It would be incorrect to assume that globalization has purely economic dimensions; it is a multidimensional concept, which includes political, economic, cultural, and ideological manifestations.
The impact of globalization is greatly uneven, as it affects some societies more than others and some parts of some societies more than others.
Globalization has a strong historical basis, and it is important to view contemporary flows against this backdrop.
The technological advancement is one of the most major causes of globalization.
WTO and IMF though are the major players, but Economic globalization involves many other factors as well.
What is often called economic globalization usually involves greater economic flows among different countries of the world.
Many economists and other experts are worried that globalization is likely to benefit only a small section of the population while impoverishing those who were dependent on the government for jobs and welfare (education, health, sanitation, etc.).
It has been emphasized that the policy would ensure institutional safeguards or create ‘social safety nets’ to minimize the negative effects of globalization on those who are economically weak.
Many experts believe that the social safety net is not sufficient to safeguard the needs of economically weak class. This is the reason that some economists and other scholars describe the globalization as “re-colonization.” However, supporters argue that greater trade among countries allows each economy to do what it does best and benefits every class of economy.
As per the cultural perspective, globalization leads to the rise of a uniform culture or what is called as cultural homogenization. For example, ‘McDonaldization.’
Cultural homogenization is dangerous not only for the poor countries, but also for the whole of humanity; it leads to the shrinking of the rich cultural heritage of the entire globe.
The critics of globalization make a variety of arguments such as −
The leftist people argue that contemporary globalization represents a particular phase of global capitalism that makes the rich richer (and fewer) and the poor poorer.
But it is interesting to note here that anti-globalization movements to participate in global networks, allying with those who feel like them in other countries.
Further, many anti-globalization movements are not opposed to the idea of globalization per se as much as they are opposed to a specific program of globalization, which they see as a form of imperialism.
For example, in 1999, at the World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial Meeting, it is argued that the interests of the developing world were not given sufficient importance in the evolving global economic system and policy.
The World Social Forum (WSF) is another global platform, which brings together a wide coalition composed of human rights activists, environmentalists, labor, youth, and women activists in order to oppose the neo-liberal globalization.
The first WSF meeting was organized in Porto Alegre, Brazil in 2001 and the fourth WSF meeting was held in Mumbai in 2004 and so on.
In India, there have been left wing protests to economic liberalization.
These leftist people voiced through political parties as well as through forums like the Indian Social Forum.
Trade unions of industrial workforce as well as those representing farmers’ interest have organized protests against the entry of multinationals.