The Superiority of Political Globalization

The Superiority of Political Globalization

In my opinion, there are very few people that doubt the existence and the progress of globalization. To such individuals, the reality of globalization hasn’t dawned on them. These are people that have raised various topics and debates concerning the definition, the phases and the effects of globalization. However, there have been attempts by the theorists to develop models to explain the concept of globalization. I believe that globalization is real and it is continually changing the shape of the world. I can attest that its effects have been experienced in the East Asia of which this paper covers. In this paper, i aim to endorse the superiority of the political globalization arguably. By so doing, I believe it is the foundational phase of globalization.

From the concepts laid down by Steger, he argues that theorists are categorized into two. Each party represents a specific perspective on globalization. The hyper globalizers affirm that politics are powerless in influencing globalization (Steger, 2017). They argue that globalization is socially and economically engineered. Technology and economic activities have blurred the national boundaries leading to unity and cooperation of nations in the trading systems. Taking the other perspective that I endorse, the skeptics antagonizes the hyperglobalist. Along with skeptics, I believe that political power fuels the globalization. To ensure global cohesion, the politically pioneered body, the United Nations (UN) was formed in 1945. It’s due to the political agreements that the nations got rid of the limitations to the economic and technological flow into the states. Treaties would be signed and agreements to promote the unity of activities between the nations hence opening a doorway for the social and economic interactions. I affirm that globalization is more political since the nations can put restrictions on the matters of immigration and trading limitations using the legislative approach. After the attack of the United States during the 9/11 catastrophe, most of the developed nations have put measures to curb the number of immigrants to minimize the cases of terrorism. This reveals how the political muscle of a nation cannot be ignored. It’s due to the political agreement that also coined the Pivot to Asia mission by the United States. The goal was to shift the military of the US to the regions for security purpose as well as promoting joint military exercises.

After the collapse of the communist regime in Asia and the death of Kim II Sung (McDevitt, 2001), North Korea was left unstable. In such a situation, the reunion and the pacification of the nation were merely possible due to the political cohesion and the co-operation with other nations. The United States has been a key player in the involvement of the tension in North Korea to ensure its reunion as well as its commitment being a catalyst to the implementation of the security adopted by the nation.  I can conclude that there is an intertwining relationship between the social-economics and the politics towards the globalization.  However, it is less true to side with hyperglobalizers to only believe in the global power that is integrated into the social units. It’s ironical to believe in the boundless world ignoring that in the past there were no social and economic interactions between nations. It is the political marriages that gave birth to the presently unified world that seem boundary-less.



Steger, M. B. (2017). Globalization: A very short introduction (Vol. 86). Oxford University Press.

McDevitt, M. (2001). The Post-Korean Unification Security Landscape and US Security Policy in Northeast Asia. Korea’s Future and the Great Powers, 253.