Volume LVI, No 1
September, 2002
Judging the Juggernaut: Toward an Ethical Evaluation of Globalization
Thomas Massaro, S.J.
IN THIS ISSUE
Moral theologian Thomas Massaro, S.J., examines globalization in its economic, technological, political, and cultural manifestations, seeking ways to evaluate the quality and morality of this phenomenon. He also provides a helpful compendium of recent statements about globalization in Catholic social thought.
Without doubt, the phenomenon of globalization is one of the premier "signs of the times" in our new millennium. As a buzzword, it is constantly invoked and indeed frequently blamed for almost anything that displays worldwide impact. Much is at stake in reaching an accurate understanding of globalization. This essay attempts three tasks: 1) to identify some of the central dynamics of globalization; 2) to reflect on the ethical challenges it presents; and 3) to evaluate the potential of Catholic social thought to offer constructive proposals for shaping a globalization that is morally responsible and pragmatically beneficial for the social development of all peoples.
In line with its post-modern overtones, everything about globalization turns out to be contested terrain, even its definition. Ironically, my favorite definition comes from my least favorite commentator on the topic, Thomas L. Friedman. In his national bestseller The Lexus and the Olive Tree, this foreign affairs columnist for The New York Times declares: "globalization is everything and its opposite."1 Friedman is making the point that the interplay of local and global, of particular and universal, makes our new era a dizzying bricolage of centripetal and centrifugal forces and trends. Perhaps the most astute observer of what is new in world affairs is David Held, whose many works on the topic define globalization in phrases like these three: 1) "a transformation of the spatial organization of social relations and transactions;" 2) "enhanced interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction and the exercise of power;" and 3) "a stretching of social, political and economic activities across frontiers." 2 While no brief summary of the meaning of globalization can aspire to comprehensiveness, any adequate definition will recognize that, in ways unimaginable to previous generations, the world is now "one place," both objectively and in our subjective awareness. We all know that the world is shrinking, and many of us are consciously attempting to discern just who we are becoming in this emerging context— one where all our actions seem to hold very real consequences even for distant others. Perhaps more ominous is the inverse: the recognition that we are all very much at the mercy of conditions, actions and choices made far away by people we do not know or understand.
Globalization, then, is largely about relationships. The empirical challenge, as felt particularly by social scientists, is to measure the extent of these increased worldwide inter-changes. The ethical challenge, especially for Christian social ethicists and their dialogue partners, is to evaluate the quality and morality of these relationships. Increases in the networks of global interdependence are experienced especially in four areas: the economic, technological, political, and the cultural. Each of these strands of the phenomenon of globalization also constitutes contested territory. Let us survey briefly in turn the ethical challenges in each realm.
Economic Globalization
The economic aspect of globalization is surely the most measurable. The level of international trade is growing steadily. Cross-border financing is multiplying exponentially, especially with the advent of computerized transfers of capital on a global basis. With the effective fall of communism, there is practically no corner of the world where my investment dollars cannot be moved with the click of a mouse. The upshot of these new economic capabilities is an extension and intensification of the global division of labor. Naturally, this has its positive aspects and its potential liabilities. Champions of liberalized trade and investment hold out the promise of global economies of scale, the achievement of Pareto-optimality, enhanced efficiency through following comparative advantage in production, the elimination of scarcity, expanded opportunities for higher standards of living, upward mobility and inclusion for all. Skeptics point to negative impacts of global markets, such as downward pressure on wages, exacerbated income inequality, workplace exploitation, maldistribution, wholesale exclusion of social groups, unrealistic consumer expectations, and the extension of corrosive market values such as commercialism and crass materialism. As is true with all aspects of globalization, a variety of interpretations of the same data scream for our attention. Market populists who celebrate the emerging order emphasize the gains, explaining that, in any case (in a phrase adopted by Margaret Thatcher long ago) "there is no alternative." Dissenting voices such as William Greider3 and Wendell Berry see a dark underside of predatory global capitalism operating under the aegis of its ideology of neoliberalism.
