The portended collapse of global markets in Thailand, Indonesia, and South Korea and the ominous gathering of the U.S. naval fleet in the Persian Gulf make even the most locality-focused worker start reading the Foreign News section of the paper. There is a hauntingly familiar subtext to the reports - not unlike the poignant articles in this special issue of Health & Social Work - that reinforce our concerns that racist and exploitative attitudes underlie the behavior of the world's rich and powerful toward the health and well-being of women and children worldwide. Globalization is defined as a process of global integration in which diverse peoples, economies, cultures, and political processes are increasingly subjected to international influences, and people are made aware of the role of these influences in their everyday lives (Midgeley, 1997). It includes the emergence of an inclusive worldwide culture, a global economy, and above all, a shared awareness of the world as a single place. Internationalists as diverse as Karl Marx and Woodrow Wilson questioned whether the nation state is the most desirable form of social, cultural, and political organization, and critics such as Noam Chomsky have argued that organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank are already de facto governments concerned with protecting the interests of international capitalists to the detriment of nation states and their citizens (Midgeley, 1997). The excesses of the world's trading partners, the wealthy businesses and powerful governments that control the world's economic system, appear to be structuring this system so that its putative benefits never quite trickle down to all the citizens of the involved countries as was promised. To put it in work terms, the world's social rarely keeps up with its economic development (Midgeley, 1997). Inequality is spreading. Wilkinson's (1997) recent book entitled Unhealthy Societies: From Inequity to Well-Being shows how among the developed countries it is not the richest societies that have the best health, but the ones that have the smallest income differences between rich and poor. Inequality and relative poverty quite literally increase death rates. Why? For one, with greater economic inequity, within nations and among nations, comes a host of global threats dangerous for local and indigenous peoples. This article addresses these threats and systems to prevent them. THREATS OF GLOBALIZATION Malnutrition As development swallows lands once used for farming, landless peasants will continue to move to cities, leaving the raising of subject to ever more mechanical and technological approaches and subject to control by international investment capitalists. Of the world's 5.8 billion population, 800 million are significantly undernourished, and fully 3 billion - over half - are deficient in essential micronutrients (United Nations [UN], 1997). Still, one of the successes of increasing world trade is the fact that malnutrition has been declining. Food availability has increased recently in all the world's regions except sub-Saharan Africa. It is hoped that undernutrition worldwide will fall to 12 percent by 2010. The prevalence of malnutrition, however, is highly uneven within and among countries, and improvements can disappear very quickly. The United States, one of the richest countries in the world, for example, had been doing quite well nutritionally for the past decade by expanding the Food Stamp program, but last year's cuts in Food Stamps are dramatically reversing this progress. The Center on Hunger, Poverty, and Nutrition Policy at Tufts University recently reported that 12 percent of American households are food insecure. (Sarasohn, 1997). In September 1997 the U.S. Department of Agriculture found that 11 million Americans, including 4 million children, lived in households categorized as moderately or severely hungry (Sarasohn, 1997). …