The liberal model of globalization 1.0 has taken a hit in recent years beset by claims of deglobalization and slowbalization. This paper argues that deglobalization claims may be a premature verdict and globalization 1.0 is being replaced by a geoeconomic model of globalization 2.0. Globalization 1.0 assumes that the United States-led neoliberal project would develop seamless connections between trading nations. I suggest that globalization 2.0 eschews the building of this modality of connection as discourses about risks shift to discourses of transnational threats.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jessie Poon (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: