Globalization: Positive or Negative

The topic of globalization was brought up recently in my multicultural literature class and within five minutes of discussion many students displayed passion in their opinions.  This was a topic that many students in my class seemed to disagree on; they could not seem to agree on whether globalization has an overall positive or negative affect on the world.  My professor played two videos for us, one on each side of the fence in terms of globalization.  The first video was a segment from the Discovery Channel done by two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Thomas Friedman, Friedman supports globalization and describes it as an optimistic situation.  The second video shown was a trailer for Naomi Klein's book No Logos.  I tend to share similar views to those of Freidman, I believe that bringing jobs to countries that otherwise are struggling economically is a good thing.  I understand that this may take away from American jobs which I do not support, I am not sure what the numbers are exactly, in terms of how many American jobs are lost and this could have an impact on how I feel about globalization overall, for now I will just assume that the number of American jobs terminated is not substantial.  

            One girl in our class mentioned that the Indian people were happy before the large "logo" companies stormed into the country.  She argued that they had lived happily for years this way, I assume trying to suggest that globalization is not necessary for the people of India to be happy, or satisfied with their way of life.  I found her statement interesting; you see I had no clue how happy the Indian people were, or how happy they were ten years ago even, I just wondered how she measured this happiness.  I was relieved, for lack of a better word, when another student, from Sri Lanka I think he said, explained how his home country had been affected by globalization and he saw it as a "win-win" situation.

            I tend to think of Starbucks when I think of globalization.  When I think about how it started up as just a coffee bean and coffee equipment shop.  Thinking of how brilliant Howard Schultz seems today, he the one who advised the original Starbucks owners to sell beverages later purchases the company and blows up.  His net worth is now over 1.1 billion dollars.  He is the chairman and CEO of Starbucks and has expanded his company worldwide.  I miss the part where an entrepreneur going international is a bad thing, I just don't see what Schultz is doing wrong by providing jobs to people all over the world as well as distributing tasty beverages to its customers.  Unless the number of American jobs lost is substantial I think globalization is a good thing.  I don't think that just because the people of India have lived the same way for so many years does not mean that they do not seek some change, who is to say if these companies going there is making the Indian people more or less happy, from what I saw on Freidman's video, though I understand it may have some bias, the Indian people looked happy and spoke well of the jobs they had received as telephone operators.  I found it funny how people in our class were offended for the Indian operators for having to use American aliases.  The reason I found this humorous was because I know that my fellow classmates can only begin to guess how the Indian operators feel about them.  Who is to say that they feel bad about this, maybe they like them, is that such an absurd thought, that maybe some of them think its fun.  Maybe some of them like them because its something you obtain along with this new job, a job that most of these people seem happy and proud to have, so in a sense perhaps they enjoy these aliases simply because they signify their connection with success.  This is all just a perspective, a way to look at the situation, I have given you very little fact to read, more or less just my thought process as I think about globalization, the optimists, and the pessimists.