Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Richard Santillan's avatar

I disagree with the short form implication of this sentence "Leftists around the world have for many years railed and rallied against free-trade and globalisation." So I looked online at what one of the most articulate leftists, Noam Chomsky had to say about globalization in 2016 regarding the The Trans-Pacific Partnership...that globalization in itself is not bad, but what most leftists were against was a specific form of globalization ("Devices that allow corporations, but of course not people, to sue governments..."):

"Globalisation can take all kinds of forms. For example, if there were anybody that believed in free markets they might take Adam Smith seriously. Adam Smith pointed out that the fundamental element of free markets is the free circulation of labour. We don’t have that. We have sharp restrictions on the movement of labour, and so, it not only means that working people can’t come to the United States to work, it means that privileged professionals, such as lawyers or CEOs, can set up protectionist barriers to prevent competition from abroad. Plenty of lawyers and doctors from abroad who are highly skilled could easily meet U.S. professional standards but of course they aren’t allowed in because professionals can protect themselves.

Globalisation could be designed so that it’s beneficial to the general population or it could be designed so that it functions along the lines of the international trade agreements, including the Uruguay Round, the WTO Agreement, NAFTA, the current Atlantic and Pacific agreements, which are all specifically designed as investor rights agreements, not even trade agreements.

Very high protection for major corporations, for big pharmaceuticals, media conglomerates, and so on, and very high barriers through intellectual property rights. Devices that allow corporations, but of course not people, to sue governments action that might potentially harm their profits. That is a particular form of globalisation designed in the interest of the designers. The designers are concentrations of private power, linked closely to state power, so in that system they are consequences of globalisation." https://chomsky.info/globalization-inequality-and-political-alienation/

Expand full comment
Tom B's avatar

I see what’s going on as essentially an economic ‘shock doctrine’ (yes I’m using Naomi Kleins Phrase). Western countries (America in particular) have deluded themselves for the last 40 years or so that they can outsource all their manufacturing jobs, let globalisation run rampant and everything will be great.

But of course, here comes the long overdue reality check. It will be painful and messy at first I except, but give it 5-10 years, everything will settle down again and the new ‘victors’ of this economic paradigm will emerge (very likely working class industries rather than more office jobs).

I’m not saying I like what Trump is doing, but I am saying its a necessary correction to the fantasy land we’ve been living in for the last 40 years.

Expand full comment
107 more comments...

No posts