The terms globalisation, humanism and neoliberalism have been significantly altered throughout recent history. The official Oxford dictionary defines humanism as: an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems.
Many decades ago after personally dissecting this terms meaning within the context of my overall system of beliefs I soon began describing myself as a secular humanist.
Although I no longer care to attach any specific label or credo to my person, I still can securely state my approval with regards to an affiliation with the word “humanist.”
According to the World Economic Forum, the first wave of “true” globalization began in the century ending in 1914. As we’re all aware humans have been trading with each other for thousands of years. Major advances of “globalization” worth noting throughout history include the establishment and progression of the Silk Road. Beginning roughly during the 5th century and significantly expanding in the 13th-14th centuries this trade route can be considered the original blueprint of todays mostly free market economy. (Info courtesy of investopedia.com)
GLOBALIZATION in the UK/US
When examining the spread of globalization, in my lifetime, it is safe to say never have my feelings been as negative as they are currently. Contrary to the overwhelming majority of far right nationalists, who have always associated the “scourge of globalization ” with Racism, Xenophobia and religion, the feelings towards the present crisis is substantially more widespread.
A survey on migration amongst the United Kingdoms population in April 2023, showed a significant increase from 40% in 2022 to 52% of those who responded immigration needs to be reduced. (Info courtesy of migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk)
Considering the current turmoil occuring in Great Britian, concerning the rise in migrate related violence and the newly elected Labour party’s incompetence, those statistics are sure to dramaticly escalate in 2024.
One prime example of this issue was the mass stabbing of children in Southport, Merseyside, UK committed by a 17 year old Rwandan national on July 29, 2024. The official reports emanating from mainstream media outlets, including the BBC, have blamed the social unrest occurring shortly after the mass murder strictly on “Far-Right hooligans”, mainly the English Defence League. (Info courtesy of npr.com)
It’s a certainty right wing groups such as the English Defence League played a pivotal part in the raucous aftermath. When digging deeper, and hearing first person accounts from non-biased sources, the facts become a lot murkier.
As for the English Defence League, an anti-extremist publication, Hope Not Hate, announced the EDL as defunct in 2023. How could an organization that officially no longer exists be the principal blame for these recent protests? Is the current leadership that out of touch with the reality of the situation or does Keir Starmer just assume his population lacks any intelligence or understanding of the actual facts?
To give everyone a clear indication of the general discontent amongst the English populace, only 52% of registered voters cast their ballots in the July general election making it the lowest turnout since 1928. (Info courtesy of theguardian.com)
Historically, abnormally miniscule voter participation tends to occur as a result of widespread discontentment amongst the majority of the population.
The growing sentiment of negativity towardsthe leadership of both parties in England revolves around issues such as excessive migration and it’s unfavorable effect on society.
During the calendar year of 2023, approximately 1.2 million people immigrated to the United Kingdom. It was the third year in a row where net migration were significantly higher than pre-covid/pre-Brexit levels. (Info courtesy of commonslibrary.parliment.uk).
Any solution or constructive plans to resolve this pertinent issue have been yet to materialize. Personally, these trends are quite unfortunate, especially for those of us who still believe that various groups of peoples regardless of race, religion or sexual preference can still live together in relative harmony.
Across the Atlantic Ocean in America, the surge in migration as a result of decades of neoliberal, pro-globalization policies has reached its ultimate boiling point.
There are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States. The dramatic spike in migration peaked in 2023 as the U.S Border Patrol registered some two million cases. (Info courtesy of cbp.gov)
According to statista.com, the issue of immigration ranks second (25%,) only to inflation, as the most important issue for American voters in the upcoming presidential election. It’s been a glaring sore spot during Joe Biden’s term in office. Only 31% approved of the Democrats handling of migration in a poll conducted by Reuters in September 2024.
The overall feeling amongst those in the American “silent majority ” are Donald Trump is better suited to handle the US migration crisis, despite his own mismanagement during his four years in the White House. Trump’s tough talk, monstrous border wall, and Anti immigration bluster seems to meet the approval of at least half the American public.
It’s been difficult for me to come to the realization that illegal immigration has unfortunately become an intense blight upon a significant number of citizens in both the United States and United Kingdom. My immediate reaction, as a humanist and steadfast pluralist, was always to con̈me to the defense of any people deemed less fortunate than myself, especially regarding economic plight mostly caused by our governments Historically unfair policies.
The present state of the once prosperous nation of America has morphed into an unsettling, overcrowded cesspool populated by ever growing radicalized demographic. According to a 2022 Gallup news poll, 74% of registered Republicans identify as having strongly conservative views, which is the category most similar to “extreme right wing.”
The current “sanctuary cities” policy was first adopted by San Francisco, California in 1989. Initially a mostly non nondescript statute, this immigrant protection guideline achieved increasing importance due to Donald Trump’s anti-migration stances during his presidency. This strong neoliberal policy has caused significant backlash from homelessness advocates in cities such as New York, Chicago, and Denver for the intense strain it’s caused on the welfare system due to the drastic rises in immigrants. New York city has especially seen its share of difficulties regarding proper shelter for not just exceedingly high numbers of migrants, but also the tens of thousands American born homeless. (Info courtesy of ncsl.org)
In my opinion, this particular societal issue is going to continue its extremely negative impact on the United States and United Kingdoms cultures. Never has the conundrum of mass migration been as toxic as its been presently. The growing sentiment of more border control has little to do with Racism, language barriers or cultural differences, when it pertains to humanists such as myself. It’s most certainly not about any of those factors, this issue now transcends such ignorance. Unfortunately the hapless leadership of the two foremost “beacons of democracies” haven shown no ability to repair the immense damaged cause by the over expansion of globalization.
