CHAPTER ‘l INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF GLOBALIZATION It has been said that arguing against Globalization is like arguing againts the laws of gravity. - Kofi Annan Intended Learning Outcomes At the end of this lesson, students are expected to have a better grasp of the concept of Globalization and should be able to: 1. Define what Globalization is and what it stands for in our contemporary world; 2. Differentiate the competing conceptions of globalization and undermine the various schools of thought and paradigms on Globalization; 3. Understand the raison d’étre of Globalization, its goals and aspirations; and 4. Equip students with 21st century learning and develop higher order thinking skills that will lead towards a deeper understanding of Globalization and its role in the world; in the Philippine society as well as its role in the individual formation of the students in relation to their future respective professions.“Your shirt is made in Thailand. And your shoes were made in China. The MP4 player you are holding comes from Japan. You can travel to Moscouw and have a Big Mac there and you cant watch an American film in a cozy and serene resort in the Maldives. These are indeed exciting times”... What is Globalization? The term “globalization” has several contending meanings. We can rundown some of the widely accepted definitions of globalization to prove this point. Giddens, for instance, defines it 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” (1990:64), The interconnectedness of human beings, brought about by technological changes, modern transportation and communication technology, seems to be the common understanding of globalization. Contributing to this understanding of globalization is Robertson, who defines globalization as a concept that “refers both to the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole. . .” (Robertson 1992: 8). Harvey (1989) introduced globalization as the compression of time and space and the annihilation of distance. The Sunny Levin Institute looks at globalization as a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology. This process has effects on the environment, on culture, on political systems, on economic development and prosperity, and on human physical well- being in societies around the world (Steger, 2005). On the other hand, a group of globalization scholars does not subscribe to the sociological viewpoint. Instead, they argue that internationalization and multinationalization are phases that precede globalization because the latter heralds the end of the state system as the nucleus of human activities (Grupo de Lisboa, 1994, quoted in DeSoussa Santos, 2002: 68). They explain that the activities and developments in globalization have taken place outside the formal structures of the nation-state, Globalization marks the increasing irrelevance of the nation-state, whose status as the dominant political organization was acknowledged by the Treaty of Westphalia. In short, according to this group of scholars, we might witness the end of the nation-state. Others explain globalization from the economic viewpoint; they think that the phenomenon is dominated by global economic activities like the neoliberal reg and improves definitions of there are scho What Primarily, thi phenomenon. decades of 19 wide interest: economics, hi analytical tool ideas and ana for instance, modern phen of internation Meanwhile, p such as the organizations interests acros Globalizatia In the globalization ideology. Globalizatio Global generate andi same time fost the local and about the com the political, If glot stretch of tim Again, lookin scholars disa political scie 1970s, with (Nederveen P globalization, of interest isplayer you mand you fare indeed rundown Giddens, which link eccurring beings, eunication interaction at nations, Seformation en political ysical well- subscribe Structures of nation-state, by the Treaty witness the viewpoint; ties like the neoliberal regime, the reduction of tariffs, the creation of transnational corporations, and improvement of multilateral trade organizations. The existence of these several definitions of globalization clearly point out that there can be as many definitions as there are scholars studying in it: What can explain the existence of competing definitions of globalization? Primarily, this can be attributed to the diversity of disciplines that have studied the phenomenon. Globalization was first used as a term in the academic circles in the decades of 1960s and 1970s (Nederveen Peterse, 2012; Steger, 2005) but had gained wide interest in the 1990s. Scholars from the traditional disciplines of political science, economics, history, sociology, and philosophy have examined globalization using the analytical tools and methods provided by their respective discipline. Apparently, their ideas and analyses can only shed light on certain aspects of globalization. Historians, for instance, are more interested in determining whether globalization is really a modern phenomenon. Economists, on the other hand, look into the changing patterns of international trade and commerce as well as the unequal distribution of wealth, Meanwhile, political scientists focus more on the impact of the forces of globalization, such as the international non-governmental organizations and international organizations, on the state and vice versa. These diverse focal points and research interests across disciplines have resulted in competing definitions of globalization. Globalization as a process, condition, and ideology In the absence of a generally accepted definition, Steger (2005) explains that