Globalisation Quotes

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.

Globalisation thus implies that sovereignty...needs to become weaker.

When globalisation means that many of the services that individual governments used to have direct power over are privatised, in education and health, even prison services, nonetheless national sovereignty still needs to be exercised.

Sovereignty must be redefined if states are to cope with globalisation.

It is obvious, I think, that national democracy withers. This has to do with globalisation.

I do think Brexit vote speaks to the ongoing changes and challenges that are raised by globalisation.

Where you are born--what you are born into, the place, the history of the place, how that history mates with your own-- stamps who you are, whatever the pundits of globalisation have to say.

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.

We need a greening of globalisation.

In the age of globalization pooled sovereignty means more power, not less.

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, 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.

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.

Opponents of globalisation may see it as a new folly, but it is neither particularly new, nor, in general, a folly.

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.

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.

One of the fundamental questions of today's world is undoubtedly the question of equitable globalisation.

The European Union's enlargement is part of the natural process of integration and globalisation that is underway in the world today.

I'm against this huge globalisation on the basis of economic advantage.

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.

Globalisation has in effect made the citizen disappear, and it has reduced the state into being a mere instrument of global capital.

Over recent years, urbanisation, globalisation and the destruction of local cultures has led to a rise in the prevalence of mental illness in the developing world.

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.

Globalisation will make our societies more creative and prosperous, but also more vulnerable.

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.

Incidentally, I don't think there is a non-adjectival 'globalisation'. What we have now is a particular form: dominated by finance and multinational corporations and by a rhetoric (though not a reality) of 'free trade' and market forces. So I'm not a localist. I'm an internationalist, but one who believes (a) that such a thing is really only possible through a prior grounding and (b) that the terms of our present globalisation have to be challenged politically.

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.

The Euro is a conquest of sovereignty. It gives us a margin of manoeuvre. Its a tool to help us master globalisation and help us resist irrational shifts in the market.

We live in a time of global transformation. The power on Earth no longer lies with the forces of imperialistic globalisation, but with those groups who are now connecting with the forces of transformation. It is not terror and violence, but trust and solidarity which will lead the new world. This is not just a wishful dream, but the objective reality of the coming epoch.

The 'anti-globalisation movement' is the most significant proponent of globalisation - but in the interests of people, not concentrations of state-private power.

Globalisation can provide the route for the development of a sustainable and prosperous planetary society in the next generation, provided that globalisation itself becomes more civilised than it is right now.

Globalization, as defined by rich people like us, is a very nice thing... you are talking about the Internet, you are talking about cell phones, you are talking about computers. This doesn't affect two-thirds of the people of the world.

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.

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.

I am actually quite encouraged and I think, actually, the UK is coping with globalisation a lot better than most other European countries. And that is reflected in the fact that (whilst of course there are people who are still unemployed) our unemployment rate is low and (whilst of course we need to export more) we are attracting a huge amount of inward investment into Britain.

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.

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.

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.

Globalisation means indeed everything is global but there are still very specific centres of power, especially when it comes to media and news.Misinformation about some attacks is going to affect how emotionally involved the audience is going to get. In the end, an emotional ranking is artificially created when it comes to casualties.

Globalisation means many other countries are asserting themselves and trying to take over leadership. Please don't ask Americans to let others assume the leadership of human exploration. We can do wonderful science on the Moon, and wonderful commercial things. Then we can pack up and move on to Mars.

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.

In a world where globalisation wants to turn everybody into the same thing, I think that anything that allows you to go to another place or be in another world has got to be celebrated.

Altermodern is an in-progress redefinition of modernity in the era of globalisation, stressing the experience of wandering in time, space and mediums. The term 'altermodern has its roots in the idea of 'other-ness (Latin alter = 'other, with English connotation of 'different) and suggests a multitude of possibilities, of alternatives to a single route. It suggests that the historical period defined by postmodernism is coming to an end, symbolised by global financial crises.

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).

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 EU should be concentrated on adapting to globalisation and global competitiveness, not building more powerful centralised institutions in Brussels.

If you're against globalisation, it doesn't achieve much by sort of bombing the head offices of Shell or Nestle. You unsettle people much more by blowing up an Oxfam shop because people can't understand the motive.

It remains the task of governments to implement the fundamental human rights standards which should influence all aspects of globalisation, including even trade talks, and to be answerable for this in a democratic way. The structure is international, but the accountability is national and I would like to see that accountability being more penetrating at regional and local level, especially in federal systems.

Globalisation has obliterated distance, not just physically but also, most dangerously, mentally. It creates the illusion of intimacy when, in fact, the mental distances have changed little. It has concertinaed the world without engendering the necessary respect, recognition and tolerance that must accompany it.