Globalization | FULL DEBATE | Doha Debates

[Music] dear world we need to talk welcome to Doha debates where we are searching for solutions to global challenges this is a debate among three speakers with differing opinions they share a willingness to find common ground first we'll hear from each speaker individually then we'll enter the measures a welcoming space for critical conversations and a traditional Arab consensus building practice globalization in general is going through a major crisis globalization has been incredibly efficient and beneficial and we need to make sure that it works for all their countries that are challenged by structural columns in their economy that make it very hard for them to participate in the global market the fight in India is on against this sort of corporate takeover we need to stop the anarchy of global supply chains that are basically leaving so many people working 80 hours a week and still destitute globalization is a fact it is not a choice what we've got to do is make it work [Music] when you hear the word globalization what comes to mind do you think of an interconnected world and greater prosperity for all or do you see the triumphs of the neoliberal order and capitalism in all its forms is globalization the solution to the world's challenges or is it a veil that masks the real problems this is our debate please welcome your no hard abates moderator Peter fuckiní [Music] hello to everyone here in the audience and all those of you who are watching us online welcome to Edinburgh and the third in our series of new Doha debates so what then is globalization if there's one thing we can all agree on it is that globalization is a murky ill-defined concept we see in it what we want to see we might seen at the growing interdependence of the world economies the flow of goods technology people and information we might also see in it mass migration exploitation of workers and more wars and conflicts globalization is under attack but can it be reversed can it be rolled back and should it be deconstructed today we will be listening to some of the very many divergent views on this topic then in our modulus we'll explore possible solutions to look at globalization to see whether we can make it work and work better for everyone we're here at the TED summit we're here in the audience and live as well on Twitter and what we want to do is hear from all of them all those of you who are watching us around the world but first let's go straight to our correspondent nano far he diet for I know is keeping it very close eye on what's going on and also ready to tell us how you can all get involved in this discussion no far thank you yes as you said I will be monitoring watching what you guys are saying across the globe we've got people who are going to be logging in tuning in from the four corners and I'm so excited to say that if you use the hashtag dear world on Twitter just make sure you use it firstly because otherwise I can't see what you've said if you do use it you will be part of this debate we don't just want the audience to have their say and vote we want you to as well and I'm gonna be right here watching out for what you guys have to say I know you're keeping a very close watch not just on that iPad and iPhone but on the map of the world as well to see where most people are joining us from I also know that you'll be joined by one of our speakers here today in our shared Studios portal just outside this hole to connect with some of the viewers watching this debate live in Lagos Nigeria so then let's begin let's start talking about globalization and I think we'll begin where many of you might expect with mobile phones hey Siri define globalization globalization is the process of interaction and integration among actually stop right there maybe the best way to explain what globalization is it's through my smartphone globalization is the way in which businesses and other organizations operate and exert influence internationally take the phone in your pocket for instance there are 1 billion more active mobile connections than people on earth with 66 percent of the human population owning a cell phone the minerals used to build many phone parts are mined in inner mongolia or the toxic waste produced by processing these rare earth minerals threatens the health of millions left exposed by china's lacks environmental laws for those in the European Union making an average wage it costs 26 hours of work to afford the pixel 3xl it would cost the workers who assembled your new phone over a month's wage to buy it globalization has led to the development of some socially and environmentally harmful practices but it's done good too in 1981 88 percent of China's population lived in poverty by 2012 it was down to 6.5 percent much of our globalized economic system is rooted in the idea of free trade British economist David Ricardo says free trade is based on the promise of the unhindered and untaxed movement of goods money and people but the reality is goods and money move across international borders much more often than people and it's not because people don't want to now ready or not we already live in this imperfect interconnected world and once we can't undo the missteps of the past we can work together to responsibly shape our shared future quite extraordinary almost 9 billion mobile connections worldwide if you can imagine that could there be a better example of just how globalized our world has become to help us look at globalization from other different perspectives we have with us three experts each one of them will have five minutes and I say just five minutes to make that case for or against globalization here they are on stage with me pericana Medea Benjamin and C song K miss among we also have with us Govinda Clayton he like the rest of us will be listening to the three positions but his task will be to apply his expertise in mediation and conflict resolution to try to find common ground if there is any but time now to hear from our first speaker our first speaker for Arkana believes globalization is a tremendous force for good and that it will help spread prosperity around the world bharat is a leading global strategy adviser world traveler and best-selling author whose latest book is the future is Asian the word globalization has only been around since the 1950s and perhaps because the term is so young we talk about it like it's a very recent phenomenon something that we can just turn on and off with a switch but globalization is much deeper than that it began the day our ancestors began wandering across the continents 100 thousand years ago and has been expanding in lockstep with our dense networks of transportation energy and communications that connect all the continents nations cities and communities of the world globalization has withstood every plague every world war the Crusades and financial crises and if you look at the continuous expansion in the flows of people of goods of capital of data you can only conclude that globalization is just getting warmed up so let's not even begin to debate whether or not globalization is our future do you remember the so-called anti-globalization protests of the late 1990s and early 2000s back then the protesters said that globalization makes the north-south divide worse but the truth is that globalization has been the greatest force for reducing poverty for billions of people from Asia to Africa the protestors were wrong and they know it that's why the protest stopped in fact these anti movements anti capitalism anti-technology anti-globalization they always lose they represent not Universalist humanism but very parochial shortsightedness the truth is that too little trade is a much bigger problem than unfair trade to little internet access is a much bigger problem than the digital divide you cannot simply say finance is evil throw the bankers in jail and ignore the that if it weren't for the global investors and asset managers who buy the bonds of developing countries they would not have any money to invest in basic infrastructure let me take these two issues finance and infrastructure just to remind everyone how much more global globalization is about to get China and other Asian countries are opening up their markets to greater foreign ownership trillions of dollars of Western savings will be flowing into them now look at infrastructure the new belt and Road initiative is the largest coordinated infrastructure investment plan in human history it's going to link more than a hundred countries more closely together it's fashionable to talk about global redistribution today but if you really want global redistribution then you should want much more such connectivity of economies and infrastructure globalization is our future let's get smart and let's make the most of it indeed it turns out that the backlash that we talked about today is not really against globalization but rather against the governments that have failed to manage it for the benefit of their societies look at the United Kingdom United States where citizens have experienced very little gain and median income since the financial crisis meanwhile the vast majority of Asians which is the majority of the world population supports globalization precisely because their governments have been actively involved in steering it for their interests as to World Bank economists recently wrote inequality is a political choice so don't blame globalization if your government fails to invest in worker retraining or in STEM education blame your leaders blame yourself we do face crises that are that are the result the consequence of poorly managed globalization the environment is being unsustainably plundered human beings are being exploited but the solution is to better regulate capitalism to clean up our supply chains not to end globalization let me be clear there is no bad globalization there is only badly managed globalization if you want affordable education for the masses then you want more books shipped across