WHAT IS GLOBALIZATION?

One way to understand a concept is to

relate it with the concepts associated with
it. In the case of globalization, it is
associated—and sometimes erroneously taken
synonymously—with the following terms:
internationalization, liberalization,
universalization, and westernization.
 

Internationalization
“[It] involves the growth of
transactions and interdependencies between
countries” (Martell 2010, 9). When the
Philippines, for instance, conducts
economic activities with other countries it
engages in internationalization. From the
word itself, internationalization is the
process whereby nation-states “inter-act”
with one another economically, politically,
socially, and culturally. “Inter” signifies
an act happening between two or more
players. Thus, the inter-action happening
in internationalization involves nation-
states, which are entities defined by
political and geographical borders. Nation-
states are prime movers in
internationalization. Unlike
internationalization, which is defined by
national and geographical boundaries,
globalization refers to the integration of
the global economy whose main actors need
not be the nation-states but the
transnational corporations, international
governmental and non-governmental
organizations, civil societies, and the
peoples themselves.
 
Istvan Benczes (2014) best puts it when
he says that internationalization refers to
the extension of a nation-state’s economic
activities to other nation-states while
(economic) globalization refers to the
organic integration of the global economy.
In that integration, the active role of the
nation-state is diminished. Hence, the
difference between the two processes,
according to him, lies not in the quantity,
but in the quality, of the economic
relations involved.        
 

Liberalization
“[It] refers to the removal of
constraints on movements of resources
between countries—an open, borderless
world. Liberalization involves abolishing
regulatory measures such as trade barriers,
capital controls and visa requirements, and
is linked in part with
neoliberalism”  (Martell 2010, 9).
Liberalization, then, is an economic
philosophy or a policy which advocates the
lifting of trade barriers such as tariffs
and quotas imposed on imported products
intended to create global market where the
prices of commodities are dictated by the
invisible hand of global competition and
not by state policies adopted by nation-
states. While liberalization may be the
economic philosophy or policy underlying
the prevailing form of economic
globalization, another philosophy or policy
may be adopted. Hence, liberalization is
not an equivalence of globalization in the
sense that (a) the latter cannot be reduced
into simply an economic philosophy or
policy advocating how national and global
economy should work—it is essentially
multi-dimensional; and (b) the former is
not the only economic philosophy or policy
which may be adopted to advance the
interests of globalization.
 
Universalization
“[It] involves the dispersion of objects
and experiences to all parts of the earth…”
(Martell 2010, 9). Universalization intends
to build a homogenized world where truths,
beliefs, values, morality, and the way of
doing things are held to be valid in all
places at all times. In other words,
universalization is a system of thought
where claims to truth, morality, values,
and practice by those who are in power are
imposed as valid across the world. Take
democracy, for instance. It is believed to
be not only the best form of government in
countries they are adopted but they are
claimed to be the right form of government
which should be adopted by countries in the
world so that non-democratic countries are
urged, nay forced, to adhere to democratic
principles of rule of law, due process of
law, equality, liberty, justice, and human
rights. Religion is another example: Those
who didn’t believe in the religion of the
ruling power were condemned as heretics!
Universalization rests on the philosophy
of rationalism which claims that since the
world is rational, humans who are rational
themselves, should relate to the world
rationally. As a policy, universalization
is carried out through global policies and
practices that uphold accreditation and
standardization. Accreditation conducted by
the International Standardization
Organization (ISO) is one way by which this
policy of universalization is carried out. 
 

Westernization
 “[It] is a particular type of
universalization of Western structures such
as capitalism, industrialism, rationalism,
urbanism, individualism, and democracy, or
put more critically, colonization” (Martell
2010, 9-10). In other words, westernization
is the imposition of western values to the
rest of the world. It is a kind of
universalization in the sense that only
western values are held to be right. If you
don’t adhere to these values, beliefs, or
practices, you’re considered uncivilized,
undeveloped, or whatever derogative words
used to describe non-subscription to
whatever ideals of the Western world.
Westernization as a policy was implemented
by the colonizers in the Philippines.
Spain, on one hand, forced the Indios in
the name of salvation to believe in
Christianity and to relinquish their
indigenous beliefs. The Americans, on the
other hand, brought to the country the
values of democracy and rationality. 
Globalization is definitely not
westernization. Globalization is not a
social process whereby only western values
are given primacy in the global discourse.
Rightly conceived, globalization may refer
to the social process whereby the world
becomes a marketplace of ideas, beliefs,
and values, where people are free to
exchange and engage in dialogue. The East
meets the West as they poetically call
it.  
Internationalization, liberalization,
universalization, and westernization are
terms which had already been used even
before the term globalization was made
popular recently. If globalization
according to Aart Scholte referred to any
of these terms, then to use globalization
to refer to the same idea would be
redundant. But globalization, according to
him, is not synonymous to any of these
terms. Hence, as a concept globalization
must be defined and understood separately
from—and not taken synonymously with—any of
these terms (Martell 2010).     

Globalization defined
 
Having clarified the notion that
globalization is not synonymous with
liberalization, internationalization,
universalization, and westernization and
having pointed out that it should not be
confused with the two closely related terms
—globalism and globality—we are now in
better position to look at the concept
itself. To guide us in our understanding of
the concept, let’s consider the definitions
of globalization given by some
globalization scholars. Let’s try to
discover the elements of globalization
common to all these definitions and
eventually come up with a synthesized
definition.  
 
