Globalization

This is a talk I gave to a large gathering about five years ago.  Even though it is dated, it might serve some purpose still. I have edited it very slightly


    The theme assigned to us has two vectors: the economic agenda called “globalization” and also the struggle for a globalization of solidarity and for societies of inclusion.  Both are important.

    Note, first of all, that between English and in French there exists a difference in the vocabulary used to talk about this topic.  In French, the term used is “mondialisation.”  The difference is significant.  “Globalization” implies a reference to geography; “mondalisation” refers much more to social structures.  What is global embraces the entire planet. What is “mondial” embraces the universe of culture and its relationships.   Obviously the reach of the economic forces at work today extend throughout the planet.  But it is the universe of meaning, relationships and communities that should especially concern us. 

    Secondly, the predecessor to globalization is mercantilism and liberalism.   Marco Polo and the explorers of the 16^th century opened up an enormous process of trade between continents.  However, for our purposes, what is significant is the way in which trade became connected with a political agenda that included colonization, the carving up of continents, the forced labour of millions to enrich Europe and the slave trade.  

     “Globalization” or “Mondalisation” is, however, a relatively new term. It is a process that builds on the 18^th century thinking of men like Hume and Adam Smith with three components:

1)     The market is the centre not just of the economy but also of politics and of ethics.

2)     The trans-national corporation is the agent of a new form of economic colonization more damaging than that of the 16-19^th centuries.

3)     Modern technology is used to structure the global market.

    In the laissez-faire philosophies of 18^th century thinkers like like Hobbes, Hume, Locke and Adam Smith, society, nation and State are redefined in terms of trade and, specifically, the market. 

    The Constitution of the United States incorporates much of this 18^th century thinking around freedom to engage in trade while it is the French Revolution that espoused the ideas of freedom, equality and fraternity.  The differences continue to resonate even today.  For the United States Constitution, the “people” who make up their democracy, consisted only and exclusively of landowning men. In other words, the propertied class, the establishment, the wealthy of the time, were the only real “people” in this democracy. And the freedom of which the U.S. Constitution speaks is really the freedom of propertied wealth to engage in trade without government interference, that is to say, without the interference of the “common good.”   While we have the illusion that this very restricted understanding of who participates in a democracy has been greatly enlarged with the provision of the vote to all citizens, quite the reverse is the case.  In almost all contemporary democracies, measures have been found to assure that the participation of the ordinary citizen in the affairs of State is enormously restricted.  The citizen normally votes once very four or five years for a candidate selected in a process over which he or she has relatively little control and based on information that is difficult for the ordinary citizen to manage.

    The contribution of the 20^th century has been to transform the notion of person to include the corporation.  The truly important “person” in contemporary democratic societies is the corporation, especially the trans-national corporations who are registered as “persons” and operate with all the rights and privileges of a “person.”  Corporations are the aristocracy of today.  And they promote a “global” agenda.  The globalization we are examining in this session of our congress is the agenda of the trans-national corporations.  It is an agenda that is driven by an ideology no less fundamentalist than that of Soviet Communism or the Taliban.

    Trans-national corporations have become, quite literally, the rulers of the world and dissociated the market entirely from anything other than their profit.  The top five hundred of these trans-nationals control more than half the wealth of the entire world.  Their economies rival that of many States, and their representatives have critical influence in all the most powerful States.  Of the one hundred largest economies in the world, 51 are corporations and only 49 are States.  Most of these corporations  are based in the United States or, secondarily, in Europe.

    The ethics regulating public affairs is thus reduced to the market in itself and for itself. One sees this in the measurement of national economies by Gross National Product, without taking into account the environment or the standard of living of the population.  The market is everything and is at the service of the trans-national corporations who are the only real people in today’s market-oriented world.  The principal tool for the exercise of this global agenda of a free market are international institutions like the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, The International Monetary Fund and international treaties like the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas.  The trans-national corporations also play an increasing role in the work of the United Nations. 

    Ordinary citizens or even national States are quite secondary “people” in this process.  Their proper function is that of consumers.   Thus the homeless, the jobless and aboriginal people are excluded. Children and women play a secondary role.  Many national States are excluded in the triage that results.  Anyone who is not in a position to be a consumer simply does not fit into the world of globalization.  Even whole continents, Africa notably, are thus excluded!  And, critical to the future, the degradation to our planet through the supreme function of the market is providing a legacy of destruction and death to future generations that they will surely judge severely.   Never in history has the process of economic colonization been carried to such extremes. 

    None of this would, of course, be possible, without the instantaneous global reach of modern technologies of communication.  The emergence of the internet has precipitated an explosion of global market activity. With the liberation of financial institutions from the gold standard, financial transactions today exceed by several multiples, the combined assets of those engaged in the market. It is a house of cards.

