The standard and a challenger view of Globalisation

Sunday morning reading turned up two separate pieces from Adam Posen President of the Peterson Institute for International Economics and

Tyler Brule head of Monocle reflecting while one of in his usual haunts St Moritz.

Two different backgrounds, US and European with diverse interesting perspectives that challenge our status quo.

The standard US view of Globalisation lies in the strength of Rules Based order founded on democracy is beginning to show cracks and as Tyler points out large countries feel the rules do not apply. In fact it is a reality and the Southern and Eastern blocs operate under different belief systems (China, India, Indonesia, Turkey and African countries. ++++) do not believe nor follow western democracy. Further it is against our own western principles to display intolerance of difference views.

The US view always comes back to war as the solution to all that is wrong and this reflects in the think tank and Education institution views sooner or later.

This has direct impacts on future of western business and minimises the scale of economic and business environment under which regulation such as privacy, securities governance and cybersecurity operate. This has many direct and direct implications, but two that spring to mind and of interest here are payments and technology funding.

BACKGROUND

Globalisation

Posher: Over the last 20 years, two trends have already been corroding globalization in the face of its supposedly relentless onward march. First, populists and nationalists have erected barriers to free trade, investment, immigration, and the spread of ideas—especially in the United States. Second, Beijing’s challenge to the rules-based international economic system and to longstanding security arrangements in Asia has encouraged the West to erect barriers to Chinese economic integration. The Russian invasion and resulting sanctions will now make this corrosion even worse.

And Tyler Brule – Monocle

“The concept of inclusion and diversity is a very American invention,” said a Singapore lawmaker during my recent visit. “And it’s being forced on nations and businesses that operate by different codes for a variety of reasons: historical values and circumstance, religion, geography and more. Not recognising these differences and trying to force a US liberal agenda through Indonesian society in itself is not very inclusive.”

Could it be that Asian conservatism and Germanic pragmatism is acting as a much-needed buffer to the Anglosphere’s culture of intolerant tolerance? Have new, well-funded media outlets revealed that the supremacy of established news organisations is far from guaranteed? Are we seeing slivers of courage where politicians, business owners and journalists choose to use cold, hard data to call out missteps in municipal policies and federally funded programmes? “