People worldwide are wrestling with the effect of globalization on their culture, identity and livelihoods.

The concept of globalization can be hard to define—as we’ll discuss later—but it can be loosely described as the world’s increasingly international and borderless political, economic and cultural landscape arising from structural changes in capitalism that happened between 1971 and 1992.

The effect of globalization is, more often than not,
experienced as powerlessness by those nations and workers who must face globalization’s increasingly intrusive economic processes. These forces appear not only to have a life of their own, but they also discourage any alternative thinking.

This profound and intense change in the shape of contemporary society demands a response from a Catholic Church dedicated to the principals of social justice.

For example, the bishops from Canada, Latin America and the United States recently issued a joint statement on globalization that echoed recent statements from Pope John Paul II. The bishops call globalization a “mixed blessing” and invite a “vigorous and in-depth critical analysis” of the phenomenon. (“American Bishops Outline Eight Pastoral Strategies,” March 24, 2003). The timing of the bishops’ initiatives could not be more appropriate.

New Word, New World
Even though the word “globalization” first appeared in the English language about 1962,

its usage did not gain popularity until the 1980s. Scholars in religion and sociology were among the first to pick up on the word. These scholars were searching for ways to explain the obvious failure of theories of secularization, which predicted the increasing irrelevance of religion as a force in shaping the modern world.

By the 1990s, globalization discourse had spread into economics and politics, perhaps reflecting the popularity of the word in everyday language.

Despite this new word’s popularity and frequency of use, there is surprisingly little agreement on the meaning of globalization. Some commentators, for example, will claim that globalization is the name given to “the global age”—a new era in human history.

Others, such as economists, MBA graduates and entrepreneurs, might see globalization as an unprecedented opportunity for conducting business. Then again, a rural peasant or a redundant factory worker might describe globaliza-tion in terms of its destruction of their local community and environment.

Globalization is more than a capricious word; it is a concept that is contested among its
participants at all levels.

The confusion associated with the term “globalization” becomes most acute when a vague term such as “anti-globalization” is used. If there is no genuine agreement on what globalization is, then how can we speak confidently about its opposite?

For example, is someone who is accused of anti-globalization against the direction of contemporary society, unregulated business activity, or the destruction of his or her community?

An Emerging Global Culture
In its most general sense, globalization is used to convey a sense of an emerging global culture that is not specific to any particular group or nation. This global culture results from a fusion of ideas, fashions and patterns of consumption. In particular, advanced communication technologies are helping make this emerging global culture possible.

The phrase “borderless world” is often used to describe the worldwide structure emerging under globalization. Such a world is one where barriers to the free flow of people, finance and ideas are supposedly being eliminated. Free trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the use of computer technology in the banking system have indeed liberated capital and foreign direct investment.

Politically, the tearing down of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent collapse of the Soviet Empire are often cited as the pre-eminent examples of the borderless world.

For those people who can afford to fly or have ready access to new technologies, the world undoubtedly is without borders. For refugees and migrant workers, however, the borderless world is a mirage. Countries everywhere are increasingly concerned with security and are rigidly policing their borders to prevent the incursion of unwanted people.

Globalization reverses basic tenants of liberal economic theory. “Comparative advantage” traditionally was understood to derive from the mobility of people as opposed to the relative immobility of capital (such as urbanization). But in a globalized world, capital is liberated. As a result, communities become locked in a vulgar form of competition to attract capital.

For example, local communities are often forced to provide “favorable” or “competitive” economic conditions to maintain jobs for their working population. As a result, economic competition rather than moral and religious values become the central focus of contemporary life. This environment creates market efficiencies, but is detrimental to human rights, working conditions and environmental protection laws.

An extension of the borderless world concept is the idea of “the end of history.” This phrase refers to the supposed victory of liberal democracy and the market economy. The line of thought is that human beings who live in the borderless world are discovering their true nature as consumers. They are “liberated” human beings governed by the precepts of the free market, especially the right to private property.

The shopping mall can be seen as the ultimate symbol of global society. But even a quick look at the vast consumption differences between the “First World” and “Third World” shows that life can be unjust and exclusive in “the global mall.”

The Pope’s Thoughts
Globalization often is associated with a particular, and often unquestioned, assumption about culture and social relationships. Thus, the world is divided into what is considered modern and pre-modern: liberal democracy and the market economy are unquestionably good; traditional feudal society is unquestionably bad.

In this sense, one influential definition describes globalization as “the universalization of modernity.” Often this division is called “the clash of civilizations.” Islam, in particular, is usually cited as being unable to cope with modernity.

However, despite the resistance of pre-modern societies, globalization is understood as an inevitable process. In 1991, President George Bush gave political flesh to this thinking when he announced “a new world order” in his State of the Union address.

In 2001, Pope John Paul II offered a valuable critique of globalization, which he described as a “human event.”

These are empowering words.

The pope challenges the contemporary world to recognize that globalization is not inevitable. Instead, globalization is a process that emerges from decisions of individuals and communities.

The pope’s strong defense of human freedom stands in stark contradiction to those who adopt the TINA (there is no alternative) principle. The pope’s message is that human beings can make decisions that can undo the injustices that create and sustain “the global mall.”

An Interconnected World
Globalization means we can no longer think of ourselves except in relation to other people, communities and nations.

A new consciousness is emerging as people are not only being brought more closely together but also, and most importantly, becoming more intensely aware of that closeness.North American bishops have prophetically interpreted this new consciousness as an “experience of interconnectedness,” which “reveals a hunger and thirst for peace, justice and compassion, and a search for deeper meaning in life.”

However, the bishops are realistic enough to know that those who embrace such thinking are in a fragile position, which is “fraught with much loneliness and a sense of vulnerability.” There is no doubt that globalization has bought tremendous benefits to some members of the human community. However, an honest appraisal reveals that globalization offers an illusion of oneness while obscuring with dazzling efficiency the brutal realities of entrenched and institutionalized poverty.

Ultimately, globalization is a failed project in its attempt to unite the world. As followers of Jesus, we are called and sent to stand squarely beside those who are excluded, impoverished and imprisoned. The authentic calling of the Church is not to help the excluded adjust to the new era, but rather to be their comfort and speak their voice as they pray and dream of a more just world.

Columban Father Pat McMullan of New Zealand recently completed a master’s degree. His thesis was a theological critique of globalization. Ordained in 1987, he has served on mission in Korea.