globalization has been commonly understood either as a process, a condition, or an ideology. Globalization as a process Globalization is viewed as a multidimensional set of social processes that generate and increase “worldwide social interdependencies and exchanges while at the same time fostering in people a growing awareness of deepening connections between the local and the distant” (Steger, 2005: 13). This view argues that globalization is about the compression of time and space brought about by changes in technology and the political, cultural, and economic aspects of human existence. If globalization is viewed as a process, which denotes happening over a stretch of time, can we trace its beginning? In short, when did globalization start? Again, looking for an answer to this question is a difficult task since globalizations scholars disagree on an answer. Scholars specializing in international relations, political science, media studies, and economics date globalization from the 1970s, with the formation of global value chains and accelerated communication (Nederveen Pieterse, 2012). Another variant of this periodization refers to neoliberal globalization, 1980-2000. In sociology, the timeline stretches wider since the point of interest is modernity, which began during the period of Renaissance, followed 5SO . .gee. by the Enlightenment, then the French Revolution and lasted up until the period of of growing m Industrialization in the late 1700s and throughout the 1800s. In political economy, as connectivity well as the Marxist perspective, the origin of globalization can be traced back to the globalization 1500s, following Marx's dictum “the conquest of the world market marks the birth of is spurred by modern capitalism” (Ibid: 3). Therefore, the historic moments of globalization are creation of in +1500s and 1800s, considered by political economists as the birth of modern capitalism. However, ctitics of these variants of contemporary periodization, which focus on modernity, raise the issues of “Eurocentrism” and “intellectual apartheid” (Hobson, 2004), Another issue raised is that by using modern capitalism (1500s) as a cutoff is equivalent to ignoring earlier forms and infrastructures of capitalism (Nederveen Pieterse, 2012). Table 1 Globalization according to Social Science and Humanities Disciplines Disciplines | Time | Agency/ Domain gitsaads “4 Political 198) | “Tatemationalization ofthe | Competitor states, post international Science, state’, INGO’s polities, Global civil society International Relations cia Dao TMF, World Bank Debt csi, structural adjustment policies ida Studies in the 1820s Ls Williamson, Geography Space, Place ‘Local Global interaction, localization to pea Economics 1970 | Multinational corporations, | Global corporations, world product, “exchange p eae technologies, banks, finance | global value chains, nev economy, impacts onal Cultural P a hedge funds Sovereign wealth funds took plea ‘Media, film advertising, ICT | Global village, Me Donaldization, and the Aime Disneyficaton, hybridization aa Faaophy [ad [Ee Saas PTS a Sociology | 1800_| Modemity Capitalism Iadustrilism, urbanization, world econe Political 500 | Modem Capitalism pees worlds. Ho: Economy Conquest ofthe World Market the 1500s, s History, 3000 | Population movement, wade, | The widening scale of global, 0 Hala, | ACE. | temo word religions | cooperation Global ow, «sumer Southeast A nithrepelogy of world ea Biology, TTime | Integration of ecosystems | Evolution, Global ecology, Gaia for him, hay ecology i J beginning o Source: Nederoeen Pieters Jan (2012) "Periodizing Globalization: Histories of Globalization,” New a Global Studies, Vol6, Issue 2, Article 1. of commere ties linked a India, Euro} the Western |A different way of tracing the roots of globalization is by looking for signs of globality, which is explained earlier as the thickening of social linkages between people from different parts of the world. What we should look for are historical evidence 6the period of economy, as back to the the birth of lization are capitalism, lich focus on aa” (Hobson, @s a cutoff is (Nederveen of growing worldwide connectivity. It implies a longer timeline because increasing connectivity is not a recent trend (Nederveen Pieterse, 2012). Viewed as such, globalization has no definite and exact beginning, From this perspective, globalization is spurred by innovations in transportation and communication technologies, and creation of institutions of commerce. Globalization from an economic perspective (Source: rethinking prosperity.nel) In this sense, economists emphasize that the beginning of globalization was in the 1820s when commodity prices across continents converged (O'Rourke and Williamson, 2002, 2004). For Flynn and Giraldez. (2006), globalization is synonymous to permanent global trade, which began when alll the major regions of the world “exchange products continuously...and on a scale that generated deep and lasting impacts on all trading partners” (Ibid:244). They conclude that the birth of globalization took place in 1571, the year Manila was founded as a Spanish entrepot connecting Asia and the Americas. Following the line of thinking of economists, some scholars argue that the emergence of world economy should be taken as a threshold of globalization. The world economy, borrowing from Braudel, is understood as the merger of economic worlds. However, while the world economy is commonly believed to have started in the 1500s, scholars still disagree on the definite period of its emergence. For Braudel and Abu-Lughod, the period is 1200s, which is concurred in by researches on Asia and