Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Journal home page:
https://inscience.uz/index.php/socinov/index
Globalization as a factor of international development
Farhod NAZAROV
1
Samarkand branch of the Republican center for spirituality and enlightenment
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received May 2021
Received in revised form
28 May 2022
Accepted 20 June 2022
Available online
25 July 2022
The article describes that the objective process of the
development of the world community is globalization, through
which a complex multi-level system of socio-economic relations
is formed. As part of this phenomenon, there is a significant
increase in political, socio-economic, informational and cultural
interrelations of countries around the world. In the political
context, globalization or so-called
“
mondialism
”
seeks to
establish supranational institutions of governance
–
a single
world government. In the economic sense, globalization
embodies the process of formation of an interconnected
monolithic global economy, a single market for goods, capital
and services. Thus, globalization is understood as the historical
process of unification of all spheres of human life, primarily a
change in the structure of the world economy, and understood
as a close interweaving of the subjects of the world economy on
the basis of internationalization, transnationalization and
liberalization, connected with each other by a system of political
relations. Consequently, capitalism, as a social system and an
ideology that calls for an increase in capital and obtaining super
profits, occupies a central place in this social process and the
trend of world development.
2181-
1415/©
2022 in Science LLC.
https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415-vol3-iss6/S-pp226-232
This is an open access article under the Attribution 4.0 International
(CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ru)
Keywords:
globalization,
economy,
politics,
enlightenment,
development,
revolution,
capitalism,
spirituality.
Globallashuv xalqaro rivojlanish omili sifatida
ANNOTATSIYA
Kalit so‘zlar
:
globallashuv,
iqtisodiyot,
siyosat,
ma’rifat,
taraqqiyot,
Maqolada jahon hamjamiyati rivojlanishining obyektiv
jarayoni globallashuv bo‘lib, u orqali murakkab ko‘p bosqichli
ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy munosabatlar tizimi shakllantirilishi haqida
fikr yuritiladi. Ushbu hodisaning bir qismi sifatida butun dunyo
mamlakatlarining siyosiy, ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy, axborot va
1
Head of the Samarkand branch of the Republican center for spirituality and enlightenment.
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Special Issue
–
06 (2022) / ISSN 2181-1415
227
inqilob,
kapitalizm,
ma’naviyat.
madaniy o‘zaro aloqalarida sezilarli o‘sish kuzatilmoqda.
Siyosiy kontekstda globallashuv yoki “mondializm” deb
ataluvchi davlat boshqaruvining milliy institutlarini
–
yagona
jahon hukumatini tashkil etishga harakat qilinadi. Iqtisodiy
ma’noda globallashuv o‘zaro bog‘langan monolit global
iqtisodiyotni, tovarlar, kapital va xizmatlarning yagona bozorini
shakllantirish jarayonini o‘zida mujassam etadi. Shunday qilib,
globallashuv deganda, inson hayotining barcha sohalarini
birlashtirishning tarixiy jarayoni, birinchi navbatda, jahon
iqtisodiyoti tarkibidagi o‘zgarishlar tushuniladi, xalqaro
transmilliylashuv va liberallashuv asosida jahon xo‘jaligi
subyektlarining bir-biri bilan siyosiy munosabatlar tizimi orqali
chambarchas bog‘liqligi anglashiladi. Binobarin, kapitalizm
ijtimoiy tizim va kapitalni ko‘paytirishga hamda
super foyda
olishga chaqiruvchi mafkura sifatida ushbu ijtimoiy jarayon va
jahon taraqqiyot tendensiyasida markaziy o‘rinni egallaydi.
Глобализация как фактор международного развития
АННОТАЦИЯ
Ключевые слова:
глобализация,
экономика,
политика,
просвещение,
развитие,
революция,
капитализм,
духовность.
