Canada and Globalization, Application Essay Example

Security: The backlash that McDonald’s has engendered as a result of its status as an icon of globalization speaks to Beck’s thesis concerning risk cultures. Beck argues that risk is fundamentally a socio-cultural phenomenon, inasmuch as different individuals have differing degrees of ability to define it (496). Moreover, Beck argues, theories of risk provide etiologies of risk, complete with prescriptions for how risk can be minimized and managed. For a global theory of risk, the etiology of the risk is precisely that, global and essentially omnipresent as opposed to particular and local (496). Moreover, the consequences of the risks are generally portrayed as incalculable, and a key idea is that the risk is also non-compensatory: thus, if the risk becomes reality, the consequences will be very dire and it will be essentially impossible to make up for them (496-497). From this socio-cultural perspective on risk Beck elaborates the concept of risk cultures, i.e. cultural ideas about what constitute the most significant risks facing global society (498).

The opposition to McDonald’s fits very neatly within this framework of risk cultures. By way of example, one need look no further than the now-famous case of anti-globalization folk hero José Bové, the French farmer who led a vigilante posse in illegally demolishing a McDonald’s (Croucher 26). For Bové and those who have lionized him, McDonald’s represents an assault on the part of international capitalism on everything small-scale, sustainable, and thus secure. From the perspective of these discontented parties, globalization as represented by McDonald’s threatens their security, and the security of others. Indeed, Goldberg gives a laundry list of such groups of malcontents, each with a particular risk culture that brands McDonald’s as the embodiment of the perils and evils of globalization: “Greek Communists, animal rightsers, farmers, unions, affluent anarchists, left-wing intellectuals, right-wing nationalists, Luddites, Chinese Communists, radical Pakistani Muslims, parochial separatists,” etc. (30). Each and every one of these groups, Goldberg explains, has some pet vendetta or ideological ax to grind against McDonald’s, whether for the chain’s supposed injustices or those of the international processes of globalization that it represents (30).

Much of the history of globalization has involved violent assaults on the security of other societies, with Western rule imposed by force (McGrew). With that rule has come coercive economic and social relations of class, race, and gender. And yet, the truly remarkable thing has been the degree to which violence has declined, as chronicled by the great scholar Steven Pinker in The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. In this remarkable book, Pinker explains that violence has actually been on the decline in Western civilization since Medieval times, and that a key part of this paradigm shift has included a greater focus on the ‘non-zero-sum interactions’ of trade (Pinker 56-60, 682-683). This is Friedman’s “Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention”, and its successor, the “Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention”, and it demonstrates that far from a bogeyman, McDonald’s is the result of international webs of nonviolent commerce, which create powerful incentives for continued peace and prosperity (Friedman 414-417).

Development: Though many of the opponents of globalization have charged that it is ineluctably westernization, especially Americanization, the reality is vastly more complex, as Sen explains. Indeed, the simplistic narrative of globalization as a recent curse from the West is spurious on all three counts: globalization is a very old phenomenon, one that has played out in the exchange of material goods and ideas between very different societies for hundreds, even thousands of years (2-4). The number of ideas and inventions that have diffused from China, India, and the medieval Islamic worlds to the West is truly staggering: everything from paper and printing to gunpowder to ‘Arabic’ (actually Indian) numerals to algebra (3-4). So, globalization is neither recent nor is it Western—and neither is it necessarily a curse.

That said, Sen does an excellent job of recognizing the legitimacy of some of the questions that globalization’s discontents ask: for all that they are often profoundly mistaken in their identifications of the problem, they are right to point out that in the course of globalization, powerful economic interests can indeed contribute to the continued marginalization and yes, suffering of vulnerable groups (5-6). As ever, McDonald’s is an excellent bellwether of all things globalization-related: in one famous case, discussed in a previous instalment of this exercise, McDonald’s laid off sixty-two of its employees in Saint-Hubert, Quebec, for the transgression of wanting to join the Teamsters union (Royle 87-88, Schlosser 77). It has racked up a number of arguably very fair criticisms for its treatment of its employees—specifically, paying very low wages—not only in Canada but also in other countries (Salisbury). This was one finding from the now-famous 1997 McLibel court case in the UK, which also found substantiation for claims of child exploitation, false advertising of their menu as nutritious, and indirect sponsorship of animal cruelty (Salisbury).

