Globalisation is the phenomenon of cultural, economic, and political integration in this world; it is intensified by technological advancements and the leadership of the USA. The impact of globalisation is the claim that it will bring the world closer together culturally, it will spread liberal values and eradicate poverty through global trade. Due to this, this essay will reject the view that the extent of globalisation has been exaggerated.

There is a strong economic argument behind the retreat of globalisation. Since the 2008 financial crisis, many countries around the world have woken up to the realisation that an over dependency on one big economy, namely the US, can lead to a global crisis. This was seen when banks in the US failed, and this caused a global recession. The consequence of this was for countries like China to ensure they had a greater number of global trade partners so that they wouldn’t be so heavily reliant on the US. Also, covid saw many countries realise that at times of difficulties, countries like India were unwilling to share medications because of prioritising their own populations. This is what was called covid nationalism and many began to consider ‘onshoring’ the idea that it is better to have some important products to be made closer to home and not to rely on the global economy. This goes against the principles of globalisation, that considers the world to be one big market, and everyone trades freely, and governments stay out of the way.

On the other hand, although there’s a lot of discussion about deglobalisation and onshoring, in reality global trade has increased in recent years. In the first part of 2022, it hit a record 7.7tn. In fact, trade between China and the USA has increased despite calls to delink the two economies and Bidens trade war. This shows that globalisation is stronger than the policies of governments because people want to trade with one another and that is now not going to reverse. The discussions during covid may have been premature. We now have a world where people no longer talk of making products locally. Furthermore, proof of globalisation can be seen in the economic rise of countries like China. In the past, economic globalisation was positive mostly for America – today brands like Huawei and BYG are global brands. These are Chinese companies. Ali Baba today is in the top 10 companies in the world. The idea of globalisation was to allow all boats to rise with the tide, and this is what has happened, globalisation has made countries such as India and China much more economically independent. In the 1950s the us has 50% of the worlds GDP. Today it is around 20%. And this shows the relative decline of US economic might in the world. Even today countries in Africa have stronger economic ties with China than they do with the US. And the US economic model after the 2009 financial crisis is no longer seen to the most effective model. At this rate, if China keeps at the stream of surpassing the USA it will continue to undermine economic influence, stability and thus its hegemonic lead within the world. This seems likely due to President Xi investing trillions into his ‘Belt + Road’ scheme, this is increasing China’s connectivity and cooperation, and this growth can give thanks to economic globalisation.

Therefore, despite the brief onshoring during the pandemic and financial crisis, it is clear that economic globalisation has not been exaggerated. Since the 1990s it has continued to intensify because of the opening of most global markets to free trade, creating intense growth for eastern countries like China.

Some may argue that the extent of cultural globalisation has been exaggerated and is simply Americanisation due to it ‘flattening out’ a global culture, the US dominates the world in terms of its cultural outreach. For example, US festivals such as black Friday have a global following and no longer follow religiously rooted traditions. KFC, an American company, is a staple in Japan for Christmas dinner and Halloween is more about the sweets and costumes than the Christian ceremony in almost every country. The biggest film successes have all been American, led by Avengers: Endgame (2019), Avatar (2009) and Titanic (1997). This is because America has a large amount of soft power, they are able to impose their culture in many different areas/countries- resulting in cultural homogenisation. This is significant because it erodes the national identities of other nation states, squashing their differences and unique features to ensure a uniform global civilisation. Using cultural globalisation is a tantamount to spreading the culture of a hegemon and nothing more.

However, this argument is weak as in recent years US culture has been in decline, to the degree that some in the world now positively work against US cultural hegemony. For example, in much of the east, such as China, US movies are severely restricted and only those that show Chinese culture in a positive light can usually make it to the cinemas. Movies such as barbie and looper, US blockbusters and Mulan, a Disney movie had to incorporate Chinese culture in order to be sold in China. The same can be said about the rise of Bollywood or Nollywood, where in these countries people opt for movies that are closer to their cultural identity and with the rise of nationalism, they regard US movies to be imperialism. In the Arab world, there is a backlash against Americanisation with McDonalds losing large amounts of money because of US funding of Israel. This is down to a cultural backlash against the US. And the diversification of culture. Globalisation is now helping smaller cultures such as the South Korean movie and popular culture industry to thrive. So, in effect Americanisation has made way for a competing culture.

