Globalisation Is a Euphamism for Neo-Colonialism

globalisation is a euphemism for neo- colonialism. Discuss. sphericisation is a complex and multifaceted income tax return (Bayliss 2008252). However, this analyze will on the unbalance mingled with western almostern sources and the growth orbit and consequential evolution, which, rather than organism condemned as neo-colonialism, is warrant as globalisation. The eradicate of colonial rule did not mark the end of the trend of scotch control and doingation of the growth founding (Manzo 2009267).The pagan, policy-making and stinting effects of globalisation upon the developing dry land resemble that of neo-colonial power an in equivalence that is defended by the benevolence of neo-liberalism and egalitarianism of the drop market. This essay will focus on the cultural and political relational inter national sureness of the west and economic partiality of globalised institutions, referring to IR theories of globalisation defending it as beneficial (Bayliss 200 8248, pacha 2009330) and condemning it as capitalistic imperialism.Colonialism describes a period of expansion and developing by European powers spanning the 15th to 20th Century, the governmental control, physical occupation, and domination of people and their commonwealth (Crawford 2002131). Between 1946 and 1976 European powers granted independence to all their colonies. However, Horvath writing in 1972 moots that neo-colonialism fleetly fol low-downed its predecessor (Horvath 197246).Neo-colonialism implies that whilst post-colonial states attained nominal sovereignty at ass the worldwide constitution, they remain reliant upon western powers and argon subsequently politically controlled, culturally conditi unrivaledd and economically victimised (Nkrumah 1968x-xii). States with the outward trappings of transnational sovereignty but in reality sacrifice their economic scheme and thus its political policy directed from outside. (Nkrumah 1968xi) globalisation can b e defined as the expansion of oecumenic interconnectedness where states integrate and supranational institutions atomic number 18 formed. Whilst stronger states control their involvement, weaker states are pressure to integrate, world influenced rather than influencing (Bayliss 2008255). Neo-liberalism copes integration is beneficial (Bayliss 2008249, Sorenson 199710) globalization will restructure the innovation economy without the need for interpolationist policies creating equality within a competitive dethaw market (Hirst 1999134). adult male- scheme surmisal however, describes monopoly capitalism where rich core states exploit peripheral miserableer states, fundamentally an international phase remains (Bayliss 2008147, Wallerstein 1989). Realist thought, would argue that powerful states unless part the globalised system for their own social wel outlying(prenominal)e ( valse 1979). globalization could therefore be seen as an instrument for imperialism raiseing s trong capitalist states (Bayliss 2008153) fundamentally a euphemism for neo-colonialism. Democracy is incited through and through globalization based upon neoliberal ideals of kindities proper(ip) to libertarian happiness (Morgenthau 1960100).The political weight of western thought, and the professed virtuous legitimacy of its international onward motion highlights a neo-colonial dominance (Nkrumah 1968ix), The westward valet de chambre believes international co-operation can only safely occur between liberal elective states (Owen 199496). Separate peace (Doyle 19861151), co-operation solely between liberal democracies, can be seen through EU accession criteria (Europa 2010C ablehagen Criteria) and ENP policy (DeBardeleben 200821) and IMF and reality Bank loan policy (Cogan 2009211). direful Hesperian political principles using economic incentive.Here, humanitarian guardianship is a chip in of neo-colonialism foreign capital used for the exploitation rather than the de velopment of the third world (Nkrumah 1968x) For occidental powers force is often a necessary option against illiberal states (Hoffman 199531) Owen 199497). US involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq has been motivated by the desire to spread majority rule and delay security (Owen 1994125-127). This power political sympathies contradicts equality of neo-liberal co-operation in globalization suggesting political homogeneousness enforce by an imperialist force.Realists argue that states espouse humanitarian motives as a pretext to cover the pursuit of national self-interest (Franck and Rodley 1973). Nato selectivity of response in Kosovo (1999) helplessness to act in Sudan (Bayliss 2008527) and the illegitimate intervention of France in Rwanda (1994) expose a blemish international justice, where Western powers act without restraint. In 2005 the UN adopted the responsibility to protect, self-aggrandizing itself legitimate right act upon human rights breaches. This is one of many exa mples of nternational institutions imposing Western political and moralistic ethics justified by an international responsibility (Morgan 197233-34) a practice widely accepted in Western public opinion (Reisman 1985279-80). globalization is essentially creating an international super power that transcends state borders possessing hegemony on moral and political principles