Introduction
In the current world where development is at a remarkably fast rate, and surpassing the geographical boundaries, there are different ways of describing this phenomenon. Globalization is a force that widens opportunities for people; especially the minorities, as women, the unemployed youth, as well as the marginalized like poor people and children.
Change is just taking place along globalization. Globalization describes the increasing worldwide change that is being experienced in communication networks like television, air travel, and telecommunication and satellite systems. All these technologies create the perception of seeing the world as ‘one world’.
These interconnections with many people across the world are usually beneficial and advantageous to economies. However, some demerits come with such changes like the neo-liberal global economics and/or corporate capitalism. However, these are short-lived experiences under the long-term stress from this ‘one world’ perception.
Global Village Economies
The increasing interconnectedness of different national economies and the advanced flows and mobility of raw materials, technology, services, ideas, and capital across geographical boundaries make up the Globalization.
Whether such economic globalization is a curse or a blessing remains a contentious issue in the current world. However, it remains misplaced, and scholars think that the better question would be how well to manage globalization. Wishing away globalization is like denying the law of gravity.
Globalization Metaphor
Looking at the issue of globalization, researchers seem to have found the best ways of describing the phenomenon. Some analysts have likened the occurrence to a global village. On the other hand, some prefer to look at it as the exact opposite referring to it as global jungle.
In the African context, the organization of a village is far much different compared to a jungle just as heaven is from then earth. It is hence extremely pertinent to clarify which perspective could best describe globalization.
The two perspectives offer two different conditions and need decidedly different strategies, skills, and knowledge to deal with in a bid to define globalization precisely. Human survival in essence depends on historical and contemporary vantage point.
Based on the metaphor of globalization, a village is a low risk area while a jungle is a high risk. A village cares and is compassionate, while in the jungle life is hostile and vicious.
In a village, there is co-operation while the jungle, survival is characterized by competition. The element of sharing is demonstrated in a village as it is communal while selfishness dominates the jungle since is it individualistic.
Cultural Boundaries
Cultural psychologists have for proposed some theories that explain the concepts of self-construal and self-perception. They claim that these human concepts are arbitrated largely by cultural boundaries and constructions like geography.
For example, “History shows that agrarian and collectivist cultures are seen to be interdependent compared to western or individualistic cultures” (Biggs 655). Currently, the modern technologies of communication especially the internet have blurred the differences between cultures and making the geographic boundaries porous.
Designing questions about the allusion for psychology of self is crucial. Global network is a cultural issue regardless of the impact the internet has. Whether this also implicates on individual or interdependent sense of self, is hence, pertinent for discussion.
Internet and Social Isolation
Recent research has raised some issues concerning the possible negative implication of the globalization phenomenon – global jungle. The controversy surrounds the cognitive and emotional impacts of the Internet and its users are increasing.
There is special attention given to computer-mediated textual communication to offer a way of making social potential. There is evidence that shows that there are possible startling contradictions. “Whereas superficially, technology is seen to promote social connection and interconnection, some analysts have found the opposite to be true” (Biggs 658).
Studies on the Internet and socialization, paradoxical results have been obtained showing that increased connectivity caused more isolation that is social. The internet offers a possible increase in the number of social connections, but these connections differ considerably from other types of relationships created online.
It is normal for people to put their best face forward, and to present themselves as ideal human beings, while, in reality, they have normal shortcomings. Such form of socialization is different from what happens in offline relationships.
Nonetheless, the constrained quality of online relationships is devoid of the real information that is presented ion offline interactions. Many people develop online relationships only to discover that the person online is far much different from the real person in offline world. A 55 year old could masquerade as a teen but still believe the other persons is who he/she says he/she is.
Internet Culture
It has been difficult to explain the impact internet has on self, particularly as it is global and penetrates faster into conventionally interdependent and rural cultures. There is the possibility for a fundamental alteration of interdependent analyses of self in relation to community.
It would appear that the Internet is to allow characteristics of contradictory cultures like collectivist and individualist to blur into each other. Considering the myriad of the Internet users and the differing interests, the Internet offers a unique culture.
