One of the important tasks of contemporary economic discourse is to demonstrate that globalization is a neutral scientific concept. This perspective allows for the justification of certain neo-liberal policies. Thus, the political decision makers of developed countries indicate criteria of good governance, performance, and economic austerity; in a word, they indicate the proper economic policies of development. In the same way, decision makers of developing countries also believe and apply the models coming from North. There is even heated competition among political decisions makers of developing countries to prove their commitment to such policies. How do these people arrive at this competition? Why do they internalize such values, without doubt? This paper tries to show that in spite of claims of universalism, the economic discourse of globalization, far from scientifically objective, is in fact, part of the process of ?neo-liberal socialization?. Indeed, the economic discourse is a circuit of socialization. For this reason, globalization is a means of ?neo-liberal socialization?. We will see how, from its framework of thought through its channels of execution, the current economic globalization creates violence. In light of the works of Michel Foucault, Marcel Mauss, and Claude Lévi-Strauss, I will work on the concept of symbolic violence, proposed by Pierre Bourdieu. Based on the writings of Kant, Hegel, Marx, Weber, and Habermas, I will show also how values operate in symbolic violence. Finally, employing the Zelizer circuit, I will give examples of symbolic violence in monetary practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]