with a self-legitimised right to enforce them. Defenders of globalization suggest the international community is one of shared and defended values.However, these values are presented by the West, who misuse this influence to intervene without justification. Globalization has allowed for an increased period of finis and traditions internationally. However, this flow has not been evenhanded, media dominance of Western powers dwarfing littler states. The advanced nature of US media and turn out weight of capital has bring ind Media Imperialism (Sklair 2002167) where the developed world is flooded by broadcasting promoting Western products, creating an externally dictated popular culture.The resultant is a developed world dominate by Western products e. g. Coco smoke the best selling drink in the world (Coca Cola 2010). Under the guess of neo-colonialism, neo-colonial states are obliged to purchase make products from imperial powers to the deficit of local products (Nkrumah 1968ix). The culture and products of powerful societies are not imposed upon weak societies by force or occupation (Crawford 2002131, Sklair 2002168) but underhandedly via an internationally dominant media limited to Anglo-American interests (Lee 198082).Whilst globalization arguably encourages multiculturalism (Bayliss 2008423), a disparate international system has pee-peed a dominant culture within the global community (Kymlicka 1991182) that exploits its status to the last of the developing world (Golding and Harris 1997). Colonialism saw a moral arrogance with missionaries striving to create a replica of ones own surface area upon the natives (Emerson 196913-14) a noble purpose of thrift the wretched. (Horvath 197246) Colonial powers occupied weaker states, imposing culture, holiness and values based upon a favorable position of power, policing and governing without legitimacy (Crawford 002131-133). Similarly neo-colonialism operates in political, religious, ideological and cultural spheres where the powerful read the other into oneself (Toje 200883) based on moral conceit. Globalisation has revealed conformity to Western democracy and culture, whether it has been received or enforced is the young of debate. Globalisation as interconnectedness (Bayliss 2008252) economically the integration of national economies into global markets (Todaro 2000713) is determined by economic growth.The creation of the international take over market intended to ask a beneficial effect on developing countries (Hirst 1999134) shifting power out-of-door from developed countries to the rest of the wo rld (Martin 199712). However, free market competition creates losers, often the most vulnerable feminized states (Peterson 2009287). Whilst globalisation did not create inequality, the solution for development was flawed, merely downslope the imbalance (Peterson 2009287) arguably, colonialism creating inequality, neo-colonialism proceeding it (Horvath 197246).Realists believe states only well-being at other states expense (Art, Waltz 198867-68) suggesting neo-liberal ideas of development would harm the developed nations. Whilst international economic institutions such as the WTO, IMF and manhood Bank are intended to maintain free trade and assist developing countries, they have often been accused truly maintaining inequality (Peterson 2009291) for the benefit of elites (Gray 1998, Greider 1997). A free market is intended to be free, simple and competitive (Bayliss 2008249). However, the rules of world trade are created, and therefore weighted in favor of rich countries.For ex ample, trade-related aspects of international policy rights control international patent protection party favor firms based in the Western initiation who hold 90% of patents forcing expensive products on the developed world who cannot produced their own low toll versions, the worst example being that of patented medicine (Watkins 200278). The double standards of the free market are also unornamented in trade tariffs (Anderson 2006147-159). nonethern governments promote free trade and use the IMF and macrocosm Bank to impose import slackening on poor states (Romano 20041012).Yet they refuse to open their own markets, south-north export trade tariffs cost developing countries $10 billion annually, double the amount they receive from humanitarian sanction (Watkins 200279). foreign economic institutions are essentially governed by Western powers the beingness commit presidential post dominated by American citizens since its creation, not based on votes but informal agreement s between the US and European stakeholders (Cogan 2009209) Since the outset the US has shown dominance (Gowa 1983) creating the Bretton Woods system in 1944 and causation its breakdown, in 1971 (Bayliss 2008245).The competition of the free market, injure against the third world by rascally steward of international economic institutions has allowed for economic hegemony post-colonial states remaining dependant upon their former know (Young 200145). Marxist theories fit alarmingly with criticisms of globalization, World System surmise and Dependency Theory showing resources flowing from periphery of poor, underdevelop states to a core of wealthy states (Bayliss 2008147). pathetic states are impoverished and rich ones enriched by the way poor states are forced into the globalised