Is globalization a necessary evil?

SOCIAL IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION IN INDIA

ThetermGLOBALIZATIONhasbeenwidelyusedaswellasheardinthelastfifteen
years.Peopleontheglobearemuchmoreconnectedtoeachothertodaythaneverbeforein
thehistoryofmankind.Theflowofinformation,money,goodsandservicesfromonepartof
theworldtoanotherpartsoftheworldaremuchmorequicklyandfrequenttoday.
Weliveinanintenselyinterdependentworldinwhichalltheearthspeoplewiththeir
immensedifferencesintheircultureandhistoricalexperiencesaregettingtogetherininstant
communication.
Socializationofpeopleforimprovingbusinessandfinancialactivitiesacrosstheglobe
canbereferredasglobalization.TheworstandthebittertastefromtheEastIndiaCompany
and British rule led the Indians little bit cautious for experiencing the adventures of
Globalization. This has been the root cause for the delay of liberalization in India.
LiberalizationbegantoholditsfootonthebarrenlandsofdevelopingcountrieslikeIndiaby
reducing the excise duty on electronic goods. Import duties were cut downto allow the
introductionofMNCstoIndiaonequalitybasis.Asaresult,newtechnologiesaswellas
newproductsandeconomicopportunitieswerebroughttoIndiabyGlobalization.Nowin
todays scenario, India has made a lead in growingIT, business processing andR&D
Investments.
Onthewhole,Globalizationmainlyaspiresat:
1.
Reducingtradebarrierssoastopermitfreeflowofgoodsamongvariousnations.
2.
Creationofanenvironmentallowingfreeflowofcapitalaswellastechnologycan
takeplaceamongdifferentnations
3.
Promotionoffreemovementoflaborbetweendifferentcountries.
The International agreements for achieving these developments can be accomplished
throughInternational conferences and through World Trade Organization (WTO), the
International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. The Era of Globalization is fast
becomingthepreferredtermfordescribingthecurrenttimes.Globalizationdescribesthe
political,economicandculturalatmosphereoftoday.Inthissense,globalizationisasocial
and cultural process in which individuals of different cultural backgrounds as well as
countriesgetachancetofreelyinteractwitheachotherinallspheresoflifemoreintensively
thanbefore.
Thetradeagreementsincludeseveralnontradeandsocialstipulationsandhavegenerated
immensesocialconsequences.Themultidimensionalimpactofglobalizationisfeltdirectly
and indirectly by all sections of the population in some sense advantage to some and
disadvantagetoothers.Thenoneconomicaswellasnonbeneficialsocialoutcomesareas
significant as economic consequences. Both developed and developing countries feel the
socialimpactofglobalizationthoughindifferentmanner.Thereisnodenyingofthefactthat
globalizationhasbroughtcheerstopeopleslifebyopeningthenewandadvancedvistasof
employment.Ithasalsomadeinroadsinculturalheritageofthiscountry.
Whileglobalizationhasincreasedtradeandhaspromotedforeigndirectinvestment(FDI)
aswellastechnologicalprogressandhencebroughtmanycommercialbenefitsbutthegains
achieved by the adventurous globalization are not evenly spread between countries or
betweendifferentsegmentswithinthecountries.Lessdevelopedcountrieshavenottaken
muchpartintechnologicalrevolutionanditsoutcome,andthishasaggravatedthegapwithin
andbetweenthecountries.Accordingtosomesectionsthedifferenceanddivisionbetween

