|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
When talking about globalization, extreme positions either in favor of or against it are frequently adopted. If we decided to see the optimistic side and to vote in favor of globalization, with its suppression of borders and commercial barriers, it will suppose a doubtless improvement for the humanity, with disappearance of wars, equal distribution of the wealth and greater technological development. If we vote against it, globalization will only benefits the richest countries and the big companies and corporations; with positive effects that will never be seen in the third world, which will be more and more extensive and poor. ... Probably a midpoint might exists where equilibrium between pros and cons could be reached in a way in which globalization will appear as appropriate, if not for all, at least for the majority. ... In this case, the globalization can perhaps suppose important positive effects: the suppression of national borders would have to involve a diminution in the amount, extent and quality of the wars (in fact, this is how it has been in Europe from the end of World War II until now); the disappearance of customs, commercial tariffs and other obstacles would have to somehow foment the economic development, the use and better distribution wealth; and the free transmission of ideas would have to be motivation for a cultural and scientific takeoff without precedents, moreover to make a bridge between cultures that, in the long run, would extinct nationalism unwillingness to unite, racism, etcetera.
Approximate Word count = 1003
Approximate Pages = 4
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|