View Single Post
  #8  
Old Thursday, February 11, 2021
SikanderAbbasi's Avatar
SikanderAbbasi SikanderAbbasi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Karachi, Pakistan
Posts: 287
Thanks: 31
Thanked 57 Times in 47 Posts
SikanderAbbasi is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karming View Post
Covid-10 has triggered an end to globalisation.

Outlines
1. Introduction
No clear stance is mentioned whether COVID has triggered an end or not.

2. A glimpse of globalisation
(difficult to interpret for me and can't say anything without the full paragraph)

3. How has globalisation been impacted (impacted or triggered an end?) during Coronavirus outbreak?
3.1 Income inequality has widened ( it is a part of globalisation not COVID)
3.2. Global supply chain has been disrupted ( it occurs number of times during recession)
3.3. A contingency of vaccine nationalism being witnessed (ok. Promotion of national intrest over global)
3.4. Democracy is seemingly under threat vis-a-vis nationalist-cum-protectionist tendencies (ok. deterioration of democratic culture, aspects,...)
3.5. Public trust in state institutions and international organisations has been eroded. (ok)

4. These multiple challenges were not without sincere multilateral efforts
(diversion from the topic. it refers to the unclear stance as mentioned in the introduction)

4.1. Extension of debt repayments by G20
4.2. Collboration of China with WHO along with other global vaccine alliances ( it means gllobalisation- not an end to globalisation?)
4.3. Virtually-held regional and global summits to for shared vision
4.4. Viviv depiction of exchanging vaccine information and doses

5. A blueprint for pushing multilateralism towards sustainable growth is required to thwart the menace of de-globalisation ( wayforwad)
5.1. Priority should be given to lives over livelihoods ( can’t say how it is related to globalisation or deglobalisation)
5.2. Marginalised people should be concentrated on during inoculation drives ( same as stated above)
5.3. Stem the tide of democracy backsliding towards authortitarianism ( can’t say anything)
5.4. Public-private partenrship is required to compensate the labour strata of global societies (can’t say )
5.5. Digitalisation is the need of the hour to reform the health sector ( digitalization, globalisation, Covid)

6. Conclusion
Sorry Ii didn’t feel that its a conclusion.

My remarks: i expressed my own views which are subjected to amendment and cannot be taken as absolutely correct.
1. Try to write it in simple, connected and well-organised way.
2. topic interpretation is not done clearly. Globalisation means free movement of people, good, ideas,
Interdependence, cultural integration, better facilities , science and techinlogy, combined efforts
On global issues like poverty, crime, health.. etc. instead of blame-game like Chinese virus, nationalism, rumours, false propaganda, questioning the credibility of institutions etc.
3. No clear stance was observed.
4. Lack of diversity is observed like social, political, economic, administrative aspects and mostly
Revolved around vaccination.
5. Importantly, one cannot judge a book by its cover. So, you might have well-justified the topic in the essay but the outline, introduction and conclusion part is, in my opinion, not up to the mark.
There's no rule of thumb to get word by word with the topic. The title generally reflects divisiveness created by pandemic on globalised efforts. If i have written 'been impacted' doesn't mean I've got to write ' triggered an end'. I mean if one used impact or affect in place of trigger, it won't cause any bad impact on the attempt, that's what I think. Second, income inequality is a part of globalisation so it was adversely impacted by covid. Supply chain disruption though happend number of times, it was the hit the most this time. In a nutshell, nobody can think or write that globalisation has ended. Did you want me to discard this subheading? It seems you wanna go word to word with the title that demands the writer to prove that globalisation has ended. It seems impossible. Would anyone dare to prove that globalisation has ended? It can never end, even a naive couldn't think like that. In the blueprint heading, there's a difference between first and second subheading. In the first one, we should first save lives which is always preceded by economic interests, and which will not reflect organisational economic interests that is quite antithetical to globalised efforts. In the second subheading, vulnerable people should be hand in hand during vaccination drive. So there's a clear difference between first and second subheading. It won't cause anyone bad result either he writes wayforward (which is a conventional word) or blueprint, which is quite used in official policy documents. Lastly, I think diversity is clearly there ( health (vaccination drive), economy (income inequality and supply chain), political (nationalism).

I really appreciate your feedback and will try to amend some points.
__________________
The fear of suffering is worse than the suffering itself.
Reply With Quote