borders or mobile learning platforms translated into local languages if you want farmers to survive the next volatile harvest then you want them to get the newest high-yield seeds that can we're going to require less water to be distributed or given to them if you want to solve the economic crises of ageing populations and high public debt then you want more migration of workers to care for the elderly and to pay taxes the solution to the negative consequences of globalization is always more globalization of the positive attributes of globalization you want to allow the supply of money of people of technology and ideas to reach the demand for money people technology and ideas so remember that globalization does not fail we do and if you don't get that balance right if we don't get that balance right that is not globalization's failure that is our failure thank you all right Kanna you say there is no bad global globalization there is just badly managed globalization sounds like an interesting attempt at deflection a positive spin that you're trying to put on this when you I presume and view and globalist like you know the other perspective the other reality that people live people who have not benefited from globalization just take a listen to this other perspective when you have 30 40 50 60 70 percent of people in different societies who feel as though the societies are working for somebody but not then you get very bad politics people in certain parts of the country thinking everything is fine and not realizing that in you know very large swathes of the country people don't feel like the future is raining on them people who simply feel that they've been left behind are you ignoring this reality and isn't the backlash that Anand is warning about what we are actually seeing today the bad politics as he calls it the rise of the populist the Boris Johnson's the Donald Trump's and so many other politicians around the world who have tapped quite successfully into this growing anger that people are directing toward the globalist toward the elites and what he's talking about and the leaders you just mentioned of the UK in the u.s. are exactly the two countries that I mentioned in my remarks the countries where the governments have failed to harness the potential of globalization think about two countries the United Kingdom the United States that over the past 200 years have been among the most powerful drivers potent drivers of shaping globalization that have actually benefited tremendously economically in in other ways and yet their political decisions have resulted in that inequality in that sense that the majority of the population is not benefited as well as it could but other countries that are more new to globalization that a recent entrance the emerging markets the Asian countries where governments have been much more proactive so he's right badly and he's a green but you seem to be suggesting that the politicians that we mentioned are the ones who are on the flip side but they are actually the ones worth tapping into this anger who capitalizing on it so quite the opposite of what you've just suggested but the question I have for you though is although it might sound perfectly reasonable from a geostrategic theoretical perspective to reason the way you do from a human cost when you look at globalization and the high inequality is created which you seems to suggest isn't all big of a deal when you look at 26 billion when you took a twenty six billionaires around the world making as much as the bottom 3.8 billion people in this world what do you say is that okay that is also what globalization has delivered globalization has enabled it but it's not globalization's fault the interesting thing is when you want to scapegoat globalization we have these commentaries where suddenly government disappears from the equation right it's this cabal of conspiratorial capitalists who have you know re-engineered and and cheated the system so that they could benefit and everyone else would lose and government comes in at the end as this knight in shining armor - and it's an always enlightened and democratic to salvage and to re-regulate things as you know that's not the way the real world works government operations that are benefits that are making more in terms of revenues the Google's the Amazon Apple making more in their market cap about a trillion dollars more than the entire GDP of every least developed countries and many of the developing and therefore here's what I would like to see I would like everyone who blames globalization for something to substitute the word globalization with a proper noun name me the company name Eva leader the government the committee that made those terrible decisions to give those tax breaks to let the wealthy of the hook - not taxi - to not regulate executive compensation you won't have a constructive conversation on globalization brain blame the real culprits because they are real people that's what we'll try to do in this but for now thank you very much colonel our second speaker Medea Benjamin believes globalization is a force for corruption abuse and inequality especially among lower-income nations and peoples Medea is a globally recognized activist who has taken on multinational corporations like Nike and more recently the United States government hello I believe that borders are artificial constructs and one day we might live in a borderless world in today's world I appreciate collaboration and scientific breakthroughs like cancer treatments or climate mitigation I also appreciate global institutions like the United Nations and I love global collaboration in the arts something that my organization code pink did just a couple of weeks ago when we borrowed the 20 foot version of this from you Brits to fly in the National Mall in Washington DC when Donald Trump was giving his speech but this is very different from globalization as an economic system which is wreaked havoc around the world let me give you a few examples and let's start with workers yes it brings cheap goods to consumers but at a tremendous cost to workers corporations move their factories around the world always searching for the cheapest workers in places that don't have unions or way that where they can easily destroy those unions I have visited Nike factories in Indonesia where workers work ten hours a day six days a week making 300 pairs of shoes a day and they could never afford to buy one pair globalization has been disastrous for the environment importing goods from thousands of miles away demands ever increasing quantities of oil that have led to overconsumption that are devouring our rainforests dumping toxins into our rivers and clogging our ocean Plastics pick this plastic straw something that Donald Trump has just politicized it's handy for sipping a cool drink on a hot summer day but the single-use product is too small to recycle and it's symbolic of the 88 pounds of plastic per person per year that we produce much of it for products like this straw that we could easily live without and speaking of junk what about the globalized junk food like coca-cola a global brand and fast food companies like McDonald's that lead to obesity and have taken a serious buy it out of healthy traditional diets but you know what the real problem is with corporate led globalization it's undemocratic and it's unfair it gives too much power to these multinational corporations that then make decisions that affect the lives of billions of people and they destroy so many local businesses how can a corner shop compete with a Walmart on top of that many of these companies don't even pay taxes take Amazon 11 billion dollars in profits last year you know how much they paid in taxes zero and now I want to talk about militarism the war machine because it's part of this conversation globalization goes hand in hand with militarism the writer Thomas Friedman once said the hidden hand of the market will never work without the hidden fist McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas the designer of the f-15 so globalization feeds the arms trade and these companies that make weapons have endless profits from endless war militarism puts Western democracies in bed with repressive regimes that buy our weapons and then there's the issue of mass migration the chaos that comes with globalization has pushed million of people from their homes to seek employment and asylum elsewhere and the backlash against this mass migration has led to the rise of right-wing populist from Donald Trump in the United States to Viktor Orban and hungry to brexit right here in the UK finally globalization of news drowns out local voices and diverse perspectives global news organizations set the news agenda and they are driven by profit think about that now let's think for a moment about the alternatives an economic system that is not driven by corporate profits but focuses instead on creating well-paid meaningful jobs so more people can have better lives an economic system that is more democratic because it's locally controlled an economic system that puts the stewardship of the environment front and center let's take one very simple step together let's go Strahl us yes it's a tiny thing but it's symbolic it puts us on the right path of thinking globally producing locally and reducing our global footprint that's where our future lies thank you [Applause] yeah Benjamin you've been talking about so many issues I think that might resonate a lot with many people around the world but you also said this he said we need to take back power which sounded very similar to what I've been hearing those who voted for brexit and Donald Trump say the need to take on power seems to be there is some kind of convergence of interest between the right and the left in the United States and elsewhere is globalization this broad concept becoming too much of a convenient punching bag for those on the rights and activists like you on the left we're simply blaming all of the world's ills and problems on