Globalization as the collective destiny of the human population for progress is a good idea. However, what happens when the tools that can transfer huge amounts of capital from Kathmandu to Paris or transfer important pieces of information, are used for destruction? The world is becoming smaller, and more dangerous. As Robert Wright talks about the shared fate of humanity, which is now entangled with technology and globalization, he makes a point. He talks about being extremely self-centered and selfless at the same time. His advice for Americans would be to work towards elevating the discontent of “seemingly strange people” and “expanding their moral horizons.” He puts the U.S. in a pedestal, a point from where it can look down on the world. He talks about the idea of manifest destiny and its expansion in this century through technology- through common themes of globalization. World economics and money is a common theme throughout the world. Trade opens places as well as minds. This article, written on the second anniversary of 9/11, is eerily hopeful and arrogant. Hopeful, because Wright talks about ways of policing globalization from falling into the hands of the wrong people. Arrogant because America is suddenly responsible not only for its own security, but also moral enlightenment and global governance. Why morality? It is understood that more economic freedom can bring greater wealth and prosperity and less hatred. But global governance? Is the U.S. responsible for monitoring activities in sovereign nations all over the world, and is this even feasible?
In the second, more direct article, Robert Samuelson talks about Globalization in a specific context- one of war. He looks at examples from history to see what effects wars have on global economies and how they always have some effect- either good or bad. Trade affects every human being in this planet and this is a common theme in both the articles. Samuelson says “commerce flourishes when there is economic confidence and political stability” but wants to see if the Iraq war would draw nations closer due to economic pressure or drive them further apart. Both these articles are talking about the importance of global trade as one of the stabilizing factors in the process of globalization. A factor that can have positive implications, but faces the danger of being a huge negative when used by negative elements. Globalization started when exchange began in a global scale- exchange of ideas as well as goods. It can go seriously wrong- like it did on September 11, and it can go right, if globalization is accompanied with global responsibility.