This week’s class focused strongly on the class objective of understanding the impact of globalization on international communication. The reading, the class activity, and the guest lecture all contributed to a better understanding of this theme, which I was fascinated by since I have not had the opportunity to study the economics or history of globalization during my time at Wesleyan.
The reading contained a lot of detail-oriented examples of the many facets of globalization, and at times it was an overwhelming amount of information since it was almost entirely new to me. However, I was able to relate some of the content to other topics I’ve learned about or experienced. I felt that I understood the section on political globalization, as I’ve had the experience of traveling abroad during the Trump presidency and feeling that even in another country all eyes were on the American democracy. In a country with a king, the knowledge about the American political process surprised me.
In class, I also noted the effects of the complexity of the topic in that most groups had difficulty determining what they believed would result from globalization. It felt difficult to evaluate, from an American perspective, what is the impact and extent of Americanization in other countries. This segment of the class reminded me of my experiences in a high school Spanish class, which focused on immigration issues, and the difficulties we had in discussing possible solutions due to the magnitude and complexity of the issue.
In order to better understand these difficult topics, it can be very helpful to have quantitative information, like what was presented during Professor Dolan’s lecture. Although I didn’t fully understand all the details of the categorizations of economic growth and development, I tried to focus on the discussion of their global impacts. I found it interesting that there is such a dramatic, observable impact on the perception of countries based on certain identifiers, and how some countries are considered “too wealthy” to receive aid even when it is evident that they are struggling in certain categories much more than other countries are. Seeing the categories and how low the income values needed to be in order to be considered a high-income country surprised me and made me reconsider the labeling system. I do believe it is useful to have the data for the purpose of distributing aid and supporting individuals from all countries, but I did find it hard to accept thinking about a ranking system in relative terms, because “wealthier” than another country still does not ensure that a living wage is given there.
