The anti-globalization movement, or counter-globalization movement,Jacques Derrida (May 2004) Enlightenment past and to come, speech at the party for 50 years of Le Monde diplomatique is a social movement critical of economic globalization. The movement is also commonly referred to as the global justice movement, alter-globalization movement, anti-globalist movement, anti-corporate globalization movement, or movement against neoliberal globalization. There are many definitions of anti-globalization.Morris, Douglas Globalization and Media Democracy: The Case of Indymedia (pre-publication version)Podobnik, Bruce, Resistance to Globalization: Cycles and Evolutions in the Globalization Protest Movement , p. 2. Podobnik states that "the vast majority of groups that participate in these protests draw on international networks of support, and they generally call for forms of globalization that enhance democratic representation, human rights, and egalitarianism."Stiglitz, Joseph & Andrew Charlton. 2005. Fair Trade for All: How Trade Can Promote Development. p. 54 n. 23 (writing that "The anti-globalization movement developed in opposition to the perceived negative aspects of globalization. The term 'anti-globalization' is in many ways a misnomer, since the group represents a wide range of interests and issues and many of the people involved in the anti-globalization movement do support closer ties between the various peoples and cultures of the world through, for example, aid, assistance for refugees, and global environmental issues.")
Participants base their criticisms on a number of related ideas.No Logo: No Space, No Choice, No Jobs by Canadian journalist Naomi Klein. What is shared is that participants oppose large, multinational corporations having unregulated political power, exercised through trade agreements and deregulated financial markets. Specifically, corporations are accused of seeking to maximize profit at the expense of work safety conditions and standards, labour hiring and compensation standards, environmental conservation principles, and the integrity of national legislative authority, independence, and sovereignty. Some commentators have variously characterized changes in the global economy as "turbo-capitalism" (Edward Luttwak), "market fundamentalism" (George Soros), "casino capitalism" (Susan Strange),Strange, Susan: Casino Capitalism. Oxford: Blackwell, 1986. and as "McWorld" (Benjamin Barber).
Ideology and causes
Supporters believe that by the late 20th century, those they characterized as "ruling elites" sought to harness the expansion of world markets for their own interests. This combination of the Bretton Woods institutions, states, and multinational corporations has been called "globalization" or "globalization from above." In reaction, various social movements emerged to challenge their influence; these movements have been called "anti-globalization," "alter-globalization" or "globalization from below."Korzeniewicz, Roberto Patricio & Smith, William C., 2001, Protest and Collaboration: Transnational Civil Society Networks and the Politics of Summitry and Free Trade in the Americas, pp. 4–6.
Opposition to international financial institutions and transnational corporations People opposing globalization believe that international agreements and global financial institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization, undermine local decision-making. Corporations that use these institutions to support their own corporate and financial interests can exercise privileges that individuals and small businesses cannot,Stiglitz, Joseph E., "Globalism's Discontents", The American Prospect, 13, 1, January 2002, PP. 1-14 including the ability to:
Move freely across borders Extract desired natural resources Use a wide variety of human resources
The movement aims for an end to the legal status of "corporate personhood", the dissolution of free market fundamentalism, and the radical economic privatization measures of the World Bank, the IMF, and the World Trade Organization.
Activists are especially opposed to the various abuses that they think are perpetuated by globalization and the international institutions that, they say, promote neoliberalism without regard to ethical standards or environmental protection. Common targets include the World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) and free trade treaties like the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement (TPPA), the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the World Economic Forum (WEF). In light of the economic gap between rich and poor countries, adherents of the movement claim that free trade without measures to protect the environment and the health and well-being of workers will merely increase the power of industrialized nations (often termed the "Global North" in opposition to the developing world's "Global South"). Proponents of this line of thought refer to the process as polarization and argue that current neo-liberal economic policies have given wealthier states an advantage over developing nations, enabling their exploitation and leading to a widening of the global wealth gap.
