Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 51

Thread: Revisiting globalisation...

  1. #1
    antaeus's Avatar Whataboutery
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,165

    Default Revisiting globalisation...

    We haven't specifically addressed globalisation for a while now, but we do have plenty of threads dedicated to things that are symptomatic of our increasingly interconnected world. Perhaps it's time we revisit the topic.

    To give is a common start point, I'll let Economist over-simplify things for us:

    This is a big topic, and we could cover a lot of ground already well-trod by other threads. So rather than discuss theory straight up, perhaps we could start by discussing the topic from a personal perspective. I'll start by sharing my experience: I'm someone who has lived and worked in several countries and amongst different ethnicities. In this respect, you could say that so far, I've done well out of an interconnected world. I'm someone who has benefited from our increasingly interconnected world, but I am very aware that many have not done well at all. I work in a service sector industry. Globalisation hasn't always been so kind on blue collar industries.

    The first question I'll ask you all is "has your experience of globalisation been positive, negative or mixed? I'm looking for personal perspectives here rather than theory or opinions.

    Moving on, there are a number of other lenses through which we could begin to explore globalisation. Certainly the election of Donald Trump and Coronavirus have focused the world's attention on just how interconnected we've become. There is in many parts of the world, a completely integrated working environment where companies can freely move goods and services around with very few restrictions as if they were in one jurisdiction. To get the more formal part of the conversation going, we could talk about any of the following:

    - Donald Trump has gone to great lengths to highlight the downsides of off-shored industries. He has focused on the experiences of those who lost their jobs when industries move overseas.

    - The literal millions of people left stranded by the response to coronavirus have highlighted the vulnerability of being a working non-citizen - particularly when combined with casualised work environments.

    - The global fight over medical supplies highlights the down side of off-shored supply and manufacture. Distributed supply chains might be cheap, but they're also incredibly vulnerable.

    You could also move this conversation into other areas if you choose. There is a lot of ground we could cover.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  2. #2

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    I have mixed experiences with globalisation. I enjoy travelling and being able to work in different countries due to an increasingly similar university degree system. So that's quite beneficial. On the other hand I totally agree with your below statement and if events like the Coronavirus emerge, we need treat all people equally - no matter their citizenship. In times like these, it's not acceptable to ask non-citizens to return to their home countries if they have lived in your country for almost 6 years and started a family or got married. They paid taxes and now some countries want them gone as they only focus on their citizens.

    "The literal millions of people left stranded by the response to coronavirus have highlighted the vulnerability of being a working non-citizen - particularly when combined with casualised work environments."

    In additional, globalisation has created an imbalance in favour of China and that dependency on cheap Chinese goods is showing its ugly side even more now. SO I believe it would be better for companies to localise some of their operations again and erase unilateral dependencies to prevent countries with authoritarian governments become so powerful in the first place.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Globalism isn't anything new, and has been something certain world powers have desired since days of antiquity.
    I like this definition better since it is a bit more accurate:
    A national geopolitical policy in which the entire world is regarded as the appropriate sphere for a state's influence.
    Only in our case we have conglomerate of corporate and banker interests that desire total power over the globe at the expense of the rest of world's population.
    What they envision is kinda like China (oligarchical elite that can do whatever it wants, big government police state that watches over the rest of population and oppresses the out of it), but on a global scale. Certainly dystopian by our standards, and we already live in dystopian society straight out of 50s sci-fi novel designed to be a warning for future generations.

  4. #4
    dogukan's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Middle freaking east
    Posts
    7,636

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    There simply is no better alternative to globalization in terms of sustainably carrying humanity forward.

    Nationalisms or a closed system inevitably leads to zero-sum games and ends up in conflicts even if they can bring a balance for a few years.
    We are headed towards a regionalist form of nationalisms against globalism today, and as we are headed this way already democracy is rapidly eroding all over the world, risk of conventional warfare is increasing everywhere and many reforms done around countries in the world are being dismantled.

    Globalism is simply humanity reaching for the most efficienct way the system can work, the most efficient way technology improves and the most efficient way we can create solutions to problems of the commons.
    On the other hand, entrenched political interests (capital or labor), cultures and identities suffer from a rapid change in things.

    I think the problem with globalism we had was that it moved on way too fast for a while with too much confidence and many took it's functioning for granted.
    There was also a problem with the way financial elite captured agenda of politics and rapidly loaded burdens on the masses. The consequences of the "too big to fail" being taken out from tax payer money had been a major driver in the anti-globalization sentiment in the world.
    Russia and China has exploited that perfectly to make the West retreat to keep their hands around their spheres for their own elites.

