Expectations Of And Response To Globalisation In The 21st Century

Brexit and Donald Trump's triumph in the US presidential election brought 2016 to an unexpected and reflective close. Supporters claimed that unrestricted trade and immigration were harmful to local interests. How much local a community needs to maintain and how much global it should go is now a pressing question. This 21st century skepticism differs from the last decade of the 20th when globalisation was seen as a driver for economic growth and the globalists have an upper hand in the discussion. This essay aims to explore the difference between expectations of and response to globalisation in 21st and 20th Century, mostly within the past 25 years. I will draw examples and insights from Hong Kong’s experience.
Globalisation refers to the multilayered

Civil society were awakened to question the narratives of the 20th Century economic globalisation. In the 21st Century, not only economic benefits and materialistic gains were sought after but “universal values” of democracy, equality, justice and compassion. The 2004 Tsunami drew outpour of worldwide humanitarian concerns and donations. Climate change is an issue that gives justification to globalisation characterised by shared responsibility. After a protracted negotiation, nations finally agreed to sign the Paris Agreement in 2015.
Players in a globalised world are not limited to institutions and organisations such as governments, corporation and social organisation. The 21st Century saw a change in the construction of rhetorics of globalisation due to the proliferation of the Internet. When the World Wide Web was invented, it was seen more as a tool for economic gains. With the development of social media in the 2010s, the Internet played an important role in shuffling power- relations in the global communication and culture. The 20th Century globalisation narrative was mostly dominated by governments and multinational corporations, creating a homogeneity in the globalised culture. Generation X children worldwide grew up eating McDonald’s, buying PlayStation, using the same products by international brands. With the start of an era of platformisation with Web 2.0, the stretching and blurring of national boundaries was

The homogeneity brought about by economic globalisation is responded to by anti-globalisation and a wave of localisation and re-nationalisation in different states. The Brexit referendum and the election of Trump supported by white-dominated Americans show people’s urge to rediscover national identity and rebuild national boundaries. “Universalising and particularising tendencies” (Robertson, 1995) contest with one another and the tension of globalisation and anti-globalisation intensifies. In the 1990s, Hong Kong brands itself as “Asia’s World City”, presenting a globalised and diverse East-meet-West culture, and the gateway to China. The solidarity to one’s home country wavers when political and socio-economical conditions change. In 2008, China hosted its first Olympics and most Hong Kongers felt a sense of pride to be Chinese. After the Olympics, China’s political censorship against what is “foreign” tightened. The tension between Hong Kong and China arose. In the 2010s, Hong Kong saw a wave of localism as citizens sought to find their cultural identities. Many denounce their identities as a Chinese and identify themselves with the British or American nationality they are entitled to, or as Hong Kongers” but not “Chinese”. Local identity or global identity have become citizens’ defence against national identity. Hong Kong’s case exemplifies