    This whole structure is supported by a few hundred major business aristocrats and the minions who serve them and who meet each year in Davos, Switzerland to map out the future of our planet.  It is a structure that, with the support of allied national States, has a formidable military force prepared to defend its interests.  This network of trans-national corporations is the empire behind the empire.  However, like the famous statue in the biblical dream of Daniel, it has a head of gold and feet of clay.

    Far broader, deeper and filled with future, is the movement that defines itself by the slogan, “Another World is Possible.”    I wish then to turn my attention to this second phenomenon that is far more interesting and far more pertinent for our purposes today.  It is the globalization, of solidarity and the effort to build foundations for societies of inclusion.  In English it is often called the anti-globalization movement.  However, in French, the term is “alter-mondalisation,” a concept that looks much more toward building something different.

    The struggle against the ideology of the market is rich in history.  One has only to think of the peasant revolts of the 1830’s or the rich history of the labour movement throughout the world.  In recent years there has been a globalization of grassroots movements that points to a significantly new configuration of forces.  While labour and even some  municipalities play an important role in this movement, the real strength comes from what we call Civil Society (and Non-Governmental Organizations – NGO’s).  By Civil Society, I refer to the associations of ordinary citizens, large and small, local and international, that have driven the struggle to stop the juggernaut of the neo-liberal, ideologically driven, market economy.  The mushrooming mobilization of peoples’ movements throughout the world has significantly changed the balance of power in recent years, beginning with the anti-free trade movement of the 1980’s, the Jubilee movement to eliminate the foreign debt of poor countries, the anti-Free Trade and anti-war struggles.  As part of this broad set of movements and with the precedent of other similar struggles in the past, the anti-war movement, for example, has been able to build a formidable opposition to the military aspirations of the United States and its allies in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine.  Similarly the women’s movement has, through the World March of Women especiallly, built an extraordinary network throughout the world.

    These movements are not just in opposition.  More and more it is clear there is an enormous effort to lay foundations for a different kind of society.   One would then have to include in this picture all the various efforts that have been made to create a world of solidarity and cooperation including Producers Cooperatives, Consumer Cooperatives, Credit Unions and Fair Trade (in Coffee, Sugar, Bananas, Tea, Chocolate, etc.).  In Canada alone these so-called “solidarity economies” provide support to millions of people around the world and have assets of over a hundred and fifty billion dollars.  Again, in Canada 2,200 housing cooperatives provide homes for more than a quarter of a million Canadians. Their financial dealings are handled by the credit union movement and they are insured by the Co-operators Insurance Company.  In addition one finds all sorts of local, national and international associations of ordinary citizens caring for the needs of specific groups: women, the handicapped, children, immigrants, the unemployed, workers of every sort and so on.

    All of these various efforts have come into focus through the World Social Forum and its counterparts on the continental, national and regional levels . The World Social Forum initially met in the year 2001 in Porto Alegre, Brazil as a counterpoint to the annual meeting of world business leaders in Davos, Switzerland.  Each year it has grown in numbers, strength, creativity and depth.  It is a sounding board for peoples’ movements throughout the world to assess their strength and define their approaches to the struggle for alternatives, for dignity and justice.

    We should not underestimate the role that the Church has played in all this.  Building on the foundations of the movement of liberation theology in Latin America (and ultimately, throughout the world), local communities in many countries mobilized to promote the elimination of the debt of poor countries.  It has been a learning experience for many to discover how an issue, simple in its ethical demand, could be so complicated in its resolution (as we are seeing with the manoeuvres of the G-8 over these last weeks).   Church related organizations were instrumental in conceiving the first World Social Forum and they have accompanied its growth ever since.  The Church can also take no little credit for encouraging grassroots organizations throughout the world who have pressed for greater recognition and respect for human rights, who have opposed military solutions to social conflicts and who have lobbied for stronger international controls on corporate business interests, who have supported cooperatives or local associations and who have encouraged research into major national and international issues.

    Contemporary theologians have attempted to provide an outline of the theology of the neo-liberal capitalist market and to indicate the relevance of the biblical opposition to idolatry.  It is here that the Church’s voice is particularly telling.  The underlying foundation of that voice has been the moral values of solidarity, respect and justice that lie at the heart of the Gospel.  John-Paul II was denouncing also an idolatry of the market proposed by neo-liberal business interests when he argued for a “Civilization of love”  (or solidarity, as he himself said). 

    Much remains to be done to provide a practical and workable model for economic and political activity that corresponds to the principles of Catholic Social Teaching.  This is perhaps the greatest challenge facing the Church in the coming generation.

    A review of the current situation reveals both creativity and stagnation.  Peoples’ movements continue to mobilize millions throughout the world to demand a voice and a place in an inclusive society.  Yet, I sense that many hesitate in face of the risks of  really throwing themselves into the struggle for justice in support of the economically poor, the socially excluded and the politically oppressed.  

A version of this text can also be found at: http://www.holycrossjustice.org/RenshawGlobalizationEng.htm