    They created identities that are not absorbable by the liberal-globalist system.

    Turkish Islamo-nationalism for instance already refers to China and Russia as allies against the "Atlantic" imperialism and this encouragement has a major impact on the Turkish aggression in Eastern Meditterenean and anti-Kurdish policies in Syria. Many high ranking officers calls themselves "Eurasianists" and declares China-Russia as allies against West.
    "Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves. Thus, communism, in particular, is a dogmatic abstraction; in which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism as taught by Cabet, Dézamy, Weitling, etc. This communism is itself only a special expression of the humanistic principle, an expression which is still infected by its antithesis – the private system. Hence the abolition of private property and communism are by no means identical, and it is not accidental but inevitable that communism has seen other socialist doctrines – such as those of Fourier, Proudhon, etc. – arising to confront it because it is itself only a special, one-sided realisation of the socialist principle."
    Marx to A.Ruge

  5. #5

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Globalization, as in process of establishment of dictatorship of bankers and CEOs and absolutist control of the rest of the world by them is certainly not something that can carry humanity to anything other then civilizational collapse or even extinction caused by never-ending string of ecological and technological catastrophes that globalism tends to cause as its byproduct.
    Globalist experiment has been a major disaster for our planet's ecosystem, it has also been disastrous to majority of world's populations (unless working for a few cents an hour in sweatoshop to make Nike shoes under a brutal dictatorship is your thing).
    Globalist governments also tend to be more authoritarian, as you need censorship and government crackdown on "extremism" (criticism of globalism) to keep the dissenters at bay.
    Nationalism tends to be more isolationist - which in all recent events considered, a good thing. We simply don't see nationalist governments invade Middle Eastern countries over petrodollar or staging coups across the world to establish a more pro-Western government. Without a doubt, globalism has caused more deaths in recent history (since USSR bought the farm, ironically from running beta-version of globalism) then any other ideology/system.
    In retrospective, one can certainly see the ancient wisdom in Hindu caste system, under which people like Bezos or Rockefeller would never be able to exert political power over society - something that Western nations desperately need as corporate elite is actively trying to undermine them and even destroy them - all to gain absolute control and preserve the "status quo" of its wealth.
    On the bright side of things, we do see more nations around the world mobilize against globalism, including many Western nations that are finally waking up from media-induced coma.
    If we want our civilization to continue, if we want humanity to finally reach the stars - we need to end the corporate power grab (globalization) once and for all.
    Hopefully, we will see a Nuremburg-style resolution when globalist powers are defeated and legally and politically seize to exist for the greater benefit of humanity.

  6. #6
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    13,524

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    In retrospective, one can certainly see the ancient wisdom in Hindu caste system, under which people like Bezos or Rockefeller would never be able to exert political power over society - something that Western nations desperately need as corporate elite is actively trying to undermine them and even destroy them - all to gain absolute control and preserve the "status quo" of its wealth.
    No the people who would control me would just be luckily born into thier cast/station no matter inane or inbred. HH you do realize the point of a caste system is to preserve somebodies wealth and station and mostly not yours.

    Globalist experiment has been a major disaster for our planet's ecosystem, it has also been disastrous to majority of world's populations (unless working for a few cents an hour in sweatoshop to make Nike shoes under a brutal dictatorship is your thing).
    When exactly would say 'Globalism' Started because your point is more or less something that has been a reality since Sargon's day if not before.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    No the people who would control me would just be luckily born into thier cast/station no matter inane or inbred. HH you do realize the point of a caste system is to preserve somebodies wealth and station and mostly not yours.
    No, that's just definition of hierarchy. Caste system was there to prevent wrong people (like modern-day bankers) from amassing political power.
    When exactly would say 'Globalism' Started because your point is more or less something that has been a reality since Sargon's day if not before.
    I too remember how Egypt outsourced chariot production to Assyria to cut on labor costs.

