Textual Essay - Option 2

In Amartya Sen’s argument, it is believed that globalization is helping decrease poverty lines and the injustice of inequality between the two social classes of the poor and rich. With this idealism of globalization, a point of wrong judgment is lighted upon the poor. It is perceived in Sen’s article that the poor are rising from the rages to the riches slowly and passively. However, my argument contradicts the thoughts of Sen’s argument. My argument is that the impecunious countries and their people are not indulging of any kind from the beneficiary of globalization. If anything, I am asserting that there is an unfairness between the two social classes causing a great inequality between them.

Within Sen’s article, he illustrates the idealism of global interdependence, the greatness of globalization and its effects on the social classes, global justice, global arrangements, inequality, and the fair sharing of global opportunities. Within his article, Sen (2002) argues that globalization is essentially not seen as an issue due to the means that the poor are gaining from it. However, he stresses that the thought process that the benefits of globalization is not spread fairly throughout the world. The benefits of the “high technology In the world of 1000 A.D. included paper, the printing press, the crossbow, gun powder, and the rotary fan were items used extensively in China and were practically unknown elsewhere. Globalization spread them across the world, including Europe.” (Sen, 2002, p. 17) However, dating back to 1000 A.D. and comparing it to today’s benefits we see a difference in the benefits of globalization and the spread of it. For example in Africa, there is a lack of technological progress seen within their society. Amongst, the technological progression not seen, the benefits of natural health care is not seen also which leads into the argument of inequality.