2
I.
Perhaps the most widely debated question of the past few years, certainly before the
attacks of 11 September 2001, concerns the justice or injustice of globalization. The
“Battle of Seattle” launched the most widespread social movement of our time: what
was then called the antiglobalist movement, now the self-designated alterglobalist
movement. I would like to argue for the latter appellation – but, due to constraints of
space and time, in this paper limit my argument to a philosophical preface. Were I to
defend alterglobalism against the charge of antiglobalism, I should supplement the
present argument with the following analyses: of the appropriate definition of
globalization and of its causes and effects; of its dominant ideology and of globalist and
parochialist alternatives; of the sociology of the movement and of its politics.
1
I should,
however, begin with the discussion of foundations and limitations presented in this
paper. This “preface,” then, intends to position the globalization debates in the context
of the dominant, broadly liberal tradition in political thought. Their significance for
political theory lies, I think, in the renewed examination of that locus classicus, Hume’s
discussion of the proper context of justice.
I would like to begin with a short – generally sympathetic – review of a very
interesting book, Naomi Klein’s No Logo.
2
It consists of two halves, the first a history
of corporate activities centered on branding, the second an overview of anti-corporate
activists and their strategies. The history may be considered education for the activist
masses, whose critiques and protests should become the more effective the more they
understand their enemy. It may also be read as an education for the uninformed masses
who, shaken out of their ignorance, should participate in or at least sympathize with the
activists. In both respects, No Logo has been quite a success. The overview of activist
strategies achieves a synthesis (if one didn’t already exist: the movement predates the
book): the efforts of various activist groups, often directed at different purposes, are
seen to complement each other. This makes it possible to exchange tips and techniques,
1
I develop these themes at some length in my dissertation (Purdue University,
forthcoming). For the record, I incline towards Scholte’s definition, but in this paper
rely rather on Naomi Klein’s description of the experiences brought about by
globalization. Cf. Scholte. Scholte, Jan Aart. 2000. Globalization: A Critical
Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
2
Klein, Naomi. 2001. No Logo. Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies. Toronto: Westwood. One of the book’s
virtues is that it made its author the intellectual spokesman for the alterglobalist movement, a useful
handhold for its students.
Convention