Best 181 quotes in «globalization quotes» category

Globalization cannot take shape without the speed of light.

Globalization is incredibly efficient but also so far incredibly unjust.

Globalization, which attempts to amalgamate every local, regional, and national economy into a single world system, requires homogenizing locally adapted forms of agriculture, replacing them with an industrial system-centrally managed, pesticide-intensive, one-crop production for export-designed to deliver a narrow range of transportable foods to the world market.

Globalization is a fact of life. But I believe we have underestimated its fragility.

Globalization really is a concrete, fundamental fact in everybody's lives, and you really see that come to life in soccer stadiums.

Globalization was a deep trend pushed by technology and right ideas, as much as anything else.

Education, particularly higher education, will take Africa into the mainstream of globalization.

Globalization exists but we shouldn't conflate globalization with trade agreements. Trade agreements is how we can shape globalization.

Globalization has made copper and other minerals more valuable, and Ghana and Kenya have recently discovered mineral resources.

Globalization is not a monolithic force but an evolving set of consequences - some good, some bad and some unintended. It is the new reality.

Globalizing a bad thing makes it worse. But globalizing a good thing is usually good.

Globalization means using slaves to manufacture products that are then sold to the unemployed!

I am not someone who believes we should build a fence around our country but I do believe there ought to be some fairness with respect to the rules of this globalization.

I feel that we're dividing along class lines for the first time in our history. Now one thing that has happened in this reaction to globalization is that the elites are not respectful of the values of those who are ordinary citizens, so we seem to be dividing ourselves into ever-smaller identity groups, each with its own narrative, each with its own grievance, and that's a problem.

I don't even know what being left wing means anymore. I feel that the left/right spectrum has been so fundamentally scrambled primarily by the politics around globalization - and you saw it in Brexit, you saw it in the French election, you see it in our election, it's happening everywhere.

I don't think massification and globalization and all those other 'izations' are necessarily hostile to regionalism.

Imperialism or globalization - I don't have to care what it's called to hate it.

If globalization is a sphere, where each point is equidistant from the centre, then it isn't good because it annuls each of us. But if globalization joins us as a polyhedron where we're all together but conserves the dignity of each ... that's good.

If globalization seeks to bring all of us together, but to do so respecting each person, each individual person's peculiarity, that globalization is good and makes us good and grow and leads to peace.

If we allow terrorism to undermine our freedom of action, we could reverse at least part of the palpable gains achieved by postwar globalization. It is incumbent upon us not to allow that to happen.

If you're totally illiterate and living on one dollar a day, the benefits of globalization never come to you.

In a world of scarce resources, globalization without new technology is unsustainable.

In an excess of examples, the walk to globalization has additionally implied the minimization of women and young ladies. What's more that must change.

Ironically, xenophobic nationalists are utilizing the benefits of globalization.

One of the paradoxes of globalization is that, in the developing world, we've seen massive reductions in property.

I think that globalization is partly responsible for the spread of the hostile, radical forms of Islam.

I think the fashion industry, as a result of globalization, has undergone a uniformity. I'm not saying that's good or that's bad but that is my observation.

It is people who are the objects of globalization and at the same time its subjects. What also follows logically from this is that globalization is not a law of nature, but rather a process set in train by people.

I was really educating myself on the environment, but I didnt realize it was so connected to politics, connected to globalization.

Most of the time the concept of globalization ends up sounding unnecessarily abstruse - even the name itself sounds clunky and highfalutin. And people discuss it in a way that makes it seem so impersonal. But globalization really is a concrete, fundamental fact in everybody's lives, and you really see that come to life in soccer stadiums.

The benefits and consequences of globalization have a great deal to do with whether we're intelligent and thoughtful about how we approach globalization, or whether we're blindly accepting... or blindly resistant.

Our task is not to make societies safe for globalization, but to make the global system safe for decent societies.

People now realize that globalization is not only for the multi-nationals and the circulation of money.

The disruption caused by globalization and technology (what Tom Friedman calls hyperconnectedness) will be around for the rest of our professional lives.

The downsides of globalization are indeed painful, ... But taking the bigger pills against its ills is superior to living inside a sterile bubble.

The features of globalization have huge consequences on pandemics. It just connects us so much more closely... And as a consequence, every one of these viruses that passes from animals to humans has the capacity to infect all of us.

The regime of globalization promotes an unfettered marketplace as the dynamic instrument organizing international relations.

The governments are seen to be less effective than they used to be. The private sector is perceived as being so much more efficient, and so globalization implies a transfer of power to the private sector.

The nation-state became powerful in the wake of the French Revolution, whereas the nation-state has become powerless in light of globalization.

The process of globalization has now interconnected almost everything ranging from financial markets to transport networks to communication systems in a huge system that no one really understands.

There are dangers that globalization increases inequality. There are dangers that because capital is mobile and workers are not, if we are not providing them sufficient protection, that they can be left behind in this process. And that's what we have to focus on.

At the end of the day, we supported globalization because we wanted to be able to buy cheaper computers, cheaper vehicles, cheaper clothes and cheaper furniture. Wal-Mart parking lots were jammed with North American workers buying bargain-basement-priced goods made in China even if in the process they were shopping themselves right out of their own jobs.

Trade reform has also been linked to increased income disparity as skilled workers have captured more benefits from globalization than their unskilled counterparts.

We are living in a period of commerical globalization. What we really need is spiritual globalization.

You can argue about globalization and the many benefits it has had, but also you have to appeal to the mass with everything. The Chinese, the Americans, the Russians... Everything becomes this very bland product, and that's all we're producing at the moment. It's driven by money.

...all this abstraction is also potentially distancing. We don't see the labor that went into building our railroads or the civilizations that were wiped out in order to clear the land. We don't see the millennia of dinosaurs or plankton that went into our oil, the Chinese repetitive stress injuries that went into our iPhones, or any of the other time-intensive processes we can spend in an instant today. We tend to see math and science as a steady state of facts rather than as the accumulated knowledge of linear traditions. As Korzybski put it, we see further because we "stand on the shoulders" of the previous generation.

America is like an isolated information island. A lot of what happens in the rest of the world, a lot of the cultural exchange, never makes it to rural Alabama.

And this is not just the United States’ problem, it is a global problem. One of the primary arguments used by apologists for this surveillance state that has developed across the United States and in every country worldwide is a trust of the government. This is critical — even if you trust the U.S. government and their laws[...] think about the governments you fear the most, whether it is China, Russia or North Korea, or Iran. These spying capabilities exist for everyone. This is not just an American thing; this is happening in every country in every part of the world. We first need to move beyond the argumentation by policy officials of wishing for something that is technically impossible. The idea ‘Let's get rid of encryption’. It is out of their hands. The jurisdiction of Congress ends at its borders. Even if all strong encryption is banned in the United States because we don’t want Al Qaeda to have it, we can't stop a group from developing these tools in Yemen, or in Afghanistan, or any other region of the world and spreading the tools globally.

An island, on the other hand, is small. There are fewer species, and the competition for survival has never reached anything like the pitch that it does on the mainland. Species are only as tough as they need to be, life is much quieter and more settled [..] So you can imagine what happens when a mainland species gets introduced to an island. It would be like introducing Al Capone, Genghis Khan and Rupert Murdoch into the Isle of Wight - the locals wouldn't stand a chance.

Architecture cannot change the economic machinations of globalization.