globalization I think people like Donald Trump got elected because of the negative effects of globalization all of these towns in the United States that have had their manufacturing bases destroyed where people can't find decent paying jobs and he came in and said you know I'm gonna create jobs I'm gonna take back our economy and that's why people voted for him I think it was a wrong vote I think it was the wrong response to the negative effects I think what we have to do is take back power on a local basis and build up the kind of economies local locally that we want to see but doesn't Perico have a point when he says that by over focusing on globalization we are missing perhaps the real culprits the politicians the corporate leaders that you might otherwise be taking on who have been pushing the profiteering that you so often decry who've been promoting these billion-dollar making a military adventurist ventures around the world shouldn't you be taking them on more specific absolutely and I do every day and I think I agree that it's the large corporations and the politicians who are in bed with them and I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist but in my country in the u.s. these big corporations are often the ones that are funding the campaign's of politicians they are the ones that are really setting the agenda and taking power away from local communities that might want a very different type of economics indeed you're right you did take on the big corporate symbols of globalization Nike for one and as you say you also try to fight for the rights of Asian workers for example making what an average of fifty cents an hour three dollars fifty a day and I have news for you by the way I think it was just yesterday a pair of Nikes from the 1970s went under the hammer at an auction in New York fetching while fetching about four hundred and fifty thousand dollars but isn't that reality as well isn't this the free market well it is but it's the market that some of us want to change so that we have a system where it's not all about corporate profits and the corporations spending so much money on propaganda that even people from poor families will spend several hundred dollars on a pair of shoes it doesn't make a lot of sense except that the corporate mindset has gotten into our own minds from the propaganda from the corporate media so yes it's the reality but I think that reality is something that we can and must change especially from the environmental perspective if we want to have a planet several generations from now certainly a paradox which we'll be diving more deeply into during the mattress for now Mattia Benjamin thank you very - speaker C song Camus among believes globalization can be both a force for good and the continuation of systemic inequality and injustice C Csonka is a noted author and cultural observer whose primary concern is the intersection of race gender and power so what are we really talking about when we talk about globalization well whether you're from a rich country or a poor one whether you are one of globalization's winners or one of globalization's losers talking about globalization is often a really interesting way to hide behind jargon to use what I call global ease it's a way to say uncomfortable things while pretending to be polite it does matter however in this debate where you live so first let's talk a little bit about people who are opposed to globalization even though they live in wealthy countries in Europe in North America New Zealand Australia globalization has for the most part worked in these places and in these places debates about globalization have often been used as excuses to stir up hatred and to blame foreigners for economic and social decline right so I personally haven't heard Donald Trump rail against the large number of Australian backpackers who overstay their visas in America and yet he seems deeply offended by Mexicans who cross the border illegally right so his anger is selective mr. Trump isn't proposing tariffs on Swedish goods or stirring up anger about the surge in ideas that are popping up across the country right but he's very upset about China so he or he hides behind an economic argument to disguise a clear racial agenda as we all know conversations in rich countries about globalization are often just conversations about race and multiculturalism dropping the global E's would make it a lot easier to have more honest conversations okay so let's turn to to talk about people who live in poor countries who are often also opposed to globalization as someone who comes from a cash poor but very resource rich continent with very little global bargaining power I'm aware of the pitfalls of certain models of economic trade there are legitimate reasons as you've heard to be against globalization in these places Africans who oppose globalization are often rejecting companies that pollute with impunity that exploit workers that dodge local taxes in the name of foreign direct investment right so conversations in poor countries about globalization are often really about hunger inequality and economic justice here too dropping the global ease would make it a lot easier to have more honest conversations in other words no matter where you live talking about your hopes and your fears is a far better starting point than talking about this abstract thing called globalization are you really anti-globalization or are you simply afraid of Muslims are you Pro globalization or does globalization just work for you because your particular business is thriving and you can get cheap goods delivered from Karachi to Detroit for example so once we're clear on what we are really talking about when we talk about globalization I think it makes it easier to do the most important thing and what's the most important thing the most important thing is to act to change things that we don't like and of course this is where things get a little tricky people like me who fly around the world to have debates about globalization really like coming up with global solutions our instinctive response is to want to establish global standards and global norms more of that global ease we think globally and we want to act globally too but people live in real places not in the global sphere so this approach only makes sense if you define the problem as being globalization as living in the global realm but if you reject that word then you might choose a different set of actions you might ask people if their fear really isn't about black and brown people moving into their cities you see political battles are still fought locally even if they have downstream global consequences and implications right the fights that will settle the future of things like climate change those are taking place block by block town by town city by city state by state and country by country we've all seen with the Paris climate Paris agreement on climate change global agreements are only as good as their weakest members so if the most powerful country in the world elects somebody who's on the borderline as a climate change denier because of the state of national politics in that place then the globe suffers so what's the solution it's simple it's a two-part process as I said before the first thing is to ditch the term globalization because it's a smokescreen it obscures the real issues the second and most important thing to do is to act and to do so politically and to do so locally now more than ever we have to take our hopes to the streets to the halls of power to the places where we live and the places we have real political influence in the words of the late great Audrey Lorde sometimes we are blessed with being able to choose the time and the arena and the manner of our revolution but more usually we must do battle where we are standing we're living in a time in which we have no choice I invite you all to take up the challenge to do battle where you stand I thank you [Music] see sulky Missy man a powerful called to arms a call-to-action to make sure that we don't allow globalization as you say to be the smokescreen that hides and obscures so many of the important things you talked about revolution and coming from a family of revolutionaries in South Africa perhaps no surprise there but when you say let's be specific and let's act at the individual level let's be specific let's take the exact the specific example of let's say a farmer a small-scale farmer in your native South Africa in a remote farm battling and competing against a large-scale industrial community which is backed by all these powerful corporations not to mention the government as well yeah how can a small-scale individual with very limited resources actually take on the big corporations and actually win yeah so I think the first thing I will say is that unfortunately none of my solutions none of the things that we need to do and they're clear but none of those things are short-term so unfortunately that small-scale farmer the fight that they have to undertake begins politically so it begins with mobilizing with organizing in ways that we've seen happen across time and space for very long time my country is a great example of having movements of people organize and mobilize against the seemingly indestructible force but it goes back to politics so for example in my country where we are dealing with a very significant question of land you need a government that's gonna work for people so I didn't think I would be saying this when I heard Parekh speak but I kind of agree with him I think that there's a real role to be played with getting down to politics and to fighting at that level well that's a good start for all right you mentioned this but there's also that glaring other issue that globalization brings to mind and it is this increasing marginalization of entire communities this invisibility that so many have to fight against there's a specific example that I want to show you about it's about someone trying literally to put his entire community on the map in Kibera