  8. #8
    antaeus's Avatar Whataboutery
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,165

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    No, that's just definition of hierarchy. Caste system was there to prevent wrong people (like modern-day bankers) from amassing political power.
    As opposed to the right people, who were those who already had amassed political powers and didn't want to lose that amassed political power.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  9. #9
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    13,524

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    No, that's just definition of hierarchy. Caste system was there to prevent wrong people (like modern-day bankers) from amassing political power.
    And I assume you imagine you would be in that proper caste? No matter how smart or useful just because your father was right?
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  10. #10
    AqD's Avatar 。◕‿◕。
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    🏡🐰🐿️🐴🌳
    Posts
    10,286

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Globalist experiment has been a major disaster for our planet's ecosystem, it has also been disastrous to majority of world's populations (unless working for a few cents an hour in sweatoshop to make Nike shoes under a brutal dictatorship is your thing).
    How did people even come to this conclusion?

    Do you know how they lived before they could work in sweatshop? Absolutely hell. Poor, dirty, hopeless.

    Globalization and outsourcing brought export-dominated industry and development to those countries. South Korea was one of them. So was Japan. Not so poor or brutal now eh?


    Your concern isn't humanity, but people willing to work in subhuman conditions for minimal pay threatens the job opportunity and the labor value of those in richer countries, because while their corporations are great, the majority of workers have no competitive edge at all and governments are not even concerned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    If we want our civilization to continue, if we want humanity to finally reach the stars - we need to end the corporate power grab (globalization) once and for all.
    How are we going to establish colonies and share all the resources among hundreds of nations and identities, rather than just one? Have world war 3 in space? Can't you see how pointless the self-identity by birthplace is, in the whole universe?

  11. #11

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    As opposed to the right people, who were those who already had amassed political powers and didn't want to lose that amassed political power.
    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    And I assume you imagine you would be in that proper caste? No matter how smart or useful just because your father was right?
    Yeah, to preserve both planet and humanity, ability of bankers to influence politics is a sacrifice that I am willing to make. How inhumane of me.
    Quote Originally Posted by AqD View Post
    How did people even come to this conclusion?

    Do you know how they lived before they could work in sweatshop? Absolutely hell. Poor, dirty, hopeless.

    Globalization and outsourcing brought export-dominated industry and development to those countries. South Korea was one of them. So was Japan. Not so poor or brutal now eh?


    Your concern isn't humanity, but people willing to work in subhuman conditions for minimal pay threatens the job opportunity and the labor value of those in richer countries, because while their corporations are great, the majority of workers have no competitive edge at all and governments are not even concerned.
    Except that those foreign companies are what is making their life hell. It is interesting, how Stockhom Syndrome is prevalent among those that think globalization is a good thing. Funny that you mentioned Japan, a country which retained its high living standards by telling globalists to go themselves.
    How are we going to establish colonies and share all the resources among hundreds of nations and identities, rather than just one? Have world war 3 in space? Can't you see how pointless the self-identity by birthplace is, in the whole universe?
    It wasn't pointless for Europeans that explored whole world, won't be pointless for people that will explore space after globalism is long gone. Clearly the idea that without dictatorship of cosmopolitan banker clique based on ideology from centuries ago everyone will go to war with each other has no correspondence with reality.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Except that those foreign companies are what is making their life hell. It is interesting, how Stockhom Syndrome is prevalent among those that think globalization is a good thing. Funny that you mentioned Japan, a country which retained its high living standards by telling globalists to go themselves.
    Ah yes, Japan, the country that embraces total protectionism and shuns all international agreements and agendas like the Kyoto Protocol or the Paris Accord.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by Love Mountain View Post
    Ah yes, Japan, the country that embraces total protectionism and shuns all international agreements and agendas like the Kyoto Protocol or the Paris Accord.
    As I pointed out above, a nation can embrace free market without giving away its sovereignty to a cosmopolitan corporate oligarchy.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    As I pointed out above, a nation can embrace free market without giving away its sovereignty to a cosmopolitan corporate oligarchy.
    Countries like Japan and Korea are the definition of "giving away sovereignty to cosmopolitan corporate oligarchy". Both countries are dominated culturally and economically by Chaebols and Keiretsu. You've picked the worst possible example. In fact, both countries suffer from the same problem that you keep harping on about in "Western societies" with massive outsourcing and poor social safety nets for the masses. Poverty in both Japan and Korea can be quite brutal and hard to dig yourself out of.

    The same free trade policies that devastated the rust belt and left so many behind in United States, have been doing the exact same thing for three to four decades in Asia. You just don't hear about it because most Westerners who know Korean and Japanese, are too busy watching Anime instead of reading the news.

