Globalism is not only defined as the free flow of goods and capital across borders but also includes instant and broad access to information and ideas from around the world.
The term globalism conjures images of an interconnected world, merging border markets and cultures influencing one another. This concept, based on free trade, easier international travel, and rapid information exchange, has evolved significantly over recent decades.
Table of Contents
In the information age, globalism transcends the free flow of goods and capital across borders, encompassing instant access to worldwide information and ideas. The internet and digital technology have opened a world where resources once limited to a few are now widely accessible. Yet, these advancements have also magnified economic and cultural disparities, sometimes leading to new tensions and challenges.
Despite its many advantages—such as increased international cooperation and novel economic opportunities—globalism has recently faced scrutiny regarding its sustainability and fairness. Reevaluations of free trade policies, rising protectionism, and a renewed focus on national policies all indicate a new phase in globalism’s history, potentially leading to a reshaped global order.
Defining Globalism
Globalism today refers to political ideologies that give globalization norms, values, and meaning. According to Merriam-Webster, globalism is a national policy that treats the entire world as a sphere for political influence, enabled by multidimensional social processes that intensify global social connections and prioritize global interests over individual and national ones.
From African Caves to the Alleyways of the Global Village
Though often seen as a modern phenomenon, globalism can be traced back historically to evidence from centuries or millennia ago. Historical analyses of globalism—its roots, growth, and impacts—offer a more comprehensive understanding of this concept.
Many scholars believe globalism began with humanity’s migration from Africa to other parts of the world. Through short or long journeys, migrants, merchants, and others brought ideas, customs, and products to new lands. The blending of people and traditions, borrowing from cultures, and adapting to external influences have shaped numerous aspects of human life.
Considering the extensive literature and varying interpretations of globalism, scholars agree that understanding its historical context is more critical than its emerging definitions and applications, which are beyond this article’s scope. Many of these analyses focus on how the 21st-century global economy builds upon centuries-old global trade expansion.
The Collapse of Globalism’s Foundation?
In examining potential causes for globalism’s collapse, one sees a multifaceted pattern of economic, political, and social challenges, each contributing to its weakening. Once a symbol of convergence and interdependence, the global economy faces trade tensions and economic nationalism. Tariffs and trade wars between major economies have not only strained bilateral political-economic relations but also eroded public trust in the global free-trade system.
Politically, rising populist forces in many countries demand stricter border policies and more control over immigration. These movements, often campaigning with slogans about preserving national identity and job security, directly oppose globalist ideas.
Socially, globalism’s consequences have exacerbated deep economic and cultural divides in many societies. While some individuals and corporations have significantly benefited from globalization, others feel left behind and marginalized. Such discontent has fueled social tensions and increased support for conservative and anti-immigration ideas.
This blend of economic, political, and social factors has not only undermined globalism’s foundations but also reshaped its future prospects. Many now believe a new era of international relations is forming, potentially leading to fundamental changes in how nations and economies interact.
COVID-19 Pandemic: A Turning Point for Globalism
The COVID-19 pandemic and the financial measures adopted to mitigate its economic effects were catalysts for profound changes in globalism’s order. Comprehensive economic packages aimed at assisting pandemic-stricken nations inadvertently accelerated globalism’s collapse.
These measures led to sharp increases in government debt and introduced a flood of liquidity, prompting consumers and businesses to reevaluate their financial decisions and investments. This contributed to the emergence of new consumption behaviors and shifts in investment patterns, leaving a significant mark on the global economy.
The pandemic also reinforced protectionist and nationalist attitudes, pushing many countries toward policies emphasizing economic self-reliance and domestic production. This approach not only reduced dependency on global supply chains but also intensified skepticism about globalism’s benefits.
Thus, the pandemic played a pivotal role in reshaping the global order, accelerating a trend that could usher in a new era of anti-globalism, where nations increasingly prioritize economic security and self-sufficiency within their borders.
Globalism with a Flavor of Chinese Nationalism
China is undoubtedly the winner in the Western globalism race, to such an extent that its role in the global economy cannot be ignored. This Eastern nation has established itself as a global manufacturing and technological powerhouse by reversing Western definitions of globalism and leveraging centralized economic policies and government support. Initiatives like Made in China 2025 and substantial subsidies to domestic companies have propelled China so far ahead in developing emerging technologies that the foundations and rationale of globalism itself are now being questioned.
