisation. In turn, technology itself has influenced and contributed to globalisation.With the use of programs such as Skype, populations are able to better communicate with each other and even hold international conferences and share information. By enhancing communications nations are more likely to converse and consult each other, increasing integration, trade and financial exchanges.
The novel, Globalisation of technology, refers to the new innovations as a technological revolution which has led to interdependence between firms and nations [ (Janet H. Muroyama (Editor), 1988) ]. Globalisation is a very heavily debated process, but I and thousands of others believe that it is the way forward.Progress cannot be repressed; it is a ‘happening thing’. Organisations heavily contribute to the progress of the concept and technologies help to support it. Globalisation will and does symbolise international unity and agreement between nations.
Hyper-globalists recognise the presence of globalisation and its significance today, that is to say they are aware of it where others are not. Not only will it control controversies whether they are trade-related or political disputes, it will provide each nation with security by sharing their sovereignty for the overall wellbeing of not only their country but the world.Globalisation is thoroughly relevant to modern politics. Because it is current and new each nation should ensure that their governments and foreign policies encompass globalisation and its consequences. If a nation is not open to interconnectedness and a goal of worldwide unity (politically and economically) then they may be left behind.
Being left behind would entail a loss of information that other nations would willingly share. It would also result in a loss of trade, access to resources and general exclusion from the rest of the world. Rather than moving forward in a collective stance, a nation would stand still in a conservative manner.Globalisation is widely recognised as a new-age, fast-running process which needs to be driven by the rest of the world.
Being involved in international organisations is a significant key to pursue globalisation and keep up with political progress. That is to say that globalisation is inevitable and refusing to acknowledge would be complying with blindness. The world needs to keep moving forward politically and economically in order to tackle new-age problems. Using old political methods to cure new problems is illogical. Globalisation is upon us. Embrace it.
