Here's an interesting piece on globalization by former HK governor Chris Patten (extracted from his new book) in the Guardian which might at first glance probably infuriate some of the good folks I went to school with who persist in seeing globalization as this great Western-led system of dominance.
Rather than bash it, people should understand it better, he says and points to the ironic use of globalisation by anti-globalisation activists to rally and fight it. He does say that in several developed nations like the US and the UK, most respondents in a survey thought globalization had a more negative than positive effect.
He then makes some thoughtful and effective criticisms of world trade but without blaming it on globalization itself as many do. He slams the protectionism of wealthy countries in imposing heavy tariffs on imports or banning them altogether which are hypocritical and exploitative to poor countries, as well as the obscene agricultural subsidies which powers like European nations and Japan grant to their farmers which thus enable them to keep their prices down and even export to poor countries. Of course, some might say that these unfair protectionist measures are main aspects of globalisation itself and which can't be seen as separate.

He also speaks out on the current financial crisis, saying that globalisation isn't to blame but the incompetence and greed of the financial players like banks and so on.

"I remember a banker once trying to explain to me how the mortgage of, say, an unemployed single parent in St Louis could be morphed into a triple-A rated financial investment in London, New York or Paris. Magically, impoverishment became a "special investment vehicle". Try as hard as the banker did to get me to comprehend the beautiful simplicities of the whole process, I remained baffled. It was, I suppose, some sort of relief later on to discover that it was not me who was stupid."

It's a very long article which goes all the way to the bottom but which is well worth the read.