The Internet does not offer intimate space, and it does allow anonymity. In some perspective, the cyberspace is seen as a place with no privacy as people can peep in your profiles and get friendlier even when they have queer motives.
With respect to self-construal, one cannot easily tell whether there is value attached to other culture especially in shaping the strong ecological associations in relation to dysfunctional ones.
Making Globalization Work
In order to make globalization work, people are required to have a change of perception and think and act globally. Few people can be said to do this. An old aphorism has been that, politics are local, and most people live locally.
As a result, they approach globalization with exceptionally narrow perspective of their local politics. This level of thinking is persistent despite global expansion to economic interdependence. This disjunction between local politics and international concerns cause so much dissatisfaction.
Global responsibility is fundamental and it means that humans must pledge for civilization according to nature and not guided by money and hostility. There are environmental crises and wars spreading throughout the world. There are political crimes, global expansion of the transnational, impoverishment of the society and religious perceptions.
From the perspective that the world is spreading misinformation about political and economic establishments, it is clear that, people no longer respect sovereignty, rather they tend to support widespread political propensity of favoring inherent necessities before developing solutions.
Because of the general denial of the impact of the current way of life on environment, and the protection of the status quo vis-vis newer ideas hampers evolution of peaceful coexistence of people.
In an attempt to solve the problems that today affect or endanger all forms of life on the planet, there is a need to reflect with a sober mind on the many unanswered questions, as well as the current abuses and injustices. Unbiased recognition of the features that are common to all life is an inspiration to personal stance and help in promotion of establishment of worldwide justice. Determination of the social system and principles is a responsibility of this benchmark.
Numerous meanings are associated with global village and global jungle based on the ideological trench that an individual occupies. Some people regard it as mainly economic concern, others as a process of revolutionizing global production especially technology.
The changes in technology have changed financial systems and production hence creating a global village. Other scholars focus more on the social and cultural issues, the implication of homogenization of different world cultures, and more importantly the Americanization of the global way of life.
Political economy offers a fascinating perception of globalization. There is a widespread investment of capital across the world in search for clients and markets. Otherwise, globalization presents the process of opening up international markets to the controlling global powers, a project inescapably controlled by the most powerful nations and large multinationals. To such degree, therefore, one can argue that there could be nothing particularly new with globalization.
Poverty reduction has been a serious problem requiring considerable global responsibilities and needs international responsibilities. There are over a billion people living abject poverty, as such; their power to purchase is far much less than one US dollar per capita per day. Many of these are women.
The two-thirds of these people are living in the developing nations and worse of it live in rural areas. However, the urban poverty has been increasing unusually fast.
There is a consensus by the international community that poverty exacerbates inequality with regard to fundamental problems in the 21st century due to globalization impact. Inequality causes global risks and threats. Being able to reduce this gap is highly crucial in the creation of a peaceful and just international community. Besides, reducing the gap is a factor in social responsibility.
Conclusion
Debate on responsibility for the globalization impact is decidedly old probably as old as the human’s ability to reason. The addition of global is a recent development inspired by globalization of many fields of operation, even though there could be an argument that the entire word is new and not the concept.
There is an ethical gap, and thus a need to offer solutions. What need to take place are adaption, redefinition, and restructuring basic values to be able to respond to the new changes of globalization like biotechnology. There are not so much new strategies, but to implement the existing tactics effectively.
Works Cited
Biggs, Stephen. “Charlotte’s Web: How One Woman Weaves Positive Relationships On The Net.” Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 2003: 655-663.
Collins, Susan, and Graham, Carol. Globalization, Poverty, and Inequality. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2004. Print.
Faizel, Ismail. “Mainstreaming Development in the World Trade Organization.” Journal of World Trade 39.1 (2005):1-4.
Nandi, Proshanta, and Shahidullah, Shahid. Globalization and the Evolving World Society. Boston: Brill, 1998. Print.
Preyer, Gerhard, and Bs, Mathias. Borderlines in a Globalized World: New Perspectives in Sociology of the World-System. Boston: Kluwer Academic, 2002. Print.
Stiglitz, Joseph. The Roaring Nineties. New York: W.W. Norton, 2003. Print.
Yeates, Nicola. Globalization and Social Policy. London: Sage, 2001. Print.