Globalization: A modern perspective Introduction: The United Nations. The 2010 World Cup. The war in Afghanistan.

All are products of globalization. Though it is highly unlikely that there will ever be an unanimous agreement on anything, a reasonable definition for globalization could be the process or phase in which a world is made smaller. A comparison that best illustrates this point is that if planet Earth was once a lake, now, thanks to this mysterious force, its a mere pond. As we all know, a drop in the bucket is only minute when compared to a bucket; if instead the container is scarcely larger than a test tube, than a drop can have a very large effect indeed. Now, thanks to such a well-connected world, multinationals have offices and factories in many different nations, markets are rapidly being opened in previously closed locations and millions of people are rising economically. A well defined path is often where, globalization leads to new markets and more infrastructure which in turn leads to higher standards of life and better income, which plays a known role in the creation of democracy. Looking at it from afar, this seems all well and good people grow wealthier and progress to a more democratic form of government, which further boosts economic growth and more progress. However, it seems counterproductive to foist democracy on nations that are unprepared for it, where corruption reins supreme, where much of the population is illiterate and numerous other problems exist. It seems as though a resolution of these issues should take priority over a change in political systems, which could actually lead to an exacerbation of these problems. Additionally, it would not be unusual for the said countries to become dependent on the very multinationals and countries that helped to bring about these unstable democracies in the first place. When the world suffers an economic crisis, as it did in the past few years, these companies will likely fall and take ill prepared countries with them. At the same time, others argue that the free market cures provides impoverished people a way out. Finally, though it would be foolish to place the blame (or credit) for political change solely on globalization since people, when sufficiently frustrated will express dissent regardless if they are or are not isolated it is hard to dispute the fact that globalization acted as a catalyst, with one caveat. In science terms, a catalyst is a molecule or entity that speeds up a reaction without it being affected-I would argue that thanks to the speeding up of this reaction, the enzyme that is globalization has only gained more strength and power, in reality as well as conceptually, as a threat. Leaders of authoritarian regimes are recognizing the great power of globalization, and as any sensible dictator would do-are working to marginalize its influence, and further close down their countries borders. This clamps down on possibilities for economic growth directly, by the government allowing less trade and indirectly- increased sensitivity could lead to a straining of relationships, which in turn has the potential to hurt trade between nations. It is evident that there are many positives and negatives to globalization, in economic, political and cultural terms. However, the fact remains that globalization is an unstoppable force in all aspects. Technology will only increase its reach and further its power. For this reason, we must seek to find ways to ensure that negative effects of globalization are properly dealt with.

This can mean a number of different things to many different people it can mean aid towards ailing countries or medical or political support. A number of organizations have been put into place with these very aims but their success has been largely limited because outside powers cannot improve conditions unless either the government recognizes and is willing to resolve these problems. Since most governments are products of the people, efforts have been going on in an attempt to better inform citizens about their rights and duties. Interestingly enough, these efforts are lead by NGOs, the veritable poster children for globalization. In this way, it becomes abundantly clear that though globalization causes many problems, in many instances, it is the solution to those problems. However, regardless of how simple these solutions may appear on paper, there will always be caveats and limitations that too require resolution. In conclusion, global cooperation and strong commitments will be instrumental in the fight to achieve prosperity for all. This review is an attempt to explore the ideas discussed above via an examination of individual events. Review Focus: This review will primarily focus on developing countries, as they are still rapidly growing power and globalization is still a work in progress there, opposed to a set institution, as it is in the developed countries of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany and so forth. I was inspired to choose countries akin to India to study after my mother returned home from a trip and began to regale me with tales of corruption and poverty in the worlds biggest democracy. I heard about massive inflation in salaries for nefarious public servants that have caused prices to rise ten-fold, making life for the typical private sector worker very difficult. If that isnt enough, corrupt leaders remain in power thanks to a large voting bloc of mostly illiterate and uneducated individuals. This process begins when, these voters initially identify with the candidates because of similar backgrounds or roots. The candidate is elected and doesnt make good on any of his or her promises, squandering public funds just as we in the west waste water. Millions of rupees have been spent on the creation of statues of the Chief Minister and the founding leaders of her party in my home state of Uttar Pradesh. Despite repeatedly being called out, this CM has continued to hoard public money away in Swiss Bank accounts while her dedicated supporters continue to suffer in poverty. Indeed, I have heard several accounts of where people pay money to get a job, opposed to being paid a signing bonus. However, what makes this study particularly enticing for me is how, I, as an individual have personally benefited from the effects of globalization. After the doors were thrown open to international companies and private industry, salaries rose dramatically for private sector works like my father. Because of these companies, I was afforded a much better childhood and education than my cousins in India ever had. It is undeniable that multinationals coming to India has contributed to the phenomena of a rising middle class, higher wages, greater education and has given the country more influence than it ever had as a non-aligned, closed up nation. Yet, it is important to remember that globalization did not come to India in the 1900s but rather in the period of colonialism, when the British Raj took over. The occupiers brought many political, economic and cultural changes to Hindustan. They