the rich and poor is intensified in this globalization era while the economists being the
optimistic consider globalization inevitable for survival. The social dimensions of
globalizationandthesocialproblemsandchallengesitpossesshavealreadybecomeanarea
ofgreatconcernofmanycountriesincludingIndiawhicharenotsociallyreadytowork
underglobalarrangements.
Economicliberalismhasintroducedvastchangesorriftintherelationshipbetweenthe
state,laborandbusiness.Intodaysscenarioafacttobenotedthattheeconomicsceneis
dominatedbymarketconditionsratherthansocialneeds.So,inplaceofinvestingonfood
products,education,housingandhealth,investmentsareshiftingtoluxurygoods,computer
hardwareandsoftwarewhichpresentlyarenottheprioritiesofcommonpeopleindeveloping
countriesbutarecapableofyieldingthehighestprofits.Developmentisunderstoodmorein
termsofmegaprojectslikeconstructionofbigdamsandpowerprojectsthanintermsof
grassrootsdevelopmentsuchassmallirrigationfacilitiesandsmallscaleindustrieswhich
havebeenthebaseofalargeproportionofthepopulation.Increasingcostsofagricultural
inputsaredrivingorthrowingoutthefarmersfromtheirfarmsastheheavilysubsidized
foreignproductsaredumpedinthemarketwhichreflectsthequestionmarkontheirfateof
survival.
Besidesallthese,jobsectorisalsoverymuchaffected.Jobshortageisinevitableinsome
sectorswiththeintroductionofcommunicationandinformationtechnology.Vastmassesof
unskilledandsemiskilledlaborarefindingthemselvesoutfromthecompetitioninthenew
marketeconomy.Thegainsofworkersoverseveraldecadesofpersistentfights likejob,
incomeaswellassocialsecurityandlaborwelfarearesaidtobefedbytheirhandsinthe
growthofunconventionaljobswithdifferentdemands.Moreandmorelaborsavingdevices
areinventedandadoptedreplacingthehumanhands.
IntheInternationalLaborConferenceheldin2000,theLaborMinisteroftheGovernment
ofIndiaisreportedtohavestatedthatthehighsocialcostofglobalizationisexcellingitself
in the form of acute unemployment, underemployment and social exclusion. Food
insecurity,destructionofsmallscalecottageindustriesandfurtherdeteriorationofwomens
positioninemploymentareallcitedasundesirableeffectsofglobaltrade.
TheCommunistparties,despitebeingsupporteroftheUPAgovernmentatthecentreare
concernedabouttheimpactofglobalizationonthecommonmaninIndia.Although65%of
thepopulationworkisinagriculturebutthefarmingcommunityinthecountryisoneofthe
worsthitsectionsunderglobalization.Somestudieshaveshownthattheshareofglobal
wealthofdevelopingcountriesisreducedfrom20%in1960to18%in1994.Ithasbeenalso
foundthatbothincreaseofpovertyandincreasinggapbetweenrichandpoorareprevailing
withinthesecountries.
Globalizationhasbeenaccompaniedbynumerousexchangesofnoneconomicproducts
amongdifferentcountrieslikeculturalideasandproducts,information,modelsandfashions,
images,brands,etc.Withoutdiscriminatingthepositiveornegativeimpactsofglobalization
ontheIndiansociety,letusfindthechangesprevailinginthesocialandculturallifeof
India:

Accessingoftelevisiongrewfrom10%oftheurbanpopulationto75%oftheurban
populationin1999.
Cabletelevisionandforeignmoviesbecamewidelyavailableandactasacatalystin
surpassingtheculturalboundaries.
Allthesetechnologieschangedthedreamsandperceptionsofthecommonpeople.

Traditionofliveinrelationshipspreadingitsfeetgraduallyinsomepartsofthe
country.
IndianyouthsleavingeducationinthemidwayandjoiningMNCs.
Increaseintheviolenceparticularlyagainstwomen.
Scientificandtechnologicalinnovationshasledthelifequitecomfortable,fastand
enjoyable.
Moreavailabilityofcheap,filthymaterialssuchasCDsorDVDsofvulgarmovies
orforeignchannelsinthenameofliberalization.
Landlineorbasicphoneswasaprestigioussymbolfewyearsbackbutnowpeople
ridingonthebicyclewithamobileonhishandtalkingorlisteningmusicoreventargeting
thegirlswiththeircamerasinthephone.
Societyhasbecomemuchmoreopencomparedtoitsearlierconservativelookdueto
exposurestootherculturethroughthevarioussourcesofcommunication.
PeoplearelessbotheredforpublicorgovernmentservicesjobasprivateorMNCs
areofferingmorelucrativejobs.
Extensionofinternetfacilitieseventoruralareas
Oldcinemahallsarereplacedbymultiplextheaters
OldrestaurantsarereplacedbyMcDonalds,KFC,fastfoodcorners,etc.
Morescandalsorscamscomparedtopreglobalizationera.
Increasingrateofcrimessuchmurder,rape,blackmailing,MMSscandals,etc.
Deteriorationofsocialvaluesevidentfromthelessrespectforthegirlsaswellas
olderpeople.
Notwithstandingontheabovepointswhathasbeenenumeratedabove,globalizationhas
definitelybroughtpositivechangesandhasimprovedthelifestyleaswellastheculturaland
psychologicalperspectiveofthesociety.Ithasalsoplayedavitalroleinthepersonalfinance
whichcanbebestunderstoodbythefollowingpoints:
Entryofprivatesectorbankhastransformedthefunctioningofpublicsectorbanktoa
largerextent.
Fallininterestrates;smallermonthlyinstallmentshavemadelifemuchsimplerto
Indiancustomers.
ATMsmadetransactionsfromthebankeasiertocommonpeoplethanearlier.
NumberofATMshasincreasedfrom500in1998to32300in2008.
Onlinetrading,purchasingofvariousfinanceproductsandonlinebankinghashelped
andmotivatedthecommonmentoparticipateintheinvestmentprocess.
Inevitablechangeshavealsobeenidentifiedinjobsectoraspointedbelow:
Studentsgetselectionorrecruitedbythecompaniesayearbeforethedateof
completionoftheirtechnicaleducationwithmuchmoreattractivesalariesthaninnineties
Inthelasttenyears,annualrevenueofsoftwareindustrieshasgrownby350%
Around1.16crorepeopleareemployedinBPOsectorcomparedtoonlyfewlakhsin
theyear1998.
Followingarethesomecommonindicatorsofchange:
NowmostofthehouseholdshavemorethanonecolourTV.
NumberofpeopletravelingbyairorACclassintrainshasincreasedtremendously.

