Globalisation Is a Euphamism for Neo-Colonialism

globalization is a euphemism for neo-colonialism. Discuss. world(prenominal)isation is a composite plant and multifaceted issue (Bayliss 2008252). However, this essay get out on the imbalance betwixt occidental creators and the create terra firma and consequential exploitation, which, sort of than being condemned as neo-colonialism, is justified as globalization. The rarity of colonial rule did non mark the end of the trend of scotchal control and exploitation of the developing origination (Manzo 2009267).The pagan, governmental and economical effects of globalisation upon the developing solid ground resemble that of neo-colonial creator an in comparability that is defended by the benevolence of neo-liberalism and equalitarianism of the escaped market. This essay will commission on the cultural and policy-making supra content symmetricalnessraint of the west and economic philia of globalised institutions, referring to IR theories of globalisation defend ing it as upright (Bayliss 2008248, Pasha 2009330) and condemning it as great(p)ist imperialism.Colonialism describes a period of elaborateness and exploitation by European powers spanning the fifteenth to 20th Century, the political control, physical occupation, and domination of people and their land (Crawford 2002131). Between 1946 and 1976 European powers granted independence to all their colonies. However, Horvath written material in 1972 begs that neo-colonialism swiftly followed its predecessor (Horvath 197246).Neo-colonialism implies that whilst office staff-colonial states succeed nominal sovereignty within the globalisticist dust, they remain dependent upon western powers and ar subsequently politically controlled, culturally erudite and economically exploited (Nkrumah 1968x-xii). States with the outward accouterments of global sovereignty just in reality have their economic arrangement and thus its political policy enjoin from outside. (Nkrumah 1968xi) globalisation washbasin be defined as the expansion of knowledge basewide interconnectedness where states meld and supranational institutions atomic number 18 formed. Whilst voicelesser states control their involvement, weaker states atomic number 18 take ind to integrate, being seed rather than influencing (Bayliss 2008255). Neo-liberalism argues consolidation is beneficial (Bayliss 2008249, Sorenson 199710) globalization will restructure the innovation economy without the need for interventionist policies creating equality within a competitive free market (Hirst 1999134). humanity- ashes theory however, describes monopoly groovyism where well-off totality states exploit peripheral unfortunateer states, essentially an worldwide class corpse (Bayliss 2008147, Wallerstein 1989). Realist thought, would argue that decent states merely use the globalised system for their own public assistance (Waltz 1979). globalization could whence be seen as an instrument for imp erialism favoring strong capitalist states (Bayliss 2008153) essentially a euphemism for neo-colonialism. res mana is promoted through globalization ground upon liberal ideals of humanities mightily to libertarian happiness (Morgenthau 1960100).The political weight of horse opera thought, and the professed lesson legitimacy of its worldwide promotion highlights a neo-colonial dominance (Nkrumah 1968ix), The westward world recalls international co-operation behind only safely occur mingled with liberal democratic states (Owen 199496). Separate quiescence (Doyle 19861151), co-operation solely between liberal democracies, can be seen through EU enter criteria (Europa 2010Copenhagen Criteria) and ENP policy (DeBardeleben 200821) and IMF and World Bank loanword policy (Cogan 2009211). Imposing western political principles using economic incentive.Here, improver avail is a gift of neo-colonialism foreign capital used for the exploitation rather than the victimization of the third world (Nkrumah 1968x) For western powers force is ofttimes a necessary weft against illiberal states (Hoffman 199531) Owen 199497). US involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq has been motivated by the desire to allot democracy and ensure security (Owen 1994125-127). This power politics contradicts equality of neo-liberal co-operation in globalization suggesting political homogeneity take downd by an imperialist force.Realists argue that states espouse humanitarian motives as a pretext to recompense the pursuit of national self-interest (Franck and Rodley 1973). Nato selectivity of result in Kosovo (1999) failing to act in Sudan (Bayliss 2008527) and the illegitimate intervention of France in Rwanda (1994) give way a flawed international justice, where Western powers act without restraint. In 2005 the UN adopted the business to protect, giving itself legitimate even off act upon human rights breaches. This is one of some(prenominal) examples of nternational institu tions imposing Western political and moral ethics justified by an international responsibility (Morgan 197233-34) a practice wide accepted in Western public opinion (Reisman 1985279-80). globalization is essentially creating an international super power that transcends state borders possessing hegemony on moral and political principles with a self-legitimised right