A period or two helps. And none of that is Uber's fault if it falls in line with the law. If someone provides a better service for the buck spent, they will succeed. The Uber example wasn't so much trying to compare it to globalism but to the people complaining about either. Uber's success is simply on a tech and idea innovation standpoint.
You misunderstood a bit because I used electricity's discovery as a point in time, meaning it wasn't just communications technology that brought up globalism. Culture sharing and global trade has been around for a very long time, because they make sense.Adapt or fall behind isn't going to work and this isn't the same condition as electricity which might have been wrongly stolen by Edison for the greater good cause because Tesla's ventures were counter-intuitive to keeping our civilization alive, though they did earn him the love of a dove of another universe. The analogy is incongruent because globalism will stop when you're eating locusts instead of steak and you can't live with the nostalgia of how great life was compared to the impoverished state you've arrived at and the measure between how much crappy life you have left isn't enough to stave off the urge to indulge in yet another "uber-company-like" lowering of business and life ethics in an attempt to escape eating sewer garbage for a day or two.
And in what way does Uber lower business and life ethics? Did online shopping do that as well? What about e-mail? Smartphones? Tech innovation is simply our natural evolution to chase for something better, and we achieve that "better" as time goes on.
- - - Updated - - -
Globalism is far more complex than what people simply equate to "job loss".