В статье описывается, что объективным процессом
развития мирового сообщества является глобализация,
посредством
которой
формируется
сложная
многоуровневая
система
социально
-
экономических
отношений. В рамках этого явления происходит
значительное
усиление
политических,
социально
-
экономических,
информационных
и
культурных
взаимосвязей стран всего мира. В политическом контексте
глобализация или так называемый «мондиализм»
стремится к установлению наднациональных институтов
управления –
единого мирового правительства. В
экономическом смысле глобализация воплощает в себе
процесс формирования взаимосвязанной монолитной
мировой экономики, единого рынка товаров, капитала и
услуг. Таким образом, под глобализацией понимается
исторический процесс объединения всех сфер жизни
человека, прежде всего изменение структуры мирового
хозяйства, понимаемое как тесное переплетение субъектов
мирового хозяйства на основе интернационализации,
транснационализации и либерализации, связанные друг с
другом системой политических отношений. Следовательно,
капитализм как общественный строй и идеология,
призывающая к увеличению капитала и получению
сверхприбылей, занимает центральное место в этом
общественном процессе и тенденции мирового развития.
INTRODUCTION
The globalization of the world economy has been studied and continues to be
actively studied by scientists of different schools and directions. It is generally accepted
that it was Karl Marx who first introduced the concept of
“
globalization
”
into literature,
but in the 19th century. the term was used in the sense of
“
intense international trade
”
.
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Special Issue
–
06 (2022) / ISSN 2181-1415
228
Based on the worldview of the universalism of the Enlightenment, Marx developed the
idea of the emergence of a global system of capitalism, and then, through the proletarian
revolution, the utopia of turning humanity into a single global civil society without a state
–
communism [1]. This utopia did not come true, the Soviet ruling elite took the path of
building communism in a single country, despite the opposition of orthodox Marxists.
LITERATURE REVIEW
More than a hundred years before the start of globalization as an active phase in
the development of capitalism, K. Marx gave an exhaustive analysis of this phenomenon.
The key aspect of Marx's teaching was the description of the immanently chaotic nature
of capitalism, which is largely subject to crises and instability. He argued that the
relentless pursuit of profit would sooner or later force companies to automate jobs and
start producing more and more goods, while reducing the wages of workers until they
could finally buy the products of their labor. Companies produce a lot until there is no-
one left to buy their products.
Thinking about overproduction led Marx to predict what is now called
“
globalization
”
–
the spread of capitalism around the world in search of new markets for
products. Marx wrote:
“
The constant need to expand the market for the sale of products
drives the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe
”
. He not only accurately
predicted what happened in the 20th century, he also explained the reason for this
phenomenon: the constant search for new markets and cheap labor, as well as the
constant need for natural resources, are animals that need to be continuously fed [2].
V. Lenin developed the teachings of Marx and subsequently formulated the theory of
imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism. He described the incessant competition
between capitalists and, as a result, the centralization of capital, which, after the merging of
banki
ng capital with industry, forms “financial capital” capable of challenging the existing
world order and starting a new redistribution of the territories of the whole world.
Moreover, Lenin created a theory of uneven development under capitalism, describing the
predatory and aggressive policy of finance capital. The political elite and the capitalist class,
according to the theory, firmly secured the right to hyper-exploit the labor force and extract
super-profits from the colonies [3]. Without delving into the philosophical meaning of the
concept, which generates many contradictions, we can conclude that this theory foresaw
some of the phenomena observed in the modern world economy. It should be emphasized
that this theory formed the basis of the modern neo-Marxist understanding of globalization
and had a significant impact on the world-systems approach.
One of the first modern scientists to study the main processes of globalization was
the American economist Theodore Levitt. Thanks to his article
“
Globalization of Markets
”
,
written in 1983, the term
“
globalization
”
is firmly entrenched in the lexicon of modern
scientists. Levitt claims that by the end of the 20th century. global markets have reached
previously unimaginable magnitudes. Within the new economic reality, corporations are
looking to capitalize on this through huge savings in the production, distribution,
management and marketing stages. Thus, by lowering the prices of goods and services,
corporations gain the opportunity to get rid of their competitors in the market.
Therefore, large corporations are focusing on globally standardized products that have a
low price, instead of products made for certain consumers. T. Levitt predicts that the
structure of preferences is “homogenizing”, and the modern world is moving towards
merging into a single community [4].
