Editing Globalization (section)

==Support and criticism==
{{See also|Criticisms of globalization}}
[[File:Press conference EU-Mercosul on June 26, 2019 (VII).jpg|thumb|The [[European Union–Mercosur free trade agreement]], which would form one of the world's largest [[free trade]] areas, has been denounced by environmental activists and indigenous rights campaigners.]]

Reactions to processes contributing to globalization have varied widely with a history as long as extraterritorial contact and trade. [[Philosophical]] differences regarding the costs and benefits of such processes give rise to a broad-range of [[ideologies]] and [[social movement]]s. Proponents of [[economic growth]], [[Economic expansion|expansion]], and [[Economic development|development]], in general, view globalizing processes as desirable or necessary to the well-being of human [[society]].<ref name=Sen1970>Sen, Amartya K. (1970). ''Collective choice and social welfare.'' San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.</ref>

Antagonists view one or more globalizing processes as detrimental to social well-being on a global or local scale;<ref name=Sen1970 /> this includes those who focus on social or [[natural environment|natural]] [[sustainability]] of long-term and continuous economic expansion, the social [[structural inequality]] caused by these processes, and the [[Colonialism|colonial]], [[imperialistic]], or [[hegemonic]] [[ethnocentrism]], [[cultural assimilation]] and [[cultural appropriation]] that underlie such processes.

Globalization tends to bring people into contact with foreign people and cultures. [[Xenophobia]] is the fear of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/xenophobia?q=xenophobia|title=Definition of xenophobia in English from the Oxford dictionary|work=oxforddictionaries.com|access-date=23 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160731222505/http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/xenophobia?q=xenophobia|archive-date=31 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/xenophobia|title=Define Xenophobia at Dictionary.com|work=Dictionary.com|access-date=23 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110101202139/http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Xenophobia|archive-date=1 January 2011|url-status=live}}</ref> Xenophobia can manifest itself in many ways involving the relations and [[perception]]s of an [[ingroup]] towards an [[Outgroup (sociology)|outgroup]], including a fear of losing identity, suspicion of its activities, aggression, and desire to eliminate its presence to secure a presumed purity.<ref name="auto">Guido Bolaffi. ''Dictionary of race, ethnicity and culture''. SAGE Publications Ltd., 2003. p. 332.</ref>

Critiques of globalization generally stem from discussions surrounding the impact of such processes on the planet as well as the human costs. They challenge directly traditional metrics, such as GDP, and look to other measures, such as the [[Gini coefficient]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPA/0,,contentMDK:20238991~menuPK:492138~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:430367,00.html|title=Poverty Analysis – Measuring Inequality|work=worldbank.org|access-date=2 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130622034007/http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPA/0,,contentMDK:20238991%7EmenuPK:492138%7EpagePK:148956%7EpiPK:216618%7EtheSitePK:430367,00.html|archive-date=22 June 2013|url-status=live}}</ref> or the [[Happy Planet Index]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.happyplanetindex.org/ |title=The Happy Planet Index |publisher=Neweconomics.org |access-date=2 June 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090926174209/http://www.happyplanetindex.org/ |archive-date=26 September 2009 }}</ref> and point to a "multitude of interconnected fatal consequences–social disintegration, a breakdown of democracy, more rapid and extensive deterioration of the environment, the spread of new diseases, increasing poverty and alienation"<ref name="The Hidden Connections">{{cite book | last = Capra | first = Fritjof | year = 2002 | title = The Hidden Connections | publisher = Random House | location = New York, New York | isbn = 978-0-385-49471-7 | url = https://archive.org/details/hiddenconnection00capr_0 }}</ref> which they claim are the [[unintended consequences]] of globalization. Others point out that, while the forces of globalization have led to the spread of western-style democracy, this has been accompanied by an increase in inter-ethnic tension and violence as free market economic policies combine with democratic processes of universal suffrage as well as an escalation in militarization to impose democratic principles and as a means to conflict resolution.<ref>Sorrells, Kathryn. Intercultural Communication: Globalization and Social Justice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2013. Print.</ref>

On 9 August 2019, Pope Francis denounced [[isolationism]] and hinted that the Catholic Church will embrace globalization at the [[Synod of Bishops for the Pan-Amazon region|October 2019 Amazonia Synod]], stating "the whole is greater than the parts. Globalization and unity should not be conceived as a sphere, but as a polyhedron: each people retains its identity in unity with others"<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2019-08/pope-francis-interview-europe-amazonia-synod-politics-environmen.html|title=Pope: isolationism and populism lead to war – Vatican News|date=9 August 2019|website=www.vaticannews.va|access-date=9 August 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190809181758/https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2019-08/pope-francis-interview-europe-amazonia-synod-politics-environmen.html|archive-date=9 August 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>

===Public opinion===
{{Update|type=section|date=December 2019}}

As a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, globalization is considered by some as a form of capitalist expansion which entails the integration of local and national economies into a global, unregulated market economy.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Guttal|first=Shalmali|date=2007|title=Globalisation|journal=Development in Practice|volume=17|issue=4/5|pages=523–531|issn=0961-4524|jstor=25548249|doi=10.1080/09614520701469492|s2cid=218523141}}</ref> A 2005 study by Peer Fis and Paul Hirsch found a large increase in articles negative towards globalization in the years prior. In 1998, negative articles outpaced positive articles by two to one.<ref name="Fiss 2005">{{Cite journal|last1=Fiss|first1=Peer C.|last2=Hirsch|first2=Paul M.|s2cid=16331519|date=February 2005|title=The Discourse of Globalization: Framing and Sensemaking of an Emerging Concept|journal=American Sociological Review|volume=70|issue=1|pages=29–52|doi=10.1177/000312240507000103}}</ref> The number of newspaper articles showing negative framing rose from about 10% of the total in 1991 to 55% of the total in 1999. This increase occurred during a period when the total number of articles concerning globalization nearly doubled.<ref name="Fiss 2005"/>

A number of international polls have shown that residents of Africa and Asia tend to view globalization more favorably than residents of Europe or North America. In Africa, a Gallup poll found that 70% of the population views globalization favorably.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/btglobalizationtradera/273.php|title=Africans and Asians Tend to View Globalization Favorably; Europeans and Americans are More Skeptical|date=7 November 2006|website=WorldPublicOpinion.org|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120212025444/http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/btglobalizationtradera/273.php|archive-date=12 February 2012|access-date=28 November 2019}}</ref> The BBC found that 50% of people believed that economic globalization was proceeding too rapidly, while 35% believed it was proceeding too slowly.<ref name="bbc08">{{cite web|url=http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb08/BBCEcon_Feb08_rpt.pdf|title=Widespread Unease about Economy and Globalization – Global poll|date=2008|website=BBC World Service|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140903173226/http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb08/BBCEcon_Feb08_rpt.pdf|archive-date=3 September 2014|access-date=24 March 2015}}</ref>

In 2004, Philip Gordon stated that "a clear majority of Europeans believe that globalization can enrich their lives, while believing the European Union can help them take advantage of globalization's benefits while shielding them from its negative effects". The main opposition consisted of socialists, environmental groups, and nationalists. Residents of the EU did not appear to feel threatened by globalization in 2004. The EU job market was more stable and workers were less likely to accept wage/benefit cuts. Social spending was much higher than in the US.<ref>Gordon, Philip. 2004. [http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/globalization-europes-wary-embrace "Globalization: Europe's Wary Embrace"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110629191739/http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/globalization-europes-wary-embrace|date=29 June 2011}}. Yale Global, 1 November 2004.</ref> In a Danish poll in 2007, 76% responded that globalization is a good thing.<ref>{{Cite magazine|url=http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1684528,00.html|title=Why Denmark Loves Globalization|last=Fox|first=Justin|date=15 November 2007|magazine=Time|access-date=28 November 2019|url-status=live|url-access=subscription|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191023072043/http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1684528,00.html|archive-date=23 October 2019}}</ref>

