Quotes about globalization by famous people. Inspiring pro and anti-globalization quotes from economics experts. Inspirational Pro and Anti-Globalization Quotes from Economic, Political and Business Experts

In the 21st century, globalization is an irreversible trend that is bringing with it levels of economic expansion, growth and accessibility unprecedented in human history. While the positive aspects of economic globalization may seem compelling, debates between professional and anti-globalization experts are intense, and from these debates emerge inspiring quotes that fuel further thinking about the risks and benefits of globalization.

The US retail industry has always seemed to embrace the idea of ​​globalization, as acquiring and transporting goods from different parts of the world has been a major motivation for history's most famous explorers. The F. W. Woolworth Company had retail stores in Canada in 1905. Chevrolet sold cars in Canada in 1915. Abercrombie & Fitch sold mahjong games imported from China in the 1920s. Retail expansion has been the leader and catalyst of economic globalization in modern business history.

Related: Old American Retail Companies Still in Business Today >>

Although the evolution of technology makes a global economy practical, logical and seemingly inevitable, an interdependent global economy is not a concept that everyone embraces wholeheartedly, nor is it a reality that is easily achieved. Professional and anti-globalization leaders from the fields of business, politics and economics will continue to define the appropriate boundaries of economic globalization, analyzing its positive and negative aspects and encapsulate their ideas in bite ideas that can be used and distributed in the form of quotation marks.

The following quotes explore, define and challenge economic globalization as it is today and as it may become in the future. Read and share these pro-anti-globalization quotes according to our own point of view, then click the links to get more quotable quotes on various business topics.

Inspirational Pro and Anti-Globalization Quotes from Economic, Political and Business Experts:

• “The generation did not have the opportunity, as now, to build a global economy that leaves no one behind. This is a great opportunity, but also a deep responsibility. "Former US President Bill Clinton
• “Our point of view is that economic isolationism is the wrong way to go. Vibrant, successful, growing economies that advance the interests of their citizens attract the global economy. to attract the global economy." - John W. Snow, former W.S. Secretary of the Treasury
• “Our global economy is out of control and contrary to the basic principles of a market economy.” - David Korten, economist and former Harvard Business School professor
• "We can't talk day after day about globalization, but at the same time we don't mean that... we need multilateral solutions." - Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Managing Director of the IMF
• "I find that due to modern technological evolution and our global economy and as a result of great population growth, our world has changed greatly: However, our perceptions have not evolved in the same way, we continue to cling to the old national demarcations and the old senses of "us" and "them"" . - Dalai Lama

• “Much of what the Tea Party candidates said about peace and the global economy during the 2010 election would earn its adherents a well-earned F in any freshman (or earth science) class.” - Eric Alterman, Author, Professor and Graduate Professor
• “The entire global economy is based on powering two percent of the world's population.” Bill Bryson, bestselling author
• “We have to remember that we are in a global economy. The purpose of fiscal stimulus is not just to keep our national economies active, but to help the global economy, and so it is critical that the measures in these packages do not avoid anything that discourages protectionism.” Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada
• “I think there are a lot of benefits in the global economy and global markets, but they are not enough because the markets don’t care about social needs.” - George Soros, Chairman of the Board of the Soros Foundation

• “We are moving towards a global economy. One way to approach is to pull the covers over your head. The other thing is: it might be harder - but this is the world I'm going to live in, and I might as well be good about it." - Phil Condit, former Chairman and CEO of Boeing
• “We have seen the entire global economy once completely in sync. The real truth is that the world is even more flattering than I thought. Our mortgage crisis is killing Deutsche Bank. Don't you still think the world is flat? " - Thomas Friedman, Pulitzer Prize-winning and bestselling author of The World is Flat
• “Lack of monetary discipline has become a hallmark of unfettered globalization. Central banks have failed to provide a stable framework for global financial markets and an increasingly asset-dependent global economy.” Stephen Roach, former Asia Chairman and Chief Economist at Morgan Stanley
• “Henry Ford was right. A thriving economy requires that workers can buy the products they produce. This is as true in the global economy as it is in the national economy.” - John J. Sweeney, former AFL-CIO President
• A successful economic development strategy must focus on increasing the skills of the region's workforce, reducing the costs of doing business, and providing the resources businesses need to compete and prosper in today's global economy." - Rod Blagojevich, former Governor of Illinois and Felon convict
• “To compete in the global economy, our students must continue their education beyond high school. To make this expectation a reality, we must provide students with the tools they need to succeed, including the opportunity to take the College Entrance Test.” - Jennifer Granholm, former Michigan governor, author and television personality
• “We must remake our country to prepare for the challenge we already face to maintain our position in the global economy. And that's the promise: America will have no national security without economic security." - John Kerry, Massachusetts Senator
• "But let no one doubt that the scale of the challenge Europe faces in this new global economy is enormous, and the practical pace of our collective action to meet these challenges has been too slow to date." - John Hutton, British politician
• “There are two globalizations... Elite globalization represents minorities. Elite globalization is about making money... People's globalization, democratic mass globalization are life values.” - Kevin Danaher, author and anti-globalization activist
• “Our private health insurance system, which fails to provide coverage to so many of our citizens, also contributes to double-digit health care inflation that makes America less competitive in the global economy.” - John Conyers, US Congressional Representative for Michigan
• “No jobs are safe in this global economy. High-speed Internet connections and low-cost, skilled labor overseas are an explosive combination.” - Bob Taft, former Governor of Ohio
• "Globalization has made the world increasingly interdependent, but international politics is still based on the sovereignty of states." George Soros
• "Rather than saying that globalization is a fact, that it is inevitable, we must also demonstrate that while the growing interdependence of the world economy is indeed a fact, it is uncontrollable." Peter Mandelson, Labor Party politician
• “This real window of opportunity to build a truly peaceful and interdependent world order will not remain open for too long. We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right serious crisis and nations will embrace the new world order." David Rockefeller
• “We have a global economy that is not structured around democratization and including people in decision-making. He works secretly." - Kevin Danaher
• “What is happening in this country? Trade unions oppose these trends. We must somehow insulate the healthy American economy from this global economy that seems to want to swallow up our standard of living." - James P. Hoffa, CEO of the Teamsters Union
• “In today's global economy, however, it is important to raise the level of excellence even higher. Today's students must be prepared to compete effectively on an international level." - Kenny Marchant, Congressional Representative from Texas
• “For globalization to work in America, it must work for working people. We must measure the success of our economy by the breadth of our middle class and the opportunity for the poorest child to fit into that middle class." - John J. SweeneyFarmer President AFL-CIO
  > “The global economy works about twenty percent of the world, about eighty percent does not.” - Kevin Danaher
• 
  “Not exclusively, but the bulk of our local economy needs to be covered by local currency, which is more efficient than global currencies that lose touch with reality in markets, shops and people's communities.” - David Korten
• 
  "The global economy is characterized not only by the free movement of goods and services, but, more importantly, by the free movement of ideas and capital." George Soros
• 
  “My guiding principle is that prosperity can be shared. We can create wealth together. The global economy is not a zero-sum game." - Julia Gillard, Prime Minister of Australia

More quoted quotes:

Pro and anti-competitive quotes

• Quotes from America's Most Notable Retail Founders
• Pro and Anti Growth of Quoted Quotes

My new website, which contains all the information on the risks of human extinction:
http://www.humanextinction.ru/

A collection of statements by famous people about global risks from the Lifeboat website.

The independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission was created by an act of Congress and President George W. Bush in late 2002. It was tasked with preparing a full and final report regarding all circumstances surrounding the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001, including the extent of preparedness for the attack and the nature of the immediate response to it. .

"The greatest danger of another catastrophic attack on the United States would be if the world's most dangerous terrorists acquired the world's most dangerous weapons."

Frank Abagnale was a master crime whose autobiography, Catch Me If You Can, was adapted into a film by Steven Spielberg starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hanks.

“It’s important to remember that technology breeds crime, it always has… and it always will.”

Jamal Ahmidan led the March 11 attacks in Spain, which killed or injured 2,000 people and resulted in a change of government in Spain, resulting in the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq.

“We change states, we destroy others with the help of Allah, and we even determine the future of the world economy. We do not accept being merely passive agents in this world."

Dale Amon writes on the Samizdata blog:

“We are in the middle of not only a war in Iraq, but a global war on the outcome of which our very lives depend. I'm too close to technology not to realize how much evil can be done by a small group of dedicated followers of the dark side.

Michael Anisimov was until recently the legal director at the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence. He is now our new Director of Fundraising for North America and a member of our Scientific Council.

“The emergence of nanotechnology will be marked by a mess of absolutely uncontrollable difficulties. Human ethics and intelligence are not enough to meet these challenges. Without new forms of intelligence, smarter people and kinder people to help us overcome these enormous difficulties, our continued survival cannot be assured.”

“If my million dollars can change the probability of ultimate catastrophe by, say, 0.0001%, then the expected benefit of that action compared to the expected benefit of promoting life extension is shocking. That is, this is the value of 0.0001% of the quadrillions of people, transhumans and posthumans, living full lives. I'll spare the reader the math and graphs of expected winnings - I'm sure you can imagine them. So why do people tend to invest more resources in prolonging life than in preventing risks? I think the reasons are:

They assume that the likelihood of any risk is extremely low. They believe their ability to influence the probability of risk is extremely small. They feel that positive PR for any futuristic goals will ultimately lead to greater risk awareness.
They feel rejected by society if they focus on 'doomsday scenarios' rather than the more traditional idea of ​​moving on with life."

“I can't stress this enough. If the ultimate catastrophe occurs, not only will the possibilities for significant life extension, advanced nanotechnology, enhanced intelligence and space settlement disappear, but absolutely everyone will be dead, once and for all. It will be terrible. Because we have so much to lose, it's worth worrying about existential threats, even if our estimates of the likelihood of such an event are extremely low.

Immortalists should not focus on funding programs to increase life expectancy. There must be projects to reduce existential threats. By definition, as soon as the likelihood of a global catastrophe is minimized, technologies to increase life expectancy will be created and applied. There are powerful economic and social incentives to move towards life extension, but very few in relation to risk management.
Existential threats give rise to the “slacker problem” - we always assume that someone else will do it. I argue that this is a dangerous strategy that should be abandoned in favor of the main objective of preventing such risks.

Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Prime Minister of Malaysia and Chairman of the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference.

“The whole world is increasingly worried. The frequency of terrorist attacks appears to be increasing.”

Scott Borg, Director and Chief Economist of the United States Cyber ​​Impact Advisory Council of the Department of Homeland Security and also a member of our Scientific Council:

"The biggest challenge I face is people's unrealistic belief that because a certain disaster has never happened before, it will never happen."

Nick Bostrom is a Templeton Foundation grantee, co-founder of the World Transhumanist Association and director of the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University.

“Based on the current pace of scientific and technological progress, there is a real chance that we will have molecular manufacturing and superhuman artificial intelligence within the first half of this century. This creates significant new opportunities and threats. In the worst-case scenario, intelligent life will go extinct."

“For example, if someone believes that a hundred-year ban on new technologies is the only way to avoid the nanotechnological end of the world, he should still be classified as a transhumanist because his opinion is not the result of general technophobia... but is the result of a rational analysis of the likely consequences of possible strategies.”

“It is probably much easier to create technology to make a destructive nanobot than technology to effectively protect against such attacks (global nanotechnological immune system, “active shield”)
“Our approach to existential risks cannot be based on trial and error. There is no opportunity to learn from mistakes. The reactive approach of seeing what happened, limiting the damage, and learning from the experience is not working. Rather, we must take a precautionary approach. This requires foresight to detect new types of risks and a willingness to take decisive preventive measures and pay their moral and economic costs.”

“The Fermi Paradox is a question that is raised by the fact that we do not observe any signs of extraterrestrial life. This tells us that it is not true that life arises on a large proportion of Earth-like planets and evolves to the point of advanced technologies that are used to colonize the Universe in ways that can be seen by our modern instruments. There must be (at least one) Big Filter here - an evolutionary step that is extremely unlikely - somewhere halfway between an Earth-like planet and an apparently space-colonizing civilization. And if this Great Filter is not in our past, we should be wary of it in the (near) future. It may be that almost every civilization that has developed a certain level of technology causes its own extinction."

British Telecommunications White Paper:

“From this perspective, it is clear that we are rapidly inventing new ways of self-destruction, and that the risk to humanity is increasing exponentially.”

As early as 2005, there will be "deliberate biotechnological self-destruction by a malicious biotech researcher" and "terrorism will grow beyond the capabilities of individual governments."

Joe Buff, bestselling author of Necks of Power, Tidal Rift, Depths of Collapse, Storm in the Deep, and Sound Deep. He is a regular columnist for military.com and winner of the 1999 and 2000 Naval Submarine League Literary Awards.

“Some crazy person being able to take over reprogrammable nanorobots originally created by normal experts for useful purposes is indeed a very frightening thought... I'm sure you know that bitter experience has shown that often people who commit suicide or revenge burnings, or other acts of cruelty, have no idea of ​​the wider and lasting consequences of their impulsive behavior. So yes, I am sure that some madman with access to technology, under the influence of a fleeting rush of irrational desire, can indeed trigger a gigantic change in the spirit of Catastrophe Theory, far beyond the expectations and understanding of this evil figure. Oh sorry!"

Warren Buffett, our 2002 Champion Award winner, is the second richest person in the world and is known as the "Oracle of Omaha" for his astute investments.

“Predicting rain does not matter, building an ark does.”

“Fear may decrease over time, but danger does not. The war on terrorism cannot be won."

“We're definitely going to have something like a big nuclear event in this country. This will happen. Whether this happens in 10 years, or in 10 minutes, or in 50 years... - it will be for sure.”

English philosopher Edmund Bruck:

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for the good man to do nothing.”

William Burrows is a co-founder of the Alliance to Save Civilization (ARC) and a member of our Scientific Council.

“The question to ask is, is the risk of space travel worth the benefits? The answer is undoubtedly yes, but not only for the reasons usually promoted by the space community: the need for research, the scientific result and the possibility of commercial use. The most compelling reason, and the most long-lasting, is the need to use space to protect the Earth and ensure the survival of humanity."

George Bush, US President:

“Our generation faces new and serious threats to freedom, the security of our people and civilization as a whole. We are faced with an aggressive force that glorifies death, that attacks the innocent and seeks to kill on a massive scale.”

“The greatest danger lies at the dangerous intersections of radicalism and technology.”

“Wishful thinking brings comfort, but not security.”

“I don’t think you can win (the war on terrorism).”

Charles Chafer, co-founder of Celestis, Inc.

“If we get a second foothold in the solar system within the next 100 years, we will be well along the way to ensuring the long-term survival of the human species.”

“Terrorism is a frightening threat and it is difficult to imagine how we will be able to find universal protection against it.”

“Someday in the 21st century, our self-deluded recklessness will collide with our growing technological power. One of the areas where this will happen will be the meeting point between nanotechnology, biotechnology and computer technology. What all three have in common is the ability to release self-replicating objects into the environment.”

“Nobody does anything until it's too late. We only put a traffic light at an intersection after a child has been crushed there.”

“They didn't understand what they were doing. I fear that this inscription will be carved on the grave of humanity."

DEBKAfile's war diary is included in the Library of Congress's Iraq War Online historical collection. This online news source provides in-depth coverage of terrorism, security measures, political analysis and espionage accounts and is available in English and Hebrew.

“While the Americans are focused on their war against militants in Iraq, and the Israelis are bogged down in the fight against Palestinian terrorists, al-Qaeda has drawn a circle of fire around them both.”

Retired General Wayne Downing served as US President George W. Bush's security adviser until July 8, 2002.

“One day the United States will be forced to declare martial law due to a devastating attack using weapons of mass destruction with tens of thousands of casualties.”

“The most depressing thing for me was the terrorists’ desire for chemical weapons, means of radiation contamination and their fascination with atomic weapons. They are literally obsessed with him."

Eric Dresler, founder of the Foresight Institute and founder of the nanotechnology movement.

Our institute's concerns about possible long-term abuses of nanotechnology have been confirmed and strengthened. Those who abuse technology to destroy for destructive purposes - from airplanes to anthrax - do exist and are unlikely to cease their activities before the emergence of full-fledged nanotechnology, with all its power to do good and evil."

“It's easy to say, 'Let the government or industry figure out how to prevent the misuse of nanotechnology,' but 9/11 and subsequent events showed the naivety of that view. (The current attempt to make airplanes safer by preventing cutting objects from being carried inside is laughable - you could break a pair of glass glasses and use the shrapnel instead. Authorities working on anthrax attacks were surprised that anthrax could leak from envelopes - although anyone who has ever- or licked at least one could make sure that the adhesive layer did not reach the edges of the envelope lapel.) With the possible exception of the military, the government is not particularly good at anticipating emergency incidents and planning strategies for their case - their initiatives are too political, and their time horizons are too short..."

“If extraterrestrial civilizations existed, and if even a small part of them behaved the way all life on Earth behaves, then they would spread throughout space.”

“By now, after hundreds of millions of years, even widely scattered civilizations would have spread far enough to meet each other and share all the space between them.”

“And an advanced civilization, expanding its habitat, will not, almost by definition, scatter energy and matter. However, we see such scattering in almost all directions, as far as we can see spiral galaxies: their spiral arms contain dusty clouds of ejected matter, illuminated by ejected starlight... The idea that humanity is alone in the visible universe matches what we see in the sky... Because of this, now, and perhaps always, we can plan our future without worrying about the restrictions imposed by other civilizations."

Robert Freitis was a research scientist at Zyvex LLC, the first molecular nanotechnology firm, and is the author of Nanomedicine, the first technical discussion book on the medical applications of nanotechnology and nanorobots. He was awarded the Lifeboat Foundation's Guardian Award in 2006 and is a member of our Scientific Council.

An immediate international moratorium on all experiments with artificial life carried out on non-biological material. In this context, "artificial life" is defined as autonomously foraging replicators, excluding purely biological objects (which are already subject to National Institutes of Health rules that are implicitly accepted throughout the world) and also excluding computer simulations, which are purely preparatory work and must continue . Alternative “inherently safe” replication strategies, such as a dispersed architecture, are already well known.”

Bill First, US Senate Majority Leader:

“Like everyone else, politicians tend to avoid looking at danger, hoping for the best and praying that disaster does not happen during their service, especially if they missed it. This is so natural for human nature that they often don’t even fight it.

But it is unlikely that we will be able to miss what appears to be coming soon - a wave of rampant and deadly epidemics, the severity of which will surpass anything you have previously worried about.
What awaits the world now is incomparable even with the most heartbreaking episodes from the Middle Ages and the great wars of the last century. No intelligence agency, no matter how astute, and no military department, no matter how powerful and dedicated, can guarantee that a few technicians of average ability, using affordable equipment costing several thousand dollars in a small and seemingly innocent environment, will not can organize a biological attack of the first order.

It is now possible to synthesize deadly pathogens from scratch, or to engineer and produce prions, which, if introduced quietly and early into the national food supply, will expose millions over time to a terrible and often fatal disease. This new world...

So what should we do?

I propose an unprecedented attempt - a "21st Century Manhattan Project" - not to create new destructive weapons, but to protect against the devastation caused by infectious diseases and biological weapons ... "

“It's a daring way of looking at things. But this is one of those things that you only need to do once. And this is one of those things that cries out to be done - and which, if not done, will condemn us forever in the eyes of history.

By devoting some of our vast resources to protecting our very lives, the lives of our children, and the life of our civilization, we will gain much beyond survival - not least the satisfaction that we have done the right thing.

Rudolph Giuliani was mayor of New York City when the 9/11 attacks occurred.

“The most dangerous situation is when you are moving towards danger, but are not aware of it.”

Alan Goldstein is a professor at Alfred University in biomaterials, molecular cell biology and biomedical materials engineering, and a member of our Scientific Council.

“...thanks to nanobiotechnology, we have never been closer to the Gray Goo scenario.”

Michael Griffin, NASA Administrator.

“But our goal is not just scientific research... It is also about expanding human habitable space beyond Earth into the solar system as we move forward through time. In the long term, single-planet species will not survive. We have abundant evidence of this."

Julian Hight, President of SpamCop.net, a leading spam control agency.

“I foresee the face of the Earth being bombed—and no one will care.”

Stephen Hawking, the famous cosmologist who discovered that black holes are not completely black, but emit radiation and eventually evaporate and disappear.

“Long term, I'm more concerned about biology. Nuclear weapons require large maintenance buildings, but genetic engineering can be done in a small laboratory. It is impossible to regulate every laboratory on Earth. The danger is that by accident or on purpose we will create a virus that will destroy us.”

“I don't think the human race will survive the next thousand years unless we expand into space. Too many disasters can destroy life on one planet.”

Robert Heinlein was an influential and controversial science fiction author. The English language has absorbed several words from his fiction, including "glok", which means "to understand so deeply that the observer becomes part of what is observed":

“For the human race, the Earth is too small and fragile a basket to hold all the eggs.”

Houston Space Society:

"Perhaps the most immediate threat to human survival on Earth is the ability of madness, personal or group, to render large areas of the earth's surface uninhabitable."

“We now have such advanced weapons that the destruction of the earth’s biosphere is a real possibility in the near future. To protect against such an event, we must strive to make humanity a multi-planetary species."

Dr. Barbara Marx Hubbard is an author, public speaker, social inventor, and President of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution. She is also a member of our Scientific Council.

“If we consider the Earth as a closed system, there will always be a shortage of everything. Borders are closed, the natural environment is destroyed, nature is being destroyed by human consumption, and billions are starving. The future looks really bleak and there really are no long-term positive solutions, no motivation to make the sacrifices and do the hard work needed now unless we view our species as evolving from a purely terrestrial level to a near-Earth or space species level.

US Navy Admiral David Jeremiah (retired), former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

“Somewhere in the back of my mind I still have the image of five smart kids from Somalia or some other undeveloped country who discovered an opportunity to change the world. Turn the world upside down. The military applications of molecular manufacturing have even greater potential to change the world than nuclear weapons.

Bill Joy, the "Edison of the Internet" is the inventor of the vi text editor for the Unix system, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, and Lifeboat Foundatio Guardian Award winner:

“Hope is a meager defense.”

“We are thrown into this new age without a plan, without control, without brakes.”

“But many other people who are aware of these dangers still seem surprisingly reticent. If pressed, they throw out the excuse of 'this is nothing new' - as if awareness of what might happen is a sufficient response."

“I think it is no exaggeration to say that we are at a tipping point in the further development of extreme evil, an evil whose capabilities extend far beyond what weapons of mass destruction have given nation states, due to the unexpected and terrifying rise of extremist individuals.”

“The immediate consequence of the Faustian bargain of obtaining the great power of nanotechnology is that we face the gravest risk—the risk that we may destroy the biosphere on which all life depends.”

"...if our own destruction is a probable or at least a possible outcome of our technological development, should we not proceed with the greatest caution?"

Michio Kaku is the co-creator of string theory:

“Of all the generations of people who have walked the surface of the Earth—for 100,000 years since we first left Africa—the generation now living is the most important.”

“The generation alive today, the generation of people you see when you look around you, for the first time in history, is the generation that controls the destiny of the entire planet.”

"Terrorism of mass destruction in the near future is unlikely to be generated even by Al Qaeda, and even less likely by nation states - but rather by small groups of highly motivated fanatics or even individuals."

“And I'm especially not convinced that when technology puts more and more power in the hands of smaller and smaller groups of individuals, it will not ultimately lead to destruction of some kind. Imagine a rowboat with ten people of different religious beliefs, each with his finger on the trigger of a personal nuclear device. They try to swim forward and create a small society. How many times will this scenario end with a big bang? More often than not it won’t end, I suspect.”

Ed Koch, former mayor of New York:

"I am convinced that the United States has faltered in its fight against terrorism and we are losing our will to win."

Charles Krauthammer is a multi-newspaper columnist who appears in the Washington Post and a number of other publications, as well as a commentator on various TV programs. He graduated from Harvard Medical School in 1975 and was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1987.

“The resurrection of the 1918 influenza virus and the publication of its structure opened the door to hell. Anyone, including the bad guys, can create one now. It is much easier for Osama Bin Laden and his friends to acquire biological knowledge than nuclear knowledge. And if you can't make this thing yourself, you can simply order DNA sequences from commercial laboratories around the world, which will make them and send them to you upon request.

And if the bad guys can't make the flu themselves, they can try to steal it. It is not simple. But the need to steal him from a secure facility may be no less. The journal Nature, which published the complete genetic sequence of the influenza virus, cites bacteriologist Richard Ebright as warning that there is a significant risk "bordering on imminent" of the virus being accidentally released into the human population or stolen by a disgruntled, defective or extremist laboratory worker."

Why try to steal orphan warheads from Russia? A bomb can only destroy one city. A properly engineered influenza virus is a potential destroyer of civilization.

We may have just given it to our enemies.

Have a good day".

Ray Kurtzweil wrote a prophetic book in 1960, The Age of Intelligent Machines, where he correctly predicted advances in the field of AI. He was also the first developer of a universal optical letter recognition system, the first machine to read text aloud to the blind, the first flat-panel CCD scanner, and the first commercial speech recognition system with a large dictionary. He is a member of the U.S. Army Scientific Advisory Panel and a member of our Scientific Council.

“...the average college bioengineering lab will soon have (and more sophisticated labs already have) enough tools and knowledge to create harmful pathogens more dangerous than nuclear weapons.”

“I am advocating a $1 billion program to accelerate the development of technologies to combat biological viruses.

“We now have an existential threat in the form of the possibility of bioengineered harmful biological viruses. Amid all the talk about bioterrorism, the possibility of a bioengineered bioterrorism agent has received inadequate attention. The tools and knowledge required to create a bioengineered pathogen are much more widespread than the tools and knowledge needed to create an atomic weapon, although it can be much more destructive. I am on the Army Military Advisory Panel (a five-member bureau that advises the Army on science and technology issues), and the Army is the organization responsible for the nation's defense against bioterrorism. Without revealing anything secret, I can say that there is a keen awareness of these dangers, but no funding or national priority to deal with them properly.

“The Department of Health and Human Services' decision to publish the complete genome of the 1918 influenza virus online in the GenBank database is extremely dangerous and immediate steps must be taken to remove this data.

"The gray goo is clearly a force—a destructive force—and if such an existential threat were to materialize, it would result in catastrophic losses... Although the survival-threatening nanotechnological danger is not yet real, denial is not an acceptable strategy."

“A self-replicating pathogen, either biological or nanotechnological, could destroy our civilization within days or weeks.”

“We can imagine a more insidious possibility. In a two-phase attack, nanobots first spread throughout the biomass over several weeks, but use a small fraction of carbon atoms, say one in a thousand trillion (10**15). At such a low concentration level, the nanobots will be as invisible as possible. Then, at the “optimal” point in time, the second phase will begin, when nanobots will quickly spread locally, destroying biomass. For each nanobot seed to reproduce itself a thousand trillion times means about 50 binary replications, or about 90 minutes."

“Remember that biological evolution is measured in millions and billions of years. So if there are other civilizations somewhere, they will be separated from each other in terms of development by huge periods of time. SETI's assumption is that there must be billions of alien intelligences (among all the galaxies), so there must be millions that are far ahead of us in their technological advancement. Yet it only takes a few hundred years at most from the discovery of computing by these civilizations to expand in all directions at least at the speed of light.

Given this, how is it possible that we do not notice them? The conclusion I have come to is that most likely (though not certain) there are no such civilizations.”

"Our failure to detect intelligent aliens is not how rarely it happens, but how often they destroy themselves after reaching the stage of technological civilization."

“It is surprising how little has been done to create artificial biospheres located on Earth. If one hundredth of the effort that went into creating nuclear weapons were spent on creating artificial biospheres, the long future of humanity could be virtually guaranteed."

Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London, said the following after Al Qaeda attacked Spain.

“It would be a miracle if, given all the terrorist resources directed against us, the terrorists did not strike, and with some willing to sacrifice their own lives, it seems incredible that sooner or later they will not reach London.”

Richard Lugar is a senator from Indiana. He is also chairman of the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

“Even if we achieve outstanding success in building democracy in the world, stabilizing broken states and spreading economic opportunity widely, we will not be safe from the actions of small groups of disaffected people who acquire weapons of mass destruction.

Kelvin Lynn, Director of the Materials Research Center at Washington State University. Dr. Lynn developed an "antimatter trap" that the US Air Force believes is the basis for an antimatter bomb that would be 1,000 times more powerful than hydrogen.

"I think we should leave this planet because I'm afraid we're going to destroy it."

“It seems reasonable to locate the initial laboratories in remote locations and equip each with a powerful and permanent thermonuclear warhead, designed to explode if nanotechnology gets out of control. To protect the warhead itself from being dismantled before an accident message is sent or received, there must be redundant detonation procedures. The bomb can be placed, for example, in a vacuum, which, if disrupted, triggers detonation. Another option is to suspend the bomb in a liquid whose volume must remain constant, under pressure which must remain constant, within an electromagnetic field which must be maintained. The wisest thing would be to combine all such measures - and violation of any of the conditions will lead to detonation. Manual detonation should also be allowed."

MIT Technology Review.

“There is growing scientific consensus that biotechnology—especially technology for synthesizing ever-larger sequences of DNA—has reached the point where terrorists and rogue states can engineer dangerous new pathogens.

Peggy Noonan is a guest editor at The Wall Street Journal and the author of The Heart, the Cross and the Flag.

"People have never designed a weapon that they didn't use."

“We are fighting not against an organized state monolith, but against tens, hundreds and thousands of state and non-state actors - madmen with atomic bombs, freelance bioterrorists, Islamofascists, independent but united terrorist groups. The temperature of our world is very high.”

David Obey, US House of Representatives, (D-WI).

“Obviously, if the ports were attacked, hundreds of thousands of people would die, and there was definitely a huge risk to the economy.”

Tara O'Toole, physician and director of the Center for Biosecurity at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

“It's true that a flu pandemic is important and we're not doing enough, but I don't think a flu pandemic can destroy the United States. But a series of moderate bacteriological attacks can.”

Ian Person, Chief Futurist at BT (British Telecommunications) and Advisor to our Scientific Council.

“In 1900, there were only a few ways to destroy our planet: a comet, an epidemic, etc. But over the past few decades, a host of new capabilities have accumulated: nuclear, biological, environmental, and many future threats related to computers.

“We have managed to drive ourselves into a situation where the statistical chance of destruction within a year will soon exceed 1 percent. This means that within the next hundred years the human race will be exterminated in some way."

"Based on this and the rate of human development, I believe the human race could become extinct within the next 30 or 40 years."

Chris Phoenix is ​​a co-founder of the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, Director of Research there, and a member of our Scientific Council.

“There is nothing to hope for if we enter the future unprepared.”

James Pinkerton is a fellow at the New America Foundation, a columnist for Newsday and TechCentralStation.com, and a contributor to Fox News Channel. He is the author of What the Future Holds: The End of Big Government and a New Paradigm Ahead and is a member of our Scientific Council.

“But the continued advancement of technology has brought a new dilemma: increasingly, each individual or small group can wield enormous destructive power. If you draw a graph from the first knife to the invention of gunpowder and straight to the atomic bomb, you can see a steeply increasing curve."

“Thanks to computers, this upward curve is likely to remain steep for a long time, as the power of the artificial brain doubles and doubles again. Technological progress will spread across the entire spectrum of human activity, but if history is any guide, the greatest “progress” will come in the form of more lethal weapons, including nano-weapons. Thus, the “briefcase nuclear” we fear today may be replaced by future mass murderers who fit inside a thimble—or a single strand of DNA.”

Sir Martin Rees is Royal Society Professor at the University of Cambridge and Astronomer Royal of the United Kingdom. He won the Peter Grubber Foundation Cosmology Prize in 2001 and our Advocate Award in 2004, and has published numerous scientific articles and books, including Our Final Hour. A Scientist's Warning: How Terror, Mistakes, and Natural Disasters Threaten Humanity's Future in This Century—On Earth and Beyond."

“Science is advancing faster than ever before, and on a broader front... But there is a dark side: new science can have unintended consequences; it empowers individuals to commit acts of mega-terror; even innocent mistakes can be catastrophic. "The 'downside' of 21st century technology may be heavier and more difficult to control than the threat of nuclear annihilation that we have faced for decades."

“If there are millions of fingers on the trigger of the doomsday machine, then the irrational act of one person, or even human error, can destroy us all.

“Biotechnology is advancing rapidly, and by 2020 there will be thousands—even millions—of people capable of causing a horrendous biological disaster. I am concerned not only with organized terrorist groups, but with individual eccentrics with the mentality of those people who are now designing computer viruses.
Even if all countries actively regulate potentially dangerous technologies, the success of the use of force seems to me to be as small as with drug laws."

“We can ask about any innovation whether its potential is so scary that we should ban its promotion, or at least impose some restrictions. For example, nanotechnology is likely to transform medicine, computers, controls, and other specialized fields, but it may advance to the stage where a replicator becomes possible. Then there would be the same risk that now exists with biotechnology - a catastrophic escape (or that the technique could be used as a suicide weapon)."

“It takes international agreement to slow down an entire field of research. If just one country imposes restrictions, the most energetic researchers and enterprising companies will simply move to another country - something similar is already happening in stem cell research. And even if all governments agreed to stop research in some area of ​​science, the chances of an effective ban are slim.”

“Even if all the scientific academics in the world agreed that certain specific lines of research have troubling downsides, and all countries united and introduced a formal ban, how effectively could it be implemented? An international ban could definitely slow down certain areas of research, even if they might not be stopped completely. When experiments are prohibited on ethical grounds, enforcement with 99 percent, or even 90 percent, effectiveness is much better than no prohibition at all. But when experiments are extremely risky, a ban must have an effectiveness close to 100 percent to be sufficiently reliable: even a single escape of a lethal virus would be a catastrophic event, as would a nanotech disaster.”

“Despite all legal restrictions, millions of people use harmful drugs; thousands are spreading them. Given the failure to control drug smuggling or murder, it is unrealistic to expect that once the genie is out of the bottle, we will ever be completely safe from bioterrorism and bio-bugs: there will always be a risk that cannot be eradicated without action. which are in themselves unacceptable, such as, for example, a pervasive worldwide system of control.”

“It is not unimaginable that physics can also be dangerous. Some experiments are designed to create conditions more extreme than have ever occurred in nature. Nobody now knows exactly what will happen. In reality, there is no point in doing any experiments if their outcome can be completely predicted in advance. Some theorists have come to the conclusion that certain kinds of experiments could apparently set in motion a divergent process that would destroy not only us, but the entire Earth."

“More ominously, there may be a critical obstacle at our current evolutionary stage as intelligent life begins to develop technology. If so, the future development of life depends on whether people survive this phase."

“Suppose that we must make a fateful decision that will determine either the possibility that our species will become extinct in the near future, or that it will live for an almost infinitely long time. For example, it might be a choice whether to send the first community away from Earth, which, once established, would spawn so many others that at least one would surely survive.

“Even several groups of pioneers living independently of the Earth will be protection from the most terrible catastrophe - the abolition of the future of intelligent life due to the extinction of all humanity.

The always existing small risk of a global catastrophe with a “natural” cause will be many times offset by the risks created by the technologies of the 21st century. Humanity will remain vulnerable as long as it remains earthbound. Isn't it worth insuring not only against natural catastrophes, but also against the likely much larger (and definitely growing) risk of human-caused catastrophes? When self-sustaining communities exist beyond the Earth, our species will be invulnerable to even the worst global catastrophes.”

“When the critical threshold for self-sustaining life in space is passed, then the long-term future of life will be secure, regardless of any risks on Earth. Will this happen before the collapse of our technological civilization, or will it remain a missed opportunity? Will self-sustaining space colonies arise before a catastrophe destroys the possibility of this kind of enterprise, perhaps closing it forever? We live, perhaps, at a decisive moment for the entire Cosmos, not just for the Earth.”

“What will happen here on Earth in this century may certainly be a bifurcation point between an almost infinity filled with increasingly complex and subtle life forms, and an infinity filled only with dead matter.”

John Reid, Home Secretary of the United Kingdom.

“We are probably in the longest period of continued serious threat since World War II.

“Although I am confident that the security services and police will give 100% effort and 100% dedication, I am not confident of 100% success.”

“Our security services and state apparatus are the most necessary condition for defeating terrorism, but they are not sufficient to do it on their own. Our common security can only be ensured by the joint efforts of the entire community.”

Adeo Ressi, Founding Partner, Sophos Partners, LLC

“There is no other way to guarantee human survival except to leave this planet.”

Glenn Reynolds is a contributing editor at Tech Central Station, where his special feature on technology and public policy, "Reynold's Winding," appears once a week.
He is also the creator of the popular blog InstaPundit and the author of Army of Davids: How Markets and Technology Empower Ordinary People to Conquer Big Media, Big Government, and Other Goliaths.

“Stephen Hawking says that humanity will not survive the next thousand years unless it colonizes space. I think Hawking is an optimist."

“Most people – and worst of all politicians – have short time horizons. Disasters are events that have not yet happened until the moment they happen. Planning for them is ignored or overlooked - often by the same people who criticize after the fact that there was not enough planning."

“In the long term, by which I mean the next century, not the next millennium, some catastrophe will be on the verge of being preventable: a terrible biological agent only needs to break out once to destroy humanity, no matter how many times others are like it.” agents were retained in the past.

In the short term, prevention and protective strategies make sense. But such strategies provide only temporary security. As Robert Heinlein once said, the Earth is too fragile a basket to hold all your eggs. We need variety, to create many baskets. Colonies on the Moon, on Mars, in orbit, possibly on asteroids and beyond..."

Condoleezza Rice, American Secretary of State.

“The phenomenon of weak and failing states is not new, but the danger they now pose has no parallel. When people, goods and information cross the globe as quickly as they do today, transnational threats such as disease or terrorism can cause damage comparable to the actions of nation-state armies. Weak and failing states serve as global pathways that enable the spread of pandemics, the movement of criminals and terrorists, and the spread of the most dangerous weapons."

Tom Ridge, first director of the US Homeland Security Administration.

“The main theme is that this is not an opportunity, but a matter of time.”

Donald Rumsfeld, US Secretary of Defense.

"It is inevitable that terrorists will acquire weapons of mass destruction and use them against us."

Carl Sagan, American astronomer, planetary scientist, biologist and popularizer of science and space exploration.

“All civilizations either spread into space or die out.”

“Perhaps advanced civilizations do not use radio, or radar, or microwaves. Advanced technology may be invoked as an explanation for the lack of extraterrestrial radio signals. But it seems unlikely that their technology will leave a mark anywhere on the electromagnetic spectrum. We can be compared to the natives who remain blissfully unaware of the storm of radio and TV signals boiling in the ether around them.

The aliens probably use advanced means of transmitting information that we cannot detect. What kind of means these are, by definition, is unknown, but they must be extremely exotic. We have not detected intelligent signals in the form of laser pulses, gamma rays, cosmic rays or even neutrinos. Therefore, the aliens must be using some kind of system that we cannot even imagine.

This reasoning, while compelling, will not survive contact with Occam's razor - or in this case, Occam's machete. The message is too simple - there are no signals. Attributing the absence of signals to the presence of aliens is an example of a kind of magic. Unfortunately, the iron laws of logic require that we reject such wishful thinking in favor of a much simpler explanation for these data: no signals, no aliens.

Heaven is deafening in its silence; The moon is eloquent in its emptiness; the aliens are undeniable in their absence. There are no inhabitants of other worlds here. They were never here. They never came here. They don't come because they don't exist. We are alone".

“The current moment is a trace in the waters of cosmic history. We stand on the threshold of a new millennium. Behind us yawn the abysses of the primeval past, when the universe was a dead and deserted place; The wide, sun-drenched plains of living space stretch out before us. In the next few galactic seconds, the fate of the universe will be decided. Life - the ultimate experiment - will either spread out into space and consume clouds of stars in a firestorm of children, trees and butterfly wings; or Life will fall, fail and go down the drain, leaving the Universe forever wrapped in the funeral clothes of an impenetrable void, devoid of hope.

Oscillating around the axis of fate, our stunned species of people stands here. The future of the universe depends on what we do next. If we raise the sacred fire and step into the Universe as carriers of Life, this universe will be born. If we carry green fire from star to star, igniting the fire of vitality, we can trigger the metamorphosis of the Universe. Thanks to us, the barren dust of millions of billions of worlds will bloom with the pulsating magic of life forms. Thanks to us, surfaces covered with radioactive waste will miraculously transform: slag will become soil, grass will grow, flowers will bloom and forests will grow in previously sterile places. The ice, as hard as steel, will melt and flow in drops into the ponds where starfish, sea anemones and mussels will live - the entire frozen universe will thaw and transmute from blatant desolation to a blooming paradise. To transform dust into life is the true alchemy of God.

If we reject the enormous challenge presented to us; If we turn our backs on the living universe and abandon our cosmic destiny, we will commit a crime of unimaginable proportions. Only humanity has the power to bring about fundamental changes in the universe. Our failure will lead to unimaginable consequences. Perhaps this is the first and only chance for the Universe to wake up from its long night and begin to live. We are the guardians of this delicate spark of life. To allow it to flutter and go out due to ignorance, neglect or lack of imagination is too terrible to be considered in the abstract.”

Robert Sauler - "the dean of Canadian science fiction" - has advised the Canadian federal government's Department of Justice on what Canadian laws should be regarding biotechnology, stem cell research, cloning and the protection of personal genetic information. He is a member of our Scientific Council.

“There is a long-standing problem in astronomy called the Fermi Paradox, after the physicist Enrico Fermi who proposed it in 1950. If the universe is supposed to be teeming with life, then where are all the aliens? This question is even more offensive these days: SETI, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence using radio telescopes, has been a complete failure in finding any signs of alien life forms. Why?

One frightening possibility is that, as the ability to cause damage on a massive scale becomes increasingly available to individuals, soon one rebel or lunatic will be able to destroy the entire world. It is possible that countless extraterrestrial civilizations were exterminated by lone terrorists who were allowed to work alone in private laboratories.”

NATO Secretary General General Jaap de Hoop Schaeffer:

“Terrorism exists everywhere. There is a struggle everywhere, in Istanbul, and in New York, and in Uzbekistan, and in Mombasa, and in Yemen, and so on.

Brad Sherman, US Congressional Representatives' Board. (Democrat - California)

“This technology (nanotechnology) is absolutely as explosive as nuclear weapons.”

StrategyPage offers insightful short summaries of military news online. They provide inside information about how and why events happen.

“The Department of Homeland Security was originally designed to find all vulnerabilities to terrorism in the United States. Month after month the list grew. It quickly became clear that there would never be enough resources to defend against all possible threats.”

Ted Turner, American media prophet, philanthropist and statesman.

“When people are too slow to react to danger, one option is to make it more visible. Seeing the danger is the first step to reducing the risk.”

“Hurricane Katrina brought home the staggering devastation that natural and man-made disasters can cause. Meanwhile, July's attacks on the London Underground reminded us that terrorists can still strike our major cities. Now picture it all together: terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction bringing Katrina-scale chaos and destruction to the heart of an American city.”

“The risk of terrorist attacks on the scale of Katrina using Russian weapons is too great to tolerate any delay in necessary action. Congress must act and enable us to prepare to face what President Bush called "the greatest threat to humanity."

Niel de Grasse Tizon is the Chairman of the Council of the Planetary Society.

“If humans ever became extinct due to a catastrophic impact, it would be the greatest tragedy in the history of the universe. Not because we lack the brain power to protect ourselves, but because we lack the foresight. The dominant species that will replace us on a post-apocalyptic Earth might wonder, looking at our fossilized skeletons in the Natural History Museum, why big-headed Homo sapiens had no better foresight than the notorious pea-brained dinosaurs.

American Academy of Sciences. By law passed by Congress in 1863, the academy is required to advise the federal government on scientific and technological matters.

“A small group of people with specialized knowledge and access to laboratories could easily and cheaply produce an arsenal of lethal biological weapons that could seriously threaten the US population. Moreover, they can produce such weapons using commercially available equipment - that is, equipment that can also be used to make chemicals, drugs, food or beer - and therefore not arouse suspicion."

Vernor Vinge, mathematician, computer scientist and prophetic science fiction author who predicted the Internet in 1981 and the Singularity in 1993.

“If the Singularity cannot be prevented or contained, how bad can the post-human era be? Well... very bad. The physical extermination of the human race is one possibility."

"Epitaph: Stupid people who never left the Earth."

Ken Wier is the creator of Rationallink.org and a member of our Scientific Council.

“For intellectual entertainment, you can imagine the hundreds of millions of years it took for intelligence to emerge on Earth. And then, with the advent of agriculture and the growth of leisure time and science, there arose the everlasting struggle for power - for the dominance of one man over others - which seems to be an inevitable consequence of rationality. The time window for the development of science, which can either destroy the world or establish communication with other worlds, is a minute - indistinguishably small - compared to the time required for the emergence of intelligence from the dust of creation. This time window probably closes the possibilities of communication and cooperation between worlds forever.

White House, US National Security Council.

“We are less threatened by fleets and armies than by catastrophic technology in the hands of a few bitter people.”

White House staffer, in an interview with the Washington Post.

“They are seeking to destroy the White House. I really started asking myself if I really wanted to keep getting up every morning and going to work on this block.”

“There are two realities of the beginning of the 21st century: the possibility of a new unexpected terrorist attack similar to September 11, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. If these two circumstances combine in the hands of terrorists or a rogue state, the United States could be attacked and tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of people could be killed. In addition, the President and his team found that protecting and blocking the area as a whole was impossible. Even with heightened levels of security and warnings about terrorist threats, the country is only partially safe.”

Jonathan Zitter, co-founder of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School, is a member of the Internet Regulation Board at the University of Oxford.

“[The system functions so well only because of] the leniency of the virus authors themselves. With just one or two extra lines of code, viruses can wipe out infected computers' hard drives or silently insert false data into spreadsheets and documents. Take the ten coolest viruses and add a dash of poison to them, and most of the world will wake up on Tuesday morning without access to the Internet - or will find much less of it, if they can help it.”

Globalization has already taken place. It's too late to cluck and wave your fists. 9

Globalization is the modern way of building the Tower of Babel. Alex Sneg 10

Global problems have become so complicated that even teenagers are not taking on solutions. Robert Orben 10

What is GLOBALIZATION? This is when, on the Irish holiday of St. Patrick's Day in San Francisco, a Mexican policeman pushes a crowd of drunken Chinese out of an Italian restaurant for fighting with Russian tourists. 11

The main slogan of globalization is “Oligarchs of all countries, unite!” 10

Globalization has become so widespread that everything that happens in one part of the world affects another part. 10

The process of globalization has already changed the world so much that it is simply impossible to enter the water that flowed under the bridge a quarter of a century ago. Grigory Yavlinsky 10

Globalization is the opportunity to feel at home everywhere and at the same time as if abroad. It’s good to travel under the wing of globalization, provided, of course, that you don’t have enough euros and you don’t have a special depth of perception. I travel around the world, but I see nothing, because there is nothing to see. All countries are like mine. Either in the forehead or on the forehead. Everyone dresses the same, as if from an incubator, and goes to the same stores. The only positive result of such an equalization: the whole world is at home, and since leaving is the same as staying, then why not leave? Beigbeder Frederic 10

Economic globalization is a huge force. Among other things, it is also extremely profitable. Thatcher 10

I am a stubborn opponent of globalization. Each country should strive to preserve its uniqueness. Only under this condition can world culture fully develop and be diverse. Kim Ki-duk 10

What is GLOBALIZATION? This is when the English princess and her Egyptian boyfriend travel
in a German car with a Danish engine, driven by a Belgian driver drunk on Scotch whiskey, and taxis into a pole in a French tunnel. Car being chased
Italian paparazzi, and an American doctor unsuccessfully tries to save the injured princess with the help of Brazilian medicines. 10

If you are a person of mental labor, then you compete with the whole world 10

The larger the market, the easier it is to steal About globalization 10

The god of globalization is an accountant. Evgeniy Smotritsky 10

The paradox of globalization is that the more visible its manifestations are, the less visible its true organizers are. 10

Currently, we see that globalization has brought us to the point where problems from the economic sphere have spread to others: education, food, family crisis and others. 10

Humanity has a thousand goals - and like a thousand-headed dragon it cannot fly. 10

Globalization is the result of the actions of powerful states, especially the United States, which force trade and other agreements down the throats of the people of the world so that it is easier for corporations and the rich to dominate the economies of various countries without having any obligations to their people. Noam Chomsky 10

Given the current interdependence, when people and countries depend on each other, nature and weather, the conclusion seems obvious that the main secret of business success is its commitment to benefit people. 10

Most of the world's population is called unprofitable by globalizers. 10

“I would like to make a prediction: by 2035 there will be no poor countries left in the world. (Well, at least the poor in the modern sense). The population of all countries of the world will reach average income. Countries will learn from their more fortunate neighbors how to use innovation to improve living standards. New vaccines, new technologies in agriculture, and the digital revolution will reach them. The human capital of these countries will increase through education, and they will be able to attract investment.” Bill Gates 10

The three pillars of globalism are “free trade”, “capitalism” and “democracy”. 11

To be a supporter or opponent of globalism, upon closer examination, means to be for or against a multitude of such disparate phenomena - financial, technical, cultural, social, judicial, military, political - that the choice becomes almost meaningless. Margaret Thatcher 10

We all live in the same world with a globalized economy, but we don’t feel global compassion for each other. Milo Rau 10

Globalization was invented by birds that have been flying around the world for centuries. Axel Hacke 10

Globalization is a mousetrap, integration is free cheese. 10

What is globalization? When answering this question, even knowledgeable people make a variety of assumptions. If we collect statements about globalization that are heard most often, the overall picture will come out contradictory and far from the truth. We are dealing with a very complex social process, and, realizing it, we inevitably fall under the power of prejudice. Which ones should be discarded immediately, which ones should be rethought, and how?

Myth 1. Globalization and globalism are the same thing

The term globalization appeared in social theories in the 60s of the twentieth century, but gained popularity only in the mid-80s, when economic theories began to actively use it. The growing popularity of “globalization” is associated, first of all, with the strengthening of the role of the WTO (World Trade Organization) and the World Bank.

The year after which everyone started talking about globalization can be considered 1991, the year of the collapse of the Soviet Union. It was this event that entailed the disappearance of the value opposition between the socialist and capitalist pictures of the world that existed throughout the twentieth century. This disappearance led to the unification of political, economic and legal norms across the globe, which in turn greatly expanded the range of options for the Western traveler.

Thus a new world emerged, not divided into warring camps. At the same time, political and economic strategies for the development of this united world emerged. One of these strategies was globalism.

Globalism- is the popularization of a certain globalization project, namely a project that promotes neoliberal values. The three pillars of globalism are “free trade”, “capitalism” and “democracy”. As you can see, globalism promotes Westernized values. Basically, this propaganda is carried out by transnational corporations, as well as, to one degree or another, by such supranational institutions as the WTO, the World Trade Bank, and the UN.

Myth 2. Those whom the media call anti-globalists are against globalization

One of the most popular misconceptions about globalization is the idea that marches against WTO and G8 policies around the world are anti-globalization marches. In fact, most so-called anti-globalists are alter-globalists, or altermondialists who oppose the policies of globalism, namely against the domination of the world by neoliberal values.

Alter-globalists advocate globalization, understood as an alternative to globalism. First of all, this alternative involves paying attention to such global values ​​as human rights, humanity’s global responsibility for the environment, global popularization of the cultural and national diversity of humanity, and critical consumption. The main slogan of the alter-globalists: Another world is possible (Another world is possible).

Alterglobalism, one of the main theorists of which can be called Noama Chomsky, believes that it is globalism that opposes globalization, since it does not protect the interests of all humanity, but the interests of specific national or transnational corporations. According to alter-globalists, globalism protects the interests of certain, privileged groups. As a result, less protected members of humanity suffer, such as, for example, citizens of countries with underdeveloped economies. Allowing citizens of all societies of the world to express themselves economically and politically is the main goal of the alter-globalists.

Basically, the alter-globalization movement is concentrated around ATTAS and the World Social Forum (created as a counterweight to the World Trade Forum). The work of the World Social Forum is related to the development and proposal of strategies for alternative globalization. ATTAC is one of the largest alter-globalist political associations. This association was created on June 3, 1998 in France and stands for Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens.

Myth 3. Anti-globalism doesn’t really exist

In addition to alter-globalism, there is also anti-globalism. Anti-globalists in economics and politics are often called protectionists and nationalists.

Protectionists include supporters of a certain economic policy aimed against the development of trade between states in order to protect the national market. Such a policy exists, for example, in the USA, China and Belarus. Protectionism is in opposition to free trade policies, believing that all trade should be regulated by quotas and taxes in order to protect national interests.

We can say that protectionism arose at the same time as the United States of America and initially aimed to protect the economy of the young state from external economic expansion. The policy of protectionism dominated the American economy until the 50s - 70s of the 20th century, that is, before the beginning of the era of free trade.

However, in some areas of the US economy, the US still maintains a policy of protectionism. The most famous examples are quotas on Japanese cars of the 80s of the 20th century, as well as unofficial quotas on goods from Europe.

The policy of protectionism has also gained particular popularity in Belarus, which was expressed, for example, in the slogan “Let’s support domestic producers,” taxes on foreign products, or in the rotation of music on the radio. So, we can confidently say that we live in an anti-globalist society.

Nationalists, of course, form an opposition to globalization, since globalization contributes to a serious transformation of such a social construct as the nation. This is associated with the formation and development of supranational institutions, in which the interests of a particular nation are taken into account, but are subject to global principles, such as human rights and democratic principles.

After the Second World War, the nationalist ambitions of individual states were brought under control in order to prevent possible conflicts and establish peace throughout the world. As a result, today a number of states have to sacrifice their geopolitical and national interests for the sake of global politics. In those states that rely only on national traditions, anti-globalist sentiments are gaining popularity. Thus, a national renaissance at the social and political levels can be found today in Russia, where national and geopolitical interests are placed above global ones.

Myth 4. Globalization leads to the destruction of the local

The term globalization initially appears in social theories and is associated with the fact that a number of social processes acquired a global character in the second half of the 20th century. One of the first global social processes was the world wars, after which the first supranational institution arose — UN. In the 90s of the same century, one of the social theorists, namely Roland Roberts, the term was proposed glocalization . He noted that modern social processes are not only unifying under the influence of globalization, but also forming a new persistent interest of Western societies in other, local cultures.

Western societies in the second half of the twentieth century began to rediscover other societies and cultures, which contributed to the development and popularization of tourism (another “herald” of globalization). As a result, there was a localization of the global. National color has become a hot commodity on the global market. Thus, a popular illustration of globalization is an African aborigine, for example, a Masaya warrior, who drinks the Coca-Cola brand drink. However, it is worth noting that this native is always dressed in a national costume, which strikingly distinguishes him from another African, for example, a Zulu warrior, who also drinks the Coca-Cola brand drink. The whole world consumes Coca-Cola, but each nation does it with its own national flavor. Thus, we see not so much an illustration of globalization as an illustration of glocalization.

Myth 5. The United States is the citadel of globalism

This myth is primarily due to the fact that neoliberalism emerged and was popularized in the United States in the mid-20th century. However, as mentioned earlier, globalism and globalization, as a whole series of diverse global phenomena, emerged only in the early 90s. Therefore, it is not entirely appropriate to associate globalism with the United States. Thus, the economic policy of the United States is characterized, on the one hand, by a pronounced propaganda of neoliberal values ​​throughout the world, but, on the other hand, it is directly related to the tradition of protectionism. This allows a number of researchers to assume that US foreign policy only creates the illusion that the center of globalism is the United States of America. In reality, such a center does not exist.

As famous critics of globalism note in their book “Empire” Negri And Hardt, emerging on the basis of Westernized values ​​and neoliberal ideology, the “Empire of Globalism” does not have a specific geographical center (unlike the metropolises of imperialism), but exercises its power through supranational institutions.

Myth 6. Globalization is a “unipolar” phenomenon

This myth arose in the 90s and is associated with a phenomenon that Francis Fukuyama means "the end of history." During the Cold War, there really was a bipolar system, which included, on the one hand, the capitalist community and, on the other, the socialist one. The collapse of the Soviet Union was perceived by many as a victory for the capitalist world. However, if we turn to the social processes that took place in the last decade of the 20th century, we can find that in addition to the collapse of the Soviet Union, several other significant global phenomena should be highlighted.

Firstly, the transformation of the European Community into the European Union led to the birth of a new political entity or, in the language of the Cold War, to the formation of a “new pole”.

Secondly, in the late nineties, Russia experienced a renaissance of nationalism, declaring itself as another “pole”.

Thirdly, we can talk about significant rates of economic growth in the Middle East region, as well as in the Southeast Asian region. In both of these regions, globalization trends have acquired a specific character, expressed, for example, in the combination of the national way of life and religious values ​​with capitalist values. Moreover, it was religious values ​​that turned out to be dominant.

Fourthly, China's economic policy has undergone some liberalization, and new markets have opened up for Chinese goods around the world, which was also a consequence of globalization

Thus, despite the fact that globalism continues to be one of the dominant trends within globalization, it cannot be said that it leads to the formation of a “unipolar” world and destroys alternative scenarios of globalization.

Myth 7. Globalization can be resisted

Today, globalization is an established social phenomenon, the interpretation of which reveals certain positive and negative aspects. So, on the one hand, globalization makes it possible to solve the economic, political, environmental and cultural difficulties of a certain region by attracting resources from the world community. In addition, a consequence of globalization is the attention of the world community to global problems, such as global warming and environmental pollution. Globalization is creating new social practices, such as the Internet, global tourism, world forums, and global social networks.

On the other side, globalization is a legacy of the imperialist policies of Western society. This leads to the division of the world into former metropolises and former colonies, which, in turn, provokes migration from less prosperous and popular regions to more prosperous and popular ones. A negative consequence of globalization can also be called globalism, which promotes the universal nature of neoliberal values, which leads to the suppression of alternative economic and political worldviews.

Over the past twenty years, globalization has become one of the key social processes that cannot be resisted, but which can be given different directions. This is clearly demonstrated by supporters of an ethical rethinking of globalization, who propose to concentrate the attention of the world community not on strengthening the market and ideas of abstract democracy, but on solving more specific problems, such as global warming, universal respect for human rights, including workers’ rights, ending wars and subordination of the interests of transnational corporations to the interests of society. Globalization liberates, opening up the whole world to people. But this discovery should be taken responsibly. ...taken from

Scientists...must be able to take a universal, global position - above the selfish interests of “their” state... “their” social system and its ideology - socialism or capitalism - it doesn’t matter.

“Investing in electronic infrastructure and education is key to ensuring the future competitiveness of each country’s economy”

Economic history is... a chronicle of state regulation methods that failed due to... ignoring the laws of economic science.

The social sphere, which plays an increasingly important role in the life of mankind, cannot develop outside the state, but at the same time, the structures of the state are completely unsuitable for it.

Equidistance in Russia's foreign policy and adherence to its national interests is the optimal path for the foreign policy of the Russian state.

I swear, tirelessly, day and night, all my life to build Venezuelan socialism, a new political system, a new social system, a new economic system.

We, historians, are the squires of our statehood. We are obliged to promote the establishment of the idea of ​​statehood and the emergence and improvement of a civil, organized society.

We chose the democratic path not under anyone's pressure. We understand that without the democratization of society, the large economic projects we envisage cannot be successful. This path is our strategic choice.

It is impossible to create a legal state without first having an independent citizen: social order is primary and before any political programs.

Oblivion, or rather historical error, is one of the main factors in the creation of a nation, and therefore the progress of historical research often poses a danger to the nationality.

Politics is divided into two parts: religious politics and political politics. Religious politics believes that the past should rule over the present. And the politics to which we are accustomed are trying to create our tomorrow.

Totalitarian systems strive to limit the number and diversity of human associations, create superstructures and control them administratively.

...Freedom of divorce does not mean the “disintegration” of family ties, but, on the contrary, strengthening them on the only possible and sustainable democratic foundations in a civilized society.

And if the low level of morality in commercial matters is a consequence of the cultural level of the country, then this applies not only to the inhabitants of wild “Muscovy”.

The goal as such is a function thanks to which a person seems to orient himself in the chaos of the world, in the chaos of his own existence. This is an illusion of understanding natural and social existence.