Debating Globalisation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words - 2

Debating Globalisation - examine ExampleStiglitz, in his 2002 book Globalization and its Discontents, argues that globalization can be a force of good, besides it has to be radically rethought (Stiglitz, 2002 ix-x), particularly later on being mismanaged by three global institutions, the World muckle Organization (WTO), the WB, and the IMF, that made globalization a deceitful tool for the advancement of developed countries. This paper critically assesses his views on globalization. It argues that Stiglitz provides compelling evidence that globalization has failed, because the main international institutions that were supposed to manage it failed as healthful however, he neglects social, cultural and religious factors that are important in making globalization work and his suggestions are not entirely workable. For the WTO, WB, and IMF, globalisation works, because it has economically integrated countries and enabled the exculpate flow of goods, services, information, and capi tal all everyplace the world. On the one hand, Stiglitz agrees, because he provides an economic perspective when he defines globalisation as the removal of barriers to free trade and the closer integration of national economies (2002 ix). ... He provides the examples of vitamin E Asian countries, which before the interventions from the IMF, were making globalisation work for them (Stiglitz, 2004 203). They did this by exporting to other countries, closing the technological gap, and then ensuring that the fruits of globalisation were equitably distributed among their citizens (Stiglitz, 2004 203). East Asian governments took an active role in managing the economy, which was far from the tenets of rapid liberalisation, privatisation, and deregulating of the IMF and WTO (Stiglitz, 2002, 2007). These governments managed the slow transition to deregulation and protected key industries. At the same time, they also provide safety nets for those who will be disadvantage by free trade (S tiglitz, 2002, 2007). On the other hand, Stiglitzs positive understanding of globalisation changed after serving the WB and the IMF. In an interview led by Stern (2006), Stiglitz remembers asserting to the WB that he will represent the interests of the developing countries and not the WB When I accepted the job, I said that I would do it only if I could be a spokesperson for the developing countries, not for the World Bank. He believes that he took the job, because he would be free to express himself as an economist, and not as an advocate and unexclusive relations personnel of the WB. He underlines that his effectiveness as a chief economist depended on commonwealth believing it was my analysis (Stern, 2006). Within the organisation, however, Stiglitz gathers evidence that prove the contrary to the belief that the world is flat and that globalisation works. His analysis showed that