What do you think?
Rate this book
The Collapse Of Globalism: And The Reinvention Of The World
Grand economic theories rarely last more than a few decades and globalization, with its technocratic and technological determinism, and its market idolatry, may have seen its best days. Perhaps it is already a spent force, argues John Ralston Saul - the prize-winning author of Voltaire's Bastards, and On Equilibrium, among others - in this groundbreaking new book. The Collapse of Globalism follows globalization from its promising beginnings in the 1970s through to the increasing deregulation in industry, and into the 1990s, when regional economic collapses and concern for the environment and for the rights of workers led to widespread protest and disillusionment. In the wake of globalism's collapse, nationalism of the best and worst sort, Saul demonstrates, shows signs of making a remarkable, unexpected recovery.
309 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2005
45 people are currently reading
878 people want to read
About the author
John Ralston Saul
57 books228 followersJohn Ralston Saul is a Canadian writer, essayist, and public intellectual best known for his provocative works on themes such as individualism, citizenship, democracy, globalization, and the role of the public intellectual. His books, widely translated and read around the world, challenge conventional economic and political thinking and advocate for civic responsibility and ethical governance. A celebrated critic of technocratic and corporatist ideologies, Saul is often recognized for his passionate defense of the public good and his deep belief in the transformative power of engaged citizenship.
Born in Ottawa, Saul was educated in Canada, France, and the United Kingdom. He holds a PhD from King’s College London, where he focused on the modernization of France during the Algerian War. Early in his career, he worked in both the corporate world and in diplomacy, notably serving as an assistant to André Malraux, the famed French novelist and minister. These experiences informed his understanding of the interplay between power, culture, and politics, which would later become central to his writing.
Saul first gained international attention with his 1988 philosophical novel Voltaire’s Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason in the West, a critique of how rationality, while necessary, had been distorted into a cold, managerial ideology disconnected from ethics, culture, and human values. The book, and subsequent works like The Unconscious Civilization and The Doubter’s Companion, positioned him as a leading voice in what he called “responsible humanism”—a worldview that values reason but insists it be balanced by intuition, memory, and imagination.
His 2008 book A Fair Country: Telling Truths About Canada argued that Canada’s political culture is deeply shaped by Indigenous values, particularly egalitarianism, negotiation, and mutual respect. The book challenged traditional Eurocentric narratives and emphasized the need for a new national conversation built on inclusion and reconciliation. This work reflects Saul’s long-standing commitment to Indigenous issues in Canada, which has also shaped his public advocacy.
Saul served as president of PEN International, the global writers’ organization, from 2009 to 2015, where he championed freedom of expression and supported writers under threat around the world. He is also the longtime companion and husband of Adrienne Clarkson, former Governor General of Canada, and served as her close advisor during her tenure from 1999 to 2005.
His many awards include the Governor General’s Literary Award for Non-Fiction, the Pablo Neruda Medal, and the Canada Council Molson Prize. Saul is also a Companion of the Order of Canada and a Chevalier of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres in France.
Through his essays, novels, lectures, and international work, John Ralston Saul has established himself as one of Canada’s foremost thinkers—a defender of thoughtful dissent and a persistent voice for a more just, inclusive, and imaginative society. His work continues to influence debates on democracy, culture, and civic engagement both in Canada and abroad.
Born in Ottawa, Saul was educated in Canada, France, and the United Kingdom. He holds a PhD from King’s College London, where he focused on the modernization of France during the Algerian War. Early in his career, he worked in both the corporate world and in diplomacy, notably serving as an assistant to André Malraux, the famed French novelist and minister. These experiences informed his understanding of the interplay between power, culture, and politics, which would later become central to his writing.
Saul first gained international attention with his 1988 philosophical novel Voltaire’s Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason in the West, a critique of how rationality, while necessary, had been distorted into a cold, managerial ideology disconnected from ethics, culture, and human values. The book, and subsequent works like The Unconscious Civilization and The Doubter’s Companion, positioned him as a leading voice in what he called “responsible humanism”—a worldview that values reason but insists it be balanced by intuition, memory, and imagination.
His 2008 book A Fair Country: Telling Truths About Canada argued that Canada’s political culture is deeply shaped by Indigenous values, particularly egalitarianism, negotiation, and mutual respect. The book challenged traditional Eurocentric narratives and emphasized the need for a new national conversation built on inclusion and reconciliation. This work reflects Saul’s long-standing commitment to Indigenous issues in Canada, which has also shaped his public advocacy.
Saul served as president of PEN International, the global writers’ organization, from 2009 to 2015, where he championed freedom of expression and supported writers under threat around the world. He is also the longtime companion and husband of Adrienne Clarkson, former Governor General of Canada, and served as her close advisor during her tenure from 1999 to 2005.
His many awards include the Governor General’s Literary Award for Non-Fiction, the Pablo Neruda Medal, and the Canada Council Molson Prize. Saul is also a Companion of the Order of Canada and a Chevalier of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres in France.
Through his essays, novels, lectures, and international work, John Ralston Saul has established himself as one of Canada’s foremost thinkers—a defender of thoughtful dissent and a persistent voice for a more just, inclusive, and imaginative society. His work continues to influence debates on democracy, culture, and civic engagement both in Canada and abroad.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews
April 1, 2017
This book give an overview of how the neo-liberal economic experiment has been installed in most of the world since the 1970's. This book is a healthy critique of what was promised by the proponents of neo-liberal economics, things like the trickle down theory (give to the rich it will eventually benefit the poor), cut taxes and grow the economy, and trade always equals economic growth, and how neo-liberal economics and globalization has only benefited a small percentage of the world (1%?). Saul points out that economic success stories like China, India and Brazil have done it by NOT embracing neo-liberal economics fully. For example China has significant controls on its cash flows and you can not speculate on its currency. All three countries are highly centralized and controlled. I've read a lot of books on this subject but I still managed to learn a lot from this book. Saul believes that most of the world and its politicians are re-learning the power of the nation state and moving away from neo-liberal economics. Unfortunately for Canada Stephen Harper is still a believer...
September 5, 2013
Very briefly, I have always enjoyed what I've read by Saul and find myself in agreement with him, but having just finished reading this one I can only wonder if his case for Globalism having ended was not several years premature. He seems to underestimate the tenacity of its proponents, and the pusillanimity of its opponents.
But he does to a wonderful job of shredding it... tying it to Mercantilism and separating it from The Invisible Hand. Brilliant.
One wonders when the American Left is going to awake from its Foucaultian delusions to the fact that we are all being screwed by the same people in the same way, and it makes not a damn bit of difference what our gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation is.
There was nothing inevitable about what happened to us economically is Saul's main point. And the fact that the cultural left insisted on seeing it as a problem of identity rather than class made it all that much easier to roll everyone over at once. The classic Alexandrian strategy of divide and conquer.
But he does to a wonderful job of shredding it... tying it to Mercantilism and separating it from The Invisible Hand. Brilliant.
One wonders when the American Left is going to awake from its Foucaultian delusions to the fact that we are all being screwed by the same people in the same way, and it makes not a damn bit of difference what our gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation is.
There was nothing inevitable about what happened to us economically is Saul's main point. And the fact that the cultural left insisted on seeing it as a problem of identity rather than class made it all that much easier to roll everyone over at once. The classic Alexandrian strategy of divide and conquer.