aided in building railroads, providing higher standards of healthcare but also exploited Indias national resources greatly, caused religious tensions, and generally suffocated the nation. They also helped bring about an elite class of Indians, which were highly educated and successful; Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (Mahatma), a lawyer and the Father of India was among their group. Again, thanks to globalization, Gandhi studied in England, worked in South Africa, was encouraged by prominent leaders and was able to inspire a country to independence, to a western liberal democracy. Globalization, or the outside world helped make this change happen not only in India but also with numerous other countries as recently as 2011. This period was coined the Arab Spring because of the positive connotations of the word spring- hope, joy, and a new future. Indeed, with a new beginning, we find many possibilities and opportunities for growth. However, at the same time, opportunities to fail are numerous as well. If we briefly examine the track record of African countries (or all countries in general) that escaped the tyranny of European colonialism, we will find that most of them have seen the quality of life drop drastically, dictators rapidly seizing power and general decline. Already, radical groups and the state militaries are competing for power in so-called free countries such as Egypt. And at the same timeauthoritarian governments, frightened by the changes overtaking other countries are cutting down on their own peoples freedoms. Since globalization cannot be stopped by any reasonable means, I hope to examine some of the political and economic effects of it so we can find ways to overcome these challenges. I have made two points that are negative and two that are positive, and hopefully resolve the earlier two.

Effects of Globalization: Political Change: Introduction Nelson Mandela, anti-apartheid revolutionary and Nobel Peace Prize winner once said: When we lose the right to be different, we lose the privilege to be free. Sadly, many people in the world have lost that right, long, long ago. Some were once ruled by oppressive colonial powers that were overthrown and replaced with equally oppressive authoritarian governments. Others had the misfortune of electing leaders who never had any intentions to leave office once their term was up. Either way, neither situation is favorable or desired to a general population. Constraints on education and economic and political activity are hardly beneficial towards anyone, besides the ruling elite. A common tactic of authoritarian governments to ensure stability in their nation is by closing off the country (and denying their citizens access) to the outside world. With such a limited source for knowledge, citizens are more likely to believe or go along with whatever propaganda the government puts out. In his book, The J Curve: A New Way to Understand Why Nations Rise and Fall, author Ian Bremmer explains the stability of a nation to be a function of its openness ( (openness) = stability). He also states that there is a dip in stability as a state transitions to more openness, with stability and openness being relative to the country in question (Figure 1). Thanks to globalization, it is becoming increasingly more difficult to restrict access to the outside world. The Internet is a veritable paradise for any information seeker, and despite the best efforts of many governments, citizens have no difficulty getting around blocked sites or the like. This influx of information has given oppressed people the opportunity to see life in more free and open states, especially those in the western world. After understanding that superior alternatives are available, dissent grows drastically. In a way that is not unlike a lightening bolt hitting a tree and the wind fanning the flames to start a wildfire, when a certain level of discontent is reached and the governing institution continues to make unpopular choices, protests and revolutions begin. While this is all fine and good, forming a country is no easy task, especially when the majority of the population is uneducated and illiterate, as is the case in several countries. Even when a country is formed, history has shown us that most new governments are unprepared for governing, thanks to the stranglehold the previous regimes had on the government prior to a revolution. With such unstable governments and an inadequate support system, we, as the outside world are essentially setting these fledgling nations up for failure.

