The phase of globalization is surely nearer to its end!

[CTO114]

Globalization surely used to be the other of the day, as countries aligned, formed trade alliances an depended on each other, before the last five years, we surely witnessed an era where globalization was prioritized; produce and trade where is cheaper.

What the world is witnessing now is quite different; there's emergence of tarrif wars, regional supply chains and most recently economic nationalism.

Countries no longer prioritize affordability or cheapness, their priorities have shifted to political agreements, security and security.

Surely survival is replacing efficiency, as a result, goods are more expensive, supply chains are duplicates, as we start to see globalization being reduced to nothing. This shift will surely be more evident for the next couple of years

[uneng]

Do you really think USA, China and Russia will stop negotiating with each other? Tarrifs are more like blackmail to reach a better agreement in the future, and not exactly to cease economical partnerships.

Indeed, there is a lot of mistrust in the world right now, and even countries which used to be allied are already hostilizing each other, but trade is inevitable in a world where money talks.

The ideology of the world is money.

[joniboini]

I'm not sure who define globalization as working together with other countries to be honest. As far as I can recall, globalization is basically the removal of distance between one countries to another, which means they can interact through other means quite easily. People mentions cultural export, economic partnership, and so on alongside stuff like tariff wars or international sanction since years ago. I feel like OP definition is a bit too limiting and nobody thinks the same way.

[rat03gopoh]

I don't see this as a sign of the end, but rather as part of a new world order (fragmented globalization). It's not just blocs of countries forming new alliances, but also how large companies are opening new production centers in regions perceived to have more stable geopolitical conditions in the long term. If countries have strategies to maintain their economies, companies also need to maintain their markets.

[viljy]

I am of the opinion that the fragmentation of the world into economic regions, and probably currency regions (for example, dollar, yuan), is more of a good thing than a bad thing. Because it reduces the power of corporations, including the control of people's minds by online corporations such as social networks. So the fact that Schwab's globalization did not take place is a blessing. Although this does not guarantee people's lack of control over society by regional corporations. But at least there won't be global planetary corporations.

[bubilas]

Globalization surely used to be the other of the day, as countries aligned, formed trade alliances an depended on each other, before the last five years, we surely witnessed an era where globalization was prioritized; produce and trade where is cheaper.

What the world is witnessing now is quite different; there's emergence of tarrif wars, regional supply chains and most recently economic nationalism.

Countries no longer prioritize affordability or cheapness, their priorities have shifted to political agreements, security and security.

Surely survival is replacing efficiency, as a result, goods are more expensive, supply chains are duplicates, as we start to see globalization being reduced to nothing. This shift will surely be more evident for the next couple of years

There is a very noticeable trend now for each country to try to respect its sovereignty as much as possible and build its domestic economy as much as possible so that it does not depend on other countries for imports. We saw a vivid example when US President Donald Trump showed how politics can have an impact on countries by cutting off technologies or resources, and these are both tariffs and sanctions, and therefore a strong state that knows how to extract resources for itself (if any) and with well-thought-out sovereign technologies. And as a great example, I would cite China, but it is also dependent on the situation with the Strait of Hormuz and oil supplies.

[imthegreat]

Each country strives not to depend on others, because it develops its own domestic products and technologies (such as the automotive industry) that will allow it to provide a lot of work to the domestic population and use resources. And at the same time, these countries do not want to be heavily dependent on those countries that export cars to this country. But, unfortunately, due to the high level of corruption, such countries (for example, Russia) cannot develop a domestic car industry because it is an unaccountable production that does not compete with anyone, as large car companies in South Korea do, but simply this industry in the Russian Federation is a pit for money. Which the government is constantly pouring huge funds from the treasury into, but it doesn't do any good.

[Die_empty]

No country is an island; they will always need each other to survive. Globalization is as old as man, but it has been made easier by technology. Kingdoms or nation-states were trading with each other from antiquity. The internet and other technological inventions made international trade and partnerships easier.

Tariff wars, sanctions, and economic blockades have always been used by powerful nations to push their agenda. But it seems Trump has made these instruments his main tool to push his interests. Globalization is not ending because of an individual; his tenure will pass, and these extreme economic nationalism policies will be replaced.

Every nation has its competitive advantage, which means we will always need each other to survive.  

[Perfectbaby]

Irrespective of what is currently happening nations can’t deal without others and of course there is needs for countries to exchange trade as we know money is what all is actually chasing making sure that they achieve their goal. What you must know is that the survival of every nation today depends on what they are doing or producing and in all, they must also need the next to survive provided that they are exporting and also importing other products from the neighbouring countries, so globalisation is as old as man origination.

[Iranus]

Each country strives not to depend on others, because it develops its own domestic products and technologies (such as the automotive industry) that will allow it to provide a lot of work to the domestic population and use resources. And at the same time, these countries do not want to be heavily dependent on those countries that export cars to this country. But, unfortunately, due to the high level of corruption, such countries (for example, Russia) cannot develop a domestic car industry because it is an unaccountable production that does not compete with anyone, as large car companies in South Korea do, but simply this industry in the Russian Federation is a pit for money. Which the government is constantly pouring huge funds from the treasury into, but it doesn't do any good.

No country can survive if it isolates itself and is completely separated from the rest of the world. The goal of governments is to find ways to reduce dependence on a single market or partner, not to sever all relationships entirely.

Self-sufficiency sounds very appealing, but in reality, no country in the world is capable of producing everything it needs on its own. Even a superpower like the US cannot do that on its own and remains heavily dependent on external supply chains.

This has nothing to do with corruption, but rather with limitations stemming from geographical conditions, resources, and production capacity.

[Spaceman1000$]

Globalization surely used to be the other of the day, as countries aligned, formed trade alliances an depended on each other, before the last five years, we surely witnessed an era where globalization was prioritized; produce and trade where is cheaper.

What the world is witnessing now is quite different; there's emergence of tarrif wars, regional supply chains and most recently economic nationalism.

Countries no longer prioritize affordability or cheapness, their priorities have shifted to political agreements, security and security.

Surely survival is replacing efficiency, as a result, goods are more expensive, supply chains are duplicates, as we start to see globalization being reduced to nothing. This shift will surely be more evident for the next couple of years

Greed is a major player in the problems associated with globalization, if goods are becoming more expensive for importation, thereby making it expensive for locals, it is better for countries to look inwards and start creating a pathway for themselves instead of depending on another country for essential services. The tariff war will continue for a long time because it's just getting started, but then it is a wake up call for countries to be independent, wether it is security wise, technology wise, essential goods, and rest of it, because the countries your relying on might wake up one morning and stop giving you their products. so despite the fact that globalization allows trade within countries on the international market, signs like this should awaken leaders to look inwards.

[Fortify]

Globalization surely used to be the other of the day, as countries aligned, formed trade alliances an depended on each other, before the last five years, we surely witnessed an era where globalization was prioritized; produce and trade where is cheaper.

What the world is witnessing now is quite different; there's emergence of tarrif wars, regional supply chains and most recently economic nationalism.

Countries no longer prioritize affordability or cheapness, their priorities have shifted to political agreements, security and security.

Surely survival is replacing efficiency, as a result, goods are more expensive, supply chains are duplicates, as we start to see globalization being reduced to nothing. This shift will surely be more evident for the next couple of years

There is definitely more push back and trade protectionism these days, which is magnified when certain goods which were previously in abundance become restricted for different reasons. Like China realizing it has control and utilizing their rare metals in more developed products rather than just exporting the base minerals abroad for other countries to gain value. Now we have an oil squeeze going on, countries are deciding to hoard food, fertilizer and fuel supplies in fear that supplies will shrink or become super expensive. All of these things are going to lead to continued global supply chain breakdowns and trade barriers going back up - which can actually lead to war when countries have less bonds keeping them friendly together.

[stompix]

So, this means Bitcoin is dead too, right?  
Because with no globalization, there is no exchange of value between countries, there is no country keen on trading, there is no country keen on having assets not entirely controlled by their own, so what purpose would Bitcoin serve if all the world was fractured?

No country can survive if it isolates itself and is completely separated from the rest of the world. Self-sufficiency sounds very appealing, but in reality, no country in the world is capable of producing everything it needs on its own. Even a superpower like the US cannot do that on its own and remains heavily dependent on external supply chains.

Plenty can survive! We have an example with North Korea!
Second, there are 3 countries that can turn self-sustainable if they choose to be so, the US, Russia, and Brazil, technically, all of them can produce everything they need, the fact that they choose not to is more economically and politically, not a technological or geographic limitation.

[Mhizlove]

You can also understand globalization much better if you see how the world has become deeply connected, not just togetherness or cooperation between countries. It do not only means partnership or trade it also do include how countries are being affected by ea h other even when there is no agreement between them. Okay for instance, if one big economy changes policy or gets crisis, it will affect others countries too through supply chain, inflation or prices which shows that everything has been linked before.

So you see globalization isn't all about togetherness or peace because even disagreements, traiffs war and competition is still among or part of it, because they all shows that all countries do interact inside one global economy or system.

