Capitalism and Globalization in Business Environment - Essay Example

Business Environment: Capitalism and Globalization of Business Environment: Capitalism and Globalization Ever since the democratic regime was introduced in the world where various communist nations were present in competition, it was marked that there was no alternative of democracy that introduced development in every sphere of public life. It was merely considered to be the sole manner in which the societies could develop into modern societies. The aforementioned situation mentioned concerning democracy presents no different case when discussing about capitalism. In the contemporary world, every state is connected to another in such a way that it is not realistic for the national government to design policies without considering the impact that various other states would have on the domestic sphere. In simpler words, globalization has become a deeply-rooted phenomenon in the present world that there seems to be zero alternative of capitalism. Different skeptics have come up with new and effective economic theories and practices to suspend the common grounds of capitalism in the world (Thornley & Appay, 2010). Nevertheless, the impact or the implementation of capitalism is effective to the core that independent economic policies are failed to practice. Herein, it should be noted that the mentioned view is merely projected by the skeptics and there is still a lot of room of explanation concerning the credibility of the aspect (Milward, 2003). The aim of this essay is to critically assess the thesis statement the proposition that governments are no longer able to implement independent policies. There is supposedly an ongoing debate when it comes to the aspect of efforts made by the governments to implement and promote independent economic policies. The weighing or the effective dimensions to the debate can only be evaluated by understanding triumphed nature of capitalism in the global world, paradox of neo-classical theory, the role of the transfer national companies (TNCs). The fact remains that the economic activities in the past were quiet limited because of the limitations imposed on the trade. In the present times, one can see that it is easier for the organizations to design a product in one region and then deliver it to customer in the opposite part of the world (Ohmae, 1994). Herein, the intensity of skepticism is evident from the fact that western civilizations see capitalism as a threat to social equality. Milward (2003) in his research included that the skeptics of capitalism have always shown great interest in the international discussion of need of non-free market structure. Such an assertion is made on the basis of efficiencies of one nation and availability of opportunities to one specific group. It surely presents an inequality within the social system (Milward, 2003). On the other hand, skepticism has been explained in a neutral manner by Giddens while discussing the threats of globalization towards the implication of independent economic policies of the national governments (Giddens, 2002). Giddens marked that the conservatives have been involved in posing out the impression that increased support to the ideals of non-capitalism would reduce the inability of societies to counter political instability. However, in the wake of finding the solution that could easily replace the capitalism or free-market, there seemed to have no logical intervention. Therefore, economic theorists have confirmed that an avid need of explanation is needed to prove the point of skeptics in terms of capitalism (Milward, 2003). Among different theorists who predicted capitalism and free-market economy as the absolute manner of regulating economic institutions, Robertson remains the famous one. In the researched work by Robertson (1992), it was well-observed that capitalism was the free way of making capital and making sure that the overall cost was to the minimum (Robertson, 1992). In other words, it can be asserted that capitalism was marked to be the wholesome regime for economic development all around the world in the 1990s. Herein, it is imperative to understand the thesis entitled, TINA which remains an abbreviation for “there is no alternative” to capitalism. The slogan was basically and initially used by Margaret Thatcher. As literal to the expression, it is evident that the motive of TINA is to ensure the understanding that there is no possible regime that could replace capitalism when it comes to the economic sphere. Cerny (2000) maintained that TINA has aroused a lot of debate concerning the capitalist way of looking at the societies (Cerny, 2000). The question of concern is that acceptance of capitalism and rejection of the idea of independent policies has been affirmed by economic theorists all over the world. In particular, the skeptics also believe that there is an avid need of undermining of statement (Cerny, 2000). It will be incorrect to accept the expression that capitalism has not triumphed globally. Ohmae (1996) was able to prove the successful triumphed globally (Ohmae, 1996). The author has marked in his research work after noting down the developments that have been undertaken because of capitalism that economic sphere have flourished with the theory of capitalism that was not possible with any other regime. Petrell (1996) further contributed into this aspect by maintaining the stance that during 1980s and 1990s, different economies of the world have flourished under the name tag of capitalism (Petrell, 1996). The evident examples in this regard could be the products that American country got manufactured in Nepal for the sake of cheap labor cost to export to Australian market. There are countless examples that can be stated in this regard. It was not possible if capitalism was not triumphed globally. Also, it may be the possibility that global triumphed of capitalism was the sole reason in its acceptance as a common manner of conducting economic activity. Furthermore, Scholote (2005) even stated that capitalism is the engine for smoothly running the procedures to maintain developments in