Globalisation has made us more vulnerable. It creates a world without borders, and makes us painfully aware of the limitations of our present instruments, and of politics, to meet its challenges.— Anna Lindh
Off-limits Globalisation quotations
Globalisation will make our societies more creative and prosperous, but also more vulnerable.
Firstly, economic globalisation has brought prosperity and development to many countries, but also financial crises to Asia, Latin America and Russia, and increasing poverty and marginalisation.
One of the fundamental questions of today's world is undoubtedly the question of equitable globalisation.
Globalisation, which benefits only multi-national companies and takes away all sense of local or national pride and identity, is the biggest threat facing all the member states of the EU.
I'm against this huge globalisation on the basis of economic advantage.
Globalisation makes it clear that social responsibility is required not only of governments, but of companies and individuals. All sources must interact in order to reach the MDGs.
Globalisation is not something that we can hold off or turn off.
It is the economic equivalent of a force of nature, like wind or water.
There are legitimate concerns and anxieties that the forces of globalisation are leaving too many people behind - and we have to take those concerns seriously and address them. But the answer isn't to turn inward and embrace protectionism. We can't just walk away from trade.
The globalisation of information makes people aware of what they have - and have not. Problems and oppression are impossible to hide, and the new and powerful tools of information provide us with more opportunities than ever to react and act.
I think that these flows of refugee are the inevitable counterparts to the flow of capital and goods. In other words, they too are by-products of globalisation.
In the age of globalization pooled sovereignty means more power, not less.
One of the striking features of the form of globalisation that has now been established is that it is based on the premise that goods and even capital should be free to roam but labour must remain imprisoned within the nation state.
If time is the dimension of change, then space is the dimension of coexisting difference. And that is both a source of nourishment (something that the globalisation gurus seem altogether to have foregone), and a challenge (how negotiate difference, how to address inequality, and so forth).
We belong to a tradition where we treat the entire universe as our family.
For me, globalisation is the manifestation of nationalisation. There is no contradiction between the two.
We must recognise that in a globalised world, we cannot remain insulated from external developments. India's trade performance in the current year has been robust, surpassing pre-crisis export levels and pre-crisis export growth trends. We have diversified our export baskets and our export destinations.
It is obvious, I think, that national democracy withers. This has to do with globalisation.
At the heart of globalisation is a new kind of intolerance in the west towards other cultures, traditions and values, less brutal than in the era of colonialism, but more comprehensive and totalitarian.
The term 'globalisation' is conventionally used to refer to the specific form of investor-rights integration designed by wealth and power, for their own interests.
In an era of globalisation, AIESEC's programmes have helped young people around the world to develop a broader understanding of cultural socio-economic and business management issues.
[I]f you think that American imperialism and its globalised, capitalist form is the most dangerous thing in the world, that means you don't think the Islamic Republic of Iran or North Korea or the Taliban is as bad.
Britain is economically very closely integrated with its European partner countries. Were these ties to be cut, it would be a huge step backwards for the country and would weaken it considerably. In the era of globalisation, "splendid isolation" is not a smart option.
There's no question that a lot of Americans on both the right and the left are expressing some fears and frustrations about the dislocations brought on by globalisation. Many of those frustrations are legitimate and they need to be addressed.
Sovereignty must be redefined if states are to cope with globalisation.
Globalisation has in effect made the citizen disappear, and it has reduced the state into being a mere instrument of global capital.
We live in such a service-based, globalised economy where very few people actually make anything and the people who do make stuff... it's all part of a massive global supply chain. So what if all those chains were suddenly cut, how would you make something? How would you keep people alive? And that was something I wanted to explore.
The challenge is to develop visions, strategies, design and innovation, not just for surviving but for thriving in this new globalising society.
Migration is a feature of globalisation.
You can’t stop it; so every time a political party says it is going to be tough on immigration, it fails to deliver and loses trust.
What will we do in a globalised world? All human beings are equal, so they have the same right to have the same lifestyle-the same social security, jobs, education.
Being open to the concept that globalisation is only 10-20% complete leaves room for some expectation that there might be more gains to be achieved from further integration.
The European Union's enlargement is part of the natural process of integration and globalisation that is underway in the world today.
Globalisation thus implies that sovereignty...needs to become weaker.
The problem is capitalism. The problem is that in order to sell seven billion people on the necessity of globalisation, we've created a moral universe where people who do not work to create profit are considered less than human, and used as surplus labour to drive down the cost of wages.
Opponents of globalisation may see it as a new folly, but it is neither particularly new, nor, in general, a folly.