The no limit free exchange myth was one of the main ideas of globalization. This idea is however put into question by the rise of extreme right votes everywhere. How to approach this idea? Is it necessary to stick to it or to reform it to respond to legitimate concerns, but without going to extreme right votes?
The idea of global trade was put in place by David Ricardo, who thought that specialization in free trade is the best solution for countries, even if they are disadvantaged. To this extend globalization looked to be a good opportunity for Western countries who triumphed from the USSR. However the 30 past years showed another scheme a lot less positive, to the extend the Western world entered, in my opinion, in a decadent age. This decline is visible, as I said in other articles, especially in the level of debt and in education. At the same time the rise of Asia, especially of China but as well of India is creating a new situation in international relations. It looks that this spectacular decline of the Western world looks its population, and the first to be confronted to the competition of Asian countries workers, want to go back to more frontiers and more protectionism.
The situation of decline is a reality. Relatively the domination of the Western world is over. It is not necessarily bad news, but it is revealing at the same time the terrible policies made by our governors. A lack of culture of work is emerging : in France the 35 hours is an example of that, while in my opinion a hard working culture is necessary to build a successful society, as well as an efficient social protection system. Desindustralization is showing a lack of strategy of the European Union and the United States. This failure is detrimental to the population of small cities, who saw a lot of work disappear. It created a great deal of precarity and absence of perspective. The COVID crisis showed to which extend this lack of strategy made us dependent from China. The 2030 investment plan of Emmanuel Macron or the policy of Joe Biden of reindustrialization are good reactions to this threat : however the advent to power of the extreme right in France and of Donald Trump in the United States can show fragility to this extend. However, in the case of Donald Trump, this lack of investment policies has been fought, as huge investments have been made to counter the advance of China in 5G for instance.
It is the reason why more protection of the state in a liberal framework can be a solution. In fact the United States has abandoned neo liberal views from the mandates of Barack Obama. Even Donald Trump, in reality, is more interventionist than many republican presidents before him. It looks to be a new area of globalization when citizens are asking for more protection from the state than before. However the idea of free exchange is a reality that can not be forgotten. The idea of protectionism is a deny of reality of the world as it is working. It is also a sign of weakness in an area of more intense free exchange. The legitimate feeling of decline, in my opinion, has to be fought another way than by following populist promises, which are more reassuring in the short run than really tackling long term issues.
The observer 