Technology
Second, technology is widely seen as the catalyst of all other aspects of globalization. Rapid improvements in transportation and instantaneous communication make possible the process of so-called "information arbitrage" that drives economic change, particularly in volatile financial markets. If the world is indeed compressed nowadays, it is precisely because of our shared web of technologies that knit together our borderless economy. Technology, of course, can become our enemy just as it can be our friend. This point is demonstrated by such threats as global terrorism, planetary climate change, infectious diseases and other public health and safety issues. The machines and technical knowledge we share, for better or worse, also heighten our sharing of danger and insecurity. Without the availability of rapid travel and communication, different indeed would be the effects of the 1997 Asian financial crisis, the events of September 11, the latest computer virus, Mad Cow disease and a host of other threats and concerns.
Political System
Third, the effects of globalization upon the political system are particularly profound, posing an unprecedented challenge to the entire post-Westphalian order of sovereign nation-states. The end of the Cold War raised the curtain upon a world that is multi-polar in ways unique in world history. The center of gravity has shifted from sovereign national powers and super-powers to sub-national and trans-national institutions that constrain national governments at every turn. In the face of such realities as extraordinarily powerful transnational corporations, new global financial institutions such as the World Trade Organization and overlapping ethnic and religious loyalties which cross borders as never before, even the formerly bedrock concept of "national interest" has been hollowed out, no longer a convincing rationale for policy. Some observers ask whether national governments are still relevant at all. They certainly are not the Archimedean point they once were, the privileged lens through which to gauge the significance of world events. No matter who wins election in any given national context, domestic politics is increasingly rendered reactive rather than proactive, as national leaders and parties struggle to respond to conditions in world markets. With decreased government control over cross-border transactions regarding investment, debt and even immigration, national governments are in effect held hostage to the mobility of globalized capital. Governments today must be concerned about luring investments by offering tax breaks, tariff concessions and promising lower levels of environmental and safety regulation as well as social welfare provision. The summons to serve the common good of one's national community by supporting and participating in the structures of public authority is increasingly giving way before global pressures for competitiveness and the necessity of compromising goals such as equity, social security and justice in the domestic realm.
Globalization and Culture
Fourth and finally, globalization includes profound implications for culture. Here too, one encounters a diversity of opinions. Cheerleaders of increased cultural interchanges celebrate the worldwide sharing of ideas and cultural products that was never before possible in human history. Naysayers bemoan the indiscriminate mixing of cultural influences, pointing out that this cheery universalism and feigned cosmopolitanism is simply a cover for a Western (or simply American) cultural imperialism that threatens to destroy local cultures or at least erode a healthy diversity of ways of life. Of course, it is impossible to provide a reliable measure of whether, on balance, the gains of global cultural enrichment through exposure to diverse ways of life outweigh the risk of developing a sterile mono-culture. Is a certain amount of cultural borrowing and mixing an inevitable outcome of an inexorable modernization process? I find it fruitless to seek empirical proof of putative claims about the workings of cultural processes. The scrutiny of "track records" and the accumulation of evidence from previous historical eras are of little assistance in reaching a consensus among all interested observers of the globalization of cultures.