Southeast Asia (Nederveen Pieterse, 2012). John Hobson (2004) dates the emergence of world economy much earlier to 3500 BCE and the big expansion of global trade, for him, happened in post-600 period. Hobson concludes that that 500 CE was the beginning of globalization, which he particularly refers to as oriental globalization. A slightly different view explains that globalization began with the unfolding of commercial revolution back in 1000 BCE. Around this time, complex commercial ties linked a vast portion of the world including eastern Mediterranean, South China, India, Europe, West Africa, East Africa, Indonesia, Central Asia, the north Pacific and the Western Pacific (Nederveen Pieterse, 2012). @Globalization is not a new idea. For thousands of years, people —and, Inter, corporations —from great distances have been trading with each other, such as the famed Silk Road across Central Asia that connected China and Europe during the Middle Ages. (Photo from asiaprimal.net) ‘The era of the commercial revolution also coincided with a revolution in the metaphysical, intellectual, ethical and religious aspects of man’s life. Major new traditions developed in religion and ethical philosophy: Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Confucianism and the teachings of Lao Tzu, Judaism, Greek philosophy, and Christianity. These significant developments indicate growing. global consciousness. Moreover, it shows that globalization goes beyond the economic and material, it also includes other aspects of human existence like culture, politics and society. The succeeding parts of this book shall elucidate that point further. Globalization as a Condition Globalization is also referred to by scholars as globality. Scholte (2008) refers to globality as social condition characterized by trans-planetary connectivity and supra- territoriality. In terms of trans-planetary relations, globality is about the establishment of social links between people located at different places of our planet. Here, our planet is not treated as a collection of geographical units but as a social space or an arena of social life. Meanwhile, supra-territorial relations are “social connections that transcend, territorial geography” (Scholte, 2008: 1480). In other words, globalization as a social condition is characterized by thick economic, political, and cultural interconnections and global flows that render political borders and economic barriers irrelevant (Steger, 2008). ‘The experience of Dr. Vihn Ching, a US-based medical doctor and was once a Vietnamese refugee, illustrates how this present world has become increasingly interconnected. “That could have been me,” he said in an interview at CNN about the photograph of a lifeless body of a Syrian boy found lying with face down in the beach of Turkey in September 2015. This chilling photo of the lifeless body of a Syrian 8 boy, which s} a a process concern over shown by th United State cessation of crossfire. Source: Globalizati Stege Freeden, exp of a set of & other words argues that g ian ° 1 « ee esBuddhism, material, it an arena of transcend, asa social was once increasingly CNN about down in the fy of a Syrian boy, which spread in various social media networks, is a fine example of globalization 25 a process and condition as it moved people from across the world to express their concern over the plight of the Syrian refugees and disappointment with the apathy shown by the international community. Months after the photo became viral, the United States and Russia negotiated with the hostile Syrian groups for temporary cessation of hostilities in order to save the Syrian refugees that were caught in the crossfire. Source: https:/eoww nytimes.com/2016/09/03/evorld/middleeast/alan-kurdi-aylan- anniversary-turkey-syria-rofugees-death. tml Globalization as an ideology Steger (2005), following the line of reasoning of globalization scholar Michael Freeden, explains that globalization exists in people's consciousness because it consists of a set of coherent and complementary ideas and beliefs about the global order. In other words, globalization is a political belief system that benefits a certain class. He argues that globalization as an ideology is defined by six (6) core claims: 1. Globalization is about the liberalization and global integration of markets, or as stated succinctly in a Business Week article published in the late 1990s: “Globalization is about the triumph of markets over governments” (quoted in Steger 2005). The decade of 1990s was a turning point for most globalization because it saw the downfall of communism with the collapse of Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). 2. Globalization is inevitable and irreversible. State leaders pushing for neoliberal policies have been heard proclaiming that globalization is happening and cannot be stopped, as it was a global wave that has been sweeping the world. This determinist language in resembles the wordis used by Karl Marx and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel when they described the course of human history.Nobody is in charge of globalization. Picking up from the classical liberal notion of the “self-regulating market,” Steger (2005) explains that globalization does not promote the agenda of any specific class ot group. In this sense, globalists are not dictating their own agenda on people. What unfold, instead, are events that follow the immutable imperatives of a “transcendental force much larger than narrow partisan interest (Ibid: 20). Globalization benefits everyone in the long run. Free trade and free market, globalists believe, will bring wealth and prosperity