The anti-globalisation movement also have a heavy critique of the state and how the power wielded by the state is dispersed on a national level. Very loosely, as the anti-globalisation movement has many different view points within it, believes that the state should be scaled down and that power should be decentralized and be dispersed on a more local level. Epstein, Barbara (Anarchism and the Anti-Globalization Movement, 2001), mentions in a website article that “Many among today’s young radical activists, especially those at the centre of the anti-globalization and anti-corporate movements, call themselves anarchists” Epstein also suggests that
“For contemporary young radical activists, anarchism means a decentralized organizational structure, based on affinity groups that work together on an ad hoc basis and decision-making by consensus. It also means egalitarianism; opposition to all hierarchies; suspicion of authority, especially that of the state; and commitment to living according to one’s values. Young radical activists, who regard themselves as anarchists, are likely to be hostile not only to corporations but to capitalism. Many envision a stateless society based on small, egalitarian communities”.
The quote is saying that power should not be held ultimately by one person or one government party. The state should be broken up, and power divided equally amongst everyone, and the continuation of current political system is unsustainable. However, it can also be argued that the state does not wield as much power as it use to because of globalisation, certainly in monetary terms, many policies implemented by government have become almost ineffective due to availability of capital from abroad, and the impact that world financial markets have on the United Kingdom.
Another main focus that the movement centres its energies on is the debt crisis that has been looming since the 1980’s. This started largely around the time that Japans economy stopped growing and other new industrializers stumbled over imbalances in trade and rising debt. (Shipman, Alan 2002) Even though the debt crisis in many LDC’s (less developed countries) is often due to contributory negligence, (bad management by the government) the anti-globalisation movements protests are directed at the WB and IMF because of their way of dealing with these complex financial, democratic and social crisis is a ‘one size fits all’ approach. The debt crisis in Argentina has left the country is disarray, initial bad economic management after a spell of economic bliss, pegging the Pesos to the Dollar led to hyperinflation and confidence in their currency evaporated. Klein (2002, p53) argues that the IMF used the same ‘one size fits all’ approach with Argentina, telling the government that they must drastically reduce public sector spending to qualify for another loan. Not to mention that Argentina did not have a large proportion of its capital going into the public sector, and that in reality two thirds of it went to debt repayments. Also, the ordering of privatisation by the IMF of Argentina’s public sector as Klein (2002, p 53) as puts it was not even possible
“Argentina have already dutifully sold off so many of its services, from trains to phones, and the only examples of further assets Cabellero and Dornbusch can think of privatising are the country’s ports and customs offices”.
However, Shipman (2002, p104) argues that most of the bad debt owed by LDC’s is written off by the banks. Although the anti-globalisation movement directs its protests at these supranational bodies because of the way which they deal with LDC’s, the way in which the economy is geared to payback the loan leaving the country worse off than it was in the first place also causes outrage amongst many protestors.
Regarding all the above issues the main political ideas of the anti-globalization movement are hard to pinpoint as there are many international crises arising such as the one mentioned in Argentina. Also, the ‘movement’ does not have one leader, one goal or one motive for its existence. Nor does it have strict rules of which to play by, the movement has many cells within it and portrays itself as being very lose-knit. It could also be argued that ironically the movement has itself, become global. Furthermore, the ‘movement’ has no one solution to the current capitalist system, or indeed how the state should be structured. In light of this the main political ideas of the movement will keep growing and diverging as more economic, political and social crises worsen. While the gap between the rich and poor widens brewing more unrest, demonstrations and poverty across the world.
Critical Bibliography
Epstein, B. (2001) Anarchism and the Anti Globalization Movement [Online]. Available at <>
[Accessed on 26/03/04]
Barbara Epstein’s view is objective and simply analysing the anti-globalisation movement’s motives, how they portray themselves and applying their thinking to other thinkers such as Marx. Epstein avoids criticising large business or supranational bodies in her writings.
This particular piece was useful due to its objectiveness and in-depth look into how the anti-globalisation portrays itself, and the ideas that it follows. It made enduring the initial task of analysing what the anti-globalisation movement stands for and how they can be linked to current ideologies an easier feat.
Klein, N. (2002) Fences and Windows, Flamingo HarperCollins publishes, Hammersmith, London
Naomi Klein is notorious for being extremely against globalisation and against the big corporations and supranational bodies such as the IMF and World Bank. However, Klein does argue her case very well and uses real life scenarios to justify her work. However, her language at times can be quite journalistic and personal rather than being objective.
Reading the whole of Fences and Windows has enriched this essay greatly and enabled real life instances to be cited and applied to the question at hand. Though being extremely against the idea of globalisation and often very journalistic, this books deep real-time analysis of far reaching issues has helped the structure, arguments and body of this essay.
Critical Bibliography
Monbiot, G. Global Governance [Online]. Available at
<> [Accessed on 26/03/04]
George Monbiot portrays himself as an internationalist and he has a very critical view of many different issues relating to politics, health, large businesses, governments and globalisation itself. His view upon the anti-globalisation movement is that they are wrongly portrayed and that they are in favour of progression rather than complete separation.
Though only taking a brief quote from this very extensive online site the reading of the differing issues here enabled different view points and thinking to surface within my writings.
Shipman, A. (2002) The Globalisation Myth, Icon Books Ltd, Cambridge
Alan Shipman does recognise the same instances that Klein expresses so well in her book, but Shipman defends most international instances such as the world debt, free trade and Westernisation. He also argues most notably that we must not stop globalisation because we are having a bad ride, but continue the ride up to the top. His language is also less simplistic and less journalistic than Klein’s.
Shipman’s The Globalisation Myth though only used in moderation definitely helped to keep an objective balance between the good and bad aspects of globalisation. Reading from authors such as Klein and Monbiot, who bring to the surface very traumatic and sometimes disturbing issues, Shipman provided a much needed alternate view of current affairs.
