Quotes About Globalization

This polarization has an unmistakably global dimension to it. Even in the small towns where folks bicker with one another about how to run the schools, the local issues and rivalries are overshadowed by a general feeling that all social orders—definitely including small-town America—are being drawn into something much larger.

Consider, for example, the image of a young Palestinian soldier that a reporter I know saw standing guard in the hills of Lebanon. He was fighting to preserve his ancient culture and its identity. He wore sneakers, blue jeans, and a Grateful Dead T-shirt. He carried an Uzi.

We are indeed seeing in our time the birth of a global superculture that pours together bits and pieces of many different cultures. But it is not just a combination of pieces, and neither will it be merely an homogenization; human beings are far too inventive for that, and the human mind is far too complex. We

The world had become pretty generally Ceceliafied.

Immigrants provide skills that we simply cannot afford to do without. They have contributed hugely to Britain's success.

At a time when we can split the atom, land on the moon, and decode the human genome, why do 2 billion people live on less than $2 a day?

I remember a great America where we made everything. There was a time when the only thing you got from Japan was a really bad cheap transistor radio that some aunt gave you for Christmas.

Experience has shown that the trade of the East is the key to national wealth and influence.

None of the recent technologies that have changed the world and created wealth—telecom, computers, aviation—have come out of India. Yet

The Indian government wants foreign investment but ignore the basic expectations that come with it. Hence

Technology brings us closer to the furthest, …and distances us from the closest.

Use of advanced messaging technology does not imply an endorsement of western industrial civilization.

We have failed to grasp the fact that mankind is becoming a single unit, and that for a unit to fight against itself is suicide.

Yes, I am Western, and I will remain so.

Basically and profoundly, we are with the West.

Breaking away from the illusion of market objectivity is the first step towards understanding capitalism.

Britain also banned exports from its colonies that competed with its own products, home and abroad. It banned cotton textile imports from India ('calicoes'), which were then superior to the British ones. In 1699 it banned the export of woolen cloth from its colonies to other countries (the Wool Act), destroying the Irish woolen industry and stifling the emergence of woollen manufacture in America.

In recommending free trade to developing countries, the Bad Samaritans point out that all the rich countries have free(ish) trade. This is, however, like people advising the parents of a six-year old boy to make him get a job, arguing that successful adults don't live off their parents and, therefore, that being independent must be the reason for their successes. They do not realize that those adults are independent because they are successful, and not the other way around.

The most important assumption underlying HOS is that all countries have equal productive capabilities – that is, they can use any technology they want.3

Free trade economists have to explain how free trade can be an explanation for the economic success of today's rich countries, when it simply had not been practised very much before they became rich.

Our story of bus drivers reveals the existence of the proverbial elephant in the room. It shows that the living standards of the huge majority of people in rich countries critically depend on the existence of the most draconian control over their labour markets – immigration control.

Today, South Korea is one of the world's industrial powerhouses, whike North Korea languishes in poverty. Much of this is thanks to the fact that South Korea aggressively traded with the outside world and actively absorbed foreign technologies while North Korea pursued its doctrine of self-sufficiency.

The importance of international trade for economic development cannot be overemphasized. But free trade is not the best path to economic development. Trade helps economic development only when the country employs a mixture of protection and open trade, constantly adjusting it according to its changing needs and capabilities. Trade is simply too important for economic development to be left to free trade economists.

It was only after the Second World War, when the US became top dog and liberalized its trade, that countries like France came to look protectionist.