Globalization Case

Globalization is no longer a radical terminology to people nowadays. More and more conservative entrepreneurs chose to enter the liberal world of trade after global financial crisis in 2008 happened rather than to continue to stay in the catastrophe. However, some radical economists think that globalization is no doubt the new epitome of hegemony, although this kind of economic form is challenging to the bureaucracy of world. As far as I am concerned, an equal accord between the developing countries and developed countries are the key to settle divergence. For instance, in the 80s and 90s, people in the most of developing countries experienced hard times. Due to the protectionism, lots of developed countries make plenty of conservative policies to intervene international trade between countries. As a result, more and more famous cartels dominate the whole world economy, such as Mobil oil Corp, Boeing Corp and G.M. These cartels often unite suppliers or manufacturers in order to control prices and raw materials as well as fulfill the hegemony of two or three generations in the future. Therefore, the globalization is no doubt a liberal epitome which is considered to be the great social resources. Most companies can rely on these sharing resources to reduce their cost of goods sold and increase enough profit. The international trade activities will thrive on each transaction.

globalization is a double-edged sword. Many opponents complain about negative effects of globalization such as exploiting developing countries or unfair international trades. However, with times past by requirement and development, globalization can overcome the problems by world organizations or civilizations. Moreover, globalization might lead to the world’s unity and co-operation. Therefore, globalization should be supported because of the above four important and beneficial effects.