Vital Interests: Thanks for participating in the Vital Interest Forum. Your timely new book, Why Globalization Works for America: How Nationalist Trade Policies Are Destroying Our Country will be published soon. Globalization is one of those terms that has gotten co-opted in contemporary political rhetoric - it is either the boogeyman that threatens the American way of life or the path to prosperity not only for the United States but also the global community. Can you explain how globalization became such a contested idea?

Edward Goldberg: First I see globalization as part of who we are as humans. From the beginning of history, empires have been conquering other empires, adopting and expanding their cultures. There is no better example than Alexander the Great pushing Greek culture onto the whole Near East. A simple example of global exchange I use in the book is the common tomato which had its origins in the Inca civilization of Peru, migrated to Mexico, then over to Spain, was introduced to Italy, and eventually made its way to the United States. 

I see globalization as an economic and political form of evolution. It's part of who we are as humans. Now, of course, many economic historians say we are actually experiencing the third time that globalization has deeply affected the world. What's different about this time is, of course, the rate of change and how swiftly it has come, mainly because of the interplay between technology and globalization. It's been instant. When the tomato went from Mexico with the conquistadors back to Spain and Italy, it took several hundred years. Now the changes are instantaneous and the problem today is human adaptation to those changes.

VI: A long-held presumption about the United States is that because we occupy a large, fertile, and rich continent, that we are relatively self-sufficient. We have been able to grow and make what we need and have not had to depend on the rest of the world. This frame of mind, that we did not have to get involved in the affairs of other countries, gave birth to the idea of isolationism. Are anti-globalization attitudes the legacy of isolationism?

Edward Goldberg: From its beginnings, the United States has been the poster child of global expansion. The U.S. was settled by the Spanish in the West, the Dutch in New York, the English in New England, and other Europeans throughout the land. African slaves also were part of this new reality. Global population exchange clearly defined the early United States.

Another key function of globalization is the interchange of finance and banking around the world and that's how the U.S. started. The U.S. started with Ben Franklin going over to France and to the Netherlands to borrow money to finance the Revolutionary War.

An additional milestone of early United States history is the Louisiana purchase,financed by the U.S. Treasury selling bonds in Europe. Jump ahead to the industrial revolution, which was financed by people like JP Morgan selling American bonds in Europe. American railroads were made possible through foreign direct investment by the English, Germans, and the Dutch.

VI: If  you believe the rhetoric of the Trump administration and people who harken back to “America on its own” mythologies, globalization is the root of all of America’s problems.

Edward Goldberg:  Globalization is an easy whipping boy for realities Americans are unwilling to accept regarding what is causing the economic and social problems confronting our society. In fact, globalization really has not caused a reduction in American jobs for the last 10 years.

The real culprit is American engineering and technological prowess and the resulting automation and increased productivity it has enabled.  A clear example is the steel industry which Trump is adamantly protecting. Twenty years ago it took 10 people to make a ton of steel. Today it takes one worker. All due to automation, absolutely nothing to do with globalization. 

VI: Innovations in manufacturing  have certainly been part of industrial history, but so has the migration of factories from high cost to lower cost locations. New England was a center of American manufacturing but the textile, leather, and tool works left for the cheaper (and non-union) labor areas of the Southern states.

Edward Goldberg: For sure. American industries are managed by MBA’s whose first loyalty is to their bottom lines and shareholders’ expectations. They left New England for the South, and then looked abroad to lower costs. When the world was based on manufacturing, you went to the lowest labor market.

VI: Globalization is not only about changing economic realities, but also about changing culture. With the growth of the American middle-class and increased prosperity, did American attitudes change to look to the global market for French wines, Italian fashions, German cars, and Japanese electronics?

Edward Goldberg: Change of attitudes, change of cultures, adapting, adapting and adapting. That's what globalization is all about - being part of a global commerce market. Countries, by the way, that have for one reason or another not participated in the global community tend to be diminished. Their economies suffer - they get poorer. History is full of examples of this.

VI: Isn’t the strength that now characterizes the American economy not due to manufacturing but rather to the growth of the services sector? 

Edward Goldberg: An indisputable fact is that the United States economy is prosperous because we invented the idea of human capital. David Ricardo talks about the significance of comparative advantages and the U.S. has a comparative advantage like no one else in the world in terms of human capital because we have put a great emphasis on intellectual freedom. 

Because our embrace of immigration brought many cultural patterns here and because of the adoption of the American entrepreneurial spirit, you have a unique dynamic force that is a fertile environment for the creation of new ideas. It's one of the reasons I think we have nothing to worry about challenges from China because they don't have that. They don't have freedom of thought. You can not have human capital ingenuity without freedom of thought.

VI: The United States can pivot from manufacturing to service and high-tech occupations only with a re-orientation of education and training. While this impacts new generations of workers, are those older workers without the necessary education and new skills the cause for societal dissatisfaction being exploited for political reasons?

Edward Goldberg: This is certainly the case. Trump laments China and others taking American jobs while we have nearly full employment. His argument doesn't make sense. While external global circumstances are a contributing factor, it is domestic economic realities that are the reason 40, 50, and 60 year-old workers are unable to find the kind of high paying, blue collar industrial jobs they once had.

