From a Marxist perspective, would you argue that globalisation mitigates or deepens global inequality? Explain why.
Marxism is arguably the approach best equipped to conceptualise and explain globalisation.
Firstly Marx would argue that imperialism would bring to the less industrial countries the advantages of capitalist technologies such as railways and more efficient methods of production. Yet Marx argued that these developments would not be positive but rather a part of the same process as the tortures and humiliation of colonial rule. A main theme of globalisation is that scientific development brings social change and thus the introduction of eg. new computers and the internet must inevitably change the way people work. Marxism on the other hand believes otherwise, the belief is that economic changes shape social life, but they do not determine its condition. According to Marx the economic base shapes society and in turn the society then reshapes its economic base. Therefore less industrialised countries may not always benefit contributing to global inequality.
Furthermore one of the claims of capitalist globalisation is that labour price is a determining factor which decides the price of a commodity hence ideally production should move to a country where labour is the cheapest. Marx disregards this assumption claiming that the price of labour is only one of the factors that decide the cost of a product. The country that has the most advanced machinery and level of production will often be cheaper even though wages are high. Consequently the value of money will be higher in countries that have higher wages and vice versa. In other words high profits are compatible with high wages and low profits with low pay, making the poorer countries poorer and the richer countries richer contributing to global inequality.
Also in another critique of capitalism Marx pointed out that increased spending on machinery as opposed to labour is in the interest of...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document