Although globalization is attracting more and more attention worldwide, the issue has been largely ignored by candidates in Taiwan's presidential campaign. Not long ago, I was invited by presidential candidate Hsu Hsin Liang
I believe the scenes of violent clashes between police and protest groups that took place in Seattle during the WTO meeting are still fresh in people's memories. Just a few days ago, more conflicts broke out during the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland.
If these violent conflicts had taken place in Taiwan, how would our presidential candidates react?
In my opinion, people's attitudes toward globalization are similar to what happens in City Besieged
In Qian's story, people in the besieged city want to leave while those kept out want to get in. Likewise, some people in countries leading the globalization trend want to stop it, while people in developing countries cannot wait to join in.
The only difference is that with globalization there is a third group of people, who are observing the direction of globalization, pondering what next step they should take.
What exactly is globalization? First, it is a vague idea. Some say it is a cultural phenomenon, best represented by the thriving of Disney and MacDonald's worldwide. In a sense, this is the weakest interpretation because root cultures are very difficult to change. That Chinese wear blue jeans and suits doesn't mean that Chinese culture is "globalized."
Some people consider globalization a political concept, referring to the decline of nation-states and their sovereignty and the emergence of super-states. The best example is the establishment of the European Union.
Recently, the European Parliament adopted political sanctions against the new Austrian government because the leader of the Freedom Party, Joerg Haider, is a far-rightist sympathetic to the Nazis. As a superstate organization, the EU is "rudely" interfering the domestic affairs of a member country. This phenomenon is what some people call political globalization.
It is natural for most people to regard globalization as an economic concept, meaning a liberalization transcends state borders. In fact, it is a sociological concept. Walestein might have been the first sociologist to use the term. According to his definition, it is a multifaceted concept -- an expanding phenomenon in a certain period of history. He also said that "world system" has been a core issue in human history.
Globalization can be exemplified by four examples. First, an evening TV broadcast shown in Berlin's airport was produced in California and sent to Berlin because of the the relatively lower costs -- demonstrating that satellite and Internet technology has facilitated the global transfer of skilled labor.
Second, pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square obtained information from the outside world via CNN and BBC, proof of the failure of the state to block the flow of telecommunication.
Third, many bicycles and shoes are designed with Taiwan technology, manufactured in China and exported to US and Europe. This shows the integration of labor, technology and markets on a global scale.
Fourth, penguins in South Pole die from industrial pollution produced in Europe.
However, the world economy is still at a stage of internationalization, rather than globalization.
Although globalization has triggered much discussion world-wide, statistics show that the world is not as "globalized" as it was back in 1913 -- the first period of globalization according to Walestein.
One of the important indices in measuring the level of global integration is the so called "open-ness" -- the percentage of trade volume in gross domestic products of a country. For example, the openness level of Japan was about 30 percent in 1913; today it's less than 20 percent. In France and England it is 38 and 48 percent respectively, slightly higher than the 1913 figures.
As for direct overseas investment, the figures nowadays are generally less than those in 1913. In 1913, Holland's direct overseas investment was 82 percent of its GDP; now it's around 40 percent. England's was 65 percent while it's 25 percent now; a similar decrease has taken place in Germany.
What's more, despite the dramatic decrease in travel costs and time, as well as border controls, global labor market integration is still less intensive than in the second half of 19th century.
Globalization has attracted both praise and condemnation, but so far we are not sure if this trend will sweep the world. Although it cannot be denied that economic globalization has brought many benefits to the world, such as the boost of productivity and the emergence of Asia's G7, more disadvantages could come along with it.
The first is the deepening income disparity resulting from the changes on employment and income structure. The German sociologist Sahsen said that in a globalized society, we only need two kinds of laborers: professionals such as computer programmers and ordinary workers such as restaurant waiters.
The interdependance between the two groups will grow and the job opportunities for people in between will decrease. This U-shaped structure of employment is prevailing worldwide -- people are equal on an unequal basis.
According to the the research published in Globalization and Conflicts by the Norwegian Technology University and the Oslo Peace Research Institute, the potential consequence of globalization has deepened income disparity, regional political instability, and even wars, caused by wrongful distribution of pollution.
The development of globalization is similar to the story of Beseiged City. To embrace this irresistable trend, Taiwan should, on one hand take part in it and on the other, preserve its regional roots.
The slogan "think from the perspective of globalization, but act by the principle of regional needs" should be one of the concerns of our presidential candidates. Dear presidential candidates, what are your substantive plans for globalization?
Tao Tsai-pu is a professor at Nan Hua University.
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
RSS