Bremmer - Us v. Them: The Failure of Globalism

Ian Bremmer introduces Us vs. Them: The Failure of Globalism by warning that the spread of an us vs. them perspective among citizens around the world, including protests and rock throwing, comes from fear - fear of strangers, terrorists, criminals, decline of economic opportunity - and that governments can't protect us from these threats. He then explained that those who were born and matured in the 20th century believed that the American dream was secured by globalism. Unfortunately, globalism also guaranteed the problems that worldwide citizens now face - that there are winners and losers of the race to globalization. Worse yet it is the fact that globalization and its impact are accelerating.

Bremmer's book and the video of his appearance at a Johns Hopkins forum after Trump's 1st election to the U.S. Presidency describe how globalization has created an interconnected world where the cross-border flow of ideas, goods, and services and the inequity that goes with that flow resulted in governments having very limited potential to protect their citizens. Some political leaders have attempted to recognize this complexity through negotiations and bridge building while others chose the cynical option of retrenchment, withdrawal, blaming others, and erecting conceptual or physical walls. Media complicates the matter because winners and losers of the globalization race can easily see the inequities - that is if they have open access that allows them to see the rest of the world through honest journalistic reporting. As Bremmer says, "It's the efforts of the losers not to get f'ed over, and the efforts of the winners to keep from losing power" (p. 10) that will create conflict with and across the borders of the world. He characterizes this dynamic as the seed that will destroy globalism, primarily because it creates insecurities that pit people against each other.

The facts of globalism are in some cases very different than the general public's perception. For instance, 88% of jobs lost in U.S. manufacturing from 2006-2013 were due to automation, not changes in global trade. Fearing the loss of culture is another example; where diversity is significant (such as Chicago) grater individuation and celebration of culture is more common rather than eroded.

The walls that have been going up around the world are generally more about protecting, rather than predicting the demise of, democracy. Isolating and pursuing separate national interests appears to protect jobs and cultures, with raising tariffs a primary example. The problem Bremmer identifies is that tariffs usually set off retaliation that locks countries into an escalating cycle or moves production to other countries all together. Cross-border flow of people and talent was an international issue in 2018 and has now risen to a much higher level in the anti-immigration movements leading up to 2024. It is the wealthiest countries that will be inclined to the strongest reactions to both the economic and human repercussions of globalism.

What are the factors that will help countries survive the growing fears about globalism? Helping citizens understand that survival is dependent on adaptation and that governments, if run honestly for the benefit of citizens, can change. Secondly, governments must address inequality and begin to lift all boats rather than the yachts of the few. Thirdly, education and retraining will be central, automatically challenging countries with large populations more than those that are smaller. Looking at these factors, "India, Indonesia, Russia, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and South Africa are especially vulnerable" (p. 53). "Mexico, Brazil, and China have more capacity than the rest to respond" (p. 54). Bremmer predicted that the success of these 10 countries will determine the outcome for the world economy in the 21st century.

All countries may eventually need to be more responsive to the seemingly universal pursuit of happiness (as defined by the World Happiness Report) including "caring, freedom, generosity, honesty, health, income and good governance" (p. 135). In order to achieve these, the ability of governments to rebuild relations among their citizens and across national borders may be inevitable with income/wealth inequality one of the most important factors. Even Zuckerberg seems to understand this when he declared on Facebook in 2017 that progress "now requires humanity coming together not just as cities or nations, but also as a global community" (p. 155). Without a commitment to this greater good, cynicism about all governments will grow until conditions become so bad that even the current winners of the globalism race will open to a new social contract.

As a reflection back almost a decade ago, and before Ian Bremmer published Us. vs. Them (2018), I warned higher education leaders to avoid using the terms globalism or globalization in their discussion of higher education (Roberts, 2015). I based the warning on Jane Knight's scholarship over the years where she clearly distinguished that globalization was export of economic, knowledge, people and other resources in ways that disrupted or replaced local culture while internationalization was the mutual and respectful exchange of processes and resources across borders. Thus, I encouraged educators to talk about their work in terms of internationalization, especially in education hubs and partnerships across regions of the world.