Explain how international exchange and consumption of goods contributes to violence in society. Address how the global flow of commodities impacts human suffering. Remember to theorize/conceptualize this issue and provide potential solutions.
Intra and inter-state conflict and violence are internationally prevalent conditions in which business across all levels whether in domestic and international level, must frequently operate. These conditions are however more pronounced in some states especially in the developing states as compared to the developed countries. The rubric for violence includes violent crimes, inter-group conflicts and poverty in general due to all these conflicts. Sometimes businesses are the causal agents and promoters of violence in the society and this imposes more suffering on the human race. Large populations of inhabitants living in the so-called modern lifestyle are involved in and are responsible for driving violence within the society through the consumption and material reliance on the international exchange system. Structural violence is one of the concepts that have been established to explain the social arrangements that often put the citizens and their societies along harm’s ways. This paper therefore, will discuss and illustrate how the international exchange and consumption of goods promotes structural violence in the society and how this violence impacts human suffering. Globalization is universally believed to be the primary source of development but at times it proves otherwise. Living in a perfect universe violence that affects the wellness of the society would not be a problem that one would ever have to reflect about. This is not, however, different and more complex due to the increasing globalization that has resulted in increased exchange and consumption of commodities. In this context, violence has to be dealt with on daily basis but it is, however, preventable (Srikantia, 2016). It is very unfortunate that today, there are more cases of violence that globalization and commodities flow has created that did not exist before. One of such theory of violence that has been developed by the increased flow of goods being structural violence. Structural violence generally is an indication of violence that develops due to social structures that deprive individual the basic necessitates thus, exposing them to harm.
This kind of violence in the international market is present when the social arrangements established and put in place by one group of people or country enable harms for a different group of society while marginalizing the capacity of the harmed society to transform those arrangements in ways that make them powerful and successful. In this case, only one side of the party is more advantaged than the other group and the success of this group is enact social arrangements that accumulate harm on the other party as they themselves accumulate advantage.
According to Reeves, 2015, he argues that structural power, as well as structural violence, is an important subject in the use of economic statecraft in any given country. He uses China to explain how its dependence on economic exchange to secure its premeditated ends in Kyrgyzstan has to lead to an asymmetric economic exchange between the two countries. This has thus enhanced China to gain more influence over Kyrgyzstan’s domestic structures. The structural power within Chin promotes violence across the other nation’s structure of the economy, environment and more so on its society and their social relations. This, therefore, has to lead to structural violence within Kyrgyzstan which effect in edge unsteadiness and domestic insecurity for China state (Reeves 2015).
Structural violence is central to the current global capitalist system since it is the only way of offering resources accessible for the expropriation at an extent and rate at which they are presently being consumed. This global capitalist is not only dependent on severe violence but it also structures the violence while the societies with minimal or no influence over structural power networks within the worldwide system may be subject to displacement and suffering of those. However, those with great influence in structural power networks can often expropriate wide range of resources through involving and joining together in violence with impunity (Jessica 2016).
Globalization has thus increased the rate at which international exchange and consumption of goods they occur and this has resulted to increase in structural violence thus silencing societies through this violence and exclusion from the core decisions that affect the society’s survival. It is thus evident that there is the coming together of interests, principles, institutions, and actors who get together and violence against the society is to further economic development and globalization (Jessica 2016).
The increasing exchange and consumption of commodities in the globalized world have resulted in structural violence since certain populace consume goods entirely for at the cost of another populace. In that, the less developed countries are denied access to basic resources and commodities due to the presence of the authoritative administration from the powerful nations. Structural violence is highly common today as globalization has progressed to ensure that the universe is reduced to a single market (Srikantia, 2016). This permits exchanging of commodities for consumption in different societies. However, this exchange is not very pleasing because it results in inequality against those societies that are perceived as inferior.
The severity of structural violence lies on the fact that the arrangements which occur socially lead the population to harm. The organization, therefore, becomes structural because it is grounded upon political as well as the economic arrangement of the society. The violence, therefore, comes from the fact that they lead to harm to individuals mainly not those that are involved in controlling supplies and exchange (Srikantia, 2016). In globalization, the violence is more severe since it is intended as offering unending support to economic growth but normally harms the societal growth. On that, it facilitates harm on a given group which led to the marginalization of the harmed populace’s capability to change the organization in a manner that guards, maintains or even re-builds their wellness. Structural violence in the case is a sociological problem not only because it hinders growth but also since it affects the wellness of the society ranging from health effects to denial of basic needs.
This kind of violence can best be resolved by designing effective policies that control exchange and guards the rights of the public. This policy can help in governing operations and exchanges while guarding individual’s privileges and in turn, support social wellness. In that, the exchange should not be conducted at the general expense of the wellness of the society in order to support any economic developments. Most administrations are currently trying to place the economic needs of the state first prior to considering the social wellness of the society based on the intensifying competition on goods flow in international trade. In other words, the increased flow harms the wellness of people by forcing them to exist under the general pressure of scarcity. In addition, it results in unequal distribution since the wealthy states tend to consume more goods and provide less to the societies that are not well developed.
Jessica Srikantia. (2016). “The structural violence of globalization”, critical perspectives on international business, Vol. 12 Issue: 3, pp.222-258, https://doi.org/10.1108/cpoib-09-2015-0040
Reeves, J. (2015). Economic Statecraft, Structural Power, and Structural Violence in Sino- Kyrgyz Relations. Asian Security, 11(2), 116-135.