1. 

If you're in the United States, spell words like "globalization" and "civilization" with Zs; in the United Kingdom and most other English-speaking countries, use "-sion" instead.

Globalization is the idea and process of worldwide (more or less) free trade. Globalization can also refer to the homogenization of cultures around the world due to the influence of foreign goods, particularly from the United States, which can "infiltrate" an existing culture. A good example of this is the rapid growth of American fast-food companies like KFC and McDonalds in China.

Globalization, although it tends to remove trade barriers and increase wealth, can also force people in undeveloped or developing countries to into positions of economic dependency. Because of the United States' position in the world's economy, globalization very nearly means Americanization. For this reason, globalization is very unpopular in some circles.

Globalization is not inevitable per se, nor is any other human activity, but a lot of people have a very strong motivation (money) to keep it going.

Globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology.

Globalization is often defined as the distribution of labor, production, and the market. In reality globalization means that the world is global and integral, every part in it is completely interconnected like cells in a single body. Each one of them determines the fate of the other parts, like in the butterfly effect. The general rule is that no conflicts are allowed between different parts of the world, because opposing integration is opposing progress and evolution, opposing the law of nature.

Today it is crucial for us to recognize this in the world; that any inconsistency or bad success in carrying out nature’s law of unity will lead to a negative result: the crisis that we are facing today will intensify.

I see globalisation as an expansions of the community. What expands? Influences expand including culture, economic trade, travel, awareness, politics, migration, etc. Technology has allowed this mainly through communications and transportation advancements.

I feel some aspects are and should be virtually restriction-free like cultural exchange and travel, some should be somewhat restricted and controlled like economic trade and migration while political expansion should be seriously restricted (i.e. sovereignty is very important to me).

While I acknowledge that man has affected the climate, I am a skeptic of dangerous or catastrophic AGW.

I'm a realist on AGW. I hesitate to call my self a "proponent", that makes it sound like I *want* AGW...

Globalization is... a thing. It can be a good thing, it can be a bad thing, it can be neutral.

The main impact on climate change that I can think of is if there's more long-distance trade, there's more fuel being used to transport goods from place to place. Oh, and one country instituting a carbon tax or the like can potentially move manufacturing to another country, if there aren't tariffs to compensate.

Globalization has always been here. To me, the meaning has been changed to mean that we should all come together under one Government. This is what the United Nations has been trying to do for several years (in fairness to all people). Unfortunately, the Global Monetary Elites have pretty much seized control of the United Nations with the introduction of the "euro". Most people don't understand how "centralized banking" works and how the Monetary Elites control the flow of money. The U.S. has been under control of the Monetary Elites since 1913 through the "Federal Reserve Act". The Federal Reserve is a private corporation through this Act.

All in all it is a bad thing (unless we can all somehow come together for a common cause against the Monetary Elites That doesn't mean business people. I'm talking about the banking systems)! It keeps the power of media and Government under the Monetary Elite's control. This is why I don't believe in man-made Global Warming. When you understand that the Monetary Elites only care about creating chaos between all people (the more divided we are then the more we are fighting against each other - which takes money to fight for a cause with interest).

I hope that made sense.

---------------------------------------

"The Money Masters" (YouTube video) tells the history about how "fractional reserve lending" has given the Monetary Elites so much power over people. Governments can't help borrowing from banks (by selling worthless Government Bonds to them to pay their debts) and has driven most Governments into our current debt crises.

--------------------------------------

Our past 4 Presidents are for Globalization (George Bush Sr said "A new world order") and have taken steps for the United states to be part of it. I definitely disagree with it in its current context.

Simply a unit of measurement. Where the unit(s) combined equals 1or some multiple of 1. Defining the units as integral value isn't as simple. So yes its pertinent when it comes to CC, you at least have a standard. But almost no or very little control..."That is the question".

AGW: Not really overly concern about activist demise...they seem to be digging in the wrong hole. Accomplish very little and contribute nothing, other then misrepresentation.

The domination of the many by the few.

I think Globalisation is purely economic and has very little to do with politics, it is money and goods driven and as such fairly inevitable.

I'm a denier, not a climate change dupe

Whatever the correct spelling; what can you tell me about "Globalisation"? What does it mean to you?...

Is it a good thing? ... a bad thing? ... something inevitable perhaps?

and its significance when it comes to the question of climate change?

I have to admit; I've heard the term but have never looked into this and have no preconceived opinions. I'm not even sure what it means so I'll probably be easily impressed!

Also, please indicate your position on man-made global warming; I'd like to know if proponents and skeptics view globalisation differently. I'll keep that in mind when choosing best answer.

Thanks in anticipation ...

Quote from the UN's Own "Agenda 21": "Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."

And when some people are not successfully reorientated, they will be executed.

Prof Richard Parncutt, who outright states that he is for killing a certain group of people because of their beliefs, “I propose that the death penalty is appropriate for influential GW deniers.” This man is positioning himself to be on that deciding committee.

It is Stalin and Hitler, only on a grander scale.

Darwin: I don't care how you spell it, I know what you mean.

It's bad. The good thing about having many governments is that it the one you're under becomes a tyrant, you can go somewhere else.

One world government would be fine if you had smart honest people running it but there are no such angels on this Earth.

globalization: To make global or worldwide in scope or application.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/globali...

You already know my position on global warming.

-----------------------

It is the root of all evil (unemployment, crap food, shoddy goods etc etc)