And thus, we can clearly see that cultural globalisation has not been exaggerated because of the growth of eastern culture and influences. Countries like Japan are openly romanticised in the west, with Studio Ghibli films grossing some of the highest earnings in the US and tourists seeking out Chinatown specifically when visiting London.

In terms of political globalisation, that is the rise of institutions, we can see in the modern world that many countries no longer care about obeying institutions. This was seen when ICJ said that Israel is plausibly committing genocide, but all of the western countries objected to the ruling and said they were unconcerned by it. The USA decided to defund the development aid organisation UNWRA, this shows that there is little concern today for international global governance orgs. We can also see this in the way the WTO is no longer seen as an acceptable place to resolve trade disputes. The US decided to go beyond WTO when it placed tariffs on Chinese goods, this goes against the WTO rules that all disputes should be controlled through them.  Furthermore, the UN and other IGOs are based on the ‘sovereign equality’ of all its members, they’re often based on intergovernmentalism, and states are therefore not forced to follow rules. No matter what the UN, for example, rules on states are not obliged to obey. Moreover, joining regional organisations is not an entrenched decision and is simply done on the state’s own accord to strengthen their sovereignty. For example, Brexit is the boldest example of a state ‘taking back control’ over its own laws, the Lisbon Treaty of 2009 allowed states to leave the EU and it was the UK who first exercised this national sovereignty. Even as members, states can opt out from EU treaties, so they do not lose too much economic, political, and legal sovereignty.

However, countries have always undermined international organisations and that does not show that these organisations are on the decline. In fact, countries are coming closer together, for example the eastern countries have expanded the BRICS organisation. Saudi Arabia and Iran recently joined them. Even though the US may be less inclined to obey these organisations, countries like China and EU countries still talk of their importance. Also, the environmental conferences, particularly Glasgow and Paris have shown that countries can come together and deal with issues through institutions and then work to implement their resolutions.  States are now transferring their sovereignty ‘upwards’ to supranational regional organisations like the EU. When this occurs, EU member states transfer power and responsibility to the EU- subsequently forfeiting state sovereignty. Furthermore, when member states transfer responsibility, they are forced to follow EU laws and policies that take precedence over domestic laws. For example, in 2018 the EU informed Italy that its own budget contradicts EU law because of high expenditure on welfare. The European Commission demanded that Italy revised its budget, reduced spending and submit a new plan to Brussels within 3 weeks- they are able to propose fines if these requests are ignored. This means that political globalisation can be seen as the reason behind the loss of sovereignty to the EU and other regional arrangements.

Therefore, despite state’s scepticism on global institutions, there is still an unspoken knowledge of their importance and so, political globalisation has not been exaggerated. The rise of political globalisation has helped to build recognition for world challenges, and even if nations disagree, they actively cede some power and responsibility to international bodies.

In conclusion, even though there are arguments considering globalisation to be exaggerated, these are continuously overruled by its significant impacts. In terms of economic globalisation, global trade has created interconnectedness between states, therefore helping to overcome the security dilemma as states rely on each other. The ability of developing economies to access larger, more global markets has been a huge asset to developing countries as foreign direct investment has continued to grow. Even though some may argue cultural globalisation is instead proof of US hegemony, pop culture of the east has dominated western markets, with shows like squid game or characters like hello kitty becoming some of the most popular in the world. Finally, political globalisation has helped to pool expertise and efforts to deal with issues like climate change and human rights, institutions like the UN continue to leas these efforts and states will often adhere to their rulings.

Nora