European countries and Russia in globalization: together or apart.

Автор: Гаврилова Е.Ю
Факультет русской филологии с углубленным изучением английского языка European countries and Russia in globalization: together or apart.
The past ten years have been a period of intense international change. Many aspects of international life have experienced rapid transformation, but one central trend stands out: the increasingly intense interchange of people, ideas, goods, information, and money across national and regional borders. This phenomenon is commonly referred to as globalization and a number of commentators have christened the contemporary period as the era of globalization. While globalization is often discussed as a predominantly economic phenomenon, in reality it has many other facets, including the global trend toward democracy and the revolution in information and communications technology. In this article I am going to tell about the meaning of the word globalization,about it`s backround and development in european countries,in particular, compare how it goes in England and Russia.
Globalization in literal sense is the process of globalizing, transformation of some things or phenomena into global ones. It can be described as a process by which the people of the world are unified into a single society and functioning together. This process is a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural and political forces. Globalization, as a term, is very often used to refer to economic globalization, that is integration of national economies into the international economy through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, and spread of technology. The word globalization is also used, in a doctrinal sense to describe the neoliberal form of economic globalization. Globalization is also defined as internationalism, however such usage is typically incorrect as "global" implies "one world" as a single unit, while "international" (between nations) recognizes that different peoples, cultures, languages, nations, borders, economies, and ecosystems exist. Sometimes the terms internationalization and globalization are used interchangeably,but there is a slight formal difference. The term internationalization refers to the importance of international trade, relations, treaties etc. Inter+national means between or among nations; hence internationalization refers to the increased importance of relations between nations - the basic unit remains the nation. In contrast, the term globalization refers to economic integration on a global scale, into a global economy, which blurs national boundaries. In the extreme, globalization would mean erasure of national boundaries for economic purposes; international trade (governed by comparative advantages) would become interregional trade (governed by absolute advantages).
The word "Globalization" has been used by economists since 1981; however, its concepts did not become popular until the later half of the 1980's and 1990's.
Globalization in its largest extent began a bit before the turn of the 16th century, in Portugal. The country's global adventurism in the 16th century linked continents, economies and cultures as never before. The Kingdom of Portugal kicked off what has come to be known as the Age of Discovery, in the mid-1400s. The westernmost country in Europe, was the first to significantly probe the Atlantic Ocean, colonizing the Azores, Madeira and other Atlantic islands, then braving the west coast of Africa. In 1488, Portuguese explorer Bartolommeo Dias was the first to sail around the southern tip of Africa, and in 1498 his countryman Vasco da Gama repeated the experiment, making it as far as India. In 1500, Pedro Álvares Cabral discovered Brazil. The Portuguese Empire would establish ports, forts and trading posts as far west as Brazil, as far east as Japan and Timor, and along the coasts of Africa, India and China. For the first time in history, a wave of global trade, colonization, and enculturation reached all corners of the world. This is the first case of the globalization in Europe.
Global integration continued through the expansion of European trade, as in the 16th and 17th centuries, when the Portuguese and Spanish Empires reached to all corners of the world after expanding to the Americas.
In the 17th century, Globalization became a business phenomenon when the Dutch East India Company, which is often described as the first multinational corporation, was established. Because of the high risks involved with international trade, the Dutch East India Company became the first company in the world to share risk and enable joint ownership through the issuing of shares: an important driver for globalization.In the 19th century it was sometimes called "The First Era of Globalization" a period characterized by rapid growth in international trade and investment, between the European imperial powers, their colonies, and, later, the United States. It was in this period that areas of sub-saharan Africa and the Island Pacific were incorporated into the world system. The "First Era of Globalization" began to break down at the beginning with the First World War, and later collapsed during the gold standard crisis in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Globalization in the era since World War II was first the result of planning by economists, business interests, and politicians who recognized the costs associated with protectionism and declining international economic integration. Their work led to the Bretton Woods conference and the founding of several international institutions intended to oversee the renewed processes of globalization, promoting growth and managing adverse consequences.