world system (Blomstrom 19848-45).Lenins take Imperialism, The Highest stage of Capitalism shows a capitalist monopoly, essentially neo-colonial periphery at the bottom of a tiered international syste m, a system Marxists would argue is essentially globalisation (Bayliss 2008157). However, unlike colonialism globalization has arguably empowered ideas above states, bountiful the defenders of neo-colonial states a louder voice. Social Constructivism argues that globalisation is far deeper than interaction between states (Snyder 200460).Whilst colonialism remained acceptable for centuries, the exploitation and imbalance of the current world system does not go unnoticed, numerous NGOs pressuring government institutions and operating independently as aid organizations. Globalisation has created an imbalanced world system retaining zero(prenominal)th-South divides that emerged during Colonialism (Horvath 197246). Whilst neo-liberal free markets aimed to resolve the inequalities, Realism argues flaws and diverge within the current international system were retained and created as to ensure the Western powers remained economically powerful over the developing world (Emerson 196915).Em erson claims it would be a twist point in history for global systems not to bring forth a new imperialism and new colonialism (Emerson 196916). The cultural and moral dominance of Western powers and active forwarding of values, for the benefit of the developing world however, is a far more malevolent abbreviate that globalization is a euphemism for neo-colonialism (Nkrumah 1968xi). Bibliography Articles J. Cogan (2009) Representation and tycoon in International Organization The operative Constitution and Its Critics The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 03, no(prenominal) 2, pp. 209-263 R. Emerson (1969) Colonialism, Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 3-16 J. Horvath (1972) A Definition of Colonialism Current Anthropology, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 45-57 J. M. Owen, (1994) How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace, International Security, Vol. 19, No. 2 (Autumn, 1994). pp. 87-125. D. Roman, R. Sandbrook (2004) Globalisation, extremism and violence in poor co untries Third World Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 1007-1030. K. Watkins (2002) Is the WTO Legit? irrelevant Policy, No. 132, pp. 78-79 J.Snyder (2004) One World, Rival Theories impertinent Policy, No. 145, pp. 62-62. makes J. Art and K. Waltz (ed. ) (1988) The use of force capital of the United Kingdom University press of America. N. Crawford (2002) contestation and Change in World government, Cambridge Cambridge University complot J. DeBardeleben (2008) The boundaries of EU Enlargement, Basingstoke Palgrave MacMillan P. Hirst, G. Thompson (1999) Globalization question, Cambridge Polity advocate S. Hoffman (1987) Janus and Minerva Essays in the Theory and Practice of International Politics, Boulder Westview printing press. W.Greider (1997) One World do or Not The Manic logical system of Global Capitalism, New York Simon and Schuster J. Gray (1998) ill-considered Dawn The Delusions of Global Capitalism. capital of the United Kingdom Granta Books J. Gowa (1983) block the Cold Window, New York Cornell University Press W. Kymlicka (1991) Liberalism association and tillage, Oxford Clarendon Press K. Nkrumah (1965) Neo-colonialism the last stage of imperialism, London Nelson C. Lee (1980) Media Imperialism Reconsidered The Homogenizing of Television Culture calcium Sage L. Sklair (2002) Globalization, Capitalism and its alternatives, New York Oxford University Press M.Todaro (2000) Economic Development, Harlow Addison Wesley Longman A. Toje (2008) America, The EU and Strategic Culture London Routledge R. Young (2001) Post-colonialism An Historical Introduction Book Chapters K. Manzo (2009) Do colonialism and slavery belong to the yesteryear (ed. ) J. Edkins, M. Zehfuss, Global Politics and new introduction, London Routledge, pp. 244-271. V. Peterson (2009) How is the world organized economically? (ed. ) J. Edkins, M. Zehfuss, Global Politics and new introduction, London Routledge, pp. 271-294. M. pacha (2009) How can we end poverty (ed. J. Edkins, M. Zehfuss, Global Politics and new introduction, London Routledge, pp. 320-344 K. Anderson (2006) Subsidies and business deal Barriers (ed. ) Bjorn Lomborg How to Spend $50 to Make the World a Better Place, Cambridge Cambridge University Press, pp. 147-159. A. Bellamy, N. Wheeler (2008) addition Intervention in World Politics (ed. ) John Baylis, Steve Smith, Patricia Owens The Globalization of world government New York Oxford university press. pp. 522-538. S. Hobden, R. Wyn Jones (2008) Marxist theories of International relations (ed. John Baylis, Steve Smith, Patricia Owens The Globalization of world politics New York Oxford university press. pp. 142-157. N. Woods (2008) International political economy in an age of globalization (ed. ) John Baylis, Steve Smith, Patricia Owens The Globalization of world politics New York Oxford university press. pp. 244-258 Websites Coco-Cola Company, http//www. coca-cola. com/index. jsp Europa, Copenhagen Criteria, http//europa. eu/scadplus/gloss ary/accession_criteria_copenhague_en. htm Europa, ENP policy, http//ec. europa. eu/world/enp/policy_en. htm