An essay on the critic of globalization

“Globalization feels like a runaway train; out of control” (Dr Gordon Brown).

We’ve seen, since the beginning of the 19th century, a big change in our society. Some might call it “interdependence”, but it’s qualified as “globalization”. It’s the process of the process by which businesses or other organizations develop international influence or start operating on an international scale. Paradoxical points of views stand to explaining a complex relation between globalization and the well-being of individuals and societies, in a positive and negative way.

“Globalization and Human Well-Being” (Nisha Mukherjee and Jonathan Krieckhaus, 2011) arguments focus on globalization and its impacts on economy, poverty, inequality in societies, environmental concerns, and global governance. The goal of this critical essay is to focus on those arguments and outline the authors’ theses on the topic of globalization.

Reading the article may bring the idea that globalization, in one hand involves the increase flow of supplies and access to basic needs. But, in another hand, the line “[…] Modern critics also emphasize the distributional consequences of economic globalization.” (p. 153), stands the author’s thesis that globalization is benefic to some societies, but not for all. By trying to alleviate poverty, globalization might also bring further inequalities, such as poverty increment in developing countries who cannot take part of this phenomena. The authors explore the notion that globalization can exacerbate income and wealth inequality within and between countries, impacting the culture and overall well-being of different social groups.

Then, the authors highlight the concerns about environmental issues. By saying that globalization increases pollution and resources consumption, Mukherjee stands that the link between globalization and climate change is thin. This environmental impact of globalization is one of the main arguments between the authors.

Political and social issues are another topic that bring the authors to discuss about the role of political and social institutions. This part involves a vision of shaping globalization, to fit to political and social institutions. One argues that globalization shapes those institutions, and the other one that these phenomena “forces” institutions to shape to globalization. By highlighting International Institutions, such as the UNDP or UNICEF (p. 156), the authors stand on both sides of this paradoxical effect of globalization. This brings the authors to ask themselves about global governance; they may consider that international mechanisms must manage the challenges and the opportunities that globalization might present.

And finally, the article drives through the themes of Healthcare and Education. In one hand, the authors descripted the impact of globalization on accessing healthcare, education, and essential services, directly influencing the well-being of humans. In another hand, the authors stand that globalization might bring a higher price of access to those necessities. Concerning education, the authors argue that globalization can sometimes promote a standardized approach to education, focusing on specific subjects and skills that are considered valuable in the global job market, making some societies lose their own culture (not a point of total deny, but more like a “human-robot-brain”). So, the impact of globalization on health and education is multifaceted. It offers opportunities for improved access to Healthcare and Education, as well as the sharing of knowledge. However, it also presents challenges related to disparities in accessing Education, the potential loss of cultural diversity in it, and the need for policies and international cooperation to address global health and education challenges.

...