Wednesday, January 7, 2009

The Preliminaries

The effects, whether they be assets or nuisances, of globalization often waddle their way into the discussions of many. Regardless of whether or not globalization is actually good for the globe has yet to be proven, the fact remains: globalization changes the standards.

Zakaria, the author of “The Rise of the Rest,” explains how the US has had to adjust to the changes brought upon by globalization. He stresses that the reason for which the US is so glum is because “Americans see that a new world is coming into being, but fear it is one being shaped in distant lands and by foreign people.” The fear of no longer being the center is ever scarier now that it is no longer just about being the best of the local community, but the entire globe. He also explains that with globalization, everything travel more quickly. Events, like news and wars, are “amplified, echoed, and disseminated.” Everything changes because of globalization.

Mahubabani, the author of “The Case Against the West,” believes the West has not handled its responsibility as a global leader appropriately. He believes that “the West assumes that it is the source of the solutions to the world’s key problems. In fact, however, the West is also a major source of these problems.” Although Mahbubani acknowledges that the West has been the global leader for quite some time, it fails to understand its role in globalization.

Similarly, Tony Judt, the author of “What Have We Learned, If Anything?” insists that the US’s stance in global affairs has provided this country with the power to readjust the ethics behind torture. With globalization changing the impact of terrorism, many leaders in the US, especially, have tried to justify the use of torture. For example, Charles Schumer, a Democrat, believes that “few people…[believe] that torture should never ever be used.” Thus, because of globalization, principles, like that regarding torture, need to be adjusted.

This leads to another topic of discussion. If the standards for principles like terrorism have changed, what about that for infectious diseases? What about TB? What makes TB such a health threat is that it is not only contagious, but it spreads through the air. So when infected individuals cough, sneeze, spit or even just talk, they're spreading the bacteria. Other people become infected when they breathe in the now airborne bacteria. As more and more people start to travel, the spread of Tuberculosis should lead to new ethical questions. Should people who spread the disease be held accountable for their actions? Are they criminals? Should they be tried with 1st degree murder? What steps should we take to prevent the spread? The list of questions goes on. Already the effects are seen across the globe. In Quebec, a man was put into jail for refusing to get treatment.

1 comment:

  1. I liked the way you segued into your own topic of interest. Your analysis of Judt's article was confusing, however. It didn't seem to reflect what I read.

    ReplyDelete