What is globalization? SHIN MIN KYEONG

Notwithstanding our attempt here to produce a definitely systematic way of analysing globalization, it should be strongly emphasized that in a major respect globalization is, in the frequently used phrase, an essentially contested concept.

Accompanying the advocacy of such a policy . one which has usually been labelled neoliberalism . has been the growing significance in the economic life of the world as a whole of transnational corporations (TNCs).

In the concentration upon the capitalistic conception of globalization a number of crucial social scientific factors were greatly neglected.

In the background of the rise of globalization theory was the relatively simple observation that the world was increasingly becoming a ‘single place’.

For example, the idea of the world as a single place has brought into great question the sociological tendency to conceive of the basic and largest unit of sociology as being society.

It is very widely, if somewhat misleadingly, thought that the most important single defining feature of globalization . whether considered as a very long-term process or a rather short one - is that of increasing connectivity(sometimes called interconnectedness).

In sum, it can here be stipulated that the major dimensions of globalization are indeed the cultural, the social, the political and the economic.

From Wallerstein’s point of view, the present world-system . or what some other writers have called world society, the global ecumene, global society and so on . has been produced primarily by the expansion of capitalism over the past fi ve or six hundred years. This expansion Wallerstein regards as now being increasingly challenged by what he calls anti-systemic movements.

One might well say that the idea of national identity has itself been globalized with increasing but intermittent intensity since the early years of the twentieth century. The multiculturality or polyethnicity of most societies has become an issue of great political contention. It would seem that nativistic, rightwing movements notwithstanding, forms of multiculturality are becoming the global norm (McNeill 1986).

This is why we consider it to be very misleading to think of globalization as being a solely macroscopic process, a process which excludes the individual, or indeed everyday life, from the realm of global change. Currently we may pinpoint considerable change with respect to the self . more especially, processes of individualization (Beck and Beck- Gernsheim 2002). Admittedly these changes tend to apply most clearly to the West, although there are intimations of these occurring well beyond the West.

In fact, the growth in the manipulation of individual identities by the state is all too apparent in much of the Western world. One notices this tendency particularly in the United Kingdom and the United States. At the same time, the identity of selves becomes increasingly differentiated in the sense that the self can and does assume a variety of forms and modes of representation, such as the ‘racial’, the national, the class, the religious, the gender and so on. This ability to manipulate one’s own identity is greatly facilitated by the anonymity of Internet communications.

Since the so-called end of the Cold War, we have witnessed an end to bipolarity. For much of the period since 1989 we have lived in a unipolar world dominated by the United States.

To the more conventional of human rights are being added a number of others, such as various categories of physical and psychological handicap, additional categories of gender and expanding rights for children and for the aged.

it has become with particular rapidity in recent years a relatively central concept in the discussion of globalization (Robertson 1992, 1995; Robertson and White 2003, 2004, 2005; Syngedouw 1989) in a much broader way. The problem that precipitated the introduction of the concept of glocalization was that concerning the relationship between the global and the local. Indeed, to this day it is not at all unusual to find the local being regarded as the opposite of the global.

Yet some people, very misleadingly, speak of ‘a globalized world’. It should be clear, however, that there can be no criterion as to what a fully globalized world might look like. In this sense, a globalized world is an impossible world.

We have also highlighted the importance of not reifying globalization. Globalization is not a thing, not an ‘it’. Recognition of its conceptual status, as opposed to its being an ontological matter, is of prime importance.

The many injustices and forms of exploitation which are rampant in the world demand continuing attention. But we insist that the attainment of ever more sophisticated frameworks for the very discussion of globalization is required in order for effective and plausible critical analysis to take place. One of the dangers of undisciplined critique is that globalization simply becomes a negative buzzword, something to employ as a source of blame for each and every ‘problem’ on this planet.」

 I think it is a very difficult writing conceptually. However, at the same time, I realized how fragmented and idealized I thought about globalization. I was doing a very lazy analysis of globalization. Globalization is not completed immediately just about the development of the Internet and the creation of SNS. Globalization has individual aspects, regional aspects, and so on. After the end of the Cold War, the neo-liberalistic economy spread around the world and the department of economy has emerged as the most important factor of globalization. A number of U.S franchises have settled in several countries, but it cannot be said to be a obvious proof of globalization.

Huntington said in 「The Crash of Civilizations」 “The most dangerous collision of the future will come from a combination of Western arrogance, Islam's intolerance and the pride of China. This clash of civilizations started not only from the differences in the historical and social backgrounds of each civilization, but also from the aspirations of independence after the Cold War and economic growth of each country to enhance the competitiveness of the human race and recover its identity through the religion. The West is trying to maintain its global hegemony and has continued its to spread Western political values and institutions. The Islamic world has a complaint with these Western imperial ideas and is trying to challenge them. The political structure of the world has been reorganized beyond the capabilities of each country into a larger civilization.

The demise of the Cold War has reduced the risk of a global war, but has further increased the number of regional conflicts. Conflicts have intensified due to nationalist eruptions, arms race and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and regional and racial discrimination and religious issues. At a time when the balance of power between the United States and Soviet Union has been broken, each region is pursuing regional hegemony, which is developing on the level of civilization." As a result, the reality we talked about as ideal globalization is same as the ideal of the United States. world has not agreed to this globalization and there are still many conflicts.

Discussions about globalization are always contentious. Globalization is a very frequently used word, but there is no concrete concept in place Globalization is not created uniformly by a country. It can only be considered when globalization and localization move in a balanced and constant manner. We should consider whether we have recklessly made value judgments about non-mainstream countries in the name of globalization.