A Practical Agenda for Revolutionary Times

Apr 21, 2017 Ngaire Woods

As the world’s financial leaders gather for the IMF and World Bank spring meetings, many working people around the world are demanding radical change, because they sense that their voices are not being heard. By repeatedly making the case for globalization without addressing these concerns, elites may be doing more harm than good.

OXFORD – As the world’s financial leaders gather for the International Monetary Fund and World Bank spring meetings, many working people around the world are demanding radical change, because they sense that their voices are not being heard. Those who are supposed to represent them should not ignore this anger and frustration any longer.

According to the 2017 Edelman Trust Barometer, the public’s confidence in the status quo has collapsed worldwide, owing to widely held concerns about globalization, innovation, immigration, the erosion of social values, and corruption. At the same time, the response from elites who regard themselves as the guardians of economic growth has sometimes made matters worse. If they think they can allay public concerns simply by explaining the benefits of the current global economic system and tweaking policies to compensate those left behind, they are in for a rude awakening.

Earlier this month, the IMF, World Bank, and World Trade Organization published a joint report extolling the benefits of trade as a driver of productivity growth, competition, and consumer choice. The report’s argument in favor of free trade is not new, nor is its recommendation that “active labor-market policies” be used to cushion the blow of lost jobs and livelihoods. What is new is that repeating these claims, without also addressing people’s deeper concerns, can now do more harm than good.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Get unlimited access to PS premium content, including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, On Point, the Big Picture, the PS Archive, and our annual year-ahead magazine.

Already have an account or want to create one to read two commentaries for free? Log in

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 17 in all 17 Comments on this article

Peter Ellis Apr 25, 2017

But is the right word to be concerned about 'globalisation', or should it be more correctly 'neo-liberal economics'. To address the former as Trump is doing, is the road to nowheresville. We need global cooperation in a refashioned economics that embraces sustainability. The problem with articles like these is that they do not think beyond conventional thinking - what work are you going to give the 'workers' - coal?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Cary Fraser Apr 24, 2017

The rise of the Asia-Pacific region as the "plaque-tournante" of the contemporary international political economy. The states of the North Atlantic and Russia have had to make adjustments to that reality since the 1990s but the capacity to shape the future already lies among the dominant and emerging powers in Asia. Hence "The establishment’s agenda has been failing for too long. And as elites continue to proclaim the benefits of free trade and globalization, they are merely widening the chasm of popular mistrust."
The Europeans experienced this development with the emergence of the US in the late 19th and early 20th century and can rely on their historical memory. Since most of the US leadership does not understand history - including their own - the return to 19th century verities under the Trump presidency illustrates the limits of American leadership.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jay Kay Apr 23, 2017

"Their vote is the only means they have left to hit back at the establishment."

The fact is that the Chattering, Political and Financial Classes now exist only at the pleasure of the New Estate, which yields the closest thing history has yet seen to omnipotent power.

The New Estate is mounting a slow motion revolution to remove the bulk of th discredited Chattering, Political and Financial Classes, whilst at the same time retaining and protecting the venerable Western Institutions. The issue with the current system is that The Institutions have been penetrated and overrun by armies of traitorous drones in thrall to The Religion of Internationalism, Political Correctness and Multiculturalism.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Delia Ruhe Apr 23, 2017

In the West, the right to organize is already constitutionally protected, if often ignored by those who should see to its protection. It’s imperative to make management threats against union organizers, and the busting of unions already in existence criminal offenses.

But encouraging welfare capitalism as a substitute for the inaccessible advantages of globalism is pointless, as social programs are vulnerable to party ideologies, especially those parties that promise them at election time but have no intention of post-election follow-through. What’s needed in addition to a basic handful of constitutionally protected economic social initiatives is labour’s participation in the negotiation of trade agreements — and not just labour, but also consumers and environmental experts representing nonhuman nature.

For as we all know — although free-trade’s winners will deny it — the “free” in “free trade” means freedom of investors from any responsibility for the welfare of workers, consumers, and the environment. If international trade is so absolutely, unambiguously, unquestionably necessary for the prosperity of all nations, then give the nations a seat at the table alongside those politicians and lawyers representing corporations. Until this sinks in and is seriously undertaken, the “revolution” will intensify, and we can look forward to more Trumps, more Le Pens, more Brexits.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Fernando Centeno Apr 23, 2017

Elites (crime families holding official power) don't give up their power, so what does history teach us happens? Let the revolution begin; it'll be messy, but we're reaching the breaking point of impatience.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Apr 23, 2017

Yes, that's about the right idea. Talking about western countries specifically here, this does not apply to the developing world - but they don't get much of a vote in most cases.

IMO, It comes down to a simple material balance. Continuing income and wealth inequality. Claims of social mobility that are over-promised. Dismantling of social democratic institutions -- multi decade control of policy by deregulationists, the Mont Pelerin Society types - I'm still not sure whether they were cynical frauds or merely naiive.

The important thing to realize is that to fix it, the "social order" does not need to be rearranged. You can rank everyone in wealth - then redistribute, while keeping the ranking the same.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Henk Crop Apr 21, 2017

What I find revolutionairy in this article is mainly the tone.
Globalisation has been going on for a long time. Just like replacing old products by new ones. The labor market has no other option than adjust to that. Times are changing. Education and transition facilities can help. I do not know about the Alabama factory, but safety in Western industry has been increasing significantly over the years.
Yes there are also people left behind.
In the labor market they are the unemployed over 50 years old and the non-western immigrants.
You also have a group of people, often with little education, who simply cannot survive in this complicated world. For them you need adequate social security.
We only need politicians who listen and act.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schaeffer Apr 21, 2017

"As the OECD has shown, “non-standard” work is proliferating globally. This trend is contributing to deteriorating working conditions, making workers feel increasingly helpless and vulnerable. Reversing it will require robust standards to ensure workplace safety, fair pay, and the right to enter into collective-bargaining arrangements. Governments will have to intervene to set these standards, as they did during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to improve abysmal conditions in factories. Otherwise, businesses will not be able to behave decently, for fear of being undercut by unscrupulous competitors. "

Macron is planning to make every one of these things worse in France. Predictably, he has the complete support of the establishment in doing so. The Bourbons will never learn. They will never contemplate reform.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Marc Laventurier Apr 21, 2017

It's remarkable how seldom commentators abstract such issues to their natural level. Here we have a complex interaction between the social processes of 'democracy' and capitalism. The former is a far more delicate and tragic phenomenon, existing in the imagination and conscience and actualized only periodically through rituals of affirmation animated by graft, hypocrisy and, as recently, the exploitation of the reduced circumstances of the less capable. Capitalism has permeated the rest of human life, arguing for and maintaining a sort of DarwinismLite which provides, in the OECD anyway, a kind of (profitable) safety net paid for with magical 'future money'. My guess is that populations, to the extent that they can think two weeks ahead, are realizing, perhaps subconsciously, that the magic is wearing off, that the social, political and financial institutions they naively assumed were in the background of this noble experiment, this inspiring passion play of democracy, are in fact businesses operated by the more ambitious and predatory, who regard them as market segments and, in a pinch, cannon fodder, again paid for with all those magical 'future dollars'. Financialized capitalism itself operates in a dream-state, where trillion-dollar market swings, amplified by HFT programs, hinge on often mistaken interpretations of rumors involving central bankers. The difference of course is that the aforementioned political institutions are geared to socialize losses and maintain the pattern of social relations roughly characterized by Marx, whose notion of the the lumpenproletariat seems to apply.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
stephan Edwards Apr 21, 2017

An interesting article professor, Unfortunately the only people who can change the status quo are those who benefit from it. Speaking if only for myself I suspect they lack ...... motivation? Combine that with the fact that for all the elections in the last ..... what 40 years? Not a single policy to benefit the poor or those whom globalization has sodomized has been carried out! The losers are starting to view democracy as a poor joke at best or an oligarchy in disguise more often. The only policies getting carried out are those benefiting the rich and connected. The question I would ask is what happens when the disenfranchised and abandoned of globalization give up on the voting that NEVER improves their situation? My guess is 5.56, 7.62 and IED's what's yours? Because let's face it voting is a joke the fix is in, No one gets to run unless the rich and connected approve.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schaeffer Apr 21, 2017

How rude (and fundamentally wrong) for Ngaire Woods to speak in negative terms of some auto-parts factory in Alabama. Doesn't she recognize a neoliberal paradise when she sees one? Doesn't she worship Macron's economic plan for France, when it is put into action>

Of course, the auto-parts factory in Alabama isn't perfect. With real Open Borders, wages could be reduced to $2 an hour (maybe less) and profits increased even more. The corporate types will get even bigger bonuses and dividends. Since the workers will come from abroad, the progressives will get even more folks to oppose the "bitter clingers" (middle and working class whites).

