Globalization, Corporations, and Soccer Oh my!

         Globalization can be defined as the increased interconnectedness between states through the spread of goods, ideas, and other aspects of culture. Though this is a widely accepted definition, Globalization remains a contested concept given its recent expansion due to novel technological advancements. This modern day progression has helped mass-facilitate an interconnected world. Despite global growth however, the increase of Globalization has led to the subversion of government authority. Power now resides among large corporations and a handful of elites that are now attempting to expand their economic power, into the political realm. However in expanding their power, elites have provided opportunities for their countries constituents. Franklin Foer’s novel “How Soccer Explains the World” provides a specific example that supports this argument, the Cartolas in Brazil.

As America is known for their hamburgers and blue jeans, Brazil is known for their soccer. Many argue that soccer is the main factor that has recently helped globalize Brazil, and I agree. The sport comprises a good portion of the Brazilian economy, “newspapers carry the prediction that soccer will generate four percent of Brazil’s gross domestic product within years.” (Foer, 120) Brazil is known for producing star-players, which is what attracts foreign investors to the region; thus connecting Brazil to other countries. Foreign investors, such as NationsBank (now Bank of America), negotiated with the club team’s elites, widely known as the cartolas, or top hats. Cartolas were infamous for capitalizing from the game and using money allocated to the team for their own personal funds. This corruption led to downfall of various club teams and, in turn the Brazilian economy. “Because Eurico Miranda (a cartola) squandered the Bank of America investment, Vasco (his club team) slipped into debt and mediocrity.” (Foer, 118) Many of these cartolas, such as Eurico Miranda, tried spreading their sphere of influence to the government largely in hopes of protecting themselves from their own corruption. Miranda was safe so long “as he held on to his congressional seat,” because “parliamentary immunity protected him from prosecution.” (118)

This is a large critique that globalization receives. As more countries trade goods and ideas, only a select few actually greatly profit. Those who do amass great wealth are the cooperate elites that facilitate trade. That is not to say that other citizens within these nations do not profit, however. Private corporations have definitely bolstered economies, which in turn have led to the emergence of several laissez faire governments. Such as Brazil' government and the United States’ government.

These governments have implemented regulatory laws to prevent cooperation’s from usurping too much power, such as the Pelé Law in Brazil. Nonetheless, so long as the economy is booming, and citizens are happy, the government will not do much to restrict these companies. Once the economy begins to fall, government’s begin to intervene. As seen, for example, in FDR’s New Deal Program after the Great Depression hit the US.

Although corporations and elites, such as the cartolas in Brazil, are gaining a lot of power, the public isn’t completely against them. This is because an inflated economy provides benefits to citizens within the nation—such as a greater standard of living, more job opportunities, etc. It is only when the economy becomes stagnant when citizens begin to request more government involvement. In Brazil for example, Eurico Miranda was a populist and who gained popularity by pushing stolen money into public works projects. This style “has been reduced to a common aphorism used to justify support for [cartolas], ‘He steals but he makes’” (Foer, 138)

As Globalization expands, it has led to an increase in corporate power. However in expanding their power, elites have helped provide opportunities for their countries constituents.