How Soccer Explains the World

How Soccer Explains the World

            Foer’s interpretation of globalization is represented through his writings about soccer and how the game of soccer demonstrates world politics. In other words, thee game of soccer, the players, and the fans all represent international relations between states and regions. Historically soccer is the most popular sport that any and everyone can play no matter how much money someone has. All a person needs is a ball, legs and a piece of open land. Because of the simplicity of the sport everyone can take part in it whether it is from the field or from the sidelines, and that is the same way that international relations work. There are the political figures constantly at work making “legitimate” decisions for the state while the citizens provide their own sideline comments and demonstrations for what they believe, and the army fights for the rights of the state they represent.

            Foer specifically talks about how globalization is failing and its attempt to eradicate hatred in a world where everyone is against each other is not working correctly. Rivalry between cultures is inevitable even within one state. Every state wants to be the best, most advanced and the strongest. Although the main goal of globalization is to have everyone understand and respect other cultures, globalization can potentially have the opposite effect. Each state and its citizens Is determined to prove why they are the best and why everyone should respect their culture, which in turn instead of spreading culture increases the completion for whose culture is the best. In soccer, where it is suppose to be a team, fair play, good sportsmanship sport that is supposed to bring the world together with one common game, the level of completion between nations increases instead. 

            Another issue he addresses, going off of the failure of globalization, is that nationalism and tribalism will keep pushing on especially to spite governments forcing different groups to share uncommon ground. Although there are a lot of different ethnicities and nationalities living in the same place, which should boost globalization, it can have an extreme opposite effect. As evidenced throughout history in Europe with the Holocaust as well as racism against African Americans in America, just because people are living in the same country does not automatically mean they will have the same ideals and vote for the same parties or root for the same teams. Soccer successfully demonstrates this on a smaller scale where different people root for different teams within one city. Especially in England and the rest of the European Union where there are multiple teams for one state, which different people root for and leads people to fight against each other, even with things as simple as sports.

            Foer’s take on globalization through the example of soccer captures the idea of how globalization may be occurring but having the opposite effect of what leaders may have expected. It has raised completion on and off fields between states to be the best and strongest team that there is. Soccer is a microcosm of what the world of international relations is really like.

China's Manipulation

China and It’s Manipulated Currency

                         As has been discussed in class, countries can choose a variety of ways in which they determine the value of their currency.  A country may chose a fixed rate system to be sure of the value of its currency at any given time and have the ability to predict what that value may be in the near future. Yet this plan lacks flexibility and the ability to adopt any kind of monetary policy. A country may also choose a flexible rate system; allowing their currency to float on the open market. No matter what the choice is, the value of a country’s currency and the price of their domestic goods abroad and the price of their imports will highly depend on which system they choose and how that system determines the value. While most countries let their currency float in the market and adapt to the changes in depreciation and appreciation, some countries do not. There has been a lot of criticism coming from the international community towards China. Many say that China is flip=flopping between systems and using other means of manipulating its currency in order to gain a favorable trade advantage in the world.

            People may ask, “What is the advantage of China having a low-valued currency?”  The answer is that, with a depreciated currency, Chinese-made goods will cost less (and sell more) in foreign countries ultimately making them more money and allowing them to obtain a very high trade surplus. Yet how does China keep its currency at such a low value? Doesn’t it float on the open market? Shouldn’t it naturally change and increase as they gain more and more of a trade surplus? The answer is that China uses the money it makes from its exports to buy foreign currencies (mostly U.S. dollars) and keep them in higher demand, thus making them worth more. In addition, China’s currency is pegged to the U.S. dollar. So, as China continues to drive the value of the dollar up, the value of its own currency will be relatively less. China can thus keep their currency at a desired value simply by buying U.S. dollars.

There continues to be criticism of China’s monetary policy in the international community. It has come to the forefront of many political debates both here in the U.S. and across the globe. While there may not be any way to take direct action yet, it is time for world leaders to come together and hold China accountable for the way they have continuously manipulated their currency in order to gain and hold an unfair advantage over international trade. There must be a mechanism put in place that allows the IMF to take swift and decisive action to stop these kinds of policies.            

Comparative Advantage

With regards to the idea of countries having a comparative advantage, it is extremely important for countries to specialize in what they are comparatively good at it in order to maximize production and increase production and consumption (Lecture). However another thing to consider is the fact that just because a country can produce certain products at cheaper costs does not mean that it will benefit their specific country, it would only benefit the consumers.  