Effects of Neoliberalism
The term Neoliberalism is a complicated one to interpret in any definitive manner. To rely simply on the official Oxford dictionary would be terribly vague. Thoughtco.com gave a fairly decent contemporary explanation of the moniker. It refers to neoliberalism as a market oriented ideal meant to reform policies such as “eliminating price controls, deregulating capital market, lowering trade barriers, and most importantly, reducing state influence on the economy.”
I inserted “most importantly” because the seeds of ultra capitalism are planted when corporations have free reign to do as they wish. I’ve come to the conclusion that, regarding economics, either extreme end of the spectrum is detrimental to society. A complete “free market”, privatized economy damages the lower, middle classes and breeds corruption. But as we’ve seen throughout history mass collectivization is an unsustainable, catastrophic policy.
This statistic effectively contextualizes the spread of ultra capitalism and unless you’re fabulously wealthy, a negative aspect of its effects. In 2023 there were an astounding 748 billionaires in the United States. Only 33 years ago there was a mere 66. What does that tell you? Am I mistaking that amazing fact for a negative? Perhaps it’s truly a positive, doesn’t it prove the American dream is alive, well and flourishing? Before we except this reality as a beneficial result of a runaway capitalist paradise, let’s delve a bit further into some numbers. (Info courtesy of forbes.com)
According to Americans for Tax Fairness, the roughly 800 billionaires hold 3.8 % of the nation’s wealth. The USA Today piece that presented those statistics did an excellent job in separating the responses from both progressives and conservatives alike. The main point expressed by advocates for Donald Trump’s tax cuts (Conservatives) say tax breaks for the richest one percent of the population creates jobs therefore boosting the economy and putting more money in people’s pockets.
The obvious problem with this “Reaganomics” malarkey is what we’ve already discovered about this policy. It’s a total pile of rubbish, over the last quarter century we learned about the ramifications from such fiscal approaches. Firstly, it’s an unfortunate reality that CEOs of large corporations tend not to be the most conscientious individuals. For instance, the companies Enron and Lehman Brothers surely bring back memories of 2008, or how about individuals such as, Bernie madoff, the heavyweight champ of ponsi schemes, and more recently Sam Bankman Freid aka cryptobro? These very intelligent, diabolical guys made a mockery of our wonderful financial institutions to the tune of billions of dollars in stolen money. (Info courtesy of businessinsider.com)
I can write all day about the windfall of global capitalism but before we lose focus let’s get back to the caustic consequences of a century of Neoliberalism. In the 19th century being labeled a liberal was theoretically a positive thing. Earlier we loosely defined the modern explanation of Neoliberalism, but when looking back to the 1800s being a liberal meant so much more than presently, when breaking down the Britannica.com interpretation of liberalism in that time period.
The foremost beliefs and practices of early liberals was equality and freedom for all individuals under the rule of law. More specifically, liberals steadfastly pursued lofty, ambitious goals including: The abolition of slavery, feudal privileges as well as, limiting the power of the clergy (mainly the catholic church).
How is it that a word of such complexity have such vastly different translations from 100 years time. A century is certainly a immense amount of time, but when pertaining to a definition of a word, be it a complicated term such a liberalism, 10 decades doesnt appear to be as longlasting as first surmised.
In this day and age being labeled a “Liberal” cannot be considered pragmatic. When I think of examples of “Liberals”, the names that come to mind are Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer and Kamala Harris. For most of us politically informed folks those individuals track records don’t necessarily exude confidence.
Similar to how the denomination “Conservative” has been severely altered throughout history, Liberalism and more specifically Neoliberalism have gone through the figurative ringer. After years of linguistic pontification being labeled a neoliberal has become a mostly negative connotation, especially amongst intellectuals and right wing conservatives alike.
Reaching a definitive conclusion on the true meanings of these terms proved to be terribly difficult. But one inference which should garner little argument is the negative impact mass globalization and neoliberal idealism has had on society in general.
According to the United States Department of Homeland Security, southwest border encounters increased by 40% in the fiscal year of 2023 compared to 2021. Since the beginning of Joe Biden’s presidency there have been 7.5 million such encounters, one statistic of concern was the roughly 33,000 arrests of aliens with a criminal record or known fugitives in 2023.
The massive problem of illegal migration isn’t a Joe Biden or Donald Trump failure. Obviously their gross mismanagement of the issue has only made it increasingly worse. This is entirely a by-product of runaway globalization, remnants of the economic damage caused by western colonialism and the inadequate leadership of less fortunate countries, as well as, global institutions such as the United Nations.
Neoliberalisms repercussions on this matter cannot be understated. As we’ve determined neoliberalism is an economic ethos, it’s principle purpose is a vast, complete free market model, which aims to deregulate capital market, eliminate price controls and dramatically reduce state influence.
The combination of these two factors, in accordance with climate change induced catastrophes, as well as multiple military conflicts in already hostile regions has prompted an unprecedented amount of refugees and migration. Unfortunately these previous “holy grails” of civilization no longer seem to have the capacity and or leadership to properly incorporate them into society.
Another great site by the Dangerous Globe
