A future imperfect: why globalisation went wrong | Adrian Wooldridge | TEDxLondonBusinessSchool 

I hope more people view this interesting lecture. So many people so poorly understand what's been going on this world (and therefore cannot understand how Trump got elected) but have this passionate uninformed opinion on politics and society that really makes them seem insane. Much of the blame for that falls on mainstream media, of course. But this man breaks it down sanely, intelligently, and humanely. Wonderful job of explaining it all in just 12 minutes.

I've watched several videos and read many articles on globalism, and not a single one has made a convincing case for globalism. Just about all of them equate nationalism to Nazism to try to prove nationalism is bad. How about Nazism was bad. Canada is a nation-state. Is it bad? What about Belize? So it's not the nation-state that is bad, but the leader and the form of government that may be bad. Maybe genetically we have come as far as we are prepared to go right now. Going from an individual to a family unit to a larger group and larger group to a tribe and eventually to a nation-state. Maybe we need a few more centuries to be ready to move toward the one-world utopia the globalists promise. Just because we have global communications and global transportation doesn't mean we are ready for a global village. What's the big hurry?

In 1990 ,I wrote an article "Democracy- a linchpin of Unipolar World " but my experience in Afghanistan with democracy on behalf of USA ,European Union and Britain has greatly disappointed me that rule of law, democratic principles and civilian rule type jargons are not meant for us because these countries did not respect the electoral results of Afghan people and abandoned them right in the middle of their journey to democracy which started in 1973.I still believe that strengthening democratic values around the world irrespective of their political philosophy can help materialise the dream of One World One Humanity.

This is the best case against globalisation I have seen, my views now so much more nuanced

The key point that is missing and left in second place, including the United States, is education. The more complex society is, without educated beings to comprehend it, it would be as if we have forced a new world into their old world minds. Same will happen as we cannot adapt to the correct use of the digital era to better our social development. We cannot pretend to to have a global society without global education and how competitiveness does not imply necessarily having an all American Car, but having a regional collaborative production system, such as GPNs and GVCs. We cannot pretend to have individual growth, without regional collaboration. Hopefully this forth industrial revolution will bring some light into more human-centric economies, where the participation of human capital will be how the world achieves economic development.

Perfect explanation on starting something that shouldn’t of been started, explains how negatively effective globalization is.

Globalisation based on a system of rules and regulations derived from a different historical context is intrinsically biased and unfair. What’s needed is a globalisation based more on genuine competitive advantage than trade distorted by tariffs, subsidies, free trade areas etc. This globalisation of disguised nationalism geared to achieving a false competitive advantage must ultimately give way to the genuine thing. Globalisation, the genuine article, based on international cooperation and unlocking the efficiencies associated with genuine competitive advantage, can take humanity forward in ways we cannot even begin to think of yet.

Spot on

0:00 - 1:47 sounds about right unfortunately 0:00 - 3:29 Stronger Together 💯💯💯💯 0:00 - 3:41 … 0:00 - 4:05 0:00 - 8:21 unfortunate truths 0:00 - 9:20 0:00 - 9:40 0:00 - 9:46 unfortunate truth 0:00 - 10:06 /: 0:00 - 10:14 💯💯💯💯REAL LIFE💯💯💯💯 0:00 - 10:27 0:00 - 10:40 10:40 - 10:54 💯💯💯 10:40 - 11:22 10:40 - 11:29 - 11:29 - 12:03 Ugh, significant points made unfortunately

Well, Fukuyama vs. Huntington debate is not directly relevant to the features of globalization. Fukuyama simply emphasized the salience of liberal democracy as a dominant political ideology.

0:00 - 1:47 sounds about right unfortunately

At 7:00 why is afraid to name China also?

Only 45k view of such amazing clear presentation of the trains why trump was elected. No wonder US is so divided...

The Marxist idea that culture is predicated on economics may be valid but there is a time lag. It takes a while for culture to catch up. Thousands of years of feudalistic agricultural economy doesn't give up and go home when capitalist economics show up, no, they hold on for dear life. Western culture took hundreds of years to evolve there were European revolutions renaissances etc. eventually liberal democracy emerged but only really in the 20th Century. So The West are tapping their fingers impatiently waiting for China to catch up and they should look at themselves are they really such great examples that everybody should be casing after them? No they aren't.

Gator Anthropology!

London School of Economics is liberal in all senses!! Liberal in the political sense of the word.

this man is looking from the other side of the mirror. i see what he means about being wating for his amazon package, he is certaintly not living in the real world.

Xenophobia? Where i live, Canada, anglophobia is rife.

...

Ah yes, Stalin politically separated people, America had nothing to do with it.

protesanism is neeed of hour not globalization

Sums up the problem very well. I disagree with his solution tho. Racists and bigots or knuckle draggers (his wording) shouldn’t be pandered to they should be disagreed with.

“Humility” and liberal go together like cats and dogs. ! Lol!!

I acknowledge his point. But it is very loosely held together. He tries to make one end of the argument connect with the next but it doesn't really work. At one moment he is talking about the global elites and bashing capitalism, the next he's talking about nationalism and racism. I think he is trying really hard to make out that globalization is inherently been a force for harm. However he wouldn't be up on this stage, delivering a speech to hundreds of diverse people without globalization. Gratitude is lacking. What a shame that is.

Nationalism , tribalism , xenophobia- yes , these forces have arrived.