The Instigator
Spartatian
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
fazz
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Should countries encourage the spread of globalisation?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
fazz
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/4/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 902 times Debate No: 45169
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

Spartatian

Pro

I urge you to challenge me.
fazz

Con

Ok. I challenge you?

Do you want Pro or Con..
Debate Round No. 1
Spartatian

Pro

I think that countries should encourage globalisation because it will make every country in this world the same. It will make all countries independent and will be able to have maximum productivity without the help of any other country. This will also make it so that countries cannot 'bully' other countries. It will also make it so that cultures would be the same, making it likely that people from different countries have less differences, people would make it probable that people would get along better and be able to work together without much conflict.

By the way, I've already set it so that I'm 'for' this topic.
fazz

Con

Thank you, Pro!

Your argument above is concise and highlights the "pro"-advantages of global trade, and so on. so let us make a slight differentiation, Globalization with a capital-G is the global trade that I have observed from India. And we can refer to your vision of the world coming together as small-g-lobalization..

As con, I will argue that Globalisation does not adhere to above-mentioned principles. Globalisation does the opposite of what you have said. Using Globalization a country like India has to let the US bull it. How? Well, for example the US says 'maximum productivity' but what it does is let India's trade barriers down (tarriffs, import tax, export tax) and hence open up the market. (Notice, still capital-G !) Once the barriers are down, thats a good thing, right, nope thats wrong - the barriers protect small local farmers, small businesses, locally based skill workers- *an argument that I have heard on this side of the fence as well*- and so big Multi-Nationals take over (say Coca-cola, Haier, Walmart). Small businesses in technical terms are called SMEs. Now when SME dies then so does the local fabric of society, the vibrancy of culture and Indian tradition.

But YOU are right :) Cultures would and should be the same. And if I was the Indian Nawab of Pataudi I would open my borders to do trade with UK and USA and Australia. But as Con I dont own India. And Pro certainly does not own big evil companies like Walmart who employ children in servitude and sweat-shops. The best we can hope for is to root for g-lobalization while making sure that Big Companies and governments do not get greedy about G-lobal Trade?
Debate Round No. 2
Spartatian

Pro

Spartatian forfeited this round.
fazz

Con

Next Round!
Debate Round No. 3
Spartatian

Pro

Spartatian forfeited this round.
fazz

Con

Stage Right. Exit?
Debate Round No. 4
Spartatian

Pro

Spartatian forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by fazz 3 years ago
fazz
I dont understand your question. Is it you asking or is in the Friedman book, lexux and olive tree?
Posted by Dazz 3 years ago
Dazz
One thing I found that surprised me while I was making my class assignment for effects of Globalization, is the concept given in "The Lexus and Olive Tree"_ basically question is if Globalization is all about "breaking down the barriers then why these barriers came to existences at first hand_ a question mark for Global Agenda Promoters lol
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
SpartatianfazzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF