Multinational Corporations in Third World Countries Essay

Multinational Corporations in Third World Countries - Essay Example Globalization is a phenomenon where the world is increasingly becoming integrated socially, economically and politically. These is mainly due to advancements in information communication technology( ICT), improvement in transport infrastructure, expedite mass migration and movement of people as well as the trade in goods and services leading to an increased economic activity that has surpassed national markets necessitating the need to exploit markets outside the borders (Jan A S, 2000). Increased technological advancement, liberalized world markets and intense competition has resulted to increased globalization. Third world countries is a term that refers to the least developed countries of the south which includes countries found in Asia, Africa, Latin America Oceania and the Caribbean. The term came about after world war two where the bourgeoisie regimes of the west were referred to as the west while the antagonistic regimes of the orient were referred to as the East and were socialist. The newly independent countries of the south coined the term third world to signify their non aligned disposition. These countries are generally characterized by low levels of investments, rampant poverty and diseases, high illiteracy levels, poor infrastructure, political instability, poor governance where the ruling elites are wealthy (comprador bourgeoisie) coupled with high birth rate with low economic growth rate (Breda P, 1983). Other features include distorted and highly dependent economies(dependency) on aid, grants and technical assistance, a key feature that is furthered by the actions of the MNC 'S and global institutions like the world bank and the International Monetary Fund(IMF). These economies generally produce primary goods that are exported to the west for value addition while they act as markets for finished products from the west. As they are technologically inferior. Third world countries lag behind in development because of various factors but it should be noted that they why brought into the global capitalistic system through colonization-a stage in globalization, a phenomena whose effect was to be felt later more so with end of the cold war. This is one of the major reasons for the cause of under development in the least developed countries. These poor countries have always sought various ways by which they can solve these development problems mainly through foreign aid and technical assistance that is overly done under the auspice of international institutions e.g. the World Bank and the IMF. These efforts have failed over the years to stem the sinking of these countries further down the path of under development hence today there is a new approach to development in the south through the need to attract and retain the foreign direct investments (FDI's). One way of achieving these objectives has been through the privatization of state enterprises.Privatization is the sale, transfer or concession of government assets or services to a privately owned entity. This has been the cornerstone of the structural adjustment program advocated by the World Bank and the IMF in the 1980's to try and stimulate growth and development in the third world (Emmanuel S S, 1987). The aim has always been to increase efficiency brought by the need for profit maximization, and increase revenue to the state in

Deontologism vs. Utilitarianism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Deontologism vs. Utilitarianism - Essay Example It advocates for fair consideration of other people’s interests while undertaking an action. Simply put, utilitarianism states that â€Å"we ought to promote the greatest good for the greatest number of people† or in another form, â€Å"inflict less harm on the least number of people† (Kanniyakonil, 2007, p. 65). A utilitarian would therefore contemplate the possible impacts of his or her action to other members of the society. Based on the doctrine, an act that threatens other people’s stakes is therefore avoided while a beneficial act is promoted. Singer, based on his four principles, argues that â€Å"pain is bad,† consideration into harmful acts should not be discriminatory and should be based on consequences of contemplated actions (Rachels and Rachels, 2007, p. 281). Utilitarianism can be understood from two perspectives, â€Å"act utilitarianism, and rule utilitarianism† (Kanniyakonil, 2007, p. 65). Act utilitarianism is based on each action by a person, which ought to always be consistent with the ethical principle of maximum good. It is defined by the view that good actions leads to good rather than harmful results. Act utilitarianism therefore judges actions from the specific consequences of a particular act, or intentions into such consequences rather an existing moral value (Kanniyakonil, 2007). ... The two approaches therefore differ with respect to time of determination of what is good and what is evil. While action utilitarianism determines morality upon an action or upon contemplation of an act, rule utilitarianism pre determines morality upon conception of an ethical value in a society (Kanniyakonil, 2007). Utilitarianism is further understood from four philosophical perspectives, â€Å"‘welfarism’, ‘consequentialism’, aggregative, and maximizing† (Kanniyakonil, 2007, p. 66). According to welfarism, utilitarianism is fundamentally determined by the resultant good from an initiative. Cosequensialism on the other hand focuses on the impacts of an act as opposed to its nature. Consequential theory therefore evaluates and determines an action with respect to available alternatives to the action and approves the most beneficial alternative. Aggregative and maximizing concepts of utilitarianism are on the other hand based on the view that even the most beneficial alternative is associated with possible reservations into unhappiness (Kanniyakonil, 2007). Associated problems Utilitarianism, regardless of its assumed appeal to maximum good from actions, has a number of associated problems. One of the problems faced under utilitarianism, and with respect to determination of the best alternative for maximum good is its reliance on probability. This means that there is no accurate measure of possible good to justify utilitarian approach to determining ethics (Kanniyakonil, 2007). Rachels and Rachels also identify a number of problems that seems to undermine the basic principles and assumptions of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is for instance associated with injustice. This based on the difference in scope between morality and law. In