The Arab Spring: When you turned on the news one year ago, you might have thought to yourself what made everyone choose to get up now, and take action? The status quo is called the status quo for a reason- the situation has remained unchanged for a certain amount of time. Former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak had been in power for nearly 3 decades; one generation and yet no one chose to take action then. To those who point to discontent of the youth- there have always been unhappy young people and for that matter unhappy middle aged people as well. The seeds for this revolt were sown by a fraudulent and widely criticized national election. If there were no way of bringing the country together or connecting it, as it has been through technology then people would have never heard about accusations of an unfair election. Rumors mightve spread, but no one would feel confident enough in their beliefs to actually mount an attack without knowing that hundreds of thousands of people agreed with their ideas. According to the J-curve, Egypt being a relatively open authoritarian government would be privy to falling apart than a nation that exists on the extreme sides of the spectrum. The stress in this situation was an unfair election and by seeing their countrymen take action, other Egyptians too were provoked to act. However, many believe that the uprisings began with a show of defiance from a 26 year old street vendor named Mohamed Bouazizi. He had often been the target of local police, who frequently abused him; the incident on December 17, 2010 was the final straw, when an officer allegedly stole his scales and assaulted him. In protest, Bouazizi attempted to speak out at the capital building but after receiving no response, he drenched himself in oil and set himself aflame. News of Bouazizis last stand spread, and many other disgruntled Tunisians congregated and protested against these actions, eventually forcing the former President to leave the country. However, what is interesting about this event is the vast number of countries who went through similar attempts at making change. As you can see in the below picture:

Arab Spring Progress Map Countries that have experienced organized protests in the past but now stopped. Countries currently experiencing organized armed conflict. Countries that are experiencing widespread protests in most major cities. Countries that are experiencing relatively minor protests. Countries that are experiencing widespread protests but have also issued major reforms as a result. Countries that are experiencing relatively minor protests but have also issued reforms. Countries undergoing various problems but are outside of the Arab World

In the above image, one can see that around 15 countries in the Arab World had some sort of change take place during 2011. Of course, change was not limited only to one particular geographical location- states in Europe, the United States and even Canada also saw discontent among the population. Though only three countries: Libya, Egypt and Tunisia went all the way, the impact of protests is indisputable. In Libya, protests manifested themselves in a war in which cars were burned, buildings bombed and countless people killed. In Syria, we watch grainy videos in which unarmed demonstrators are shot on the streets. It is clear that regardless of the location, all protests create some level of uncertainty and instability in a nation. Examples include the occupy protests that were no doubt encouraged by the Arab Spring. Though the validity of their message was quite debatable, the damage and pain that they caused to other, functional members of society was certainly not. Although many may claim that the ends justify the means via Machiavellian principles, more often than not, we see that the end is no better or often worse than the beginning. And usually, the end is worse because of the means used to obtain the end. For instance, in Egypt via a democratic election, we may see the hostile Muslim Brotherhood seizing control of the nation. Though life was certainly difficult for citizens under Hosni Mubarak, Egypt frequently collaborated with Western Nations, even creating a peace treaty with Israel and growing economically. In contrast, the Muslim Brotherhood has put out a lot of anti-Semitic rhetoric and will likely move towards greater social conservatism. Furthermore, though it may not directly oppose Israel, thanks to its military might, Egypt could end up tacitly supporting Israels enemies, which is equally damaging. After Israels 2008-2009 operations in Gaza, Egypt carefully took care of the Egypt-Gaza border and prevented Hamas from acquiring more weapons. The Brotherhood might instead supply Hamas with weaponry and aid, or at least be more lax in security, which in turn could lead to Israel stepping up action and operate from Egypt, causing unbearable tension and chaos. Of course, foreign nations could tie aid to good behavior from Egypt but is likely that this will cause internal resentment and anger. Historically speaking, colonies that broke away from oppressive rulers via violence often saw one dictatorship replaced with another. A prime example could be Zimbabwe- after breaking away as Southern Rhodesia; Robert Mugabe took power in 1980 and has stayed in officer for nearly 32 years. Under his rule, numerous citizens lack basic necessities such as food and clean drinking water (see the below figure). At the same time, a debt of 210 million pounds to Great Britain remained unpaid with inflation rising to great new heights.

