Globalization and its discontents

The events of 11 September 2001 and their aftermath have prompted several obituaries of the so-called 'Anti-globalization movement'. Even before that date, the movement was struggling to cope with the problem of violence at its set piece summit protests in Genoa and elsewhere. This article explores the origins of the movement and its likely response to these events.
Three broad trends can be identified in a movement made up of different currents and thinking, but concerned with the present direction of economic globalization: statists who wish to rebuild the developmental role of the states; alternatives seeking grassroots 'small is beautiful' models of development; and reformists who wish to improve the workings of the current institutions and rules governing globalization to address concerns such as rising inequality, the need to tailor economic policies to national conditions, and the lack of accountability of transnational corporations. There has been some change with regard to these issues in recent years, but the introduction of reforms have posed a challenge to the unity of the movement, threatening to drive a wedge between its reformists and its rejectionists.
The impact of the events of 11 September on the movement will depend mainly on how it affects the shape of political and economic governance. If the West responds with a national security crackdown and a return of Cold War mindsets, then the political space and appetite for protest is likely to diminish. However, there are encouraging early signs that the West is pursuing a broader goal, seeking to achieve long-term stability by addressing the sources of political, social and economic exclusion and injustice. If this turns out to be the case, then the movement may even come to be seen in hindsight as the true defender of globalization.