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Special Issue
–
06 (2022) / ISSN 2181-1415
229
The British scientist and one of the founders of the theory of cultural globalization
Roland Robertson, on the contrary, believes that those corporations that produce and sell
their goods on a global scale are forced to adapt their products to certain local market
conditions. Robertson introduced the term
“
glocalization
”
, that is, the process of
coexistence of regional features and characteristics against the backdrop of the
development of mass global culture. Consequently, globalization is developing in two
directions simultaneously: impressive integration processes and the formation of a single
dominant global ideology are taking place at the level of world elites, and complete
archaization and the loss of any kind of universalism are taking place at the regional
level. According to Robertson, this process is ambiguous and can lead to the creation of a
global society as well as provoke the development of a completely “new barbarism”,
“archaism”, “regionalism” and “locality” [5].
Daniel Bell, an American sociologist and publicist, has proposed a completely
different approach to globalization. The concept of a post-industrial society, described by
D. Bell in his book
“
The Coming Post-Industrial Society
”
in 1972, is perhaps the most
authoritative and well-known concept at the moment. Within the framework of this
theory, Bell showed the development of society as a transition between three stages
–
pre-industrial, industrial and post-industrial societies. The basis of each stage is the
dominant type of production
–
agriculture, industry and services. Bell identifies three
technological revolutions that have served as the strongest impetus for the development
of mankind. The first technological revolution was the invention of the steam engine in
the 18th century. and the subsequent Industrial Revolution, which swept through all the
advanced countries of Europe and America. The impetus for the beginning of the second
technological revolution was the scientific and technological achievements in the field of
chemistry and electricity. And, finally, the creation of computers and further mass
informatization became the cause of the third technological revolution. A distinctive
feature of the post-industrial society is the primacy of knowledge, not property. D. Bell
wrote: “If over the past hundred years the main figures were the entrepre
neur,
businessman, head of an industrial enterprise, today the “new people” are scientists,
mathematicians, economists and other representatives of the new intellectual
technology” [6].
METHODOLOGY & EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS
Alvin Toffler, a no less famous American sociologist and philosopher, one of the
authors of the concept of a post-industrial society, actually completes Bell
’
s theory,
believing that a post-industrial (information) society will become the basis for the
prosperity of all mankind in the future. Toffler focuses on the presence of a key product
inherent in a particular technological wave, the possession of which is a priority for the
state. In the periods of Antiquity and the Middle Ages, land (agrarian society) was a
similar product. In the industrial age
–
raw materials and markets for products. The third
technological wave is characterized by the availability of information as the highest
value, and the
“
knowledge economy
”
–
the highest stage of development of the post-
industrial (information) society. Toffler made remarkable predictions, many of which
have already become reality [7].
Speaking of globalization, it is impossible to ignore Immanuel Wallerstein, a
talented American sociologist, political scientist and philosopher, a follower of the neo-
Marxist concept of the theoretical interpretation of globalization. Wallerstein is the
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Special Issue
–
06 (2022) / ISSN 2181-1415
230
founder of the most widely used version of world-systems analysis. According to
Wallerstein, the formation of the capitalist system was originally a global and world-wide
process, so globalization is at least five hundred years old. This system consisted of three
zones: core, periphery and semi-periphery. The core was the countries of Western
Europe, later also the countries of North America, in which the rapid development of
capitalism took place. It should be noted that capitalism is a colonial phenomenon in its
essence, as it is based on a global division of labor: cheap or free resources, including
human (slaves), are concentrated on the periphery, and the beneficiaries are in the core.
Countries of the semi-periphery, not as dependent on the core as the countries of the
periphery, but less independent than the countries of the core. From the 16th century,
that is, from the moment of the emergence of capitalism, to the present, the world system
has changed little. The core developed through the exploitation of the periphery under
various pretexts
–
from direct colonization and the slave trade to the modern economic,
social and political exploitation by the rich North of the poor South. Currently,
industrialized countries are headed by representatives of the industrial and financial
oligarchy, who are aware that their very existence, as well as enrichment, security and
continuity are directly related to maintaining the global system of capitalism [10].
