Chapter 5: Mapping the Winners and the Losers.
The new world order and the failure of globalisation
Chapter 6: Globalisation and Empowerment. Chapter 7: Policy Rhetoric and Policy Realities. Chapter 8: Globalisation by Whom and for Whom?
Chapter 9: Conclusions. Edward Elgar Publishing. Powered by PubFactory. Barton himself was traveling to Chile later in the week, then on to Sao Paolo, where McKinsey was holding its own board meeting. The Luddites and isolationists in both parties are already starting to argue that this globalization of American business is a bad thing. They are wrong — surely America would be even worse off if its brightest businesses leaders were missing out on globalization and the rise of the emerging markets. But the shift of American capital and American capitalists outside the U.
That will be dangerous not just for the global super-elite, but for the entire world economy. We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links.
Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. The USA is not Britain. We have never had an Empire on which the sun never set. British Imperial practice is hardly what we are about. We are also a continental country, not a smallish island chain. We certainly need not emulate the Imperial model. Our rich export business because they do not lose American military and legal protection or lose their right to live here in privilege. They like an expensive dollar because it provides them with the opportunity to sell foreign made goods here, at the expense of unemployed American workers.
A lower value dollar would make those overseas investments and outsourcing deals far less profitable and perhaps outright unprofitable. Yes, there is class conflict. The fact that the Government is irretrievably in the hands of the richest is not healthy for anyone, including rich people who have any reason other than low taxes to live here. These wealthy businessmen who are investing American money overseas and building thousands of factories there, instead of here in the USA, are costing our country tens of millions of manufacturing jobs.
The current depression is going to be a lasting one for those who now can not find decent employment as jobs are relocated overseas. The balance of payments deficit and outflow of cash is killing the country.
Sooner or later the system is going to collapse. China and Japan already own trillions of dollars in US debt. Soon we will be number two. I hope that the common people will wake up and re institute import duties to encourage local manufacturing before the middle class is wiped out. Repeal of the unfair free trade acts before its too late is essential!
This might come as a big surprise, but globalization has been going on for the last years. The rules have shifted a little bit. Before you could only exploit countries other than your own.
The next phase of globalisation: democracy, capitalism and inequality in the industrialised world
Now global ventures are allowed to exploit their own countries as well, all done under the rubric of globalization. This consequence is exactly what George Bush wanted to inherit to his successors i. Globalization has been with us for thousands of years. In its present form it changed 50 years ago from colonial exploitation phase to the present form which under the rubric of capitalism, exploits not only abroad but is an equal opportunity exploiter. Nor is the China Dream-as articulated by Xi Jinping-possible, because that is not the logical destination of the globalisation of the Chinese economy.
It is a regression to a past glory which lingers in the Chinese psyche but is unattainable in a vastly different geopolitical terrain. It is only a new internationalism which enables the benefits of globalisation to be shared equitably, mitigates the negative fallout, and adjusts existing governance regimes as well as emerging ones to accommodate all stakeholders, which could bring relative peace and prosperity.
Multilateral institutions and processes should no longer be the platform for a contest of competing nationalisms, but should function in a spirit of internationalism without which multilateralism is condemned to deliver least common denominator results. India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, was a fervent nationalist but was also a committed internationalist. His ideal was a "collectivism which neither degrades nor enslaves".
The Indian concept of Vasudev Kutumbakam, or universal brotherhood, in his view, was what was needed to meet the challenge of a post-atomic world, with its threat of universal annihilation. Nehru's vision of India was a country at peace with itself, a democracy which guaranteed fundamental rights of the individual, which enabled its citizens to pursue their own genius and a federal polity which incorporated the ideal of unity in diversity. But, more importantly, Nehru located India's quest as part of a global endeavour for peace and development.
- Examples and counterexamples in graph theory!
- The politics of globalisation and polarisation /Maurice Mullard. – National Library.
- Developments in Language Theory: 19th International Conference, DLT 2015, Liverpool, UK, July 27-30, 2015, Proceedings..
- How group psychology is driving global political turmoil | World Economic Forum!
To quote his well-known and what today are truly prescient words:"And so we have to labour and to work, to give reality to our dreams. These dreams are for India but they are also for the world, for all the nations and people are too closely knit together today for any one of them to imagine that it can live apart.
The Global Observer: The globalization of polarization | In English | EL PAÍS
Peace has been said to be indivisible; so is freedom, so is prosperity now and so is disaster in this One World that can no longer be split into fragments. One does not pretend to know how one could bridge the disconnect between the reality of the One World we inhabit today and the wave of intolerance, sectarian and racial hatred and the grossness of political discourse which is sweeping across country after country in the world. Could India lead the way to shaping a new world order which is aligned with the challenges we confront as humanity? Through the ages, India has developed a civilisation whose attributes are what that new order requires: the innate syncretism of its accommodative and self-confident culture, its easy embrace of vast diversity and plurality with an underlying spiritual and cultural unity, and a deep conviction that to achieve greatness a nation must stand for something more than itself.
We work on a much narrower agenda now, and seek to advance India's interests without much thought to our place in a larger, interlinked and interdependent world. In the context of the ecological challenge we confront as humanity, it has been said that if we as a species fail to halt and reverse the ravaging of the earth we inhabit, then we face cataclysmic and irreversible consequences.
In a world where each national leader wants to make his country great again, there may well be a future in which greatness will have become irrelevant in every sense of the word. Will India point to a different, more hopeful future?
- Country Selection.
- Main navigation?
- Access Key Navigation.
Shyam Saran is a former foreign secretary. The future is still global In India, we have a prime minister who is not averse to kindling the flames of nationalism or acquiescing in the politics of polarisation. Get real-time alerts and all the news on your phone with the all-new India Today app.