    Japan and Korea are the prophecy you want to avoid. Albeit, they were always xenophobes who closed off their borders to any immigrants. Which is right up your ally. Kind of makes people wonder though, it was never about economics or people's lives in the first place, was it?

  15. #15
    antaeus's Avatar Whataboutery
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,165

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Curiously... speaking of Japan and Korea.

    I just made a couple of purchases on Amazon. I have an old Macbook I'm wanting to use as a spare so I bought some ram and a new SSD.

    The ram was sold through Amazon UK, and shipped from a distribution centre in Poland. According to the label, it was assembled in Mexico from parts made in who knows where, and the brand is Korean. It arrived in Australia 5 days after purchase. Even during an extreme lockdown. When I made the purchase, all taxes, duties, tariffs and shipping costs were hidden from me. I just paid the listed price. This is in essence what the Economist meant by globalisation. Irrespective of local trade policy, my purchase was made in a way that appeared to me as if the world was all one jurisdiction.

    In that respect, what ever happens from now with regards to pushback, I think there is a Pandora's box at play here that is going to be difficult to put back. Through my one purchase, jobs were potentially supported in some small way in the UK, Poland, Mexico, South Korea and Australia. Politicians pockets were greased, each of those countries has large industrial parks that have been built and promoted for the jobs they'll create and rolling them back is a tough sell.

    For me the real question isn't whether globalisation is right, or whether it is going to happen - because it's too late for the latter and the former is irrelevant because of it. It is how do we moderate any negative affects of it. Even now, as the world publicly seeks to unhitch itself from dependence on China or the US or whoever, international trade has grown. For example, this year China publicly pushed back against Australian coal, wine, barley, iron, yet Australian trade with China grew by 2.5 billion dollars. It's insatiable.

    Going back to my Amazon purchase, how do we ensure that taxes are paid in each of UK, Poland, Mexico, South Korea and Australia that enable governments to function, how to we ensure that labour practices in each exist to a level sustainable for each of those economies? As of now, these considerations haven't been the primary concern, and that has lead to offshoring without balance, and ultimately to protest votes such as that which brought Trump to power.

    How do you offshore production while keeping local jobs? To a degree in Australia and New Zealand this has already happened. When the UK joined the EU, both were thrown out in the cold and had to restructure their economies. The 1970s through to the 1990s were tough times as traditional industries that focused on the UK's needs were closed and new industries developed. But it happened, and now Australia and New Zealand are more well known for their unique local products rather than duplication of what other countries can make. Car factories closed, vineyards opened. In the United States this process stalled for what ever reason.
    Last edited by antaeus; September 10, 2020 at 12:16 AM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  16. #16

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by Love Mountain View Post
    Countries like Japan and Korea are the definition of "giving away sovereignty to cosmopolitan corporate oligarchy". Both countries are dominated culturally and economically by Chaebols and Keiretsu. You've picked the worst possible example. In fact, both countries suffer from the same problem that you keep harping on about in "Western societies" with massive outsourcing and poor social safety nets for the masses. Poverty in both Japan and Korea can be quite brutal and hard to dig yourself out of.

    The same free trade policies that devastated the rust belt and left so many behind in United States, have been doing the exact same thing for three to four decades in Asia. You just don't hear about it because most Westerners who know Korean and Japanese, are too busy watching Anime instead of reading the news.

    Japan and Korea are the prophecy you want to avoid. Albeit, they were always xenophobes who closed off their borders to any immigrants. Which is right up your ally. Kind of makes people wonder though, it was never about economics or people's lives in the first place, was it?
    Yet, something tells me that despite all the alleged horrors of lack of diversity and multiculturalism, you'd prefer to live in a "xenophobic" nationalist nation like Japan or South Korea and their higher living standards then that of North Korea, China or any other "inclusive" socialist regime in East Asia.
    Same reason why biggest supporters of globalism are rich elites that can separate themselves from consequences of their ideology, be it living in gated white-only communities to avoid exposure to higher criminal activity to using offshore tax havens to avoid paying excessive tax rates that they impose on the rest of the nation.

  17. #17
    AqD's Avatar 。◕‿◕。
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    🏡🐰🐿️🐴🌳
    Posts
    10,286

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Yeah, to preserve both planet and humanity, ability of bankers to influence politics is a sacrifice that I am willing to make. How inhumane of me.

