Free Essay Example - De-Globalization

Deglobalization is defined as the process of reducing integration and interdependence between different organizations in the world (Martin, 2018). It is mostly used to outline the period when economic investment between states diminished bringing new era of independence. The word deglobalization comes from the profound reduction of trade as part of economic activities up to the 1970s compared to the early years from the 1910s (Livesey, 2018). The reduction of trade means that the economies developed less integration within global markets despite the profound scope of economic globalization. Deglobalization became deeper in two periods the first one being Great Depression in the 1930s and the second one Great Trade Collapse in the 2010s (Livesey, 2018). The aim of this study is to research on the factors, theories, effects, process and applications of deglobalization in the world.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Two strong proponents have played roles in the death of globalization. According to Mervyn Martin, The US and UK policies are two coherent solutions to short-term critical challenges affecting powerful nations (Martin, 2018). Although a lot of studies focus on international economics, deglobalization broadly refers to trade, economic, political, cultural, social, and technological dimensions. Deglobalization periods have been viewed as fascinating comparable to other periods like 1850 to 1914 and 1950-2007, whereby globalization had been viewed as a norm (Livesey, 2018). Most people take globalization as a norm because they interpret it based on a global economy whose integration is also framed as increasing. In the recent past scientists have tried to understand the major causes and impacts of deglobalization by comparing the two major periods when it has occurred.

In both phases, deglobalization was equally caused by shocking demands in the midst of a financial disaster. However, the two periods were identified in the light of deglobalization; they were not that identical. The trade composition was a very significant factor in the 1930s and 2000s; the manufacturing trade was the source of contradiction (Martin, 2018). The impacts subjected to countries during both the Great Depression and Great Recession were very diverse such that polices were not appropriate enough to address the consequences of deglobalization. During the 1930s, democracies were in support of free trade; deglobalization was influenced by autocratic policies made to reinforce self-sufficiency. In the 2010s, political organization is essential, but in the recent years, the decision of democracy such as the Brexit and President Trump's election with first American Agenda have driven deglobalization across the world (Martin, 2018).

Drivers of De-globalization

Several factors pose challenges to globalization and influencing the deglobalization. Factors that trigger globalization are mostly related to trade, economic, political, cultural, social, and technological dimensions. The same reasons that influenced the growth of globalization are the same reasons that have caused deglobalization. Globalization created a lot of employment opportunities which served billions of people across the world while creating opportunities for expansion of international organizations by capitalizing on cheap labor. The election of Donald Trump as the president of the United States has been treated as the public orientation to the start of deglobalization. He influenced the Americans to believe that the other developing countries were snatching all the American employment opportunities thus, changing the country's approach to pose a threat to globalization (Reznikova et al., 2018). The president started by developing sabotage to the globalization by imposing free trade restrictions, for example, by pulling American out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and imposing high import tariffs.

The flow of migration has increased cases of deglobalization. Before the start of world war 1, Max Weber, a Germany scholar introduced an argument explaining why globalization was affected. Deglobalization, in this case, brought a lot of advantage to the people of inferior cultures (Prashantham et al., 2018). Max Weber's first work majorly to be recognized as the research on the agricultural workers from the republic of Poland flooding into the East of Germany. Migration had been a critical agenda in the election of Donald Trump, continental Europe, and the Brexit campaign. The 2015 uncontrolled flow of migration is responsible for damaging the reputation of Angela Merkel in Germany. Migration was also used in other countries, especially France, to convert populism into a strong brand against German (Reznikova et al., 2018). Another perfect example is the uniqueness of Japan among the industrialized nations for not opposing populism is related to the lack of immigration in the country.

Migration of foreigners mostly results the fear of losing jobs and reduction of income, and the fear for the increment of welfare costs. The two components are combined to form the conclusion that migrants lead to under-development in infrastructure, especially in health administration, housing, transport while influencing an emergency of threatening and alien culture. Contrary to trade, the distributive impacts of high immigration mostly fall on the medium and low class. The incomes are lost in the emerging competition while the change in prices between unskilled and skilled labor only benefit the privileged. The fight of immigration has affected the performance of globalization in the country. The xenophobic killings in South Africa can exemplify the latest cases of migration, causing deglobalization. The South Africans are killing and chasing away foreigners because of competition of employment opportunities and low incomes. The xenophobia contributed to a lot of foreign enmity between south Africans with Nigeria and Zimbabwe, taking revenge by damaging south African multinational businesses in their countries (Dur et al., 2019).

