Current issue: Vol.1, No. 3 July 2001

Go to Content page Feedback Alternatives to Globalisation By Pete Henriot In the raging debate today about "globalisation," its blessings and its curses, most focus is on the economic and political aspects. Pete Henriot recently presented a paper on the impact of globalisation on Africa, offering an ethical framework within which to discuss alternatives. We offer here edited excerpts from the conclusion to that paper. My analysis of the impact of globalisation on Africa, on the people of Africa, and especially on the poor of Africa, is very negative. But we can offer alternatives to the orientation, organisation, operation and outcome of globalisation. That is because we have the positive influence of the church's social teaching. I believe that the church's social teaching - found in scripture, in the writings of theologians both ancient and contemporary, in the statements of popes, councils, synods, regional and national pastoral letters, and in the lives of good people everywhere - offers a vision and suggests structures that can create alternatives to what we are experiencing today. Alternatives Let me say a word about alternatives. To Margaret Thatcher is attributed the "TINA" phrase: "There is no alternative!" She was speaking about free market approaches. But I - and millions, probably billions - prefer the "TAMA" phrase: "There are many alternatives!" For are we to accept the fact that globalisation is "inevitable"? To answer that it is necessary to make an important distinction between: Objective forces driving globalisation, such as the facts of technological production, electronic communications and trade patterns, that, left to themselves, would inevitably concentrate in the hands of the already powerful any benefits of globalisation. Subjective choices shaping globalisation, such as the policies that contribute to its direction, for example, regulation, taxes, governance structures of accountability and participation, etc., that can be changed to spread the benefits of globalisation. To influence the subjective choices, I believe it is necessary to follow a three-fold path, as suggested by a specialist in the church's social teaching, J. Bryan Hehir - that includes: Working with globalisation; Working against globalisation; Working towards globalisation. Different approaches Working with globalisation means utilising the objective forces that can indeed benefit humanity. For example, in my social justice work in Zambia, I personally benefit in research, education and advocacy efforts from the Internet. While I am aware that I am part of a very small and very privileged minority in Africa, indeed, in Zambia, I hope that I work with this technological instrument of globalisation for the benefit of others. Working against globalisation is to do the critical analysis necessary to expose its counter-development consequences and to struggle to confront the actors - personal, political and corporate - that promote those consequences. Much publicity has been given in recent months to the demonstrations occurring in Seattle, Washington DC, Prague, Davos and elsewhere by the forces of "anti-globalisation." I personally know many of those involved in such demonstrations and the most important part, indeed, the strongest part, of their confrontation has not been sporadic violence but consistent analysis. Working towards globalisation is to offer the alternatives that will shape our future, not only here in Africa but around the world. But to work for alternatives requires imagination and organisation capable of promoting the strategies and tactics for effective change. That imagination is visionary and that organisation is structural. For me, the church's social teaching offers the vision and suggests the structures that can assist in all three endeavours. Let me offer a framework of three varieties of globalisation that embody both vision and structures that have meaning for us here in Africa today. Globalisation of Solidarity This is a counter-emphasis, indeed a counter-cultural emphasis, to the structures that drive globalisation today. This emphasis was summed up by John Paul II in his World Day of Peace Message in 1998, when he called for "a globalisation in solidarity, a globalisation without marginalisation." Solidarity can also be expressed in the beautiful African proverb, "I am because we are; we are because I am." My personal existence, identity and worth is only within community; and the order, function and beauty of community is only possible with my personal contribution. P Solidarity means, especially in the writings of John Paul II, awareness and caring, actions and programs. It is a contemporary expression of the commitment to the common good. It is a response to the recognition that true development is not only of the whole person but also of the whole person within the whole community. This is a vision that contains the social values grounded on the fundamental dignity of the human person. This solidarity of globalisation would mean a globalisation with: Ethics, less violation of human rights, not more Equity, less disparity within and between nations, not more Inclusion, less marginalisation, not more Human security, less instability of societies and less vulnerability of people, not more Sustainability, less environmental destruction, not more Development,- less poverty and deprivation, not more Where is this very eloquent list of values found in the body of the church's social teaching? In many places to be sure. But it is important to note that this precise list is found on the second page of the UNDP Human Development Report 1999. And that it something that excites me! A secular institution like the UNDP is quite at home in speaking the value language we ordinarily associate with the church's social teaching. Surely we should be equally at home! For that is something essential to promoting alternatives: to have an alternative vision and to unabashedly push it. Globalisation of concern This is simply the value that emphasises the priority of people over profit, labour over capital and co-operation over competition. It is an expression of a central emphasis in contemporary church's social teaching, the preferential option for the poor. A Jesuit moral ethicist, David Hollenbach, has argued that global public goods such as environmental sustainability, protection from global transmission of infectious diseases and promotion of peace and stability both nationally and internationally are goods that cannot be expected to be produced in free market exchanges. According to Hollenbach, these goods …are also both global and public in the sense that any particular nation can enjoy them only when other nations also enjoy them in some directly proportional way. An individual shares in a global public good precisely because that nation is part of the global whole in which that good is present. Recognition of this strengthens our critique of the free market ideology, since free markets do not produce global goods. As one ethicist commented, "The free market is potentially a useful servant, although it is certainly a bad master." (J. Philip Wogaman). This means that the globalisation of concern is a prerequisite for the well-being of all. In our globalizing Africa, it is indeed a prerequisite for the survival of all. Globalisation from below This happy turn of phrase focuses our attention on the fact that integral human development, sustainable human development, depends more on harmonious human relationships at the local level that on the organisation and operation of unaccountable national or international political structures or an unfettered free market. A fundamental fault with globalisation, especially as experienced in Africa, is that it is not rooted in community but structured from above according to abstract economic laws. To counter this situation in a creative fashion calls for implementation of what the church's social teaching calls subsidiarity. This is the building at local levels with people's participation of the structures necessary for development. One such structure obviously is a strong national government. The church's social teaching certainly does not support neo-liberalism's call for the retreat of the state from its duties to promote the common good. It is true today that nations with strong political structures, rooted in real democracy, are more likely to defend themselves against the pressures and crises of globalisation than weak and inefficient states or even strong states that lack public support. I believe that this truth has profound and challenging lessons for Zambia and all of Africa today! Moreover, much - but admittedly, not all - of the recent world-wide explosion in the so-called civil society, activities by non-governmental organisation (NGOs), is one expression of this effort to build globalisation from below. The women's movement, human rights advocacy, environmental concerns - all have strong international networks of local based groups. Two recent campaigns that have special relevance to Africa as examples of globalisation from below are the campaign against land mines, and the Jubilee 2000 debt cancellation campaign. The fact that both these extremely complex and difficult issues have been moved to the forefront of global concern is a tribute to widespread efforts at the local level. Political mobilisation Globalisation is a phenomenon with many characteristics and many consequences. It involves an increasing integration of nation states through economic exchanges, political configurations, technological advances and cultural influences. In a world of great inequalities, the driving forces of globalisation are predominately rich and based in the North. From what we have seen in the past decade, Africa is not a beneficiary of these driving forces of globalisation and the great gap between rich and poor has dramatically grown. For us in Africa to respond effectively to globalisation requires political mobilisation. The church's social teaching can help to empower that mobilisation by reminding us of basic values of solidarity, concern for the poor and working at the local level. Pete Henriot, S.J. from the U.S. has taught in many universities and written many books on the social teaching of the Church. He resides in Lusaka since 1989, where he has founded the Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection and has an intense activity as political analyst and policy activist. African Scribe is guest on PeaceLink web site