Kenya it makes me feel sad when it is shown as as a black spot it means there is no there's no life in that area but that's contrary to what is on the ground people are living in that area there are facilities that like that area and life is going on in that area it's important to map this informal settlement so the data are select and a tool to back up your your argument so when you engage in the government or even different stakeholders you would tell them this is the problem that we have in the community and the map and the data is showing that so an example of someone actually making a difference taking matters into his own hand Zak and his community and just last night I was trying to actually find this community on Google Earth and I did because just up until about ten years ago it was as he said a blank spot it did not exist but so how difficult is that struggle and how many Zak's are out there and people who simply don't make it the way I think it's such a powerful example because it's an example that speaks to the fact that in many ways the tool that you use is neutral so that could have opted to use a different metric to get the same outcome so it's not necessarily that anyone cares that much about Google identifying us or not on a map it's about the fact that your absence there signifies a political insignificance a political invisibility so it's a great way in which you're using that as a metaphor for something that's far more important so it's a very good example of how our tools may be neutral but our actions are super important and they always have to be political a key word their political and we'll get to that of course in more detail but for now she's okay Nancy monk thank you so much indeed so then you heard from all three of our speakers and before we step into our mesh list let's have a quick recap where do the speakers stand on globalisation here's a quick summary pericana says globalization does not fail we do Medea Benjamin wants us to think globally and act locally and finally Susan Kim is among you just heard her she believes that we should make it concrete we should make it more specific not abstract she says stand up it's time to vote we need your input to find common ground among the speakers we want to know exactly how much value you attach to the arguments you've heard you have a total of 100 points to divide you can divide them over one two or all three statements to do so simply assign points to the statements on a sliding scale so then time now to vote I see everyone's phone is out that's great and as you're voting you probably want to be thinking about many things but about the nuances and the different layers of every argument you just heard you might agree wave Parag that globalization is indeed the future but you might also say and think that society has a good points that a discussion on globalization is simply too abstract we need to ditch the term as she says or you might think that media has captured the ugly truth behind globalization now of course while you consider your options and while we tabulate the votes we can go one more time to our correspondent Nell afar who is standing by and so just give us a sense net of our what people around the world are thinking about this discussion absolutely before I do that I just want to quickly apologize to the people watching on periscope and on Twitter I know there have been a couple of technical faults so if you have been watching and it's been freezing it's live TV I'm afraid that's just how it's gonna be sometimes so I do apologize just remember that you can absolutely have your say asks some really insightful and interesting questions and make your comments online please use the hashtag dear world in order to do that so that I can see your tweets and hopefully read some of them outs now I have to say the debate is being hard in the studio and our audience here is voting but the conversation is global I've got people here from Australia from Afghanistan from Gaza Mexico Sweden and Germany all chiming in with their thoughts and opinions some of which I am gonna read in the next couple of minutes but before I do Twitter periscope remember you were part of this vote just log on to Twitter make sure that you have the dough hard debates page up click on the vote link and have your say you can shape this conversation as much as anyone in our audience who are I think eagerly voting away I think not just to give you some of those trends today we've got three main trends that I'm seeing a pair one about borders that Madea mentioned in her speech connectivity and globalization and also some pretty awesome one-liners that I've seen and I wanted to tell you what mirror in Gaza had to say she said people are suffering from the closure of borders they can't travel freely everyone she says has the right to travel and choose where they live so they can't be useful to the community they are part of that community word keeps coming up guys I'd love to hear from you about that and then we've got harlot in Herat Afghanistan which is where I'm from so I had to include that one harlot says so in my community after the globalization process people have started seeking their rights and women have also started to seek their rights and participate more which i think is absolutely brilliant a couple of tweets now some brilliant one-liners I've got one from Omar who says globalization is colonization Akbar says globalization is a failed utopia and a really thoughtful one from Reem in Qatar who says if we don't manage globalization and use it wisely she says to me this potential then we're going to stay at a disadvantage in a world that today is based mainly on globalization so lots of really interesting thoughts and opinions we're going to obviously have our modulus and hear what everyone else has to say but remember guys use the hashtag dear world to tell me what you think and if they're there just before I throw to you to give the results of the first of our two votes just time to let you know that after the debate has been had in the studio you guys watching on periscope can absolutely join me in our shed studio portal where we will be talking and deconstructing everything that's happened in here so thank you guys thanks very much now for that roundup and as you say I'm also hearing that the results are actually in the results of that first vote so let's have the results on the screens let's let's see whose position is the one that garnered the most of your votes both those of you here who are online who vote who are here in the audience and those of you online all right so looking at it there is actually well that's a very close call at I virtually between the first two positions per arcanas globalization doesn't fail we do just under thirty percent of the vote very close to the results that Medea Benjamin got with think globally and act locally but there's a runaway winner and I hate to use the word winner but there is clearly clearly there's clearly a position that is resonated with more people and it is the last one that we heard C song keys make it concrete not abstract stand up people in the mood for revolution there forty one point twenty five percent C song case so that is the vote and what's interesting is that later on after the malaise discussion we'll see whether this vote is going to shift in any small or significant way when we you know check the pulse one second time now someone who didn't actually vote that has been listening very closely is our connector dr. Govinda Clayton is a senior researcher in peace processes within the Center for Security Studies at ETH Zurich dr. Clayton's research interests include negotiation mediation conflict management and civil war as our connector dr. Clayton will provide guidance on identifying common ground and steering towards bridge building and consensus if indicating please join me on stage so even though you're here to help us find some common ground some consensus but what kind of consensus should we be looking for and can we actually even think about forging consensus when as you've heard there are very deeply held and deeply entrenched views there are competing ideologies there I say when it comes to globalization sure well I think one really important point for us all to remember here is a conflict and disagreement and not necessarily dirty words they're not bad things in fact conflict can be a really creative process that can promote internal and collective growth it can lead to innovative solutions and more kind of creative outcome so I think we shouldn't be scared of conflict per se conflict only becomes a problem when it turns violent which hoping won't happen today or leads talking to breakdown in communications so I think I kind of an aspiration for us really it's not necessarily so much to to just find a consensus that everybody agrees on which which is unlikely to feel to feel very natural instead it'd be good to get clear mum of course the areas where we agree but more generally the areas in which we have disagreement listening to these areas of disagreement and I think there were plenty what were the commonalities was there a common thread that you can actually build on that you thought you were able to spot between the three different perspectives sure what I mean I think probably as we would expect as well one of the most consistent themes that came up through all the different talks with this idea of economic globalization and so we heard lots of talks of tax avoidance multinational corporations and of course like the horrific levels have been equality that we have across the globe and so I think that was that was great and it was interesting to hear that come out across the discussions but what I'd like to do is kind of echoes this home kids point actually of of moving beyond the the more abstract and into the more specific and so what I'd really like to hear from the different participants is really digging down without getting into the weeds a little bit and hearing it's more specifically