Diana Bang's ETEC 531 e-portfolio

Globalization has given rise to modern warfare in an evolved type of work wherein war occurs between complex online networks. Thus, a concern is the advancement of communication systems that interconnect the globe. Although widespread communication is beneficial in some ways, consider the aspect of terrorism. Terrorism is no longer an isolated, home-grown notion. Rather it has turned into a global phenomenon where terrorist activities can occur just about anywhere. For example, after 9/11 airport security measures were tightened and there are regulations for liquid carry-ons, shoe-removal (due to shoe bombs), and even pat-down screening (including the use of a highly debated full-body electronic scanning device).

Although the Internet was first developed and utilized by the military, the widespread use of the Internet is leading to increasing difficulties to fully monitor and control virtual communities. For example, there are terrorist factions that communicate and operate through the Internet. Thus, in a sense there is an abundance of information available to just about anyone and so this enables the ease in which information is shared. There are positives and negatives to this aspect in that this free flow of information can aid people in their decision-making processes, helping them to become more informed or it can have negative effects like recruiting individuals into terrorist activities through the manipulation of individuals susceptible to biased information (essentially brainwashing them) and spreading information on bomb-making and the like is now widespread and easily accessible online.

Also, in terms of economic highs and lows- the world’s markets are intrinsically linked due to globalization. Thus, with economic perils and market crashes there is a ripple effect felt among countries who are investors and trading partners. For example, the recent economic meltdown in the U.S. that has put them through a state of recession has also affected Canada as they are one of Canada’s major trading partners. Capitalism and the effects of the recent economic hardships, the monopoly of large corporations being bailed out by the U.S. government, and the subsequent effects on its citizens in the form of widespread home foreclosures was well-illustrated in a Michael Moore documentary called “Capitalism: A Love Story.”

Another potential concern around globalization is the shift of labour to other countries and the growth of knowledge-based jobs in industrialized countries. Although this means that purchasing consumer goods is relatively inexpensive compared to the past, what does this mean in terms of our overall standards? Having access to cheap market goods may pose potential health and safety risks (i.e. faulty baby cribs, food contamination, toys laced with harmful chemical additives, etc). For example, whenever there is a food recall, this message is communicated worldwide as the product may not merely be a localized concern since it has been exported to countries around the globe.

Also, I wonder whether globalization is occurring under the pretense of a Westernized dominating force? Is it under the guise of having more positive benefits than the negative? Is it benefiting some countries but not others? For example, consider the concept of the rich becoming richer at the hands of impoverished nations. Is globalization truly benefiting third-world countries and helping them get out of poverty? Is it really benefiting the lives of citizens or is it helping governments to gain more dominance in terms of their own power and control?

Additional resources:
For the historical development of the concept of globalization check out: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/globalization/

Here is a link to an interesting article from the Bank of Canada regarding the “Implications of Globalization for the Economy and Public Policy” (2008) at: http://www.bankofcanada.ca/2008/02/speeches/implications-globalization-economy-public-policy/

Also, according to Fischer (2000) “we are in the process of becoming one world.” What implications does this message carry? This article can be accessed from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) entitled “Globalization: Valid Concerns?” (2000) at: http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2000/082600.htm

Globalization and Health: Health law and Bioethics at: http://queensu.academia.edu/udoschuklenk/Papers/70994/Globalisation_and_Health_A_Developing_World_Perspective_on_Ethical_and_Policy_Issues

The Globalization Rorschach Test: International Economic Integration, Inequality and the Role of Government (2004) http://bev.berkeley.edu/ipe/readings/globalizations-rorschach-test-paper.pdf

Anderson (1991) refers to a nation as an “imagined community.” Poole (1991) refers to it as a “principle of identity or a number of principles of identity.” Murphie and Potts (2003) refers to a nation is an ideal concept. Compared to a state which operates as a collective of functions, a nation operates with principles. As Poole (1991) mentions it essentially combines a diverse group of individuals, and cultures into one. People identify with the nation (i.e. identifying themselves as Canadian, American, etc). It offers a sense of place (home) and a common time (i.e. shared history). The nation offers a shared identity in which people feel a sense of belonging. The concept of a nation is almost illusory as Murphie and Potts (2003) offer a prime example of how people symbolically would sacrifice their lives in war for the sake of their country/nation and yet they would not do the same for different state functions (i.e. the CRA tax office, or in the U.S.- the much despised IRS).

Thus, I think there’s a great deal of symbolism associated with the thought of connecting yourself to a particular nation and showing national pride. It definitely illustrates the power of such national symbolism as evident in the Vancouver Olympic games and in stark contrast the quick tarnishing of a nation as shown in the media’s depiction of the recent Vancouver riots. Is brings to light, when does a person associate themselves with their greater community, city, and/or country? Does it have a bit of a group mentality associated with it as it may occur when everyone else is showing their pride? For example, competitive sports like hockey, football, etc bring about more pride and spirit than at other times (i.e. when the game season ends and there’s no teams competing).

According to Murphie and Potts (2003) the state is operational, it has fixed borders and laws that people follow. It is an entity to which one belongs whether one likes it or not. The state is a pragmatic entity a set of functions (borders, laws, armies, police, education systems, taxes, regulation of industry, the protection of copyright, etc).

Advances in technologies have enabled the state’s functions to monitor and act as a governing surveillance system that tracks movement of individuals and products (i.e. from passports and other paperwork to networked computing, satellites, airplanes, etc). The adoption of widespread technologies has also enabled the state to maintain electronic records of its citizens within the state and to communicate with neighbouring counties about these issues. For example, in healthcare there is the development and use of electronic health records so that clinicians can have immediate access to a person’s health history and any medications they may be on which is linked to their government-issued health card. The state also regulates and dictates operations within the boundaries of their borders (and sometimes even beyond i.e. the U.S.-led operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) with roads, railways, and other infrastructure.