Globalization is said to be a tool and instrument for multinational corporations and global capital, but the reality is that it is sustained by government and institutions (trade.ec.europa.eu). They liberalize trade, protect investment, and define the size, shape, equity, and social justice of the global economy, and these lead to their goal to guarantee monetary stability. The global trading systems, such as the GATT and the WTO, is a political choice, and it can only be maintained by political choices. Governments are the ones who make the choice on behalf of their represented people. (trade.ec.europa.eu) The highest expectations are expected from the world’s largest economies, the governments of America and Europe.
Research Question: Does the current Economic Globalization and Interdependence process help or hinder the development of all nations? Theory/Hypothesis/Abstract: Economic globalization is reinforced by the idea that states which integrate with the international economic exchange system will become a more progressive and modernized as a consequence. However this paper will argue that this general perception about development does not take into account that globalization may in fact keep poorer nations weak for the purpose of exploitation. There is a need for the current approach to be adjusted. The international division of labour, class distinction, and the domination of liberal economic theory under the current approach to globalization all serve the interests of the wealthy nations, promoting and supporting dominance and exploitation.
Adorno and Horkheimer elucidated the cultural industry in the capitalist society as a condition of enlightenment that has taken over the social life of human by rationality. (Horkheimer, Max, and Theodor W. Adorno, 1972) The concept of cultural industry is a main aspect of late capitalism in which it markets the production of culture that is in opposition to “authentic culture”. (Horkheimer, Max, and Theodor W. Adorno, 1972) Unlike the “authentic culture” which is not goal-oriented, culture industry is subjected to economic success and profit maximization (also, the main focus of capitalism). Cultural products are created to appease the capitalistic mass consumers’ increasing demands for entertainment. Adorno and Horkeimer posit that the phenomenon of the mass-produced culture in cultural industry serves as a purpose to ensure the continued passivity and obedience of the capitalist mass consumers.
Like mainstream neo classical theory Marx does not offer a theory of price. He is instead interested in seeing the mechanisms of capitalist reproduction. He would not deny that there are huge differences between concrete capitalistic societies. Marx‘s critique of capitalism further includes the following; Commodity production,Commodity Alienation and Fetishism ,Exploitation.Capitalism, Law and Government Marx recognized the emergence of crisis and its resolution The development of capitalism and the Bourgeois revolution dialectically and inadvertently produced a new agent, the proletariat. "What the bourgeoisie, therefore, produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers.
In this essay I will discuss the views of Conflict Theorists on education and the implications it does when dealing with curriculum and learners. Marx argued the bourgeoisie (ruling-class) used the capitalist economic system to extract surplus value from the proletariat (working-class). Marxism is seen as a conflict approach because of the class conflict the above system creates between the two social-classes (the opposite of the consensual approach Durkheim, Parsons Etc. argue). Contemporary Marxists argue globalisation has created a global bourgeoisie based on the evidence of a global 1% of ruling-class owning the means of production.
He used the concept of civil society to explain a sphere that is distinct from the state. He attempted to resolve the private vs. public dichotomy in his own way by incorporating the civil society in the state structure. Nonetheless, Hegel could not come up with a systematic theory of civil society. Karl Marx (1818-1882) was critical of the bourgeois theories
Ultimately, Marx and Weber seek to legitimize the threat of capitalism by identifying how significantly it has changed society. Karl Marx highlights the greed of the bourgeoisie contributed to the rise of capitalism. Marx does not see religion as a cause for the rise of modern capitalism. Instead, he identifies the growing power of the bourgeoisie as a cause. He recognizes how “modern bourgeois society…has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society… [and it has] not done away with
This paper attempts to club all of Hume’s Economics ideas and underscore his contributions to the discipline. Essay:- Hume’s contributions to the field are multifold and prominent among modern economists is his quantity theory of money in an open economy. Drawing upon history, he argued that an inflow of specie, as a result of an increase in net exports, would subsequently lead after a lag, to a rise in the general price level. Thus, attracting increasing amounts of bullion or silver (specie) within a nation would only curtail export competitiveness, undermine the nation’s wealth and transmit this advantage to competing nations and enhance the overall price level thereby rendering imported goods more desirable which would lead to an outflow of specie and a return to the original status quo. This
Karl Marx introduced the theory of class struggle during the industrialisation period that emphasised on one’s financial status. However in this contemporary society, Marx’s monolithic theory fails to encompass other aspects of social life. Building upon Marx’s theory of class struggle, Pierre Bourdieu sets out to rethink the factors involved in the stratification of classes. The addition of cultural capital to economic capital was amongst the many capitals Bourdieu suggested in determining the class of an individual in this society where ‘capital’ is interpreted as a “set of actually usable resources and power” (Bourdieu, 1979, p.114) that allows one to invest and gain returns. Economic capital is wealth and income one accumulates, while cultural capital is the “possession of knowledge, accomplishments, formal and informal qualifications embodied by individuals” (Johnson, 2009, p.51).
Constructivists, like Liberals, are not only interested in the state as the actor, but also in international and transnational organizations (Viotti and Kauppi, 2012: 278). They do not place secularity over any particular unit, actor or agent of analysis. The agents may be both state and non-state actors (Fox, 2001).While to Economic Structuralists, in order to explain status and role of any actor in global affairs at any and all levels of analysis; one must first understand the overall structure. They divide the world structure not in terms of state power nor in terms of state and non-state actors but in terms of First/Third worlds, South/North, capital owning bourgeois/working class and Core/Periphery(Viotti and Kauppi, 2012: 190). Most Economic Structuralists believe that the starting point of analysis should be the international economic market, or for them, the capitalist world system.