What could possibly go wrong? We have utopia waiting to be picked up from a sidewalk. What is stopping humanity from the state of perfection beckoning before us?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
jagjeet sinha Apr 21, 2017

REAL DEMOCRATIZATION OF FINANCE
Economics suggested Hillary Clinton with 64 % of the GDP college would over come Trump with 36 % of the GDP college.
The GDP based figures for and against Brexit perhaps not too different - given London voted to Remain.
Marginalization of The Majority in India GDP wise again in line with Trump n Brexit - yet Modi Mantra succeeded.
The pattern of Experts voicing wisdom against Preident LePen is ringing a familiar tone - Dollarized Democracy days numbered.
The Institutional Architecture of Global Capital Flows and Global Institutions - have changed Economic Geography everywhere.
The Marginalized Majority have only Democracy left - to salvage and realign the Economics with Democracy.
Simply lamenting over Social and Regional Inequalities can no longer be permitted - Action to reverse the Economics has begun.
Europe can choose to rejoice in status quo - but the tide worldwide has changed.
Either the Institutional Architecture or The Assets they incubated or both have to be realigned leading to Democratization of Finance.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kostas Markopoulos Apr 21, 2017

Well written article, but us a Greek comedian said once " if elections could change lives of ordinary people for the better then elections
would be illegal and the tool of terrorists".
- Peter Schaeffer Apr 21, 2017
  
  KM, " if elections could change lives of ordinary people for the better then elections would be illegal and the tool of terrorists". The words are supposedly from a "comedian". However, they are no joke. In these very pages, the Brexit referendum has been repeatedly condemned. Elections are only OK if they produce the results the cosmopolitan elite demand. Otherwise, they are not "legitimate".
  
  Quote from Chris Patten in PS
  
  "The Brexit referendum last June was itself a disaster. A parliamentary democracy should never turn to such populist devices."
  
  My response was that only the Lords should be allowed to vote.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
B Wilds Apr 21, 2017

Over the last several years the "stop globalization" movement has gained support in developed countries across the world. The subject of globalization is made up of many threads interwoven in a complex way, the discussion can include several issues such as, but not limited to, immigration and free trade.

Other social concerns also feed into the mix, things like global warming, nationalism, inequality, even population growth. The article below explores this complex issue and questions whether it is justified.

http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2016/07/is-stop-globalization-movement-justified.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
M M Apr 21, 2017

Very good article from the author for a change! How can anyone trust a person or an organisation that is "Self Centred"? This generation of leadership have destroyed no less than 10 future generations due to their "Austerity Measures" under the banners of "Reforms" of the one or the other or Terrorism, etc.. From the misery of the Greeks, in 2015 the IMF had a profit margin of 71%, far outperforming some big banks. And, Greece has been a great revenue source for the Fund; since the bailout programs started in 2010, the country has paid the IMF almost €4 billion in fees and interest (before extraordinary expenses). In fact, Greece payments were so important to the IMF that they were 118% of IMF’s operating profit. Can one call this fairness and extreme happiness for the Greeks? It is not anymore a question of Status Quo, it is about resisting "Absolute Autocracy" , Greed and kicking out the incompetents of the last decade or so. The upcoming French and British elections are going to surprise big times, watch this space.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steve Hurst Apr 21, 2017

The status quo is maintained until the ballot box is overwhelmed in protest at which point status quo collapses. It is highly unlikely that the perpetuators of status quo are capable of significant reform. The question is - will protest groups actually deliver anything other than protest, there is risk they may be tunnel visionaries. But the fundamental failure is incumbent failures not protest. Status quo activists of one sort or another abound because they feel they would lose the benefits granted to them by the status quo so resort to character assassination attempts on protesters. The problem is the outcome is polarisation with the centre ground abandoned and a ballot box civil war develops as displayed in the US. the failure of anybody to secure the centre ground can only lead to social dysfunction because the cohesive mandate of society fails

At one end of the spectrum of protest - The extreme protester is the anarchist and there is no collective noun for anarchists suggesting anarchists have difficulty in being anything more than anarchistic. What is needed, if reform is needed, is protest which is more than a one trick pony
A new reply to this comment has been posted.