A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Monday, November 28, 2016
It’s back to the drawing-board for globalisation
"Globalisation needs course correction"- Obama in Athens

Globalising the neoliberal way
Internationalism nourishes pluralism, eschews ultra-nationalism
Internationalism nourishes pluralism, eschews ultra-nationalism
by Kumar David-November 26, 2016, 7:36 pm
Ranil
Wickremesinghe is right to say growth in Lanka depends on international
linkages. Local investors are effete; overseas ones have to be enticed.
Western capital is risk averse and investors shy due to the prolonged
low key depression, aggravated by Brexit, Trump and ascendance of the
far-right in France, Holland, Denmark and Austria. Therefore trade and
investment cooperation with China and India assume importance. We must
not let self-serving professionals or skilled labour alarmed by
competition stop ECTA. Likewise we must evolve a win-win strategy with
China for an investment zone in Hambantota incorporating the harbour and
that wacko flights-to-nowhere airport.
Let’s begin with a recap of the 40 year story from neo-liberal times
(mid-1970s). Globalisation was the poster child of imperialism; free
trade, open markets, capital movement, curbing wages and workers’ rights
(pseudonym ‘labour market reforms’), eliminating tax on multinationals
and removing currency restrictions. For decades this was the IMF,
Washington and Whitehall chorus, the refrain of learned economists, some
of them Nobel Prize winners now strangely deaf and dumb, and of course
our very own JR and his mouthpieces. Then what on earth went wrong?
Unexpectedly millions in the West were left out and left behind;
globalisation did not work in the Appalachian coal mines, Detroit,
industrialised regions of France and in the north of England. The
sorcerer’s apprentice, capitalist globalisation, turned on its master,
Globalisation per se, and devoured it? Brexit, Trump and the rise of the
European far-right manifests this wrath, but none has the foggiest
notion how to stop the slide.
Flat-footed globalisation
Globalisation has gone sour; not news for the left which raged against
it from day-one. (It committed to internationalism long ago; but more on
that later). Neo-liberal globalisation is interleaved with capitalism
hence it has been a target of unremitting assault by the Left. What is
the difference between ‘actually existing globalisation’ (AEG) and the
Left’s cherished world without borders, nations as anachronisms and
workers of the world unite? Why has a universalist vision of previous
centuries flared up as class-struggle now? Why has globalisation become a
political question? Simple, AEG is a process in the service of capital
and profit. It lets trans-national corporations disentangle from
national constraints on wages, welfare, national labour regulations and
trade union influence. It shapes not only the economy but also politics;
it transforms society itself.
This was the story for decades but after the calamitous financial crisis
and recession of 2008-09 and the subsequent prolonged low key
depression (I call it a Wobble-U shape) the shoe moved to the other
foot, nemesis came with a vengeance. Insecurity now is a phenomenon of
Europe and the USA and to compound matters it is no longer just
economics but also a startling political menace – racial intolerance.
Obama laments "globalisation needs course correction"; Angela Merkel
softens her election losing hard stand on border controls; strange words
from unexpected quarters.
The political ramifications are far reaching. Take two scenarios
(actually it will be a mix). If Trump is tamed by his GOP handlers and
abandons his hare-brained promises there will be uproar in his feral
following. If he does not, he will be declared unfit to lead the ‘free
world’ – code for global capitalism. In the latter case I have a hunch
leadership will be transferred into the trustworthy hands of Angela
Merkel. Thereafter the ruling classes of America and Europe can breathe a
sigh of relief. What was Obama up to in Germany last week – taking an
Alpine holiday! Oh no; options must have been discussed and persuading
Merkel to stand for a fourth term I am sure was high on the closed-door
agenda. If the overbearing dominance of a Trump madhouse eases into a
more pluripotent world with three power centres (US, Europe and China)
it would be an opening for smaller nations. Ranil will find at hand a
helpful table on which to play asking-hitting (booruwa), raise
investments and promote Lanka’s exports if he plays a smart hand.