to enforce them. Defenders of globalization suggest the international participation is one of sh bed and defended set.However, these values are presented by the West, who misuse this influence to intervene without justification. globalization has allowed for an increased advert of culture and traditions internationally. However, this flow has not been evenhanded, media dominance of Western powers dwarfing smaller states. The advanced nature of US media and sheer weight of capital has created Media Imperialism (Sklair 2002167) where the substantial world is flooded by broadcasting promoting Western products, creating an externally dictated popular culture.The consequence is a developed world dominated by Western products e. g. Coco cola the best sell drink in the world (Coca poop 2010). Under the theory of neo-colonialism, neo-colonial states are compel to purchase manufactured products from imperial powers to the shortage of local products (Nkrumah 1968ix). The culture and products of powerful societies are not imposed upon weak societies by force or occupation (Crawford 2002131, Sklair 2002168) but underhandedly via an internationally dominant media express to Anglo-American interests (Lee 198082).Whilst globalization arguably encourages multiculturalism (Bayliss 2008423), a different worldwide system has created a dominant culture within the global community (Kymlicka 1991182) that exploits its status to the demise of the developing world (Golding and Harris 1997). Colonialism saw a moral self-reliance with missionaries striving to create a reproduction of ones own country upon the natives (Emerson 196913-14) a horrible purpose of saving the wretched. (Horvath 197246) Colonial powers intermeshed weaker states, imposing culture, religion and values found upon a superiority of power, policing and governing without legitimacy (Crawford 002131-133). Similarly neo-colonialism operates in political, religious, ideological and cultural spheres where the powerful transform the different into oneself (Toje 200883) based on moral conceit. Globalisation has revealed compliancy to Western democracy and culture, whether it has been foold or enforced is the issue of debate. Globalisation as interconnectedness (Bayliss 2008252) economically the integration of national economies into global markets (Todaro 2000713) is driven by economic growth.The creation of the international free market mean to have a beneficial effect on developing countries (Hirst 1999134) fracture power away from developed countries to the rest of the world (Martin 199712). However, free market opposition creates losers, often the most vulnerable feminized states (Peterson 2009287). Whilst globalisation did not create inequality, the solution for discipline was flawed, merely worsening the imbalance (Peterson 2009287) arguably, colonialism creating inequality, neo-colonialism maintaining it (Horvath 197246).Realists believe states only bene suit at other states expense ( cunning, Waltz 198867-68) suggesting neo-liberal ideas of development would victimize the developed nations. Whilst international economic institutions such as the WTO, IMF and World Bank are intended to maintain free get by and assist developing countries, they have often been accused actually maintaining inequality (Peterson 2009291) for the benefit of elites (Gray 1998, Greider 1997). A free market is intended to be free, impartial and competitive (Bayliss 2008249). However, the rules of world parcel out are created, and therefore burden in favor of rich countries.For example, softwood-related aspects of international policy rights require international spare protection favour firms based in the Western World who hold 90% of patents forcing expensive products on the developed world who cannot produced their own low cost versions, the flog example being that of patented medicament (Watkins 200278). The double standards of the free market are also apparent in trade tariffs (Anderson 2006147-159). Northern governments promote free trade and use the IMF and World Bank to impose import liberalization on ridiculous states (Romano 20041012).Yet they refuse to open their own markets, south-north merchandise trade tariffs cost developing countries $10 billion annually, twice the amount they receive from humanitarian aid (Watkins 200279). International economic institutions are essentially governed by Western powers the World bank presidential post dominated by American citizens since its creation, not based on votes but escaped agreements between the US and European stakehol ders (Cogan 2009209) Since the commencement exercise the US has shown dominance (Gowa 1983) creating the Bretton woods system in 1944 and causing its breakdown, in 1971 (Bayliss 2008245).The tilt of the free market, handicapped against the third world by dishonest steward of international economic institutions has allowed for economic hegemony post-colonial states remaining dependent upon their former masters ( late 200145). redness theories fit alarmingly with criticisms of globalization, World System supposition and Dependency scheme showing resources rate of flow from fringe of poor, underdeveloped states to a core of wealthy states (Bayliss 2008147). Poor states are needy and rich ones enriched by the way poor states are forced into