in this area where they have some agreement and also again whether it's disagreement so that's what you'll be looking for absolutely from the audience and from the speakers yeah totally good questions in particular what kind of questions do you think will actually lead us to build those sort of Canaries of consensus sure I think what what would be type the questions we'll be looking for is I mean there's be really clean and this is not an Oxford style debate any more debate anymore so there's no more winners in this in there as we move into the Majlis okay instead we're looking for morbid Oh hostile debate so what we're looking to create here is is a discussion like a difficult conversation the highlights the differences that we have but at the same time draws out for everyone here and at home where the areas of commonality are these important difference thanks so much Govinda Clayton thank you welcome to the measureless a traditional Arab consensus building practice focus of the mesh list is to welcome critical conversations and reach solutions hero will encourage our speakers to bridge differences and find common ground alright so where should we begin so Parag Khanna Medea Benjamin say song came is among three very interesting perspectives let's see if we can find any common ground between the treeview to you first Media Park says that inequality is a political choice so he is urging all of us not to blame globalization does he have a point yes but you get a lot of inequality when there is not enough space for mobilizing from the bottom up to create the kind of changes you need to happen so often times I've seen around the world communities that are fighting for better pay for better working conditions and they're being crushed and they're being crushed sometimes by corporate goons sometimes crushed by government militias sometimes a combination of the two but I think it's the lack of ability for people to make the changes they want to see para do you agree with this and do you agree with what sis Anka said earlier that there is just a bit too much globally is being thrown around that we should be more specific without a doubt and you know to to your appointment it's absolutely correct that when you have this exploitation what you've done well is touching name the culprits you said it is the corporate goons it is the corrupt governments so it's not helpful to simply you know again scapegoat globalization this abstract term that means everything and nothing at the same time what is it that is a causing that government is not globalization that is exploiting those workers right it is it is actually those companies and who allows those companies to get away with what they're doing why are they not more why are they not doing what they're supposed to be doing which is actually maximizing the welfare for their citizens if I'm not mistaken that's why we entrust governments to to lead us right and so these governments are failing and they're failing whether they're enabling this exploitation and but what's important is to point out that a lot of when we talk rhetorically about globalization we're really using a not to say antiquated model but we're forgetting that there is so much more transparency in the world today domestically and internationally so for every example that you have of workers getting crushed there's also governments and workers that are standing up and saying wait a minute we've seen this game before we've seen colonialism before we've seen corporate globalization and from the 1960s and 70s and 80s well we're gonna do now in the 21st century is we're gonna make sure that we benefit so for example it's very easy so just quickly for people to say China and Africa is just like the British East India Company it's the new colonialism well it's not because if you talk to African governments African leaders say they're saying we've seen this before when the Chinese come in here we're gonna make sure no you can't just bring your workers you have to hire locals you can't just bring your things you have to manufacture locally in some countries it's working in others it's not but let me tell you something in the 17th and 18th centuries these societies didn't have that choice and today they do well let's pick on this very last point that you just made and to use this on key I mean a lot of obsession around the world is centered around China as Paris mentioned it was the Europeans in the 19th century the Americans and 20th now it seems to be China's turn growing influence across the world but on your continent reciprocity as well yes China being unfairly picked on doing anything different from what the rest of the great powers have done not just for decades for centuries I think there are some interesting similarities and interesting differences between the way the West has traditionally operated in Africa and the way that China in the last 15 to 20 years has operated and I think they are definitely shifts in the way that African governments have begun to respond to China's conduct so I think in the early years you certainly had very heavy-handed tactics by China as they came in and essentially did did what they wanted and and those relationships I think were very stilted as a consequence of mobilizing and organizing at a very local level by civil society organizations and I've done this work in Angola and in Zimbabwe there has been a significant pushback by those governments against Chinese companies but that hasn't happened simply because those governments have decided because of transparency it's happened because they've been pushed politically and forced by local activists to ask much tougher questions I do think that in general the conduct of the Chinese in Africa and the conduct of the West in Africa is far too similar unfortunately far too exploitative media what do you think of this argument and the fact that many will point to the fact that Russia China and and some others are often criticized by certainly the Western media because they are quote/unquote not democracies for some of the actions that they take are we too conditioned to accept actions taking taken by so-called democracies the United States and others when the end effect the damage might be even more egregious oh absolutely I mean I think my government has done terrible things around the world oftentimes pushed by big corporations you can go back to the days of the 1953 in Iran when the people decided we want to take our oil and use it for ourselves and the British in the UK said no you can't do that we're gonna overthrow your government and look what we have today a fight that we might be going into the next world war with Iran we have examples of US companies that go in and destroy other people's agricultural systems and then we try to stop the migration that comes to the United States as a result of that so I think that there are some very egregious examples of global corporations that especially at this time when people are sensitive to the environmental issues I don't think we can afford as a planet to keep going on this kind of economic system that depends on things being produced and consumed from thousands and thousands of miles away it just doesn't make any sense anymore if it ever did work how to respond to media for someone who's lived in the United States for many years who now lives in Singapore how do you look at these competing geo strategic dynamics I think you're correct that there has been again this multinational exploitation and it but it is a two-way street they have been operating in very weak you know societies post-colonial countries that are very young most of the world's countries were born after 1945 right and globalization really kicked off in the 50s and 60s so these countries had resources but didn't have the wherewithal the technology is the access to to global markets to actually harness those resources themselves and so you know multinationals get sweetheart deals and so forth and then the rest is sort of history but as I as I said we're moving into a new phase where governments have a lot more confidence or at least should have a lot more confidence you don't really see every country in the world every poor country saying you know here's a tax holiday please come here right there really structuring these relationships much more carefully so they are benefiting again you can see this with China's belt and Road initiative all across Asia let's remember that even the China Africa dynamic as much as I agree with what you've said you give a very balanced view of society but again Asia is where the vast majority of the world population is I spend most of my time traveling in you know the 45 50 countries there where I see every single country figuring out calculating very precisely how am I gonna get the better the longer the longer end of the stick in this deal with China rather than China getting it that's what's really happening today and that can be seen maybe as a more positive globalization that's a two-way Street rather than the traditional dynamic of superpower comes superpower exploits superpower wins okay how do you see it from a model so again you know in some of the work that we did in the Congo and I admit that this is a dramatic example simply because the Congo is a as a country in crisis and continues to be in crisis but the work that we did in the Congo we literally sat down with lawyers who had been hired by a civil society organization to negotiate on behalf of the government sitting across the table from a number of companies looking at coltan and and and and titanium our smartphones are generated through power that comes from these places so I think a point that I want to make taking it back to like what is our individual responsibility is to recognize that again while the conversation may seem abstract what's really important is to think about that thing that is sitting in your pocket and the direct relationship between that gadget in your pocket and the actions that we're talking about here global the globe