An Unprepared Population: What are the key elements of democracy? In an ideal and fair world, it would be one where all citizens have an equal voice in decisions that the government takes. However, with democracy comes the problem that every citizen may not be qualified enough to make conscious and clear decisions regarding such important issues. They may have little or no understanding at all of what is at stake and the implications of their decisions. What is striking about this phenomena is how often it happens in settled, first world nations where all citizens are supposedly promised at least 10 years of schooling and where resources are far more plentiful than their developing counterparts. Even in the United States, arguably the greatest power of the world right now, has suffered from its fair share of poor leaders who often brought disaster to the nation- be it economic or political. With that in mind, if such a wealthy country like America suffers so many problems, then it makes sense for new states that lack both the resources and educated population to have many more problems. If we go by the 10,000-dollar rule which states that a successful democracy develops after the per capita income reaches the landmark value of 10,000 dollars. However, thanks to the raging forces of globalization, it is safe to say that most, if not all countries that have achieved independence have made it to that mark. Indeed, even states such as India that have been free for more than 60 years still suffer greatly from these issues. It is often said that leaders reflect their demographic and being a nation of 1.2 billion people, most of whom are illiterate and uneducated, most leaders are not up to par. I will not go through the many embarrassing scandals that have happened as a result of having such a weak legislative body but be content knowing that public funds are routinely spent on luxuries for officials, wages have been raised for public servants so much so that costs have been artificially inflated and that the President of India, the main diplomat for the nation can hardly speak English and failed to recognize the national anthem when it was played. Additionally, bureaucratic red tape is everywhere and the market wholly unregulated. When put in these terms, the worlds biggest democracy doesnt sound so, well, great. China, another gargantuan nation with a growing economy and population has escaped these problems (to some extent) because of the difference in type of government. The Communist Party has a solid command of the government and those who wish to advance must imitate and support communist agendas. Though corruption is still present in the Peoples Republic, hundreds of thousands of soldiers are not mindlessly deployed at one single border. Along with the Chinese economy that has been prospering, (recently surpassing Japan to become the second largest in the world), China is becoming a bigger play on the world stage, in terms of influence and politics. Thanks to Chinas place on the J-curve, globalization happens, but it happens through a sieve, a screen. The benefits are reaped, but anything that could be damaging to the stability of China doesnt make it through. Most recently, the Chinese government chose to ban or limit the number of foreign Western films that can be played in China because they feared that the Chinese people were losing their culture. In this way, through their control of all aspects of life, incidents like the one discussed below are less likely to happen there than they would in more diverse places.

The Godhra Train Burning A special court in the western Indian state of Gujarat has found 31 people guilty of setting fire to a passenger train in the town of Godhra in 2002. The court acquitted 63 other people of conspiracy and murder. The Sabarmati Express was attacked by a Muslim mob killing 59 people, mainly Hindu pilgrims. The attack led to some of the worst riots seen in India and left more than 1,000 people, mainly Muslims, dead. Gujarats authorities were criticized for not doing enough to stop the riots. Those convicted will be sentenced on Friday. Security is tight across Gujarat and extra police have been deployed in case of communal unrest. All of those accused and convicted were Muslim. The attackers were said to have forced the train, carrying Hindu pilgrims from Ayodhya, to stop and then set fire to one of the carriages.

Sadly enough, this incident embodies the fate of democracy in India right now. The stories or rulings that the judicial system and state government have come out with are wholly unreliable. During my research on this story, I found a variety of viewpoints that stated that the aftermath or riots were really a state sanctioned event. In particular, the essay Democracy: Whos She when Shes at Home? by Arundhati Roy, an Indian journalist claimed that Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujarat and other members of the government meticulously planned out a small scale genocide. She describes truckloads of lower class, uneducated people being brought in and armed by the government to systematically attack Muslims. Within hours of the Godhra outrage, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Bajrang Dal put into motion a meticulously planned pogrom against the Muslim community. Officially the number of dead is 800. Independent reports put the figure at well over 2,000. More than a hundred and fifty thousand people, driven from their homes, now live in refugee camps. Women were stripped, gang-raped, parents were bludgeoned to death in front of their children. Two hundred and forty dargahs and 180 masjids were destroyedin Ahmedabad the tomb of Wali Gujarati, the founder of the modern Urdu poem, was demolished and paved over in the course of a night. The tomb of the musician Ustad Faiyaz Ali Khan was desecrated and wreathed in burning tyres. Arsonists burned and looted shops, homes, hotels, textiles mills, buses and private cars. Hundreds of thousands have lost their jobs. Democracy: Who's She when She's at Home?

