Reading from the academic
literature of Ambrose & Brinkley (1997) during my morning coffee obliged me
to turn on my personal computer again and write the positive views of globalization.
Ambrose & Brinkley (1997) from their literature the “rise of globalism”
portrays the concept of world war and economics. Since the war in Europe and going to Asia and
the modern cold war, still the conclusive theory to unionize the world is
towards the conceptualization of globalization.
On the contrary, the readings portrays the war and economic theory of
the famous US presidents like Eisenhower & Kennedy in pushing the new
frontiers of democracy over communism.
As a thought, government ideology will greatly affect towards the
national economic endeavor of a country like US or Cuba for example.
As of today the concept of Clinton towards
the Democratic Enlargement uses the skills and tools of NATO and the UN to
academically and professionally mobilize the whole program scenario. Take for example, the influence of US economic
culture towards the Arab countries like Saudi Arabia. The economic relationship
of the two countries surpasses that of any given allied countries due to its mutual
economic exchange relationship. In that
sense, from Carter to Obama the inter-economic connectivity between the two countries
becomes a necessity for both national economies.
The reading finally suggest that
twisting the path to war is actually towards a more common avenue of political
and economic international culture.
Having said that UN and NATO are the working force in mobilizing
globalization, governments on the contrary together with all the religious
groups must show common grounds in uniting loosen cultural values and respect
among international countries.
According to Ronald Reagan “Peace
is not the absence of conflict, it is the ability to handle conflict by peaceful
means.”
Comments