For Anthony Giddens, “Globalization can
[…] be defined as the intensification of
worldwide social relations which link distant
localities in such a way that local
happenings are shaped by events occurring
many miles away and vice versa.” (in Steger
2003, 10; emphasis supplied). The key
phrase here is “intensification of worldwide social
relations.” It is not the worldwide social
relations that characterizes globalization;
it is rather the intensity of that social
relations. Globalization is characterized
of that strong interconnection facilitated
by economics, politics, culture,
technology, and various global concerns. 
 
According to Fredric Jameson, “The
concept of globalization reflects the sense
of an immense enlargement of world
communication, as well as of the horizon of a world
market, both of which seem far more
tangible and immediate than in earlier
stages of modernity” (in Steger 2003, 10;
emphasis supplied). The key phrase is
“immense enlargement of world communication.”
Jameson must have in mind the development
of information and communication technology
which makes intense worldwide communication
possible. Globalization has made the world
so small that communicating to another
person in another continent is just like
communicating to someone in neighborhood.
Globalization, brought about by the
development of information and
communication technology, has indeed
tremendously increased the level of
communication, and hence the level of
global awareness, occurring among peoples
of the world.       
 
Another definition of globalization
worth considering is that of David Held.
According to him, “[g]lobalization may be
thought of as a process (or set of
processes) which embodies a transformation in
the spatial organization of social relations and
transactions – assessed in terms of their
extensity, intensity, velocity and impact -
generating transcontinental or
interregional flows and networks of
activity, interaction, and the exercise of
power.” (David Held in Steger 2003, 10;
emphasis supplied). What Held means by
this, is that, the social relations and
interactions among peoples in the world has
become much broader in reach (worldwide)
and much deeper and stronger in connection,
transcending time and space.       
 
Roland Robertson has similarly
interesting definition of globalization:
“Globalization as a concept refers both to
the compression of the world and the intensification
of consciousness of the world as a whole.” (Roland
Robertson in Steger 2003, 10; emphasis
supplied). This definition offers two
elements of globalization,
namely, compression of the world
and intensification of consciousness of the
world as a whole. To compress means to make
it smaller. It could also mean to reduce
the widely dispersed world into a unified
whole. Of course, compression here should
be taken literally. It refers to the
transcendence of space and time made
possible through the development in
transportation and information and
communication technology. You can give
various examples of this transcendence. To
give one: it only takes us some hours to
reach the continent of Europe or Africa via
jet planes, something impossible during the
time of Rizal. Another example is that we
can communicate with anyone in any place in
the world in real time. All of these
developments in science and technology have
compressed the world which results to the
intensification of our consciousness of the
world as one we all inhabit. In other
words, this compression of the world has
made us realize that we belong to the same
world, a world of challenges.    
 
James Mittelman offers a similar
conception of globalization when he says:
“Globalization compresses the time and space
aspects of social relations” (in Steger 2003, 10;
emphasis supplied).
 
Lastly, Aart Scholte (in Martell 2010,
10) defines globalization as
“supraterritorialization.” The term may
sound heavy but Scholte gives a clue:
supraterritorialism includes jet planes,
telecommunications, global media, finance,
ecological problems and global
consciousness (Martell 2010, 10). Supra
means over or beyond. Literally,
supraterritorialization means going over,
or going beyond, national and regional
territories. It is the removal
(metaphorically) of the difficulties
imposed by physical space.  It is the
removal of territorial boundaries, which
Friedman in his book The World is
Flat (2007) poetically calls the flattening
of the world.  The world is flat; meaning,
the barriers imposed by space and time have
been removed, thus opening up limitless
opportunities for everyone.
 
Now, given the definitions of
globalization above, let’s try to find out
the elements of globalization common to all
these definitions. 
 
Let’s analyze the definitions above by
showing them on the table below.
 
Process (What's happening) Human Activ
Intensification Worldwide soc
World communi
Enlargement
World market
Transformation Social relati
Compression World
Intensification Consciousness
Compression Time and spac
Supraterritorialization [Human activi
 
    On the one hand, the terms on the left
column all signify a process, a historical
process. Globalization, then, is an on-
going event, which started in the past,
happening at present, and will continue to
happen in the future. Friedman (2007)
claims that globalization has three eras,
namely: globalization 1.0 (1492-1800),
globalization 2.0 (1800-2000), and
globalization 3.0 (from 2000). (Friedman’s
book was originally published in 2005. With
the unimaginable speed of technological
transformation, we can only imagine that we
are now living in the age of globalization
4.0 or 5.0.) 
           
On the other hand, the terms on the
right column refer to the relations,
conditions, or activities being transformed
by various developments in the world. These
are social relations, world communication
and world market, and world consciousness.
Here, we see that globalization as a
historical process has multiple dimensions,
namely: political and economic (world
communication and world market); social
(social relations and transactions), and
cultural (consciousness of the world).
 
Now, based on our analysis above, we can
come up with a synthesis of the definitions
of globalization, thus:
 
Globalization is a historical process characterized
of the compression of the world, enlargement of world
communication and world market, intensification of
social relations, and intensification of the
consciousness of the world.
 
 Is it a good definition of
globalization, or can you think of a better
one? Well, give it a try!  
 
 
HAS COVID-19 KILLED GLOBALIZATION?
 
           After defining globalization, you are
now, hopefully, in a  better position to
answer the question we posted in the
introduction: “Has COVID-19 killed
globalization?”