Fiss, ''et al.'', surveyed US opinion in 1993. Their survey showed that, in 1993, more than 40% of respondents were unfamiliar with the concept of globalization. When the survey was repeated in 1998, 89% of the respondents had a polarized view of globalization as being either good or bad. At the same time, discourse on globalization, which began in the financial community before shifting to a heated debate between proponents and disenchanted students and workers. Polarization increased dramatically after the establishment of the WTO in 1995; this event and subsequent protests led to a large-scale anti-globalization movement.<ref name="Fiss 2005"/>
Initially, college educated workers were likely to support globalization. Less educated workers, who were more likely to compete with immigrants and workers in developing countries, tended to be opponents. The situation changed after the [[Great Recession]]. According to a 1997 poll 58% of college graduates said globalization had been good for the US. By 2008 only 33% thought it was good. Respondents with high school education also became more opposed.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB121623686919059307|title=The Declining Value Of Your College Degree|last=Ip|first=Greg|date=18 July 2008|work=The Wall Street Journal|access-date=29 November 2019|language=en-US|issn=0099-9660|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200229022054/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB121623686919059307|archive-date=29 February 2020|url-status=live}}</ref>

According to Takenaka Heizo and Chida Ryokichi, {{as of|1998|lc=y}} there was a perception in Japan that the economy was "Small and Frail". However, Japan was resource-poor and used exports to pay for its raw materials. Anxiety over their position caused terms such as ''[[internationalization]]'' and ''globalization'' to enter everyday language. However, Japanese tradition was to be as self-sufficient as possible, particularly in agriculture.<ref>{{Cite book|chapter-url=http://www.jcie.org/researchpdfs/DomAdjst/takenaka-chida.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110406132050/http://www.jcie.org/researchpdfs/DomAdjst/takenaka-chida.pdf |archive-date=2011-04-06 |url-status=live|title=Domestic Adjustments to Globalization|last1=Heizo|first1=Takenaka|last2=Ryokichi|first2=Chida|publisher=Japan Center for International Exchange|year=1998|isbn=4-88907-012-5|editor-last=Morrison|editor-first=Charles E.|location=Tokyo|pages=76–102|chapter=Japan|oclc=40657196|editor-last2=Soesastro|editor-first2=Hadi}}</ref>

Many in developing countries see globalization as a positive force that lifts them out of poverty.<ref name="bhagwati"/> Those opposing globalization typically combine environmental concerns with nationalism. Opponents consider governments as agents of [[neo-colonialism]] that are subservient to [[multinational corporations]].<ref name="visuality.org">{{cite journal |last=Shoa |first=S. Rajgopal |year=2002 |title=Reclaiming Democracy, the Anti-globalization Movement in South Asia |journal=Feminist Review |number=70 |pages=134–137 |jstor=1395975}}</ref> Much of this criticism comes from the middle class; the [[Brookings Institution]] suggested this was because the middle class perceived upwardly mobile low-income groups as threatening to their economic security.<ref>{{cite web |first=Carol |last=Graham |title=Winners and Losers: Perspectives on Globalization from the Emerging Market Economies |publisher=Brookings |date=1 January 2011 |url=http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2001/fall_globaleconomics_graham.aspx |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511180832/http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2001/fall_globaleconomics_graham.aspx |archive-date=11 May 2011  }}</ref>

===Economics===
[[File:20041120-1 bushchinamtg-1-515h.jpg|thumb|[[Hu Jintao]] of China and [[George W. Bush]] meet while attending an [[APEC]] summit in Santiago de Chile, 2004.]]

The literature analyzing the economics of free trade is extremely rich with extensive work having been done on the theoretical and empirical effects. Though it creates winners and losers, the broad consensus among economists is that free trade is a large and unambiguous net gain for society.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1 = Fuller|first1 = Dan|last2 = Geide-Stevenson|first2 = Doris|title = Consensus Among Economists: Revisited|journal = Journal of Economic Review|volume = 34|issue = 4|pages = 369–87|date =Fall 2003|url = http://www.indiana.edu/~econed/pdffiles/fall03/fuller.pdf|doi = 10.1080/00220480309595230|s2cid = 143617926|access-date = 22 December 2016|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20040920081202/http://www.indiana.edu/~econed/pdffiles/fall03/fuller.pdf|archive-date = 20 September 2004|url-status = live
}}{{registration required}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Friedman|first=Milton|author-link=Milton Friedman|title=The Case for Free Trade|journal=[[Hoover Digest]]|volume=1997|issue=4|page=42|url=http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3550727.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070122032127/http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3550727.html|archive-date=22 January 2007|bibcode=1993SciAm.269e..42B|year=1993|doi=10.1038/scientificamerican1193-42|url-access=subscription}}</ref> In a 2006 survey of 83 American economists, "87.5% agree that the U.S. should eliminate remaining tariffs and other barriers to trade" and "90.1% disagree with the suggestion that the U.S. should restrict employers from outsourcing work to foreign countries."<ref>{{Cite journal|last = Whaples|first = Robert|title = Do Economists Agree on Anything? Yes!|journal = The Economists' Voice|volume = 3|issue = 9|year= 2006|doi = 10.2202/1553-3832.1156|s2cid = 201123406}}</ref>

Quoting Harvard economics professor [[N. Gregory Mankiw]], "Few propositions command as much consensus among professional economists as that open world trade increases economic growth and raises living standards."<ref>{{cite web|last = Mankiw|first = Gregory|title = Outsourcing Redux|date = 7 May 2006|url = http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/05/outsourcing-redux.html|access-date = 22 January 2007|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070402023947/http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/05/outsourcing-redux.html|archive-date = 2 April 2007}}</ref> In a survey of leading economists, none disagreed with the notion that "freer trade improves productive efficiency and offers consumers better choices, and in the long run these gains are much larger than any effects on employment."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_0dfr9yjnDcLh17m|title=Poll Results {{!}} IGM Forum|website=www.igmchicago.org|access-date=1 July 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160622104941/http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_0dfr9yjnDcLh17m|archive-date=22 June 2016}}</ref> Most economists would agree that although increasing returns to scale might mean that certain industry could settle in a geographical area without any strong economic reason derived from comparative advantage, this is not a reason to argue against free trade because the absolute level of output enjoyed by both "winner" and "loser" will increase with the "winner" gaining more than the "loser" but both gaining more than before in an absolute level.

