Globalisation implies global government.

by Colman
Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 10:22:24 AM EST

Henning Meyer, writing for Social Europe argues that over the last twenty years or so politicians have abdicated their responsibility to shape the globalisation process. The current disaster is a result of that:
But far from realising their political mistake politicians were ill prepared for this seemingly impossible scenario and reacted more than they guided. Caught on the wrong foot about the extent of the predicament of the financial sector and the beginning global recession, national governments had to prepare emergency landings for financial institutions and enacted stimulus packages to strengthen economic demand using dizzying amounts of taxpayers’ money. The irony therefore is that it was the ordinary citizen, who used to have little say over how the global economic system was governed, that in effect had to provide the means to prevent a disaster and was left with serious risks and liabilities.

Against this backdrop, it is crucial for political leaders to realise that what is needed now is not just basic repairs of a broken system. Above all politicians must comprehend that giving up the scope of action to shape economic Globalisation was a big mistake and part of the reason why the crisis could happen in the first place. Politics must not surrender democratic control over the global economy again but insist on setting the rules of the game in the future. This would also help to make Globalisation more democratic, accountable and responsive to citizen concerns taking into account their new role as risk-bearers of last resort. If political leaders, however, simply move back to pre-crisis business as usual there is a good chance that the next crisis is just around the corner.

Global free trade and free movement of capital needs global regulation and probably global taxation and redistribution.


Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
I, for one, will welcome our global overlords ...
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 10:23:10 AM EST
As Migeru keeps asking, how much would a global living wage cost?
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 10:26:14 AM EST
as long as my tribe gets a bit more than that one down the road, it doesn't matter.

are we back to monetising the portugese peasant life style again?

let's see, 25c a day for rabbit food, and so on...

it is a good question, what's your rough guess?

and are the guys doling it out going to have chauffeurs, limos and private dachas for potentate pajama parties?

where the eleet meet to tweet?

If'Madness is the absence of work'(Foucault), then Sanity is the presence of play..

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 10:50:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
that would be protectionnist, anti-freedom and socialist!

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (jeromeguillet@yahoo.fr) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 10:59:01 AM EST
The problem is that some profit more from globalisation than others (specifically, classes in the UK and US that dominate politics).

Of course the next crisis is just around the corner. But it will probably take a few deep crises in quick succession before learning kicks in.

by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 11:28:21 AM EST
Assuming the dominant classes aren't too deeply entrenched.

Skennah Kowa
by Crazy Horse on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 12:00:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The biggest blocking factor, IMO, is the intellectual hegemony of Neo-Classical Economics.  One of the main accomplishments of NCE was to separate economics from politics by proclaiming it to be a separate, autonomous sphere of activity.  Then they proceed to treat government, which their clients, the wealthy, tacitly control, as the big problem, misapplying arguments that last held relevance in the mid 19th century, if not the Age of Absolutism.  This has had the effect of deflecting attention away from the machinations of the wealthy elites by casting a spell over the minds of the public.

The public, as the result of a century or more of indoctrination by the media and politicians, thinks that "the economy" is some mysterious entity that only a few specialists can really understand and that it should be left alone, lest bad things happen.  This same public has been convinced that chief amongst the bad actors are misguided "liberals" who would mis-use the government to shower favors on a particular minority.  That public seems so enchanted as to be unable to see that the particular minority upon which the government has showered favors is the wealthy elite.

On the international front these same principals have been applied with the effect that the multi-national corporations have all of the benefits of "globalization" with the electorate footing the bill.  Any Global Government is perceived by the public as a dangerous entity that would be used by the numerous poor to take wealth from the citizens of the developed nations.  In order for us to climb out of the hole we are in it is necessary to successfully take on this whole noxious ideology.  As Bishop Laud said to Charles I: "No Bishop, no King!"  We mush find a way to break the spell.

If sanity be culturally normative, then by the norms of this culture I claim insanity.

