Global Political Economy in Disarray: Pre- & Post-COVID-19 - Essay Sample

Introduction

The global economy came to a near standstill in 2020 when the epic Corona Virus spread across most nations of the world. Other than turning to political interventions and relations to salvage the epidemic, the world at the time witnessed expansive political disagreements and conflicts revolving around COVID-19 as well as other global political issues. In particular, the global political economy was in disarray before COVID-19, and the state of affairs was worsened during and post COVID-19. The following discussion explains why the economy was in shambles, and details the reasons based on extensive nationalism and the BREXIT move orchestrated by Great Britain. The basis of the discussion revolves around Marxist’s philosophies and the dispositions of neoliberalism as widely acclaimed by politicians of the time, and how these theories and activities helped to shape the global economy as it is today.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Brexit

After announcing her intention to leave the European Union, The United Kingdom only took ten months to effect this proclamation, and the official BREXIT happened on Jan. 31, 2020 (De Spiegelaere, 2020). That was very rapid for a significant geopolitical move of enormous repercussions and extremity to the international community. Similarly, as with any structural change, the consequential convulsions can be at any rate as significant as the headliner. Arranging a different economic alliance in under a year was, at that point, goal-oriented and nationalistic.

COVID-19 presented another reason for deferring top of what was at that point an overwhelming political errand. Talks were deferred as the mediators themselves were wiped out or that the policymakers chose to concentrate on battling the infection. Even before the Corona Virus invasion, the European Union had unravelled its money related markets from its long-term reliance on London. This realignment implied a centralization around how much capital markets mix to expect a revamped economy (Bagneris, 2018). At long last, the monetary disturbances of COVID-19 and the going with geographic vulnerability cast a shadow over everything. At the time, most researchers expected future flare-ups after the ebb, and these were profoundly problematic to the degree they covered with the finish of the Brexit progress period.

For those firms that desired to keep doing business in the United Kingdom in the wake of losing the European Union identification, the UK additionally set up a brief consents system to apply after the general change time frame closes (Luo, 2020). On the EU side, precautionary measures were additionally set up. In the years between the choice and the UKs takeoff, budgetary firms made the necessary arrangements to prepare for a hard Brexit, should one happen. Brexit ended up being to a greater extent of a test for those specialist cooperations that are not money related, yet whose administrations are firmly connected to budgetary items.

Marxism

It is the intricacy of the class and political arrangements around Brexit that represented a test to political examinations of the time, including a Marxist political investigation (Ahmed & Fahey, 2019). Indeed, because they exist outside of ordinary gathering political arrangements, they can frequently create complex partnerships and fortuitous events of intrigue. Furthermore, it is never a straightforward undertaking to outline interests onto types of political awareness or ideological group affiliations.

Since the Marxism model of governance was followed, the political realm initially begun by spreading out the principal class arrangement in the Brexit banter. It presently settled past any genuine uncertainty, albeit like much else in the Brexit negotiations that this predisposition did not stop Brexit. However, as much as most international firms did not support Britain’s move to exit the European Union, Britain still initiated the move and became an independent economic state (Bloom et al., 2019). As the cutoff time for leaving the EU drew near, a large number of these organizations initiated primary and direct interests to the political foundation and the more extensive populace asking either a deserting of Brexit or the gentlest of delicate Brexits.

Yet, this political stance did not imply that the entrepreneur class is altogether joined behind a ‘Remain’ position. So the industrialist class was isolated between its significant worldwide aggregates. The methodological point which this reality epitomized was a significant social and economic class awareness that was consistently lopsided. A financially homogenous class could hold a wide range of ideological positions, so class awareness could never be diminished to the social and economic classifications. To some degree, this separation reflected diverse social conditions influencing various segments of a solitary class in various manners.

Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism is the belief system created by individuals to represent a lot of free-showcase thoughts, as well as an engaged controlling mentality that is intentionally applied the world over (Slobodian, 2020). It regards rivalry as humankind’s characterizing trademark, and clusters people as either consumers or producers. By so doing, individuals are sorted out by the forces inherent in the market. The market, it claims, sorts people into a particular order of capitalists and socialists. Any endeavour by governmental issues to intercede disturbs the disclosure of this special request.

In the pre-COVID-19 era, most nations of the world had forged alliances to allow the free trade of goods and services amongst citizens of their countries. Though trade deals were still highly restricted on the international convention of fair trade practices, countries such as the United States of America and Great Britain had already felt the hit of such arrangements and was already planning to deviate. The Corona Virus came to acclimatize their intentions, and most capitalist nations took up the chance to curtail international trade.

