Globalization - an opinion letter in essay form

I had to write a letter in essay form to a editor about my opinion on globalization. I had to clearly identify the topic in the intro and my opinion. in the body of the letter i had to state my 3 points, and 2 stories, and in my conclusion summarize it up with a statement. Could u let me know if i did the following, and if its organized. Also could you help me with my grammar and spelling, and anything else that needs to be changed...thanks soooo much

Dear: John Thomas

I'm writing a letter to express my frustrations and anger towards the way globalization has been shaping, and modifying our world. It appears this "New World Order" will only benefit the lives of rich individuals, but subdue the lives of the poor. Below, is a letter that demonstrates my beliefs and opinions towards this issue, including evidence based on the beliefs of anthropologists, sociologists and psychologists, as well as personal stories from those who are not benefiting from this system.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, "It has been said that arguing against globalization is like arguing against the laws of gravity." His statement embodies great truth, since globalization appears to be a major phenomenon that has been being practiced from earlier times, but has recently become an essential factor of the way our world functions. Globalization is "the increasing integration of economies and societies around the world, transcending the boundaries of the nation state, particularly through international trade and the flow of capital, ideas and people, the transfer of culture and technology, and the development of transnational regulations" (Yara.200). It's said, globalization unifies humanity, linking all nations together, resulting in a single society where all counties form mutually as one. The argument of globalization begs two major questions: Is globalization an equal practice that benefits both the rich and poor societies within our world? Or is globalization a system that operates to better the lives of the rich, but to decrease the quality of life for the underprivileged? It appears globalization is inevitable, because it is a natural consequence of combining capitalism with advanced communication and transportation technology.

Globalization affects worldwide cultures, transforming the diversity of our world into "Westernized" civilization, as well as internationally increasing financial inequality. I personally deem globalization as the reason for disparity and poverty escalating in developing and non-developing nations, due to the advances in technology. Globalization is inevitable, but there are initiatives to preserve culture and prevent exploitation. Canada being a developed nation who has great influence in the world, should strive to mitigate the negative effects of globalization, if willing to do so.

Its said globalization was formed to create an enhanced world. However, this practice is commercializing humanity, since mankind is under the ascendancy of Western civilization. Internationally, cultures are being modified, and individuals are losing their cultural identities. The Western world is noticeably dominating the world, altering the connotation of multiculturalism. Culture is now being imported. It's a factor of capitalism, which can be witnessed by the craze of Bollywood movies in Western culture. Bollywood movies have an immense resemblance to the movies filmed in Hollywood. In recent years one can notice an alteration in how the movies are being created, the fashion, and the appearance of the characters.

Westernized civilization continues to dominate the world by using technology and provisions. However, globalization promotes multiculturalism, which is a global fascinating element. Individuals in Italy can try meals from Japan, while people in England can taste food from Brazil. Even though there is a pro to this factor, Western culture benefits the most, since franchises such as McDonalds are generally popular, and generate millions of dollars. McDonalds being an American company has opened 31,000 locations worldwide. However even though American businesses dominate culturally and economically, there remain millions of impoverished workers in The United States, establishing this structure reimburses those who are only prosperous.

There has been an increase in financial inequality internationally, between countries that are developed via non-developed nations. An example of financial inequality is: In Chile, a taxi driver had to quit his occupation due to him not making enough money to support himself. He later found a job at a chicken possessing plant in a small town own by Chileans, where he was required to process chickens to sell in Chile, as well to import to other Latin American nations, Europe and Asia. "To make a living he works in a freezing room, cracking open chickens that speed down an assembly line at a rate of 41 per minute." He greatly suffers, losing feeling in his hands after a few minutes on the job. His income is less then $200.00 a month and if he misses one day of work, he loses $30.00. However he is satisfied with his job. Also out of desperation when this job is hiring, numerous of individuals apply in hope to make money, even though they are not working in a productive environment.

This demonstrates the unfairness in our world. In North America this would never occur. Jobs in America, as well as Canada are suppose to protect and treat their employees fair. Individuals receive a well paying income, as well as benefits, and support. Here is a man who is struggling to make a living, who is victimized by globalization. He has no choice but to settle for an unjust job. He is financially unstable, and in danger at work, just to import these goods, so businesses in Asia and Europe can sell these chickens and make currency. This man has to suffer so another individual can receive financial stability. This is what capitalism is. This is an example of how globalization benefits the rich, while this poor man, struggles to live.