In the book ''[[The End of Poverty]]'', Jeffrey Sachs discusses how many factors can affect a country's ability to enter the world market, including government [[Political corruption|corruption]]; legal and social disparities based on gender, ethnicity, or caste; diseases such as [[AIDS]] and [[malaria]]; lack of infrastructure (including transportation, communications, health, and trade); unstable political landscapes; [[protectionism]]; and geographic barriers.<ref name="The End of Poverty">{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/endofpovertyecon00sach|title=The End of Poverty|last=Sachs|first=Jeffrey|publisher=Penguin Press|year=2005|isbn=978-1-59420-045-8|location=New York|oclc=57243168|url-access=registration}}</ref> [[Jagdish Bhagwati]], a former adviser to the U.N. on globalization, holds that, although there are obvious problems with overly rapid development, globalization is a very positive force that lifts countries out of poverty by causing a virtuous economic cycle associated with faster economic growth.<ref name="bhagwati">{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/indefenseofglob00bhag|title=In Defense of Globalization|last=Bhagwati|first=Jagdish|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2004|isbn=978-0-19-533093-9|location=Oxford; New York|oclc=719371219|url-access=registration}}</ref> However, economic growth does not necessarily mean a reduction in poverty; in fact, the two can coexist. Economic growth is conventionally measured using indicators such as [[GDP]] and [[Gross national income|GNI]] that do not accurately reflect the growing disparities in wealth.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Theories of Development: Contentions, Arguments, Alternatives|last1=Peet|first1=Richard|last2=Hartwick|first2=Elaine|publisher=The Guilford Press|year=2015|isbn=978-1-4625-1957-6|edition=3rd|location=New York|page=2|oclc=908634816|quote=But economic growth can occur without touching problems like inequality or poverty when all the increase in income goes to a relatively few people.}}</ref> Additionally, [[Oxfam International]] argues that poor people are often excluded from globalization-induced opportunities "by a lack of productive assets, weak infrastructure, poor education and ill-health;"<ref>{{Cite book|title=Introduction to International Development: Approaches, Actors, and Issues|last1=Beaudet|first1=Pierre|last2=Schafer|first2=Jessica|last3=Haslam|first3=Paul A.|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2012|isbn=978-0-19-544020-1|page=112|quote=According to Oxfam International, the contrasting experiences of Latin America and East Asia illustrate that globalization-induced growth and poverty can co-exist. Even when the market expands, 'poor people are often excluded from opportunities by a lack of productive assets, weak infrastructure, poor education, and ill-health'}}</ref> effectively leaving these marginalized groups in a [[poverty trap]]. Economist [[Paul Krugman]] is another staunch supporter of globalization and free trade with a record of disagreeing with many critics of globalization. He argues that many of them lack a basic understanding of [[comparative advantage]] and its importance in today's world.<ref>Conversi, Daniele (2009) '[http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/conversi/Globalization.pdf Globalization, ethnic conflict and nationalism] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110607191631/http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/conversi/Globalization.pdf|date=7 June 2011}}', in B. Turner (ed.) Handbook of Globalization Studies. London: Routledge/ Taylor & Francis; [[Tarak Barkawi|Barkawi, Tarak]] (2005) Globalization and War. Rowman & Littlefield; Smith, Dennis (2006) Globalization: The Hidden Agenda. Cambridge: Polity Press. See also Barber, Benjamin R., [[Jihad vs. McWorld]]. Ballantine Books, 1996</ref>

The flow of migrants to advanced economies has been claimed to provide a means through which global wages converge. An IMF study noted a potential for skills to be transferred back to developing countries as wages in those a countries rise.<ref name="12th April 2000: IMF Publications"/> Lastly, the dissemination of knowledge has been an integral aspect of globalization. Technological innovations (or technological transfer) are conjectured to benefit most developing and least developing countries (LDCs), as for example in the adoption of [[mobile phone]]s.<ref name="Saggi2002" />

There has been a rapid economic growth in Asia after embracing [[market orientation]]-based economic policies that encourage private [[property rights]], free enterprise and competition. In particular, in East Asian developing countries, [[GDP]] per head rose at 5.9% a year from 1975 to 2001 (according to 2003 [[Human Development Report]]<ref>{{cite web|year=2003|url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr03_complete.pdf|title=Human Development Report 2003|publisher=UNDP|access-date=6 April 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130418072827/http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr03_complete.pdf|archive-date=18 April 2013|url-status=live}}</ref> of UNDP). Like this, the British economic journalist [[Martin Wolf]] says that incomes of poor developing countries, with more than half the world's population, grew substantially faster than those of the world's richest countries that remained relatively stable in its growth, leading to reduced international inequality and the incidence of poverty.

[[File:Berg Ostry 2011 Chart 4.gif|thumb|left|Of the factors influencing the duration of [[economic growth]] in both developed and developing countries, [[Economic inequality|income equality]] has a more beneficial impact than trade openness, sound political institutions, and foreign investment.<ref name=BergOstryEE>{{Cite journal |last1= Berg |first1= Andrew G. |last2= Ostry |first2= Jonathan D. |year= 2011 |title= Equality and Efficiency |journal= Finance and Development |volume= 48 |issue= 3 |url= http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2011/09/berg.htm |access-date= 10 September 2012 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120703033111/http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2011/09/berg.htm |archive-date= 3 July 2012 |url-status= live }}</ref>]]
Certain demographic changes in the developing world after active [[economic liberalization]] and international integration resulted in rising general welfare and, hence, reduced inequality. According to Wolf, in the developing world as a whole, life expectancy rose by four months each year after 1970 and infant mortality rate declined from 107 per thousand in 1970 to 58 in 2000 due to improvements in [[standards of living]] and health conditions. Also, adult literacy in developing countries rose from 53% in 1970 to 74% in 1998 and much lower illiteracy rate among the young guarantees that rates will continue to fall as time passes. Furthermore, the reduction in [[fertility rate]] in the developing world as a whole from 4.1 births per woman in 1980 to 2.8 in 2000 indicates improved education level of women on fertility, and control of fewer children with more parental attention and investment.<ref name="Wolf2004">{{cite book|url= https://archive.org/details/whyglobalization00wolf|title= Why Globalization Works|publisher= [[Yale University Press]]|author= Martin Wolf|year= 2004|isbn= 978-0-300-10252-9|access-date= 6 April 2013|df= dmy-all}}{{dead link|date=January 2019|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref> Consequently, more prosperous and educated parents with fewer children have chosen to withdraw their children from the labor force to give them opportunities to be educated at school improving the issue of [[child labor]]. Thus, despite seemingly unequal [[distribution of income]] within these developing countries, their economic growth and development have brought about improved standards of living and welfare for the population as a whole.

Per capita [[gross domestic product]] (GDP) growth among post-1980 globalizing countries accelerated from 1.4 percent a year in the 1960s and 2.9 percent a year in the 1970s to 3.5 percent in the 1980s and 5.0 percent in the 1990s. This acceleration in growth seems even more remarkable given that the rich countries saw steady declines in growth from a high of 4.7 percent in the 1960s to 2.2 percent in the 1990s. Also, the non-globalizing developing countries seem to fare worse than the globalizers, with the former's annual growth rates falling from highs of 3.3 percent during the 1970s to only 1.4 percent during the 1990s. This rapid growth among the globalizers is not simply due to the strong performances of China and India in the 1980s and 1990s—18 out of the 24 globalizers experienced increases in growth, many of them quite substantial.<ref name="DDollar">{{cite web|author=Dollar, David|author2=Kraay, Aart|title=Trade, Growth, and Poverty|url=http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2001/09/dollar.htm|work=Finance and Development|publisher=International Monetary Fund|access-date=6 June 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120111124849/http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2001/09/dollar.htm|archive-date=11 January 2012|url-status=live}}</ref>