the globalised world system (Blomstrom 19848-45).Lenins work Imperialism, The Highest stage of capitalism shows a capitalist monopoly, essentially neo-colonial periphery at the bottom of a tiered international system, a system Marxists wou ld argue is essentially globalisation (Bayliss 2008157). However, unlike colonialism globalization has arguably authorise ideas above states, giving the defenders of neo-colonial states a louder voice. accessible Constructivism argues that globalisation is far deeper than interaction between states (Snyder 200460).Whilst colonialism remained acceptable for centuries, the exploitation and imbalance of the online world system does not go unnoticed, numerous NGOs pressuring government institutions and operating one by one as aid organizations. Globalisation has created an disturbed world system retaining North-South divides that emerged during Colonialism (Horvath 197246). Whilst neo-liberal free markets aimed to take root the inequalities, Realism argues flaws and bias within the modern international system were retained and created as to ensure the Western powers remained economically powerful over the developing world (Emerson 196915).Emerson claims it would be a turning poi nt in history for global systems not to stupefy forth a in the altogether imperialism and unused colonialism (Emerson 196916). The cultural and moral dominance of Western powers and active promotion of values, for the benefit of the developing world however, is a far more(prenominal) malevolent sign that globalization is a euphemism for neo-colonialism (Nkrumah 1968xi). Bibliography Articles J. Cogan (2009) Representation and Power in International Organization The Operational Constitution and Its Critics The American daybook of International Law, Vol. 03, No. 2, pp. 209-263 R. Emerson (1969) Colonialism, Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 3-16 J. Horvath (1972) A definition of Colonialism Current Anthropology, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 45-57 J. M. Owen, (1994) How Liberalism Produces Democratic pacification, International Security, Vol. 19, No. 2 (Autumn, 1994). pp. 87-125. D. Roman, R. Sandbrook (2004) Globalisation, extremism and effect in poor countries Third W orld Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 1007-1030. K. Watkins (2002) Is the WTO Legit? Foreign Policy, No. 132, pp. 78-79 J.Snyder (2004) star World, Rival Theories Foreign Policy, No. 145, pp. 62-62. Books J. Art and K. Waltz (ed. ) (1988) The use of force capital of the United Kingdom University press of America. N. Crawford (2002) Argument and Change in World government, Cambridge Cambridge University Press J. DeBardeleben (2008) The boundaries of EU Enlargement, Basingstoke Palgrave MacMillan P. Hirst, G. Thompson (1999) Globalization question, Cambridge Polity Press S. Hoffman (1987) Janus and Minerva Essays in the Theory and Practice of International Politics, Boulder Westview Press. W.Greider (1997) angiotensin-converting enzyme World Ready or non The Manic Logic of Global capitalist economy, newfangled York Simon and Schuster J. Gray (1998) False Dawn The Delusions of Global Capitalism. London Granta Books J. Gowa (1983) Closing the Cold Window, newborn York Cornell Unive rsity Press W. Kymlicka (1991) Liberalism Community and Culture, Oxford Clarendon Press K. Nkrumah (1965) Neo-colonialism the uttermost stage of imperialism, London Nelson C. Lee (1980) Media Imperialism Reconsidered The Homogenizing of goggle box Culture California Sage L. Sklair (2002) Globalization, Capitalism and its alternatives, New York Oxford University Press M.Todaro (2000) Economic Development, Harlow Addison Wesley Longman A. Toje (2008) America, The EU and Strategic Culture London Routledge R. Young (2001) Post-colonialism An Historical Introduction Book Chapters K. Manzo (2009) Do colonialism and slavery belong to the past (ed. ) J. Edkins, M. Zehfuss, Global Politics and new introduction, London Routledge, pp. 244-271. V. Peterson (2009) How is the world unionized economically? (ed. ) J. Edkins, M. Zehfuss, Global Politics and new introduction, London Routledge, pp. 271-294. M. Pasha (2009) How can we end poverty (ed. J. Edkins, M. Zehfuss, Global Politics and new introduction, London Routledge, pp. 320-344 K. Anderson (2006) Subsidies and Trade Barriers (ed. ) Bjorn Lomborg How to Spend $50 to Make the World a break off Place, Cambridge Cambridge University Press, pp. 147-159. A. Bellamy, N. Wheeler (2008) Humanitarian Intervention in World Politics (ed. ) John Baylis, Steve Smith, Patricia Owens The Globalization of world politics New York Oxford university press. pp. 522-538. S. Hobden, R. Wyn Jones (2008) Marxist theories of International Relations (ed. John Baylis, Steve Smith, Patricia Owens The Globalization of world politics New York Oxford university press. pp. 142-157. N. Woods (2008) International political economy in an age of globalization (ed. ) John Baylis, Steve Smith, Patricia Owens The Globalization of world politics New York Oxford university press. pp. 244-258 Websites Coco-Cola Company, http//www. coca-cola. com/index. jsp Europa, Copenhagen Criteria, http//europa. eu/scadplus/glossary/accession_criteria_copenhague_en. htm Europa, ENP policy, http//ec. europa. eu/world/enp/policy_en. htm