The mechanics of globalism are complex, but its causes are simple: improved technologies of transportation and commmunication, combined with de-regulation, which vastly increased the scope of world trade in the 80s and 90s. Its effects are also simple: it is good for corporations and bad for governments (except city-states like Singapore and Dubai, which are the 21st century version of Venice and Florence, corporate-governmental hybrids really). Globalism is also good for rich people in rich countries, rich people in poor countries, and poor people in poor countries. Poor people in rich countries, however, get screwed. Less clear is the effect on the middle-class (it mostly depends on their occupation and sheer luck), though evidence suggests a trade-off between cheaper goods for less secure work and fewer benefits. Globalism became something of an elite religion in the 90s (with NYTimes writer Tom Friedman as its rather obnoxious prophet). Whether or not it works out in the long term, it's clearly not the solution to all the world's problems, as it has been marketed. Globalism, not party affiliation or 'culture wars', is the key to understanding modern political divisions: Neo-conservatives and Neo-liberals support it, while Paleo-conservatives and Socialists oppose it.

Great, as long as the sovereignty of each individual state within the global community remains intact.

While I firmly believe in the ability for all nations to engage in open and free trade, I feel that the current version of globalism will prove to be very harmful, if not destructive. It appears that there is a push to eliminate nationalism of any type, to consolidate every nation and population under one global entity. I view the present push for globalism as a form of Corporate Fascism which seeks to control the labor of the earth's population for it's own benefit.

Globalization has had its perks and its vices, however I believe our sophisticated internationally dependant economy relies on it. When I say there is no good way of turning back one has to look at the alternatives. If we localize all industries then we eliminate any country specific specialization, thus eliminating efficiency. In addition, we would weaken most industries by eliminating some competition (which is the key to progress). This case can be seen in several Latin American countries, who in an attempt to develop their own infrastructure started making cars. The only way they sold these cars was by placing tariffs on all foreign cars, thus protecting all domestic brands. However, as foreign cars continued to compete amongst themselves, they continued advancing. In the end you had one country supplying its people with some seriously outdated and inefficient cars, while on the other hand you see how successful companies such as Toyota and GM have been due to their international competition. However, despite the wonders that Globalization has on the economy, it is culturally sketchy. Globalization sometimes imposes standards on cultures, which may conflict greatly and cause hatefully reactions. This can be seen in the discontent with America certain regions of the world display. Globalization does have a bad habit of trapping nations too. Sometimes this is for the better, such as between the United States and China. These two countries are completely dependant on one another, thus preventing war and conflict. On the other hand we see several examples of damaging relationships, such as the United States overdependance on Saudi oil. Other bad relations can be seen in how newly industrialized countries are arguably economically dependant on their former colonies (although several Asian countries have seem to break free dependency chains)...all in all its a mixed bag that can't be reversed without hideous consequences. It will take a bit more trial and error, but eventually Globalization will reach an ideal equilibrium.

Proof that Marx's critique of capitalist imperialism was right.

Listen up, you would be politicians. The very idea of globalization is what will bring about the end of life as we know it. What is driving up the price of oil and gas is globalization. The europeans have been paying the equivalant of $7 a gallon since the early '80's. Now that companies such as Exxon are going international, they want to charge the same here. Check out the profits for them so far this year, when they are complaining about the price of oil yet recording record profits. Globalization does work for the lowest common denominator as far as personal freedoms, personal wages, rights, and almost all things private or personal. It also works for the greater wealth of the rich, more power and governmental controls. The World Trade Organization is another driving force of Globalization. They are pushing now for the US to force companies that make dietary supplements to bend to the WTO rules that they can not sell vitamins with more than 20% of the recomended daily allowance without a prescription from a doctor. No more diet pills, herbal extracts, nothing without a script. Why? Because we are one of the only countries that allow it. Bring us down to their level. I can also tell you that according to the Bible, the countries do unite and form one governmental body to guide all nations. The fellow leading such a governmental agency...... was the son of satan. Now do you want globalization?

Thanks to globalism, the 21st century economy will be more efficient.

Corporate government at its worst. Dangerous, ugly, and frightening. In my youth one worlders used to refer to the ultra left, now it refers to these profit hungry, arrogant, and rapacious bastards.

Take your citizen of the world crap and your so-called free trade and get out of my country. Peaceful relations and fair (note the word fair) trade are one thing, sacrificing national sovereignty and national economic interests are suicidal.

I detest it with every last fibre of my being. It means a world of least common denominator, a world of misery for all. You think the old U.S.S.R. was bad? Implement this crap.

Interesting idea, but look at the end results: Germany doesn't want to go to war, Libya is in the human rights group, nobody wants to follow America, and scarriest yet, France is given a major say in world affairs. This globalism idea has turned the world upside down, and frankly, I don't like it.

Globalism is a current trend in international politics that really doesn't bode well for democracy. Government in a globalist government will not have the people's best interests in mind. The government that governs closest to the people is the best. That's why America's federalist government works so well. Local government takes care a lot of our concerns while the federal government sets broad guidelines. Under a globalist society, we will have decision making that is really separated from the peoples and indeed even nations best interests. This can't work in our world today; nationalism is a big issue throughout the world. We can't run away from the fact that people still do have a tendency of dividing themselves up into nations that many times have many differences along with similarities. Issues like allocation of resources create fault lines in international politics that are difficult to bridge. Paradoxically, nationalism is increasing but at the same time nations depend more and more on each other. This is disturbing because as international bodies like the International Criminal Court exert their authority, it is certain to create major conflicts between nations. To top it off, people feel like they are losing control of their lives as undemocratic institutions like the WTO exert more and more influence on their lives. Unfortunately as society becomes more complex and technocratic, our freedoms may very well begin to disappear as international bodies exert more influence on the masses.

I hate the UN. It has some articals implying that no nation has the right to protect themselves, has a pacifist & Social-democratic agenda. (I've seen this in its Charter).

A hideous, nightmarish thought! But what's really scary is to look around and see that it appears to be exactly the direction the world is moving. It may be hard to think of it in its most basic form but I have no doubt that one-day it will come to this. I agree with Dirk - the leadership will be evil and corrupt - can you say Anti-Christ?

liberal garbage.

Globalism is much the same as federalism. There are one difference though: Gloalism tends to be more global than federalism. While the UN is a good example of a result of globalism, the EU is for federalism. Globalism though is a much more new ideology than federalism though, but maybe more well-known in our days. Ask ten people if they know what federalism is, & most of them will say "no". The only way to give poor regions of the world the wealth the Western industrial countries have experience for decades, is to go global. If we really mean something with helping the poorest of the poor to get education, health, enough food & economic growth, we have to start thinking global. My dream is that one day there will exist a global parliament with at least as much power, hopefully more, than the US parliament, a global prime minister elected by the people worldwide, and a cabinet/government choosen by this prime minister! This is also the principal thought in federalism. :-)

It's funny how globalism is a term of derision for people who have very opposite views from my own. I am all for global trade and efforts to harmonize trade to allow of greater economic activity. Those who think harrassing the WTO helps kids in sweatshops are completely mistaken. But I do have a grave suspicion of how some want to move decision-making authority away from sovereign nations and to a centralized authority that is not accountable to voters. The farcical things that the U.N. has done -- like letting Libya sit on the human rights commission, but denying a seat to the U.S. -- should be a clear warning against delegating too much power to a world government.