But nowdays the situation in European countries and in Russia are completely different. And I doubt a lot whether it`s correct to talk about this event in our country. Because in Europe globalization means that you are in the European Union, so facts like changing in culture and in confession of population it`s only result of economic and politic collaboration. Russia wants to have consequence without reason.
How globalization goes in England:
Britain has been a self-governing nation for 900 years and has been developing democracy and freedom for most of that time ( in contrast European countries have relatively little experience of democracy). They have been under the control of autocratic kings and dictators until very recently. Now they are ruled by the EU's unelected bureaucracy).
England may be the country of twins! This is a face of man which will be typical for England in the nearest future!
44240452922905In 1972 Britain joined the Common Market; then joined the European Economic Community, then found country in the European Community, and now they are in the quagmire of the European Union.This has been very costly for Britain. UK send the EU $55 million a day. In addition, the cost of living has increased tremendously for every person in Britain. This is because the EU, which was sold to them as a free trade area is in fact a customs union with heavy tariffs on all imported goods. Particularly agricultural goods. Thus people no longer enjoy cheaply produced food from the U.S., Canada, New Zealand, and Australia. Instead preference is given to much more expensive French products, and, of course, the French farmer is supported by the immensely costly Common Agriculture Policy, and still cannot produce the goods as cheaply as you can in the States. Now UK suffers from exploitation of foreign impoverished workers: The deterioration of protections for weaker nations by stronger industrialized powers has resulted in the exploitation of the people in those nations to become cheap labor. Due to the lack of protections, companies from powerful industrialized nations are able to offer workers enough salary to entice them to endure extremely long hours and unsafe working conditions. The shift to service work: The low cost of offshore workers have enticed corporations to move production to foreign countries.
The laid off unskilled workers are forced into the service sector where wages and benefits are low, but turnover is high. This has contributed to the widening economic gap between skilled and unskilled workers.
The loss of these jobs has also contributed greatly to the slow decline of the middle class which is a major factor in the increasing economic inequality in the United States. Families that were once part of the middle class are forced into lower positions by massive layoffs and outsourcing to another country. This also means that people in the lower class have a much harder time climbing out of poverty because of the absence of the middle class as a stepping stone, the possibility of alternative global institutions and policies, which they believe address the moral claims of poor and working classes throughout the globe, as well as environmental concerns in a more equitable way
Russia and Globalization: While 18th century Czar Peter the Great succeeded in opening up Russia to the world and turning it into a European power, later generations struggled to keep up with the process. Then, the October Revolution in 1917 put Russia's integration with the rest of the world on hold for nearly 70 years. In its present inward-looking and bitter mood, verging on nationalism of the more dangerous kind, Russia sees itself as isolated — the neglected land mass between an unsympathetic West and booming Asia.
The strategy developed to "globalize" Russia was known as "shock therapy." Its implementation began with the January 1, 1992 elimination of price controls on most goods. The objective of shock therapy was, in essence, to create a market economy in Russia as quickly as possible. This was to be achieved by freeing prices and liberalizing trade policies, which would stimulate competition; and by privatization, which would create private property with all its attendant behavioral incentives for enterprises. At the same time, it was essential to make the ruble convertible and ensure that its value remained relatively stable. This meant controlling inflation and, therefore, keeping tight control of currency emissions and government spending.
Successful economic reform was to create a new middle class that would become a powerful political constituency favoring the consolidation of economic and political reform in Russia. This would serve larger American interests by promoting peace between Russia and other democracies and, therefore, enhance American security.
Despite severe economic hardship and widespread dissatisfaction, which led to the replacement of acting Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar at the end of 1992, the Clinton administration quickly took up the banner of shock therapy upon entering office in 1993. In fact, administration officials applied heavy pressure to Boris Yeltsin to stick with the program throughout 1993, despite growing opposition in the Russian legislature. Only after Yeltsin’s forcible dissolution of the Supreme Soviet in October and the victory of Communist and nationalist parties in the State Duma elections that followed did Strobe Talbott, then the coordinator of U.S. policy toward Russia, admit that Russians needed "less shock and more therapy." Nevertheless, the administration continued for years to press for rapid privatization, tight monetary policy, and other key components of the shock therapy program.
