For almost 15 years, the liberalisation of financial markets was imposed on most countries of the world in the name of globalisation. The crumbling down of the Russian economy, the crisis of the Asian countries and the return to exchange control measures by certain emerging countries have underlined the unfortunate consequences of a process devised by a small elite to defend the interests of a minority. Since the various countries involved do not by themselves have any alternative to offer against this process, it is in the upcoming globalisation that civil societies have to find most of the alternatives that are to be invented.

With the "Washington consensus", which came after the cold war and which was in favour of liberalising financial markets the world over, the power of countries, populations and their representatives for economic matters was largely reduced. Under the pretext that there "were no alternatives" to liberalisation measures, the most powerful economic actors slowly imposed their rules of the game without any thought to the social and political consequences which are particularly visible in major regional zones created or consolidated during this period - the North American Free Exchange Agreement, the Asia-Pacific Economic Commission, etc. The economies in these zones, which were largely unequal, were made to compete with each other artificially, often without the accord of the peoples concerned or their representatives. All over the world, the economies which closely followed the recipes of international financial institutions are those which are today very weakened and vulnerable to rapid capital flows¹. Financial liberalisation should have enabled a better diversification of investments and ensured the convergence of standards of living at the global level. But, instead of strengthening unity and interdependence amongst nations, the world was transformed into some sort of "global casino" where 350 traders can generate twice the profit for their firm than the 250 000 workers in the industry. Liberalisation also resulted in the erosion of the workers’ rights and the environment. It disconnected social links, fragmented territories and widened the gap between the economic sphere and the society, even in rich countries, creating a sort of "social apartheid" at the global level.

The "masters" of world economy themselves (International Monetary Fund, World Bank, etc.) today feel compelled to adjust their compass to reality and accept the most basic measures practised by some of their best students (Chili, Malaysia, etc.) to control capital flow. Several amongst the better-known economists of today are raising their voices for the creation of a new international financial institution which has real authority². But, these measures can at best be adjustments to the main existing model as long as new links between civil society, political power and economic power are not invented. In the last few years, many countries lost most of their credibility as factors of change. But, during the same period, as a reply to the different challenges posed by the enormous power of enterprises with means which are increasingly "global", a number of citizens’ networks were formed to fight for the environment, propose economic alternatives, fight for minorities and take up several other issues. Their means are still quite low compared to those of multinationals and States. But the challenge of the possible emergence of a civil society at the world level is immense.

As this neo-liberal illusion started fading, citizens’ initiatives and economic practices which seek to strengthen social links are coming out of their secrecy. These include local exchange systems, fair trade, joint savings, etc. They appear more and more as precursors to a new way of conceiving the relations between economy and society, and provide a message of hope by projecting the image of a more human and unified economy. An unexpected effect of globalisation was the constitution of international networks, some of which aimed to coordinate and strengthen local initiatives while others sought to fight the destructive aspects of the "global" activity of some companies (causing harm to the environment and people’s rights, striking confidential negotiations for a Multilateral Agreement on Investment within the club of rich countries, etc.) Changes in the practices of multinationals and the policies followed by the more powerful countries show that the message and the sentiment of the various populations involved is beginning to be heard. France opted out of this Agreement; due to protest movements in USA and Mexico, Texas is giving up unloading nuclear products near its Southern frontier which is a seismic zone; Nike, the sports shoe giant, has been forced to increase the salaries of its workers in Indonesia. It is certain that a number of changes will have to take place before moving towards a responsible and united world. But, this awakening of a global conscience is a key element of this process.

More than ever before, we have to accept diversity and the intermingling of cultures, the different ways of looking at the world and relating the economy with societies. This rich diversity is one of the main reasons for the general opposition to the standardised model of financial globalisation. A number of challenges are posed at the local level. The solidarities, which were shaken by the dominant competitive model, should be reconstructed both within the economy and education. Our immediate environment should be protected and local forms of democracy defended. New and old practices are trying to find an answer to this situation. But both thought and action at the global level is essential as the future of the world is already at stake whether it is a question of protecting the environment, regulating financial markets or defending human rights. We should therefore invent links at different levels so that we may act both at the local and the global levels. In other words, multiple forms of mediation and alliances between peoples and civil societies are required.

Return to Top