October 3, 2008
shows the real deal behind the hype of globalism and how most of the worlds leaders blindly bought into the concept.
easy to read and comprehend for the laymen yet gripping enough for those who are comfortable with this type of material.
easy to read and comprehend for the laymen yet gripping enough for those who are comfortable with this type of material.
March 21, 2018
انهيار المجتمعات الأوروبية سوف يكون مسبوقًا بانسحاب للناس والموارد إلى أوطانهم الأصلية. ذلك أنَّ الدول الأفقر سوف تستمر في التحلل بسبب الصراعات والكوارث الطبيعية، ما سوف ينتج عنه موجات ضخمة من المهاجرين بعيدًا عن هذه المناطق الفاشلة، سعيًا وراء ملاذ آمن في دول أكثر استقرارًا. سوف تستجيب المجتمعات الغربية بتقييد، إن لم يكن حظر الهجرة: سوف تُبنى جدران تكلف عدة مليارات من الدولارات، وتُستخدم قوات وطائرات بدون طيار تجوب الحدود وتكثف الإجراءات الأمنية حول من وما يسمح له بالدخول، ويُطبق المزيد من السلطوية، وأنماط الحكم الشعبوية. وقال ديكسون: «الأمر يشبه، على وجه التقريب، محاولة مناعية من قبل الدول للحفاظ على حدودها ومقاومة الضغط».
وفي غضون ذلك، فإنَّ الفجوة المتزايدة بين الأغنياء والفقراء داخل هذه الدول الغربية الهشة بالفعل سوف تدفع المجتمع ناحية المزيد من عدم الاستقرار من الداخل. وقال راندرز: «بحلول عام 2050، سوف تتطور الولايات المتحدة والمملكة المتحدة لتصبح مجتمعات ثنائية الطبقات حيث تعيش طبقة صغيرة حياة جيدة في الوقت الذي تتراجع فيه رفاهية الأغلبية. إنَّ ما سوف ينهار على الحقيقة هو العدل».
وقال ديكسون إنَّ هذا الأمر ينطبق على الولايات المتحدة أو المملكة المتحدة أو أي مكان آخر: كلما زاد استياء شعب ما وخوفه، زاد ميله للتعلق بهويته الداخلية، سواء كانت دينية أو عرقية أو قومية. سوف ينتشر الإنكار، بما فيه إنكار دلائل الانهيار المجتمعي نفسه، كما سوف ينتشر الرفض للحقائق المبنية على أدلة. لو اعترف الناس بوجود مشكلات على الإطلاق، فسوف يعزون تلك المشكلات لكل واحد خارج مجموعتهم، وهو الأمر الذي من شأنه أن يزيد من استيائهم. وقال هومر ديكسون: «أنتم تُعدون الشروط النفسية والاجتماعية اللازمة للعنف الجماعي». عندما ينفجر العنف المحلي أخيرًا، أو عندما تقرر دولة ما، أو مجموعة ما أن تغزو غيرها، سوف يكون من الصعب تجنب الانهيار.
ويقول التقرير إنَّ أوروبا سوف تكون أول من يشعر بهذا الضغط نظرًا لقربها من إفريقيا، ولكونها معبرًا إلى الشرق الأوسط إلى جانب الحالة المتقلبة سياسيًا لجيرانها في الشرق. أما الولايات المتحدة فمن المرجح أن تصمد وقتًا أطول، نظرًا لإحاطة المحيط بها.
ومن ناحية أخرى، فربما لا تلاقي المجتمعات الأوروبية نهاية عنيفة دراماتيكية. إذ أحيانًا ما تتلاشى الحضارات من الوجود بكل بساطة ــ تصبح أثرًا بعد عين، بلا ضوضاء. وقال راندرز إنَّ هذا هو الطريق الذي اتخذته الإمبراطورية البريطانية منذ عام 1918. وربما تطرق دول غربية السبيل ذاته أيضًا. بمرور الوقت سوف تتناقص أهمية هذه المجتمعات، وسوف تتجاوز قيمها، التي تعتز بها اليوم، بشكل صارخ حال استجابتها للمشكلات المسببة لتلاشيها. وقال راندرز: «لن تنهار البلدان الغربية، لكنَّ الإدارة السلسة والطبيعة الودية للمجتمع الغربي اليوم سوف تختفي نظرًا لتفشي الظلم. سوف يفشل المجتمع الديمقراطي الليبرالي، في الوقت ذاته سوف تفوز بالانتخابات حكومات أقوى على غرار الصين».
وقال التقرير إنَّ بعض هذه التنبؤات وإشارات التحذير المبكرة ينبغي أن تكون مألوفة لأنها تحدث بالفعل. وبينما لا يشعر هومر ديكسون بالاندهاش من الأحداث التي وقعت حديثًا في العالم – إذ كان قد توقع بعضها في كتابه المنشور عام 2006 – فإنه لم يتوقع لهذه التطورات أن تحدث قبل منتصف عشرينيات القرن الحالي.
وأضاف هومر ديكسون أنَّ انهيار الحضارة الغربية، مع ذلك، ليس أمرًا مفروغًا منه. ذلك أنه يمكن للمجتمع الإنساني أن يتطور إلى مستويات أعلى وأعلى من الرخاء والتطور لو استخدم العقل والعلم ليكونا مرشدين للقرارات، مصحوبين بقيادة رشيدة وإرادة استثنائية. وحتى مع كوننا نعاني من الضغوطات القادمة بفعل التغير المناخي، والنمو السكاني، ونقص عائدات الطاقة، فيمكننا الحفاظ على مجتمعاتنا وتحسينها. لكنَّ هذا يتطلب مقاومة هذه الرغبة الطبيعية في أن نكون أقل تعاونًا وأقل كرمًا وأقل انفتاحًا على التفكير المنطقي عندما تواجهنا مثل هذه الضغوطات الكاسحة. وقال هومر ديكسون: «السؤال الآن: كيف يمكننا المحافظة على نوع من الإنسانية في العالم بينما نمر بهذه التغيرات؟
وفي غضون ذلك، فإنَّ الفجوة المتزايدة بين الأغنياء والفقراء داخل هذه الدول الغربية الهشة بالفعل سوف تدفع المجتمع ناحية المزيد من عدم الاستقرار من الداخل. وقال راندرز: «بحلول عام 2050، سوف تتطور الولايات المتحدة والمملكة المتحدة لتصبح مجتمعات ثنائية الطبقات حيث تعيش طبقة صغيرة حياة جيدة في الوقت الذي تتراجع فيه رفاهية الأغلبية. إنَّ ما سوف ينهار على الحقيقة هو العدل».
وقال ديكسون إنَّ هذا الأمر ينطبق على الولايات المتحدة أو المملكة المتحدة أو أي مكان آخر: كلما زاد استياء شعب ما وخوفه، زاد ميله للتعلق بهويته الداخلية، سواء كانت دينية أو عرقية أو قومية. سوف ينتشر الإنكار، بما فيه إنكار دلائل الانهيار المجتمعي نفسه، كما سوف ينتشر الرفض للحقائق المبنية على أدلة. لو اعترف الناس بوجود مشكلات على الإطلاق، فسوف يعزون تلك المشكلات لكل واحد خارج مجموعتهم، وهو الأمر الذي من شأنه أن يزيد من استيائهم. وقال هومر ديكسون: «أنتم تُعدون الشروط النفسية والاجتماعية اللازمة للعنف الجماعي». عندما ينفجر العنف المحلي أخيرًا، أو عندما تقرر دولة ما، أو مجموعة ما أن تغزو غيرها، سوف يكون من الصعب تجنب الانهيار.
