(Held, 1996, 340-341) It is not a case of all powers and local economies eventually coming to benefit from neo-liberal economic planning. Instead, it is known that some sectors will benefit and others will not. For example, the experience of a Third World raw material exporting country is not going to resemble at all the experience of a wealthier industrialized country whose gross national product is more connected to industrial output and secondary or tertiary enterprise. Third World producers will continue to be at the mercy of world price fluctuations and perhaps more so than in the past, given the inability of most countries to be competitive while protecting their economies or their citizens' concerns. The pre-established industrial power that is able to benefit from the changes set about after 1989 will of course move very much further ahead, perhaps acquiring new advantage with which to exploit weaker entities with which its business community deals. Opening up world markets to market forces of supply and demand and with increased competition in the absence of barriers or subsidized prices will obviously cause Third World economies to be even more dependent upon market trends in the developed countries. .
Globalization represents what can be seen as an American capitalist approach to the world economy in the absence of the countervailing socialist bloc. This may seem benign enough and as simply the predictable role assumed by the world's major economic and political power with the breakup of its principal adversary in the Soviet Union of old. However, as Lipset warned just before the term Globalization began to be familiar to people throughout the world, America's economic history is one which has encouraged what Engels referred to as, "the purest example of bourgeois society". (1987, 71) The United States were born into modernity and the modern, without a feudal elitist and corporatist tradition, and was able to move forwards directly in capitalism.