to everyone. This claim is often backed up by several success stories of businessmen from underdeveloped countries that have embraced globalization. A fine example is Chinese businessman Jack Ma, founder and executive chairman of the Alibaba Group, who gained wealth and fame by pioneering e-commerce in China back in the 1990s when using the internet needed so much patience. Jack Ma, founder an d CEO of Alibaba, one of the most successful and pioneer online based business in China Globalization furthers the spread of democracy in the world. Globalists share the belief that democracy, freedom, free markets, free trade are synonymous terms. Although democracy and freedom comprise 2 particular type of political system while free markets and free trade refer to a particular economic system, globalization scholars and state leaders argue about the interconnection of the two (2) systems. Francis Fukuyama, for instance, thinks that a certain level of economic development brought about by globalization would be conducive to the creation of complex civil societies with a powerful middle class (Steger, 2005). Globalization requires a global war on terror. This belief, which resulted from the 9-11 attack, combines the idea of economic globalization with ‘American brand of right-wing foreign policy (openly militaristic and nationalistic). Prior to 9-11 attack, the economic globalization dominated 10 academic we scientists, wi impact canb Over the yes of new reses tourism, evo of working and the glo research top globalizatior By the enormit globalizatio: to our pred The globali (1) those ste studying th Both areas phenomend ‘we call glot change in t disciplines we need ne generation usa distin of globaliz it would m ‘The subsec serve the f The discus bbe based ©the classical explains that lass or group. people. What ratives of a st (Ibid: 20). ide and free to everyone. businessmen ation. A fine tive chairman ‘by pioneering et needed so comprise a free trade refer state leaders is Fukuyama, ent brought complex civil which resulted alization with ilitaristic and fion dominated by the core states in Western Europe, United States and Japan defined the world order, which was openly challenged during the 9-11 attack by the global network of terror led by Osama Bin Laden's Al-Qaeda. Globalization scholars think that the ensuing aggressive, militaristic US foreign policy is a response to protect the gains of globalization. ‘The Impact of Globalization on the Academe ‘The advent of globalization in the 1970s had affected greatly affected the academic world as it immediately gained the interest and attention of most social scientists, who were occupied with social phenomena related to globalization. The impact can be seen in the surge in the number of scholarly works about globalization. Over the years, the literature on globalization has been enriched with the inclusion of new research areas and topics, such as studies on transnational sexualities, global tourism, evolution of siate institutions, the restructuring of work and the improvement ‘of working conditions, transnational care-giving, transnational crime syndicates, and the global media to name a few. Clearly, the wide array of globalization-related research topics that scholars can choose from points to the ubiquity of the effects of globalization (Appelbaum and Robinson, 2005). By way of reiteration, the burgeoning literature on globalization reflects the enormity of human activities that can be studied. Also, it shows the extent of globalization’simpacton human lives; itshowshow differentwehavebecomecompared to our predecessors in terms of the level of sophistication and cosmopolitanism. The globalization literature suggests that there are two major branches of research: (1) those studying specific problems or issues as they relate to globalization; (2) those studying the concept of globalization itself - theorizing the very nature of the process. Both areas entail a great deal of theorizing in order to make sense of the various phenomena comprising globalization. How do we theorize on this phenomenon that we call globalization? What types of theories have been developed to explain social change in the 2st century? Are the major theories of the traditional social science disciplines adequate to explain the various phenomena within globalization? Or, do we need new theoretical models? Domain Questions ‘Asmentioned above, the burgeoning literature on globalization resulted in the ‘generation of several theories and conceptual frameworks. Each of these theories gives usa distinct way of interpreting the social realities that form part of the phenomenon of globalization. Given their contradicting assumptions about the globalized world, it would not be incorrect for us to think that these theories are engaged in a debate. ‘The subsequent discussion will attempt to cover the major theoretical paradigms that serve the function of a lens that we can use in order to get a clear view of globalization. The discussion on the theories of globalization, according to Robinson (2005), should ‘be based on domain questions, which provide the assumptive bases for theorizing, iThe following are the domain questions: of the s include When did globalization begin? This is likely the most important ‘domain that he question’ since it involves the underlying ontological issue in globalization other m studies; include Third | 2. Isthe core of the process economic, political or cultural? Is there an underlying were B material or an ideational determinacy? Are there multiple determinations that w and how would they be ordered? These questions involve the causal feature determination(s) in globalization; system 3. Does globalization refer to a process or a condition? Most theories view — globalization as a process of transformation. Some theorists make a distinction coal between globalization as a process and globality as a condition. How do modernity and post modemity relate to globalization? 