Understanding Globalization

This critical discussion outlines three main pieces of evidence that support the fact that globalization is, in fact, neo-colonialism in all contexts. The paper discusses the similarities and differences between colonization and globalization, and how globalization has become a form of neocolonialism. The three pieces of evidence presented in the paper show that there is no difference between colonialism and neocolonialism.

Running head: UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION 1
Understanding Globalization
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date of Submission

UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION 2
What are the Links between Colonization and Globalization?
Introduction
There is a similarity in globalization and colonization in one way or the other. However,
the most significant is that both have weak and strong forces dictating how their presence meets
to have resources disproportionately shared. On the same note, there are several kinds of
colonization one of which involves a large group of individuals leaving an overcrowded
geographical location to settle in a far less crowded place (Andreotti & Pashby, 2013, pg. 424).
These Europeans then became New England’s thirteen colonies. However, globalization and
colonization are different as well. For instance, unlike colonization, globalization has insistently
defied the odds of time by defining the present global society and that of the future. It is
symbolized by the availability of a governing body in the form of ‘the United Nations.'
Otherwise, whatever the similarities or differences, globalization is neo-colonialism. Therefore,
this paper will discuss the three evidences portraying the fact that no difference exists between
colonialism in the early days where political supremacy and direct military was enforced on the
weak against the current neocolonialism in which capitalism, multinational corporations, and
cultural forces imposes economic colonialism on countries that are economically inferior (Sabah,
2016).
Discussion
As mentioned in the introduction section, this critical discussion will outline three main
pieces of evidence that support the fact that globalization is, in fact, neo-colonialism in all
contexts. First and foremost, the world as it currently is has witnessed several decolonization and
colonization consequences all of which are associated with enormous social, economic, and

UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION 3
political outcome both positively and negatively. Colonialism in itself encouraged the growth of
globalization. However, the world vaguely understands the critical aspects of what globalization
is. It is essential to understand the context in which "globalization" as we know, is used. For
instance, by closely examining the context with which decolonization and globalization are used,
it is clear that there is a close association between the two. In whatever way they are employed,
however, the political, economical, or social contexts of “globalization” have the same
framework when soliciting the meaning. However, the political meaning relies on compliance or
concurrences between people to create a universal sense (Antonio, 2010). In the three aspects of
globalization, political, economic, and social, only economic and social context solicit the same
meaning worldwide. Otherwise, the political context of globalization varies worldwide.
Critically speaking, with the political significance of globalization being flexible, a power source
gets created in which the exploitation of ambiguities for political and personal is done. In one
way or the other, language difference is one essential means of critically soliciting the position of
globalization about power structures and actions. It is then clear that globalization as firstly
contended, in whatever language and definition, is a game that involves political supremacy, a
commonality with neocolonialism (Apple, 2004).
As the second piece of evidence, many authors conform to the fact that ‘globalization’ is
a term that is most common with most world politicians in the current global society. It is also
impossible to dispute the famous definition that ‘globalization’ is the outright perception that the
world is evolving into one giant, single society in which the existing social space gets shared by
technological and economic forces (Antonio, 2010). Apart from that, the same definition
suggests that general developments in a given geographical area can in a way or the other;
influence the life outcomes of communities and individuals in another part of the world. On the

UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION 4
contrary, particular benefits of businesses and countries developed or not, have no such thing as
direct impacts on other companies and countries that are less developed and such is only a way
that policies of globalization could aggressively be pursued (Green, 2016).
Thirdly, according to L’Huillier (2011), many business schools and institutions tend to
educate students on practices of globalization and not to draw any attention to the associated
impacts could most likely be promoting a given policy directive that is political. It is also
concerning and disturbing that business schools and institutions do not make efforts in providing
students with platforms that encourage ‘sound practices’ as well as models that will help growing
countries develop by themselves (pg. 815). The business context exploits globalization via
Multinational Corporation setups in which local resources, technology, and capital get exported
to parent countries of such installations while parent countries remain with nothing to benefit
from. As this critical paper is written, there are about 77 million jobs that have been created
thanks to the existence of Multinational Company setups. Nevertheless, only approximately 11
million in such situations are located within host countries. Most probably, such cases are
directly linked to the fast spread of cultural globalization in which practices and norms as well as
values of the culture that dominates in the Multinational Company setups spread worldwide
(Antonio, 2010).
Conclusion
Three pieces of evidence are attached to this critical paper in answering the question on
links between colonialism and globalization. The three parts of evidence portray the fact that no
difference exist between colonialism (in the early days where political supremacy and direct
military was enforced on the weak) against the current neocolonialism (in which capitalism,

UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION 5
multinational corporations, and cultural forces compels economic colonialism on countries that
are economically inferior) all of which have been discussed herein (Andreotti, Jefferess, Pashby,
Rowe, Tarc & Taylor, 2010, pg. 11).

UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION 6
Reference
Andreotti, V. & Pashby, K. (2013). Digital democracy and global citizenship education:
mutually compatible or mutually complicit? The Educational Forum, 77(4) pp. 422-437.
Andreotti, V., Jefferess, D., Pashby, K., Rowe, C., Tarc, P. & Taylor, L. (2010). Difference and
conflict in global citizenship in Higher Education in Canada. International Journal of
Development Education and Global Learning, 2(3) pp. 5-24.
Antonio, R., J. (2010). Globalization and Colonialism: The New International Division of Labor.
Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9780470756119.part6
Apple, M.W. (2004). Ideology and Curriculum (3rd Edition). New York & London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Green, A. (2016). Is all this Globalisation not just a modern form of Colonialism? Retrieved
from https://aidangreen93blog.wordpress.com/2016/11/04/is-globalisation-a-modern-
form-of-colonialism/
L’Huillier, B. M. (2011). Recipe for Poverty, Degradation, and Hopelessness. Accounting,
Auditing and Accountability Journal, 24(6) pp. 815.
Sabah, D. (2016). Globalization new form of colonialism, President Erdoğan says. Daily
Economy. Retrieved from
https://www.dailysabah.com/economy/2016/11/02/globalization-new-form-of-
colonialism-president-erdogan-says