ويقول التقرير إنَّ أوروبا سوف تكون أول من يشعر بهذا الضغط نظرًا لقربها من إفريقيا، ولكونها معبرًا إلى الشرق الأوسط إلى جانب الحالة المتقلبة سياسيًا لجيرانها في الشرق. أما الولايات المتحدة فمن المرجح أن تصمد وقتًا أطول، نظرًا لإحاطة المحيط بها.
ومن ناحية أخرى، فربما لا تلاقي المجتمعات الأوروبية نهاية عنيفة دراماتيكية. إذ أحيانًا ما تتلاشى الحضارات من الوجود بكل بساطة ــ تصبح أثرًا بعد عين، بلا ضوضاء. وقال راندرز إنَّ هذا هو الطريق الذي اتخذته الإمبراطورية البريطانية منذ عام 1918. وربما تطرق دول غربية السبيل ذاته أيضًا. بمرور الوقت سوف تتناقص أهمية هذه المجتمعات، وسوف تتجاوز قيمها، التي تعتز بها اليوم، بشكل صارخ حال استجابتها للمشكلات المسببة لتلاشيها. وقال راندرز: «لن تنهار البلدان الغربية، لكنَّ الإدارة السلسة والطبيعة الودية للمجتمع الغربي اليوم سوف تختفي نظرًا لتفشي الظلم. سوف يفشل المجتمع الديمقراطي الليبرالي، في الوقت ذاته سوف تفوز بالانتخابات حكومات أقوى على غرار الصين».
وقال التقرير إنَّ بعض هذه التنبؤات وإشارات التحذير المبكرة ينبغي أن تكون مألوفة لأنها تحدث بالفعل. وبينما لا يشعر هومر ديكسون بالاندهاش من الأحداث التي وقعت حديثًا في العالم – إذ كان قد توقع بعضها في كتابه المنشور عام 2006 – فإنه لم يتوقع لهذه التطورات أن تحدث قبل منتصف عشرينيات القرن الحالي.
وأضاف هومر ديكسون أنَّ انهيار الحضارة الغربية، مع ذلك، ليس أمرًا مفروغًا منه. ذلك أنه يمكن للمجتمع الإنساني أن يتطور إلى مستويات أعلى وأعلى من الرخاء والتطور لو استخدم العقل والعلم ليكونا مرشدين للقرارات، مصحوبين بقيادة رشيدة وإرادة استثنائية. وحتى مع كوننا نعاني من الضغوطات القادمة بفعل التغير المناخي، والنمو السكاني، ونقص عائدات الطاقة، فيمكننا الحفاظ على مجتمعاتنا وتحسينها. لكنَّ هذا يتطلب مقاومة هذه الرغبة الطبيعية في أن نكون أقل تعاونًا وأقل كرمًا وأقل انفتاحًا على التفكير المنطقي عندما تواجهنا مثل هذه الضغوطات الكاسحة. وقال هومر ديكسون: «السؤال الآن: كيف يمكننا المحافظة على نوع من الإنسانية في العالم بينما نمر بهذه التغيرات؟
July 18, 2009
every citizen in the G-20 should have this as mandatory reading.
April 2, 2020
الكاتب هو بروفيسور جون رالستون سول .. استاذ الاقتصاد والعلوم السياسية بلندن ..
من اول صفحة فى الكتاب كان واضح جدا رأيه الشخصى فى العولمة .. شبهها بإبليس اللى اغرى ادم وحواء بالنعيم الدائم وبعدين تسبب فى شقائهم و سابهم يعانوا وخلع ..
.
اتكلم عن ان العولمة ظهرت فجأة فى السبعينات .. وظهرت كشاب ناضج وليس كطفل زاحف .. ودا معناه ان فيه حد كان ورا انتشار العولمة بالشكل الرهيب المتقن خلال اخر 40 سنة ..
.
اتكلم كمان عن الاساليب اللى فرضت بيها العولمة نفسها على كل الدول .. فالداعين اليها كانوا محددين ملامح كل ركن من اركانها قبل ما يطرحوها للناس .. وكانوا بيتجهزوا ليسودوا العالم فى الوقت اللى كان فيه الناس التانية لسة بتتعلم قواعد اللعبة الجديدة .. ودا اللى ادى للفروقات الرهيبة فى فترة التسعينيات تحديدا .. زى مثلا امريكا اللى وسعت اوى الفجوة بينها وبين باقى الدول .. روسيا وليدة الاتحاد السوفييتي اللى انهار .. المكسيك اللى حصلت فيها كوارث اقتصادية فى الوقت دا نقلتها من مقدمة الدول الصناعية الكبرى ذات الاقتصادات الراسخة الى دولة ضايعة .. ومن الاساليب دى حقوق الملكة الفكرية و تدشين منظمة التجارة العالمية سنة 1995 و الاتجاه للسيطرة على اقتصادات الدول من خلال الكيانات الاقتصادية الكبرى الموجودة فى معظم الدول زى شركة ( كوكاكولا - بيبسي - مرسيدس .. إلخ ) .. كذلك خصص لصناعة الدواء جزء منفصل لإنه شافها من اقسى الادوات اللى اتخذتها العولمة للانتشار ..
.
كذلك اتكلم عن تجارب الحكومات اللى رفضت الرضوخ لسياسات العولمة .. زى الهند وماليزيا و البرازيل .. وازاى ان الدول دى نجحت وحققت طفرات اقتصادية هايلة فى العقود الاخيرة .. سواء بقصد معاداة العولمة لأسباب دينية ( زى ماليزيا ) او لأسباب اقتصادية زى ( البرازيل ) ..
.
وفى الاخر اتكلم عن ان الدول كل يوم بتدرك ماهية العولمة اكتر من اليوم اللى قبله .. وان العولمة فى طريقها للزوال .. وقال ان البديل عن العولمة هيكون ( القومية ) .. وقسم القومية لقومية ايجابية عندها استعداد للتعامل مع القوميات التانية وقومية سلبية بتتعامل مع القوميات التانية بنظرة السيد للعبيد .. واستشهد بحادثة انهيار الاتحاد السوفييتي فجأة .. لعبت القوميات دور هام جدا فى انتاج 25 دولة جديدة كلها انشئت بفعل القومية .. كذلك انهيار سور برلين .. رجع دولتين خلاهم دولة واحدة والسبب هو ( القومية ) .. وذكر الاسلام فى مجمل كلامه واعتبر ان القومية الاسلامية تدخل ضمن القوميات الايجابية بالرغم من ارتفاع اصوات الراديكالية ضمن الفئة دى ( المسلمين ) وبيحاولوا يجذبوا المسلمين ليهم وبالفعل بينجحوا فى ضم اعداد لا بأس بها يوميا بسبب الجهل بالدين .. الا ان كل الكلام دا مخلاش الكاتب يشوف ان مكان القومية الاسلامية المفروض يكون ضمن خانة القوميات السلبية ..
.
اخر حاجة قالها الكاتب انه مش قادر يحدد مين بالظبط القومية اللى هتسيطر على العالم فى الفترة الجاية .. لكنه استبعد الولايات المتحدة الامريكية .. والسبب مش لانها دولة لسة معمولة امبارح ومعندهاش قومية وسكانها اصلهم من دول اوروبية وافريقية مختلفة .. بل بالعكس امريكا قدرت تصنع قوميتها الخاصة على مدار القرن العشرين .. قومية ( النسر الامريكي ) ..
.
