• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What Do You Think of Globalization?

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
What do you think of globalization? Where is it leading to?


For those who are interested: "Globalization or globalisation is the process of interaction and integration between people, companies, and governments worldwide. Globalization has grown due to advances in transportation and communication technology. With increased global interactions comes the growth of international trade, ideas, and culture.

Large-scale globalization began in the 1820s. In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the connectivity of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly. The term globalization is recent, only establishing its current meaning in the 1970s." -- Wikipeadia.​
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
images (27).jpeg
is
 

InChrist

Free4ever
I think globalization is the fulfillment of biblical prophecy and will lead to the rise of the antichrist one world leader and government, shortly thereafter the end of life as we know it on earth and the personal return of Christ.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
What do you think of globalization? Where is it leading to?


For those who are interested: "Globalization or globalisation is the process of interaction and integration between people, companies, and governments worldwide. Globalization has grown due to advances in transportation and communication technology. With increased global interactions comes the growth of international trade, ideas, and culture.

Large-scale globalization began in the 1820s. In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the connectivity of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly. The term globalization is recent, only establishing its current meaning in the 1970s." -- Wikipeadia.​

I really like the phrase 'think globally, act locally'. Humanities prosperity and security is increasingly reliant on our interdependance. One of the great challenges for humanity is to find unity while retaining our diversity. The world has fundamentally changed since before WWI when we had the competing hegemony of European Empires to a post WWII reality where we have become a global village.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
What do you think of globalization? Where is it leading to?


For those who are interested: "Globalization or globalisation is the process of interaction and integration between people, companies, and governments worldwide. Globalization has grown due to advances in transportation and communication technology. With increased global interactions comes the growth of international trade, ideas, and culture.

Large-scale globalization began in the 1820s. In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the connectivity of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly. The term globalization is recent, only establishing its current meaning in the 1970s." -- Wikipeadia.​
I'm okay with globalization aside from some concerns as to if it's fair and equitable. I'm actually more worried about centralization on a global scale.
 
For those who are interested: "Globalization or globalisation is the process of interaction and integration between people, companies, and governments worldwide. Globalization has grown due to advances in transportation and communication technology. With increased global interactions comes the growth of international trade, ideas, and culture.

Globalisation is actually 2 things:

1) Technological globalisation (comms and transport)
2) Political globalisation - Political decisions that make international trade, travel and migration easier (e.g. EU, NAFTA, WTO, IMF, etc)

They really need to be treated separately, as 1 is basically unstoppable (save a major catastrophe) and 2 could be reversed, accelerated or modified at any point.

Technological globalisation is generally a good thing, political globalisation is very much a mixed bag and we are very slow to recognise and adapt to its negative consequences.
 
One of the great challenges for humanity is to find unity while retaining our diversity.

While well meaning, I find this approach to be, unintentionally, the source of many problems. Unity is an impossible goal and is the cultural progeny of universalist religion. Attempts to artificially create unity often do more harm than good as they frequently result in a desire to influence others to be 'more like us'.

If the goal is changed from unity to peaceful coexistence, then this creates a significantly different way of looking at things. We can peacefully coexist even with people we despise, as long as we don't interfere in each other's affairs.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
While well meaning, I find this approach to be, unintentionally, the source of many problems. Unity is an impossible goal and is the cultural progeny of universalist religion. Attempts to artificially create unity often do more harm than good as they frequently result in a desire to influence others to be 'more like us'.

If the goal is changed from unity to peaceful coexistence, then this creates a significantly different way of looking at things. We can peacefully coexist even with people we despise, as long as we don't interfere in each other's affairs.

Peaceful coexistence with those we despise is an oxymoron, is it not?

How well the current international order is working is highly dependent on what country we live in and our socioeconomic status.