Capital flows are always considered as the chief instigator of deglobalization. It seems anonymous and international when capital is moving swiftly; it only brings complications when capital retreats as people are left wondering the source of delay. There has been renationalization of finance since 2008, mainly through regulation concerns (Reznikova et al., 2018). Apart from seeking for domestic issues, specifically migration, the other most prioritized problem is by the European Union and the United Kingdom is concerns related to financial flows. Capital flows happen with a lot of benefits. In receiving countries, the increase of capital flows is determined by the rise in human capital and financial openness. There are, however, consequences when the framework of business organizations is not fully developed. The European Union was tailoring its strategies to the policy of equivalence before the Brexit vote (Dur et al., 2019). The organizations controlled by the same regime were allowed to take the role of the European Union. The plan to employ a simple regulation in the US is also supporting the European Union not to involve what they term as unfairly regulated foreign organizations.

Discussion about financial flows is very sensitive as it is connected to information. Financial reports are known to help in understanding the structure of an economy which forms bases for international politics. After the immediate financial crisis of 2008, financial institutions were viewed as the source of deglobalization (Reznikova et al., 2018). The information is perceived as a weapon of mass destruction and a tool to apply for national power. The instruments that link information economy relies on interaction systems and complex software managed and controlled exclusively by corporations from the US such as Microsoft, Google, amazon, and telecon firms (Dur et al., 2019). The leaks by Edward Snowden concerning the National Security Agency have enlightened individuals on the global network works for power and intelligence (Dur et al., 2019). The sensitive information was fed to critiques of the international financial system in China and Russia, which viewed the dollar as a tool for the American power and fear for the consequences of the American economic sanctions (Dur et al., 2019).

Challenges affecting the capital markets rise eyebrows on the degree of coordination and the rules; leading to deglobalization. There have been questions on who legislates laws on the reliability of the interconnected system and the one that ensures that the policies are equally beneficial to every nation. In the 19th century, globalization followed set rules that were set by the British government. The globalization in the 20th century was primarily controlled by the United States as it was the delegated the role of making currency arrangements and defending the multilateral system (Reznikova & Ivashchenko et al., 2018). The availability of international organizations in financial markets has largely influenced to the domestic banking system to be stable. Challenges and the role of powerful nations in the capital markets contributed to disabling the domestic banking systems because of the overall impact on international organizations. Majority of nations feel that they are sidelined and that the superior countries such as the UK and the US are gaining the advantage at the expense of the undeveloped countries (Dur et al., 2019).

Factors that affect on De-globalization

Deglobalization has very impacts globally. Deglobalization affects the mutual agreement between countries on the global markets. While some countries are encouraged to produce the goods abundantly available in their market, deglobalization will make it hard for the get the market internationally. Since there is not a self-sufficient country in the world, most nations produce different products to meet demand in the international market. The interference of globalization affects trade; hence, there will be a lot of sabotage and hostility based on the interest of countries. The trade competition between countries may not be fair as countries may restrict their resources to deny other opportunities. For example, some states produce products which are used as raw materials. In international markets, restriction or change of terms may substantially affect the economies of the respective countries (Holm, 2019). Worldwide de-integration leads to a rise in goods and services, which further reduces the profit margin of multinational organizations. Deglobalization affects peace and collaboration between different countries, which also reduces the size of the global market. The latest enmity can be related to America's restriction of android features in Huawei phones from China; this is a start or continuation of a trade war between the two nations.

Different countries have different cultures which, when integrated, promotes cultural values. Deglobalization divides people and increases the chances of discrimination based on origin, social status. Religion and race. The aspect of power actors controlling international politics based on the interests of their countries draws a thick between the state of different nations. Deglobalization influences some weaker countries to feel victimized hence giving them a reason to hate the citizens from the other countries regarded as powerful countries. The disintegration of cultures means a division of people which further restricts certain people from working in certain countries. When globalization was performing well, cultural practices such as circumcision to females and restriction of girl education in some countries had been abolished. Now those practices will no longer be viewed as wrong because apparently deglobalization influences people to retain their culture.