In a paper consisting of seven pages a definition and argument against globalization are presented in terms of the World Bank, the IMF, and environmental destruction. There are six bibliographic sources cited.
Name of Research Paper File: MM12_PGantigl.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
in goods and services and of international capital flows, and also through the more rapid and widespread diffusion of technology" (CountryScope, nd). * A more encompassing definition was offered by
Friedman: "Globalization is a state of the world involving networks of interdependence at multi-continental distances with multiple economic/financial, political, national security, environmental, social/cultural and technological linkages among nation states, markets
and individuals" (CountryScope, nd). * Greider used a more descriptive approach: "Globalization [is like a] wondrous new machine,...that reaps as it destroys. ...huge and mobile, ...like the machines of
modern agriculture, but vastly more complicated and powerful. ....running over open terrain and ignoring familiar boundaries. ... As it goes, the machine throws off enormous rows of wealth and bounty
while it leaves behind great furrows of wreckage. . . .[The machine is] modern capitalism driven by the imperatives of global industrial revolution, [creating] the drama of a free-running economic
system that is reordering the world" (CountryScope, nd). It is safe to say that all definitions and descriptions address trade between and among countries and development in underdeveloped and
undeveloped countries. The global market knows no boundaries. Capital flows between nations more freely. Information is exchanged more freely and also more quickly. People also move between nations with greater
ease. This has all happened since the end of the Cold War (CountryScope, nd). Reports about globalization have most often described the benefits to undeveloped and underdeveloped nations.
More people are working. Poverty levels have decreased. Nations are exploiting their natural resources. And, so on. Given these facts, and there are data to support these claims, why is
there a sudden backlash against globalization? And, who is leading this anti-globalization movement? It is only in the last couple or three years that there have been highly publicized movements