إلا انه فى التقديم لكتابه فى مؤتمر فى احد الجامعات الامريكية قال ان القومية الاسلامية قد تكون القادمة المسيطرة على العالم الا انها لن تدوم طويلا وستنقسم لقوميتين ..
من اول صفحة فى الكتاب كان واضح جدا رأيه الشخصى فى العولمة .. شبهها بإبليس اللى اغرى ادم وحواء بالنعيم الدائم وبعدين تسبب فى شقائهم و سابهم يعانوا وخلع ..
.
اتكلم عن ان العولمة ظهرت فجأة فى السبعينات .. وظهرت كشاب ناضج وليس كطفل زاحف .. ودا معناه ان فيه حد كان ورا انتشار العولمة بالشكل الرهيب المتقن خلال اخر 40 سنة ..
.
اتكلم كمان عن الاساليب اللى فرضت بيها العولمة نفسها على كل الدول .. فالداعين اليها كانوا محددين ملامح كل ركن من اركانها قبل ما يطرحوها للناس .. وكانوا بيتجهزوا ليسودوا العالم فى الوقت اللى كان فيه الناس التانية لسة بتتعلم قواعد اللعبة الجديدة .. ودا اللى ادى للفروقات الرهيبة فى فترة التسعينيات تحديدا .. زى مثلا امريكا اللى وسعت اوى الفجوة بينها وبين باقى الدول .. روسيا وليدة الاتحاد السوفييتي اللى انهار .. المكسيك اللى حصلت فيها كوارث اقتصادية فى الوقت دا نقلتها من مقدمة الدول الصناعية الكبرى ذات الاقتصادات الراسخة الى دولة ضايعة .. ومن الاساليب دى حقوق الملكة الفكرية و تدشين منظمة التجارة العالمية سنة 1995 و الاتجاه للسيطرة على اقتصادات الدول من خلال الكيانات الاقتصادية الكبرى الموجودة فى معظم الدول زى شركة ( كوكاكولا - بيبسي - مرسيدس .. إلخ ) .. كذلك خصص لصناعة الدواء جزء منفصل لإنه شافها من اقسى الادوات اللى اتخذتها العولمة للانتشار ..
.
كذلك اتكلم عن تجارب الحكومات اللى رفضت الرضوخ لسياسات العولمة .. زى الهند وماليزيا و البرازيل .. وازاى ان الدول دى نجحت وحققت طفرات اقتصادية هايلة فى العقود الاخيرة .. سواء بقصد معاداة العولمة لأسباب دينية ( زى ماليزيا ) او لأسباب اقتصادية زى ( البرازيل ) ..
.
وفى الاخر اتكلم عن ان الدول كل يوم بتدرك ماهية العولمة اكتر من اليوم اللى قبله .. وان العولمة فى طريقها للزوال .. وقال ان البديل عن العولمة هيكون ( القومية ) .. وقسم القومية لقومية ايجابية عندها استعداد للتعامل مع القوميات التانية وقومية سلبية بتتعامل مع القوميات التانية بنظرة السيد للعبيد .. واستشهد بحادثة انهيار الاتحاد السوفييتي فجأة .. لعبت القوميات دور هام جدا فى انتاج 25 دولة جديدة كلها انشئت بفعل القومية .. كذلك انهيار سور برلين .. رجع دولتين خلاهم دولة واحدة والسبب هو ( القومية ) .. وذكر الاسلام فى مجمل كلامه واعتبر ان القومية الاسلامية تدخل ضمن القوميات الايجابية بالرغم من ارتفاع اصوات الراديكالية ضمن الفئة دى ( المسلمين ) وبيحاولوا يجذبوا المسلمين ليهم وبالفعل بينجحوا فى ضم اعداد لا بأس بها يوميا بسبب الجهل بالدين .. الا ان كل الكلام دا مخلاش الكاتب يشوف ان مكان القومية الاسلامية المفروض يكون ضمن خانة القوميات السلبية ..
.
اخر حاجة قالها الكاتب انه مش قادر يحدد مين بالظبط القومية اللى هتسيطر على العالم فى الفترة الجاية .. لكنه استبعد الولايات المتحدة الامريكية .. والسبب مش لانها دولة لسة معمولة امبارح ومعندهاش قومية وسكانها اصلهم من دول اوروبية وافريقية مختلفة .. بل بالعكس امريكا قدرت تصنع قوميتها الخاصة على مدار القرن العشرين .. قومية ( النسر الامريكي ) ..
.
إلا انه فى التقديم لكتابه فى مؤتمر فى احد الجامعات الامريكية قال ان القومية الاسلامية قد تكون القادمة المسيطرة على العالم الا انها لن تدوم طويلا وستنقسم لقوميتين ..
February 27, 2018
الكتاب ده بكل بساطه عظيم
August 21, 2016
First book in ages to get me to write a summary to try to remember it:
Globalism is presented as a religion. It is inevitable. Once something is presented without thinking through it, like it must happen, it becomes like a religion. Economists become like acolytes as they have an assumption built-in that free-trade will help capitalism which will make the world a better place. No critical thinking of whether it will lift everyone up equally.
Free trade isn't a pure idea. It started with the corn laws in early 19th century. Corn was expensive, farmers wanted to get the margin, but people were starving. Cheap corn was allowed, so a form of free trade was started. In return though, the british empire went to war to be able to sell opium to China. The chinese didn't want it as it was a harmful drug. The British wanted the profits so fought the opium wars to get it.
British didn't switch to free-trade straight away. Waited until they were strong and had an advantage and then imposed it. Of ex-soviet states, the ones that went straight to capitalism suffered corruption and privatised enterprises for peanuts due to lack of law. Ones that went slowly had more success.
Lots of people live on $2 a day have been raised up, true. But many of those people didn't deal with currency, eg. bartering, people living in villages. Introducing capitalism and forcing people to sell crops to make money has actually made things worse, as they're
This has led to the current lack of belief in experts. If an expert keeps telling you the world is a better place, and its not as you can see with your own advice, then why not believe what a Pauline Hanson says?
Now that political parties take it for granted that globalism is a pure good, it has taken away choice from voters and weakened democracy. Democracy is about citizens making a choice. We're not making a choice, we're choosing who to manage our country. Not lead it. The difference is leading can mean taking an action that doesn't stand up to deep analysis, but is done because it is right. Management especially means managing risk. This is done through quantifying options and understanding what can happen. This reduces everything down to numbers. Eg. poverty isn't a disgrace, it becomes a managed risk.
As globalisation is discredited, countries realise they do have choices and start to make them even if they go against the religion (globalism). Eg. Brexit. Hanson is an example of this, but mixed up with the bad nationalism of fear of the other.
What then do we do as people?
- First thing is to join a society or group that allows us to be part of a community or society. Reconnect with our local people. Positive nationalism?
- Understand that people feel insecure. For the last 30-40 years we've been told globalism is the answer. It clearly isn't which means we need to readjust. Readjustment is difficult. People prey on the insecurities by raising the fear of the other. Talking past people doesn't help. Use the socratic method, understand why people are following the idea. Use stats, but make an emotional connection as well. eg. terrorism is scary. But its scarier when you think that a majority of homicides in Australia (75% between 2010 and 2014) were caused by someone that the victim knew.
- Don't belittle others regardless of their views
- Concede that there is no easy answer. Its not the government controlling everything, nor the market doing everything. Different scenarios require different solutions. Markets that naturally tend to monopolies, eg. energy, banking, require so many regulations and warping of the marker that it can be easier for the government to administer, especially if it is a public good. Yes there will be waste. There's waste in private companies too!
