Mapping the world's opinions

argument top image

What are the advantages and disadvantages of globalization? Show more Show less

For its proponents, globalization improves citizens' lives via the unbridled distribution of jobs, capital, and technology across international borders, promoting peace through deeper economic ties between nations. For its detractors, the globalized movement of goods and people has fueled inequality, led to the destruction of the environment, and created a race to the bottom, keeping workers' salaries low and eroding workplace protections.

Globalization is good Show more Show less

Globalization has created jobs, lowered the price of consumer goods, fuelled innovation and contributed to peace on earth.
< Previous (2 of 2 Positions)

Globalization promotes peace

The deeper the economic ties between nations, the greater the incentive to avoid conflict.
< Previous (4 of 5 Arguments) Next >

Context

A state that is more dependent on another is not likely to engage in actions that could lead to conflict with that state. In those nations, the business elites, who stand to lose the most from trade disruptions, will also lobby the government to avoid conflict or military aggression against a trading partner.

The Argument

A recent study examined inter-state military conflict between 290,040 country pairs between 1950 and 2000. It concluded that the higher the interdependence in bilateral trade between the country partners, the lower the chance of military conflict. For every 10% increase in bilateral trade, the probability of military conflict between the partners decreases by 0.1%. If the two states share a border, the probability decreases by 1.9%.[1] Even if the two states do not have substantial bilateral trade, if the pair are part of trading blocs like the EU, the Mercosur or ASEAN, and other nations in the bloc have significant import and export levels with the opposing nation, they are also less likely to engage in military conflict. Because the promotion of global trade and international open markets is at the heart of globalization, it can be seen as a pacifying force.

Counter arguments

This argument has been debunked by history. Famously, Norman Angell published a book shortly after the turn of the century entitled ‘The Great Illusion’. Angell argued that Germany and Britain were so deeply economically interdependent that war between the two great nations was unthinkable. Within a few years of the book’s publication, Britain and Germany were engaged in battle in the First World War. [2] It, therefore, becomes impossible to conclude that globalization and increased bilateral trade leads to peace. The two bloodiest and most mutually destructive wars in history, the First World War and the Second World War, saw nations with strong economic ties clash on the battlefields of Europe.

Framing

Premises

[P1] States with higher levels of bilateral trade are less likely to engage in military conflict. [P2] Globalization promotes bilateral trade between states. [P3] Therefore, Globalization promotes peace.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] History shows this premise to be inaccurate.

Proponents

Further Reading

References

  1. https://voxeu.org/article/globalisation-promotes-peace
  2. https://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-policy/international-trade-and-development-1-57/general-analysis-on-international-trade-and-development/47297-does-globalization-bring-war-or-peace.html

Explore related arguments

This page was last edited on Thursday, 13 Feb 2020 at 16:49 UTC