Thereare42millioninternetusersinIndiaintheyear2008ascomparedto1.4
millionin1998.
Numberofmobileusershasgrownto246millionin2008from1.0million1998.
Therehasbeen96%increaseinthepurchasingofpassengercarsinthelasttenyears.

ApartfromtheabovebenefitsdemandforIndianscientists,engineers,techniciansand
mechanicshasresultedinincreasedpopulationofnonresidentIndians.Forexample,thereis
avillageinKeralanamedDubaivillageasonefromeveryhouseholdhasgonetoDubaifor
employment. Globalization is certainly creating wealth but it is not distributed with any
fairnessinthesensethatopportunitiesarenotopentoallinafairmanner.
Thecruxofthewholedebateiswhetherglobalizationleadstomoreopportunitiesor
increasinginequality?Theanswerwouldbeglobalizationcanliftpeopleoutofpoverty,but
inequalitiesbetweengroupsgetstronger.WhiletheIndianeconomycannotinsulateitself
fromthehappeningsintherestoftheworldandsoitmuststrivetoreapthebenefitsof
globalization,theimmediatesocialconsequencesmustbetackledtoreducetheburdenonthe
commonpeople.
Globalization a necessary evil or an archetype of the modern world?
"It has been said that arguing against globalization is like arguing against the laws of
gravity."
Kofi Annan
In recent years, the phenomenon known as globalization has become a widespread
byword not only in the academic milieu but also in the mainstream media. Impossible as
it is to dissociate it from the economic environment and the dynamics within, it is safe to
say that its increasing presence was triggered by a series of events in the late 20th
Century: the collapse of the iron curtain in Europe, the demise of socialism and the rapid
technological progress and circulation of internet, which created the premise for a
worldwide network. Certain other notions are associated, such as Americanization (the
assimilation of the social, economic, political and cultural pattern of the United States of
America), acculturation (the merger of several cultures), glocalization (a portmanteau
between the concepts of local and global; a milder form of globalization), even
McDonaldization, as a prototype established by a multinational corporate empire.
Perhaps one of its most encompassing definitions belongs to Philip G. Cerny, professor of
global political economy at Rutgers University Newark. He explains globalization as
being not just about changing relations between the inside of the nation-state and the
outside of the international system. It cuts across received categories, creating myriad
multilayered intersections, overlapping playing fields, and actors skilled at working
across these boundaries. People are at once rooted and rootless, local producers and
global consumers, threatened in their identities yet continually remaking those
identities.
In the extract entitled Making Sense of Globalization authors David Held and Anthony
McGrew attempt to synthesize current theories on globalization thus identifying two main
ideological biases regarding this phenomenon: skepticism and globalism. The
phenomenon of globalization fails to fall under a standard scientific paradigm, due to its
fluctuating nature. That is precisely why the authors use a holistic approach when it
comes to defining this concept, pinpointing its social, political, economic and
anthropological aspects. At the very beginning we see globalization reduced to its basic
building blocks, which are human interactions. Whether these patterns of social conduct
occur on a local, national, or transnational level, they can partake in the massive power
structure that is globalization, by means of mass communication between the developed
areas of the world. One of the hypotheses that can be drawn from the article is that