[[File:Worlds regions by total wealth(in trillions USD), 2018.jpg|thumb|250px|Worlds regions by total [[wealth]] (in trillions USD), 2018]]
The globalization of the late 20th and early 21st centuries has led to the resurfacing of the idea that the growth of economic [[interdependence]] promotes peace.<ref>E.g. {{cite web |title=Globalisation promotes peace |first1=Ju Hyun |last1=Pyun |first2=Jong-Wha |last2=Lee |date=21 March 2009 |url=http://www.voxeu.org/article/globalisation-promotes-peace |access-date=25 October 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141025034256/http://www.voxeu.org/article/globalisation-promotes-peace |archive-date=25 October 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref> This idea had been very powerful during the globalization of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and was a central doctrine of [[classical liberals]] of that era, such as the young [[John Maynard Keynes]] (1883–1946).<ref>See, for example, [[Roy Harrod]], ''[[The Life of John Maynard Keynes]]'', Macmillan, 1951; [[Donald Markwell]], ''[[John Maynard Keynes]] and International Relations: Economic Paths to War and Peace'', Oxford University Press, 2006. Keynes had colourfully described the globalization before World War I in ''The Economic Consequences of the Peace'', Macmillan, 1919, chapter 2.</ref>

Some opponents of globalization see the phenomenon as a promotion of corporate interests.<ref>{{cite news|first=Laurence|last=Lee|title=WTO blamed for India grain suicides|url=http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/2ED53A8B-1058-49CF-B9FF-3D96639456D1.htm|publisher=Al Jazeera|date=17 May 2007|access-date=17 May 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070519082251/http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/2ED53A8B-1058-49CF-B9FF-3D96639456D1.htm|archive-date=19 May 2007|url-status=live}}</ref> They also claim that the increasing autonomy and strength of [[corporate entities]] shapes the political policy of countries.<ref name="The Corporation">{{cite book | last = Bakan | first = Joel | author-link = Joel Bakan | year = 2004 | title = The Corporation | publisher = Simon & Schuster | location = New York | isbn = 978-0-7432-4744-3 | url = https://archive.org/details/corporation00joel }}</ref><ref name="Confessions of an Economic Hit Man">{{cite book | last = Perkins | first = John | author-link = John Perkins (author) | year = 2004 | title = Confessions of an Economic Hit Man | publisher = Berrett-Koehler | location = San Francisco | isbn = 978-1-57675-301-9 | url = https://archive.org/details/confessionsofec000perk }}</ref> They advocate global institutions and policies that they believe better address the moral claims of poor and working classes as well as environmental concerns.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/index.php?cd_language=2&id_menu= |title=Fórum Social Mundial |publisher=Forumsocialmundial.org.br |access-date=31 July 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080918063356/http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/index.php?cd_language=2&id_menu= |archive-date=18 September 2008 |url-status=live }}</ref> Economic arguments by [[fair trade]] theorists claim that unrestricted free trade benefits those with more [[financial leverage]] (i.e. the rich) at the expense of the poor.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_viewpoints_nafta_legacy_at10/|title=NAFTA at 10|work=Economic Policy Institute|access-date=7 February 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120630061101/http://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_viewpoints_nafta_legacy_at10/|archive-date=30 June 2012}}</ref>

Globalization allows corporations to [[outsource]] manufacturing and service jobs from high-cost locations, creating economic opportunities with the most competitive wages and worker benefits.<ref name="Kuruvilla 2008 39–72"/> Critics of globalization say that it disadvantages poorer countries. While it is true that free trade encourages globalization among countries, some countries try to protect their domestic suppliers. The main export of poorer countries is usually [[agricultural production]]s. Larger countries often subsidize their [[Agricultural subsidy|farmers]] (e.g., the EU's [[Common Agricultural Policy]]), which lowers the market price for foreign crops.<ref name="Hurst E. Charles P.41">Hurst E. Charles. Social Inequality: Forms, Causes, and consequences, 6th ed. p. 41</ref>

===Global democracy===
{{Main|Democratic globalization}}

Democratic globalization is a movement towards an institutional system of global [[democracy]] that would give world citizens a say in political organizations. This would, in their view, bypass nation-states, corporate oligopolies, ideological [[non-governmental organization]]s (NGO), political cults and mafias. One of its most prolific proponents is the British political thinker [[David Held]]. Advocates of [[democratic globalization]] argue that economic expansion and development should be the first phase of democratic globalization, which is to be followed by a phase of building [[International political economy|global political institutions]]. [[Francesco Stipo]], Director of the United States Association of the [[Club of Rome]], advocates unifying nations under a [[world government]], suggesting that it "should reflect the political and economic balances of world nations. A world confederation would not supersede the authority of the State governments but rather complement it, as both the States and the world authority would have power within their sphere of competence".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.usacor.org/archive/index.html |title=USACOR.org |publisher=USACOR.org |date=28 July 2009 |access-date=31 July 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100520180352/http://www.usacor.org/archive/index.html |archive-date=20 May 2010 }}</ref> Former [[Canadian Senator]] [[Douglas Roche]], [[Order of Canada|O.C.]], viewed globalization as inevitable and advocated creating institutions such as a [[directly elected]] [[United Nations Parliamentary Assembly]] to exercise oversight over unelected international bodies.<ref>{{cite web|last=Roche|first=Douglas|title=The Case for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly|url=http://www.wfm-igp.org/site/files/Roche_UN_Parliamentary_Assembly_2002.pdf|publisher=The World Federalist Movement – Institute for Global Policy|access-date=28 May 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130531054746/http://www.wfm-igp.org/site/files/Roche_UN_Parliamentary_Assembly_2002.pdf|archive-date=31 May 2013}}</ref>

===Global civics===
{{Main|Global civics|Multiculturalism}}
{{See also|Global citizenship}}

Global civics suggests that [[civics]] can be understood, in a global sense, as a [[social contract]] between [[global citizens]] in the age of interdependence and interaction. The disseminators of the concept define it as the notion that we have certain rights and responsibilities towards each other by the mere fact of being human on Earth.<ref name=case>{{Cite journal|last=Altinay |first=Hakan |title=The Case for Global Civics |journal=Global Economy and Development at Brookings |year=2010 |url=http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/03_global_civics_altinay.aspx |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100603104201/http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/03_global_civics_altinay.aspx |archive-date=3 June 2010  }}</ref> [[World citizen]] has a variety of similar meanings, often referring to a person who disapproves of traditional [[geopolitical]] divisions derived from national [[citizenship]]. An early incarnation of this sentiment can be found in [[Socrates]], whom [[Plutarch]] quoted as saying: "I am not an Athenian, or a Greek, but a citizen of the world."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.wcaa.org.au/|title=Global Parliament &#124; World Citizens Association (Australia)|website=australia|access-date=19 August 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190819194210/https://www.wcaa.org.au/|archive-date=19 August 2019}}</ref> In an increasingly interdependent world, world citizens need a compass to frame their mindsets and create a shared consciousness and sense of global responsibility in world issues such as environmental problems and [[nuclear proliferation]].<ref name = feasible>{{cite journal| last = Altinay| first = Hakan| title = A Global Civics: Necessary? Feasible?| journal = Global Policy| date = June 2010| url = http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/articles/international-law-and-human-rights/global-civics-necessary-feasible| access-date = 16 July 2012| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120926193551/http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/articles/international-law-and-human-rights/global-civics-necessary-feasible| archive-date = 26 September 2012}}</ref>

Baha'i-inspired author Meyjes, while favoring the single world community and emergent global consciousness, warns of globalization<ref>{{cite book| chapter = Language and Universalization: a 'Linguistic Ecology' Reading of Bahá'í Writ | first = Gregory Paul | last = Meyjes (also: Posthumus Meyjes) | title = The Journal of Bahá'í Studies | publisher = Association for Bahá'í Studies | volume =IX (1) | year =1999 | location = Ottawa | pages = 51–63 }}</ref> as a cloak for an expeditious economic, social, and cultural Anglo-dominance that is insufficiently inclusive to inform the emergence of an optimal world civilization. He proposes a process of "[[Universalism#Non-religious Universalism|universalization]]" as an alternative.