Before WWI the United Nations and international governing bodies such as the IMF and WTO were unthinkable along with an international court. However the problems are obvious and there for all to see. The whole system of international governance needs to be strengthened, enabled to become fairer and working in the interests of everyone, not just those with narrow self interested agendas. The are limits to nationalism. Environmental concerns are of utmost urgency. Proliferation of WMD remains a great threat to everyone's security.

Reform is impossible without a shared vision of what is wrong and what needs to happen. It took two world wars and the great depression for a radical adjustment in world affairs to take place after WWII. Unfortunately, given the current confusion, apathy, and resistance to change and reform, another crisis appears inevitable.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
While well meaning, I find this approach to be, unintentionally, the source of many problems. Unity is an impossible goal and is the cultural progeny of universalist religion. Attempts to artificially create unity often do more harm than good as they frequently result in a desire to influence others to be 'more like us'.

If the goal is changed from unity to peaceful coexistence, then this creates a significantly different way of looking at things. We can peacefully coexist even with people we despise, as long as we don't interfere in each other's affairs.

The question is: Do we want to peacefully coexist with those we despise ?

I don't think we do. It doesn't take much to go to war. Change them or kill them. It is one or the other.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
What do you think of globalization? Where is it leading to?


For those who are interested: "Globalization or globalisation is the process of interaction and integration between people, companies, and governments worldwide. Globalization has grown due to advances in transportation and communication technology. With increased global interactions comes the growth of international trade, ideas, and culture.

Large-scale globalization began in the 1820s. In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the connectivity of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly. The term globalization is recent, only establishing its current meaning in the 1970s." -- Wikipeadia.​

While I like the idea in theory and see us ultimately progressing toward this over time, I think we still have a long way to go with regard to assimilating cultural diversity, religious ideals, and political and economic views for it to be a viable system.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
One aspect of globalization I dislike is a threat to defense.
1) As technology becomes "deeper" it's possible for foreign sources to embed malware into products.
2) If we lose domestic sources for critical technology, this could bring loss in a protracted war.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
What do you think of globalization? Where is it leading to?
I think stupidity is cumulative. The more humans there are, the more stupidity there is in the world. And the world can only handle so much of it.

I think we're reaching the saturation point for human stupidity, and we'd better wise the **** (mod edit) up, soon, or the whole amazing planet is going to end up a cold dead rock floating in space. And we've got nowhere else to go.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Peaceful coexistence with those we despise is an oxymoron, is it not?

No, we don't have to fight everyone we don't like. In general it's pretty easy to peacefully coexist with anyone who leaves us alone.

An example (it's domestic, but the point could be expanded to the international arena)

Good Fences: The Importance of Setting Boundaries for Peaceful Coexistence

We consider the conditions of peace and violence among ethnic groups, testing a theory designed to predict the locations of violence and interventions that can promote peace. Characterizing the model’s success in predicting peace requires examples where peace prevails despite diversity. Switzerland is recognized as a country of peace, stability and prosperity. This is surprising because of its linguistic and religious diversity that in other parts of the world lead to conflict and violence. Here we analyze how peaceful stability is maintained. Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistence, but rather on well defined topographical and political boundaries separating groups. Mountains and lakes are an important part of the boundaries between sharply defined linguistic areas. Political canton and circle (sub-canton) boundaries often separate religious groups. Where such boundaries do not appear to be sufficient, we find that specific aspects of the population distribution either guarantee sufficient separation or sufficient mixing to inhibit intergroup violence according to the quantitative theory of conflict. In exactly one region, a porous mountain range does not adequately separate linguistic groups and violent conflict has led to the recent creation of the canton of Jura. Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by physical and political boundaries. A similar analysis of the area of the former Yugoslavia shows that during widespread ethnic violence existing political boundaries did not coincide with the boundaries of distinct groups, but peace prevailed in specific areas where they did coincide. The success of peace in Switzerland may serve as a model to resolve conflict in other ethnically diverse countries and regions of the world.

Good Fences: The Importance of Setting Boundaries for Peaceful Coexistence | NECSI
 
Globalization is good, if the government is good. Its bad, if the government is bad.

