Darwinist asked in EnvironmentGlobal Warming · 7 years ago

What can you tell me about "Globalisation" ...?

Whatever the correct spelling; what can you tell me about "Globalisation"? What does it mean to you?...

Is it a good thing? ... a bad thing? ... something inevitable perhaps?

and its significance when it comes to the question of climate change?

I have to admit; I've heard the term but have never looked into this and have no preconceived opinions. I'm not even sure what it means so I'll probably be easily impressed!

Also, please indicate your position on man-made global warming; I'd like to know if proponents and skeptics view globalisation differently. I'll keep that in mind when choosing best answer.

Thanks in anticipation ...

14 Answers

  • 7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Globalisation is the UK spelling, globalization the U.S.

    The term is commonly used in economics, social science, business, economic history and by journalists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization

    Although this is an interesting question, I would not anticipate any great revelations from it. I may be missing something, but I do not see much of a connection to, or correlation between, globalization and anthropogenic global warming either as (i) a physical phenomenon or (ii) a subject of scientific research and widespread deluded denial of science:

    a) The ability of homo sapiens to alter the planetary climate is almost purely a function of greenhouse gas emissions, and is completely independent of whatever else our species does or does not do on a worldwide scale. Suppose humans, instead of spreading across the globe from Africa some tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago, had all moved to and stayed with Eurasia, but had otherwise developed a more or less modern industrial economy, such as what we actually have now, and thereby burned up most of the Mideast's oil and the coal reserves of what is now the British Isles, Germany, Russia and China. That would be more CO2 and more global warming that we actually have now, yet you could not talk about "globalization" in any real political, cultural or socioeconomic sense since over 3/4 of the globe, including the whole western hemisphere and the whole southern hemisphere, would be complete wilderness never seen by human eyes or touched by human feet.

    b) Globalization has dedicated proponents and dedicated opponents of varying ideological stripes, from pro-globalization advocates of "world peace and brotherhood" and multinational corporations determined to exploit worldwide markets, to the detractors of such developments whether environmentalists decrying loss of species diversity or linguists fearing the extinction of minor languages or the Taliban blowing up world heritage sites. Acceptance or denial of the reality, significance, and risks to the human economy of man-made long term global climate change has little correlation with any of that. It depends first and foremost on the level of scientific education, and secondly on the degree of susceptibility to a widespread anti-science disinformation movement (see the links below under sources).

    How inevitable globalization is or isn't, although partly a matter of semantics, is also a very interesting and debatable question, but in any case has little to do with any of the above, and basically nothing to do with this category of Yahoo Answers.









    Youtube thumbnail

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    If you're in the United States, spell words like "globalization" and "civilization" with Zs; in the United Kingdom and most other English-speaking countries, use "-sion" instead.

    Globalization is the idea and process of worldwide (more or less) free trade. Globalization can also refer to the homogenization of cultures around the world due to the influence of foreign goods, particularly from the United States, which can "infiltrate" an existing culture. A good example of this is the rapid growth of American fast-food companies like KFC and McDonalds in China.

    Globalization, although it tends to remove trade barriers and increase wealth, can also force people in undeveloped or developing countries to into positions of economic dependency. Because of the United States' position in the world's economy, globalization very nearly means Americanization. For this reason, globalization is very unpopular in some circles.

    Globalization is not inevitable per se, nor is any other human activity, but a lot of people have a very strong motivation (money) to keep it going.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    Globalization is often defined as the distribution of labor, production, and the market. In reality globalization means that the world is global and integral, every part in it is completely interconnected like cells in a single body. Each one of them determines the fate of the other parts, like in the butterfly effect. The general rule is that no conflicts are allowed between different parts of the world, because opposing integration is opposing progress and evolution, opposing the law of nature.

    Today it is crucial for us to recognize this in the world; that any inconsistency or bad success in carrying out nature’s law of unity will lead to a negative result: the crisis that we are facing today will intensify.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Laura
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Usually 4... but sometimes 3

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    I see globalisation as an expansions of the community. What expands? Influences expand including culture, economic trade, travel, awareness, politics, migration, etc. Technology has allowed this mainly through communications and transportation advancements.

    I feel some aspects are and should be virtually restriction-free like cultural exchange and travel, some should be somewhat restricted and controlled like economic trade and migration while political expansion should be seriously restricted (i.e. sovereignty is very important to me).

    While I acknowledge that man has affected the climate, I am a skeptic of dangerous or catastrophic AGW.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    I'm a realist on AGW. I hesitate to call my self a "proponent", that makes it sound like I *want* AGW...

    Globalization is... a thing. It can be a good thing, it can be a bad thing, it can be neutral.

    The main impact on climate change that I can think of is if there's more long-distance trade, there's more fuel being used to transport goods from place to place. Oh, and one country instituting a carbon tax or the like can potentially move manufacturing to another country, if there aren't tariffs to compensate.

    Source(s): Please check out my open questions.
    • Login to reply the answers
  • Pat
    Lv 4
    7 years ago

    Globalization has always been here. To me, the meaning has been changed to mean that we should all come together under one Government. This is what the United Nations has been trying to do for several years (in fairness to all people). Unfortunately, the Global Monetary Elites have pretty much seized control of the United Nations with the introduction of the "euro". Most people don't understand how "centralized banking" works and how the Monetary Elites control the flow of money. The U.S. has been under control of the Monetary Elites since 1913 through the "Federal Reserve Act". The Federal Reserve is a private corporation through this Act.

    All in all it is a bad thing (unless we can all somehow come together for a common cause against the Monetary Elites That doesn't mean business people. I'm talking about the banking systems)! It keeps the power of media and Government under the Monetary Elite's control. This is why I don't believe in man-made Global Warming. When you understand that the Monetary Elites only care about creating chaos between all people (the more divided we are then the more we are fighting against each other - which takes money to fight for a cause with interest).

    I hope that made sense.


    "The Money Masters" (YouTube video) tells the history about how "fractional reserve lending" has given the Monetary Elites so much power over people. Governments can't help borrowing from banks (by selling worthless Government Bonds to them to pay their debts) and has driven most Governments into our current debt crises.


    Our past 4 Presidents are for Globalization (George Bush Sr said "A new world order") and have taken steps for the United states to be part of it. I definitely disagree with it in its current context.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Rio
    Lv 6
    7 years ago

    Simply a unit of measurement. Where the unit(s) combined equals 1or some multiple of 1. Defining the units as integral value isn't as simple. So yes its pertinent when it comes to CC, you at least have a standard. But almost no or very little control..."That is the question".

    AGW: Not really overly concern about activist demise...they seem to be digging in the wrong hole. Accomplish very little and contribute nothing, other then misrepresentation.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    The domination of the many by the few.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Kano
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    I think Globalisation is purely economic and has very little to do with politics, it is money and goods driven and as such fairly inevitable.

    I'm a denier, not a climate change dupe

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.