International Economic Institutions: Globalism vs. Nationalism

by Ramon P. DeGennaro

Since the end of World War II, groups such as the World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, European Union, and G-20 have sprung up with a variety of missions, including promoting trade, ensuring financial stability, eradicating poverty, and advancing sustainable economic growth. Behind these worthy goals is the ultimate preventing the kind of global economic instability that can easily lead to war.

But while such organizations are trying to knit the world more tightly together, in many countries the voices of populism and nationalism are objecting that the price of lost sovereignty is too high and that traditions and customs are being lost. Furthermore, such organizations have the failings common to all human institutions. Do they really work? Have some saved us from disaster? Are we better off without others? What is the best route to prosperity, and do these groups help smooth the way or obstruct it?

International Economic Globalism vs. Nationalism uses these influential bodies as a lens to study today's globalized economy. In 24 eye-opening half-hour lectures, award-winning teacher and economist Professor Ramon P. DeGennaro of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, conducts you through the dizzying array of institutions, their backgrounds, their goals, and the important roles they play in the economic life of the entire world.

Genres: Economics, Audiobook, History, Nonfiction

24 pages, Audible Audio

Published January 1, 2017

Reviews

[Mark Lawry · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not the best of The Great Courses. This is not a discussion of Globalism vs. Nationalism but an econ 101 course, and not a very good one. Obviously we all have our own biases and I'm an ardent globalist. Clearly DeGennaro is not a fellow globalist. That is fine but he did not do justice to globalism in the least. If such a course is to fairly represent the pros and cons of these issues it would have been better to have two solid economists argue from both sides. As it is DeGennaro mocks international integration represented by the Schengen and open borders. My own family is European and spread all over the continent. In northern Europe you have Sweden, Finland, and Norway. These Schengen nations would be the richest states in GDP per capita if you made them American states. Their sovereign wealth funds are invested in global companies we might add. The Balkans are a nationalist utopia. People can't freely move across open borders in that part of Europe. The nations that once made up Yugoslavia are shockingly not the rishest parts of Europe. Businesses can't easily form and there are no opportunities for a better life. But, they all get to have walls around themselves.

One interesting discussion he almost touched on was the great debate about what ended The Great Depression. Many believe it was WWII. This is based on the fact that unemployment went to zero. Does this mean the world is better? Running death camps, building bombers to level cities, mass starvation and death across the globe, digging out from destroyed buildings. Surely the world was not better in 1942 than 1932 just because more people were "working." How economic policy improves lives well beyond finding busy work just to keep people working is a much deeper and longer discussion than this course. The world got better when the war ended and people got back to real productive work.

In general the entire course sounds like one big Fox News talking point that reminds me of my late father's favorite lyrics of a favorite song:

"Think of what you're saying
You can get it wrong and still you think that it's alright
Think of what I'm saying
We can work it out and get it straight or say good night "

[Simon Thornewill von Essen · Rating 1 out of 5]

Returned the book an hour in, author might as well have written "I don't like multilateralism" and saved us all the time that I'm glad I saved by putting the book down.

There are barely any historical accounts, just ramblings about various institutions. I want to know how they came to be, why people thought it was a good idea and what problems solved if any were. Etc. I want to know more than the smooth brained take of "multilateralism bad".

It's fine to criticise or have an opinion, but this book is nothing more than that. And if that's the level of analysis I want, I'll go listen to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, whose PoVs have been shoved down our throats for the past half-decade. We all already know why people don't like multilateralism.

If anyone is interested in the topic and want a more nuanced take than that outlined by right wing populists who have been having a field day as of late, then go find another book and save yourself the time to read 10% of the book only to discover this for yourself.

Tl;DR - This book would have been useful before brexit and brefore trump when this PoV wasn't as widespread and people couldn't take the position as easily in public. But in a world where these things have come to pass this book cannot hold its value because it simply represents popular opinion. Since this book has nothing else to offer it becomes vacuous.

[Elwin Kline · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author did the best he could have on a rather dull subject. So glad I am not an economics major, but for all you out there who love this stuff... I fully support and more power to you. I am glad you are dedicating your life to this stuff and not me!

Can documented history, facts, and the obvious be considered spoilers? I don't think so... as such I will not spoiler mask the content below.

This can really be summarized in three short sentences instead of investing ~12 hours into this content like I did:

1. WW1 ruined the Gold Standard, and it's pretty much all down hill from here.

2. Printing money without tangible assets to back them up == fastest path towards destruction (this does differ from #1, as it pertains to the world and not just focusing on the US. Numerous examples of nations mass printing money are provided. #1 absolutely targets the US our ~20 trillion dollars worth of debt that continues to grow...).

3. Corrupt Governments/politicians/elites drive #2.

The author really beat these three subjects to death and really looped over and over on them. This probably could have been easily reduced to ~6 hours worth of material.

Not bad, not great, and definitely not a favorite Great Course.

[Gonzalo Lujambio · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great.

Goes a bit too fast in the end, i would´ve liked it if it went a bit slower and more in-depth into how exactly the sub-prime mortgage crisis worked. It does offer many explanations for that one recession, but i found it harder to keep up by the last few chapters. Generally it is a great overview of international economic institutions. A lot is said about how they actually work and their limitations, rather than sticking to their mission statements and the broad, bland descriptions that you´ll get most of the time.

[Eric · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very like a 12 hour podcast - not bad. The lectures do all focus on economics, mostly from a global perspective. The subtitle, "Globalism vs. Nationalism," is only somewhat appropriate although tension is clearly there in some articles. DeGennaro describes these situations well enough, but his pre- and proscriptions seem to me to be somewhat lukewarm - perhaps that's not all bad, but there seem few clear paths to take away from the work, overall.

[Lee · Rating 1 out of 5]

The first lecture was great, but subsequent lectures were not particularly enlightening. DeGennaro has a tendency to choke his lecture with citations, saying, “Scholar A says this, while Scholar B says it is more like this, but I think Scholar C has a point when she says…” At points, I just felt like it was delving too deeply into the literature on the subject without giving me the gist of the topic, which is what I expect from anything in the Great Courses.

[JanaT · Rating 3 out of 5]

I find the lecturer stuck between two opposite approaches. In the first set of lectures, he promotes the importance of regulation to avoid international tension, but the second set opposes the point generally based on the invisible-hand-of-the-market idea. I appreciate a lot of questions raised, but dislike leaving the questions abandoned in the second half.

[Bo · Rating 5 out of 5]

not sure how there are so many bad reviews. 5 star from me.

This is a great crash course on covering different international institutions, their achievements, and the global dynamics in play.

[Marcus Goncalves · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good overview of international institutions!