Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (650,000)
U of G (30,000)
POLS (2,000)
POLS 2200 (100)
Lecture 18

POLS 2200 Lecture Notes - Lecture 18: Fixed Investment, Total Annihilation, Economic Surplus

Political Science
Course Code
POLS 2200
Cindy Clarke

This preview shows pages 1-2. to view the full 7 pages of the document.
POLS2200 International Relations 11/8/16
What is globalization and is it something new?
Jakso ad “oeso efe to it as a itesified itedepedee
o Creating a world economy that is not based on autonomous national economies but on
a consolidated global marketplace for production, distribution and consumption
o They argue that it is something new
o Not a question of this state or that, but a whole new type of economy that has been
created and companies respond to it
This single global economy dominates all the individual national economies that are contained
within it
Other scholars refer to shallow and deep integration
o Deep integration occurring as a result of TNCs increasingly organizing the production of
goods and services on a global scale
o Nothing is national anymore there is no one national place/state where things occur
Each global location performs a different aspect of the production and servicing
Naim calls it the widening, deepening and speeding up of worldwide inter-connectedness in all
aspects of contemporary social life not just international trade and investment, goes beyond
the economy
Even if the current economic crisis is slowing things down, groups around the world are still
We still have globalization not new, but intensified?
How do Liberals view globalization?
Liberals dominate much of the discussion on globalization an intensified cobweb
o Argue that the nation-state is becoming too small for some things and too big for others
in era of globalization
o Mean the nation-state is going to be too small for anything economic see more
institutions like the EU, other larger economic organizations
o It will become obsolete, it is too big for
Globalization creates cross-border activities which states no longer able to control on their own
At the same time, there is a trend towards stronger identification with the local community
where people live their daily lives
We are therefore witnessing the rise of fundamentalisms on the one hand and of large
economic unions on the other
o The nation-state is not going to be that meaningful to the rest of us
o Future of much smaller states to represent them, and bigger units (institutions) to deal
with this growing economy
Why do many liberals think we are going to see the rise of these fundamentalist movements?
(groups breaking away and demanding their own, smaller units)
o We can connect with people more easily who speak/look/act like us
o They argue that we are going to increasingly see this pushback in the globalizing effect
pat of gloalizatio is the loal oeet
find more resources at
find more resources at

Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

POLS2200 International Relations 11/8/16
o Many people feel that globalization has a large homogenizing effect everything looks
the same
o Many argue that there is a pushback to this because individuality is being washed away
o In response, you see the rise of fundamentalism
Gloalizatio has also eat the rise of trialis. What do sholars, suh as Bejai Barer, ea
by this?
Ceatio of e soial oeets ased o esistae idetit
o People goig ak to thei o
o Religious fundamentalists, nationalism, ethnic identity, locally-based movement
These are political struggles about which economic transfers should be out under political
control and how the benefits from globalization should be distributed among countries and
groups of people
This not only means a future of smaller and smaller states but the rise of terrorism
o Critic of globalization
o Why would he say we will see the rise of more terrorism? Might protest things that
represent globalization
How do Realists understand globalization?
Realists/mercantilists believe that the economics are subordinate to politics
o The state is the most important actor
o Its ot a uestio the ask
Realists, in general, are unconvinced that there is a qualitative shift towards a global economic
Globalization is more of the same a process of intensified interdependence between national
economies (not much has changed at all)
Ho do ealists espod to eooi lieals lais egadig the end of the nation-state?
o Reject the claim that corporations have lost their national identity
Argue that they remain tied to their home country
Still have to follow laws in states, get permission to do work in states, etc.
They would argue that globalization has made states more powerful
o States and their national corporations remains closely linked regardless of increased
world trade and investment flows
o Why?
States have increased their capacity of regulation and surveillance they have
enhanced their capacity to extract taxes and to regulate activities
This means more state autonomy, not less
How do Economic Structuralists understand globalization?
Neo-Marxist economic structuralists such as Robert Cox argue that there has been both an
intensification of interdependence and a qualitative shift towards a global economy
According to Cox, a new global economy exists alongside the classical capitalist world economy
There is uneven development
find more resources at
find more resources at
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version