The above analysis contains an implicit answer to a frequently asked question: Is globalization inevitable or is it perhaps somehow reversible? I wish to be candid in acknowledging my assumption that a globalized order is surely here to stay, that no matter what we as heirs of the tradition of Christian ethical reflection do, we will never have the opportunity to start all over again in a non-globalized context. I had already signaled this opinion in choseing the title of this essay. I deliberately selected the word "juggernaut," a word with a fascinating etymology. It comes from the Hindi, where it refers to a particular incarnation of the god Vishnu which exacted blind devotion and terrible sacrifice from its worshipers, so that the word juggernaut has come to mean, according to Webster's dictionary, a "terrible irresistible force." The choice of this word helps signal my conviction that it is beyond our control whether we globalize, although I suspect some recalcitrants might be able to huddle like sectarians as far away from global markets as possible. What is within our power to influence is the question of how we will globalize. In other words, as people of a Christian faith that seeks to engage culture, our resistance against market forces had best become a carefully measured one, as we seek a desirable modus vivendi which will surely include prudent compromises with global capitalism. We will surely have, for example, more "free trade," but what is yet to be determined is whether it will be "fair trade," conducted in ways that are socially and environmentally sustainable. Of all the possible ways to participate in the further integration of the world economy, are we capable of discovering distinctive modes that are more socially responsible than the default agenda of, say, the Washington consensus on IMF policies? Might we even hope to influence events so that the greatest preponderance of good over evil effects of globalization comes to pass? An affirmative answer to these questions is the wager not only of this essay, but indeed of much of the most recent Catholic social thought.
It is encouraging to know that I am not alone in focusing, not on how to stop globalization, but rather on how to manage it so that human values are best preserved. My judgment is by and large supported by the very semantics of globalization debates. In recent months, numerous mainstream observers of globalization have adopted an idiom that forms a well-worn groove in the road of ethical discourse. I refer to the frequent use by many authors, in speaking about the ethics of globalization, of verbs such as "harness," "tame," "control" "bridle," "yoke," "curb," "circumscribe," "domesticate," "discipline" and "restrain." I am particularly fond of the "wild animal in need of forcible restraint" metaphors implicit in these recurring turns of phrase by a variety of commentators. By employing such words, observers such as James Wolfensohn (former president of the World Bank), Jay Mandle, (professor of economics at Colgate University) and Kenneth Himes (of Washington Theological Union), each from his particular profession and perspective on the political spectrum, attest to the common desire somehow to pursue human values within the seemingly cut-throat world of global capitalism.
So, if some manner of "taming" is indeed the central task when confronted with a globalization that threatens proper human development, how is this reflected in official Catholic social teaching? Most of what has been written on globalization in the name of the church demonstrates a healthy aversion to either extreme pro-globalization or anti-globalization perspectives, neither baptizing the dominant narrative offered by the enthusiasts nor uncritically adopting whole cloth the counter-narrative of globalization protesters and naysayers who demonize the growth of world markets. Rather than supporting knee-jerk reactions to the complex issues involved in evaluating this juggernaut, official Catholic voices have adopted a measured embrace of what is good in globalization and a heart-felt, if not consistently boldly prophetic, appeal to curb practices that are destructive and exploitative. Starting at the top, it is noteworthy that Pope John Paul II has never issued a major statement on globalization. In his many brief occasional statements that touch this topic, his most frequently repeated calls are for "the humanization of globalization" and for "a globalization of solidarity" to complete the process of the globalization of trade and production. The ethical significance is clear: only by making globalization an instrument of inclusion and opportunity will we live up to the gospel mandate to love our neighbor, not just to invite him or her into a potentially mutually beneficial competition for jobs and resources. The "Pope of Freedom" thus demonstrates a predilection for a highly principled interpretation of rightly ordered economic liberty, one that truly considers not only our rights but also our moral duties to all humankind.
The appendix to this article lists thirteen addresses, allocutions and similar occasional statements of John Paul II on globalization. The context of many of the items on this list is quite idiosyncratic in nature. However, they do supplement in revealing ways the Pope's brief treatments of globalization in the 1991 social encyclical Centesimus Annus and his 1999 post-synodal exhortation Ecclesia in America. It is interesting to compare these texts to an even more motley collection (also in the appendix) of eleven statements on globalization emanating from a miscellaneous assortment of diverse Catholic voices, ranging from Vatican officials to German, Canadian and Latin American bishops' conferences to religious orders to lay groups such as Pax Christi and think tanks such as the Center of Concern on the left and the Acton Institute on the right. My frank opinion is that, on the whole and despite the enormous diversity of perspectives expressed, these eleven documents are far more perceptive and incisive in their analysis than the papal treatments of globalization. Allow me to characterize some similarities and dissimilarities between the two categories of statements in the appendix and, finally, to recommend a course of action for the future.