            According to the US Bureau Labor Statistics, the United States currently has a comparative advantage in agricultural products and processed food, and high-tech manufacturing. When thinking about why certain countries have comparative advantages in certain products things to consider are is it a result of not having free trade, do they have better production strategies, or is it a result of cheap labor. In the case for the US it is a result of not having agricultural free trade as well as efficient ways of production. These aspects are important to consider because for example in countries like Japan where labor laws are not a prominent focus and t-shirts can be cheaper to produce because they are not paying their citizens a decent wage.

            The US Bureau Labor Statistics also mentions that the US has a global comparative advantage because we have the ability to produce so many products in our country and still sell them here. Americans want American-made products, they are high in demand and we have a comparative advantage in that aspect as a result the amount of goods exported surpass that of the goods that are imported which aids significantly in the success of the American economy.  In addition to this, the US is fortunate to have the benefit of being a good seller of financial assets which will go a long way in benefitting the country in the future. This will benefit the United State’s future because these financial assets are foreign assets.

            There has been constant discussion on the rise in China and the comparative advantage that they have because of the fact that they are able to develop a great deal of products at a quick rate for such a cheap price. China is able to export a significant amount of products and make a profit because of this, which is aiding in their success. However, though they have an advantage with the development of their products, unlike the United States, China does not have the ability to have as much of an internal surplus selling to their citizens because it is still in the process of developing.

            The notion of the benefits of the topic of comparative advantage is questionable just because of the fact that some countries can win significantly in this process and others may lose. Hypothetically speaking, comparative advantage can be extremely prosperous because everyone is producing what they are best at. However since trade is international, there is no international government, as a result there are not any specific rules for how to produce products ie there are no international labor laws. Also as seen in this article, though the US has stricter labor laws than China, we still have the dominance with production/ selling of products.

"What Are the U.S. and China's Current Comparative Advantages?" China Global Trade. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.chinaglobaltrade.com/article/us-and-china-current-comparative-advantages>.

Nuclear Weapons

Matt MiChael

GVPT200

Blog Post

Nuclear Weapons

            For the last few decades, nuclear weapons have been up for debate. It all started during world WWII with the race to build these destructive weapons. Throughout the years the mere existence of these weapons have caused fear and misery in the hearts of many defenseless countries. Even now, there is a divide between countries who have nuclear weapons and those who do not. Nuclear weapons are by far a threat to the survival of the human race. Nuclear weapons should be disarmed due to its political injustice and the danger it presents to people.

            The presence of nuclear weapons promotes coercion between certain countries. Countries use nuclear weapons as a deterrence to prevent other countries to undertake an action. Deterrence strategies consist of having the ability to use force. Nuclear weapons give certain countries this power to haunt over their adversaries. Sometimes these “adversaries” are nothing more than countries that have no means of defending themselves are forced to comply because they feel they have no other choice. This belittles countries preventing them from ever becoming a great power. While using deterrence to prevent countries from taking certain unwanted actions, compellence is also used to force another country to take certain actions. These countries with nuclear weapons use their power to force other countries to do certain actions they want to occur. The fear surrounding nuclear weapons allows countries that are armed to get away with many more things compared to other countries. The United States is one of five countries that are deemed a nuclear weapon zone. Much fear resides with other countries and the U.S. because of what the U.S. is capable of doing. This is why countries tend to be allies of the United States rather than enemies. When the United States presents sanctions against countries the rest of the world are more likely to agree. In 2012, the United States proposed sanction of Eritrea due to their possible aid to Somalia militants. Afterwards, the United Nations backed the United States with sanctions leaving a defenseless country in a state of even more political and economic instability. Where is the justice in targeting a country that cannot defend itself in ways others can?

            The use of nuclear weapons was clearly seen during WWII by the United States. The attacks on Japan at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were an insightful viewing of how dangerous these weapons are. These attacks killed and injured hundreds of thousands of people. The impact of a nuclear bomb can be felt for years after it explodes, as the radiation and gases can continue to make people sick. Nuclear weapons are the deadliest weapons to have ever been created. Total disarmament is necessary to preserve life, as we know it. If nuclear weapons were launched in one of today’s modern cities such as New York, Los Angeles, London, etc. millions of lives would be lost instantaneously. This should provide a clear understanding of how devastating nuclear weapons are in the world.