logo
The Trouble With Compulsory Globalism

The Trouble With Compulsory Globalism

Epoch Times04-05-2025

Commentary
For years, I've resisted deploying the word globalism with approbation because international cooperation is a good thing. Travel is glorious and so is the freedom to trade and migrate. How did the practice of freedom as it extends over national juridical lines come to be so widely loathed and disparaged?
There is a complicated story here that speaks to entanglements between states, industry, finance, multinational government structures, and the control of a people over regimes.
The COVID experience revealed all. The response was notably global, nearly all nations locking down in the same way at roughly the same time, enforcing the same protocols and issuing the same remedies (more or less).
The World Health Organization seemed to be calling the shots, with national public health agencies deferring on point after point. The virus itself seems to have emerged from within the structure of multilateral research on both pathogens and possible pharmaceutical countermeasures.
In addition, central banks all over the world cooperated to fund the extreme policy response, printing money like never before to stop full economic collapse under forced closures. Nations like Sweden and Nicaragua that went their own way were demonized by media all over the world in the exact same way.
Related Stories
4/23/2025
4/23/2025
National legislatures had no role in the initial lockdowns. They were excluded from decision-making. This means that the people who elected them were disenfranchised too. No one voted for six feet of distance, business closures, and shot mandates. They were imposed by administrative edicts, and nowhere did judicial systems stop them.
Democracy as an idea, plus the rule of law, died in those months and years, deferring always to the global institutions and financial systems that assumed
de facto
control of the planet. It was the most astonishing show of universal power on the historical record.
Given the results, it is hardly a shock to see the backlash, which has centered on a reassertion of the rights of nations and the citizens thereof.
Many defenders of human liberty (right and left) are often uncomfortable with the ethos of the backlash and wonder whether and to what extent there is good historical precedent for reclaiming sovereignty in the name of freedom.
I'm here to say that such a precedent exists, with some discussion of a historical episode that is almost wholly forgotten.
It is well known that the Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944 included portions that dealt with international monetary settlement (the gold-exchange standard) as well as finance and banking (the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank). Many people are also aware of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (1948)
What is not known is that GATT was a fallback position. The original draft of Bretton Woods included an International Trade Organization (ITO) that was to be empowered to manage all global trade flows. It was drafted in 1944 and codified in the Havana Charter of 1948. There was a tremendous push at the time on the part of major governments and corporations to ratify this agreement as a treaty.
The ITO was to rule the world, with oligarchs seizing control in the name of globalization.
It was defeated, and why? It was not because of opposition from protectionists and mercantilists. The main opponents of the ITO were in fact free traders and economic libertarians. The campaign to trash the treaty was led by French-American economist Philip Cortney and his barnburner book called
'The ITO Charter is a monument to wishful thinking,' he wrote, 'a bureaucratic dream that ignores the hard realities of national economies. It promises free trade but delivers shackles, binding nations to rules that cannot bend with the storms of inflation or scarcity.'
He and others in his orbit could detect the hand not of freedom in this charter but rather central planning, corporatism, inflationism, fiscal planning, industrial policy, and managed trade—in short, what today is called globalism. He was dead set against it, precisely because he believed it would set back the legitimate cause of free trade and submerge national sovereignty into a bureaucratic morass.
The objections he had were many, but among them were those centered on issues of monetary settlement. Nations would be locked into a tariff regime with no flexibility to adjust currency values based on trade flows. There was a genuine danger under the ITO, he believed, that nations would lack the ability to adapt based on changes in exchange rates or other specifics of time and place. Even though the charter seemed to push free trade, Cortney believed it would ultimately undermine it.
He further believed that if nations were to open up their economies to international competition from all corners of the world, it should be done in a way that was consistent with democratic governance and national plebiscites. An iron-handed global government imposing such a regime would contradict the whole history of the structure against mercantilism, and would likely be abused by the largest firms in industry and finance to game their system in a way that benefited themselves.
What's striking about the argument is that it came from a liberal/libertarian point of view that favored traditional methods of obtaining free trade, while opposing what today would be called globalist means of getting there.
Indeed, Ludwig von Mises
It was Cortney, alongside his ideological compatriots in business and editorial writing, who ultimately torpedoed the Havana Charter and sent the International Trade Organization into the dustbin of history.
To be clear, the rejection of the ITO was not a result of activism by reactionaries, socialists, protectionists, or even economic nationalists. It was rejected by strong proponents of economic liberalism, free trade, and commercial business interests dominated by small- and medium-sized firms that feared being swallowed up by the globalist morass.
These people distrusted bureaucracy in general and global bureaucracy especially. This was a principled generation and they were by then very aware of how something can sound fantastic in rhetoric but be awful in reality. They simply did not trust the gang in charge in those days to hammer out a sustainable trade arrangement for the world.
The rejection of the ITO is how and why we ended up with the General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade. It was General, meaning not firm law. It was rooted in Agreement, meaning that no nation would be compelled against its interests. It was about tariffs but did not attempt some grand strategy to equalize all currency valuations. It was informal and not formal, decentralized not centralized.
GATT prevailed until 1995, when the World Trade Organization was shoved through under tremendous media and corporate pressure. It was a revival of the old ITO. By this time, the free-market crowd had lost its sophistication and went all in for the new global agency. As if to confirm Cortney's prediction, the WTO has now been rendered mostly obsolete, scapegoated for economic stagnation, deindustrialization, currency mismatches, and unsettled foreign accounts backed by foreign holdings of US dollar assets.
Now we face a backlash in the form of crude mercantilist policies arriving with fury. America has been the destination for vast products from China, now being blocked by high tariffs. In extraordinary irony, the
New York Times
is
Imagine that!
The balance between national sovereignty and freedom itself is a delicate one. Generations of intellectuals once knew that and were careful never to overthrow one to back the other. To permanently detach governing structures from citizen control, even if only through a periodic plebiscite, courts disaster even on topics like trade, to say nothing of infectious disease and virus research.
Thus has the revolt arrived, exactly as Philip Cortney would have predicted.
From the
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

