A future imperfect: why globalisation went wrong | Adrian Wooldridge | TEDxLondonBusinessSchool

Summary

The transcript discusses the global shift from the optimistic pre-World War I era of globalization to the rise of nationalism, protectionism, and tribalism. Drawing parallels to the early 20th century, it highlights how the global elite, blinded by confidence in economic integration, failed to foresee the current rise of nationalism and authoritarianism. The speaker argues that hyper-globalization has led to economic stagnation and inequality, and calls for reform to prevent a return to destructive nationalism. The solution, according to the speaker, lies in balancing globalization with respect for national identity and fair governance.

Takeaways

• 📖 John Maynard Keynes described a Londoner, pre-WWI, who was confident in globalization but blind to the rise of nationalism, tribalism, and protectionism.
• 📉 The global elite has similarly overlooked forces of nationalism, tribalism, and xenophobia, which are reshaping the world.
• 🌍 After WWI, the world shifted from integration to division, leading to economic crises, protectionism, and ultimately WWII and the Cold War.
• 💼 Post-WWII saw a push for globalization led by the U.S., promoting free trade and international security, but this era began to wane after the financial crisis.
• 🔄 Globalization, as an ideological project, is now weakening, with the U.S. retreating from its global leadership role and the EU facing limitations, as seen with Brexit.
• 💸 While globalization brought prosperity to the emerging world, it led to stagnation and decline in many parts of the developed world.
• 📉 Hyper-globalization has not resulted in the promised growth, particularly in productivity, and instead has led to economic stagnation in the West.
• 💼 The global financial elite has benefited disproportionately from globalization, engaging in practices like tax avoidance and regulatory capture.
• 🌐 Authoritarian regimes, like those in Russia and Turkey, have embraced an alternative model of globalization that rejects liberal democracy, leading to a rise in illiberal capitalism.
• 🏛 The speaker calls for a reform of globalization with more humility, a balance between nationalism and globalism, and a crackdown on global cronyism and self-dealing.

Q & A

Who is the 'middle-class, civilized Londoner' that Keynes describes, and what is his worldview before World War I?

The 'middle-class, civilized Londoner' represents a person living in comfort and confidence before World War I. He uses modern conveniences like the telephone to order commodities and invest in global markets, believing in the certainty of globalization, progress, and economic stability, unaware of the looming threats of nationalism, tribalism, and protectionism.

How does the speaker compare the global elite of the past 20 years to Keynes’ Londoner?

The speaker compares the global elite to Keynes' Londoner by suggesting that both groups were blindly confident in the continuous progress of globalization. Just as the Londoner was unaware of the forces that would lead to World War I, today's global elite have overlooked rising nationalism, tribalism, and xenophobia that now challenge the global order.

What major global events does the speaker attribute to the end of globalization as an ideological project?

The speaker attributes the end of globalization as an ideological project to the 2008 financial crisis, which exposed the limits of global economic integration. He argues that the crisis marked the beginning of a shift away from policy-driven globalization aimed at lowering borders, with rising protectionism and nationalism threatening its progress.

What role did the United States play in globalization after World War II, and how has that changed recently?

After World War II, the United States played a leading role in promoting globalization by advocating for free trade, forming NATO, and establishing a global security architecture. However, the speaker argues that the U.S. has recently begun retreating from this leadership role, reminiscent of its isolationist stance after World War I, which contributed to global instability.

How does the speaker describe the impact of globalization on different parts of the world?

The speaker highlights a stark contrast in the impact of globalization. In emerging markets like China, globalization has brought prosperity, economic growth, and optimism. However, in the developed world, particularly in regions like Wolverhampton, deindustrialization and economic stagnation have left many people without hope for the future.

What does the speaker identify as a significant failure of hyper-globalization in terms of productivity growth?

The speaker points out that despite promises of accelerated growth, productivity growth in the rich world has slowed during the period of hyper-globalization, particularly since the 2008 financial crisis. This stagnation contrasts with the higher productivity growth seen from 1945 to 1970, when globalization was more controlled.

How does the speaker criticize the global elite's role in the process of globalization?

The speaker criticizes the global elite for engaging in self-dealing and cronyism during globalization. He argues that while the elite have benefited enormously from globalization, amassing wealth and exploiting tax havens, the broader promises of economic prosperity and stability have failed to materialize for many, especially in the developed world.

What does the speaker mean by 'authoritarian globalization,' and how does it differ from the liberal vision of globalization?

The speaker refers to 'authoritarian globalization' as a model embraced by countries like Russia and Turkey, where illiberal governments promote global capitalism without democratic or liberal values. This contrasts with the liberal vision of globalization, which aimed to integrate global markets while advancing democracy, human rights, and liberal values.

How does the speaker view the relationship between globalization and nationalism in recent years?

The speaker argues that rather than eradicating nationalism, globalization has often exacerbated it. Nationalism and xenophobia have resurged in response to the failures of hyper-globalization, with many people turning to populist, nationalist leaders as a reaction to broken promises and economic stagnation.

What does the speaker propose as a way to reform globalization in order to prevent the rise of xenophobia and nationalism?

The speaker suggests that in order to save globalization, liberals must show greater humility, be willing to compromise, and reform aspects of globalization that have led to resentment. This includes reconsidering policies like the free movement of people and addressing cronyism within the global elite to create a more equitable system that acknowledges the positive aspects of nationalism.