Well ok sure, but how do we manage specialized inputs for the production of the global economies goods and services in an efficient manner without gloabalization? Everyone growing up thinks they are going to be a "doctor" or a "lawyer" or a programmer or a professor or whatever, some very large sector of labor that requires very little specialized inputs: but in fact, the vast majority of people become involved in labor that intersects with the global economy in ways they only understand in a small way. That is the nature of our modern economy, why capitalism is so robust is precisely because it has somehow managed to efficiently distribute labor such that all these various processes whose complexity is dizzying in nature are able to work like grand clockwork.
If an alternative form of economic planning does not come about, since Global Capitalism introduces so many externalities it will destroy itself relatively quickly. Such self-destruction seems inevitable at this point, but we are not given real alternatives: Communism is a spectre, it haunts discourse since it exists as the only alternative posited that seeks to increase productivity and global wealth. Others are simply regressive, right-wing policies that emphasize a return to communal life (whose advocates forget, or perhaps are simply unfamiliar with, the extraordinary poverty of traditional rural communities).
And yet not once has communism been shown to out-compete capitalism in terms of wealth generation and the destruction of poverty. Capitalism has been adapted so severely to social concerns that it is difficult to tell (especially in China, which still calls itself communist) where the social policies end and the wealth generation begins. Though it is not and cannot be the end of history. But then how could our future be anything but at the same time both fantastically wealthy and horrifically dystopic? Out of that extreme chaos, what could come but more chaos, more terror, more luxury and more suffering. Magnitudes of pleasure and displeasure vacillation, desire inversion, operational schizophrenia, than we could even comprehend today. The alternative is already a lack of an alternative.
If an alternative form of economic planning does not come about, since Global Capitalism introduces so many externalities it will destroy itself relatively quickly. Such self-destruction seems inevitable at this point, but we are not given real alternatives: Communism is a spectre, it haunts discourse since it exists as the only alternative posited that seeks to increase productivity and global wealth. Others are simply regressive, right-wing policies that emphasize a return to communal life (whose advocates forget, or perhaps are simply unfamiliar with, the extraordinary poverty of traditional rural communities).
And yet not once has communism been shown to out-compete capitalism in terms of wealth generation and the destruction of poverty. Capitalism has been adapted so severely to social concerns that it is difficult to tell (especially in China, which still calls itself communist) where the social policies end and the wealth generation begins. Though it is not and cannot be the end of history. But then how could our future be anything but at the same time both fantastically wealthy and horrifically dystopic? Out of that extreme chaos, what could come but more chaos, more terror, more luxury and more suffering. Magnitudes of pleasure and displeasure vacillation, desire inversion, operational schizophrenia, than we could even comprehend today. The alternative is already a lack of an alternative.