The current process of globalization is not much different from what happened in the 1700s and 1800s,Ugg a new york when nation-states in Europe were born of disparate villages and townships that had previously been ignorant of the lifestyles of their neighbors. Political consolidation, improved transportation, and greater contact made the differences between people much more obvious.It was often unhappiness resulting from the knowledge of these differences that forced governments to try to reduce the gaps between classes and regions – that is why French aristocrats lost all their feudal rights during the revolution, and Giuseppe Mazzini’s Italy tried to “Italianize” the Mezzogiorno.
Of course, the globalized world lacks a central authority that could do something about income gaps.Ugg a new york Globalization has no “closure”: income differences are exposed and feelings of deprivation grow, but there is no outlet for them nor solution to them. So how should the world deal with the age of “want more”?Solving the problem through remedial action at the global level – for example, transfers of wealth from the rich to the poor – is inconceivable. Total official development aid to poor countries is less than three out of every thousand dollars the rich world earns. The current financial crisis is likely to depress that figure further.
And such small amounts cannot make a serious dent in absolute poverty across the world, much less in feelings of deprivation.Modern capitalism’s ethos will also not change overnight; anyway, there are no dour Calvinists ready to replace our happy,Ugg a new york globe-trotting millionaires. To jettison globalization is not only impossible, it would be outright foolish. Globalization brings enormous economic and cultural benefits; the last twenty years have seen a jump in income that rivals the increase between 1914 and 1980. Equally foolish would be a Luddite reaction to new technologies or attempts to censor what people can write about themselves or read about the outside world.