In the XX century. the world system has reached the limits of its development, and
there is no more room for further expansion. This means that world capitalism is on the
verge of historical extinction: it arose under certain historical conditions and reached the
limit in the implementation of its model. The liberal ideology that was its basis dissipates
in the absence of a large-scale ideological alternative (which for a long time was
communism). Wallerstein states: “The
structural limitations of the process of endless
accumulation of capital that governs our world have reached the bow of the ship and now
act as a functional brake. They create a chaotic situation. Fifty years from this chaos, a
new order will emerge.” Mod
ern globalization, therefore, is not the beginning of a new
process, but the end and completion of the old one. How the “era of transition” will end,
Wallerstein does not specify, admitting: “We are face to face with uncertainty” [11].
Samuel Huntington, an American sociologist and political scientist, the author of
the concept of the ethno-cultural division of civilizations, also does not make any specific
predictions, but declares with some confidence about the upcoming confrontations. The
author identified several dominant world civilizations: European (including North
American), Orthodox, Islamic, Confucian, Hindu, Latin American and African; which have
specific features in the first place
–
culture. By a clear example, the author proved that
cultural and religious differences in the conflicts of civilizations play a more important
role than ideological and economic ones. Therefore, societies that are united by ideology,
but historically divided culturally, disintegrate, as happened with Yugoslavia and the
Soviet Union. Consequently, culturally similar countries are most likely to cooperate
politically and economically. Huntington attaches great importance to economic
globalization, which is the basis of the power of one or another
“
core
”
state or group of
states. Globalization, according to the political scientist, leads to the weakening of a
particular nation-state, but at the same time strengthens
“
civilizational self-awareness
”
(belonging of peoples and nation-states to a certain civilizational model). He drew
attention to the total hegemony of European civilization. Western policy, expanding its
expansion, covering more and more spheres of public life, gives rise to aggression by
non-Western civilizations trying to maintain their positions. Of course, within the
framework of the world order under consideration, the “war of civilizations” becomes
truly irreversible [12].
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Special Issue
–
06 (2022) / ISSN 2181-1415
231
RESULTS
At its core, modern globalization has a neoliberal European-American trend and is
developing in the interests of a few developed countries and transnational corporations.
The process of globalization and the strengthening of the role of TNCs lead to an
unprecedented and merciless increase in inequality everywhere, exacerbate the
environmental situation in the world, encourage international institutions to interfere in
the internal affairs of sovereign states, and much more. In this regard, the movements of
anti-globalists, who oppose globalization in general, and alter-globalists, who reject
neoliberal globalization and the global power of transnational capital and uphold the
principles of social justice and the protection of the cultural identity of the peoples of the
whole world, are becoming widespread. Such world-famous scientists as Joseph Stiglitz
and Noam Chomsky openly declare the dangers of globalization processes on the stage of
the World Social Forum, created in opposition to the World Economic Forum in Davos,
offering an alternative model for the development of globalization. It is a rare case today
when representatives of the American intellectual elite do not share the opinion of the
Western ruling nomenklatura. Stiglitz criticizes
“
market fundamentalism
”
and the policy
of the Washington Consensus, believes that the conditions imposed by the IMF on the
client country cause only economic disasters and do not contribute to economic growth
at all, and the liberalization of international trade proceeds exclusively in the interests of
a small number of transnational corporations. Globalization, Stiglitz notes, requires
global collective interaction. However, in order to achieve social justice and reduce the
gap between developed and developing countries, it is necessary to establish cooperation
in a completely new format, where there is no dictatorship of international financial
capital [13]. However, such sentiments are not widespread and are not capable of
challenging the current world order. Globalization, as before, is neoliberal and Western in
nature, allowing a certain group of subjects of the world economy to develop
successfully, and others to fight for survival.