- Have compassion for people left behind. People are dropping through the safety net. Globalism says that it shouldn't happen and would only happen through laziness or lack of trying. Reality is not everyone can find a job.
Globalism is presented as a religion. It is inevitable. Once something is presented without thinking through it, like it must happen, it becomes like a religion. Economists become like acolytes as they have an assumption built-in that free-trade will help capitalism which will make the world a better place. No critical thinking of whether it will lift everyone up equally.
Free trade isn't a pure idea. It started with the corn laws in early 19th century. Corn was expensive, farmers wanted to get the margin, but people were starving. Cheap corn was allowed, so a form of free trade was started. In return though, the british empire went to war to be able to sell opium to China. The chinese didn't want it as it was a harmful drug. The British wanted the profits so fought the opium wars to get it.
British didn't switch to free-trade straight away. Waited until they were strong and had an advantage and then imposed it. Of ex-soviet states, the ones that went straight to capitalism suffered corruption and privatised enterprises for peanuts due to lack of law. Ones that went slowly had more success.
Lots of people live on $2 a day have been raised up, true. But many of those people didn't deal with currency, eg. bartering, people living in villages. Introducing capitalism and forcing people to sell crops to make money has actually made things worse, as they're
This has led to the current lack of belief in experts. If an expert keeps telling you the world is a better place, and its not as you can see with your own advice, then why not believe what a Pauline Hanson says?
Now that political parties take it for granted that globalism is a pure good, it has taken away choice from voters and weakened democracy. Democracy is about citizens making a choice. We're not making a choice, we're choosing who to manage our country. Not lead it. The difference is leading can mean taking an action that doesn't stand up to deep analysis, but is done because it is right. Management especially means managing risk. This is done through quantifying options and understanding what can happen. This reduces everything down to numbers. Eg. poverty isn't a disgrace, it becomes a managed risk.
As globalisation is discredited, countries realise they do have choices and start to make them even if they go against the religion (globalism). Eg. Brexit. Hanson is an example of this, but mixed up with the bad nationalism of fear of the other.
What then do we do as people?
- First thing is to join a society or group that allows us to be part of a community or society. Reconnect with our local people. Positive nationalism?
- Understand that people feel insecure. For the last 30-40 years we've been told globalism is the answer. It clearly isn't which means we need to readjust. Readjustment is difficult. People prey on the insecurities by raising the fear of the other. Talking past people doesn't help. Use the socratic method, understand why people are following the idea. Use stats, but make an emotional connection as well. eg. terrorism is scary. But its scarier when you think that a majority of homicides in Australia (75% between 2010 and 2014) were caused by someone that the victim knew.
- Don't belittle others regardless of their views
- Concede that there is no easy answer. Its not the government controlling everything, nor the market doing everything. Different scenarios require different solutions. Markets that naturally tend to monopolies, eg. energy, banking, require so many regulations and warping of the marker that it can be easier for the government to administer, especially if it is a public good. Yes there will be waste. There's waste in private companies too!
- Have compassion for people left behind. People are dropping through the safety net. Globalism says that it shouldn't happen and would only happen through laziness or lack of trying. Reality is not everyone can find a job.
September 16, 2014
Hmmm... How to make a topic like this sexy? Answer is that you can't, really. Reading it felt like I was sitting in a 3rd year economics lecture - which isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's dry, yes, but still worth reading. Very informative, very detailed, very thorough, and I like books that make me think, that teach me something.
July 8, 2017
I gave it a 1 rating as I could not give it a negative rating. It is a schizophrenic view of the economic changes and supports his thoughts with changinf countires, decades and subjects. Read if you want to waste your time on this planet. I did not finish reading it and will burn it when the fire ban have gone down. In a right conscience I cannot pass it on.
August 29, 2020
للأسف أسلوب الترجمة أو الكاتب نفسه سىء جداً، بتجاهد عشان تربط الأفكار ببعضها. سهل جدا يتشتت تفكيرك فى منتصف القراءة.
August 5, 2019
This is one disappointing book. First Saul starts defining globalism, he says it's hard to define, and then quits. After that he starts enumerating facts that show how globalism fails, and other facts that show how nationalism, humanism, is the way to go. Only the "facts" most of the time aren't facts. Actually the book is completely devoid of any numbers, strange, considering that the subject is macroeconomy.
So, because we don't know exactly what globalism is, everything that failed is due to globalism, everything that is successful is due to nationalism and localism
The book is also sprinkled with bookish quotations, most of them completely irrelevant. Just to show off I guess.
One thing he touched are airlines, saying that reducing the number of airlines and making them bigger reduces consumer choice and raises prices. What an interesting argument from a nationalist from Canada, where one national company is having the highest prices on internal routes in the world! Would that continue if we would open the market for others?
I could actually start picking on many other things the book covered, but I stop here. I don't think it's worth the effort. Boo!
So, because we don't know exactly what globalism is, everything that failed is due to globalism, everything that is successful is due to nationalism and localism
The book is also sprinkled with bookish quotations, most of them completely irrelevant. Just to show off I guess.
One thing he touched are airlines, saying that reducing the number of airlines and making them bigger reduces consumer choice and raises prices. What an interesting argument from a nationalist from Canada, where one national company is having the highest prices on internal routes in the world! Would that continue if we would open the market for others?
I could actually start picking on many other things the book covered, but I stop here. I don't think it's worth the effort. Boo!
January 13, 2022
Now this book was released a long time ago all the way back in 2005. Yet it feels as if it was only written a couple of years ago. It really is a book of our time in spite of the new issues that have surfaced in the meantime surrounding the pandemic, climate change, unprecedented inequality, the fallout of austerity measures in the 2010s, data privacy, the delegitimizing of democracies. Frankly all the crises of today were prepared yesterday; in part by viewing most aspects of life through the prism of economics. Can we help it? Can we do better? The book does not provide an answer but it signals us towards the ideas and practices that have created today's world....for better of for worse. Saul finds fault in neo-liberal economics, corporate technocrats, the failure in teaching people from different backgrounds in living together, but by no means do you find finger-pointing or a romanticization of the good old days. No, the answer is more profound as he diagnoses the symptoms of our time that have made any conceptualization of the common good harder than ever: it is up to us to do better.