[[Cosmopolitanism]] is the proposal that all human ethnic groups belong to a single [[community]] based on a shared [[morality]]. A person who adheres to the idea of cosmopolitanism in any of its forms is called a cosmopolitan or cosmopolite.<ref>{{cite web|title=Cosmopolitan|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cosmopolitan?s=t|work=Dictionary.com|access-date=7 April 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160102020627/http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cosmopolitan?s=t|archive-date=2 January 2016|url-status=live}}</ref> A cosmopolitan community might be based on an inclusive morality, a shared economic relationship, or a political structure that encompasses different nations. The cosmopolitan community is one in which individuals from different places (e.g. nation-states) form relationships based on mutual respect. For instance, [[Kwame Anthony Appiah]] suggests the possibility of a cosmopolitan community in which individuals from varying locations (physical, economic, etc.) enter relationships of mutual respect despite their differing beliefs (religious, political, etc.).<ref>Kwame Anthony Appiah, "Cosmopolitan Patriots," Critical Inquiry 23, no. 3 (Spring, 1997): 617–39.</ref>

Canadian philosopher [[Marshall McLuhan]] popularized the term ''[[Global Village]]'' beginning in 1962.<ref>Marshall McLuhan and Bruce R. Powers (17 September 1992) The Global Village: Transformations in World Life and Media in the 21st century . Oxford University Press: 17 September 1992</ref> His view suggested that globalization would lead to a world where people from all countries will become more integrated and aware of common interests and shared humanity.<ref>Chapman, Roger. ''Culture wars: an encyclopedia of issues, viewpoints, and voices, Volume 1.'' 2009: M.E. Sharp</ref>

===International cooperation===
[[File:Obama and Medvedev sign Prague Treaty 2010.jpeg|thumb|right|[[Barack Obama]] and [[Dmitry Medvedev]] after signing the [[New START]] treaty in Prague, 2010]]
'''Military cooperation'''&nbsp;– Past examples of international cooperation exist. One example is the security cooperation between the United States and the former Soviet Union after the end of the Cold War, which astonished international society. Arms control and disarmament agreements, including the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (see [[START I]], [[START II]], [[START III]], and [[New START]]) and the establishment of [[NATO]]'s Partnership for Peace, the Russia NATO Council, and the [[G8]] Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction, constitute concrete initiatives of arms control and de-nuclearization. The US–Russian cooperation was further strengthened by anti-terrorism agreements enacted in the wake of 9/11.<ref name="globalpolicyjournal1">{{cite web|url=http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/brookings-audit/international-cooperation-stepping-stone-world-government|title=International cooperation as a stepping-stone to a world government|publisher=Global Policy Journal|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203072547/http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/brookings-audit/international-cooperation-stepping-stone-world-government|archive-date=3 December 2013|access-date=15 June 2013}}</ref>

'''Environmental cooperation'''&nbsp;– One of the biggest successes of environmental cooperation has been the agreement to reduce [[chlorofluorocarbon]] (CFC) emissions, as specified in the [[Montreal Protocol]], in order to stop ozone depletion. The most recent debate around nuclear energy and the non-alternative coal-burning power plants constitutes one more consensus on what not to do. Thirdly, significant achievements in IC can be observed through development studies.<ref name="globalpolicyjournal1"/>

'''Economic cooperation''' – One of the biggest challenges in 2019 with globalization is that many believe the progress made in the past decades are now back tracking. The back tracking of globalization has coined the term "Slobalization." Slobalization is a new, slower pattern of globalization.<ref>{{Cite magazine |title=Slowbalisation |magazine=The Economist |volume=430 |issue=9127 |date=Jan 26, 2019 |id={{ProQuest|2171135679}}}}</ref>

===Anti-globalization movement===
{{Main|Anti-globalization movement}}
[[File:2016-04-23 Anti-TTIP-Demonstration in Hannover, (10118).jpg|thumb|Anti-[[Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership|TTIP]] demonstration in [[Hannover]], Germany, 2016]]

Anti-globalization, or counter-globalization,<ref>[[Jacques Derrida]] (May 2004) ''[http://mondediplo.com/2004/11/06derrida Enlightenment past and to come] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170719035915/http://mondediplo.com/2004/11/06derrida |date=19 July 2017 }}'', speech at the party for 50 years of ''[[Le Monde diplomatique]]''</ref> consists of a number of criticisms of globalization but, in general, is critical of the globalization of [[corporate capitalism]].<ref>Morris, Douglas "Globalization and Media Democracy: The Case of Indymedia", ''Shaping the Network Society'', [[MIT Press]] 2003. Courtesy link to (pre-publication version) [http://www3.fis.utoronto.ca/research/iprp/c3n/CI/DMorris.htm FIS.utoronto.ca] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090304030415/http://www3.fis.utoronto.ca/research/iprp/c3n/CI/DMorris.htm|date=4 March 2009}}</ref> The movement is also commonly referred to as the [[alter-globalization]] movement, anti-globalist movement, [[anti-corporate]] globalization movement,<ref name=Juris>{{cite book | last = Juris | first = Jeffrey S. | title =Networking Futures: The Movements against Corporate Globalization | publisher = Duke University Press | location = Durham | year = 2008 | page = 2 | isbn = 978-0-8223-4269-4}}</ref> or movement against [[neoliberal]] globalization. Opponents of globalization argue that power and respect in terms of international trade between the developed and underdeveloped countries of the world are unequally distributed.<ref>Staggenborg, S. (2011). Social movements (Rev. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.</ref> The diverse subgroups that make up this movement include some of the following: trade unionists, environmentalists, anarchists, land rights and indigenous rights activists, organizations promoting human rights and sustainable development, opponents of privatization, and [[anti-sweatshop]] campaigners.<ref name="stwr.org">{{cite web|url=http://www.stwr.org/the-un-people-politics/the-anti-globalization-movement-defined.htm|title=The Anti-Globalization Movement Defined Share The World's Resources|last=Engler|first=M.|date=30 May 2007|access-date=14 March 2013}}{{dead link|date=August 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}l</ref>

