Yes, the definition of "globalization" is very important.
As the word is being used now (pro or con), referring to economic
cooperation and outsourcing to foreign countries, this does not
require much long term movement of individuals: 1) technical and
business standards are converging; 2) easy long distance
transportation allow the persons involved to maintain close personal
contact with their home country, reducing the establishment of such
with the natives of the country to which they are assigned - now
probably for a shorter period than in the past.
Foreign trade in earlier centuries - English, Dutch, Spanish and
Portuguese - was also a form of globalization and certainly led to
mixing of races: SE Asia, western and South Africa, the Americas;
also Chinese, Arabian and Indian trade.
This led to colonization and more mixing, as did the slave trade.
If you want to go further back in history, the spread of Islam and the
Crusades played a role.
Once different races (however you want to define them) live in the
same area, there will eventually be mixing. It is a question of what
moves the most people. I don't think that the globalization that
ATTAC is worried about is a significant factor.
http://www.attac.org/indexen/ |