April 1, 2022
يتنبأ المؤلف بانهيار الحتمية الاقتصادية ونظام العولمة الذي بدأ من سبعينيات القرن الماضي
ينقسم الكتاب إلي خمسة أجزاء
الجزء الأول السياق الذي نشأت فيه العولمة كأيدلوجية معتمدة علي أن الاقتصاد هو المشكل الوحيد للأحداث الإنسانية
الجزء الثاني الصعود وذكر فيها اتفاقية الجات ومنتدي دافوس كمظاهر للعولمة وناقش رومانسيات العولمة وهي الأمثلة التي فشلت فيها سياسة العولمة وذكر أزمة ديون العالم الثالث
الجزء الثالث النجاح ثم الجزء الرابع وهو سقوط العولمة وذكره لأمثلة مثل ماليزيا ونيوزيلندا والهند والصين والبرازيل وتحررها من ربقة العولمة
الجزء الخامس وأين نذهب الآن عن الفراغ الذي أحدثه غياب العولمة كأيدلوجية وعودة القوميات للظهور مرة آخري وبين إيجابيات وسلبيات ذلك وإعادة بناء العالم بعد ١١ سبتمبر حيث أن الشركات عبر الوطنية والتي قالت العولمة بأنها بأنها ستحل محل الدول القومية كدول افتراضية قللت من استثماراتها لتظهر الحكومات الوطنية والقومية علي السطح لحل المشكلات الاقتصادية القائمة
علي ذكر مسألة القوميات فقد ذكر مخاوف الغرب من روسيا وبوتين كقومية وقد تحققت مخاوفهم في الحرب الروسية الأوكرانية القائمة الآن واعتقد أنها تمثل مرحلة جديدة في إعادة بناء العالم وانتهاء فرضية وحتمية العولمة
الكتاب صعب في فهمه وتراكيبه والترجمة كانت سيئة في إيصال المعلومة
ينقسم الكتاب إلي خمسة أجزاء
الجزء الأول السياق الذي نشأت فيه العولمة كأيدلوجية معتمدة علي أن الاقتصاد هو المشكل الوحيد للأحداث الإنسانية
الجزء الثاني الصعود وذكر فيها اتفاقية الجات ومنتدي دافوس كمظاهر للعولمة وناقش رومانسيات العولمة وهي الأمثلة التي فشلت فيها سياسة العولمة وذكر أزمة ديون العالم الثالث
الجزء الثالث النجاح ثم الجزء الرابع وهو سقوط العولمة وذكره لأمثلة مثل ماليزيا ونيوزيلندا والهند والصين والبرازيل وتحررها من ربقة العولمة
الجزء الخامس وأين نذهب الآن عن الفراغ الذي أحدثه غياب العولمة كأيدلوجية وعودة القوميات للظهور مرة آخري وبين إيجابيات وسلبيات ذلك وإعادة بناء العالم بعد ١١ سبتمبر حيث أن الشركات عبر الوطنية والتي قالت العولمة بأنها بأنها ستحل محل الدول القومية كدول افتراضية قللت من استثماراتها لتظهر الحكومات الوطنية والقومية علي السطح لحل المشكلات الاقتصادية القائمة
علي ذكر مسألة القوميات فقد ذكر مخاوف الغرب من روسيا وبوتين كقومية وقد تحققت مخاوفهم في الحرب الروسية الأوكرانية القائمة الآن واعتقد أنها تمثل مرحلة جديدة في إعادة بناء العالم وانتهاء فرضية وحتمية العولمة
الكتاب صعب في فهمه وتراكيبه والترجمة كانت سيئة في إيصال المعلومة
lv-0-чух-основите-няма-да-чета
January 8, 2022Видях я при баба и дядо. Може би трябваше да я оставя в тях.
Интелектуалците на Томас Соуел добре описва хора като този.
Изслушах няколко интервюта на автора и мисля, че основната му грешка в мисленето е това, че не е осъзнал, че не съществуват неща като "хората", като "обществото" и като "общественото добро". Има хора, и хора които са лидери на обществено мнение.
Общо взето звучи като доста плу пил автор. Говори за глобализмът, но за най-хубавата му част - търговията. А не за ужасната му част - политическия глобализъм. всъщност май и за това говори, но не му е това проблема.
Абе като цяло човека не звучи ТВЪРДЕ ЗЛЕ, ами нормално объркан интелектуалец. Даже дори не беше толкова зле в говоренето.
Няма да я прочета.
Нови автори като Молдбъг са много по-добре описващи какво се случва.
В едно от интервютата автора хвалеше демокрацията, в което той показа, че няма представа за какво говори. Като цяло човек на теория, изглежда като да няма никаква практика в света който коментира. Но пък е доста симпатичен дядо. Ако човек не знае нищо може и да му се върже.
Интелектуалците на Томас Соуел добре описва хора като този.
Изслушах няколко интервюта на автора и мисля, че основната му грешка в мисленето е това, че не е осъзнал, че не съществуват неща като "хората", като "обществото" и като "общественото добро". Има хора, и хора които са лидери на обществено мнение.
Общо взето звучи като доста плу пил автор. Говори за глобализмът, но за най-хубавата му част - търговията. А не за ужасната му част - политическия глобализъм. всъщност май и за това говори, но не му е това проблема.
Абе като цяло човека не звучи ТВЪРДЕ ЗЛЕ, ами нормално объркан интелектуалец. Даже дори не беше толкова зле в говоренето.
Няма да я прочета.
Нови автори като Молдбъг са много по-добре описващи какво се случва.
В едно от интервютата автора хвалеше демокрацията, в което той показа, че няма представа за какво говори. Като цяло човек на теория, изглежда като да няма никаква практика в света който коментира. Но пък е доста симпатичен дядо. Ако човек не знае нищо може и да му се върже.
October 29, 2024
Did a clear and comprehensive job outlining the ins and outs how the globalist economy came about, tying it to who it benefits and the myriad of hindrences it encompasses, the warning signs of what lead it to bust and the examples of economies that bucked the trend and came out on the other side better. I also bought the digital copy to get the appendix follow up from 2018 which was of little note, more of an 'I told you so' with another forecast of future economical paradigm shifts that are starrting to fabricate before our eyes.
May 11, 2017
An interesting and timely look atwhat globalisation primarily is, why it went wrong and its consequences. Although first published in 2005 (with an afterword from the financial collapse in 2008), it's still entirely relevant today with the rise of 'false-populism' and 'negative nationalism' seen around the world from globalisation's backlash.
Saul writes in an accessible style punctuated with wise words from figures stretching back throughout the centuries.
An excellent read.
Saul writes in an accessible style punctuated with wise words from figures stretching back throughout the centuries.
An excellent read.
April 29, 2022
A very good book on a subject I had little knowledge of. It summed up the problems of relying on one particular discredited economic theory, among the claims of which is that a rising tide lifts all boats, or as , the rich get richer the poor will also benefit. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the theory's pedaled by the mostly conservative side of politics.
November 5, 2014
Saul gives an absolutely fantastic overview of economics from the Leftist position about what led to Globalism. However, if Saul’s intended and clearly set out thesis for The Collapse of Globalism was about “pro–active choice,” then he nearly completely failed to deliver what he had said he would.
Yet, Saul does superbly deliver the process of the development of Globalism and outlines how our individual power of choice has been undermined by larger entities.
“Soon these servants of the public good were calling citizens; clients, stakeholders or taxpayers.”
Saul’s solutions to globalism are very limited and to that extent so are the relevant indicators on how to re-balance our sense of choice as both came in quite weakly at the conclusion of the book under the heading of, “Positive Nationalism;”
Answers for globalism provided by, "Positive Nationalism:"
1. Assumptions of nation states ensuring that they are citizen based, focused on national common good and on developing binding treaties in a range of areas at the international level.
2. Transience of many populations needs to addressed
To which he adds a concluding proviso; “However, the vacuum of next 25 years will be dominated by the most powerful,” which nearly completely nullifies any possibility of directing any change driven by the power of individual choice.
Answers from Positive Nationalism for inculcating greater social responsibility:
1. Now the message is sustainability and equality.
2. Change awaits as human potential for self-confidence (grows)
3. If people who know each other well serve the welfare of their fellow citizens they may learn that there are two advantages 1. That they discover how different they are 2. How similar their values are.
This is simple pandering to the counter-argument of, ‘sustainability.’ This is simple kowtowing to pop-psychology. This is an easy out of, “Why can’t we all just get along?”
At least at the end of his other book, The Unconscious Civilization, he gave a more specific set of objectives. Despite the fact, that many have been co-opted.
