It started in a calm classroom when our professor, Dr. Imtiaz from the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, gave us a presentation on globalization, explaining both its advantages and disadvantages. At first, globalization sounded like a positive idea. It was described as a bridge between countries, making the world smaller and more connected. Famous scholar Marshall McLuhan called this world a “Global Village.” Countries were linked through trade, culture, politics, and technology. Everything seemed closer than ever before.

After this lecture, I decided to read the book Globalization and Its Discontents by Joseph Stiglitz. I thought the book would only talk about the benefits of globalization. However, as I started reading, my thinking slowly changed.

Stiglitz accepts that globalization has brought many benefits. After World War II, countries created international institutions to avoid future wars and improve economic growth. Big companies started working in many countries, creating jobs. People moved from one country to another in search of work. The IT revolution connected people across the world through the internet and technology. Trade agreements and economic projects promised development and prosperity. From the outside, globalization looked like a great success.

But Stiglitz asks an important question.Did globalization help everyone equally, or only a few powerful countries?

The book takes a serious turn when Stiglitz talks about the dark side of globalization. One important event discussed is the Battle of Seattle in 1999, when people protested outside a World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting. These protesters were not against progress or global connection. They were angry because globalization had caused job losses, environmental damage, climate problems, and refugee crises. While rich countries became richer, many poor countries became poorer. At this point, globalization no longer felt like a happy idea; it became a painful reality for many people.

Stiglitz explains globalization through four main areas.First is political globalization, where countries and organizations like the United Nations and the European Union work together.
Second is economic globalization, which includes trade agreements, multinational companies, labor migration, and global markets.
Third is cultural globalization, where Western culture, movies, fashion, and lifestyle spread across the world.
Fourth is military globalization, where countries form defense alliances like NATO.

These four forces changed the world deeply, but the benefits were not shared fairly.

The book also explains how problems in one country can affect the whole world. Events like the 2008 global financial crisis, the Arab Spring, and Brexit showed how connected the world has become. A crisis in one place quickly spreads to others. Even powerful countries started feeling unhappy with globalization. The rise of “America First” policies under Donald Trump showed that even people in developed countries felt left behind.

A major focus of the book is the role of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Stiglitz strongly criticizes the IMF for using the same economic rules for every country. During the East Asian Crisis of 1997, the IMF forced countries to cut spending and open markets quickly, which made their economies worse. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, strict IMF policies caused poverty and unrest, allowing strong authoritarian leaders to take control. During the 2008 crisis, the IMF admitted it could not help all countries at once. These examples show that global institutions often ignore local conditions.

Despite all this criticism, Stiglitz does not say globalization should end. Instead, he says it should be managed better. He suggests that economic policies should be based on each country’s needs. International institutions should be more democratic and fair. Rich countries should help poor countries fight poverty, unemployment, and climate change.

After finishing the book, I thought again about Dr. Imtiaz lecture. I understood that globalization is neither completely good nor completely bad. It is a strong force. If controlled by powerful nations only, it can harm others. But if managed fairly, it can help unite the world. Globalization and Its Discontents teaches us that globalization should serve people not control them.