The Moral Case for Globalization
-
Globalization has had tremendous net benefits for humanity, and the freedom to move, trade, accept influences from far away, and incorporate those influences into your experience and identity is central to being human. Every person should enjoy the equal presumption of liberty to travel and of liberty to exchange, just as there is a presumption of the liberty to think, speak, and live.
-
Consequentialist condemnations of globalization only have force if they are based on evidence. The evidence shows that the world has improved during, or more strongly, because of globalization, so consequentialism should lead us to embrace globalization rather than condemn it.
-
Wealthier populations can afford to invest more in maintenance of cherished traditions than can poorer populations. The human experience and appreciation of diversity has grown enormously because of globalization. Attempts to maintain “pure cultures,” free of “pollution” from others, are doomed to fail. Cultural purity is a myth; it has never existed.
-
There is a causal relationship between globalization and war, but not in the way the critics think. The greater the globalization of commerce, the lower the likelihood of armed conflict. The causes of freedom of trade and of peace have long been closely entwined. Those who prefer peace over war should embrace globalization.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.