Im not sure what this reminds you, the reader of, but to me, it sounds awfully like a melding of the Rwandan Genocide and Kristallnacht (Night of Broken Glass) except with superior technology. Again, a minority group is blamed for a tragedy and is brutally attacked for it. With this in mind, one can truly understand the scope of the tragedy. We live in a new world, a modern world, and a democratic one, a world in which never again is everyones favorite catchphrase. According to Roys essay and other works, people believe that the politicians of India capitalize on differences between the people of India and exploit them to win elections. Of course, this is nothing new-all politicians do it. However, the way it is portrayed seems like the rhetoric is more akin to hate-speech than a political platform. The world must read beyond the lines and understand that there is more to democracy than economic growth. A democracy, being the second largest democracy in the world means absolutely nothing when the democracy is flawed, inherently corrupt and spreads hate among the people. What makes this worse is that by being so very corrupt, all the way to the judicial system, violators of human rights, criminals, and terrorists are not prosecuted. Mohdi, the leader of the attacks on Muslims in Gujarat was not charged with a crime, but instead asked to resign. Not arrested, but asked to step down. Contrary to whatever the world thinks, democracy takes time to sink in, to work. There is no magic bullet, no handout that will cure any state from the problems it faces. For democracy to truly be effective, the millions of poor and helpless must be educated, fed and taken out of their current situation. However, with a flawed government, not only will funds designated for these purposes be spent, but any adventurer trying to make a difference will inevitably meet yards of red tape that can only be cut through the scissors that are called bribes. Furthermore, in a time where industrial factories and CO2 pollution are already endangering the planet, unstable governments will be unable to properly regulate or save their respective countries from suffering environmental damage. An example could be how forest officers in the Indian government turn their heads and allow people to illegally cut down trees. As we all know, trees and plants are essentially for the recycling of CO2 to O2, and in a rapidly industrializing country with a vast population, there is a great need of greenery. Likewise, in Nigeria- gangs control oil pipelines and countless oil spills happen a year. If the Gulf of Mexico spill appeared large to you, imagine that many times that amount of oil being spilt a year. Oil spills destroy the land and often make it difficult for wildlife to live, hurting the people of Nigeria both now and in the future. Indeed, the sea floor damaged in the Exxon Valdez spill has still not returned to normal, and many workers who assisted in clean up efforts are now suffering diseases because of their work. This brings up another point: if progress is not made fast enough, irreparable damage can appear. In any event, violence and misconduct that leads to property damage is in no way beneficial to an economy. Instability in one state will quickly spread to another, and another if not quickly contained. In this case, fortunately or unfortunately, government propaganda did a good job of concealing the tragedy and the crisis was averted. However, as the country grows and technology becomes cheaper and readily available, the question comes up: how many times will the government get lucky? Lightening strikes a spot once, twice, three times, but continual genocide and corruption are unsustainable. The

bubble has to burst eventually, and unless India makes significant progress on all fronts (which fortunately, it is) it will not go over well. In essence, an unstable and inept government will often be unable to step forward and make correct decisions for the country. Though non-governmental organizations and other aid organizations can try and help, change comes from within, from the people. Though it is unlikely that most countries will face problems on the same scale that India does while nation building, all parties involved should make their best effort to try and deal with the aforementioned problems. However, as discussed earlier in the section- globalization is catalyzing change in countries that are in essence not ready for a smooth transition. There will be road bumps- revolutions are very rarely bloodless and we already know what the aftermath can be. However, we must be realistic and recognize that most states that do manage to escape oppressive rule will generally not be in a position to have everyones input and calmly resolve any disputes. These problems are going to inevitably crop up- the real question is how can we get through them and progress towards a more prosperous state. Positive Effects of Globalization: Introduction Globalization is not a new institution or idea- its been happening as early as the agricultural revolution, when farming first began and civilization truly appeared. Its been responsible for numerous tragedies-which will be elaborated on in the later sections of this document but also numerous accomplishments. For every civilization that came crashing down thanks to outsiders invading a formerly untouched part of the world, there are likely thousands of scientists, coming together and collaborating to find cures for diseases. The Human Genome project is an excellent example of this; it is a major research project undertaken by the international scientific community. Through it, scientists have identified the sequence of chemical base pairs that make up DNA and to identify the approximately 20,00025,000 genes of the human genome. Although it appears to be something that is of no importance to a layman, the benefits of this venture are almost unthinkable for scientists. With it, researchers can run proteins through machines and immediately find out which other proteins are involved in a reaction, making the discovery of pathways far easier. Eventually, this basic science research will make its way to translation and clinical studies, where this key knowledge can be applied to make therapeutic cancer treatments. When a cure is found for cancer, there will be no doubt that the findings of the Human Genome were key to the discovery. Besides scientific research, we can also take a look at the 2010 Haiti Earthquake. Thanks to globalization, everyone was informed of this tragedy; and thanks to that facteveryone was felt compelled and encouraged to take action. Not only were the better sentiments of man stirred, but the world watched others act and it all snowballed from there. For instance, athletes at the 2010 Australian Open held a Hit for Haiti exhibition, which resulted in thousands of dollars being raised. Other celebrities joined in as well, with several artists coming together to make an album dedicated to the survivors of the earthquake. Regardless if one is a Bieber fan or not-he or she has to admit that if the air headed Biebs is managing to do something for Haiti, you could too. Lastly, via globalization, markets throughout the world are opened; prosperity, ideas and knowledge spread to all people. Through free trade, relationships between countries improve, and opportunities are opened.

