Egalitarian Politics in the Age of Globalization

by Craig N. Murphy

In recent years women's movements and democracy movements appear to have been more successful in promoting social equality than labour movements or development movements. Wage gaps between men and women have narrowed. New democracies have flourished. Yet, gaps between the rich and poor remain. Do differences in organization and strategy account for the differences in outcomes? Through in-depth studies of the United States, Eastern and Western Europe, Latin America, Africa, China, and north- and southeast Asia the contributors to this volume provide some thought-provoking answers.

257 pages, Hardcover

First published November 14, 2001

Reviews

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book presents information about various social movements in various parts of the world. Although the book context is "in the age of globalization," the social issues discussed are not necessarily the result of globalization. (Globalization may contribute to details of these pre-existing social issues.) For instance, exploitation of women and immigrant workers was a problem well before "the age of globalization." And much in the articles deal with movements (or less organized activity) about the symptoms of globalization (or capitalism), but not about addressing globalization (or the IMF, WTO, trade pacts, etc.) itself. In that sense, the topic is limiting the level of inequality, rather than full egalitarianism.

At least some of the material is dated - the book was published in 2002 and the most recent source materials seemed to be from 1999. When it comes to the "Fall of Communism" (1989 - 91) and the end of apartheid (1991), this left less than 10 years of what developed afterward - and about 20 years have passed since what is described in the book.

The formerly Communist countries are discussed in terms of the decline in health care, pensions and other public programs (and the increase in inequality.)

It may be informative to learn about the movements which favored policies which would decrease hardships for the less affluent / less powerful. However, I felt the discussion had more to do with efforts to modify the symptoms (or trim the tendrils) of globalization / plutocracy.