London Breed's former chief of staff to lead urban think tank SPUR
London Breed's former chief of staff to lead urban think tank SPUR

San Francisco Chronicle​

time37 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

London Breed's former chief of staff to lead urban think tank SPUR

Sean Elsbernd, a former member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors who most recently served as chief of staff to former Mayor London Breed, has been tapped to become chief executive officer of the urban think tank SPUR. Elsbernd will replace Alicia John-Baptiste, who left the position in February to become chief of infrastructure, climate and mobility for Mayor Daniel Lurie. A city hall insider who has served as both an elected politician and low-key, behind-the-scenes power broker, Elsbernd led city and county operations for Breed and oversaw the city's regional partnerships and state legislative work. He previously served as state director for the late U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein. 'Sean is a thoughtful and values-driven leader with deep knowledge of how Bay Area government works and how to build strong public partnerships that move policy forward,' said Lydia Tan, Chair of SPUR's Board of Directors. 'He understands SPUR's mission and brings the experience and vision we need to lead the organization into its next chapter.' SPUR, which has offices in San Jose, Oakland and San Francisco, bills itself as a 'good government' think tank that publishes policy reports laying out the case for how to improve public transit, preserve the environment, build more housing and make government more efficient and effective. Recent policy reports include: '10 ideas for equitable transportation in Oakland'; how the Bay Area could grow its population without increasing water demand; and how to reform the region's sales taxes. While SPUR doesn't endorse individual candidates its ideas are often in sync with the moderate faction of the city's political spectrum while its board of directors and membership is dominated by real estate developers, architects, nonprofit leaders and affordable housing leaders. Recently, Mayor Daniel Lurie implemented SPUR's recommendation to reorganize the Mayor's Office and create new roles to improve collaboration and accountability. SPUR also played a central role in advocating for $5.1 billion in state funding that included $400 million for Bay Area transit operations. Elsbernd has held several transit leadership roles, including serving as Chair of the Caltrain Board of Directors and as a Director of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District. He led San Francisco's COVID response, providing oversight of the Department of Public Health and Department of Emergency Management. 'Having worked with Sean for years in various roles, I know he is the right person to help SPUR boost our local economies, advance new ideas and reforms and improve the lives of our residents,' said Caltrain Executive Director Michelle Bouchard. Elsbernd officially assumes the role later this month and has already begun working closely with staff, the board of directors and regional leaders to carry the organization's mission forward, according to SPUR. The organization, which holds regular talks and panels at its Urban Center at 654 Mission St., had $5.9 million in expenses in the last fiscal year. It generated $4.6 million in revenues – a combination of membership fees, grants and special events. The nonprofit took in another in another $1.3 million in donations, according to the group's annual report. 'I'm honored to be joining SPUR,' Elsbernd said. 'Throughout my public service career, I've admired SPUR's work from both inside local government and as a resident of this region. The chance to lead an organization that's driving practical, forward-looking solutions is a privilege.'

