Globalisation is under attack these days from all quarters. It has
of course long faced criticism from the left for being divisive and
undemocratic. That’s not new. But, remarkably and in an act of brazen
but effective political theft, that core critique - which in effect
alleged that the purported universal benefits of globalisation had not
‘trickled down’ inclusively enough and that the process was instead
fostering growing and increasingly outrageous inequalities - has been
purloined over the course of the past couple of years by the populist
right.
As we know and
now hear almost every day, Donald Trump and his followers look forward
to initiating a process of what is being called ‘de-globalisation’
whereby companies are hauled back to their national bases, rust-belts
are made good again and trade wars seen as valid tools of national
diplomacy.
How should progressive, or just sensible, people respond to such a
challenge? Well, the first step towards an answer to that question is
not to defend the status quo. After all, governments of the centre and
centre-left in the USA, the UK and other parts of Europe have not only
presided over much of the recent expansion of globalisation, but have
also arguably entrenched its legitimacy by rendering it, via their
embrace, a cross-party, more or less universal, project of the West.
This is one of the key points trenchantly made,
for example, by Thomas Frank in recently asking, of the US Democrats
under the Clintons and Obama, ‘whatever happened to the party of the
people?’
Read more...
Read more...
