Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Response to an Email

First, please accept my apologies for not having attended the last several meetings! I am – unfortunately – so much opposed to globalization and cannot see any benefit in it for the Western World, economically, politically as well as militarily, that I cannot in good conscience support this "pro globalization" conference! It is my firm conviction that globalization in its present form is the beginning of the end of Western civilization. If we do not oppose this scheme, we will either all speak Chinese or will have to pray to Allah within 50 years. I do hope you understand my dilemma! I am sorry that I did not have the guts to express my feelings earlier on!

-Concerned Citizen


Dear CC,

I am sad to hear that you will not be supporting the upcoming conference, but I wanted to take this chance to explain to you why we are organizing such an event.

You stated that you are very opposed to globalization, but I wonder if we are talking about the same thing. The idea covers such a broad and vague issue, that sometimes the world itself becomes vague. This conference will be discussing the many benefits of globalization, but if we don't clarify the word, then we cannot clarify the world. Globalization, as we define it, is the cultural and economic integration of nations around the world. It is the ease of communication, the opening of trade, and the flow of culture around the world. Put simply, it is the process of shrinking the globe.

Now that you understand what we are organizing, let me explain why we have a positive point of view of the subject. From an economic viewpoint, globalization has radically and unambiguously increased the wealth of nations around the world. Countries that embraced this idea of the free global market (South Korea, Switzerland and the United States to name a few) are the richest and most prosperous nations. Those that have rejected global trade (North Korea, Iran and formally China) are the poorest and most destitute nations. This is not happenstance, but instead a direct result of their international cooperation.

Another point you mentioned was the lack of political benefit to the West. This comment was confusing to me because of what I see and define as the West. What characteristics differentiate this region from others around the world? Globalization is a western idea. Pioneered by Great Britain and championed by the United States, the process of globalization defines western civilization. From the industrial revolution to the age of the internet, western nations have always been at the forefront of connecting the world. The results of this process has improved not hindered, politics. Globalization partners with freedom and democracy around the world. Wealthy people demand and get individual liberty.

Your final worry was that globalization may come at an expense to our military might. This is again opposite of reality. Historically, democracies rarely, if ever, go to war each other. If globalization is a path to democracy, then it must also be a path to peace. Also, nations whose markets are interwoven together have no incentive to use military action against the other. It would only serve to disrupt the economies of both nations.

Finally, I like to respond to your fear of Chinese, Islamic other foreign influences. Like I stated above, the spread of globalization has resulted in more, not less western influence. For good or bad, we have seen the English language and the Christian religion spread around the world. Increased global competition between goods and services are good for consumers and the same is true for other kinds of competition. Rises in competition between cultures, languages and even governments will result in the failure of the bad and the success of the good. Harmful cultural norms will be weeded out by an increase in choices. The resulting free flow of information and ideas will even increase the quality of governments around the world. As people are given the opportunity to move elsewhere, governments must work harder and better to keep their populace.

I hope that this lengthy response has helped you to understand our support of the global integration. That globalization does not mark the end, but instead the spread of western ideas (the good ones at least). In future feel free to speak with me personally so that we can involve you in our future support of globalization.


Harrison Brookie

*this was an assignment for ECON 621: Globalization


  1. Iran, North Korea, and China are the poorest nations in the world?

  2. Those examples were used because they are kind of known for being anti-global. In reality no they aren't the poorest, but they are still relatively very poor.

    United States - 4
    Switzerland - 6

    North Korea - no rank, doesn't want the world to know how poor it is
    China - 82, but it was a lot poorest before it opened itself up 15 years ago

    North Korea and South Korea have almost identical resources and SK is ranked 32. So clearly entering the world market is beneficial.


You are the reason why I do not write privately. I would love to hear your thoughts, whether you agree or not.