1.

Define the Globalization as: Historical Epoch; Confluence of economic phenomena;

the hegemony of American values; technological and social revolution.
Globalization in Historical Epoch is unmistakable, and they all agree that it may
be described as a historical epoch rather than, say, a social phenomena or a theoretical
framework. As a result, the cold war was characterized by traits such as bipolar power
distribution. The Cold War coincided with the start of globalization, raising the issue of
whether there is a causal link between the two, and whether or not the two are directly
associated with globalization as a time may be considered to chronologically succeed
the Cold War. This regime subordinated commerce to national economic management
systems rooted on important economic sectors such as steel and agriculture.
International and national institutions collaborated to control monetary and wage
relations in order to stabilize national capitalisms under a liberal trade system. This time
period is a probable choice since it shows that globalization began with two phenomena
happening at the same time. The first was the establishment of détente between the US
and the Soviet Union. Whichever version is finally recognized as the standard by this
technique, it is obvious that in this formulation, time, rather than functional qualities,
better defines the word "globalization." While these definitions lack a significant analytic
component and are largely descriptive in nature, they do provide definitive contours as
well as the possibility of using interdisciplinary research for a dissenting view that these
changes imply a reduction in the Left's policy power and understanding the unique
properties of the Epoch of Globalization. In summary, it is a historical approach to
understanding globalization; time is the essential determining factor.
Globalization may be functionally defined by an inherently linked set of economic
occurrences. These include market liberalization and deregulation, asset privatization,
retreat of state activities, notably welfare services, technological diffusion, cross-national
dispersion of industrial production or foreign investment, and capital market integration.
Many analysts believe that previous eras of globalization were the conclusion of a long
process. Examination of the suitability of one or more indicators as a measure of
convergence ends up taking precedence over a broader consideration of whether
income distribution is equitable. It is relatively simple to find supporting arguments and
evidence to back up assertions of convergence or divergence, depending on what one
is looking for. He stated that "the key bottom line for me is if the living standard disparity
between wealthy and poor countries narrows over time." Convergence means that this
difference will narrow, at least in percentage terms. Along with ‘globalization' and
‘competitiveness,' the theme of ‘convergence' has permeated public debates about
policies and prospects for developing countries, but more as a ‘deepening' than a
qualitative change in the global economic structure is specific in their characterization of
globalization. It is associated with greater international capital mobility and an increase
in mergers and acquisitions as well as strategic partnerships. All, however, place a
premium on the company and the market, as well as an expanding global integration
process. Thus, despite globalization's deterministic and political nature, they all see it as
process-driven and economically defined.
 The idea of the hegemony of American values in the form of assimilation of
political and economic institutions in the public sector and best business practices in the
private sector is central to the predominance of American values approaches. In the
literature on modernization, the convergence is toward liberal democracy and
modernity, which is described as industrialized economic progress with the
characteristics of a restricted state apparatus. Thus, the distinction between scientific
work in the social sciences and work in the natural sciences is a difference in moral
perspective. Beyond science lies moral intuition. Knowledge of experience necessitates
the participation of all of our senses. And so Apter concludes, perhaps the overarching
goal of this work is to put together certain broad approaches and their moral
consequences. Apter eventually exposes this to be synonymous with liberal democracy.
One might argue that globalization is regarded not just as a panacea for a variety of
management issues, but also as an ideology that fits well with the zeitgeist by many.
The fall of the Berlin Wall, the annihilation of the other major ideologies, and united
worldwide action Given that the Marxian variation concentrates on techniques used in
the political science literature, notably in the domain of comparative politics, this
perspective weighs significantly, but certainly not completely.
The technological and social revolution represents a dramatic move away from
industrial capitalism and toward a postindustrial view of economic relations. The
previously discovered economic phenomena are significant not only because they
constitute a distinct cluster of activity, but also because they represent a novel type of
activity. In contrast to our previous concept, time has no significance here. Furthermore,
as a result of technological advancement, space has been compressed, albeit the
impact of such compression may be to increase heterogeneity, as represented in the
concept of glocalization. A major rearrangement of economic activity is taking place at
the regional/local level, while information/communication and commodity/services flows
are exploding across cities, regions, and nations. They contend that globalizing
businesses follow a strategy aimed at achieving a global intrafirm division of labor,
whereas glocalizing firms pursue an alternate strategy aimed at replicating output
across many areas, therefore avoiding the risk associated with trade bloc formation. We
are now witnessing the emergence of what Schwartz and Leyden refer to as the
"networked economy," in which processes move from hierarchical constructions to ones
in which individuals are vertically linked in an integrated and flexible manner, resulting in
tremendous productivity improvements. As a result of the impacts of globalization,
society will become more open.
2.Is Globalization the same as Globalism and Universalism? Explain ( Make it simple)
No, since at its core, globalism aims to define and explain nothing more than a
world characterized by networks of connectivity that transcend multi-continental
distances. In a summary, globalism refers to the underlying fundamental network,
whereas globalization refers to the dynamic reduction of distance on a broad scale.
Globalism is a long-standing phenomena. As a result, the question is not how ancient
globalism is, but how “thin” or “thick” it is at any particular time. Globalization, on the
other hand, refers to the growth or decrease in the degree of globalism. It emphasizes
on the forces, the dynamism, or the speed with which these changes occur and since
The philosophical and theological idea of universalism states that some concepts have
universal application or applicability. Another essential element of universalism is the
belief in one basic truth.

3.Explain Francis Fukuyama’s statement that “Convergence is Inevitable.”

Based on Francis Fukuyama's statement that technology allows for the infinite
accumulation of wealth and hence the fulfilment of an ever-expanding range of human
needs, convergence is unavoidable. This trend ensures that all human cultures will
become increasingly homogeneous.