Perhaps by burying the issues of choice, by making them as blasé as he could get away with, Saul hoped to avoid being co-opted by the powers that be. And/or maybe he hoped his readers, would simply be so enlightened by the historical machinations of the elite that propelled Globalism revealed in this book, that it would generate the type of change that he envisioned.
More so, I think that Saul’s, Collapse of Globalism was written to document the effects it has had to date on societies for the sake of prosperity, to have a record of how societies came to be ruled by the most powerful and by the end of debate.
He does say after all that, “When you look carefully at society you find debate has always been about seeking equilibrium between social obligations and individual right.”
Saul hints at what thing we can do, but does not expand on it, instead he hides it away in the description of Globalism; ACTION AS REFUSAL.
Yes, Saul does describe six concrete points that arise out of the ideology of progress or read the "continuation of ruler-ship by the most powerful," which can be used by those who already possess some power to reckoned with to try and counteract the relentless impetus of progress.
The six points are:
1. Power as consolidation - mergers and acquisitions.
2. Normalized dumping is an economic tool to bring prices down artificially.
3. Inverse dumping is an economic tool to artificially raise prices on things like technology.
4. Internal shipping - where companies secretly outsource their purchases by seeking the cheapest parts possible. For example - the hidden market of recycled goods sold as being new.
5. The fact that there does exist other alternative and successful economic models.
6. Unfair taxation as the result of economic blackmail by corporations - if you don't keep taxes low we will simply up and leave your country.
Perhaps, I am just a pessimist. But then again Saul doesn’t write anything to really back up his initial claim that he was writing a book about choice. As a matter of fact, Saul writes about the loss of individual choice, and I think he shifts the onus of choice onto those who are already in positions of power.
Okay, I’m done being a Debbie Downer. Phhheeww, do I ever need to take a break from reading political manifestos. It just makes my head spin and have an increased feeling of dizziness [no not ditziness (lol)]
I give this intensive read a 3.9, as it dances around the fact of who the intended audience should be and fails to deliver what it promised at the very onset - giving the reader a false expectation.
However, it should be a recommended read to all those in positions of power. I will recommend it to my MP.
This book is about our ability to choose. It is also about where those choices might lead us. To believe in the possibility of change is something is something very precise. It means we believe in the reality of choice. That there are choices. That we have the power to choose in hope of altering society for the greater good.
Yet, Saul does superbly deliver the process of the development of Globalism and outlines how our individual power of choice has been undermined by larger entities.
“Soon these servants of the public good were calling citizens; clients, stakeholders or taxpayers.”
Saul’s solutions to globalism are very limited and to that extent so are the relevant indicators on how to re-balance our sense of choice as both came in quite weakly at the conclusion of the book under the heading of, “Positive Nationalism;”
Answers for globalism provided by, "Positive Nationalism:"
1. Assumptions of nation states ensuring that they are citizen based, focused on national common good and on developing binding treaties in a range of areas at the international level.
2. Transience of many populations needs to addressed
To which he adds a concluding proviso; “However, the vacuum of next 25 years will be dominated by the most powerful,” which nearly completely nullifies any possibility of directing any change driven by the power of individual choice.
Answers from Positive Nationalism for inculcating greater social responsibility:
1. Now the message is sustainability and equality.
2. Change awaits as human potential for self-confidence (grows)
3. If people who know each other well serve the welfare of their fellow citizens they may learn that there are two advantages 1. That they discover how different they are 2. How similar their values are.
This is simple pandering to the counter-argument of, ‘sustainability.’ This is simple kowtowing to pop-psychology. This is an easy out of, “Why can’t we all just get along?”
At least at the end of his other book, The Unconscious Civilization, he gave a more specific set of objectives. Despite the fact, that many have been co-opted.
Perhaps by burying the issues of choice, by making them as blasé as he could get away with, Saul hoped to avoid being co-opted by the powers that be. And/or maybe he hoped his readers, would simply be so enlightened by the historical machinations of the elite that propelled Globalism revealed in this book, that it would generate the type of change that he envisioned.
More so, I think that Saul’s, Collapse of Globalism was written to document the effects it has had to date on societies for the sake of prosperity, to have a record of how societies came to be ruled by the most powerful and by the end of debate.
He does say after all that, “When you look carefully at society you find debate has always been about seeking equilibrium between social obligations and individual right.”
Saul hints at what thing we can do, but does not expand on it, instead he hides it away in the description of Globalism; ACTION AS REFUSAL.
Yes, Saul does describe six concrete points that arise out of the ideology of progress or read the "continuation of ruler-ship by the most powerful," which can be used by those who already possess some power to reckoned with to try and counteract the relentless impetus of progress.
The six points are:
1. Power as consolidation - mergers and acquisitions.
2. Normalized dumping is an economic tool to bring prices down artificially.
3. Inverse dumping is an economic tool to artificially raise prices on things like technology.
4. Internal shipping - where companies secretly outsource their purchases by seeking the cheapest parts possible. For example - the hidden market of recycled goods sold as being new.
5. The fact that there does exist other alternative and successful economic models.
6. Unfair taxation as the result of economic blackmail by corporations - if you don't keep taxes low we will simply up and leave your country.
Perhaps, I am just a pessimist. But then again Saul doesn’t write anything to really back up his initial claim that he was writing a book about choice. As a matter of fact, Saul writes about the loss of individual choice, and I think he shifts the onus of choice onto those who are already in positions of power.
Okay, I’m done being a Debbie Downer. Phhheeww, do I ever need to take a break from reading political manifestos. It just makes my head spin and have an increased feeling of dizziness [no not ditziness (lol)]
I give this intensive read a 3.9, as it dances around the fact of who the intended audience should be and fails to deliver what it promised at the very onset - giving the reader a false expectation.
However, it should be a recommended read to all those in positions of power. I will recommend it to my MP.
June 13, 2019
I am not a liberal. Left-leaning for sure. This had all the fun of listening to your cool, left-moderate uncle explain the global financial system to you before he starts to speculate on how geothermal tech might work to cool the planet.
September 19, 2017
Brilliant critique of globalization and its true believers.
December 8, 2017
A functional and lucid exploration of the shortcomings of Globalism and Neolib/Neocon theory!~
January 4, 2022
An eyeopener of a book!
August 7, 2025
Saul çalışmasında sosyopolitik analizlere, tarihsel süreklilik ve kırılma noktalarına odaklanıyor. Metin, klasik anlamda “ekonomik determinist” bir okuma yapmaz; aksine, iktisadi sistemlerin kültürel, siyasal ve insani yönlerini merkeze alır. Saul’un yaklaşımı disiplinlerarasıdır ve özellikle tarih, siyaset bilimi, sosyoloji ve iktisatın sınır alanlarında gezinir.
Kitap, birkaç ana eksen etrafında inşa edilmiştir:
Küreselleşme ideolojisinin dogmatikleşmesi: Saul, 1990’lardan itibaren küreselleşmenin “kaçınılmaz” bir gerçeklik gibi sunulmasını eleştirir. Bu yaklaşımın hem ekonomik hem de demokratik kurumsallıkları aşındırdığını savunur.
Ulus-devletin dönüşen rolü: Küresel ticaret ve finans dinamikleri karşısında etkisizleştirilen ulus-devletlerin, sonrasında yeniden sahneye çıkış süreci izlenir. Yazar bu dönüşü, küresel düzenin istikrarı açısından kritik bir gelişme olarak değerlendirir.
