A notion that I think that we forget is that we all live on the same planet, so this concept of globalization should be seen as inevitable. Today, hearing the word globalization brings about a negative connotation—made to benefit the rich and privileged. And although globalization is most often viewed as westernizing and even as a broad form of gentrification, globalization should not necessarily be viewed in a negative light. It is the unjust authority from the wealthiest nations and monetary institutions that have created this bad reputation with globalization and its efforts.

Globalization should be a force for good in global health, but without the effort to restrain corrupt authorities from making decisions for the whole world based on their own interests, there is no possibility that globalization will be viewed as a way for unification instead of oppression.

Globalization is usually broadly defined as "fundamental changes to human societies" on an international scale that thus creates influence on these communities. Globalization is not a recent or new phenomenon that has only occurred in the 21^st century, but has been present since the migration of Homo erectus from Africa. The reason as to why this term seems to have originated presently is that in most recent decades, globalization has become even more intense and has accelerated—affecting a larger sum of society and at a greater level. For organizations like WHO, globalization is focused on assisting low income countries that face health risks. The reason as to why this phenomenon occurs and its subcategories of definitions must be explored first before delving into the impacts and effects of globalization (both the positive and negative).

Globalization although described in broad terms, has facets of categories that are a part of it—liberalization, internationalization, universalization and westernization. A possibility to having globalization be seen in a less negative light would be to use these different subcategories to describe a certain phenomenon, especially since each of these have different negative and positive connotations to it.

Internationalization is what we most often think of with globalization: the increasing interaction of people and cultures internationally, usually by trade, exports, mass communication and migration. Universalization is similar to this in terms of describing the migration of people and cultures, that within internationalization, can be viewed in a positive light. When including liberalization (transfer of resources with little repercussions or barriers) and westernization (the adoption of western cultures—usually the U.S—that is most often forced into different cultures or romanticized) is when globalization is seen in a negative tone. It is important to understand these different subcategories of globalization because of its presence in employment, agriculture, education and human inequalities—that are all included and connected to the health spectrum—that includes multiple actors and affects multiple communities through its positive and negative repercussions.

We all live on the same planet, so the concept of globalization is inevitable. But to what effect is globalization most often seen through a negative lens when it should be viewed as a positive tendency of the spreading of knowledge, culture, ideas and development? If it ever seems like oppression—a circumstance common today—then it is due to the current leadership and authority internationally that undermines human rights and equity when its aim should be for universal democracy.