Governing Global Business Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Governing Global Business - Essay Example Liberalism is the most accepted theory in this regard and the main principles of globalisation are based on this theory. Research Question Since the theory of liberalism is most close to the topic of globalisation, the theory has got a wide acceptance among the research scholars who have written about the state and the effects of Globalisation. This paper makes an attempt to analyse how far the principles of Liberalism are applicable to the globalisation and how it has been actually applied in practice. Literature Review Globalisation is a phenomenon that the world experienced through the opening up of the networks of communication and trade relations across countries in different parts of the world. As a result of the globalisation the world would be a single village of people where the flow of ideas would be free and the cultural exchange between people would be more liberal (Smith, 1980, p. 119). There are several facets of the process of globalisation. First of all it means the l iberalisation of the foreign policies of the state. Along with this it includes the privatisation of the government enterprises and investments in projects across the barriers of nationality (Waters, 1995, p. 11). The phenomenon would also include the easy mobility of the employable people and exchange of business ideas. But the idea chiefly includes mainly communication across cross country borders. The advent of Globalisation was seen mostly towards the fag end of the twentieth century (Appadurai, 2000, p. 82). With the inception of the World Wide Web, the people could easily establish the relations that lie at the diametrically opposite part of the globe. The time taken to carry out this communication process was also less which in turn facilitated trade across countries. The free flowing ideas and exchange of information had also brought the nations with the common interests on a same platform. On the other hand, a state in the sense of politics are a group of people living in a definite area of land and are controlled and guided by the rules laid down by a powerful body known as the government (Featherstone, 1990, p. 73). Often the term government is used interchangeably with the state. There are several states or nations in the world that have their specific set of rules and regulations. The process of globalisation would encourage the interaction of all these states from an economic, social, cultural and religious perspective on a common field. The terms that are commonly used along with the term globalization include Liberalism, Marxism and Realism. The political philosophy of Liberalism believes that a state should allow liberty and equality to all the citizens of the state. The people of the state should provide each and every citizen to take part in the election in the most open manner. The country should take part in free trade and the people should be allowed to have ownership of property (Rosefielde, 2008, p. 60). This is completely opposed to th e theory of Marxism that does not believe in the possession of private property but believe that the surplus value that comes out of any production process should be sent to the government who will have the responsibility of allocating the resources according to the needs of the people. The ownership of the means of production should lie in the hands of

Arizona Immigration Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Arizona Immigration Law - Essay Example â€Å"Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona signed the nation’s toughest bill on illegal immigration into law in April 2010. Its aim is to identify, prosecute and deport illegal immigrants† (Archibold). Even though, the above bill got some support in Arizona and some other parts of America, many of the prominent political leaders including President Obama and scholars slammed Arizona’s decision to implement such a bill in its territory. Many others expressed their doubts about the legal validity of such a bill considering the fact that America is a federal republic. I strongly believe that Arizona immigration bill is totally against the constitution of America and this paper argues against it. America is currently facing huge manpower shortage in almost the entire segments of the professional world or employment segments. In fact President Obama is trying hard to regulate or prohibit outsourcing jobs. He knows very well that American organizations outsource its jobs to chea p labor markets in order to reduce their expenses. In America, availability of skilled labor is extremely low and therefore it is highly expensive. In fact, illegal immigrants are ready to work on cheaper rates, which is a blessing to the American organizations, especially to the small and medium scale industries. California is one state in which small and medium scale industry is completely dependent on illegal immigrants who are ready to work on cheaper rates. Because of that California is able to compete effectively in the market by reducing the price of their products and services. Arizona is going to suffer heavily because of the crackdown of illegal immigrants and subsequent underdevelopment in small and medium scale industries. Small and medium scale industries are actually controlling the economy of a state and any problems created in this sector may adversely affect the state in the long run. In short, Arizona is going to lose millions of dollars in its revenue as a result of this controversial immigration law. This law creates a suspect class, based in part on ethnicity, considered guilty until they prove themselves innocent. It makes it harder for illegal immigrants to live without scrutiny -- but it also makes it harder for some American citizens to live without suspicion and humiliation. Americans are not accustomed to the command 'Your papers, please,' however politely delivered (Arizona's Hard Line on Immigration: Pros and Cons) One of the surprising things about this controversial bill is the decision of American Supreme Court. â€Å"The Supreme Court gave a big boost to proponents of stricter state laws against illegal immigration by upholding Arizona's "business death penalty" for employers who repeatedly hire undocumented workers† (Savage). In other words, Supreme Court upheld the decision of Arizona to punish the employers who employ illegal immigrants. Even though three of the total eight members in the jury gave their verdict again st the law, majority of the jury supported the law and allowed Arizona to implement it without any reconsideration. â€Å"The court's majority opinion, written by its chief justice, John Roberts, rejected arguments by business and civil rights groups and the Obama administration that the Arizona law conflicted with federal immigration law and must be struck down† (Arizona immigration law upheld by supreme court). Supreme Court also upheld the right of a state in passing such a controversial law. In my opinion, Supreme Court failed to