Spreading Prosperity: Self sufficiency and interdependency. The former sounds great- keep everything within one nation- help out Uncle Sam, or the appropriate national pride figure. It all sounds good theoretically- keep trade internal. Fortunately or unfortunately, this isnt the reel life-its real life. Practically every country, which has adhered to, the above policy has failed economically, with much of their population remaining in poverty. Indeed, the nations who continue to pursue such ideals have remained stricken by poverty, stunted economic growth and low global standing. To look at a historical example, we can examine India, circa 1991. After independence in 1949, the Indian economy was rather similar to that of the Soviet Unions thanks to the unfavorable impression they had received of the free market via colonialism. This meant that economic policy had a strong grounding in protectionism, import substitution industrialization, regulation of businesses and economic planning. All of these failed miserably, with Indias companies becoming largely inefficient due to a lack of competition. With no competitors, there was no real incentive for change; an improvement in services and growth stagnated in comparison to other, more successful nations (Asian Tigers) like Japan, Taiwan and Singapore. Eventually, the collapse of the Soviet Union, a crucial trading partner for India coupled with the Gulf War, which raised oil prices significantly left India asking for a 1.8 billion dollar bailout. Though it was granted, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) asked for a number of reforms to be made. Though the request was not followed word for word, changes were made and the rest is history, as seen in the figure below:

These reforms revived the Indian economy by opening the market to competition across the globe. No longer could Indian manufactures rely on government protection to deal with competition from inexpensive Chinese imports. Along with the removal of protectionist policies, deregulation of the market and businesses also took place. Additionally, a movement towards privatization took place, tax reforms implemented and inflation controlling measures put into place. This was contrary to Keynesian economics, which had been a prominent institution for the past few decades. This ideology was more closely aligned with the beliefs of John Maynard Keynes, a British economist who believed strongly in government intervention and regulation. Instead, the Hayekian economic policy was implemented- self-regulation by the market and minimal government control will lead to greatest growth. Based on the above figure, it appears that the Hayekian school of thought was proven correct, with a near exponential growth of GDP. Indeed, they have been so successful, that major players in Indian industry are requesting a second round of reforms that will open up retail and insurance markets to foreign investors and improve the tax coed. However, the general population is mostly unconcerned with such concepts and is in opposition to sweeping reforms that could help them. Ashutosh Varshney, a professor of Political Science at Brown University believes that this phenomena occurs because of the disconnect between the general population and those in power. In a New York Times article, he stated that ...Indias elite political class executives, technocrats and others, the sort of people who attend the W.E.F. rightly recognize reforms as a way to boost growth to 9 percent or 10 percent. That would make the country richer and more productive faster, which would translate into outsized benefits for them. But for the mass political class in India that is, most voters economic reforms and the boost to growth that they could provide are relatively abstract concepts They are more interested in policies that will directly benefit their lives now, he said. And few of the delayed reforms will do that, at least in the short run. However, it is important for the Indian government (and most governments in general) to recognize the vast benefits of further opening up for free trade. Contrary to popular belief, multinationals actually benefit the economies of their host countries greatly, by raising the bar for local companies and giving local people an opportunity to work for wages that are far greater than what they normally earn. Although working conditions may not be ideal initially, these initial workers will be able to significantly raise the standard of life for their families, so much so that they can afford to give their children superior schooling and growth opportunities. Equipped with these tools, these students will be in a position to learn from successful enterprises and become entrepreneurs, scientists and captains of industry themselves. The presence of multinationals will continue to provide healthy competition- Economic Darwinism at its finest, so that all sides will continue to improve. At the same time, thanks to the secure wages and improved working conditions (which will inevitably take place, thanks to competition), worker output shall continue to grow and better quality products will be produced. Innovation will reach great new heights and eventually, the economy will turn into a largely service and office job driven one, where positions are stable. Many countries have gone through this metamorphosis, this time of being at the bottom of the J-curve. While none say that it was particularly pleasant initially, the