the global power dynamic matters on a very personal individual level and so I I definitely think that in some parts of the world and in some places that very exploitative relationship continues to exist and what's important about the fact that there are nuances what's important about that is that we have as Medea says very little time so we aren't having this conversation 50 years ago we're actually having this conversation now with a finite amount of resources that's getting smaller and smaller and so I think our tolerance for the mess-ups of capitalism has to be like we can't be as patient with capitalism and with inequality as I think we have been in the past Media how much of the pushback the unease that we're seeing towards globalization today in the United States and elsewhere has to do with what sis Anka just referred to these underlying issues the underlying causes that make us see the sort of backlash the racial factors that are associated with it the us versus them that's sort of narrative that seems to be prevalent these days yes and I think that a lot of times when we're talking about the US versus them we can be talking about repressive governments corporations that work hand in glove with them and people who are trying to get a fair shake save their communities stop the exploitation of minds of oil companies and so it really is a question to me of democracy and how do we democratize our societies in ways that we can see through this power dynamic that is so unfair right now and open up the space for local communities for grassroots groups for unions for more people control of our economy I want to emphasize again that especially when you're talking about the United States time and you're talking about wealthy governments rich countries established institutions democracy rule of law and so forth they have so much more capability to do better for their people and they haven't used it you said in your opening remarks that Donald Trump was elected you know in some ways because of globalization let's be specific right Donald Trump was elected because the United States has spent less than 0.2 percent of its discretionary budget every year on what's called Trade Adjustment Assistance something that has existed since the 1960s and wealthy governments around the world have done they've seen since the 1960s the jobs are being offshored workers lose their jobs they need new train now where is the Donald Trump of Germany of Korea why did Donald Trump or the is equivalents if they existed get elected in those countries well in those countries you spend three or four percent of GDP on retraining workers right and preparing them transitioning to new jobs upscaling them for better jobs than just making cars again it was a political choice that the United States makes every year not to spend on worker retraining and you can just go back and I'm being as absolutely brutally specific as possible because you know exactly what district those workers are in who didn't get the retraining money and the equivalent of that American worker in Switzerland or Germany or Korea or many other countries did get it so choices were made bad choices that affected people and again that is so domestic in origin you should blame the domestic poorly decisions you mentioned also our people some keep blaming their leaders in a constructive way you say there is something actually constructive and I've read you I've read an article in which you said that Citizen anger is actually a constructive thing there are people putting it channeling it in the right direction to ask for less corruption for more democracy so in in in response to what Park has just said I think it's such a powerful and important point and in in many ways I think I'm gonna contradict myself because this is where jargon and globally is actually is really helpful because it helps us to drill down on specifics that gives people tools and arguments to make at a very local level to build up at once again to that national level where I think things really make a difference and in in some ways I think the crisis that we see in America is a crisis both of what you've described but it's also a crisis in which and here I'll I'll take up something that you know was said earlier is that I think there is in some ways less transparency and less accountability because of the relationship between global elites and multinationals and governments particularly I think the US and the UK are particularly good examples right and so the the neighborhood and block-by-block organizing and the kind of information you've just provided becomes particularly important because at a national level in America I think we see that the street is dead we have a death of conscience right so politicians like Donald Trump can say whatever they want and there is no and and protesters can come there was a time when a March mattered it had a direct consequence right and the street no longer matters in politics in America anymore because of the power and confluence of what happens behind closed doors and this elitism and not really worried okay you mentioned in a very important point is it is as you see the confluence of interest between the special interests the lobbies the corporations and those who are actually voted into office and you've been quite the disruptive force media haven't you in congressional testimony and meetings and heckling politicians and the rest of it but but is there something too what's the song kids just said can activists still make a difference well they have to we better or we're doomed I think a lot of people are seeing through this collusion that happens and in our great democracy how every two years Congress people are getting elected with money that is coming from the pharmaceutical industry that doesn't want us to have a good health care system from the oil industry that doesn't want us to have a good public transportation system from the weapons industry the profits by keeping us in these perpetual states of war and people are trying to break through that and we have a couple of wonderful Congress women right now who've managed to do that and it's been so illuminating for so many people in our country to say AHA here's people who managed to get to a position of power who are actually speaking a truth and so have millions and millions of followers because people are very hungry to hear that kind of honesty coming from a perspective that's not bought and sold by big corporations someone who sings the praises of globalization what do you think of what Madea just said I think you're absolutely right that you want to have these democratic checks and balances and again but remember it's not just authoritarian countries that are driving globalization your main culprit is democratic America right so it's not even necessarily about whether it's the mock democratic state or authoritarian state is the decision-making it's the collusion it's you know who benefits the most you mentioned in your remarks actually Amazon and Walmart so you were talking about two American companies that are getting away with paying very little tax in America and not paying American workers a lot in what part of that equation is globalization over there to blame for something that is utterly intrinsic and domestic to America right so your global corporations their first and most America where they are in fact that's the point is they could be headquarters in the UK they Walmart is America in in in our countries where are they regulated think that perhaps the biggest problem I have with your vision is one that it blocks out what could we have in this world how could it be different what if we didn't have a Walmart or big companies that were allowed to go into any place around the world and wipe out local businesses and buy politicians and change laws what could we have in terms of the diversity that we are losing in our world so that you have more of a homogeneous a ssin going on it's actually not good for the planet so I would want people just to think creatively and think of all the different alternatives we could have if we didn't have major huge corporations that are so powerful so some key is that is that the kind of honest discussion that you were talking about it is and and and and part of why I struck I struggle in this in these kinds of conversations is that I want to bridge this divide I take this middle ground between a utopian ideal because we can't wish away multinational corporations I think we can regulate them better but we can't wish them away at the same time I worry about a view that suggests that we double down on globalization when we know that many things about it aren't working right so they're so so so in your opening remarks the point was if globalization isn't working for everybody let's just do more of it so that it works better for more people and I'm not convinced that doing it more is the thing that will make it work for more people yeah well I don't define globalization as multinational dominance I went back a hundred thousand years and I want to humanize it in the spirit of madea's remarks I talked about migration how come in our conversation globalization that we that we should be talking more about the fact that 1 billion people per year now are empowered to cross borders more than ever before half a trillion dollars of remittances now flow back to the communities and homes and families to which those people came from to support them that's globalization - that's as human a face to globalization as you can possibly have and that is every bit as much globalization as the fact that Walmart is able to produce cheap things in China and I want to talk about human dimension the number of small companies mom-and-pop shops corner stores SMEs small and medium enterprises that are able to participate in global supply chains thanks to the internet e-commerce the fact that it's cheaper than ever to communicate with buyers and sellers and actually create jobs for people all over the world that is happening right