modern societies (Scholte, 2005). The role of the labor is increasingly important whenever the research is conducted concerning the capitalistic regime of economy (Lane, New York). It is because it is the reason for which companies become global. Cheap or lower cost of labor has allowed companies to take steps further to develop the product and reach out to maximum number of consumers. In the recent times, it has become quite a common phenomenon. Herein, there are two categories of labor, firstly skilled and secondly unskilled labor (Kema, 2005). The prospects available to the skills labor would be mobilization i.e. working with the companies globally while unskilled labor is prone to serve the companies within their home regions. The theory has suggested that unskilled labor must also be made mobile because that would make an impact through the context of agglomeration (Milward, 2003). However, the basis or working schema of capitalism beholds the rule that unskilled labor should not be moved because the cost of internationalizing such group would be increased since they are unskilled for the prospects of the products and business as a whole (Kramer, 2011). It is the fruit of capitalism that smaller companies, in the past, have turned into larger economic contributors throughout the world. Some of the most successful Transfer national companies include Shell, General motors’ etc. that hold increased workforce as well as the technological advanced infrastructure (Porter & Kramer, 2011). They provide employment to home as well as international regional population making a global mark in terms of capital returns (UN Habitat, 2004). In no way, TNCs are undermining state governments (Kloosterman & Rath, 2003). The domestic issues within the context of politics may have an impact of the procedures but it can never halt the business operation (Cavanagh & Mander, 2010)s. The regulations that are imposed on TNCs by differing governments are also workable because technically, these companies bring a lot of business and economic stability to the government (Frericks & Maier, 2012). In relations to the fruits of capitalism, there is a peculiarity named as the paradox of neo-classical theory (Chell, 2001). It mentions that neo-classical theory marks the evidence of wealth being distributed unequally. The riches are confined to the private wealth rather than the public wealth. Neo-classical theory or its paradox has remained a sole point of discussion whenever its merits are researched (Kloosterman & Rath, 2003). There is an avid need of scarcity in order to marginalize the value of a product or service (Robertson, 2009). The change of economic manner or the way it had to work out is complex on its own. The paradox of neo-classical theory rather puts capitalism in a state of question (Hollingsworth & Boyer, 1988). Through the above discussion, it can be well-stated that there is certainly no alternative available to replace capitalism completely. The independent economic policies have been implemented in different parts of the world and have failed to a larger extent. The evident cases of root causes for the failure of such policies were the fact that they are not able to cater the mutual grounds of practice for government and TNCs, labor is not used for the purpose of mobilization etc. Capitalism is the sole manner in which international business markets have been able to work out even during the era of distress in political discourse. List of References Cavanagh, J. & Mander, J., 2010. Alternatives to Economic Globalization (Large Print 16pt). New York: ReadHowYouWant.com. Cerny, P., 2000. Structuring the political arena: public goods, states and governance in a globalizing world.. London: Routledge. Chell, E., 2001. Entrepreneurship: Globalization, Innovation and Development. New York: Cengage Learning EMEA. Frericks, P. & Maier, R., 2012. European Capitalist Welfare Societies: The Challenge of Sustainability. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Giddens, A., 2002. Runaway world: How globalisation is reshaping our lives. First ed. New York: Profile Books. Hollingsworth, J. R. & Boyer, R., 1988. Contemporary Capitalism: The Embeddedness of Institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kema, I., 2005. Globalization and the Development of Underdevelopment of the Third World. Journal of Third World Studies, 22(1), p. 41. Kloosterman, R. & Rath, J., 2003. Immigrant Entrepreneurs: Venturing Abroad in the Age of Globalization. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Kramer, M., 2011. How to reinvent capitalism – and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Buisness Review, pp. 62-77. Lane, D., New York. The Capitalist Transformation of State Socialism - Was it Worth It?: The Making and Breaking of State Socialist Society, and What Followed. 2013: Routledge. Milward, B., 2003. Globalisation?: internationalisation and monopoly capitalism: historical processes and capitalist dynamism. Cheltenham. New York: Edward Elgar. Ohmae, K., 1994. The borderless world: power and strategy in the global marketplace. New York: HarperCollins. Ohmae, K., 1996. The end of the nation state : the rise of regional economies. London: HarperCollins. Petrell, R., 1996. Globalization and internationalization. States against markets: the limits of globalization. London: Routledge. Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M. R., 2011. Creating shared value : how to reinvent capitalism - and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, pp. 63-77. Robertson, R., 1992. Globalization: Social theory and global culture. 16 ed. New York: Sage. Robertson, R., 2009. Globalization, Wages, and the Quality of Jobs: Five Country Studies. New York: World Bank Publications. Scholte, J., 2005. Globalization: A critical introduction. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Thornley, C. & Appay, B., 2010. Globalization and Precarious Forms of Production and Employment: Challenges for Workers and Unions. London: Edward Elgar Publishing. UN Habitat, 2004. The State of the Worlds Cities 2004/2005: Globalization and Urban Culture. New York: UN-HABITAT. Read More