POLAR OPPOSITES:

BLAME AMERICA: They no longer fill the streets, but they have not gone away. Anti-globalisers are angrier than ever - and their hatred for all things American has only deepened since September 11th. (John Lloyd, WorldLink: The magazine of the World Economic Forum)

In one important respect at least, the world has not changed much since September 11th. Despite its inherent instability, capitalism has again proved resilient. Fears that the attack on the Twin Towers would deepen an already-evident economic slump have, for the moment, been confounded. In fact, it may have stimulated a more rapid recovery, at least in the US, which has resumed its role as the world's dynamo. Europe's economy remains sluggish, though it promises to pick up over the next 12 months. Japan's continues to stagnate, although some see flickers of light at the end of the tunnel. Those who saw (or wanted to see) the of the system in the attack on capitalism's iconic monument have been disabused for now - although the world economy remains unhealthily dependent on the US, which in turn relies on foreigners to finance its yawning trade gap.

Yet the very resilience of western capitalism throws into sharper relief the miserable precariousness of the more marginal areas of the world. [...]

The US and Israel, with guest appearances from European leaders (especially Tony Blair), now constitute the anti-globalisers' own "axis of evil". In his overdrawn phrase, Mr Bush linked together three disparate states that, although they have all supported or encouraged terrorism, require different policy approaches. The global movements' axis is similarly crude. In identifying the leaderships of certain states as always and everywhere malign in their actions, it seeks to make of political judgment a Manichean game in which evil oppressors confront pure victims, in which the rich North exploits the poor South and in which faceless capitalism suppresses individual striving and group solidarity.

The extremism of the radical anti-globalisers' demands, and the black-and-white nature of their politics, have both become more pronounced since September 11th. For the most militant among them, their rejection of political and economic liberalism is complete. This has, to be sure, forced some of the more moderate critics of globalisation to make clear their opposition to extremism. But it also legitimates a political discourse that scorns institutions and voting procedures in favour of an undefined populism that relies on the impulse - like that of a spoiled child - of demanding instantly a solution to all problems, as if from an omnipotent and hated parent.

This psycho-analytical explanation is particularly apt. The radical anti-globalisers are self-confessedly instinctive and individualist. They dismiss objectivity and reason as tools of the enemy. The danger of their approach becomes clearer as it becomes more extreme. It drains trust and support from democratic institutions that are imperfect but functioning, and that can help mediate between global interests, encourage development and achieve greater equity. What the anti-globalisers propose instead is either aimless activism or detached cynicism. They remain a danger not for their - so far - minor outbursts of violence, but for their sustained narrative of the failure of reform, and of liberal thought and practice.

Despite the general excellence of this essay, one wonders if Mr. Lloyd does not too blithely dismiss the Manichean viewpoint. It seems that even he's arguing that the U.S., Britain and Israel are the prime defenders of democratic institutions and free markets, of liberal thought in general. We are opposed by the remaining communist states, radical Islam, and the anti-globalists, a disparate group to be sure, but a group united by their hatred of classical liberalism. To this extent the world does indeed seem to have an axis running through and two diametrically opposed groups at the opposite poles. All that remains for other states and groups who fall at various points along the axis is to decide which pole they favor. Posted by Orrin Judd at September 12, 2002 8:01 AM