From Liberal Globalisation to Economic Nationalism?

stmm. 2019 (4): 136-141

UDC 171 : 172

DOI: http://10.15407/sociology2019.04.136

The article is published on the website: Reprinted with permission of the author.

David Lane - Emeritus Reader in Sociology, Emeritus Fellow of Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Abstract. Сontemporary counter movements, universally dubbed as ‘populist’ differ in many respects, but they all agree on a number of significant political and economic issues. First, a condemnation of the economic polices shared until now by the major electoral parties. Second, a criticism that the economic mechanism and political process have led to social polarisation. Third, a contention that electoral democracy has delivered an oligarchic bloc of irresponsible elites who have utilised neo-liberalism to legitimate their own interests.
Skepticism about the benefits of the global order is fueled by two political issues. First, the results of globalized markets do not solve many incompatibilities, and this leads to critical movements against the establishment. The second problem is that the economic mechanism must move from the coordination of the global market to public administration. If market coordination leads to booms and busts, enrichment and poverty, some form of administrative coordination is an acceptable alternative.
Such political events are associated with economic nationalism. However, a globalized neoliberal economy has created many obstacles to deter governments from pursuing policies promoting economic nationalism. In addition, there are limits to the power of administration — political, constitutional and economic. Anyway, it can be assumed that if economic coordination could be carried out on the principles of planning and maximizing public welfare, many of these problems could be solved.

Keywords: ‘populist’ counter movements, effects of globalization, economic nationalism, state management and coordination.