In ''[[The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy]]'', [[Christopher Lasch]] analyzed<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-treachery-of-the-lites-elite-sense-of-irresponsibility-1610879.html |title=The treachery of the lites Elite sense of irresponsibility |newspaper=The Independent |date=10 March 1995 |access-date=19 September 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170827124832/http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-treachery-of-the-lites-elite-sense-of-irresponsibility-1610879.html |archive-date=27 August 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref> the widening gap between the top and bottom of the social composition in the United States. For him, our epoch is determined by a social phenomenon: the revolt of the elites, in reference to ''[[The Revolt of the Masses]]'' (1929) by the Spanish philosopher [[José Ortega y Gasset]]. According to Lasch, the new elites, i.e. those who are in the top 20% in terms of income, through globalization which allows total mobility of capital, no longer live in the same world as their fellow-citizens. In this, they oppose the old bourgeoisie of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which was constrained by its spatial stability to a minimum of rooting and civic obligations. Globalization, according to the sociologist, has turned elites into tourists in their own countries. The denationalization of business enterprise tends to produce a class who see themselves as "world citizens, but without accepting ... any of the obligations that citizenship in a polity normally implies". Their ties to an international culture of work, leisure, information – make many of them deeply indifferent to the prospect of national decline. Instead of financing public services and the public treasury, new elites are investing their money in improving their voluntary ghettos: private schools in their residential neighborhoods, private police, garbage collection systems. They have "withdrawn from common life". Composed of those who control the international flows of capital and information, who preside over philanthropic foundations and institutions of higher education, manage the instruments of cultural production and thus fix the terms of public debate. So, the political debate is limited mainly to the dominant classes and political ideologies lose all contact with the concerns of the ordinary citizen. The result of this is that no one has a likely solution to these problems and that there are furious ideological battles on related issues. However, they remain protected from the problems affecting the working classes: the decline of industrial activity, the resulting loss of employment, the decline of the middle class, increasing the number of the poor, the rising crime rate, growing drug trafficking, the urban crisis.

D.A. Snow et al. contend that the [[anti-globalization movement]] is an example of a [[new social movement]], which uses tactics that are unique and use different resources than previously used before in other social movements.<ref>Snow, D.A., Soule, S.A., & Kriesi, H. (2004). The Blackwell companion to social movements. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.</ref>

One of the most infamous tactics of the movement is the [[Battle of Seattle]] in 1999, where there were protests against the World Trade Organization's Third Ministerial Meeting. All over the world, the movement has held protests outside meetings of institutions such as the WTO, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, and the Group of Eight (G8).<ref name="stwr.org"/> Within the Seattle demonstrations the protesters that participated used both creative and violent tactics to gain the attention towards the issue of globalization.

===Opposition to capital market integration===
{{Main|Anti-capitalist movements}}
[[File:Worldbank protest jakarta.jpg|thumb|World Bank Protester, [[Jakarta]], Indonesia]]
{{Capitalism sidebar}}

Capital markets have to do with raising and investing money in various human enterprises. Increasing integration of these [[financial market]]s between countries leads to the emergence of a global capital marketplace or a single world market. In the long run, increased movement of capital between countries tends to favor owners of capital more than any other group; in the short run, owners and workers in specific sectors in capital-exporting countries bear much of the burden of adjusting to increased movement of capital.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Invested Interests: The Politics of National Economic Policies in a World of Global Finance|last=Frieden|first=Jeffry A.|journal=[[International Organization]]|issn=1531-5088|volume=45|issue=4|year=1991|pages=425–51|doi=10.1017/s0020818300033178|jstor=2706944|s2cid=154738660 }}</ref>

Those opposed to capital market integration on the basis of [[human rights]] issues are especially disturbed{{According to whom|date=March 2020}} by the various abuses which they think are perpetuated by global and international institutions that, they say, promote [[neoliberalism]] without regard to ethical standards. Common targets include the [[World Bank]] (WB), [[International Monetary Fund]] (IMF), the [[Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development]] (OECD) and the [[World Trade Organization]] (WTO) and [[free trade]] treaties like the [[North American Free Trade Agreement]] (NAFTA), [[Free Trade Area of the Americas]] (FTAA), the [[Multilateral Agreement on Investment]] (MAI) and the [[General Agreement on Trade in Services]] (GATS). In light of the economic gap between rich and poor countries, movement adherents claim free trade without measures in place to protect the under-capitalized will contribute only to the strengthening the power of industrialized nations (often termed the "North" in opposition to the developing world's "South").<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.heritage.org/trade/commentary/how-tariffs-and-regressive-trade-policies-hurt-the-poor|title=How Tariffs and Regressive Trade Policies Hurt the Poor|last=Kolas|first=Logan|website=The Heritage Foundation|language=en|access-date=30 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190330093705/https://www.heritage.org/trade/commentary/how-tariffs-and-regressive-trade-policies-hurt-the-poor|archive-date=30 March 2019|url-status=unfit}}</ref>{{better source needed|date=March 2019}}

===Anti-corporatism and anti-consumerism===
{{Main|Anti-corporatism|Anti-consumerism}}

[[Corporatist]] ideology, which privileges the rights of corporations ([[Legal personality|artificial or juridical persons]]) over those of [[natural person]]s, is an underlying factor in the recent rapid expansion of global commerce.<ref>{{cite journal | url=http://carnegieendowment.org/2001/09/01/corporatism-goes-global | title=Corporatism Goes Global | author=Ottaway, Marina | journal=Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations | volume=7 | issue=3 | date=September 2001 | doi=10.1163/19426720-00703006 | access-date=28 August 2014 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140903042838/http://carnegieendowment.org/2001/09/01/corporatism-goes-global | archive-date=3 September 2014 | url-access=subscription }}</ref> In recent years, there have been an increasing number of books ([[Naomi Klein]]'s 2000 ''[[No Logo]]'', for example) and films (''e.g. [[The Corporation (2003 film)|The Corporation]]'' & ''[[Surplus (film)|Surplus]]'') popularizing an [[anti-corporate]] [[ideology]] to the public.

A related contemporary ideology, [[consumerism]], which encourages the personal acquisition of goods and services, also drives globalization.<ref>{{cite journal | title=Lived effects of the Contemporary Economy: Globalization, Inequality, and Consumer Society. | author=Storper Michael | journal=Public Culture | year=2000 | volume=12 | issue=2 | pages=375–409 | doi=10.1215/08992363-12-2-375| citeseerx=10.1.1.571.5793 | s2cid=53599498 }}</ref> Anti-consumerism is a social movement against equating personal happiness with consumption and the purchase of material possessions. Concern over the treatment of consumers by large corporations has spawned substantial activism, and the incorporation of [[consumer education]] into school [[curricula]]. Social activists hold materialism is connected to [[Big-box store|global retail merchandizing]] and [[supplier convergence]], [[war]], greed, [[anomie]], [[crime]], [[environmental degradation]], and general social [[malaise]] and discontent. One variation on this topic is activism by ''postconsumers'', with the strategic emphasis on moving ''beyond'' addictive consumerism.<ref>{{cite journal | title=Collective dissonance and the transition to post-consumerism | author=Cohen, Maurie J. | journal=Futures |date=July 2013 | volume=52 | pages=42–51 | doi=10.1016/j.futures.2013.07.001}}</ref>

===Global justice and inequality===
====Global justice====
{{Main|Global justice movement}}
[[File:GINI index World Bank up to 2018.png|alt=|left|thumb|Differences in national income equality around the world as measured by the national [[Gini coefficient]], as of 2018<ref>{{Cite web|title=GINI index (World Bank estimate) {{!}} Data|url=https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI?view=map|access-date=23 July 2020|website=data.worldbank.org}}</ref>]]