3642995368935In a highly critical 1999 review of the role of the United States and international financial institutions in Russia’s transition, former World Bank Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz suggests that the shock therapy approach, which he termed "the Washington Consensus," failed in Russia because it represented a fundamental misunderstanding of the reform process. He argued that policymakers adhered too strictly to neoclassical economic dogma and consequently gave little attention to the laws and institutions required for an effective market economy, to concepts such as corporate governance, or to the qualitative impact of their plans on Russia’s citizens. Russia would have been much better off, Stiglitz suggested, if it had been advised to take a more gradual, consensus-based, bottom-up approach to reform that developed at least some key institutions before the conduct of large-scale privatization programs.
The eventual outcome of Russia’s reform process is all the sadder when one takes into account the fact that from the vantage of 1992, Russia was supposed to be an "easy" case for globalization. At the time, in addition to having plentiful natural resources and a highly educated population, Russia was blessed by a vibrant free media, a leadership determined to pursue radical economic reform and rapid integration into the global economy, and a population eager to soak up American culture in any and every possible form. After a decade, Russia should have been well on the way to becoming a prosperous and friendly democracy. The fact that a country having so many advantages has failed to follow the course projected by globalization theory should raise serious questions.
3557270849630This is not to say that the globalization model is not useful; after all, it is readily apparent that the world has changed in fundamental ways in the past 20 years and that the globalization paradigm can explain much of what has happened. What is also clear, however, is that it does not explain everything — and that it can easily lead policy makers astray.
So, in process of globalization Russia is apart. But it`s not the thing to disappoint us, because the countries which are involved don`t like it anymore. We can see it clear on the English example. To allow the market mechanism to be the sole director of the fate of human beings and their natural environment, indeed, even of the amount and use of purchasing power, would result in the demolition of society... Robbed on the protective covering of cultural institutions, human beings would perish from the effects of social exposure; they would die as the victims of acute social dislocation through vice, perversion, crime and starvation. Nature would be reduced to its elements, neighbourhoods and landscapes defiled, rivers polluted, military safety jeopardized, the power to produce food and raw materials destroyed. (Karl Polanyi 1957) Globalization has dangers and an ugly dark side. But it can also bring tremendous opportunities and benefits. Just as capitalism requires a network of governing systems to keep it from devouring societies, globalization requires vigilance and the rule of law.
Anti-trust laws, the Securities and Exchange Commission, labor unions, charities, the Federal Trade Commission, and countless other agencies and organizations keep American capitalism in check. Similar transparent mechanisms are needed to make sure globalization is a positive force in the world.
Globalization will always have cheerleaders who are blind to the destruction globalization can cause. And it will always have strident opponents blind to the way globalization gives some people their first opportunity to fulfill basic aspirations.
Maybe Russia won`t avoid globalization, and we will have to go through all the difficulties that European countries now trying to overcome. But I am happy that my motherhood is apart. Why? We have time to learn on other`s mistakes and make a profit from this process, though it`s difficult to compare such huge and multinational country with European state.
Reference Literature
1. Энциклопедия для детей.Т.1.Всемирная история.-4-е изд., испр. и перераб./Глав. Ред. М.Д. Аксенова.-М.:Аванта+,2001.-688 с.; ил.
2. Словарь иностранных словю-4-е изд. Перераб. и дополн./под редакцией И.В.Лехина и проф. Ф.П. Петрова. -М.: Государственное издательство иностранных и национальных словарей,1954.-856с.
3. Энциклопедия для детей. Т. 12.Россия: физическая и экономическая география.- 2-е изд., испр./Глав. ред. М.Д.Аксенова.-М.:Аванта+,1999.-704 с.: ил.
4. The Moscow Times.-2007.-№.749.
5. Passport Moscow.-2007.-№12.