Jim Hlavac
| Politics Home The Practicalist The Socialist Era Politics Re-Explained Fundamentals Domestic Affairs Economic Theory Foreign Affairs Libertarian Ideas Political Theory Philosophy Royalty & Theology |
Economic Theory
| Economic Theory |
Globalization has been going on since the dawn of time, when
the first hominids wandered the earth. This is not something new.
The cultures, peoples, languages, goods, and all things on earth have
been mixing since the beginning. Since the beginning of written
history we know that there have been great movements of groups of
people, mixing as they went with those they found in their path.
Sometimes the mixing was peaceful, sometimes war like. Over layed
on this has been the lone individual who also went beyond homeland.
This globalization that has been occurring for millennia has merely
stepped up in speed and scope as the technology of our times has
moved along. If the technology had been created earlier than we
would have been further along with the globalization.
As the different groups mixed they assimilated those things which
seemed to be the best, or which actually turned out to be the best
despite the efforts of those who opposed the mixing. The history of
the world is replete with examples of peoples being overrun, annexed,
slaughtered, married into, joined in economic ventures, and all sorts of
ways of mixing together. This has resulted in the cultures we know
today.
Some major examples are the Muslims. We perceive today that
they are against globalization. But they themselves are a product of
the globalization program followed by Mohammed, his followers and
their ideas. They overcame other people and worked their own ideas
on to the existing cultures. What surfaced was not uniformity from
Morocco to Indonesia, but a multitude of Muslim-related cultures that
preserved some part of their pre-Muslim cultures. No doubt these
older cultures resisted the globalization program -- but for one reason
or another they acceded to the new mix.
This same force is behind the so-called gloablization. We are only
more aware of it because of the technology that we possess today.
Communications, the internet, the ease of travel and more have all
conspired, in a natural uncontrolled way, to bring bits and pieces of
each culture to other cultures. The mixing is more commercial today
than the more brutal slaughtering of yesteryear. And that just one
reason that today's globalization is better than that of the past.
However, there is no way to stop it. Not only that, it shouldn't be
stopped.
The premise that all men are created equal means that the
ultimate reality of man is that all over the world a general sameness in
the level of development will occur. There will be great differences
in the cultures around the world for several reasons. One is the
propensity for most people to never leave their homeland -- to never
settle beyond 50 to 100 miles from where they were born. The smaller
amount of people who do go beyond that are the people who are
doing the major portion of the mixing.
What the people who oppose today's globalization are doing is no
different than what the ancients did when the neighboring horde
showed up. This rear guard action does work to preserve some of the
idiosyncratic differences between the two mixed cultures. But there
is a dilution of both cultures involved. They are, however, doomed to
failure.
Those who today currently oppose globalization are really calling
for the preservation of peoples to the exclusion of the prosperity of
individuals. There can be no doubt that the people of Africa would be
better off if they were more like Europe or America. And in order to
be so they must adopt the ways and means of the other cultures. In
adoption they will necessarily dilute their own cultures.
The peaceful adoption of different parts of another culture stems
only from the natural tendency for people to enhance their survival by
engaging in economic activity that results in more benefit for less
effort. Why on earth would a woman in Sub-Saharan Africa want to
continue to toil for endless hours in a brutal sun washing clothes at the
edge of a river when she could simply throw the clothes in a washing
machine and go pursue other tasks? Why would she put so much effort
when she knew she could get more benefit for less effort? And why
would some smug satisfied westerner want to keep her from the
benefits of a washing machine over pounding with rocks? What part of
the old culture is so great that the new culture shouldn't overcome the
difficulty? Is gloablization of the washing machine really bad for
mankind?
the first hominids wandered the earth. This is not something new.
The cultures, peoples, languages, goods, and all things on earth have
been mixing since the beginning. Since the beginning of written
history we know that there have been great movements of groups of
people, mixing as they went with those they found in their path.
Sometimes the mixing was peaceful, sometimes war like. Over layed
on this has been the lone individual who also went beyond homeland.
This globalization that has been occurring for millennia has merely
stepped up in speed and scope as the technology of our times has
moved along. If the technology had been created earlier than we
would have been further along with the globalization.
As the different groups mixed they assimilated those things which
seemed to be the best, or which actually turned out to be the best
despite the efforts of those who opposed the mixing. The history of
the world is replete with examples of peoples being overrun, annexed,
slaughtered, married into, joined in economic ventures, and all sorts of
ways of mixing together. This has resulted in the cultures we know
today.
Some major examples are the Muslims. We perceive today that
they are against globalization. But they themselves are a product of
the globalization program followed by Mohammed, his followers and
their ideas. They overcame other people and worked their own ideas
on to the existing cultures. What surfaced was not uniformity from
Morocco to Indonesia, but a multitude of Muslim-related cultures that
preserved some part of their pre-Muslim cultures. No doubt these
older cultures resisted the globalization program -- but for one reason
or another they acceded to the new mix.
This same force is behind the so-called gloablization. We are only
more aware of it because of the technology that we possess today.
Communications, the internet, the ease of travel and more have all
conspired, in a natural uncontrolled way, to bring bits and pieces of
each culture to other cultures. The mixing is more commercial today
than the more brutal slaughtering of yesteryear. And that just one
reason that today's globalization is better than that of the past.
However, there is no way to stop it. Not only that, it shouldn't be
stopped.
The premise that all men are created equal means that the
ultimate reality of man is that all over the world a general sameness in
the level of development will occur. There will be great differences
in the cultures around the world for several reasons. One is the
propensity for most people to never leave their homeland -- to never
settle beyond 50 to 100 miles from where they were born. The smaller
amount of people who do go beyond that are the people who are
doing the major portion of the mixing.
What the people who oppose today's globalization are doing is no
different than what the ancients did when the neighboring horde
showed up. This rear guard action does work to preserve some of the
idiosyncratic differences between the two mixed cultures. But there
is a dilution of both cultures involved. They are, however, doomed to
failure.
Those who today currently oppose globalization are really calling
for the preservation of peoples to the exclusion of the prosperity of
individuals. There can be no doubt that the people of Africa would be
better off if they were more like Europe or America. And in order to
be so they must adopt the ways and means of the other cultures. In
adoption they will necessarily dilute their own cultures.
The peaceful adoption of different parts of another culture stems
only from the natural tendency for people to enhance their survival by
engaging in economic activity that results in more benefit for less
effort. Why on earth would a woman in Sub-Saharan Africa want to
continue to toil for endless hours in a brutal sun washing clothes at the
edge of a river when she could simply throw the clothes in a washing
machine and go pursue other tasks? Why would she put so much effort
when she knew she could get more benefit for less effort? And why
would some smug satisfied westerner want to keep her from the
benefits of a washing machine over pounding with rocks? What part of
the old culture is so great that the new culture shouldn't overcome the
difficulty? Is gloablization of the washing machine really bad for
mankind?