CONCLUSIONS
Thus, in whatever direction globalization develops, objectively it is an inevitable
and irreversible process. In addition, at the end of the 20th century, the phenomenon of
globalization gave rise to the so-
called “global economy” as a new historical reality and
the current stage of the evolution of international economic relations, expressed in the
transition from a set of national economies interconnected by the exchange of
manufactured goods to the interpenetration of all economic entities and their
interdependence with each other. from a friend internationally. Unfortunately, in such
conditions, the negative trends of modern globalization only continue to worsen.
Globalization and the modern world order have a predatory expansionist nature, and,
perhaps, only not all of them, having rethought their mission and developed a viable and
viable ideology, can bring into this world certain social and moral guidelines that can
balance the modern world system.
REFERENCES:
1.
Ergashev I.I. (2017). Features of evaluation of investment attractiveness of
service enterprises. In The Fourteenth International Conference on Economic Sciences
(PP. 102
–
105).
2.
Khotambekovna E.M. (2021). Systematic Analysis of Education. ResearchJet
Journal of Analysis and Inventions, 2(07), 85
–
96.
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Special Issue
–
06 (2022) / ISSN 2181-1415
232
3.
Rizaev I.I. (2019). Evolutionary mechanisms of self-organization of the social
system. Scientific Bulletin of Namangan State University, 1(9), 81
–
86.
4.
Husan M. (2022). Dialectics of Potentiality and Virtuality in Space and
TIME. European Scholar Journal, 3(1), 40
–
42.
5.
Khayitboy K., & Ilhom R. (2020). The impact of liberalization on the
development of the social system. International Engineering Journal For Research &
Development, 5(3), 4
–
4.
6.
Эргашева
М.Х. (2022). Таълимда инновацион ғоялар кириб келишидаги
хаотик жараёнлар ҳамда таълим тизимида аттрактор омили.
Философия и жизнь
международный журнал, (SI
-1).
7.
Ганиев
К., & Ризаев
И.И. (2021). Конструктивные и деструктивные аспекты
либерализации социальной системы: философский подход.
Вестник Прикамского
социального института, (2 (89)), 156–
162.
8.
Каримов
Б.Р., & Тураев
Б.О. (1985). Научное предвидение как высшая
форма опережающего отражения действительности.
/
Предвидение как форма
научного познания.
9.
Сафаров
А.И., & Ризаев
И.И. (2021). Возможности и перспективы
экотуризма в Узбекистане. In
Экономика и управление гостеприимством
территории
(PP. 123
–
127).
10.
Шодиев
Р.Т., Кушакова
Н. Философские концепции соотношения языка и
мышления //Философия в современном мире. –
2017.
–
С. 261–
267.
11.
Alikulov X., Haqqulov N.Q. Spiritual maturity and philosophical thinking
dependence of development // ISJ Theoretical & Applied Science 04(84) 2020. Pages:
164
–
167.
12.
Ҳаққулов
Н.Қ. Сиддиқий
-
Ажзий
маърифатпарварлик қарашларида
миллий толерантлик масаласи // НамДУ илмий ахборотномаси –
Научный вестник
НамГУ. –
2020.
–
№10. –Б.
296
–
302.
13.
Xaqqulov N.Q. Perfect generation
–
personality of private education and
humanity facilities //
«МИРОВАЯ НАУКА»
международное электорнное научно
-
практическое периодческое издание. –
2019.
–
№2(23). –
С.
62
–
63.
14.
Сафаров
А.И., Хаккулов
Н.К. Свойственные качества совершенному
человеку в суфизме //
Современная наука как социально
-
политический фактор
развития
государства:
материалы
международной
научно
-
практической
конференции (10 мая 2019г., Москва) Отв. ред. Зарайский
А.А.
–
Издательство ЦПМ
«Академия Бизнеса», Саратов 2019. –
С. 48–
50.
15.
Ҳаққулов
Н.Қ. Сиддиқий
-
Ажзийнинг ижтимоий
-
фалсафий қарашлари
//
Falsafa va Hayot |
Философия и Жизнь || Philosophy and Life. –
2020.
–
№SI
-2.
–
Б.
162
–
171.
