Meg MacNeille

GEOG 101
Selectiveness at its Finest

This just in: an outbreak in medicine that offers a cure to most cancers!

Finally, a disease that has ended the lives of so many innocent humans can be

squashed for good; however, this antidote will only be offered to regions that can

afford it. Sure, all cancer patients need this drug regardless of where they are but

making profit off of this discovery is more important. No hard feelings, right?

Simply speaking, Globalization is a game of favoritism. Globalization

describes “the myriad forms of connectivity and flows linking the local (and

national) to the global.” The ultimate goal of Globalization is to bring the world to

a state of globality, where it can be so interconnected that borders are not of

importance anymore. While Globalization has brought many regions and countries

together to share their discoveries, wealth, cultures, and political practices with

each other, these benefitting regions have formed cliques with one another.

Globalization selectively brings societies together while driving out the ones that

cannot keep up.

There seems to be a constant, global demand for wealth and

industrial/technological advancements to increase the ease of living in specific

environments. Every discovery starts somewhere and trickles elsewhere, but for

some reason, there is a repetitive pattern for regions that do not get a taste of the
fun. “For nearly five centuries, countries in the Global North have industrialized,

developed, and accumulated riches. During the same period, countries in the

Global South have been languish in poverty and underdevelopment.” At first, the

underlying thought relates to the lack of fairness in this situation. Looking further

into the situation, it is clear that the privileged continue to grow while the

communities struggling in poverty barely make it by. How can globality be

expected through such a selective process? The concept of “survival of the fittest”

is taught like it was only relevant in the prehumen era, but the details reveal that

this concept perfectly explains Globalization.

In the United States particularly, there is an uneven distribution of wealth.

“…recent globalization trends have increased U.S. inequality by disproportionately

raising top incomes…To the extent that top income earners disproportionately

benefit from globalization through the exploitation of poor governance settings…”

There are constant battles in the U.S. over whether competition of wealth is

important, or if every American should attain the same amount of wealth. This can

be projected on a global scale as well. Major areas around the world are booming

in wealth, but after traveling not even 20 miles from that destination, beauty can

quickly swap into poverty.

 This image compares two booming cities: one in the United States, one in

East Africa. Large, industrialized areas like these cities gain influence from one

another. Zoom Tanzania even referred to Dar Es Salaam as the “New York of East

Africa.” Africa is known for having astounding amounts of poverty, so how does

Africa have places like Dar Es Salaam, but also manage to be filled with people

who do not know when their next meal will be? “’At this critical juncture in human

history, only a united global public can pressure governments to reorder their

distorted priorities, cooperate more effectively, and share the resources of the

world more equitably.’” This is not to say that regions rich in resources do not

share them with others, but that they selectively share them. The demand for

wealth encourages trade to be done with regions, companies, countries, etc. that

will pay a good price or trade for other needed goods in return. This allows

Globalization to only benefit the places that can afford to help others out and be
helped in return. Regions that are swimming in poverty cannot keep up, drowning

in the inability to support themselves while the rest of the world expands and

excels to new levels.

It would be close minded to say there have not been efforts to bring societies

together and create a more equal world. For example, The North American Free

Trade Agreement was made in effort to bring together the United States, Canada,

and Mexico by reducing tariffs and increasing economic activity throughout the

continent. Sandy Tolan, an esteemed journalist, explored these regions to gain a

genuine understanding of how successful NAFTA has been. He found that “what

we got instead were tens of thousands more unemployed American workers,

collapsing Mexican maize prices from a market flooded by U.S. corn, [and] a sharp

rise in hunger and rural poverty in Mexico.” While NAFTA had the best intensions

of bringing neighboring countries together, these efforts remained unsuccessful.

This trade agreement is currently being analyzed by President Trump who intends

to create a more effective trade agreement. All that is known is that these efforts

have not been successful in the past, so how optimistic should people be about

Trump’s new plan, and what will the new agreement really entail?

So, what is the big deal here? Yes, Globalization brings certain societies

together, but what about everyone else? Allowing Globalization to selectively

benefit the wealthier parts of the world is leaving everyone else in the quicksand
that pulls them deeper into poverty. Until the addictive need for wealth that

successful countries and regions possess is demolished, it is foolish to assume that

Globalization can bring the world to a state of globality. As long as wealth

continues to be such a tempting need, the countries consumed by it will only

continue to trade and share ideas with the places who will give it to them. Regions

in poverty are not as appealing as places booming in industrialization, wealth,

culture, or politics. Because of this, it is not 100% true that Globalization is a

beneficiary process to all. Globalization is as cliquey as high school, where only

the wealthiest and “prettiest” get the attention. If anything, Globalization does

nothing less than push the countries that struggle to keep up with industrialized

regions even further into the gutter.