    Except that those foreign companies are what is making their life hell. It is interesting, how Stockhom Syndrome is prevalent among those that think globalization is a good thing. Funny that you mentioned Japan, a country which retained its high living standards by telling globalists to go themselves.
    Foreign companies aren't using slave labors. If locals have better chance doing anything else they'd have.

    Japan went through that long ago, back in 19th and early 20th century. Then they became globalists who sell products everywhere and employ massive numbers of workers in 3rd world countries. They were among the earliest to have factories in China and SE Asia.

    Quote Originally Posted by Love Mountain View Post
    Countries like Japan and Korea are the definition of "giving away sovereignty to cosmopolitan corporate oligarchy". Both countries are dominated culturally and economically by Chaebols and Keiretsu. You've picked the worst possible example. In fact, both countries suffer from the same problem that you keep harping on about in "Western societies" with massive outsourcing and poor social safety nets for the masses.
    Plus high cost of life by barring foreign goods and food to enter. But despite all those they have high standard living, great education and zero political unrest.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Clearly the idea that without dictatorship of cosmopolitan banker clique based on ideology from centuries ago everyone will go to war with each other has no correspondence with reality.
    China? India and Pakistan? Palestine? Syria? Not until recently US meddled in south american politics too including arming rebels.

    Can't you see how pathetic they are, struggling for a few inch of land, oil or water resource, while on the other side people across the whole planet are working together building things that will be relevant to the future mankind? The cosmopolitan banker as you call it is what makes funding to all those projects possible, when governments and local people are busy with their unimportant lives and trivial problems.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by AqD View Post
    Foreign companies aren't using slave labors. If locals have better chance doing anything else they'd have.

    Japan went through that long ago, back in 19th and early 20th century. Then they became globalists who sell products everywhere and employ massive numbers of workers in 3rd world countries. They were among the earliest to have factories in China and SE Asia.
    Foreign companies definitely use slave labor (child labor is slave labor). The engage in other immoral activities especially in third world regimes that have little to no standards on environmental regulations, employment regulations, etc.
    China? India and Pakistan? Palestine? Syria? Not until recently US meddled in south american politics too including arming rebels.

    Can't you see how pathetic they are, struggling for a few inch of land, oil or water resource, while on the other side people across the whole planet are working together building things that will be relevant to the future mankind? The cosmopolitan banker as you call it is what makes funding to all those projects possible, when governments and local people are busy with their unimportant lives and trivial problems.
    Most of conflicts today are product of globalist powers like Entente re-drawing map of foreign nations with little consideration for actual ethnic and sectarian differences. Hence current conflicts in Syria, Palestine, Kashimir, etc.Let's not forget American military-industrial complex, which is a major factor behind America's current endless wars in Middle East. So cosmopolitan banker is the reason why these conflicts are happening.
    You are trying to pass literal product of globalism as something that nationalism caused, which isn't correct.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Yet, something tells me that despite all the alleged horrors of lack of diversity and multiculturalism, you'd prefer to live in a "xenophobic" nationalist nation like Japan or South Korea and their higher living standards then that of North Korea, China or any other "inclusive" socialist regime in East Asia.
    Same reason why biggest supporters of globalism are rich elites that can separate themselves from consequences of their ideology, be it living in gated white-only communities to avoid exposure to higher criminal activity to using offshore tax havens to avoid paying excessive tax rates that they impose on the rest of the nation.
    I prefer to live in United States or France or Germany. Next to my Asian, Algerian, Turkish, Indian, and Somali neighbors. I would hate to be subject to a society that normalizes racism to the degree that Asians have, and I would hate to be indoctrinated to be a low-key racist had I been raised in those countries.

    I have lived in a suburb all my life, surrounded by minorities and races of all types, went to a public school, also attended by minorities and people of all color from all kinds of different socio-economic background, and I have worked in places that took me past a homeless shelter every day. As have many of my friends, my co-workers, and acquaintances that represent the "coastal elite" your harp on about. I live in the real world, not an imaginary gated community dreamt up by you.

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    Curiously... speaking of Japan and Korea.

    I just made a couple of purchases on Amazon. I have an old Macbook I'm wanting to use as a spare so I bought some ram and a new SSD.

    The ram was sold through Amazon UK, and shipped from a distribution centre in Poland. According to the label, it was assembled in Mexico from parts made in who knows where, and the brand is Korean. It arrived in Australia 5 days after purchase. Even during an extreme lockdown. When I made the purchase, all taxes, duties, tariffs and shipping costs were hidden from me. I just paid the listed price. This is in essence what the Economist meant by globalisation. Irrespective of local trade policy, my purchase was made in a way that appeared to me as if the world was all one jurisdiction.

