1. The Global Village An Interconnected World

2. Marshall McLuhan The Canadian who introduced the term “Global Village” Key Concepts: technology is making the world seem smaller we know more about what is going on in other parts of the world much more quickly trade and transportation has become much easier and more efficient

3. Communication Telephones Cell Phones Internet – spread of information (literature, news, arts, sports, etc.) Media – Television, Radio

4. Goods, Foods, & Travel We eat foods from all over the World. We wear clothing and shoes produced in other countries. We drive cars made in foreign countries. We are able to travel around the World in a matter of days.

5. Interconnectedness The decisions and events in our country affect the lives of people in other countries, just as the decisions and events in other countries affect us. For Example: The War in Iraq has increased the World oil prices and our gas has become more expensive. Therefore less people are driving large vehicles, taxis and public transportation have become more expensive, and they have a greater demand on them.

6. Where were your clothes made? Take a look at the labels in your clothing and in those of the people sitting around you. Label all of the places on the map and draw lines showing how you think they got to the point of purchase.

7. Pros and Cons of Globalization MINUSES -- Millions of Americans have lost jobs due to imports or production shifts abroad. Most find new jobs--that pay less. -- Millions of others fear losing their jobs, especially at those companies operating under competitive pressure. -- Workers face pay-cut demands from employers, which often threaten to export jobs. -- Service and white-collar jobs are increasingly vulnerable to operations moving offshore. -- U.S. employees can lose their comparative advantage when companies build advanced factories in low-wage countries, making them as productive as those at home. PLUSES -- Productivity grows more quickly when countries produce goods and services in which they have a comparative advantage. Living standards can go up faster. -- Global competition and cheap imports keep a lid on prices, so inflation is less likely to derail economic growth. -- An open economy spurs innovation with fresh ideas from abroad. -- Export jobs often pay more than other jobs. -- Unfettered capital flows give the U.S. access to foreign investment and keep interest rates low.

8. Globalization is an integration soon to happen in this 21st century. But this fast approaching concept is seen in two different views. Globalization can be seen as a sign of a hopeful future by some. By others this is a disaster for the world economy. Many experts argue for and against this new move in the economy. Both groups are standing their ground to protect their own beliefs towards the future. To fully understand globalization one must look at its definition first. “Globalization simply means freedom of movement for goods and people, and it is hard to be violently hostile to that. But behind this fight lies an older and more fundamental struggle—against economic liberalization, and against the chief representative thereof, which is the United States.” (Revel) This term has become a common word within the last few decades. Although the term is a new one, the concept has been around for a while. This is a coming event and some people are looking forward to the coming events. Others fear and protest away from it. Some even see it as a defining point soon to come to change our lives. “The restructuring of our political and economic life due to globalization may be as significant a process as the industrial revolution.” (Danaher) The next industrial revolution is a big shoe to fill. But a globalized economy would definitely make for big and possibly better changes.

9. The debates are strong and fierce for and against globalization. To take a look closer at this, we view the pros and cons of globalization itself. According to an April 200 issue of Business Week these are the most common Pros and Cons. Pros - Viewing both the Productivity grows more quickly when countries produce goods and services in which they have a comparative advantage. Living standards can go up faster. - Global competition and cheap imports keep a lid on prices, so inflation is less likely to derail economic growth. - An open economy spurs innovation with fresh ideas from abroad. - Export jobs often pay more than other jobs. - Unfettered capital flows give the U.S. access to foreign investment and keep interest rates low. (Baker) The Pros for globalization show that prices will be kept at one set price and that money will be quickly made by all. That help with foreign countries could also speed up technology as well. Technology could help the underdeveloped countries in the long run, and help everyone overall economically. Cons - Millions of Americans have lost jobs due to imports or production shifts abroad. Most find new jobs - that pay less. - Millions of others fear losing their jobs, especially at those companies operating under competitive pressure. - Workers face pay-cut demands from employers, which often threaten to export jobs. - Service and white-collar jobs are increasingly vulnerable to operations moving offshore. - U.S. employees can lose their comparative advantage when companies build advanced factories in low-wage countries, making them as productive as those at home. (Baker) The Con list shows that the concerns are that smaller businesses will be put out of business by larger ones. Also stating that only the white-collar or richer people will be making a benefit in the changes. Both pro and cons list make good points and only time will tell to see which ones will be found to be correct. But this does not stop either side from moving forward and fighting for their cause. Especially the anti-globalist whom are fighting against this transformation towards globalization.

10. The Anti-globalist groups’ stand hard against the changes in their countries to make sure globalization does not happen. Starting in the early days of the 1970’s and of the simple protests. “These protests often featured an Uncle Sam in a Stars-and-Stripes costume as their supreme scapegoat.” The anti -groups seem to think the United States represented the ultimate view of capitalism, one of their biggest fears. But the simple protests have stopped and as more time progresses and more things are changing, their acts have become more violent. “Today’s anti-globalists are much more than false prophets. Their violence has gone far beyond legitimate protest into real savagery. They have killed people through charming acts like bombing McDonald’s restaurants. In Seattle, Nice, Genoa, and other cities, rioters destroyed millions of dollars worth of property and attacked officials and police. Anti-globalists have tried to replace democracy with despotism of the mob, advancing the brutal proposition that street demonstrators are more legitimate than elected governments. Wherever they have been active, their goal has been to prevent elected heads of state or appointed officials of international organizations from meeting. Like other totalitarians, they treat the mere __expression of ideas contrary to their slogans as a crime.” (Revel) Their violent protests have only but a damper into the production pushing forward globalization.

