Economic globalization, passing idea's from culture to culture can be more than the catalyst it is intended to be. The general concept has merit; wanting to share advancements with others and bring them up to a higher economic level is a noble idea, yet help is not always appreciated as we assume it would be. In fact, more attention should be given to the thoughts and opinions of those receiving the "help," for it may make us look twice at what we have been impressing upon others.
Former United States president Bill Clinton and Vandana Shiva, the director of The Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Natural Resource Policy in India, hold two drastically different opinions on the subject. Each holds the beliefs that one would expect from their respective backgrounds. Shiva feels as though her culture is being overrun by corporations and larger governments in the name of "development." On the other hand, Clinton feels as though economic globalization is necessary for the world to progress as a whole. Clinton shares his opinion on economic globalization to the WTO ministers at a luncheon in December of 1999.
Clinton sees economic globalization as a good thing, for he looks at it from a corporate perspective. He sees corporations as helping underdeveloped countries reach the status of industrial nations. What he does not take into consideration, which Vandana Shiva points out, is that perhaps these countries do not want to become like the industrialized nations of the world. Even if they wanted to, the ways in which it is being imposed upon them will not bring them up to a higher economic level, it will only push them further downward. The fault in the corporate thinking (or rather the ingeniousness of it) is evident, for by installing factories and such they draw revenue away from the local businesses by stealing both customers and workers. Their reasoning is that it will raise the standard of living by giving the people good jobs, which will allow children not to work as much.