benefits of becoming an industrialized economy speak for themselves. Prominent examples of this include Sweden, Taiwan, and now India. If we look at the ramifications of these changes in India, we will quickly learn that thanks to the change in economic policy, over 300 million Indians were lifted out of abject poverty. While that still leaves much to be desired, any growth at all is still incredible for a nation of more than 1.2 billion people. Furthermore, as the above discussion states, when these people are lifted out of poverty and become integrated into the global economy, they come in contact with different people, ideas, and values. While this may not affect them right away, it will most certainly impact their children, who will go on to receive superior educations that will teach them the duties of citizenship; such well informed people are more likely to make better decisions when choosing leaders and not be as easily incited to violence, like those in Gujarat. This, in turn, will undoubtedly help too quell corruption- as more and more people become aware of this issue, the greater the pressure will be to take action. After some time, India (and all nations) will slowly be transformed into a more peaceful, prosperous and stable nation, which will thrive. They will thrive and grow into a democracy, instead of having a quick, abrupt change. The aspect of Taiwan that is most interesting is how this gradual industrialization helped to induce democracy in a peaceful manner; citizens were well educated and prepared for the change and now Taiwan is not only an industry leader, but also among the most prosperous nations of the world today. If more nations move towards a free economy, there will be an unstoppable move towards democracy in all nations and likely in a more peaceful manner, than what we witnessed in Libya, a more closed nation. In fact, that might be the very reason why revolution took less time in Tunisia and Egyptboth were among the most industrialized in Africa; the people were better educated and prepared to fight. Though lives were lost, and property damaged in both cases, the order of magnitude is vastly different from Libya and its counterparts. Additionally, free trade has been shown to open up a country, expose the people to new ideas and opportunities. By opening up, a nation moves to the right on its J-curve, to a more free and stable nation. That is precisely why the United States did not suffer a collapse or have a police crackdown on protestors for decades. Even when the anti globalization movement was protesting and blocking up the streets of Seattle at the time of a World Trade Organization conference, police efficiently dealt with the situation. Though the nation was still shocked, these clashes did not lead to widespread riots, like those we witnessed in Greece. The UK was in a slightly worse place when looters and rioters overran the streets of London. Still, though no one appreciated the inconvenience that they caused, the UK was not brought to its knees, unlike some nations in the Arab World. Finally, if, a free market economy means unrestricted trade with all nations throughout the world. Trade means peace and collaboration; very rarely do countries that trade with each other suddenly turn and begin fighting. Trade opens the door for the sharing of ideas, to collaboration, my final point. Collaboration: Coming Together The coming together of ideas and people is a textbook definition of globalization. The world is smaller, so were easier to reach and find. No longer can we say Hey, I

didnt know that when we all carry at least one device capable of connecting to the Internet around with us, if not two or three. We now have access to all the knowledge in the world, living in the information age. Now, the question is how do we act upon that knowledge. I think that there is one key philosophical principle that governs how the International Community responds to situation: Immanuel Kants categorical imperative (the Universal Law) that states that all moral statements are general laws that are always applicable. In essence, people have the duty to take the correct action on moral grounds, regardless of the situation. Now, since more countries are industrialized, open, and aware, they are in a position to aid and collaborate with states that are less well off. The United Nations exemplifies this idea; or at least the ideals do. The charter, which has been agreed upon by the UNs 193 members begins with the phrase we the peoples of the United Nations, determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetimes has brought untold sorrow to mankind and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rightsin the value and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women... In other words, they are dedicated to peacekeeping and ensuring human rights are respected and to complete this goal, they expect nations to come together and confront any threats to these ideals. Though the UN has been roundly (and fairly) criticized for its many failures by many people (including the author of this paper), it is important to remember that there have been instances in which the UN has actually been successful in resolving an issue. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) is the agency that is responsible for coordinating the use and distribution of medical aid. It works closely with NGOs to bring humanitarian actors together in times of crisis. OCHA evaluates the situation, identifying key needs and priorities and decides upon strategies to best meet them. Furthermore, OCHA is instrumental in marshaling funding, informing the general public, obtaining access for humanitarian actors and monitoring progress. A key role that OCHA has played in recent years was helping those impacted by the 2005 tsunami in Indonesia, India and other nations. OCHA helped coordinate meetings between leaders of nations and NGOs and was a great boon to governments who were crippled by this catastrophe.

