Current trends in globalization are causing many global issues, including limited markets, growing debt, vast climate changes, and issues with sovereignty and technology. Joseph’s Stiglitz’s bookHow to Make Globalization Workargues that through better collaborative management, we can achieve highly efficient and ethical global economic markets. Stiglitz strategizes on how to strengthen global economic markets, but he fails to convince that globalization can me managed successfully. Not only does his book fail to demonstrate how we can realistically manage globalization, but it also fails to prove that globalization itself is not the problem. His arguments throughout the book grow from five major concerns, “(that) The rules of the game that govern globalization are not fair, it advances material values over other values, it undermines democracy, many have not benefited from it, and that its’ economic system has been pressed upon developing countries.” After looking more in depth into the issues of globalization and how it correlates to markets and sovereignty, we will see how Stiglitz’s arguments that sprout from the above concerns are well grounded, but unrealistic.
First and foremost, global markets are proving to be asymmetrical and risky, especially in developing countries. Economic systems have been forced on developing countries, and the rules tend to benefit industrialized countries. In Chapter one, Stiglitz outlines how developing countries are often forced into privatization, Americanization, and capitalistic economic systems. An example of this is highlighted in chapter four regarding a “free trade” agreement proposal between Morocco and the United States just a few years ago. U.S. negotiators were only interested in their own drug profits, so they basically forced an agreement with Morocco that would protect American drug companies by delaying generic drugs to the Moroccan market. This created a panic when Moroccans realized the unaffordable prices of U.S. drugs and the delay in vitally needed generic AIDS drugs. This example highlights the main concerns of globalization for Stiglitz. If we look deeper at this example, we’ll find that the solution he offers is insightful. In this instance, Stiglitz hopes to tailor to developing countries in multiple ways: protecting intellectual property by withdrawing TRIPS standardization, giving developing countries access to lifesaving medicines by lowering cost, protecting traditional knowledge, stopping Bio-piracy, and giving developing countries a voice. Many other instances and issues are involved in his book that concern globalization. Each chapter focuses on an issue, and then ends with his insightful solutions to the issue. However, it is difficult to understand how he plans on implementing his ideas to realistically work in today’s global economy. My question is, how does he plan for everyone to specifically cooperate while implementing these ideas?
Stiglitz is brave for writing a book about the problems of globalization, and offering up solutions to the problems. He seems to denounce multiple management systems that are currently in play, for example: TRIPS standardization, United States and its’ influence, the global reserve system and more. However, he doesn’t expand his argument with an idea of where and how to start. In my opinion, his book offers a solid start towards changing people’s minds about globalization, and transforming globalization into a more fair and ethical process. But overall, it gives us the ideal end solutions to globalization, not how to slowly implement the ideas he offers. Because I believe that reaching this ideal will almost be impossible and too complicated on a global scale, I regret to claim that globalization itself may be the problem. An example of how unrealistic his ideas are can be seen in justice for developing countries in regards to economic globalization.
He outlines in chapter three how we can make trade “fair” by limiting the liberalization of markets in developing countries, offering more assistance, offering little to no tariffs, and liberalizing migration. Ultimately, he proposes that we create a “transparent” national and international management system or systems that are above and separate from any government. This committee, he says, would offer assistance to developing countries. He offers many insightful points on improving the economic system in developing countries, such as requiring the certification of goods from developing countries (so as not to re-recreate a “Blood diamond” type effect again). The small changes he offers could surely be implemented, but markets are much more complex. Multiple variables need to be accounted for that he doesn’t address. For example, he fails to recognize that developing countries need to be able to depend on themselves for stability before they are ready to be globally competitive. He recognizes that they need to have their own voice (which I absolutely agree with), but he put forth that they should implement many capitalistic processes (limiting markets and liberalizing migration) before they are stable. I believe that developing countries have a right to develop their own foundation and niche in the global community, and therefore may have different interests that may not correspond to anything other industrialized countries or committees may want. In many ways, giving developed countries assistance can be positive, but I believe it should be implemented at the request of the country. Also, what would his proposed global economic management committee look like? Would Stiglitz want an international board of ‘transparent’ political leaders? Would we have one group or multiple groups carrying Stiglitz’s ideas out? What would justify this group giving the developing country assistance, and how can we be sure assistance would be given towards the goodwill of the country, and not out of political and economic interest? In “assisting” them in a sense, it is just creating another set of rules to add to the capitalistic game; it’s just making everything even more complicated. He suggests banning tariffs for developing countries– why don’t we just ban tariffs altogether then? And, wouldn’t liberalizing the migration of people only prompt the people of developing countries to opt out before their country is able to become stable? The responsibility of developing countries also needs to be considered. If developing countries focus inwards on educating their unskilled population, building transparent institutions, and finding ways to keep their brightest, they will ultimately be able to pull themselves up and into a stable position to choose how they want to be involved in the global economic system. Yes, they may need assistance, but they must determine the rules. Not only do global markets negatively affect developing countries, but also negatively affect industrialized countries (since trade liberalization only benefits a countries’ GDP). Usually, trade liberalization causes the poorest (even in developed countries) to be worse off. Stiglitz notices this, but obviously supports trade liberalization.
In conclusion, it’s easy to see that Stiglitz has a variety of insightful ideas that could be incorporated into the global economic system. However in my opinion, his suggestions merely prompt more questions and specifications that make implementing his ideas more confusing. In my opinion, his ideas are well grounded, but unrealistic when trying to implement them on a global scale. It would be difficult to create this ideal global economic system. This in turn, leads me to believe that globalization itself may be the problem. In his introduction, Stiglitz admits that globalization is “shaped by politics… and reflective of corporate interests”. I definitely believe this to be true; and also believe that reshaping the global economic system would be difficult to change because of this. I also argue that Stiglitz’s main concerns of globalization are in actuality the very definition of capitalism: capitalism is competitive and leaves some better off and some worse off, it values material values over other values, it allows the better off to capitalize on others, and it leaves the worse off helpless. I’d like to end in saying that capitalism and globalization are “creatively destructive; the best of the worst options available” (by Joseph Schumpeter). Maybe the way we’re going about our business is wrong, and that’s why globalization isn’t working.
urbngame 