This account of the recalibration of the global pecking order is not
farfetched if you read respected gurus of the establishment. I cannot
devote space to quoting many so will make do with one, Martin Wolf,
Chief Financial Editor of the Financial Times. I abridge and quote
"Will there be another huge financial crisis? So it is with banks. They
are designed to fall. So fall they surely will. A recent book explores
this reality. What makes attention justified is that its author was at
the heart of the monetary establishment before and during the crisis;
Mervyn King, former governor of the Bank of England".
This was written on 3 June before Brexit and perhaps can be read as
exaggerated to persuade voters not to leave the European Union. Ok then,
what does Wolf say now (15 November)?
"Donald Trump has won the presidency, the US has, as a result, chosen as
its next president a man whose inexperience, character, temperament and
knowledge make him unsuited for this office. The consequences will be
many; the economic ones important. He may reverse globalisation,
destabilise the financial system, weaken US public finances and threaten
trust in the dollar. US-led globalisation is already fragile. Trump
seems likely to push it into the coffin".
Wolf is an outspoken advance guard in his apprehensions about "free
world" leadership. Trump’s version of America’s place in the world is to
kill TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) and open the road for
consolidation of the China-led Regional Comprehensive Economic
Partnership; the Transatlantic Partnership was "unborn tomorrow dead
yesterday"; NAFTA with Mexico and Canada will survive, damaged. Imposing
tariffs on China and Mexico are contrary to WTO rules; the ensuing
trade wars will not restrain US companies from investing overseas, nor
bring jobs and investment to the America. The misery of Trump’s
following will not be assuaged. In short, his threats if translated into
action will kill AEG without help from detractors of globalisation.
Wolf and his ilk cry wolf but offer no way out. The way out is to shrink
the obscene wealth and income gap everywhere and to curb the vast
transfer of value from global labour to elites and multinationals. The
crumbs falling from the table to the yokels below in America have
evaporated; so Trumpets bellow and all manner of Exiters march to the
global door. However shrinking inequality or crafting a fairer
world-order are not what Wolves, Trumpets or for that matter Clintons,
cherish.
Last week I said Trump’s bogus-Keynesian (loose fiscal policy and
irresponsible monetary antics) infrastructure building impetuosity
(Mussolini populism) will come in conflict with entrenched philosophy
Republicans are committed to with near religious zeal. His policies lead
to inflation (at last) and an erosion of the dollar encouraging search
for a new global currency order. That is if Trump is allowed to have his
way, but more likely he will not; Washington will cut in and tame him.
If that is how the wind blows Trump and the GOP will face the music of
an outraged gullible electorate.
What I am taking pains to say is not about Trump, America or its
economy. It is that globalisation as we have known it for decades (AEG)
is nearing the end of its shelf-life, one way or the other. A deep
recession and economic dislocation in advanced capitalist economies will
be painful for others as well, but small countries, if nimble and quick
witted, can benefit by taking advantage of these fissures. Do people
who make these decisions ever read my crap? Not likely.
Internationalism for
the people
What is called globalisation these days and better known as
internationalism in previous times is no stranger. I will close with two
passages (heavily edited for length and style) from what is surely the
best known of all the world’s political pamphlets.
"We are reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationalities.
Working men have no country! National differences and antagonisms
between people are daily vanishing due to freedom of commerce, the world
market, uniformity in the mode of production and corresponding
conditions of life."
"Exploitation of the world-market (has) given a cosmopolitan character
to production and consumption in every country. To the chagrin of
reactionaries it has drawn from under the feet of industry the national
ground on which it stood. Old established industries have been
destroyed, dislodged by new ones that no longer work indigenous
materials but materials drawn from the remotest zones, whose products
are consumed in every quarter of the globe. In place of national
seclusion and self-sufficiency we have universal interdependence of
nations. The intellectual creations of individual nations become common
property. National one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become
impossible. In a word, the bourgeoisie creates a world after its own
image".
So be it. The next phase for mankind’s progress is not the illusory
world of Walls and barriers but a world where "we shall have an
association in which the free development of each is the condition for
the free development of all".
