The EU, GATT, NAFTA, WTO, IMF and several others are all ingredients of the alphabet soup which comprise “Globalization”, a concept that includes and transcends economics, politics and national identity,  environmentalism and human rights. It is an issue which has for years been a hotly contested topic among developed and underdeveloped countries throughout the world.  Depending on the point of view being expressed, it is either the achievable Paradise of World Order, or rather the ultimate in dictatorship, a kind of “Dr. NO”.

A recent public TV series on WGBH entitled “Commanding Heights” reviews and dramatizes, through excellent historical detail and through discussions with many of today’s world leaders, the centuries-old battle between “command and control” theories of economic policy (think Soviet Union) and free market capitalism (think U.S.A.)  But for true “globalists” the economic manifestations are only the beginning to the true goal of a world-wide supra-national governing structure led by... them.

The following are shared as my deductions regarding this matter:

• At most, we should be debating the merits and risks of economic globalization - and not of any kind of supra-national political structure.  The tribal instincts of the human race are still too strong for that.
• A true global market structure should result in empowerment of the majority of the current poor of the world.  It should not be a power grab that worsens the distance between haves and have-nots.
• Economic globalization, if it survives the labor pains of the 1990’s, will occur in tandem with world democratization and a higher standard of living for all; or it will produce world political turmoil, terrorism and war.
• Economic globalization will not be possible without the extension of property rights to all (land reform and related issues).  This is not the case in vast regions of the world now.
• Economic globalization must entail serious risk-taking by investors, rather than involving government bail-outs when investors’ greed and/or stupidity have come home to roost.  This should include the requirement that investors contribute meaningfully to the infrastructure and to the environment of poor countries as  the “quid pro quo” for their access, thereby spreading both the risks and benefits of those investments.
• There can be no viable economic globalization without  clear and enforceable international rules of economic behavior.  The idea that the unfettered “market rules” leaves too many casualties to sustain its viability.
• Nations should have the right to opt in or to opt out; and they should have the power to expel nations that do not play by the rules of the global economic game.

GS