One of the critical factors in China’s success in the new globalism lies in its centralized domestic economic policies and the government’s prominent role in the economy. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) emphasizes government involvement and economic self-sufficiency, enabling China to continuously improve and strengthen its production infrastructure.
The Made in China 2025 program is one of China’s most significant initiatives to advance technology and reduce dependency on foreign companies. This program targets progress in ten key technological sectors, including robotics, aerospace, and information technology.
As a global manufacturing power, China plays a vital role in global supply chains. As the primary producer of many consumer and industrial goods, it has created significant dependency within the global economy. China’s trade policies—focusing on high-value-added products and advanced technologies—have made many countries reliant on Chinese imports. However, despite its remarkable achievements, China faces numerous challenges.
One major challenge is the political and security tensions with other nations, particularly the United States. The U.S.’s strict trade and investment policies against China have prompted the latter to seek new strategies to maintain and enhance its position in the global economy.
Developed democratic nations, especially the United States and the G7 members, are also attempting to counter China’s economic and security challenges by adopting policies to reduce dependency on China and build resilient supply chains. These countries focus on developing domestic technologies and strengthening international collaborations to safeguard their positions against China’s growing economic influence.
By emphasizing economic nationalism, China has secured its place in the new global order. Despite various challenges, the country has leveraged intelligent economic policies and government support to become one of the primary beneficiaries of the new globalism.
Russia and Sovereign Globalization: Emergence, Fall, and Future
During his presidency, Vladimir Putin has consistently pursued two objectives: establishing a controlling state and building a prosperous economy. He has faced the ongoing challenge of managing the tension between these two goals—benefiting from globalism while maintaining Russia’s internal control and national sovereignty.
To achieve this, Russia in the 2000s shifted toward a new model of globalization, eventually developing the concept of Sovereign Globalization. Initially, this strategy involved managing economic interactions to limit external influences by reducing sovereign debt, restricting foreign property rights, and maximizing benefits over obligations in global economic governance.
This model combines nationalist economic policies with continued international engagement. Putin, aiming to enhance Russia’s economic independence and reduce reliance on the West, implemented new economic strategies, including nationalizing key industries and strengthening domestic production.
With growing confidence, Russia sought broader political influence through economic tools, leveraging the markets of former Soviet territories and becoming Europe’s primary energy supplier.
However, several adverse developments weakened this strategy: declining energy-export-driven growth, changes in global energy markets, the European Union’s responses to Russian policies, and, most notably, the invasion of Ukraine. These events disrupted the balance between opportunities and risks in Russia’s global economic engagement.
In recent decades, globalization has been one of the main driving forces of the global economy. However, with the rise of economic nationalism, several countries, including Russia, have moved toward new economic policies that blend globalization and economic independence.
In the post-Soviet era, Russia faced significant challenges on its path to economic development as major changes occurred in the country’s policies and economic structures. In the 1990s, Russia tried to pave the way for economic growth by adopting a free-market economy and integrating into the global economy. However, these changes were accompanied by problems such as corruption, social inequalities, and economic crises.
During his presidency, Vladimir Putin has always pursued two goals: creating a controlling state and building a thriving economy. He has constantly faced the challenge of managing the tension between these two objectives—a challenge of benefiting from globalization while ensuring that Russia’s internal control and national independence are not compromised.
One of Russia’s primary advantages in this journey has been its abundant energy resources. With vast oil and gas reserves, Russia played a significant role in the global energy market, using its exports to Europe and Asia to solidify its position in the global economy and fund its nationalist policies.
Meanwhile, Russia’s relations with the West—particularly the U.S.—have been marked by tensions, from economic sanctions to geopolitical disputes, influencing Russia’s economic policies. However, through diplomatic strategies and fostering new relations with Asian and African countries, Russia has worked to manage these tensions and reduce its reliance on the West.
Despite existing challenges, Russia continues to strive for a stronger position in the global economy. Plans for future economic development include infrastructure expansion, investment in advanced technologies, and diversifying export markets. However, ongoing tensions with the West and the need to adapt to rapid global economic changes present significant obstacles.
