Theory of the Anti-Globalization Movement - Essay Example

According to some people, globalization is taking place due to technology, whereas a realistic approach shows that globalization is purely linked to economics.

 Globalization is portrayed as a positive thing from which undeveloped countries can benefit. However, an alternative view suggests something else. Some people are of the view that through the excuse of globalization, developed countries are exploiting weak economies. They are making the undeveloped countries dependent on themselves which would eventually result in making them their slaves. The theory behind the movement was so strong and convincing that it brought together the ideological school of thought that believed in anarchism and communism, and the activists who have a much more pragmatic approach to life. Before this movement, nothing had worked to unite these two opposite forces.

The ideology behind the movement is as I have previously mentioned, strong economies use the excuse of globalization to further strengthen their economies and in the process drain the weak economies. Globalization is giving rise to the accumulation of wealth and power. The strong are getting stronger and the weak weaker. The undeveloped countries have started becoming increasingly dependent on the developed nations and thus the developed countries are in a position to make or break them.

One of the basic reasons for the movement is the market failure. People venture into places where they are not wanted. These businesses function under the umbrella of multi-national companies and at times take ownership of property which they can not run properly to suit the local people. They do not understand the basic value systems. For instance, Pakistan’s electricity company has been taken over by a Saudi company and now Pakistan is facing the worse electricity crisis ever. According to Noreena Hertz, in her book ‘The silent takeover’ “Corporations have become behemoths, huge global giants that wield immense political power” and in the process of their evolution, “justice, equity, rights, the environment, and even issues of national security fall by the wayside.” This as we can see is very true.

Another major issue is that anti-globalization activists believe that the concept of intellectual property has been overly dramatized and stretched. Now information and intellectual property which used to be possessed collectively by a country or an ethnic group are being retained by a smaller portion of people. Thus sharing of resources has finished. The people cling to their intellectual property and share very little of it with others. Thus weaker people can not benefit from it and are at a loss. Generally, they are the big companies who have retained this kind of intellectual property thus their market concentration increases.

Labor issues are also a major backbone of the movement. Referring back to the privatization of Pakistan's electric companies we see that the developed countries are influencing the developing countries to privatize their businesses. This is because in their opinion privatization is a good thing and therefore they are forcing others to go for it too. However, privatization causes unemployment for many employees.

There have been many influential works seen in the movement. Examples of them include Naomi Klien’s book ‘NO Logo’. This book talks about the unethical side of the production processes of multinational companies. There were two other prominent writer’s Vandana Shiva and Amartya Sen. Vandana have written ‘Biopiracy’ and talked about the intellectual property issue, whereas Amartya’s book ‘Development as Freedom’ emphasizes third-world development.

There is one problem with the whole situation. Apart from these inspirational book writers, there is no prominent leader. Thus the movement is not organized and does not have a big impact. Apart from a few vandalizing episodes nothing great has been done. The banners of multi-national corporations were marked with crosses, their signs were burnt, etc. But they fail to make a major mark and therefore have not been able to help the underdeveloped countries as yet. One of the major setbacks in the movement was also that they addressed the issues incorrectly. There was a wide array of thoughts, with different views. Thus there was conflict among the people as well.