Globalization - the purchasing of goods from around the world, rather than closer to home - has reduced the standard of living in many 3rd world nations. Once independent agrarian people, capable of sustaining and feeding their families, are now among the poorest ad most destitute people on earth. And they are poor because of foreigners wanting to buy their goods - goods they manufacture at slave wages.
I think we've moved away from the statement that kicked this off, above. You're no longer trying to defend this, and are even going against it.
This is what I disagree with. You've mentioned some examples of why this is often wrong - Korea, China, India, Singapore, perhaps Brazil and Mexico, etc. These success stories clearly show that globalization can be a very good force. Sure there are cases where it's caused harm, but you can't blame free trade or globalization, you should blame unregulated economies and weak governments.
Again, offering somebody a choice is not wrong. Forcing them to take it can be wrong. Foreclosing on their loans can be wrong. Forcible evicting them from their land can be wrong. You need to separate these things.
I recently heard (perhaps unreliably) that in the past 30 years, China has lifted more people out of poverty than all western countries have since the industrial revolution. Nobody can doubt that the biggest factor causing such a spectacular improvement in people's quality of life is ta-da, globalization and buying foreign goods!