Globalization has caused economic issues. Even though globalization is recognized as enabling individuals in developing countries to be employed by wealthier nations, it creates a worldwide financial inequality between nations, exemplified by America who in fact tends to weaken the economies of the companies it offshores labour to. Counties such as America go to poor nations, and employ the people there to manufacture goods for them to sell to impose their businesses, which betters their economy. Western capitalism strictly depends on untenable practices and low-priced labour from non-developed nations to form a strong market economy. By them having the power to do this, they are able to obtain power, forcing laws and notions on individuals in non-developed nations. Professors Jeffery Alexander and Ron Everman believe those from Western culture tend to believe they are "better" than those from other poorer nations. Their poverty and predicaments seems justifiable, since individuals from the Western world are benefiting from it.

Nhep Chanada, a Cambodian, seventeen year old girl has no choice but to work daily combing through a dump for plastic bags and metal cans to sell. Nhep ends up getting cut, and her hands get caked with filth. Here is a young girl who is working harder than many people in North America, however she only makes approximately 75 cents daily. She hopes to work in a factory, but doesn't have an ID card to do so, to prove she is old enough. A New York Times columnist Nicholas Krisof discussed Nhep issue, and how we can abort sweatshops. Krisof states that there has been some change in the way countries in Asia have been treating civilians. Factories are hiring more girls and young women providing them with status and power. Overall, the concern of sweatshops relies on the United States. If America bans certain products from nations that are not willing to meet their international standards, jobs will be forced to move from desolate areas to substantial nations such as Malaysia or Mexico.

Globalization is responsible for the modification of particular cultures around the world, as well as the exploitation of other nations. The most acknowledged language internationally is English. Approximately seventy-five percent of the worlds mail, taxes and cables are in English, well approximately sixty percent of the radio and television shows worldwide are also done in the English language. Many individuals internationally learn English so that they can have a better opportunity at receiving employment, due to the economic discrepancy that makes it easier to earn a good living if you speak English. In this globalized world, nations are becoming clones of others, resulting in losing enriched cultural differences and specificities that contribute to our world's uniqueness.

Other ways nations can preserve their culture is by having cultural festivities, and creating documentations (film and writing) of their culture. By a nation having cultural festivities it will allow individuals to stay true to their roots. A festival represents all that is artistic in a society. Festivities hold great meaning that is rooted in the foundation of a cultural group, helping to build and maintain cultural identity, since they often infuse music, art, as well as food. By creating documentations of culture in literature and film, internationally the world can learn about different cultures from a practical point of view, not from a Westernized individuals perspective. Movies such as Slum Dog Millionaire in a sense exemplified true culture, by showing a realistic demonstration on what occurs in the slums within India.

The exploitation of certain nations is linked to globalization. Individuals from developed, industrialized nations are given the opportunity to offer workers from non-developed nations to work for an unjust salary, where they undergo long hours, and unsafe working conditions. The low costs of offshore workers have enticed big corporations to move production to foreign countries, where they can save money, and earn great profit. Methods to stop this would be to form a truly demographic international council, where all nations, no matter if they are developed or non-developed, can voice their opinions on what is occurring internationally. This would create an equal balanced world, so powerful countries do not take advantage of individuals from poorer nations.

Also imposing an international standard of living could influence the negative transition of globalization in regards to exploitation. For example if the cost of living in Canada is high, and the minimal wage is also high, it should be relative in every part of the world, meaning everyone will be paid the same amount of money. This would banish labour in poorer nations. Also an initiative to prevent exploitation would be the elimination of odeus debt, since it would relief pressure on those nations who are financially in debt. When a country is in a financial crisis, other countries that are wealthy are able to control them, forcing them into selling off their land, and natural resources for economical income.

Globalization is resulting in affluent counties getting wealthier, well poor nations remaining underprivileged. If our nation Canada used the elements taught to us about democracy and justice, Canadians could modify globalization, so developed nations, and non-developed nations both economically benefit from this system, which then would be unity. Globalization is responsible for altering the cultural diversity of our world into "Westernized" civilization, as well as globally increasing financial inequality. It is also to blame for disparity and poverty that continues increase in developing and non-developing nations. Globalization is inevitable but there are methods that can help change the course of globalization, allowing our world to be exposed to equal opportunity. If nations such as America and Canada believe in an egalitarianism world, and start removing sweatshops and labour internationally, it would influence our world to use globalization as a system to link our world as one, in fairness, not in corruption.

Employers in America and as well as Canada are supposed to protect employees and treat them fairly.

Sociologists discovered economic issues caused by globalization, which anthropologists tend to agree with as well. ----> When you make assertions like this, it is good if you cite someone's article or book. It would make it a lot better if you added an author's name in parentheses at the end of the sentence.

The biggest problem here is that you say in the beginning that Annan was right about it being inevitable, and then at the end you said Canadians could modify it.