11. The Anti-globalist groups’ stand hard against the changes in their countries to make sure globalization does not happen. Starting in the early days of the 1970’s and of the simple protests. “These protests often featured an Uncle Sam in a Stars-and-Stripes costume as their supreme scapegoat.” The anti -groups seem to think the United States represented the ultimate view of capitalism, one of their biggest fears. But the simple protests have stopped and as more time progresses and more things are changing, their acts have become more violent. “Today’s anti-globalists are much more than false prophets. Their violence has gone far beyond legitimate protest into real savagery. They have killed people through charming acts like bombing McDonald’s restaurants. In Seattle, Nice, Genoa, and other cities, rioters destroyed millions of dollars worth of property and attacked officials and police. Anti-globalists have tried to replace democracy with despotism of the mob, advancing the brutal proposition that street demonstrators are more legitimate than elected governments. Wherever they have been active, their goal has been to prevent elected heads of state or appointed officials of international organizations from meeting. Like other totalitarians, they treat the mere __expression of ideas contrary to their slogans as a crime.” (Revel) Their violent protests have only but a damper into the production pushing forward globalization.

12. The biggest fear of the anti-globalist is capitalism taking over. “The simplistic article of Marxist faith that capitalism is absolute evil, and that it is incarnated in and directed” (Revel) America is often seen as something most countries do not want to achieve. The anti-globalists want to dominate and destroy the ways of the United States. “The anti-globalist want to destroy: liberal democracy and free-market economics.” (Revel) They want to continue on with their old ways of living, despite its conditions. The anti-globalist believe globalization will make the poor even poorer and the rich even more rich. Their fear is that this will be caused by a major loss of jobs due to the competitive nature the global factor will make and to lower paying countries getting their jobs. The fear of little nations being completely ruled and dominated by the more industrial nations such as the United States, Russia, and Japan, is also a fear they have. But many argue that the anti-globalist have no facts to prove their points. “The anti-globalist have no ambition to advance a program by democratic means, for the simple reason that they don’t have a program, or coherent ideas, or facts on their side. So instead they beat relentlessly on the archaic anti-capitalist and anti-American drum.” (Revel) They are often seen as more anti-American then anti-globalization.

13. But besides the fact that the anti-globalist seem like a group of rebels or just anti- Americans, their points are practical and idealistic. In their eyes, globalization stands for capitalism, job loss, and the rich only becoming more in power. This is a probably outcome for globalization.

14. Before the dawn of the 21st century, the debate over globalization was largely confined to the halls of academia. That changed in November 1999, when massive protests erupted during a World Trade Organization summit in Seattle. By the end of the session, there had been 600 arrests and an estimated $3 million in property damage. “The new debate over globalization has brought people out onto the streets,” said Anthony Giddens, director of the London School of Economics and Political Science, who delivered the Zellerbach Distinguished Lecture as a guest of the School of Social Welfare Oct. 25. “It is no longer a debate about whether it exists. It’s more about the consequences of it being here.” Were the events of September 11 one such consequence? “Globalization is not an ‘out there’ phenomenon, as if some external forces are at work. September 11 showed that it’s an ‘in here’ phenomenon,” said Giddens. “With interdependence comes vulnerability, a shift in our institutions, our emotions, our anxiety… something that, as a European citizen, I am very familiar with.” Giddens believes the globalization debate is the most important dialogue taking place in the social sciences today. “It is a debate that shapes what form the century will assume, what society will assume,” he said. The first major conversation about globalization took place between the mid-1980s and the mid-1990s, when academics debated whether the world was changing. “It was a debate between the advocates of change and those who were skeptical of it,” said Giddens, a social theorist who has written 35 books published in more than 30 languages. “We’ve accumulated evidence that shows the skeptics were wrong. In the last three decades, changes have been more profound and comprehensive than ever imagined,” he said. Today, he said, there is only “a partial understanding of globalization” on either side of the debate — the international institutions like the World Bank, who are promoting globalization, and the people in the streets, who question the enterprise. “They only think about it as an economic phenomenon,” he said. Granted, economic globalization is accelerating at a rapid rate. More than $2 trillion are turned over every day in world currency markets. We’ve seen an acceleration of economic interdependence. But globalization is also social, political and cultural, driven by the communications revolution.” Besides expansion of the marketplace and global communications, Giddens said globalization was fueled by the end of the Cold War, an era “when divisions between nations were more clearly established.” Today, globalization’s opponents argue that corporations have too much power in the world. “A world run by corporations is not a democracy… when you have expansion of commercialism and dominance of corporate power. There is some validity to that,” Giddens said. “But the idea that corporations are equivalent to nations is false. Nations control territory, laws and military power. They have the power to regulate what corporations do.” Global inequality is part of the debate as well. The division between the rich and poor grows, and they believe it benefits rich countries at the expense of poor countries. “But they need to take into consideration not only income inequality,” he said, “but also many other factors such as education, health care and women’s rights.” Giddens concluded his talk with a warning against isolationism: “If a country lurches toward protectionism and isolation, it’s not a good thing.”

15. References http://www.biblehelp.org http://www.wyndham.com/corporate/technology/main www.webcom.com/duane/global.html http://www.graphics.jsonline.com www.iliumsoft.com/site/fg/dw_pix.htm www.tripleplate.com www.last-bid.com