I also just read a BBC article[1] that includes an interview with Zuck regarding this piece, and I can't help but think "they still don't get it." There are valid concerns regarding globalism that have gone largely ignored by (usually liberal) politicians. Those who raise issues like manufacturing jobs moving abroad[2] or violence from a sudden influx of refugees[3][4] have been labeled racist, bigoted, and ignorant. Connecting the world's population and facilitating the sharing of information and perspectives worldwide is laudable, but in a democracy you can't simply ignore that many people believe a move towards globalization and specifically opening national borders to foreign goods and people is not a decision that should be so cavalier.
As much as this sounds as a defence of people who want to build walls, I have to agree with it to some degree. I don't agree with the "violence from a sudden influx of refugees" claim, but here's an interesting anecdote on the issue.
When NAFTA was originally signed in 1994, with the intention of opening borders to big businesses, there were some unfortunate side effects.
A lot of Mexican farmers used to operate in smaller scales. Many worked on communal lands that grew food in smaller scale.
Now, fast forward to NAFTA. Part of the deal phased out tariffs that were protecting and helping these small farmers keep in place. With the market open, American corn started flooding Mexico, bringing many of these millions of small farmers out of business or severely hurting their economic prospects.
What was left for them to do? Mexico didn't have a supply of alternative jobs for all these people, so illegal migration to the United States picked up. Lots of illegal immigrants didn't move to the US because things are just "better" there; they were willing to leave their home land, their families, cross a desert, risk not only decoration but their lives and move into an unknown country that speaks another language because they were desperate. They didn't have a choice, since they lost their land and source of income. It was, and still is, a big risk and sacrifice.
That's largely why we saw that 20 year hump in Mexicans coming illegally into the United States (Mexican migration to the US has been falling these last few years though).
It's interesting, because now the US wants to close their borders. Effectively the consequence of this development is that big food corporations greatly benefited from the open borders, but the average person did not.
This is not black and white, about opening borders always, or having nothing go through. Globalization and open borders needs to be to the interest of the people, and it's not always good. Building physical walls is incredibly stupid and childish, but there do need to be some hurdles in place so the big fish doesn't eat the small, specifically, so the big corporation doesn't destroy local economies all of a sudden.
When NAFTA was originally signed in 1994, with the intention of opening borders to big businesses, there were some unfortunate side effects.
A lot of Mexican farmers used to operate in smaller scales. Many worked on communal lands that grew food in smaller scale.
Now, fast forward to NAFTA. Part of the deal phased out tariffs that were protecting and helping these small farmers keep in place. With the market open, American corn started flooding Mexico, bringing many of these millions of small farmers out of business or severely hurting their economic prospects.
What was left for them to do? Mexico didn't have a supply of alternative jobs for all these people, so illegal migration to the United States picked up. Lots of illegal immigrants didn't move to the US because things are just "better" there; they were willing to leave their home land, their families, cross a desert, risk not only decoration but their lives and move into an unknown country that speaks another language because they were desperate. They didn't have a choice, since they lost their land and source of income. It was, and still is, a big risk and sacrifice.
That's largely why we saw that 20 year hump in Mexicans coming illegally into the United States (Mexican migration to the US has been falling these last few years though).
It's interesting, because now the US wants to close their borders. Effectively the consequence of this development is that big food corporations greatly benefited from the open borders, but the average person did not.
This is not black and white, about opening borders always, or having nothing go through. Globalization and open borders needs to be to the interest of the people, and it's not always good. Building physical walls is incredibly stupid and childish, but there do need to be some hurdles in place so the big fish doesn't eat the small, specifically, so the big corporation doesn't destroy local economies all of a sudden.
A few interesting reads.
http://www.npr.org/2013/12/26/257255787/wave-of-illegal-immi...
http://www.politicalresearch.org/2014/10/11/globalization-an...