The global justice movement is the loose collection of individuals and groups—often referred to as a "[[movement of movements]]"—who advocate [[fair trade]] rules and perceive current institutions of global economic integration as problems.<ref>{{Cite book|title=A Movement of Movements: Is Another World Really Possible?|publisher=Verso|year=2004|isbn=1-85984-504-5|editor-last=Mertes|editor-first=Tom|location=London|oclc=53243132|editor-last2=Bello|editor-first2=Walden F.|editor-last3=Bové|editor-first3=José|editor-link3=José Bové|editor-last4=Cassen|editor-first4=Bernard|editor-last5=Graeber|editor-first5=David|editor-last6=Hardt|editor-first6=Michael|editor-last7=Klein|editor-first7=Naomi|editor-last8=Marcos|editor-first8=Subcomandante|editor-last9=Muchhala|editor-first9=Bumika|display-editors=4}}</ref> The movement is often labeled an anti-globalization movement by the mainstream media. Those involved, however, frequently deny that they are [[anti-globalization]], insisting that they support the globalization of communication and people and oppose only the global expansion of corporate power.<ref>della Porta, D. 2005. "The Social Bases of the Global Justice Movement: Some Theoretical Reflections and Empirical Evidence from the First European Social Forum." Civil Society and Social Movements Programme Paper No. 21.Geneva: UNRISD (United Nations Research Institute for Social Development).</ref> The movement is based in the idea of [[social justice]], desiring the creation of a society or institution based on the principles of [[social equality|equality]] and [[solidarity]], the values of human rights, and the dignity of every human being.<ref name="autogenerated2006">Education and Social Justice By J. Zajda, S. Majhanovich, V. Rust, 2006, {{ISBN|1-4020-4721-5}}</ref><ref name="autogenerated2005">Nursing ethics: across the curriculum and into practice By Janie B. Butts, Karen Rich, Jones and Bartlett Publishers 2005, {{ISBN|978-0-7637-4735-0}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-act-135-of-2004.pdf|title=Legal Birth Definition Act – Act 135 of 2004|access-date=1 June 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203011611/http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-act-135-of-2004.pdf|archive-date=3 December 2013}}</ref> [[Structural inequality|Social inequality]] within and between nations, including a growing [[global digital divide]], is a focal point of the movement. Many nongovernmental organizations have now arisen to fight these inequalities that many in Latin America, Africa and Asia face. A few very popular and well known [[non-governmental organizations]] (NGOs) include: [[War Child (charity)|War Child]], [[Red Cross]], [[Free The Children]] and [[CARE International]]. They often create partnerships where they work towards improving the lives of those who live in developing countries by building schools, fixing infrastructure, cleaning water supplies, purchasing equipment and supplies for hospitals, and other aid efforts.

[[File:Countries by total wealth (trillions USD), Credit Suisse.png|thumb|260px|Countries by [[List of countries by total wealth|total wealth]] (trillions USD), [[Credit Suisse]]]]

====Social inequality====
{{Main|Social inequality|International inequality}}
[[File:Global-share-of-wealth-by-wealth-group-768x409.png|thumb|260px|Global share of wealth by wealth group, Credit Suisse, 2017]]

The economies of the world have [[Development theory|developed]] unevenly, historically, such that entire geographical regions were left mired in poverty and disease while others began to reduce poverty and disease on a wholesale basis. From around 1980 through at least 2011, the GDP gap, while still wide, appeared to be closing and, in some more rapidly [[developing countries]], [[life expectancies]] began to rise.<ref>{{Cite news | url=https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24835822 | title=How much do you know about the world? | publisher=BBC | date=2013 | access-date=9 July 2014 | author=Rosling, Hans | work=BBC News | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714222626/http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24835822 | archive-date=14 July 2014 | url-status=live }}</ref> If we look at the Gini coefficient for world income, since the late 1980s, the gap between some regions has markedly narrowed—between Asia and the advanced economies of the West, for example—but huge gaps remain globally. Overall equality across humanity, considered as individuals, has improved very little. Within the decade between 2003 and 2013, income inequality grew even in traditionally egalitarian countries like Germany, Sweden and Denmark. With a few exceptions—France, Japan, Spain—the top 10 percent of earners in most advanced economies raced ahead, while the bottom 10 percent fell further behind.<ref name="Stiglitz">{{cite news | url=http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/inequality-is-a-choice/?_php=true&_type=blogs | title=Inequality is a Choice | date=13 October 2013 | access-date=9 July 2014 | author=Stiglits Joseph E. | location=New York Times | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181125162537/https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/inequality-is-a-choice/?_php=true&_type=blogs | archive-date=25 November 2018 | url-status=live }}</ref> By 2013, 85 multibillionaires had amassed wealth equivalent to all the wealth owned by the poorest half (3.5 billion) of the world's total population of 7 billion.<ref name="WEF2014">{{cite web | url=http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC_GlobalAgendaOutlook_2014.pdf | title=Outlook on the Global Agenda 2014 | publisher=World Economic Forum | access-date=9 July 2014 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150210134450/http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC_GlobalAgendaOutlook_2014.pdf | archive-date=10 February 2015 | url-status=live }}</ref>

Critics of globalization argue that globalization results in weak [[labor unions]]: the surplus in cheap labor coupled with an ever-growing number of companies in transition weakened labor unions in high-cost areas. Unions become less effective and workers their enthusiasm for unions when membership begins to decline.<ref name="Hurst E. Charles P.41"/> They also cite an increase in the exploitation of [[child labor]]: countries with weak protections for children are vulnerable to infestation by rogue companies and criminal gangs who exploit them. Examples include [[quarry]]ing, salvage, and farm work as well as trafficking, bondage, forced labor, prostitution and pornography.<ref name="Edmonds_Pavcni">{{cite journal | last1 = Pavcnik | first1 = Nina |date=September 2005 | title = Child Labor in the Global Economy | journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives | volume = 19 | issue = 1 | pages = 199–220 | doi = 10.1257/0895330053147895 | last2 = Pavcnik | first2 = Nina | citeseerx = 10.1.1.488.791 }}</ref>

[[File:May Day Immigration March LA60.jpg|thumb|upright|Immigrant rights march for amnesty, [[Los Angeles]], on [[International Workers' Day|May Day]], 2006]]
Women often participate in the workforce in [[precarious work]], including [[export-oriented employment]]. Evidence suggests that while globalization has expanded women's access to employment, the long-term goal{{Whose|date=April 2024}} of transforming [[gender inequalities]] remains unmet and appears unattainable without regulation of capital and a reorientation and expansion of the state's role in funding public goods and providing a social safety net.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Seguino|first1=Stephanie|last2=Grown|first2=Caren|date=November 2006|title=Gender equity and globalization: macroeconomic policy for developing countries|journal=Journal of International Development|volume=18|issue=8|pages=1081–104|doi=10.1002/jid.1295|author-link1=Stephanie Seguino|citeseerx=10.1.1.589.4614}} [http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/Seguino_GrownGenderEquityandGlobalizationJID.pdf Pdf version – via the World Bank.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130605144218/http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/Seguino_GrownGenderEquityandGlobalizationJID.pdf |date=5 June 2013 }}</ref> Furthermore, the intersectionality of gender, race, class, can be overlooked by scholars and commentators when assessing the impact of globalization.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Gender, development, and globalization: economics as if all people mattered|last=Lourdes|first=Benería|others=Berik, Günseli, Floro, Maria|isbn=978-0-415-53748-3|edition= Second|location=New York|oclc=903247621|date=2014}}</ref>

In 2016, a study published by the IMF posited that [[neoliberalism]], the ideological backbone of contemporary globalized capitalism, has been "oversold", with the benefits of neoliberal policies being "fairly difficult to establish when looking at a broad group of countries" and the costs, most significantly higher income inequality within nations, "hurt the level and sustainability of growth."<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Foroohar |first=Rana |date=3 June 2016 |title=Globalization's True Believers Are Having Second Thoughts |url=https://time.com/4356816/neoliberalism-imf-globalization/ |magazine=TIME |access-date=12 July 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160617175511/http://time.com/4356816/neoliberalism-imf-globalization/ |archive-date=17 June 2016 |url-status=live }}</ref>

===Anti-global governance===
{{Main|Global governance}}

Beginning in the 1930s, opposition arose to the idea of a world government, as advocated by organizations such as the [[World Federalist Movement/Institute for Global Policy|World Federalist Movement (WFM)]]. Those who oppose global governance typically do so on objections that the idea is unfeasible, inevitably oppressive, or simply unnecessary.<ref>Kennedy, Paul. (2006.) ''The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations.'' New York: Harper Collins. {{ISBN|978-0-375-50165-4}}</ref> In general, these opponents are wary of the concentration of power or wealth that such governance might represent. Such reasoning dates back to the founding of the [[League of Nations]] and, later, the [[United Nations]].