2. Global 4, What is the relationship between globalization and the nation-state? Is the a nation-state being undermined or has it retained its primacy and relevance? slobal Or, has the nation-state experienced unprecedented transformation due to ome globalization? Does globalization involve internationalization (seen as an ee increased intensity of exchanges among nation-states) or transnationalization cngiy (involving emerging structures, processes and phenomena that transcend the ae nation-state system)? and m Lastly, to what extent is the relationship between social structure and (2000, territoriality being redefined by globalization? What is the relationship ee between the local and the global? How are space and time being reconfigured? of tea as ar ‘These questions shall form the backbone of the discussion on the theoretical am paradigms associated with globalization. be ia 1. World Systems Paradigm — Immanuel Wallerstein, the principal proponent sector of the theory, views globalization not as a recent phenomenon but as virtually > synonymous with the birth and spread of world capitalism, c. 1500. For him, a the appropriate unit of analysis for macro-social inquiry in the modern world a is neither class, nor state/society, or country, but the larger historical system, floba in which these categories are located. This paradigm adheres to the idea that cas capitalism has created a global enterprise that swept the 19® century leading aa to the present time. That is why the followers of this paradigm argue that aa globalization is not at all a new process but something that is just continuing and evolving. 3, The} , i ie parad A key structure of the capitalist world-system is the division of the ae world into three great regions, or geographically based and hierarchically organized tiers. The first is the core, or the powerful and developed centers 2 . =‘domain lobalization relationship reconfigured? theoretical al proponent t as virtually 1500. For him, ‘modern world argue that just continuing division of the hierarchically eloped centers of the system, originally comprised of Western Europe and later expanded to include North America and Japan. The second is the periphery, those regions that have been forcibly subordinated to the core through colonialism or other means, and in the formative years of the capitalist world-system would include Latin America, Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Eastern Europe. Third is the semi-periphery, comprised of those states and regions that were previously in the core and are moving down in this hierarchy, or those that were previously in the periphery and are moving up. Another key feature of this world-system is the centrality and immanence of the inter-state system and inter-state rivalry to the maintenance and reproduction of the world-system. The world-system paradigm does not see any transcendence of the nation-state system or the centrality of nation-states as the principal component units of a larger global system. Global Capitalism Paradigm ~ The theories under this school of thought treat globalization as a novel stage in the evolving system of world capitalism (hence these theorists tend to speak of capitalist globalization).As. such, globalization has its own unique features that distinguish it from earlier epochs. They focus on new global production and financial system; both are seen to have superseded earlier national forms of capitalism. They also emphasize the rise of processes that cannot be framed within the nation- statefinter-state system, which lies at the core of the world-system theory and most traditional macro-social theories. The seminal studies of Sklair (2000, 2002) have showcased the ‘theory of the global system’, which espoused the ‘transnational practices’ (TNPs) as operational categories for the analysis of transnational phenomena. His theory argues that the TCC has emerged as a new class that brings together several social groups who see their ‘own interests in an expanding global capitalist system: the executives of transnational corporations; ‘globalizing bureaucrats, politicians, and professionals’, and ‘consumerist elites’ in the media and the commercial sector (Sklair, 2000), Meanwhile, the major studies of Robinson (2003, 2004) have advanced a related theory of global capitalism involving three planks: transnational production, transnational capitalists and a transnational state. For him, globalization creates new forms of transnational class relations across borders and new forms of class cleavages globally and within countries, regions, cities and local communities, in ways quite distinct from the old national class structures and international class conflicts and alliances. ‘The Network Society School of Thought ~ In its simplest explanation, this paradigm of globalization does not subscribe to the contention that capitalism fuels globalization. Instead, it puts forth the premise that technology and 13technological change are the underlying causes of the several processes that comprise globalization. In fact, this idea is articulated in the important collection of works of Manuel Castells called The Rise of the Network Society (1996, 1997, 1998), which features his ‘technologistic’ approach to globalization, He advanced the notion of the “new economy”. This