What the eleven diverse documents all have in common with the papal statements, as well as with each other, is an appeal to the same basic principles of Catholic social thought. There are few surprises here, as the authors of these documents "round up the usual suspects" to ground their variety of claims about justice in a globalized age. The venerable themes from previous social encyclicals are all here: human dignity, solidarity, common good (particularly on a now universal level), integral human development, the universal destination of material goods (existing as it always does in tension with the right to private property), preferential option for the poor, participation in social living and proper subsidiarity.
Where these diverse documents from Catholic sources generally improve upon John Paul II's treatment is with regard to the level of specificity. While the Pope seems eager to demonstrate his awareness that there are winners and losers in global competition, most of these other documents are far more willing to name names, identifying groups who suffer disadvantages and exploring more specific causes of disproportionate burdens. Unlike the Pope, who generally seems satisfied to recite the names of familiar principles and to issue vague moral appeals for a greater sharing of resources, many of these other Catholic voices actually apply these principles to the concrete institutions that determine patterns of production, trade, distribution and opportunity in today's world. This more thoroughgoing institutional analysis is the perfect remedy to the usual complaint that Catholic social thought is all too often "long on diagnosis but weak on cure." The first step is getting beyond the, to my mind, unnecessary scruples displayed by documents of papal social teaching which prevent it from identifying specific injustices and suggesting concrete remedies, except on rare occasions such as Pope John Paul's outspoken support for the Jubilee 2000 movement for debt relief.
My hope for a future papal encyclical on globalization, then, would include the prospect that, despite the differences in genre and the usual caveats about not offering detailed blueprints for social organization, a future pope would be so bold as to call for specific reforms of global financial institutions, strict codes of conduct for transnational corporations and perhaps as specific a proposal as the Tobin Tax upon cross-border financial flows, a measure advocated by several of the eleven non-papal documents cited in the appendix. A movement away from vague generalities to more empirical engagement of the phenomenon of globalization in papal statements would not only be a service to those seeking moral support for efforts to reform global institutions, but would build upon a seminal, yet often neglected insight of Pope Paul VI. In paragraph 46 of his 1971 Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens, he recognizes "the need to pass from economics to politics" in analyzing international social relations. In other words, without a sober assessment of power and its use, any ethical advice offered by religious voices is relegated to mere high-minded moralizing. Paul VI's earlier encyclical Populorum Progressio represents perhaps the universal church's most serious grappling with injustices arising from skewed distributions of power and warped international structures. Its balance of the prophetic and the practical might serve as a model for church statements in our new age of globalization.
The methodology of Catholic social teaching is often summarized as a three-part process of "see, judge, act." Globalization presents us, as a worldwide community of moral discernment and action, with an opportunity to make a crucial and distinctive contribution to a key sign of our times. We need not invent entirely new tools to deal with the ethical challenges of globalization. We would be advised, however, to hone our inherited moral resources and to marshal them in a courageous manner_one that assists all people in their efforts to see accurately, judge insightfully and act responsibly vis-a-vis the juggernaut of globalization.
Endnotes
[1] Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization (N.Y.: Anchor Books, 2000), p. 406.
[2] See, for example, David Held et al., Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture (Cambridge, England: Polity Press, 1999). These phrases appear passim.
[3] William Greider, One World, Ready of Not: The Manic Logic of Global Capitalism (N.Y.: Touchstone Books, 1997).
Appendix 1: 13 Papal Statements and Addresses Treating Globalization
John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, 1 May 1991.
John Paul II, "From the Justice of Each Comes Peace for All." World Day of Peace Message, Jan 1, 1998. Reprinted in Origins (1/1/98).
John Paul II, "Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in America," 22 January 1999.