absolute globalization is far from possible at present, due to unequal division of power
structures across the globe. However, in its ideal, archetypical form, globalization brings
forth the vision of homogeneity and consistency in lifestyle worldwide.
The wave of skepticism deals mainly with demystifying this occurrence as being simply
an alternate expression for Americanization. Globalization would in that sense have to
exist as a platform for promoting capitalism and consolidating multinational corporate
empires worldwide. Skeptics believe that globalization is merely a pretext for the
massive spread of capitalism and progression towards a global liberal market.
In contrast to the skeptic theories which have a focus to the economy, globalists attempt
to zero in on other factors such as social dynamics within the modern organization. The
similarities that nations worldwide share are key elements of the globalist approach.
According to the globalists, geopolitics is to be taken into consideration, along with the
migratory movements that have taken place throughout history, both meant to generate
a natural need for globalization, as it ensures harmonious diplomatic relationships.
What both opinions have in common is the fact that they recognize globalization as
stemming from the United States. The American model, in this respect, functions as a
wide-reaching pattern for social and economic structures.
Regardless of trending opinions on the subject, globalization is an ongoing phenomenon
to be reckoned with. To fully understand the scope of globalization is to examine the
urban landscape. Even in an Eastern European country such as Romania, urban
development incorporates the blueprint of a modern, fast-paced, interconnected
configuration, specific to the modern metropolis predominant not only in the European
Union, but also in the United States of America.
The information revolution seems to have triggered a rapid increase in the
aforementioned phenomenon, considering the speed at which we can access and
download unlimited information; instantaneous communication possible from almost any
region of the world to another is a source of multi-cultural, multi-ethnic interaction and
dialogue, incorporating itself into a concept coined by Marshall McLuhan, the global
village. Ideally, this global village would require the presence of a sense of solidarity
between the citizens of the world, able to react immediately in case of a
national/regional emergency, their combined efforts diminishing the corrosive impact of
its aftermath. One example would be the news of one of the greatest tragedies of the
21st century, the 9/11 incident, within seconds bringing the entire world in a state of
alert. More recently, the Haiti catastrophe managed to conjure enough support from
organizations and individuals worldwide to help victims and their families. These kinds of
collective call-to-arms actions, organized on an international scale, can be seen as a
symptom of globalization, along with their counterparts, public protests and
insurrections.
Subsequently, globalization can be defined a network of transcontinental relationships,
as stated in the premise of the article. Its presence can be beneficial in terms of
knowledge and awareness of the environment and the global media agenda.
Political analyst and Newsweek columnist Fareed Zakaria argues that despite the
initiating role the United States presumably had in globalization, its administration has
brought it to the brink of economic stagnation. He lists a series of problems which
represent an inability to cope with the rate globalization has reached in present times:

We have not noticed how fast the rest has risen. Most of the industrialized world--and a
good part of the non-industrialized world as well--has better cell phone service than the
United States. [] Americans are constantly told by their politicians that the only thing
we have to learn from other countries' health care systems is to be thankful for ours.
Most Americans ignore the fact that a third of the country's public schools are totally
dysfunctional (because their children go to the other two-thirds). The American litigation

system is now routinely referred to as a huge cost to doing business, but no one dares
propose any reform of it. Our mortgage deduction for housing costs a staggering $80
billion a year, and we are told it is crucial to support home ownership, except that
Margaret Thatcher eliminated it in Britain, and yet that country has the same rate of
home ownership as the United States. We rarely look around and notice other options
and alternatives, convinced that "we're number one.

All things considered, globalization remains an inevitable phenomenon, prompted by the

increasing technological advances. One of the biggest fears the adversaries of
globalization have is the imminence of rendering individual cultures and traditions
obsolete, by compelling them to adapt to a singular, unifying culture. As far as economy
is concerned, a possible solution for the negative effects of globalization would be its
replacement with glocalization, as both a means to combat ethnocentricity as well as
avoid creating a gap between the developed and developing countries. Implementing
glocalization can also translate as a gesture of corporate social responsibility, as it
simultaneously respects local and global standards, adapting products and services to
each country where they are distributed. However ambiguous the definition of
globalization may remain and regardless of what type of phenomenon prevails, be it
globalization or glocalization, current times require a thorough understanding of political
power structures and economic mechanisms that shape the very nature of our future.