Conservatives view nation-state as a sole representative of the upper class or the core, according to Wallerstein's depiction, and they work with the aim to safeguard their interest rather than those belonging to the periphery. Therefore, mostly they reject the founding idea of globalization and global governance. In contrast to the conservatives, from the transformational vantage point, the single cause behind such globalization cannot be determined as many factors contribute to its emergence and the outcome is very unpredictable. Again, this notion is denied by the opposition that believes that there is nothing that cannot be predicted or controlled of globalization and this form of explanations are given by those directly benefited by its outcome. Defining the role of modern corporations (MNC) is also an issue of conflict between the indigenous or anti-globalization and the global forces. Although MNC opens the pathway for many job possibilities, conservatives still believe that it narrows down the job opportunities for the poor or middle-class population as they favor the rich and core of the power circle. From these conflicting ideas of those defining globalization in a different perspective, I feel that there cannot be a single, unanimous and unopposed interpretation of its meaning. I can support the statement by giving examples of various anti-globalization movements that originated to boycott the extent of economic neo-liberalization and corporate globalization.