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer at eurotrib.com) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 12:16:16 PM EST
Two amens!!

but what if the global insititutions feed us more chicago school nonsense?

My only hope is that the crazy people on financial markets realize that there are other crazy millionaire people which will lose everything if they keep on with their nonsense...and cave in front of the pressure.

so I hope a global government would take care of all the rich people.. and not merely the nut-jobs.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 01:06:44 PM EST
but what if the global insititutions feed us more chicago school nonsense?

That is a legitimate concern, IMO.  But NCE is not equally appealing to all.  In its current incarnation it has a core/periphery structure and is so designed that the core can suck the life out of the periphery while claiming that "the laws of economics" made them do it.  This was very satisfying to the financial elites on Wall Street and in the City.  It was acceptable to the financial elites in Japan and in Germany, France and other EU members, even if they were not all equally enthusiastic about many of the features.

It appears very different to Brazil, Russia, India, and China, along with much of South East Asia, most of the rest of South America and almost all of Africa.  They have been on the receiving end of the "Great Sucking Sound from the North" and their interests align differently.  And they have the advantage of being in a stage of development where rapid income growth is usual.  They have achieved a certain degree of autonomy from the pressures of US style NCE and are banding together to minimize their exposure.  Their elites have enough sense to know what has been happening.

While they have the preponderance of the world's population, The WestTM has the preponderance of the worlds capital, broadly construed, (i.e. buildings, roads, rail, power and water infrastructure, etc. in addition to investment capital denominated in monetary units.)  As they become more assertive of their own self interest things will get more difficult for proponents of NCE in The WestTM, who will be forced increasingly to turn to their own population for wealth extraction.  Even if the population remains anesthetized by NCE propaganda and other distractions, the current course of policy is eating alive the very society in which NCE proponents live.  It is getting interesting.

If sanity be culturally normative, then by the norms of this culture I claim insanity.

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer at eurotrib.com) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 03:23:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
For a Brazilian perspective see this recycled comment.
 

If sanity be culturally normative, then by the norms of this culture I claim insanity.
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer at eurotrib.com) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 03:42:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think it will happen until there is a pan-human identity, and the only way that will happen is with an extraterrestrial threat - an asteroid bearing down on us, alien attack, etc. Sadly our ecological crises can't induce it.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 01:23:25 PM EST
We have been here since time immemorial.  See my line art in Nazca, which was done as a mere child so long ago.

i smile when i read of engineering professors at MIT wondering how we built sacsayhauman.


that's me as a child

Who do you think engineered the coming ecological catastrophe?  We take the long view.

ps.  after more than 500 years, i revisited Sacsayhuaman, and was impressed that you still couldn't get a razor blade between the stones too heavy to lift by modern cranes, including offshore wind.

we now return you to normal discussions regarding the end of civilization as we know it.

this planet is ours.  you will thank us if we let you survive.

Skennah Kowa

by Crazy Horse on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 05:21:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Good old Erich von Daniken, I remember reading his children's books too ;-)

--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
by martingale on Sat Jul 4th, 2009 at 03:49:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Not convinced. Didn't the Netherlands run a pretty good trading economy based on globalisation of trade several centuries ago, while maintaining a completely separate legal system of their own? With an interface at the various remote trading sites between their system and the local system?

Seems to me that the failure of the global system is not so much the result of interlocked economies as that the political systems around the globe all bought into the same model. One could run a "use gold as currency" or "use Euro as currency" or "prohibit interest" or your own favorite economic model for one country even whilst interacting with others...

by asdf on Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 at 07:38:28 PM EST
Furthermore, diversity is more resilient than monoculture.

I think future generations will be laughing at us(*), who think our systems are the be all and end all. Fukuyama indeed.

(*) They always do.

--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$

by martingale on Sat Jul 4th, 2009 at 04:11:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It is a pity that the people we trust and elect are the ones who back stab us.
by domitay on Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 at 05:34:26 AM EST
And that Barrack Obama was the President.
by santiago on Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 at 12:20:42 PM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]