Russia’s model of sovereign globalization illustrates its effort to balance economic independence with global engagement. The success or failure of this model in the coming years will profoundly impact Russia’s economic policies and international relations.
Economic Nationalism in Iran During Globalization
Support for national production and economy has deep roots in Iran’s history. A look back reveals that the first exhibition of Iranian goods, titled “The National Goods Exhibition,” was held in 1923, marking a starting point for the development of Iran’s national economy.
During the Pahlavi era, economic exhibitions and policies supporting domestic production gained prominence. By the 1960s, economic nationalism was further strengthened through protective tariffs, industrial investment guidelines, and export support, contributing to the country’s industrial and economic development.
After the Islamic Revolution, Iran continued to embrace economic nationalism, tailored to its unique political and economic circumstances. Iran has faced various challenges throughout its history as a nation rich in natural resources, especially oil and gas.
International sanctions and oil price fluctuations in past decades have deeply impacted Iran’s national economy. Amidst these challenges, successive Iranian governments have adopted economic nationalist strategies to reduce reliance on foreign resources, aiming for self-sufficiency and sustainability.
Iran’s economic development plans under the framework of economic nationalism have included structural reforms in banking and finance and efforts to strengthen non-oil sectors. The primary goal of these programs is to decrease dependency on oil revenues and build a resilient economy capable of withstanding external shocks.
For example, Iran’s Sixth Development Plan (2016–2021, extended to 2024) emphasized developing a resilient economy, advancing science and technology, and promoting a culture of excellence.
Iran has sought to enhance economic relations with neighbors and friendly nations like China in response to international sanctions. These efforts include increasing exports of petrochemical products and other domestically produced goods, bolstering Iran’s position in regional markets. Additionally, the rial’s depreciation has made Iranian goods more competitive in international markets.
While economic nationalism has helped Iran resist sanctions, it has also presented challenges, such as high inflation rates and reduced purchasing power for citizens.
Nonetheless, economic nationalism has allowed Iran to pursue independent development by relying on its domestic capabilities. Looking ahead, Iran’s economic policies will likely aim to strike a delicate balance between economic nationalism and global integration, heavily influenced by the political orientations of future governments.
In summary, while economic nationalism has enabled Iran to withstand external pressures, achieving sustainable development requires addressing structural challenges and fostering an environment conducive to innovation, investment, and long-term growth.
This requires valuable economic policies and broad reforms to improve governance, transparency, and social cohesion. By optimizing its human and natural resources, Iran has the potential to emerge stronger in the face of global economic uncertainties.
Nihilism: From the Word to Economy
Nihilism, or nihility, originates from a philosophy that rejects the accepted or fundamental aspects of human existence—be it knowledge, morality, or even the meaning of life. Nihilism emerged in mid-19th-century Russia as a school of thought opposing all forms of aesthetics while advocating for utilitarianism and scientific rationality.
Over time, nihilistic perspectives have evolved, ranging from rejecting human values to challenging long-standing economic foundations. The term is often associated with anomie, describing a general sense of hopelessness stemming from a lack of meaning in existence or the arbitrariness of human principles and social institutions. In common parlance, nihilism often refers to existential nihilism, which posits that life inherently lacks value, meaning, or purpose.
Financial nihilism dismisses traditional values and goals associated with financial activities, deeming existing financial systems meaningless. This perspective may lead to alternative lifestyles such as minimalism or self-sufficiency.
Financial nihilists often disregard wealth accumulation and consumerism while expressing distrust toward financial institutions. By promoting critical thinking and reducing consumption, financial nihilism can pose new economic challenges and social transformations. This philosophy compels a reevaluation of financial values and objectives.
Financial Nihilism: A Profound Disillusionment
Financial nihilism, a burgeoning phenomenon among younger generations, captures their frustration and disbelief in traditional financial and economic systems. Especially influenced by repeated economic crises and, more recently, the COVID-19 pandemic, this perspective reflects deep skepticism about achieving financial stability through conventional means such as saving, investing in stock markets, or even purchasing real estate.
This attitude has led to the pursuit of alternative, often riskier, ways to build wealth, including investments in cryptocurrencies and emerging assets like non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Young people increasingly favor innovative, short-term investments promising rapid returns over trusting large financial systems.