    In that respect, what ever happens from now with regards to pushback, I think there is a Pandora's box at play here that is going to be difficult to put back. Through my one purchase, jobs were potentially supported in some small way in the UK, Poland, Mexico, South Korea and Australia. Politicians pockets were greased, each of those countries has large industrial parks that have been built and promoted for the jobs they'll create and rolling them back is a tough sell.

    For me the real question isn't whether globalisation is right, or whether it is going to happen - because it's too late for the latter and the former is irrelevant because of it. It is how do we moderate any negative affects of it. Even now, as the world publicly seeks to unhitch itself from dependence on China or the US or whoever, international trade has grown. For example, this year China publicly pushed back against Australian coal, wine, barley, iron, yet Australian trade with China grew by 2.5 billion dollars. It's insatiable.

    Going back to my Amazon purchase, how do we ensure that taxes are paid in each of UK, Poland, Mexico, South Korea and Australia that enable governments to function, how to we ensure that labour practices in each exist to a level sustainable for each of those economies? As of now, these considerations haven't been the primary concern, and that has lead to offshoring without balance, and ultimately to protest votes such as that which brought Trump to power.

    How do you offshore production while keeping local jobs? To a degree in Australia and New Zealand this has already happened. When the UK joined the EU, both were thrown out in the cold and had to restructure their economies. The 1970s through to the 1990s were tough times as traditional industries that focused on the UK's needs were closed and new industries developed. But it happened, and now Australia and New Zealand are more well known for their unique local products rather than duplication of what other countries can make. Car factories closed, vineyards opened. In the United States this process stalled for what ever reason.
    This is what "neoliberal" free trade agreements are all about. International agreements that agree on basic frameworks and labor rights are essential to making sure that things are "fair". Notice that intellectual property theft is not a concern in Europe, or Taiwan, or South Korea, or Japan. Nowhere near to the same degree as it is in China for example. This is due to international agreements governing patents and trade secrets that everyone agrees to follow. Is it perfect? No, but it's a starting point for all further collaboration. The same goes for any debates regarding labor rights, corporate taxes, and offshoring.

    This is why populists from both the left and the right are wrong on economic issues. Tearing up evil neoliberal NAFTA Free Trade Agreements doesn't mean we can play "fairly" now. It doesn't give us leverage when it comes to negotiating. It just flips the whole board over and forces us to start from the beginning. It tears down progress we've already built, and causes us to revisit the same issues hoping we can get a better deal. Except we could've negotiated for a better deal without flipping the board over and pissing everyone off...


    Quote Originally Posted by AqD View Post
    Plus high cost of life by barring foreign goods and food to enter. But despite all those they have high standard living, great education and zero political unrest.
    These countries don't have "zero" political unrest. In fact, there are often times when they protest more than Black Lives Matter. Don't confuse your perceived absence of evidence for evidence of absence.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Revisiting globalisation...

    I prefer to live in United States or France or Germany. Next to my Asian, Algerian, Turkish, Indian, and Somali neighbors. I would hate to be subject to a society that normalizes racism to the degree that Asians have, and I would hate to be indoctrinated to be a low-key racist had I been raised in those countries.
    Neither Japan nor South Korea are racist. They don't owe foreigners welfare or accommodation. Neither do Europeans.
    I have lived in a suburb all my life, surrounded by minorities and races of all types, went to a public school, also attended by minorities and people of all color from all kinds of different socio-economic background, and I have worked in places that took me past a homeless shelter every day. As have many of my friends, my co-workers, and acquaintances that represent the "coastal elite" your harp on about. I live in the real world, not an imaginary gated community dreamt up by you.
    These generic anecodatal tales remind of USSR apologists, who constantly rant about how great "international" USSR was because of so many different cultures and other blablabla about meeting foreign people. That isn't real world.
    I'm more grounded in reality - mass-immigration is very bad for countries that host such policies, as it devalues labor and opens the flood gates to potential criminals and religious fundamentalists. It is very bad for native citizens, whose taxes are used to pay to accommodate immigrants and pay them welfare. It is also very bad for countries that immigrants emigrate from. The only people who benefit from that are rootless elites.
    Which is why eventual end of globalism will be a great thing for both West and the rest of the world.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •