Through an essay by Keishi Saeki, this chapter examines how the global spread of the novel coronavirus exposed the contradictions of excessive post-Cold War globalism. It discusses dependence on China, financial instability, widening inequality, the fragility of the EU, and the weakening of public social foundations, calling for a shift from efficiency-driven competitive capitalism to stability-oriented public capitalism.

May 31, 2020
Fourth, in the midst of all this, China, ruled by the Communist Party, of all countries, became the winner of globalism, and the economies of various countries became dependent on China.
The following is from an essay by Keishi Saeki, professor emeritus of Kyoto University, published in today’s Sankei Shimbun under the title, “Toward a Shift to Public Capitalism.”
Toward the end of the period when I was traveling back and forth between Tokyo and Osaka on business, I first learned of him while reading Wedge on the Shinkansen.
I thought, this man is genuine.
I immediately introduced him in this column as well.
When I first learned what kind of person Susumu Nishibe was, I also immediately introduced him in this column.
While Mr. Nishibe was still alive, Saeki was also in the position of one of his finest interpreters.
I also watched the two of them appear together live on a BS Fuji program.
＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
Keishi Saeki, a thinker who has criticized globalism and a professor emeritus of Kyoto University, regards the worldwide spread of the novel coronavirus and its economic impact as the result of excessive globalism.
He seeks the post-corona image of society not in global competition, but in the direction of strengthening public social foundations.
We asked him to contribute this essay.
◇Infectious diseases are as old as human history, and even if we look only at the past one hundred years, our civilization has repeatedly been exposed to the threat of infectious diseases.
And this pandemic, the worldwide spread of the novel coronavirus, cannot be separated from post-Cold War globalism.
The reason this infectious disease spread so rapidly throughout the world and had such a great impact on the entire world economy is globalism.
At the same time, it became a major blow to globalism.
The irony of market competition.
The post-Cold War world promoted the borderless movement not only of goods, but also of capital, information, technology, and people, and sought economic growth through global market competition.
Neoliberalism and market-centered thinking advocated minimizing the role of the state, and by raising the banner of this policy, the United States sought to establish economic hegemony in the post-Cold War world.
Japan’s structural reform line, which began in the 1990s, was also under its strong influence.
But ironically, excessive global market competition brought about results completely different from what neoliberalism and market-centered thinking had assumed.
First, the global financial economy became extremely unstable and caused the Lehman Shock of 2008.
As a result, a return to Keynesianism began, in which governments support the economy through powerful fiscal and monetary policies.
Second, global competition creates income disparities and asset disparities, and destabilizes national economies.
Third, excessive global competition led not to the “withdrawal of the state,” but to state-led growth strategies, protectionist trade, and the like.
This is the national-interest-first approach represented by U.S. President Trump.
Fourth, in the midst of all this, China, ruled by the Communist Party, of all countries, became the winner of globalism, and the economies of various countries became dependent on China.
Fifth, the experiment of the EU, the European Union, which may be called regional globalism, has almost failed.
Sixth, as a result of excessive market competition, public social foundations such as medical care, welfare, education, and local communities have weakened in many countries.
Seventh, information and knowledge, which should originally be public assets, realized huge profits in the market, giving rise to the so-called GAFA problem, the problem of the four major American IT companies.
Society and politics have also come to be swayed by information on social networking services and the like.
And eighth, despite globalism and innovation, advanced countries have not been able to grow very much.
A bankrupt set of values.
Global market competition had already reached a point where it could no longer hold.
Then the corona shock occurred.
The corona crisis further exposed the problems brought about by this globalism and pushed them into a more serious dimension.
National-interest-first thinking will advance further, and the U.S.-China confrontation will become more serious.
Even democratic countries will strengthen the power of the state and government.
The EU will become increasingly fragile, and the movement of people, immigration, will become a burden on the economy.
Information on social networking services and the like will be subject to stronger government management because of emergencies.
Despite extreme fiscal and monetary policies and the scattering of support payments, economic growth cannot be expected.
This is not a challenge to globalism, but the consequence of excessive global competition.
Therefore, the value system of economic growth through rebuilding globalism has already collapsed.
The present corona crisis has made that fact manifest.
We now stand at a crossroads.
On one side, there is the idea that we should endure this shock and return once again to global competition through a V-shaped recovery.
On the other side, there is the idea that this should be made into an opportunity for a major social transformation.
I belong to the latter camp.
If there is to be an image of post-corona society, it must be one that strengthens “public social foundations” such as medical care, welfare, nursing care, education, local communities, disaster prevention, and human ties.
Rather than efficiency-first global competitive capitalism, it should be called stability-oriented national, public capitalism.
Saeki Keishi.
Graduated from the Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo, and completed the required coursework for the doctoral program at the Graduate School of Economics of the same university.
Professor emeritus of Kyoto University and specially appointed professor at the Kokoro Research Center of Kyoto University.
Age 70.
He discusses economics and conservatism from the standpoint of civilization theory.
He is the author of many books, including The Future of “Conservatism,” The Theory of the Subordinate State, and The Crimes of Economics.
He has received the Suntory Prize for Social Sciences and Humanities, the Seiron Grand Prize, and other awards.