Contemporary dynamics of capitalistic relations' development has made world economy a complicated and intricate system of national economies, transnational production & distribution constructs, international economic organizations etc. Within its framework competencies of governments and of corporate top managers, directors of supranational unions and of local consumers, business owners and employees are intercrossing and overlapping, resonating and counteracting. The article analyzes the key bottlenecks and problems of globalization as a social progress concept along with the accompanying social and economic problems provoked by liberalization. The potential of sufficiency economy is analyzed as an alternative to the globalist approach. Potential prospects of sufficient economy principles' implementation are assessed. These principles have been suggested by His Majesty King of Thailand Bhumipol Adulyadej as the key values and strategic guidelines for nation's development. The related conditions and requirements for their implementation in the economic policies of todays' governments worldwide are discussed.
TopGlobalizing Economy: Through “Flat World” To World Segregation
Formation of the global capitalist system, on one hand, has lead to repositioning of countries in the global structure of labour distribution: some of them got the latest and most advanced production factors (including innovations, high technologies and most qualified labour resources), thus, the traditional factors of national competitiveness (geographical location, tourist resources, consumer market volumes) got a completely new value and role.
On the other hand, global economic system made an attempt to combine what is potentially not incompatible into the global pyramid of competitiveness, in which the role of the state within the structure of international production is rather fixed, while the system of vertical lifts between the levels of this pyramid does not seem to be possible as such (Delyagin, 2003). Same applies to widely promote liberal business values which are partially related to limiting the state regulation of economy and eliminating legal and administrative barriers on the way of globalization's advent (including free trade, freedom in production factors' relocation, unification of public regulation etc.).
Consequently, globalism today as the concept of capital development is actually an attempt to recreate the zones of “limited freedom”, that is those economic and business territories the socioeconomic development of which is rather strictly planned, very much regulated and controlled, however, inside them, standards of free entrepreneurship and competitiveness are nourished in a rather artificial way. High level of this so-called “internal freedom” is often generously sponsored from the inside by means of country’s investment attractiveness growth, its growing international ranks (which is today the most widely spread form of international acknowledgement of country’s success, at least in a short-term period) and also, by significantly cheaper credit rates. At the same time this “internal freedom” serves to limit national governments in realization of their national strategic interests, since “freed” market forces are actively building the required institutes according to external economic requirements.
Our previous research (Ushakov, 2016) on the dynamics of economic liberalization in a range of countries around the globe has already confirmed our assumption that market instruments of free internal market force the national market system to be oriented not locally, but rather globally – on the world market environment. And these mechanisms of the global market which essentially are transnational production & distribution constructs, highly efficient systems for logistics and communication, today have already created all conditions for national economic systems to strive for their own universalization and standardization, own adaptation to global trends of the world economy’s development. And these trends are somehow seen as the only possible way for national competitiveness development. National economic system, being closely connected to global financial, information, labour and other markets, become too sensitive to any global factor, and thus, becomes more oriented to global (that is external) rather than internal, own, local necessities (Ushakov, 2016).