Carney's Views And Hyperglobalist Perspective
for financial stability, it may already be too late.” (“Bank of England’s Carney”, 2015). By analyzing the article through three contrasting globalization theories, it is clear that Mark Carney’s views compare with the hyperglobalist perspective. Hyperglobalists believe there is a new age of history coming and is entirely new. The article speaks on the fear of climate change negatively affecting global stability. The effects of climate change can be considered this “New Age”. It is unprecedented because the exact level or rate of negative effect climate change will have on the planet cannot be accurately predicted. Climate change will affect the planet as a whole physically and financially. Hyperglobalists argue that the world economy
is borderless, meaning there is only one global market operating with the help of trade, finance, and production. Along with the market, the power of nation-states begin to lessen because climate change affects every area at different rates. This was a hyperglobalist argument made by Ohmae, stating “nation-states have become unnatural, even impossible, units in the global economy” (Ohmae, 1995, p.5). Ohmae argues that globalization is not an individual issue. No form of government was mentioned in the article, as climate change is seen as a global issue that cannot be fixed by one sole government and rather humans play a larger role. The hyperglobalist perspective addresses the need for erosion of nation-states and need for new forms of government, similar to how Carney addresses that the current generation is pushing the climate issues onto the next and needs to take a stand. This also relates to Held’s hyperglobalist argument that globalization is nothing less than a “fundamental reconfiguration of the framework of human action” (Held et al., 1999, p. 5). The manner in which inhabitants treat Earth has a direct correlation with the effects of climate change, comparable to the hyperglobalist theory that the manner in which humans act has a direct correlation with the effects on globalization. Both climate change and globalization are seen are inevitable, but there are precautions to take in order to ensure positive results. Although the article can be analyzed through the hyperglobalist theory of globalization, there is no set definition for this perspective and can be interpreted slightly in different ways.
is borderless, meaning there is only one global market operating with the help of trade, finance, and production. Along with the market, the power of nation-states begin to lessen because climate change affects every area at different rates. This was a hyperglobalist argument made by Ohmae, stating “nation-states have become unnatural, even impossible, units in the global economy” (Ohmae, 1995, p.5). Ohmae argues that globalization is not an individual issue. No form of government was mentioned in the article, as climate change is seen as a global issue that cannot be fixed by one sole government and rather humans play a larger role. The hyperglobalist perspective addresses the need for erosion of nation-states and need for new forms of government, similar to how Carney addresses that the current generation is pushing the climate issues onto the next and needs to take a stand. This also relates to Held’s hyperglobalist argument that globalization is nothing less than a “fundamental reconfiguration of the framework of human action” (Held et al., 1999, p. 5). The manner in which inhabitants treat Earth has a direct correlation with the effects of climate change, comparable to the hyperglobalist theory that the manner in which humans act has a direct correlation with the effects on globalization. Both climate change and globalization are seen are inevitable, but there are precautions to take in order to ensure positive results. Although the article can be analyzed through the hyperglobalist theory of globalization, there is no set definition for this perspective and can be interpreted slightly in different ways.