“When people talk, listen completely. Most people never listen.”
—Ernest Hemingway
Like many of my fellow Americans, I stayed up later than usual on Tuesday, 8 November, glued to my television. It was election night, and I watched as one by one, the map of the United States bled into a sea of red, concluding with Donald Trump’s successful bid for the Presidency of the United States. I admit I was shocked. Every prediction said otherwise. But I shouldn’t have been.
Just six months ago, I was finishing my MBA at Oxford when Brexit shocked the world, countering all expectations, and shook the markets as they adapted to the new risk of business in Europe. From Geert Wilders in the Netherlands to Marine Le Pen in France, one can sense a global force at work. Whether you call it conservative, Alt-Right, populism, nationalism, the world is seeing a right-way shift in global politic. For those in leadership, whether in businesses, government, congregations, or nonprofits, It provides an opportunity to reflect, and decisively move forward responsibly and thoughtfully.
What’s Happening?
You can’t tell the story of modern economic development without Globalism. To more established economies, Free Trade has opened new markets for both commodity sourcing and markets to sell products into, namely developing economies. Eventually these developing economies can compete in manufacturing as capital investment becomes available to building such capacities. At large, this is good. This is the core of globalism, and relies on understanding simple supply and demand. While a closed market will have a price that dictates an even amount of supply and demand, globalism decouples this symmetry. If the global equilibrium price is above the domestic one, suppliers will produce more and then export their products to the market. In theory, prices will rise domestically, but the benefit through production is greater than the loss in price increases. Conversely, if the global equilibrium is below the domestic one, local manufacturing will decrease, but the price drop will add more value than lost through reduced manufacturing. In theory, everyone wins.
But in practice, there are always winners and losers of globalism. While developing economies run the risk of becoming Rentier States (economies driven by single commodities with little investment in domestic capacity), developed economies face forces pushing labour markets from manufacturing to service industries. Typically the jobs lost are outpaced by jobs created, but labor is not ubiquitous; a factory worker cannot leave the plant and take up a job at a hospital. This mismatch of available labor need to needed labor is known as Structural Unemployment. Unlike Seasonal or Recessional Unemployment, these are jobs that aren’t coming back.
Those working in manufacturing have suffered the most from this shift. This chart (look on page 12) above shows real increases in income for global workers over the period from 1988 until 2008 (segmented by income percentile). In short, everyone seems to be better off except those at and around the 80% percentile. These are the blue collar workers in the US, United Kingdom, and across Europe.
They are frustrated. Imagine you began working in a car factory 30 years ago, and received union-approved raises and promotions for the first 10 years, then saw income and opportunities flatline for ten years, only to be laid off in 2011. You’ve collected unemployment (at a fraction of your salary), falling behind on your mortgage, all while looking for a job like the one you excelled in. You feel like you can’t provide for your family, that political leaders are ignoring you, and that you’ve been lied to, misled, and cheated out of the life you were promised by simply working hard.
While it’s more likely that their jobs were automated or or possibly replaced by workers in China, South Asia, or Latin America, populist voices find it most expedient to blame immigrants, the last generation of political leaders, the media, and major corporations. The savviest of these voices have mobilized these real grievances into nationalist angst, sometimes in a reactionary frenzy that threaten to incite violence against ethnic and religious minorities. It’s important to note that while many voted for Brexit, Trump, Le Penn, and other politically rightists did so despite the nationalist and anti-immigrant narratives (not because of it). But these narratives now appeared normalized for public discourse in a way that should make us all uncomfortable.
What Can Be Done
To address this schism, those in government, the private sector, and nonprofits all must dedicate to building more inclusive societies in this tumultuous time. To this end, here are concrete steps we can commit to in our personal and professional lives, outlined in the acronym B.U.I.L.D.:
- Bridge: If you don’t know anyone from the opposing political persuasion, step out of your comfort zone and meet someone, and build a relationship.
- Unify: Work to facilitate relationships across the social divides. Research shows a single positive relationship is all it takes.
- Invest: Whether through building infrastructure, creating a local call center, or attracting resources to affected education systems, invest into improving these communities.
- Listen: No one ever changed their mind because they lost an argument. Seek understanding before being understood, and engage in real dialogue.
- Demonstrate: Both in personal and professional lives, we must demonstrate how diverse communities can thrive through pluralism. We are truly better together.