3 ms·
I think globalisation as we saw it was the logical evolution of a world largely at peace for 30 years. No cold wars, no world wars (of course plenty of local on
by rich_sasha 5y ago
I think globalisation as we saw it was the logical evolution of a world largely at peace for 30 years. No cold wars, no world wars (of course plenty of local ones with terrible human suffering). It was almost as if we thought humanity was past that; we were past the trenches of WWI, fascist craziness of WWII and entrenched rivalry of Cold War, and we’re building a stable, global world of tomorrow. Then it does make sense to source everything wherever it is cheapest; services in developed countries, resources in developing ones (for consumers in the former anyway).
Except of course, it turns out that wasn’t right. China is raising the stakes and wants a seat in the superpower club, Russia clearly isn’t past WWII style politics. But I guess 4 years ago this wasn’t obvious to the average politician (who tend to be reactive anyway).
- stjohnswarts 5y agoI personally think that it was the collapse of the Soviet Union, not anything to do with trade. We've always had trade for the past few centuries and it never stopped countries from attacking/invading others.