Kennedy names new members of CDC vaccine advisory panel days after removing previous advisers
Kennedy names new members of CDC vaccine advisory panel days after removing previous advisers

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Kennedy names new members of CDC vaccine advisory panel days after removing previous advisers

Just two days after retiring the entirety of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's vaccine advisory panel, US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has appointed several prominent critics of the government's Covid-19 response to that committee. He announced eight new members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, on Wednesday. Kennedy had said Monday that the previous 17-member panel that makes recommendations on who should get vaccines and when was rife with conflicts of interest and that he would appoint new 'highly credentialed' experts in time for the panel's June 25 meeting, at which the members are expected to discuss guidance for Covid-19 and HPV shots, among others. In a statement Wednesday, Kennedy said the reassembled panel will demand 'definitive safety and efficacy data before making any new vaccine recommendations, but will also review data for the current vaccine schedule as well.' The eight new ACIP members include Dr. Robert Malone, a biochemist who made early innovations in the field of messenger RNA but in more recent years has been a vocal critic of mRNA technology in Covid-19 vaccines. The CDC recently narrowed its recommendations for mRNA Covid-19 shots, but some advocates in the Make America Healthy Again space have pressed Kennedy to go further and bar the vaccines entirely. Another new member is Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a biostatistician and epidemiologist who co-authored an October 2020 strategy on herd immunity known as the Great Barrington Declaration with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, now director of the US National Institutes of Health. Both Malone's and Kulldorff's names were circulated early in the second Trump administration as potential advisers on ACIP or other panels, according to a person familiar with the process who requested anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak with CNN. Kennedy also chose Dr. James Pagano, an emergency medicine physician he described as a 'strong advocate for evidence-based medicine' who has served on hospital committees and medical executive boards. Dr. Retsef Levi, an MIT professor who has published studies on mRNA vaccines and cardiovascular events, is also joining the panel. Levi is a professor of operations management. Several of the new members have served in federal health agencies previously, including Dr. Joseph Hibbeln, a former acting chief of the NIH's section on nutritional neurosciences. Dr. Cody Meissner, a Dartmouth professor of pediatrics who also signed the Great Barrington Declaration, has previously served on ACIP and on the US Food and Drug Administration's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. Dr. Vicky Pebsworth, the Pacific region director of the National Association of Catholic Nurses, also served on the FDA committee and on a national panel reviewing the 2009 H1N1 swine flu vaccine. Dr. Michael Ross, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at George Washington University and Virginia Commonwealth University, has previously served on the CDC's Advisory Committee for the Prevention of Breast and Cervical Cancer. Kennedy also nodded in his statement to Ross' 'continued service on biotech and healthcare boards.' The private equity company Havencrest, in which Ross is an operating partner, describes him on its site as a 'serial CEO' who has served on the boards of several biotechnology companies.