Any system is good, if the people in it are smart, honest, and good.

How do we get majority to be smart, honest and good? That is the biggest question for me.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
No, we don't have to fight everyone we don't like. In general it's pretty easy to peacefully coexist with anyone who leaves us alone.

An example (it's domestic, but the point could be expanded to the international arena)

Good Fences: The Importance of Setting Boundaries for Peaceful Coexistence

We consider the conditions of peace and violence among ethnic groups, testing a theory designed to predict the locations of violence and interventions that can promote peace. Characterizing the model’s success in predicting peace requires examples where peace prevails despite diversity. Switzerland is recognized as a country of peace, stability and prosperity. This is surprising because of its linguistic and religious diversity that in other parts of the world lead to conflict and violence. Here we analyze how peaceful stability is maintained. Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistence, but rather on well defined topographical and political boundaries separating groups. Mountains and lakes are an important part of the boundaries between sharply defined linguistic areas. Political canton and circle (sub-canton) boundaries often separate religious groups. Where such boundaries do not appear to be sufficient, we find that specific aspects of the population distribution either guarantee sufficient separation or sufficient mixing to inhibit intergroup violence according to the quantitative theory of conflict. In exactly one region, a porous mountain range does not adequately separate linguistic groups and violent conflict has led to the recent creation of the canton of Jura. Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by physical and political boundaries. A similar analysis of the area of the former Yugoslavia shows that during widespread ethnic violence existing political boundaries did not coincide with the boundaries of distinct groups, but peace prevailed in specific areas where they did coincide. The success of peace in Switzerland may serve as a model to resolve conflict in other ethnically diverse countries and regions of the world.

Good Fences: The Importance of Setting Boundaries for Peaceful Coexistence | NECSI

We don't have to fight everyone we don't like. But take away the economical prosperity and let's see how long peace will last.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
To the OP, I much prefer more emphasis on the expansion of cottage industries, with a consortium of private ownership, labor, and community involvement but, unfortunately, that's not the current trend. Instead, with the trend of more globalization and buying on the internet, say goodbye to jobs in most communities, especially with smaller and more rural towns.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
What do you think of globalization? Where is it leading to?


For those who are interested: "Globalization or globalisation is the process of interaction and integration between people, companies, and governments worldwide. Globalization has grown due to advances in transportation and communication technology. With increased global interactions comes the growth of international trade, ideas, and culture.

Large-scale globalization began in the 1820s. In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the connectivity of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly. The term globalization is recent, only establishing its current meaning in the 1970s." -- Wikipeadia.
Its leading to unwieldy bureaucracy; but its never going to happen.

You know how sidewalks have to have expansion joints or else they crack? Its like that. There have to be spaces in between regions.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
We don't have to fight everyone we don't like. But take away the economical prosperity and let's see how long peace will last.
It's not a matter of economic prosperity, it's a matter of equitable distribution. If we all had a more or less equal chance to survive and thrive in life, we wouldn't be so inclined to attack others for what they have, that we don't. But unfortunately, the human inclination is to respond to good fortune and abundance with greed: to hoard anything we have or get that we don't need, or deserve; thereby denying any opportunity of gaining it, to everyone else. The wealth and opportunities pile up in the hands of those who are most unwilling to share them, forcing everyone else to go without until they are are driven to try and take it by force. At which point they also want vengeance as well as their share of the wealth, and that begins a whole 'tit-for-tat' cycle of violence that can go on the many generations.

All of this could be eliminated if we would simply design and implement a socio-economic system that equitably shared wealth and opportunity. But so far, we just can't seem to do it. Fear and greed drives us to hoard whatever we have, and to resentment those that are doing the hoarding, and eventually to shortages that propel us to violence. Over and over and over, again.

But now there are so many of us living on this planet that our greed and stupidity are threatening to destroy not just us, but the planet, itself.
 
Top