I guess my take is somewhat in-between. net globalization flows not shrinking, but have a new geometry, incrementally trending toward blocs & global fragmentation. Not sure zero-sum geopol/securitization of econ decisions is sustainable, tends toward conflict. So maybe it is a bit of an interregnum?
Globalisation isn't just one thing, and it isn't primarily reductions in barriers to trade in physical goods. Other elements (movements in people, ideas and financial assets) are more important, and often in conflict. Most obviously, there is very little correlation between support for free movement of people and support for free movement of capital. The ideal position for capital, in effect through the period of neoliberalism, is one where the threat of capital movement can be used to discipline workers in every country separately.
I guess my take is somewhat in-between. net globalization flows not shrinking, but have a new geometry, incrementally trending toward blocs & global fragmentation. Not sure zero-sum geopol/securitization of econ decisions is sustainable, tends toward conflict. So maybe it is a bit of an interregnum?
https://www.stimson.org/2024/whither-globalization-retreat-industrial-policy-unintended-consequences/
Globalisation isn't just one thing, and it isn't primarily reductions in barriers to trade in physical goods. Other elements (movements in people, ideas and financial assets) are more important, and often in conflict. Most obviously, there is very little correlation between support for free movement of people and support for free movement of capital. The ideal position for capital, in effect through the period of neoliberalism, is one where the threat of capital movement can be used to discipline workers in every country separately.