The term globalization has become clouded with emotional and moral connotations since the term arose in the 1970’s and 1980’s. What is essentially an economic process is analyzed through a moral lens, and companies are judged for non-economic failings. While reading Immanuel Wallerstein’s economic breakdown of globalization I found myself smiling. The article was a short economic explanation of globalization, plain and simple. I usually dislike economic jargon, but I welcomed abstract terms that invoke no emotion. By using the word “firm” or “quasi-monopoly” instead of an example like McDonalds, the article forces the audience to continue reading before forming a value judgement.
The endless accumulation of capital is impossible. And yet, it is the goal of everyone engaged in the global capitalist economy. Workers on all levels strive to collect as much capital as possible. As sad as it is to say, accumulation of material wealth is seen as personal worth in the modern world. I find it hard to criticize globalization and multinational corporations for engaging in ruthless capitalism when it trickles down to nearly every modern consumer. Ruthless capitalism may be ugly, but it is a fact, and as long as corporations do not violate laws or basic human rights (environmental destruction is an issue to complex to tackle here) value judgments are seemingly unfair.