Environment: The critics of McDonald’s, and of globalization generally, love to wax eloquent about ecological sustainability. Shiva’s piece is a perfect case in point, one that demonstrates the many unfortunate tendencies of this crowd: idealism concerning policies of state protectionism and intervention in the economy, and a condemnation of globalization and the forces of international capitalism in quasi-religious terms (130-132). Free trade policies and movements are placed within a moralistic narrative of history, as (of course!) the heirs of historic processes of violent colonization and imperialism by Western nations (131-132).

Cutting through the histrionics and moralizing, Runnalls and Najam do a much better job of documenting Canada’s vacillating willingness to engage with the international community on the crucial subject of climate change (376-379). By any measure, this is a serious issue, and it is one that Canada needs to start taking more seriously once again (379-380).

What, then, is the connection to McDonald’s? The answer is simple: McDonald’s has been accused, and not without significant justification, of environmental abuses (Salisbury). While some of the charges were apparently spurious (notably the idea that McDonald’s, in addition to its other real or putative evils, devastates rainforests), there were some legitimate concerns, and much to its credit, the company has responded with a new commitment to eco-friendliness (Salisbury). For example, in 2010 McDonald’s “announced that it was launching a three-year study into reducing the carbon emissions caused by the cattle used in its burgers”, a significant contribution indeed, given that cattle alone count for some 4% of UK emissions of greenhouse gases, which cause global warming (Salisbury). What this demonstrates is that the best way to combat the abuses of McDonald’s is to be clear on what those abuses actually are, and to proceed by pressuring the company to change. Whenever its public image—a key part of its stock in trade—has been on the line, McDonald’s has had every incentive to change, and has done so accordingly.

Conclusion: As seen in previous instalments, McDonald’s is a veritable lightning-rod for anti-globalization protests and the like. For many of the malcontents who rally against it, McDonald’s is a key part of their risk cultures, and it has been indicted on charges ranging from truthful to utterly absurd. The best way to secure reform from McDonald’s has proven to be calling out the company and exposing its actual (as opposed to fictitious) misdeeds, and pressuring it to change or lose credibility.

Works Cited

Beck, Ulrich. “World Risk Society”. A Companion to the Philosophy of Technology. Ed. J. K. B. Olsen, S. A. Pedersen and V. F. Hendricks. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2009. 495-499. Print.

Croucher, Sheila L. Globalization and Belonging: The Politics of Identity in a Changing World. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishes, Inc., 2004. Print.

Friedman, Thomas. The world is flat: A brief history of the Twenty-first Century. New York: Farrar, Stratus and Giroux, 2005. Print.

Goldberg, Jonah. “The Specter of McDonald’s.” National Review, 52.10 (5 June 2000): 28-32. EBSCOhost. Web. 9 February 2013.

McGrew, Anthony. “Organized Violence in the Making (and Remaking) of Globalization”. Globalization Theory. 2^nd ed. Ed. Anthony McGrew and David Held. Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2007. 15-40. Print.

Pinker, Steven. The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. New York: Penguin, 2011. Print.

Royle, Tony. Working for McDonald’s in Europe: The Unequal Struggle? New York: Routledge, 2000. Print.

Runnalls, David, and Adil Najam. “Canada and Climate Change Politics”. Canada Among Nations, 2009-2010: As Others See Us. Ed. Fen Hampson and Paul Heinbecker. Montreal, Quebec: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2010. 371-382. Print.

Salisbury, Peter. “The Globalization of ‘Fast Food’. Behind the Brand: McDonald’s.” Global Research. Centre for Research on Globalization, 16 June 2011. Web. 9 February 2013.

Schlosser, Eric. Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2001. Print.

Sen, Amartya. “How to Judge Globalism”. The American Prospect (Winter 2002): 2-6. ProQuest. Web. 30 Mar. 2013.

Shiva, Vandana. “Ecological balance in an era of globalizaiton”. Principled World Politics. Ed. Paul K. Wapner and Lester E. J. Ruiz. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2000. 130-149. Print.