now that's globalization - the fact that everyone knows the name Nike and everyone knows the name McDonald's and everyone knows the name Raytheon doesn't mean that they represent all globalization when you're singling them out I agree with you I'm saying that you're only speaking about a very very you know particular slice of gozi it's a devastating one it's an important one it has more power than other aspects of globalization but it is not the sum total of say of migration think of the millions and millions of people who are forced to leave their countries and I want to give an example of 1994 when the North American Free Trade Agreement nafta went into effect and farmers small farmers through Mexico were then competing with us corporate farms subsidized by the US government and we're not able to survive anymore and started flooding across the border into the u.s. that's the kind of example I think of globalization that shows the negative side the personal side the destruction of so many beautiful local communities forcing people to go to another country they didn't want to come to the good and the bad side of globalization at hold your thoughts for just a moment while I go back to our connector Govinda Clayton sitting there in the front row and given it just to get your take on what you've been hearing here quite an engaged dynamic conversation between our speakers very deep layers of agreement and disagreement what do you make of it so far great discussion so far so I mean we could certainly see that everyone was really making an effort to find some consensus in there in the beginnings of the madness and so it's great to hear some points in particular with regard so obviously the problems have been equality but also the need for some engagement with different forms of democratic governance but I think for me the most interesting part is what we've just seen at the end here which is that as we started to move into talking more specifically about different solutions the conversation shifted a little bit and we moved we fell back into the problem of globalization being a multi-faceted concept and people starting to speak Pastore rather than to each other so I've kind of been encouraged the speakers to as much as possible to stay on the same topic so they can become current dig a bit deeper and hear a little bit more the source of the disagreement rather than kind of moving around for the different aspects of globalization so we heard the message not in here let's stay on topic we'll try to do this when we get back but before then I just want us to get back to our phones and engage in our second round of voting to see whether this discussion so far has actually swayed anyone around the room and around the world if it has changed any of your opinions let's go then to our second round we are going to revisit our vote we want to know exactly how much value you attached to the arguments and discussion you've heard once again you have a total of 100 points to divide you can divide them over one two or all three statements to do so simply assign points to the statements on a sliding scale all right so while you are putting your votes into your phones and after everything that you've heard has the way you look at globalization changed has it shifted in any way metaphor what are people on online saying oh goodness I have to say it's getting very lively on Twitter and periscope I think we've figured out some of those glitches so those of you watching I hope you've been able to keep up because it's just been absolute fire on that stage I wanted to kind of talk about some trends that haven't been mentioned and I'd love to get your takes on this guy's because people are really concerned about the environment and people are very concerned about climate breakdown there's a lot of tweets here for example Jack who was from Scotland from the University of Edinburgh he's worried he says hearing economic growth social justice and planetary climate issues as themes are really important to him he says I wonder how compatible these are and how we all reconcile them with our duty to protect the planet our duty to protect the planet seems to be like a really important thing then we've got some issues of the downsides a lot of the people on Twitter are very concerned that globalization in this global ease kind of language we're speaking is missing out on the downsides and the human cost so Rob Capretta for example says unfortunately it has spread the gap between rich and poor he says theoretically it's his sound but in reality it has solidified the position of economic superpowers which I think makes a lot of sense to me just listening to the debate if it down and then I wanted to get one of our viewing parties there are loads of you who have got together in your houses or in other spaces and schools and universities and you're watching Doha debates online together so hello to all of you specifically Alastair in Sydney if you're watching right now and you can see me I love your comment this is really really important for all globalization's benefits Alastair says the phenomenon threatens to destroy and erase local minority cultures around the world a melting pot might bring many ingredients together but it also risks allowing one flavour to dominate all others that cultural aspect of globalization that idea of sanitizing difference so we are all one homogenous group is definitely a trend on Twitter today and then I've got a question here from Corrine and this is versus aunque specifically curry wants to know what do you mean when you say act locally what is acting locally I think I've got just enough time together to mention that there is so much more coming up on the show but that we are also on YouTube where you should be going and subscribing to do harder baits well we've got so much more content not just the live debates that you can watch but also amazing films and videos including undivided an incredibly powerful film about a trump supporter being saved and protected by a young repeat muslim woman so head over to youtube subscribe to Doha debates and engage with us here back to you now thanks very much it's great to get that idea of what the emerging trends might be online and what the specific concerns are for people watching this debate so hopefully we'll get to these thoughts and questions in our second round of discussion with the guests but I'm told that we do have the results of that second round of voting and I think it'd be particularly interesting here and valuable to actually put them up and compare them to the first round of voting and see whether the results have shifted in any way at all so this was the first round of voting as you can see 29% 29% for Parag Khanna and Mitya Benjamin and the argument of hassan key is the one that got the most votes has that changed well sis honking you've just twin deled a little bit you've gone down in in the count in the vote count but the one that has gone significantly up is Parag Connors argument of globalization doesn't fail we do so obviously people buying into this argument think globally and act locally Medea Benjamin you have also gone down so I think there's more work to be done for the ladies in our second round of discussed discussions in just a few moments we'll be opening the floor to your questions but before that I want to ask each one of our guests here on stage to make one commitment if they can in just about ten words or less one commitment one thing that you think is particularly useful for you to make as a commitment for an action that you can take locally regionally nationally or globally and we can ask the rest of you and those of us tuning in online to make a commitment to using the hashtag dear world tagging Doha debate so Parag what are you willing to do in just ten words or less vote haha your voter participation is so low around the world even in democracies we clearly take it for granted and abuse it by neglecting it I believe we should have mandatory voting that's more than ten votes what I heard clearly and loudly media you expose the collusion between governments and corporations but lift up the positive things that our communities are doing to inspire others so expose the collusion it's okay find one specific thing that bugs you in your community and do something about it all right what bugs you so just find one thing that bugs you more than anything else and try to do something about it that's the more important yeah beautiful you've just said so thank you very much for those commitments it's your turn now to ask questions and share your ideas with our experts all I'd ask you is to simply raise your hand and wait until I call on you when I call on you please go to one of these 2.you microphones that you see do introduce yourselves ever so briefly and of course make your questions short but make them tough so goofy goats right there on the left to you sir hello and thanks for this debate Patrick bins from Seattle Washington and I'm open source soil net the question I had raised is that globalization is both a positive phenomena in terms that we see we're cohabitants of a fragile planet and we really have a lot in common but I also see the globalization is a driver of hyper specialization and it reduces the degree to which our countries or regions or watersheds are able to be self-sufficient whether it's and food and other things and I'd be interested in hearing your comments on how do we find the right balance between leveraging all the positives of globalization but not forgetting that it's not just goods it's jobs and livelihoods that we want to support thank you very much for that question questions it's okay finding the right balance between the positives and negatives of globalization yeah again it sounds you know really boring but it comes down to political leadership once again because the the answer to so many of things that have spun out of control is its sound policy and good regulation and in many ways what we've seen is a couple of decades of unchecked