Besides the OCHA, there are many other committees and subcommittees designed to deal with specific issues like Human Rights (the United Nations Human Rights Council), Public Health (the World Health Organization), Terrorism (the Security Council) and so forth. When H1N1 took the world by storm, WHO was responsible for alerting the world of this dire issue and collaborating with various governments to determine the epidemiology of the incident. The fact that we now know also leads for both American and Chilean engineers to cooperate and rescue the 33 miners that had been buried under the rubble. As we can see in the excerpt from an article of the Christian Science Monitor, such a rescue wouldve been impossible without collaboration between different countries. The Chile mine rescue showed off the nations mining and engineering expertise, but the efforts were sped up and bolstered with international assistance, including drills and workers from Canada, NASA specialists and a 13-ton drilling tool from the United States, and a drilling consultant from Australia. The degree of collaboration here was exceptional, certainly, and beyond what there ever was before, says Michael Nelson, chair of the mining engineering department at the University of Utah. Something on such a kind of scale never took place before, agrees Andrezi Wala at the University of Kentucky. Even with all this help, it took over two months; without international help it probably would have taken much longer. (Chile mine rescue spurred unprecedented global coordination) In an increasingly more interdependent and connected world, the cooperation of all peoples is paramount to resolving worldwide challenges such as terrorism and human rights violations. Aid can be given to countries struggling to get by and help provided to growing new nations in terms of economics, politics and security forces. By pooling resources and working together, the world has weathered many crises in the past, present and will most definitely in the future. Conclusion: Throughout this review, weve established that globalization is an unstoppable force in the world today, linking continents and people that are thousands of miles apart. Globalization has given everyone the burden of knowledge and technology the possibility of acting on it. However, there is no free lunch, and with the many benefits we reap, we must also face the harmful side effects. We now face bloody revolutions, where many lives are lost and the harmful aftermath that can come of such uprisings. Each problem can be resolved in a different way; though the review focuses primarily on problems related to politics and economics, globalization can also lead to loss of culture and other sorts of issues. We are at the crossroads of destiny; at a time when so much change is going on, any decisions that we take are likely to have a significant impact on the world and as such it is our responsibility to make the right ones.

<- A perhaps unoriginal, but poignant take on globalization

References: 1. Bajaj, Vikas. "India's Godot: Economic Reforms 2.0 NYTimes. New York Times, 14 Nov. 2011. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/indias-godot-economic-reforms-20/>. 2. "BBC News - India Godhra Train Blaze Verdict: 31 Convicted." British Broadcasting Corporation, 22 Feb. 2011. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12534127>. 3. "BBC News - Keynes v Hayek: Two Economic Giants Go Head to Head." British Broadcasting Corporation, 2 Aug. 2011. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14366054>. 4. Bremmer, Ian. The J Curve: A New Way to Understand Why Nations Rise and Fall. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006. 5. "Kant and the Categorical Imperative." Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://members.fortunecity.com/rsrevision/kantandthecatimp.htm>. 6. Kurczy, Stephen. "Chile Mine Rescue Spurred Unprecedented Global Coordination." Christian Science Monitor, 14 Oct. 2010. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2010/1014/Chile-mine-rescuespurred-unprecedented-global-coordination>. 7. Google Image Search for Photographs 8. "Libya - Economy." Mongabay.com. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://www.mongabay.com/reference/country_studies/libya/ECONOMY.html>. 9. "Coordination and the Indian Ocean Tsunami." Organization for the Coordination of Humanitarian Aid. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://ochaonline.un.org/ocha2006/chap6_1.htm>. 10. Roy, Arundhati. Listening to Grasshoppers: Field Notes on Democracy. London: Penguin, 2010.