===Environmentalist opposition===
{{Main|Environmentalism}}
{{See also|Climate change|Deforestation}}
[[File:Madagascar highland plateau.jpg|thumb|[[Deforestation]] of the [[Madagascar]] Highland Plateau has led to extensive [[siltation]] and unstable flows of western [[river]]s.]]
[[File:Carbon footprint hotspots of foreign final consumption in China.webp|thumb|'''a''' shows carbon footprint (CF) hotspots of foreign final consumption in China. '''b'''–'''d''' show carbon footprint hotspots of the consumption of the United States, Hong Kong, and Japan, respectively. Among all foreign regions, the United States, Hong Kong, and Japan have the largest CFs in China, contributing ~23.0%, 10.8%, and 9.0%, respectively, to the total foreign CF in China in 2012.]]

[[Environmentalism]] is a broad philosophy, ideology<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/ideology.html |title=Ideology and Sustainability |publisher=Formal.stanford.edu |access-date=13 June 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120204042425/http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/ideology.html |archive-date=4 February 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Ronald Bailey from the February 2002 issue |url=http://reason.com/archives/2002/02/01/debunking-green-myths |title=Debunking Green Myths |date=February 2002 |publisher=Reason.com |access-date=13 June 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120710221038/http://reason.com/archives/2002/02/01/debunking-green-myths |archive-date=10 July 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>Donald Gibson. Environmentalism: Ideology and Power. Nova Science Pub Inc. 2003</ref> and social movement regarding concerns for environmental [[Conservation movement|conservation]] and improvement of the health of the [[environment (biophysical)|environment]]. Environmentalist concerns with globalization include issues such as [[global warming]], global [[water supply]] and [[Water security|water crises]], inequity in [[energy consumption]] and [[energy conservation]], transnational [[air pollution]] and pollution of the [[world ocean]], [[Human overpopulation|overpopulation]], world [[habitat]] [[sustainability]], [[deforestation]], [[biodiversity loss]] and [[Holocene extinction|species extinction]].

One critique of globalization is that natural resources of the poor have been systematically taken over by the rich and the pollution promulgated by the rich is systematically dumped on the poor.<ref>Low, Nicholas. (2002). ''Global Ethics and Environment''. Routledge Science. {{ISBN|978-0-415-19735-9}}.</ref> Some argue that Northern corporations are increasingly exploiting resources of less wealthy countries for their global activities while it is the South that is disproportionately bearing the environmental burden of the globalized economy. Globalization is thus leading to a type of" environmental [[apartheid]]".<ref>Lechner, Frank J., and John Boli. 2012. ''The Globalization Reader'', 4th ed. Wiley-Blackwell. {{ISBN|978-0-470-65563-4}}.</ref>

[[Helena Norberg-Hodge]], the director and founder of Local Futures/[[International Society for Ecology and Culture]], criticizes globalization in many ways. In her book ''[[Ancient Futures]]'', Norberg-Hodge claims that "centuries of ecological balance and social harmony are under threat from the pressures of development and globalization." She also criticizes the standardization and rationalization of globalization, as it does not always yield the expected growth outcomes. Although globalization takes similar steps in most countries, scholars such as Hodge claim that it might not be effective to certain countries and that globalization has actually moved some countries backward instead of developing them.<ref>{{cite book|last=Norberg-Hodge|first=Helena|title=Ancient futures: learning from Ladakh|year=1992|publisher=Sierra Club Books|location=San Francisco|isbn=978-0-87156-643-0|edition=Sierra Club Books paperback|url=https://archive.org/details/ancientfuturesl000norb}}</ref>

A related area of concern is the [[pollution haven hypothesis]], which posits that, when large industrialized nations seek to set up factories or offices abroad, they will often look for the cheapest option in terms of resources and labor that offers the land and material access they require (see [[Race to the bottom]]).<ref name="Unmaskingthe">{{cite journal|last=Levinson|first=Arik|author2=M. Scott Taylor|title=Unmasking the Pollution Haven Effect|journal=[[International Economic Review]]|year=2008|volume=49|issue=1|pages=223–54|doi=10.1111/j.1468-2354.2008.00478.x|s2cid=40982519|url=http://www.nber.org/papers/w10629.pdf|access-date=29 November 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180602151508/http://www.nber.org/papers/w10629.pdf|archive-date=2 June 2018|url-status=live|doi-access=free}}</ref> This often comes at the cost of environmentally sound practices. Developing countries with cheap resources and labor tend to have less stringent [[environmental regulations]], and conversely, nations with stricter environmental regulations become more expensive for companies as a result of the costs associated with meeting these standards. Thus, companies that choose to physically invest in foreign countries tend to (re)locate to the countries with the lowest [[environmental standard]]s or weakest enforcement.

The [[European Union–Mercosur Free Trade Agreement]], which would form one of the world's largest free trade areas,<ref>{{cite web |title=Farmers, environmentalists slam 'sell-out' EU-Mercosur trade deal |url=https://www.france24.com/en/20190629-eu-south-america-agriculture-trade-mercosur-farmers-environmentalists |publisher=France24 |date=29 June 2019 |access-date=25 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190825090453/https://www.france24.com/en/20190629-eu-south-america-agriculture-trade-mercosur-farmers-environmentalists |archive-date=25 August 2019 |url-status=live }}</ref> has been denounced by [[environmental activists]] and [[Indigenous peoples in Brazil|indigenous rights]] campaigners.<ref>{{cite news |title=EU urged to halt trade talks with S. America over Brazil abuses |url=https://www.france24.com/en/20190618-eu-urged-halt-trade-talks-with-america-over-brazil-abuses |work=France 24 |date=18 June 2019 |access-date=25 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190825102307/https://www.france24.com/en/20190618-eu-urged-halt-trade-talks-with-america-over-brazil-abuses |archive-date=25 August 2019 |url-status=live }}</ref> The fear is that the deal could lead to more [[deforestation of the Amazon rainforest]] as it expands market access to Brazilian beef.<ref>{{cite web |title=We must not barter the Amazon rainforest for burgers and steaks |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2019/jul/02/barter-amazon-rainforest-burgers-steaks-brazil |work=The Guardian |date=2 July 2019 |access-date=25 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190824153649/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2019/jul/02/barter-amazon-rainforest-burgers-steaks-brazil |archive-date=24 August 2019 |url-status=live }}</ref>