John Paul II, "Address to the Members of the Centesimus Annus Pro Pontifice Foundation," 11 Sept. 1999. (at the conclusion of a meeting on the theme of ethics and finance).
John Paul II, "Address to International Catholic Union of Business Directors," 13 October 1999.
John Paul II, "Homily at Mass for the Jubilee of Workers," 1 May 2000.
John Paul II, "Message for World Day of Migration," 13 Feb 2001 (available at zenit.org)
John Paul II, "The Ethical Dimensions of Globalization" address in Rome to annual plenary meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, April 27, 2001.
In Origins (5/31/2001, pp. 44-5), as well as Vatican website version.
John Paul II, "Address to Members of the Foundation for Ethics and Economics," 11 July 2001.
John Paul II, "Address to the Pontifical Academies of Theology of St. Thomas Aquinas," 8 Nov. 2001.
John Paul II, "Address to Members of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences,"11 April 2002.
John Paul II, "Message to the Federation of Italian Catholic University Students," 26 April 2002.
John Paul II, "Address to `Glocal' Forum of 18 Mayors of World Cities," Rome, 13 May 2002.
Appendix 2: 11 Miscellaneous Statements on Globalization from Catholic Sources
Documents of General Congregation 34 of the Society of Jesus, Decree Three "Our Mission and Justice," promulgated 22 March 1995 (pars. 7-10 treats globalization themes).
"Social Responsibility in the Age of Globalization," Conference Declaration of Center of Concern Conference at Marquette University, 27-9 May 1997, reprinted in Center Focus, September 1997, pp. 7-9.
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, "Trade, Development and the Fight against Poverty: Some Reflections on the Occasion of the World Trade Organization `Millennium Round,'" 18 Nov. 1999.
German Bishops' Conference on the Universal Tasks of the Church, "The Many Faces of Globalization: Perspectives for a Humane World Order." Bonn, January 2000, 66 pp.
"A New Partnership for Solidarity_A Source of Hope." Final Statement of the Pax Romana ICMICA 28th Plenary/Jubilee Assembly 2000. Paris: Sept. 17 to 24, 2000.
CELAM "The Challenges of Globalization for New Evangelization in Latin America." 2 Nov. 2000 (First Draft of 2003 Report), 14 pp.
"Manifesto of the Catholic Associations to the Leaders of the G-8," Genoa, Italy, July 2001. Signed by representatives of over 60 Catholic lay groups and missionary orders and available in translation (posted 25 July 2001) at nathcat.org\documents.
Paul Cleveland, Gregory M.A. Gronbacher, Gary Quinlivan, and Michel Therrien, "A Catholic Response to Economic Globalization: Applications of Catholic Social Teaching," Christian Social Thought Series, no. 1 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Center for Economic Personalism of the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty, 2001)
"Trading Away the Future: Concerns Arising from the Investor-State Mechanism of NAFTA," a background paper prepared for the Episcopal Commission for Social Affairs for the conference "On Humanizing the Global Economy." Canadian Conf. Of Catholic Bishops and USCC, Jan. 2002.
Archbishop Renato R. Martini, "Development is First and Foremost a Question of People: Address from Head of the Delegation of the Holy See to the United Nations International Conference on Financing Development," Monterrey, Mexico, 24 March 2002.
"Toward a Globalization of Solidarity: A Pax Christi USA Interim Position Paper on Globalization To Promote Dialogue" a supplement to The Catholic Peace Voice Spring 2002 (vol XXVII, no. 1), pp. 9-12.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Thomas Massaro, S.J., is Associate Professor of Moral Theology at Weston Jesuit School of Theology inn Cambridge, MA. He has a doctorate from Emory University, and is the author of Catholic Social Teaching and United States Welfare Reform, and Living Justice. This article is an adaptation of an address he gave to the 2002 annual meeting of the Catholic Theological Society of America. He has contributed other articles to Blueprint on the topics of Welfare Reform and Catholic Social Thought.