An Unhealthy Nationalism

Nationalism is the aspect of favouritism to one’s own country concerning comparison to other nations of the world (Saad-Filho, 2019). Before and during the time of COVID-19, China’s test to US authority was at that point fortifying on numerous fronts even before the Covid-19 emergency emitted. The pandemic quickened this move. For US-unified popular governments that worth open administration, social equality, and free discourse, this is a stressing prospect.

The worldwide effect of the coronavirus pandemic marked the most noteworthy change in the world. The equalization of the political and monetary force moved definitively, and a great many people, in many nations, life has never been entirely the same again. Significant worldwide changes occurred at the time, and people and their countries have never been the same. For innumerable people and families, typical life was overturned in inconceivable manners.

A few investigators see the justification for hopefulness, for instance, in useful natural impacts in Northern Italy and China. Nations heretofore in conflict, for example, Iran and the UAE, are collaborating, at any rate incidentally. In the Philippines, the emergency provoked a truce with Communist dissidents. Worldwide reliance and the significance of group, multilateral methodologies have been strikingly underscored. The pattern towards unified, tyrant rule apparent in nations, for example, India, Brazil, and Turkey, and epitomized by China and Russia, has matched with the ascent of conservative patriot populist governments and gatherings in Europe. Some are currently following China’s lead in endeavouring to weaponize the infection for political distraught.

Masrxism and Nationalism

The new patriotism that supported the Chinese Dream worked contrary to what would be expected of Marxism. The world was confronting a fiasco, and most nations chose to do so singularly. Indeed, even in the more developed nations, where there was a propelled social insurance framework, the circumstances of COVID-19 pushed their resources to the limit (Hanafi, 2020). Be that as it may, emerging nations were confronted with extreme circumstances of inconceivable extents.

The effects of this pandemic hit hard the developing and the under-developed nations of the world. The interviewee recalled that the United States of America pulled out funding for the World Health Organization, and this greatly hurt the less fortunate nations as they are most dependent on global aids to out-live calamities of such magnitude as COVID-19. The COVID-19 pandemic brought into sharp focus the fundamental monetary emergency which had been fermenting for quite a while. Organizations failed, and a considerable number of labourers lost their positions.

Nationalism and Neoliberalism

Numerous examinations see neoliberalism as the greatest victim of the novel Corona Virus epidemic of 2019. COVID-19 offered an ascend to the destruction of open marketization and open administrations. Too bad, neoliberalism is in a difficult situation by and by, maybe in critical condition. The interviewee attributes the fall of multilateralism nation-centeredness of the global countries. Free-market capitalism was dwindling even before this pandemic, and the global health emergency worsened the situation. Most nations looked internally unto themselves to carry through this scourge.

Also, internally executed national controls initialized countries to fend for themselves. The demise of neoliberalism has been articulated previously, not least in the wake of the 2007-08 financial crisis (Fraser, 2019). The coronavirus offered an opening to improve the world, not least by fixing many years of neo-liberalization. The epidemic offered crucial callings in social insurance and instruction on the gratefulness they merit. The worldwide political economy before the flare-up of the epidemic was characterized by the ascent of worldwide capitalism and nationalism.

Reasons Why China’s Duality is a Source of Both Its Promise and Its Limits

Economic nationalism is essential to a country in increasing the benefits or gains at the expense of other countries. It unites people and creates a sense of pride and identity. However, it may lead to conflicts with other countries as it infringes on their rights. Neo liberalization, on the other hand, promotes free market trade and privatization, thereby enhancing healthy competition in the industrial sectors both locally and internationally. China’s contradiction in being an industrial superpower in the world and at the same time falling into the category of a developing country is attributed to the country’s economic approach of nationalism and neo-liberalism. Even though the state initiated the reforms to shift to the neo-liberal economic approach and is being integrated into the market on a global scale, the Chinese government still reserved rights to control its economy, which creates the issue of “problematized China”.

Government Control

The duality nature of the Chinese economy provides an opportunity for the government to control the dimension of its economy. The control includes the implementation of measures and regulations while offering a platform for the growth of the private sector. The economic reforms in China saw the country embrace neo-liberalization to expand and grow the economy from the traditional economic nationalism practiced in the country for centuries. The approach gained relevance in the 1970s as a framework to help guide economic development and orientation (So & Chu, 2012). Because of this change, there have been magnificent changes in the social and economic gains. However, the use of both sy...