new economy is: (1) informational, knowledge-based; (2) global, in that production is organized ona global scale; and (3) networked, in that productivity is generated through global networks of interaction. In Castells’ view, ‘the networked enterprise makes material the culture of the informational, global economy: it transforms signals into commodities by processing knowledge’ (1996: 188). Space, Time and Globalization ~ For Anthony Giddens, the conceptual essence of globalization is ‘time-space distanciation’. Giddens defines time- space distanciation 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’ ~ social relations are ‘lifted out” from local contexts of interaction and restructured across time and space (1990: 64). In a distinct variant of this spatio-temporal theme, David Harvey, in his now classic 1990 study The Condition of Post-modernity, argues that globalization represents a new burst of ‘time-space compression’ produced by the very dynamics of capitalist development. Another key figure in the globalization theories involving space and time is Saskia Sassen’s, who wrote The Global City (1991), which has had an exceptionally broad impact across the disciplines and left an indelible mark on the then emergent field of globalization studies. Sassen’s study is grounded in a larger body of literature on ‘world cities’ that view world-class cities as sites ‘of major production, finances or coordinating of the world economy within an international division of labor, and more recent research on ‘globalizing cities’ Sassen proposes that a new spatial order is emerging under globalization based on a network of global cities and led by New York, London and Tokyo. ‘These global cities are sites of specialized services for transnationally mobile capital that is so central to the global economy (this will be further discussed ina separate chapter on global cities). Roland Robertson introduced and popularized the concept of “glocalization.” This catchy term means that the ideas about home, locality and community have been extensively spread around the world in recent years, 80 that the local has been globalized. And, the stress upon the significance of the local or the communal can be viewed as one ingredient of the overall globalization process (Robertson 1995). Transnationality and Transnationalism — In the globalization literature, transnationalism generally refers to an umbrella concept encompassing a wide variety of transformative processes, practices and developments that 14 take p proces ~ econ institu Smith novel ties ar count and ec and n etal] 6. Globe evokki villag as gl global (1993, the sa came Rites proce orgar and s toag aliens forth. The | underpinnin it cannot be endless acad they have al: about global Misconcep Scho! the several § produce ney it is not. Bel1 processes important is organized ted through enterprise Fit transforms conceptual defines time- lations which by events “ifted out! produced by ang space and has had an lible mark on "is grounded in cities as sites globalization and Tokyo. e, locality and recent years, significance of the overall take place simultaneously at the local level and global level. Transnational processes and practices are defined broadly as the multiple ties and interactions — economic, political, social and cultural — that link people, communities and institutions across the borders of nation-states. Scholars such as Levitt (2001), Smith and Guarnizo (1998), and Portes and his colleagues (1999) point to the novel character of transnational links in the era of globalization. Transnational ties among recent immigrants are more intense than those of their historical counterparts due to the speed and relatively inexpensive character of travel and communications and that the impact of these ties is increased by the global ‘and national context in which they occur (Levitt, 2001; Portes, 1995; Portes et al, 1999). 6. Global Culture paradigm ~ These theorists emphasize the rapid growth of the ‘mass media and resultant global cultural flows and images in recent decades, evoking the image famously put forth by Marshall McLuhan of ‘the global village’. Cultural theories of globalization have focused on such phenomena as globalization and teligion, nations and ethnicity, global consumerism, global communications and the globalization of tourism. For instance, Ritzer (1993, 2002) coined the now popularized term ‘McDonaldization’ to describe the sociocultural processes by which the principles of the fast-food restaurant came to dominate more and more sectors of US and later world society. Ritzer, in this particular homogenization approach, suggests that Weber's process of rationalization became epitomized in the late 20th century in the organization of McDonald’ restaurants along seemingly efficient, predictable and standardized lines — an instrumental rationality (the most efficient means toa given end) - yet results in an ever deeper substantive irrationality, such as alienation, waste, low nutritional value and the risk of health problems, and so forth. The above-mentioned approaches are just some of the major theoretical ‘underpinnings that seek to provide a clear conceptualization of globalization. While it cannot be denied that the formulation of these theories have resulted in seemingly endless academic debates centered on the correct way of interpreting globalization, they have also helped us in correcting some of the wrong notions and misconceptions about globalization. The discussion that follows is focused on these misconceptions. Misconceptions about globalization Scholte (2008), in his attempt to clarify the meaning of