A report by Jean Ziegler, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, notes that "millions of farmers are losing their livelihoods in the developing countries, but small farmers in the northern countries are also suffering" and concludes that "the current inequities of the global trading system are being perpetuated rather than resolved under the WTO, given the unequal balance of power between member countries."Ziegler, Jean, 2004, Economic, social and cultural rights - The right to food, page 9 Activists point to the unequal footing and power between developed and developing nations within the WTO. With respect to global trade, in relation to the protectionist policies towards agriculture enacted in many developed countries. These activists also point out that heavy subsidization of developed nations' agriculture and the aggressive use of export subsidies by some developed nations. The export subsidies make agricultural products more attractive on the international market, and this is a major cause of declines in the agricultural sectors of many developing nations.
Global opposition to neoliberalism Through the Internet, a movement began to develop in opposition to the doctrines of neoliberalism which were widely manifested in the 1990s when the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) proposed liberalization of cross-border investment and trade restrictions. This was implemented through its Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI). This treaty was prematurely exposed to public scrutiny and subsequently abandoned in November 1998 in the face of strenuous protest and criticism by national and international civil society representatives.
The neoliberal position argued that free trade and reduction of public-sector regulation would bring benefits to poor countries and to disadvantaged people in rich countries. Anti-globalization advocates urge the preservation of the natural environment, human rights (especially workplace rights and conditions) and democratic institutions are likely to be placed at undue risk by globalization unless mandatory standards are attached to liberalization. Noam Chomsky stated in 2002 that:
Anti-war movement
By 2002, many parts of the movement showed wide opposition to the impending invasion of Iraq. Many participants were among the 11 million or more protesters who on the weekend of February 15, 2003, participated in global protests against the imminent Iraq war. Other anti-war demonstrations were organized by the anti-globalization movement: see for example the large demonstration, organized against the impending war in Iraq, which closed the first European Social Forum in November 2002 in Florence, Italy.
Anti-globalization militants worried about a proper functioning of democratic institutions as the leaders of many democratic countries (Spain, Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom) were acting against the wishes of the majority of their populations in supporting the war. Chomsky asserted that these leaders "showed their contempt for democracy".
The economic and military issues are closely linked in the eyes of many within the movement.
Christian right
Opposition to globalization has been present among the Christian right. Globalization, among the Christian right, is seen as a way of imposing a centralized standard upon institutions such as the nuclear family and nation, though economic critique has been secondary to the "homogenization of social relations." In their 2003 book Globalizing Family Values: the Christian Right in International Politics, authors Doris Buss and Didi Herman note that while the views of those on the Protestant right have some overlap with anti-globalization on the left, such as concern for effects on developing nations, the underlying issue for the Protestant right is one of "secular values and morality they believe accompany, indeed underpin, economic globalization." The United Nations is seen as one example of a dominating centralized entity whose "economic program is aimed at destroying Christian American sovereignty and compelling the U.S. government to engage in economic relations with anti-Christian regimes".
Appropriateness of the term The movement has no singular name, chiefly because it has no singular leader or consensus to give it one. It has been called a variety of names based on its general advocacy for social change, justice, and radical activism, and its general opposition to capitalism, neoliberalism, and corporate globalization. Activists also resisted using a name conferred by corporate media to smear the intention of their protests. Some activists were also not necessarily against globalization.
Many participants (see Noam Chomsky's quotes above) consider the term "anti-globalization" to be a misnomer. The term suggests that its followers support protectionism and/or nationalism, which is not always the case – in fact, some supporters of anti-globalization are strong opponents of both nationalism and protectionism: for example, the No Border network argues for unrestricted migration and the abolition of all national border controls. S. A. Hamed Hosseini (an Australian sociologist and expert in global social movement studies), argues that the term anti-globalization can be ideal-typically used only to refer to only one ideological vision he detects alongside three other visions (the anti-globalist, the alter-globalist and the alter-globalization). He argues that the three latter ideal-typical visions can be categorized under the title of global justice movement. According to him, while the first two visions (alter-globalism and anti-globalism) represent the reconstructed forms of old and new left ideologies, respectively, in the context of current globalization, only the third one has shown the capacity to respond more effectively to the intellectual requirements of today's global complexities. Underlying this vision is a new conception of justice, coined accommodative justice by Hosseini, a new approach towards cosmopolitanism (transversal cosmopolitanism), a new mode of activist knowledge (accommodative consciousness), and a new format of solidarity, interactive solidarity.