Josh Kraft calls out ‘heartbreaking' conditions at Boston Housing Authority
Josh Kraft calls out ‘heartbreaking' conditions at Boston Housing Authority

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Josh Kraft calls out ‘heartbreaking' conditions at Boston Housing Authority

Mayoral candidate Josh Kraft criticized the Boston Housing Authority's handling of maintenance issues at its public housing properties during a press conference Wednesday. Kraft called out a February report by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in which inspectors found numerous issues throughout Housing Authority properties. During an appearance at the Authority's Mildred C. Hailey development in Jamaica Plain Wednesday morning, Kraft, the former head of the Boys and Girls Club of Boston and the son of New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, called the report 'heartbreaking.' 'What is safe or healthy about broken or missing smoke and carbon monoxide detectors? About electrical hazards or blocked exits?' he said. 'What is dignified about seniors and disabled residents having to climb seven flights of stairs because the elevators in their building do not work?' HUD auditors inspected a sample of 36 units across the BHA system and found 113 'deficiencies,' of which 37 had been present at the time of HUD's last inspection and 18 were categorized as 'life-threatening.' In addition, a survey of 24 BHA buildings found 105 deficiencies in common areas, exteriors, mechanical systems and sites, of which 18 had been present at the last inspection and 31 were life-threatening. Read more: Boston mayor, challenger clash over affordable housing policies The report also found that the BHA had largely failed to respond to maintenance issues in a timely manner, due in large part to a lack of staffing and of oversight of its own inspections, along with a backlog of work orders. In a written response to HUD's findings included in the report, BHA Administrator Kenzie Bok acknowledged that 'there are opportunities for operational improvements and additional quality control' and said the Authority was already working to establish new protocols to address those improvements. Bok explained that because HUD relaxed its inspection requirements for public housing authorities in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, when the BHA resumed inspections, it had a major backlog of both work orders and outstanding unit inspections to address. At the same time, according to the report, staffing shortages and COVID infections meant the Authority did not have the resources available to conduct inspections and repairs. Although the agency hired a contractor to help with the inspections, the contractor also experienced delays due to COVID infections among its staff and ultimately withdrew from the contract. On Wednesday, Kraft said he thinks Mayor Michelle Wu cares about issues at BHA housing, but said he questioned if she had the 'management skills' to fix them. 'I've seen up close what housing instability does to a family. You're living in a suitcase. Kids get pulled out of schools,' he said. 'It's not only undignified, it's heartbreaking, and it should never be allowed to happen in a city like Boston.' Multiple BHA properties are currently undergoing significant redevelopment or modernization projects, including its two largest properties, the Mary Ellen McCormack and Charlestown developments. Like other public housing authorities, the BHA gets a significant amount of funds from the federal government. However, as the Trump administration slashes funding across the country, public housing has experienced reductions. Last month, the BHA began sending out letters to landlords of tenants with Section 8 housing vouchers — which are administered by the housing authority — asking them not to raise rents for the next year, citing cuts to the housing assistance program, according to the Boston Globe. Read more: Mass. rental voucher program falls short for many low-income tenants On Wednesday, Kraft acknowledged that the BHA has limited funds to cover the extensive upgrades its properties need. However, he said the city should better prioritize its own money to cover some of those costs, giving the multimillion dollar White Stadium redevelopment as an example of something that Boston is putting too many resources toward. 'There are definitely some places we would need to look and look hard and find savings,' he said. 'But I do know this: I managed multimillion dollar budgets as CEO of Boys and Girls Clubs of Boston, and when pressed, you can always find savings.' In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson for the mayor's office directed MassLive to Wu's campaign team, who did not immediately respond Wednesday afternoon. Super PAC coordination allegations heat up Boston's mayoral showdown Out-of-town money floods Boston mayor's race Yes, immigration is a flash point in Boston's mayoral race. A debate confirmed it | Bay State Briefing Read the original article on MassLive.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store