I think what you mean to say is that it IS inevitable, because it is a natural consequence of combining capitalism with advanced communication and transportation technology... but that we can strive to mitigate its negative effects if we are willing to do so.

As of now, it is wishy washy, because you offer no real solution. However, you can fix it by saying it IS inevitable, but then going on to give examples of initiatives that could preserve culture and prevent exploitation, etc.

It is always a good idea to define your key terms at the start of your essay, too. What, exactly, do you mean by globalization? You've written an entire essay about it, without ever bothering to say what you think the term means. Nor is this an academic exercise to show you understand the term -- the word means different things to different people. Wikipedia lists at least five separate definitions, and it is hardly the most comprehensive article ever written on the subject. So, start by writing out exactly what globalization is, from your point of view, and you will find it much easier to write a coherent critique of it.

Thanks sooo much based on ur advice i changed up my essay, could u let me know if i fixed it up okay?? Also for the bolded part, i want to know if thats a good reason or if i explained myself well. thanks sooo much

The previous Secretary-General of the United Nations K ofi Annan...


Well, they should preserve language and culture, but, pragmatically, they are learning English so that they can have opportunities to get good jobs, etc... because of the economic discrepancy that makes it easier to earn a good living if you speak English. So, that should be acknowledged.

Really, globalization is evening the odds in many ways. So, that should be acknowledged, but I do understand your message. Acknowledged the other side, though, and you have more credibility.

Globalization contributes to maintaining an unfair society that helps the rich remain wealthy, and the poor remain in poverty.-----> Yeah... globalization is not all bad!! It is enabling people in developing countries to be employed by wealthier countries. America actually tends to weaken the economies of the companies it offshores labor to, so that supports your argument, but the weakening is only because of increased spending by the people who are suddenly gainfully employed. The truth is... globalization is a natural process.

It appears that ( or as if )...., but subdue the lives of the poor. The less words the better I believe.


you better say: has once stated, because once usually comes with present perfecet, and

the president's words have a direct effect on the meaning right now.


an imporatnt fact will do better.



arises is much more formal and suitable here.

I hope I have helped you some how.

A stronger second draft. You still need to work on the definition, though: "Globalization is a practice "to extend to other or all parts of the globe; make worldwide (cite)."" To extend what, exactly? And Kevin is right -- it wouldn't hurt to acknowledge the other side. After all, if globalization were all bad, then there would be more resistance to it than there actually is among those most directly affected by it. (And no, protests by idealistic Westerners who have all the benefits of living in the First World don't count). Don't just drop in the opposing arguments though -- if you add them, you have to include your counter-arguments as well. So, you would have your argument, the other side's counter-argument, then your counter-counter argument. That really isn't as confusing as it sounds, if you think about it.

hey ttc, are you taking hsb4m-a?

Hey thanks for ur help! I fixed up my letter. it doesnt have to be to specific, i basically had to write a letter based on my opinion on globalization. I added some counter-agruments. could you tell me what you think and if anything else has to be changed. I want to keep it simple so my opinion is heard and strong.

He later found a job at a chicken processing plant in a small ...

Other than the above, I saw no mistakes. The essay is technically sound, but...

I think it is hard to argue against something that you admit is as natural as gravity. Isn't it pointless to argue about something that is inevitable?

I wonder if you could argue against the exploitation that is made possible by globalization -- rather than globalization itself.

I recently read that American businesses offshore work to India and that, although this helps the economy in India, America sells its goods and services to India and ends up profiting in the long run -- hurting India's economy. That supports your argument, but... Globalization itself enables people in poor countries to be employed by companies in wealthy countries... evening the odds. In general, it is a process that promotes equity.

However, you could ake your whole essay stronger by saying all the sae things about the EXPLOITATION of developing countries, and not globalization itself.

hey ttc, are you taking hsb4m-a?

please e-mail at tha_rodriguez@hotmail.com if you think you could help me

thank you

But this would a be a good thing, surely? If you eliminate the notion of money, which seems to provoke mindless offense in so many, you are essentially saying that you have two groups of nations, and that one set is better off thanks to globalization, while the other is no worse off. How is that a bad thing?If the gap between them were growing because the poorer nations were getting poorer, then you might be able to cry "exploitation," but as it is, you don't make that case. You cite the example of the Chilean worker, but you don't compare his current situation with the one he would have been in before globalization, so it is difficult to tell if he is suffering from the ill effects of globalization, or is merely in a similar position to what he would have been in anyway, or even if he is in a better situation than he would have been in otherwise. So, you should make this comparison to strengthen your essay.