top of page
  • 執筆者の写真Yuko

Is Globalisation Entering into Transition, Closure or Perhaps Mutation?

Globalisation has held sway in everyday life to lower the geopolitical barriers for our children's future. In contrast, even before the pandemic, it was well documented that globalisation was in trouble, such as climate change and the trade war. Do you think that globalisation is so evil? Now, more than in the past, the population is divided on whether globalisation is a force for good or not.

Believe it or not, globalisation is not a new idea. For thousands of years, even without the striking growth of telecommunication technology, people have been buying from and selling to each other in lands at great distances, such as through Silk Road or with a British East India Company across Central Asia that connected China and Europe during the Middle Ages. Since then, for centuries, people and corporations have invested in enterprises in other countries.

Supporters of globalisation claim that globalisation, the idea itself, could be a profoundly enriching process, opening minds to new ideas and experiences, and strengthening the finest universal values of humanity. Moreover, its phenomenon has facilitated capitalism which is characterised as a process of “creative destruction" a strong belief for the corporate world and by the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpete, and the capitalism became a centre of the corporate world.

In addition, globalisation brings many positives such as women’s rights, eco-awareness and it aids the development of countries. Some people, especially in developed countries have been emphasising negative aspects. However, the positives outweigh the negatives - without globalisation we would be living in the dark ages supported by male-chauvinists and class-minded conservative people.

On the other hand, shutting off countries from the rest of the world could also have benefits. As everybody has recognised with covid-19. Benefits could include a mighty lock against global pandemics, not only that, it would enrich their own cultural values. In short, it provides nations not only with feeling of security and pride, but also with isolation and absence of foreign affairs. Sooner or later, people are too afraid of destruction of their cultural values to forget the basic principle of capitalism, which is if no destruction can be considered as “creative”. Economy will stagnate.

Globalisation is deeply controversial, however. proponents of globalisation argue that it allows poor countries and their citizens to develop economically and raise their standards of living, while opponents of globalisation claim that the creation of an unfettered international free market has benefited ONLY multinational corporations in the Western world at the expense of local enterprises, local cultures, and everyday people.

In my book, now the world has just been in a muddle about globalisation for the last a couple of decades, and by an outbreak of pandemics in 2020 the fragility of the unbalance between benefits and costs associated with globalisation has just been exposed completely and visually. Because this current wave of globalisation which stems from earlier ones, has driven “farther, faster, cheaper, and deeper” by advanced information technology. As a result of this movement, the world has lost the sense of the right balance between benefits and costs associated with globalisation, therefore, the way of focusing on benefits allows nations to create policies to consume more in advance, but pay costs in the distant future.

Like unusual lockdown deployments have managed to bring off the release from the axis of the value added by speed, speed of time, speed of technology development. Without the umbrella of misused globalisation, the value of life which is shelved would start shining through slowly and soon the new globalisation would find the right balance. In order to do so, citizens of all nations need to understand in depth how globalisation works and we should try to think of cultural issues pertaining to globalisation in terms of conflicting values, and decide for themselves what aspects of globalisation may be positive, negative, or truly indifferent to cultures around the world.

Now it is high time we should wait until the liquid of the disturbed society becomes filtered, then we must taste it in order to determine what is missing in the distant future, which could be said to be a huge debt. I believe that without the slogans or ideological biases we can facilitate new values in the current globalisation. And its transition or mutation with the new value will be shining through.





bottom of page