This will take place Monday 22 October, 6-8pm in Room OC.108.

Why historians don’t agree with social scientists on what globalisation is? Who opposes globalization and who think instead that it is innately ‘good’? And why is it such a loaded term? Is globalization another aspect of westernization?

1. Key Readings

Please read

William H. McNeill, ‘Afterword: World History and Globalization’, in A. G. Hopkins, Global History: Interactions between the universal and the local (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2006), pp. 285-90.

David Held, et. Alt, Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, and Culture (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999), introduction*. [JZ1308.G59]

2. Definitions of Globalization

Work in pairs. Please Choose one scholar (each pair a different one; use the forum to divide the work) from this list

Arjun Appadurai; Zygmunt Bauman; Ulrich Beck; Peter Dicken; Anthony Giddens; David Held; Paul Hirst and Grahame Thompson; Jan A. Scholte, or any other scholar you might wish to consider.

- How does he define globalization?

- Does he think it is good or bad?

- When does he think globalization start?

Please post a 200-word summary by Sunday night and be prepared to present at the Monday lecture.