globalist argument

globalist argument

1. what they believe

   • produces both winners and losers: social inequality
     • global poverty
       • poorest 40% of the world's population accounts for 5% of the global income
       • access to water becoming a crucial global agenda
     • global north v global south
   • talk about Eurocentric belief
     • see europe as the superior
   • problems it has bought about
     • deterritorialisation, unregulated economic flows, weak political legitimacy
   • [Mishra 1999, Beck 2000, Taylor-Gooby 1997, Deacon, Jessop
     • globalisation erodes state capacities
       • over economy
         • shift in economy: from Keynesian policies of full employment, progressive taxation, high social spending to supply side liberal policies: spending cuts, privatisation
           • neoliberalism increased privatisation and marketisation
             • foreign direct investment :the least developed countries have only attracted 1% of recent world FDI flow
             • issues with global trade regime
             • deep ethical and moral questions around corruption and political pressures, systematic deploiticisation of its own operations
     • weakens democracy
     • downward pressure on spending, taxes and wages
     • labour market consequences
       • unemployment
   • BUT: no evidence to prove that social spending has decreased
   • globalisation is the cause of crisis
   • economic issues
     • adapting to global competition leads to reduction in costly welfare system productions
     • subjects the economy to danger
     • undermines macroeconomic control
       • internationalisation of capital
       • as capital decreases you can't regulate it as easily
       • less control over interest rates
       • reduces fiscal policy autnomy

2. other belief

   • there is increasing internationalisation of the production/exchange of goods/services
   • technological revolution
     • BUT technical inequalities between global south and north
   • increased migration and human mobilites
   • SCEPTICS
     • Pierson 1998, Leibfried 1998, 2003
     • globalisation has little impact on welfare states
       • evidence: welfare spending remained stable in the 1980s/1990s
     • it is not the cause of tension btwn democracy and capitalism
     • domestic factors are the most influential
       • pressures on welfare states are unrelated to globalisation
         • jobless growth: from manufacturing to service economy
         • extended welfare state: policy inflexibility and budgetary pressures
         • demographic changes: ageing- impact on pension and health and social care costs
     • Yeates, N., Holden, C. (2009)
       • power of globalisation has been exaggerated
       • ideology impacts the way a welfare state is viewed with regards to globalisation
   • PRAGMATISTS
     • Rhodes 1996, Swank 2002, Esping-Andersen 1996, Jessop, Palier 2001
     • globalisation is very important but differentiated impact
       • pressure points in liberal regimes: low wages, poverty, low welfare spending, poverty trap
         • corporatist: insurance based, high wage flooring, high unemployment, service issues
         • scandinavian: large public sector, need for increased flexibility, generous benefits, activation policies for full employment
     • critique of globalists: 1) overestimate the effect of globalisation, neglect domestic factors 2) it has a differentiated effect on different welfare states
     • critique of sceptics :they miss important points eg how globalisation is an ideological and political project
     • consequence rather than a cause
       • welfare states are self inflicting

3. my belief

   • can see the most evidence in this argument
     • race to bottom
   • welfare state exposed to economic forces
     • eg 1970s oil crisis: reliance on russia's resources caused huge issues for europe
       • we rely on resources, so their is less control over economy when things go wrong
     • inflation crisis has had a world wide effect
   • if you focus on the global south, this argument is clear: globalisation has had dire impacts on these countries, perhaps less so in western countries

4. evidence of belief

   • TNCS/NGOs
     • very powerful, major players in global public policy making
       • they shape the development assistance flow to the global south
   • unequal trade rules
   • privatisation
   • world bank/ IMF
     • debt crisis in developing countries
     • world bank: focuses on poverty reduction, economic development
     • IMF: monetary and fiscal policies, monitors deficits
   • politically
     • geopolitical integration
     • shock therapy
       • washington consensus
         • sudden social reforms eg in eastern europe and latin america: need to shift to a free market quickly without public opposition
   • spread of global brands
     • 'mcdonalisation'
     • companies ship out the profits and tax, pay under minimum wage, Africa looses out
     • race to the bottom
       • big countries target smaller countries, cheap labour= labour standards decreased, ge Nike, reebok
         • caused by globalisation economic competition, drive for profit
   • ecologically
     • deforestation
     • famine/war
   • oil crisis 1970s: reliance on Russian gas
   • conditionality
     • 2006: average of 37 conditions per loan
     • contributed to debt crisis
     • corruption issues