Financial nihilism has also reshaped young people’s perspectives on work and money. Many perceive the global economy as skewed against them, leading to a decline in interest in traditional, long-term career paths. Instead, they seek creative, quick-income opportunities through technology and the internet.
These changes in attitudes toward money and investment could have lasting impacts on global financial structures and investment strategies.
Impact on Financial Markets
The widespread shift in the attitudes, behaviors, and consumption patterns of younger generations—particularly under the influence of financial nihilism—has significantly affected global markets. These changes have disrupted traditional markets, such as stocks and bonds while fueling the growth of high-risk, emerging markets like cryptocurrencies and tokenized assets.
Younger investors seeking faster, less conventional income streams often gravitate toward technology-based investments, especially digital platforms. This trend weakens traditional markets. For instance, the surging prices of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, driven by small-scale investments globally, demonstrate the power of this generation’s influence on financial markets.
This shift has also prompted changes in regulatory and legislative frameworks. Governments and regulatory bodies are searching for ways to manage risks associated with these new markets while ensuring that excessive restrictions do not stifle innovation in this evolving industry.
In conclusion, financial nihilism and emerging generational perspectives on investment are reshaping not only their approach to wealth-building but also the overall structure of global financial markets. These dynamics could pave the way for a new era of financial and technological innovation.
Economic Nihilism vs. Globalization
As demonstrated, globalism and nihilism offer different approaches to understanding and engaging with the world, especially in economics.
Core Principles of Globalism:
1. Free Trade:
Advocates for removing trade barriers like tariffs, quotas, and subsidies to promote the free exchange of goods and services globally.
2. Multinational Corporations:
Facilitate cross-border operations, investments, and job creation.
3. Global Institutions:
Organizations like the WTO, IMF, and World Bank provide frameworks and support for international trade and economic policies.
4. Economic Integration:
Proponents strive to create economic unions with converging currencies and regulations.
5. Cultural Exchange:
Beyond economic factors, globalism encourages cultural exchange to foster a worldwide perspective and create new consumption patterns.
In contrast, nihilism follows different principles; while it is true that nihilism has issues with principles, the intellectual foundations of this school can only be described as principles.
1. Rejection of Economic Goals:
May lead to disbelief in the intrinsic value of economic growth, wealth accumulation, or material well-being.
2. Criticism of Capitalism:
Views capitalist systems as meaningless or corrupt, with profits deemed unworthy goals.
3. Anti-Consumerism:
Opposes consumer culture, contrasting globalism’s aim of expanding consumption patterns.
4. Skepticism Toward Institutions:
Distrusts centralized global economic frameworks, seeing them as harmful or irrelevant structures.
5. Alternative Lifestyles:
Prioritizes alternative modes of living over traditional economic activities.
In summary, while globalism embraces interdependence and economic growth, nihilism questions the intrinsic value of these goals and often advocates for a deeper reevaluation of societal and economic priorities.
Financial Nihilism and Cryptocurrencies
As we’ve seen so far, economic nihilism seeks to reject the values imposed on the public by centralized institutions over the years. But here’s an intriguing point: what resolves the distrust in traditional centralized financial institutions, the lack of individual financial freedom, and personal sovereignty? What addresses the rejection of conventional financial values alongside the challenges and opportunities of innovation and new alternatives? The answer is blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies.
Economic nihilists generally distrust banks and traditional financial institutions. Cryptocurrencies, with their decentralized nature, reinforce this distrust and serve as an alternative to traditional financial systems. Additionally, cryptocurrencies allow individuals to manage their assets without relying on central institutions or governments. This financial autonomy aligns with the principles of economic nihilism, which discredits conventional economic values.
Economic nihilism questions traditional values related to money and wealth. Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin enable individuals to bypass traditional financial systems, creating new values for transactions and investments.
All these characteristics resonate with nihilistic beliefs, making cryptocurrencies a fitting tool for this philosophy.
A simpler real-world example of financial nihilism is the astounding rise of memecoins. These cryptocurrencies, often created as jokes, symbolize a deeper movement rooted in financial nihilism. This phenomenon, frequently seen as a reflection of despair toward traditional financial systems, drives younger and newer investors toward unconventional and bold investment options.
These cryptocurrencies, often lacking any tangible backing and featuring comical designs or concepts, are symbolic protests against traditional financial systems, which seem inadequate in meeting the economic needs of newer generations.