This segment of the population is drowning. They don't know what to do. Our government has failed these people and there's huge resentment because of this. The jobs they seek just don't exist and they don't have the skills or mobility to come to New York or San Francisco or Chicago or Atlanta and find employment in the service or high tech sectors. 

VI: Should there have been more constructive government job creation and re-education programs?

Edward Goldberg: Yes, without a doubt. I believe the American political system failed its displaced workers. I think Trumpism is basically a sign that says that the American political system did not deliver. We see that in the late 19th century during the industrial revolution. When monopolization looked like it could destroy entrepreneurial energy and damage American culture,Teddy Roosevelt came in with trust-busting policies. We see Woodrow Wilson supporting a progressive agenda. In the 1930s during the Great Depression, we see FDR create a safety net for the workers displaced by harsh economic circumstances as well as jobs programs.

But in this recent time when a significant segment of American workers lost meaningful employment, elected representatives, who are supposed to have the interests of their constituents in mind, did not advocate for them. Really nothing was done to remedy a pressing social problem. It's really a failure of the political system and many are suffering because of it.

VI: Do you think a massive re-education or re-training bill, for example like the GI bill after the Second World War, would make a difference?

Edward Goldberg: Yes and I think there are many, many ways to do this. For example we have the challenges of climate change. This is a prime example of how the American government could refocus the economy to promote green industries and businesses through support of education, training, and subsidies. Congress could say, here’s $500 million, here's $1 billion to Kentucky and West Virginia, whatever it takes, to make these coal producing states new centers of research for renewable energy, to make these coal producing states leaders in the fight against climate change. 

VI: To have the government take on these kinds of responsibilities, you need to have not only the political will but also the support of the elites in control of the business community. Aren’t business leaders also being accused of supporting globalization at the expense of the American worker?

Edward Goldberg: I think we have competing elites. The Trump administration has staked its  political fortune on protecting the old industries like coal and steel - America’s industrial past not America's industrial future. But honestly, we've had an imbalance.   Paul Krugman partly won his Nobel prize for the idea of geographical clusters- that people are leaving economically depressed areas, coming to centers of new business activity, and that those left behind feel abandoned and resentful. If you're a smart entrepreneurial person, you can basically do well. If you're not educated and your work has been in a factory, then your options are indeed limited. This disparity of opportunity is not good for any society. Tax cuts for wealthy elites and the lack of programs to assist displaced workers are not sustainable in a viable democracy.

VI: Where is the road out of this situation when the nation is so divided and globalization is being used as a scapegoat?  How can the dialogue on globalization become a positive idea that Americans embrace as opposed to being something that they fear or think has caused harm to the country?

Edward Goldberg: I think it's good leadership. I think it takes government responsibility, without a doubt. I think America is really at a crossroads for the future. Do we want to see the future optimistically or do we want to pretend that the future's harmful and become more and more turned into ourselves and more and more isolationist? We have that choice.

VI: The Trump administration has walked away from multilateralism and demands that foreign relations be on a bilateral basis so that American interests are better promoted. Is this a reasonable approach to dealing with the global community?

Edward Goldberg: The absurdity of that is demonstrated by climate warming and the current panic on the coronavirus. Look, climate change and the coronavirus are similar in that you need global coordination to stop both. You can't stop the inevitable just by being isolationist. The virus is going to come no matter what. Climate change is going to come no matter what. You can't say we're going to build a wall against pollution coming from Canada.

VI: Are climate change deniers and those advocating America First harkening back to bygone times when the United States could stand apart from the rest of the world?

Edward Goldberg: Exactly. Added to this is another reality that we no longer dominate the world's economy like we did after World War II. We have not gotten poorer, interestingly enough, we've gotten much richer, which is hard for people to believe given China's rise. It seems not logical.

The fact is that global economic growth is not a zero sum equation. China's gotten wealthier, Europe’s gotten wealthier, India's gotten wealthier, even parts of Africa have gotten wealthier. America’s total share of global wealth has shrunk, so we're no longer this giant in the world. We're at 17% or 18% of the world's GDP and not 40% -50% like we were in 1947 and we have to get used to that also. That's just the reality. We have not gotten poorer, just our percent of the world's GDP has gotten smaller.

VI: But that's not necessarily a bad thing because, we want to live in a prosperous world, to support global economic growth so that the world is a better place for all.

Edward Goldberg: It's absolutely not a bad thing but once again, leadership has to discuss this and explain it. We need leadership that's not afraid of discussing the positive realities of globalization.

Edward Goldberg is a leading expert in the area of where global politics and economics intercept. He teaches International Political Economy at the New York University Center for Global Affairs where he is an Adjunct Assistant Professor. He is also a Scholarly Practitioner at the Zicklin Graduate School of Business of Baruch College of the City University of New York where he teaches courses on globalization. He is the author of “Why Globalization Works For America: How Nationalist Trade Policies Destroy Countries.” and “The Joint Ventured Nation: Why America Needs A New Foreign Policy”. He is a much-quoted essayist and public speaker on the subjects of Globalization, European-American relations, U.S.-Russian and China relations. He has commented on these issues on PBS, NPR, CBS, Bloomberg, and in The New York Times, The Hill, and the Huffington Post