Globalization and the Ideologized World
Nildo Viana
Several books on globalization have been written. Despite this, there is still a great doubt about what globalization is and what its characteristics are. Alexandre Barbosa's book, “ The Globalized World. Politics, Society and Economy[1] ”aims to answer these questions and provide a global analysis of the phenomenon. However, if the objective is interesting and reveals a need to increase awareness about such a phenomenon, the result is not as desired, as we will show below.
The author seeks to explain what globalization is, and affirms that it is a present reality, both economic and political and cultural, being the result of the accelerated exchange of goods, capital, information , ideas, from different countries, reducing geographical borders. It is characterized by the expansion of information flows, worldwide; for the acceleration of economic transactions, at the international level, and for the worldwide diffusion of universal political and moral values. The internet allows access to news from around the world in real time, goods become international, certain companies produce goods in other nations (Nokia, Nike, among others), international tourism and migration have increased, in addition to mergersand acquisitions of several companies. Globalization affects everything, the world of culture and sports, human rights and social movements.
This first aspect is quite problematic. In fact, it does not go beyond the world of pseudo-concreteness, of appearance, of superficial changes. If this is what globalization is, then it is nothing, because since the emergence of capitalism, the speed of trade, informational exchanges, among others, has increased, and since the end of the Second World War it has been at a high level, including the production of goods in other countries. countries dates from that time, which is marked by the expansion of transnational oligopolistic capital . At that time, the expansion of television fulfilled a role analogous to the expansion of the internet today. Globalization affects everything, but what is defined as globalization is only a consequence of capitalism and its superficial perception. We really need to show what is new in capitalism and what would justify calling it globalization.
In relation to other ideologues of globalization, the author has the merit of recognizing that it “affects” countries differently. This metaphysical entity, "globalization", is uneven. It is metaphysical because it appears to be external, affecting countries in a different way, forgetting that it is the product of some countries. Either way, the division between globalizing and globalized countries countries could have been discussed in greater depth , as only more abstract observations about advantages and vulnerability are not enough s for it. More outsiders to is the claim that the US is globalizing but are left globalize, with the entry of multinationals, which reduces the discussion of globalization, and transform ideology verb. The discussion of those excluded from globalization only reproduces another dominant ideology of today.
A new ideological juggling is presented in the discussion on the “ historical background ” of globalization. The author states that there are two interpretations of globalization and its historical background, some claim that globalization makes a historical break and others say in it means a capitalist continuity. The author positions himself saying that both do not capture the complexity of globalization, as it would be a revolutionary process that is developing slowly and progressively and that has not yet reached its last stage. Thus, the author wants to encompass the two concepts outlined above and for that he conceives a “revolutionary process” that is “slow” and “progressive”, breaking with any idea of revolution and falling into contradiction. Furthermore, it confuses the historical antecedent of globalization with capitalist continuity, since they are opposing ideas. The thesis of capitalist continuity comes precisely to criticize and refute the ideology of globalization. To claim that the maritime discoveries, colonial system, commercial expansion, industrial revolution, are antecedents of globalization means to empty it of any meaning.
The new phase of capitalism, marked by the establishment of a new accumulation regime (therefore, a formal change in capitalism), is left aside and in its place events and dates show only the chronological development and without any reasoning. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the emergence of neoliberalism that goes hand in hand with globalization (the indissoluble bonds of the social and historical process are replaced by classificatory and arbitrary elements, brought together only by concomitant occurrence and not by their common genesis, a totally wrong methodological procedure ).
The author separates a supposed “economic globalization” from the other aspects and, in this, he still makes other distinctions, in four spheres, the commercial, the productive, the financial and the technological. These elements would be separated in the author's ideology. What the author tries to explain, for example in the case of “multinationals” (transnationals) is the process of concentration and centralization of capital, already theorized by Marx in the 19th century, and the expansion that seeks cheaper labor, which does not it is new in the period of the so-called “globalization”. The supposed “political globalization” encounters obstacles, since a global government and the end of the Nation-State has not taken place . The author's insistence on affirming that there is a strengthening of “democratic values” is curious, as it is a time of greater repression than the previous historical period and some other past periods. Without a doubt, military dictatorships have lost ground in Latin America, but the reasons for this process are more complex and the supposed democratic values are, at most, a strengthening of the market, individualism and commercialization, much more than new values that point to for a greater “democracy”, even if formal, representative .
When discussing the emergence of global society and the maintenance of national societies, he explains this process through supposed resistance and seeks to maintain the local identity. The issue of international exploitation and class struggle does not exist, only the discourse of identity and the maintenance of the global and the local is reproduced.
Finally, the author puts one of the first characteristics of neoliberal capitalism, which is the increase in poverty and international inequalities. It also cites the 150 million unemployed people and 750 million in information work, 30% of the world population. And it refers to other consequences of this process: global crime, sex tourism, trafficking in women, forced labor and child labor.
When it comes to resistance, he mentions part of the problem: NGOs and unions, which are products (including, in most cases, financed by the State and large transnational companies). In other words, the author works only with the world of pseudo-concreteness, he does not leave the surface of the problems.
In summary, Alexandre Barbosa's book does not contribute to the understanding of globalization. The ideology of globalization does not even appear as an object of analysis , as it is considered to be true and manifests itself as the position of the author of the book all the time. The new phase of capitalism, marked by the emergence of the regime of integral accumulation, and its consequences, also do not appear. What appears is, on the one hand, the constant use of a word, globalization, which is poorly defined and which serves to explain everything, being confused with internationalization, something that has existed since the emergence of capitalism and, on the other hand, a proliferation of information dí spares and whose explanation does not. The various existing information about the recent reality are presented and always accompanied by the word globalization, but the reason for being and the genesis of such processes never appear. In the absence of an explanation, the word globalization appears. This magic word is the beginning and the end of the book and is the source of all the mystification of the book. Removing that word, we would have a descriptive discourse on aspects of social and historical changes and nothing more. The book shows, therefore, the “spirit of the time”, in which an ideology reigns, the ideology of globalization, already denounced in different forms (Bauman, Bourdieu, Vergopoulos, Hirst, etc.) and which remains strong, because the ideas dominant are the ideas of the ruling class, as Marx said.