Assets like these, which gained popularity through viral hashtags and social media campaigns, not only express dissatisfaction with traditional economies but also advocate for democratizing investment opportunities and providing broader access to financial markets. This trend signals a shift in the game’s rules, reflecting the younger generations’ desire for transparency, equal opportunities, and innovative approaches to managing their assets.
Global investment markets are witnessing how memecoins, born out of humor, can attract investors and significantly impact traditional markets for a time. This phenomenon serves as a wake-up call for investors and market analysts, urging them to incorporate innovations and the preferences of younger generations into their investment strategies.
The Role of Globalism in the World’s Future
Over recent decades, globalism has driven cultural, political, and especially economic integration among nations. This phenomenon has enabled countries on our blue planet to reap the benefits of free trade and significantly enhance prosperity levels.
However, recent events, such as global economic crises and pandemics, have raised serious questions about the sustainability and benefits of globalism. In response to these challenges, emerging technologies like blockchain are playing a key role in redefining future perspectives.
Blockchain, commonly associated with cryptocurrencies, offers diverse new opportunities for increasing transparency, improving efficiency, and reducing the costs of global trade and financial transactions. By reducing reliance on financial intermediaries, blockchain effectively lowers the costs tied to global commerce.
For example, the use of smart contracts on blockchain ensures that transactions occur only when certain predefined conditions are met, eliminating the need for repetitive and costly checks by both parties involved.
Economically, blockchain can reduce corruption and enhance transparency in governments and corporations. Its immutable data and exemplary transparency allow all stakeholders to remain fully informed about transactions.
Socially, blockchain can help bridge the digital divide and provide greater access to financial services for low-income individuals. However, it remains to be seen whether this issue is a priority for today’s policymakers or if billions will still lack access to universal banking services. Moreover, blockchain has the potential to combat climate change by facilitating the identification and tracking of natural resources and environmental impacts.
Given the global challenges facing globalism, emerging technologies like blockchain will be pivotal in shaping the future of the global economy. While globalism seeks to address problems through greater integration, blockchain and other digital technologies based on the third generation of the internet may offer solutions for survival and growth in a highly decentralized world. Thus, the future of the global economy will heavily depend on how these technologies are integrated into the world’s financial and administrative systems.
While there are many challenges and obstacles in the way, there are also countless opportunities for those who can adapt and effectively utilize new technologies.
Conclusion
In the three decades following the fall of the Iron Curtain until the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the world witnessed unprecedented growth in globalism, driven by the Western bloc.
During this period, the expansion of international trade, the opening of political borders, and the free movement of people and capital brought globalism to life.
This golden era yielded numerous benefits. Rapid economic development in China and other regions, cheap energy from Russia, and security provided by the U.S. created ideal conditions for wealth creation in Europe and significantly reduced poverty worldwide.
However, the West’s efforts to westernize China and Russia failed. Both countries leaned toward authoritarian and dangerous governance models, becoming strategic challenges for the West. China, with its dynamic economy and global ambitions, emerged as a serious competitor to the West’s economic and political influence. Meanwhile, Russia leveraged its energy resources and military power to threaten international security and stability. These developments demonstrated that globalism alone cannot solve the world’s geopolitical issues and requires new, more coordinated strategies.
The COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine revealed significant vulnerabilities in Western nations. These events disrupted the global economy and challenged the interdependencies among nations. Recent crises have highlighted the risks of relying on global supply chains. Western nations realized the need to devise new strategies to reduce dependence on specific resources and markets, necessitating a re-evaluation of economic and trade policies and a strengthening of international cooperation.
Experts envision three plausible scenarios for the future: first, Independence from Autocracies: Closer collaboration between democratic economies and free markets fosters self-sufficient national economies, which could help democratic nations prevent external threats and ensure greater security and stability.
Second: Rising Protectionism and Economic Weakness: A scenario where reduced international trade and increased economic tensions prevail. Third: The Decline of Democracy: Some Western countries could transition to semi-democratic or authoritarian systems.
The Western world, having advanced globalism for years, now faces a crossroads: either establish new borders and adopt protectionist policies, challenging decades of global village-building, or pursue broader cooperation with culturally and politically aligned nations. The choice between these paths will profoundly impact the world’s economic and political future.