globalization, criticizes the several flawed analyses of globalization pointing out that they end in failure to produce new knowledge. In other words, he defines globalization by telling us what it isnot, Below are the misconceptions of globalization.Globalization as internationalization Although the terms internationalization and globalization are interchangeable, there is a big difference in their meanings. Internationalization includes activities by entities such as corporations, states, international organizations, private organizations, and even individuals with reference to national borders and national governments. Globalization, on the other hand, includes a gamut of human activities that do not require reference to a state's national borders. For instance, exchanges of romantic words in a social media platform such as Facebook between a Filipina located in the Philippines and a German residing in his country fall within globalization do not need their respective government's permission to do so. Globalization occurs in this “Facebook era”, where social networking sites have drawn people closer more than ever (Source: The Shining Gem — WordPress.com). Facebook is a social networking site with at least 2.19 billion active users in the first quarter of 2018. The problem is “when globalization is interpreted as internationalization, the term refers to a growth of transactions and interdependence between countries” (Ibid: 1473) Most accounts of globalization-as-internationalization stress that contemporary trends are a repetition of the past. For example, some scholars note that the levels of cross-border trade, direct investment and permanent migration were as great or greater in the late 19* century as they were a hundred years later (Hirst and Thompson, 1999; and O'Rourke and Williamson, 1999). These claims of familiarity and historical repetition become the basis for its rejection. Scholte points out his critique through a question: if globality is nothing other than internationality ~ except perhaps larger amounts of it- then why bother with new vocabulary? (2008: 1474) Globalization as liberalization Another misconception in the analyses of globalization is treating it as synonymous to liberalization. Liberalization is commonly understood as the removal of barriers and restrictions imposed by national governments so as to create an open 16 and borderle governments exchange rest The ¢ globalization ‘On one side « that have sup and fiscal res for all, On the opposed neo! greater pove! and democra a political im for a truly gk laissez faire e globalization Globalizatic A fina of as univer: spreading v2 planet. Henex worldwide. 1 politics, econ several indi local cultures colonialism, Scholt First, univers human specie in the ancient Islam since th confined to « Secon as shown by’‘oxganizations, governments, that do not of romantic located in the donot need drawn people contemporary that the levels re as great or end Thompson, and historical que through a perhaps larger treating it as as the removal create an open and borderless world economy. In this sense, globalization is realized when national governments “reduce or abolish regulatory measures like trade barriers, foreign exchange restrictions, capital controls and visa requirements” (Scholte, 2008: 1475) The problem with this, Scholte explains that it confines the study of globalization within the debate concerning the neoliberal macroeconomic policies. On one side of the debate are the academics, business executives, and policymakers that have supported neoliberal policies of liberalization, privatization, deregulation, and fiscal restraint would in time bring prosperity, freedom, peace and democracy for all. On the other side, the critics in the so-called anti-globalization movement have opposed neoliberal policies, arguing that a laissez faire world economy produces greater poverty, inequality, social conflict, cultural destruction, ecological damage and democratic deficits (Ibid: 1475). In addition, this misconception carries with it a political implication - that neo-liberalism is the only available policy framework for a truly global world. Finally, debates about the advantages and disadvantages of laissez faire economics have gone on for centuries without involving the language of globalization. Globalization as universalization and westernization A final cul-de-sac appears in the analyses of globalization when it is thought of as universalization and westernization. Universalization denotes a process of spreading various objects, practices, and experiences to the different parts of the planet. Hence, there is globalization when things, values, and practices have spread worldwide. This interpretation of globalization entails homogenization of culture, politics, economy, and laws. As homogenization progresses, globalization destroys several indigenous cultures and practices. IF Western modernity spreads and destroys local cultures, this variant of universalization is known as Westernization, neo- colonialism, Americanization, or Mc Donaldization, Scholte (2008) notes that there are issues arising from these misconceptions. First, universalization is not a new feature of world history. The migration of the human species that took place a million years ago is one great example of globalization in the ancient times. The continuous spread of the major religions like Christianity and Islam since their foundation constitutes another instance of globalization which is not confined to contemporary period. Second, westernization is not the only path that can be taken by globalization as shown by the studies on oriental globalization. 7