regulation of companies being able to do whatever they want of poverty you know deepening of inequality widening when they are very clear and specific and tested policy mechanisms to deal with those things so the systemic failures are happening and there's very little leadership in how you address those so has to come back down to politics it has to come back down to this issue of voting for the right people or choosing the right leaders III can't get around it I know it's a generic response but it is genuinely what I believe all right for you to specific downstairs one is that you know globalization is not some virtuous end in itself right it's something that is useful in in the right way at the right time right every government every society should have the right to say and does have the right to say we're not going to outsource all of our you know production of things to other countries we have a right to desire to maintain certain industries or jobs so that all of our people are employed that's our number one priority right that's what that's what a democratic or not undemocratic society what a government that cares what its people should be thinking the other is how we price things right you know if you had to put a price on how much water it takes to make that avocado and ship it all the way from you know wherever to Australia it would cost a lot more right and we need to think about this sort of holistic accounting so that globalization the price of globalization is paid either by the producers the consumers are both and then that will have an effect of people saying hold on why don't we do more of it here what is the need to to globalize everything yeah I saw you nodding in agreement with absolutely I love what you said I think both in terms of being able to make your own decisions as a community or our country of how much emphasis you want to give to local production and also totally agree with you in terms of the real cost of something and can I just ask the audience to raise your hand if you prefer to eat locally so look we have a lot of consensus in this audience that produce locally tastes better it's better for the environment and it tends to be healthier food media so let's go to another question let's take one on this side of the aisle go ahead good afternoon my name is karima bonaga I'm from Queens New York I'm an education entrepreneur and its head fellow what role do the political constructs and social frameworks like capitalism communism socialism or democracies play and how we speak across borders and we talk about globalization [Laughter] interesting you know to hear the growing usage of this phrase millennial socialism in the United States and you know Bernie Sanders he's a Democratic Socialist and it's just incredible how even within Western civilization across the Atlantic societies that are supposed to be well-versed in each other's you know discourses and politics what the most progressive American politicians are basically saying with this terminology that they're fumbling with is they want to be more European in Europe it's called social democracy it's been around for generations and so I find it really paradoxical strange you know that that we have to at least in America they're fumbling you know to to come up with words to describe what Europe has had for decades and I think that's a testament obviously to what many European societies have done a good job of achieving and are struggling to maintain just a variation on this though can we ever get to that equality that you were mentioning that we all strive towards if still the US dollar is what leads us if capitalism is the way of the world should there be an alternative I mean yes I would not be true to my revolutionary roots if I didn't answer yes however I live in the real world in which it's hard to imagine differently and in in some ways that that question gets us to this point about imagination which you know Medea raised earlier so so I think beyond the labels and what we I think many of the frameworks that we have constructed whether we talk about communism socialism or capitalism those words are in some ways insufficient because they represent ideological positions that existed that have existed for far too long and don't account sufficiently for the moment we stand in right now let me interrupt you there if I can I'm being told no more questions but let's take a quick questions and let's have you all address it and give us your final thoughts as we try to wrap this discussion here okay thank you I'm Maggie and I'm from China now I'm the international student in the University of Edinburgh and I'm going to ask a question about how do you see about the so called treat war between the United States and China and you said we're going to think globally and act locally so what are the government's gonna response what kinds of attitudes and actions shoot the government shoot take all right thank you so as you think of this of an answer to this question can I also ask you for your final thoughts what is the best way forward well the trade war tape will take quite a while to do disaggregate but look trade is going to continue right what's happening is that two countries are decoupling somewhat from each other but bear in mind they're not the only two countries in the world you're trades a lot more with China than America does and Europe is gonna trade more with China while America trades less so don't get too fixated just look at the new patterns and new alignments because again more countries are getting more connected to each other all the time and this is just one particular spat between two it's actually taking up more attention than it should can I just make a final plea and I'll make it quick please I know that it's it's very fashionable to talk about inequality but if you spend all your time talking about inequality it probably means that you haven't spent enough time in actually poor countries because in really poor countries even though there is high statistical inequality as there is everywhere else in the world poverty is still the bigger problem so please remember that you know addressing poverty focusing on equity an opportunity on what you can do as as members of society or how you can shape globalization to empower poor people is going to be the greatest thing you can do to reduce inequality not just talking about inequality thank you very much for these thoughts but is is globalization the answer to this to statement out is like the last thing and then and then now I'm supposed to wrap up my thoughts and I want to respond to that and say I I come from one of the most unequal societies in the world and inequality drives violence in South Africa looking at someone people who are moving ahead because globalization has benefited them and you're standing still and you're we have structural unemployment in South Africa so I think poverty and inequality are equally painful at a human level for people to live in and sit with so my so that would be my response with my my closing comment I think is is to go back to the original argument that I made which is that in many ways the words trap us and so I am very interested in removing the labels and in finding new more clear more direct more honest language to talk about what it is that we want to talk about and the reason we keep coming back to the wounds to the things that are failing about globalization since that's where it hurts and so it's important to talk about the things that hurt around globalization in order to be able to address them effectively see some came is among the importance of talking about the you the cultural wounds so is more globalization or less globalization and I think I know the answer but if I define globalization as corporate driven and there is another concept which is international solidarity internationalism I think that's what we need which is as a planet we all work to support people in wherever they're living to have greater democracy greater say about their lives an economic system that cares about poor people more that wants to make sure that people have the human rights which are include right to healthcare right to an education as well as the freedoms of expression and those other kinds of rights and I think the only way we're going to get that is if we do more empowerment of local communities and more regulation of global corporations and on this note we will end our debate thank you very much indeed to pericana Medea Benjamin and his son Camus among and of course thank you all for being part of this debate thank you to our guests here on stage and of course thank you to the TED summit delegates our students and the Qatar Foundation as well let's continue this conversation on Twitter follow us on Instagram and YouTube and learn more about globalization and all of our seasons other great topics go to WWE become to see all of our films that have been produced on this and other important issues let's all make a commitment now using the hashtag dear world at Doha debates thank you all very much indeed for being part of this discussion from me if Edith ugly and the entire team thanks for watching and do join us again for our next debate which will take place in Cape Town in South Africa on September 10th where we will be addressing another crucial issue which is what is Cassidy but from all of us here for now thanks very much for watching [Applause]

Channel: Doha Debates

Views: 15,432

Rating: 4.8139534 out of 5

Keywords: Labour, Labor, Unions, Business, Workers, Worker, Worker's Rights, Factory, Factories, Exports, Imports, International Trade, Trade, Outsourcing, Trade Agreements, Trade Agreement, Labor Unions, Trade Association, Trade Associations, Economy, Economics, Factory Workers, Globalization, Internationalism, Internationalization, Nationalism, Solutions, Debate, Oxford Style Debate, doha, doha debates capitalism, douglas murray, doha debate 2019 with english subtitute

Id: EoMN0TCqsQM

Length: 88min 6sec (5286 seconds)

Published: Thu Jul 25 2019