Globalisation has become a 'hot topic' in homes and boardrooms around the globe in recent years, and whilst it is not a new term, globalisation is a contemporary ethical issue that has acquired more emotive force than ever before. Whilst opinions on the matter are both varied and passionate, an increasingly prominent ethical debate centres on whether globalisation brings little or no benefit to poor countries and as second speaker for the negative I will continue the argument that this statement is simply not true.
The term 'globalisation' instantly conjures images of a world whose countries and continents are all somehow connected with each other. Today, communication barriers are open and information and goods travel from one place to the next at a speed never before seen. We essentially live in a 'one world' environment where its citizens no longer need to rely on its own countries resources to survive and surely there is no argument that this is not a wonderful thing?Globalisation is a process which increases trade and aid to the worlds poorest countries, which in turn assists these nations to not only integrate within a global society, but can be seen to narrow the gap between the so-called rich countries and their poorer neighbours.
The integration of the world's financial markets is undoubtedly one of the most important indicators of globalisation, therefore some aspects of globalisation are undeniably capitalist processes, so it not surprising that multi-national companies, who promote job opportunities and trade in countries outside their own, are 'the main players and often the driving forces in the corporate arena of globalisation' (Zhibin Gu 2006, p.24). Increasingly, they are also often unfairly blamed for abuse of power and the furthering of a country's economic or social decline.
Opponents of globalisation, including the speakers for the...