[el kaka22]

We are definitely getting very close to it, and I think it is going to happen eventually. But right now, we are still lacking some nations. Russia did opened its borders to crypto a bit when the sanctions started after the Ukraine war, it's still not as wildly used as we hope for it, but it is getting more and more adoption each day.

China is the biggest one left that is not open about it, it's not fully illegal like it used to be, but it's very government controlled, which is what happens in a dictatorship of course, but that prevents full scale adoption.

[AmoreJaz]

Irrespective of what is currently happening nations can’t deal without others and of course there is needs for countries to exchange trade as we know money is what all is actually chasing making sure that they achieve their goal. What you must know is that the survival of every nation today depends on what they are doing or producing and in all, they must also need the next to survive provided that they are exporting and also importing other products from the neighbouring countries, so globalisation is as old as man origination.

As we put it this way, no country can survive alone. They can but they need to sacrifice a lot or they will be limited to what they have. Globalization needs every country to have at least similar goals just like what we have - the UN SDGs. If not, our survival is in question as our planet is going thru different changes.

[slapper]

Efficiency to survival has its own hidden bill. People like to think of it as resilience; otherwise, if they thought of it as regression, they would be changing the emotional temperature. A structural inflation floor is created when a nation reshoes manufacturing and/or copies supply chains for security reasons. But the ones who take in that don't include those who are negotiating trade deals. The expense is borne by the household.

Markets rarely decide these things alone. The numbers obey only after there is consensus. Post WWII architecture was built with the premise that an economically entangled country would not go to war with other countries. That was done purposefully, intentionally, when it became insufferable. That's a bet on the level of the civilization. And maybe it pays off. Some countries genuinely face security threats that justify the cost.

For most people, however, it is a matter of costs only increasing. Supply chains get redundant. With duplication, the capital flow to research is diverted, slowing innovation. Winners are defense contractors and domestic manufacturers supported by protected markets. All others adjust downward.

The repricing of interdependence may better characterize end of globalization. The cost of connection finally exceeded what governments were willing to tolerate politically, even though economically it was still the rational choice. Humans have been very good at walking away from rational decision making, especially for political reasons.

[Unknown Op]

Globalization surely used to be the other of the day, as countries aligned, formed trade alliances an depended on each other, before the last five years, we surely witnessed an era where globalization was prioritized; produce and trade where is cheaper.

What the world is witnessing now is quite different; there's emergence of tarrif wars, regional supply chains and most recently economic nationalism.

Countries no longer prioritize affordability or cheapness, their priorities have shifted to political agreements, security and security.

Surely survival is replacing efficiency, as a result, goods are more expensive, supply chains are duplicates, as we start to see globalization being reduced to nothing. This shift will surely be more evident for the next couple of years

In recent past years we have seen that different countries were trading with each other to save money and to make the economy  better but due to the recent global crisis that is happening in the world, it is true that depending on others can be risky and it can unstable your economy. So now certain nations are moving toward priortizing their relation with limited and trustworthy partners rather than going for the lowest prices.this will surely help different countries to be more resilient against any future crisis but it is making goods very expensive causing high inflation so globalisation is not going anywhere or disappearing but it is splitting up into different smaller and political blocks.

[Hamza2424]

Surely survival is replacing efficiency, as a result, goods are more expensive, supply chains are duplicates, as we start to see globalization being reduced to nothing. This shift will surely be more evident for the next couple of years

Bro, it might feel like things are changing, but we are that generation that has to face the serious impacts of older generations. Right now, we are supporting and giving our resources to AI data centers, and the word is they are using a lot of water, which could become a problem for the next generation. In the same way, we are a generation that is facing these things, not because of our ancestors, but because of older governments.

It is like a cycle bro. The tariff wars are no news,; this is like a cycle that occurs after a time, and I don't know what that timeframe actually is, but we are in it now haha sadly. So bear with it, and eventually he won't be the president anymore and we could live a good life again, but the tariffs will already be affecting our lives and will keep affecting us until we adjust to it. So yep the phase is near to its end, and we have to adjust with it as well.

[Curious T]

This is not true. Countries of the world are still involved in trade with each other. China is still among the top three countries that the US exports to the most, while the US is the country China exports to the most. The issue Trump was having is simply because the US buys more from China than it sells, because China has a bout 300 million dollars in surplus trade with the US. But the way to fix this was not by imposing tariffs, it was by backing his country to produce more and export more or produce more so they would need fewer goods from China.

Countries still focus on foreign trade. Not much has changed. In fact, countries are looking for ways to make it more affordable and accessible. This is why capitalism is good: it forces countries to compete because if they don't do it, someone else will, so it's best if they do it.