Yeni toplumsal bölünmeler ve marjinalleşme: Orta sınıfın zayıflaması, lümpen proleteryanın yükselişi ve genç işsizliğin yaygınlaşması gibi olgular, küreselleşmenin ekonomik eşitsizlikleri derinleştiren etkileriyle ilişkilendirilir.
Popülizm ve negatif ulusalcılık: Küreselciliğin başarısızlığı, popülist ve dışlayıcı siyasetlerin yeniden doğuşuna zemin hazırlamıştır. Saul, bu gelişmeleri demokrasi açısından ciddi bir tehdit olarak yorumlar.
Metin, neoliberal söylemin ve küresel serbest piyasa ekonomisinin insani, kültürel ve siyasal boyutlarda ciddi kırılmalara yol açtığını ikna edici bir şekilde ortaya koyar. Küresel finansal düzenin etik ve rasyonel bir temelden yoksun oluşu, sosyal devletin gerileyişiyle birleştiğinde, kitlesel hayal kırıklıkları üretmiştir. Bu kırılmanın sonucunda, eğitimli gençlerin göçü, demokratik katılımın düşmesi, borç sarmalı ve sosyal güvencesizlik gibi yapısal sorunlar görünür hale gelmiştir.
Yazar, bu sorunların sadece ekonomik değil, aynı zamanda birer kültürel ve ahlaki mesele olduğunu ortaya koyarak; etik, bellek, sezgi ve hayal gücü gibi “insani nitelikler”e yeniden dönülmesini önerir. Bu yaklaşım, günümüz akademik tartışmalarında sıklıkla eksik kalan bir felsefi derinlik kazandırır.
Kitap, birkaç ana eksen etrafında inşa edilmiştir:
Küreselleşme ideolojisinin dogmatikleşmesi: Saul, 1990’lardan itibaren küreselleşmenin “kaçınılmaz” bir gerçeklik gibi sunulmasını eleştirir. Bu yaklaşımın hem ekonomik hem de demokratik kurumsallıkları aşındırdığını savunur.
Ulus-devletin dönüşen rolü: Küresel ticaret ve finans dinamikleri karşısında etkisizleştirilen ulus-devletlerin, sonrasında yeniden sahneye çıkış süreci izlenir. Yazar bu dönüşü, küresel düzenin istikrarı açısından kritik bir gelişme olarak değerlendirir.
Yeni toplumsal bölünmeler ve marjinalleşme: Orta sınıfın zayıflaması, lümpen proleteryanın yükselişi ve genç işsizliğin yaygınlaşması gibi olgular, küreselleşmenin ekonomik eşitsizlikleri derinleştiren etkileriyle ilişkilendirilir.
Popülizm ve negatif ulusalcılık: Küreselciliğin başarısızlığı, popülist ve dışlayıcı siyasetlerin yeniden doğuşuna zemin hazırlamıştır. Saul, bu gelişmeleri demokrasi açısından ciddi bir tehdit olarak yorumlar.
Metin, neoliberal söylemin ve küresel serbest piyasa ekonomisinin insani, kültürel ve siyasal boyutlarda ciddi kırılmalara yol açtığını ikna edici bir şekilde ortaya koyar. Küresel finansal düzenin etik ve rasyonel bir temelden yoksun oluşu, sosyal devletin gerileyişiyle birleştiğinde, kitlesel hayal kırıklıkları üretmiştir. Bu kırılmanın sonucunda, eğitimli gençlerin göçü, demokratik katılımın düşmesi, borç sarmalı ve sosyal güvencesizlik gibi yapısal sorunlar görünür hale gelmiştir.
Yazar, bu sorunların sadece ekonomik değil, aynı zamanda birer kültürel ve ahlaki mesele olduğunu ortaya koyarak; etik, bellek, sezgi ve hayal gücü gibi “insani nitelikler”e yeniden dönülmesini önerir. Bu yaklaşım, günümüz akademik tartışmalarında sıklıkla eksik kalan bir felsefi derinlik kazandırır.
December 27, 2016
Interesting examination of the globalist movement and its effect on nation-states. Saul presents an intelligible and quite an objective outline of globalism, the causes of its rise and demise. Although sided on the issue – obviously a harsh critic of it –, both pros and cons of the globalist theory are presented and explained factually and indiscriminately.
Not everyone might like the book, as its writer, a leftist and firm believer in third-worldism, speaks harshly of the West and its leaders. He often contents himself with simplistic answers to complex, political questions; regarding the unintended turnout of globalism, he said that leaders, technocrats and managers were confused, unprepared, and uncaring.
When it comes to politics, his work is ill-researched. In the book, it is claimed that the breakup of Yugoslavia was triggered by nationalism, but it could be argued that it was rather caused by sectarianism. Another incorrect, minor detail was his indirect labeling of Kurdistan as a new country following the dissolution of the USSR.
But, despite all of these petty remarks, the book is insightful; its author wrote a fine essay. Truly an expert on the issue.
Not everyone might like the book, as its writer, a leftist and firm believer in third-worldism, speaks harshly of the West and its leaders. He often contents himself with simplistic answers to complex, political questions; regarding the unintended turnout of globalism, he said that leaders, technocrats and managers were confused, unprepared, and uncaring.
When it comes to politics, his work is ill-researched. In the book, it is claimed that the breakup of Yugoslavia was triggered by nationalism, but it could be argued that it was rather caused by sectarianism. Another incorrect, minor detail was his indirect labeling of Kurdistan as a new country following the dissolution of the USSR.
But, despite all of these petty remarks, the book is insightful; its author wrote a fine essay. Truly an expert on the issue.
January 7, 2017
A witty and interesting critique of globalism. A good amount of irony and black humor in it. Reading the book now is slightly more interesting thanks to the recent election of Donald Trump (a false populist) and further rejection of globalism in the United States.
Ralston-Saul writes very well and his historical knowledge provides some insight into the problems we are facing now. It does a good job of informing the reader about the history of globalism, how globalism has caused some significant problems, and where it is starting to collapse. However, I think his prediction of collapse is premature -- there are many staunch advocates. Just turning on the television in Australia and you get the classic globalist line from leaders.
Ralston-Saul writes very well and his historical knowledge provides some insight into the problems we are facing now. It does a good job of informing the reader about the history of globalism, how globalism has caused some significant problems, and where it is starting to collapse. However, I think his prediction of collapse is premature -- there are many staunch advocates. Just turning on the television in Australia and you get the classic globalist line from leaders.
February 22, 2025
Such a good read. I read this twenty years ago and found it enlightening. I’ve picked it up again and makes even more sense 20 years later. Goes a long way in explaining where we are today and the impetus behind the rise of populists and right wing parties, the anger towards progressives. The scary thing is that despite the warnings and some high profile protests over the past 20 -25 years the larger corporate bodies have only become more powerful and dare I say it, care even less about the “common good” or the disappearing middle.
November 23, 2009
this book is a few years old.. a sign im finally getting thru the pile of 'books i should have read by now given to me by mum'...ralston saul certinaly makes u think..not all happy thoughts tho...the recent market driven snafus in the global eocnomy certainly lend more credence to his stance..the keynes and the galbraiths will have their revenge over the hayeks and the friedmans sooner that i might have thought...
November 3, 2015
If you are Canadian and want to have an informed opinion on our economic situation and system, then you need to read at least this book by John Ralston Saul, and you should also read his other books on political economics.
January 2, 2015
It really exposed how paltry my knowledge of history is :P
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews