Globalized and loving it

excerpts from the book can be read here

The AGE

by Michael Duffy

24 September 2005

Free markets and unfettered migration are the path to happiness, says the upbeat poster boy of the right. Johan Norberg is soon to visit Australia.

MOST defenders of globalisation are middle-aged men, their natural habitat the international conference and the office or ivory tower.

Johan Norberg is different. Aged 32, the Swedish author has shoulder-length hair and in winter wears a beret and long scarf. He prefers to talk about the moral importance of free trade or his visit to a Nike factory in Vietnam than trade theory and statistics.

He is on his way to Australia and on October 11 will give the annual John Bonython lecture in Sydney for the Centre for Independent Studies, a right-wing think tank.

Norberg is head of political ideas at Timbro, a free market think tank in Stockholm. He is a breath of fresh air for globalisation's cause, because of a certain flamboyance, the breadth of his concerns and his moral focus, things more typically found in activists of the left. His website talks of his tastes in music, alcohol and books.

He believes free markets promote happiness and, posing a challenge to many on the right, that there ought to be no restrictions on immigration: having globalised the flow of money, goods and ideas, we should do the same for people.

Norberg started out as an anarchist. Early political activities included hiding refugees the government wanted to deport and running an illegal early-morning bar to persuade the Stockholm authorities to extend licensing laws beyond midnight. It worked, and he describes his time as a barman as "my greatest political success to date".

He became a free market liberal when he learned that free trade had lifted Sweden out of poverty in the 19th century. Indeed, it saved the lives of his ancestors. Looking at today's widespread opposition to globalisation, Norberg wondered why poor countries now should be deprived of the opportunity Sweden had back then, and in 2001 published In Defence of Global Capitalism.

"I found that those countries that have globalised recently have seen a faster reduction in poverty than has ever been seen before," Norberg says. "But that wasn't the story we were seeing in the media, which was that free trade was making things worse."

He points to the fact that in recent decades globalisation has reduced the number of people living in abject poverty by half.

"That's 400 million people, mainly in Asian countries such as China and India, who for decades were stuck in the deepest misery." In just one generation, the average income in developing countries has doubled.

So why aren't Western opponents of globalisation more impressed by these figures? One reason is a lack of sufficient information to provide a sense of proportion. For example, the "anti-globos" often refer to the undoubted fact that people working in Western factories in the Third World are paid a lot less than Westerners would be for the same work.

"But they ignore another fact, that these workers are getting far more than their neighbours earn or than they themselves used to earn from primitive agriculture. Western anti-globo activists tend to exaggerate the attractions of such activity," Norberg says drily.

"When I talked to workers at Nike factories in Vietnam, on the basis of anonymity, their major complaint was that the company wasn't expanding, so their relatives could come in from the fields and work there too."

Norberg thinks it is time the anti-globos faced the implications of their position.

"A lot of young, well-educated people fortunate enough to be born in countries full of opportunity, like Sweden, sit there and deprive poor countries of opportunities," he says. "They say they shouldn't industrialise or be involved with foreign companies. I find this a very paternalistic mentality, from people who've never experienced poverty. The strange thing is that it has come to be seen as the moral standpoint. But it's giving people freedom and opportunity that is moral."

The problem is that most young public intellectuals are on the left, because bright sparks on the right tend to go into business and do things rather than read books and engage in public debate. So, at least as far as the young are concerned, the debate over globalisation has taken place with one side largely missing.

In Sweden, Norberg has thrown himself into the discussion at every opportunity and is encouraged by the results. The anti-globos have not embraced his position but they have abandoned the primitive protectionism of five years ago, and realise that if they are going to continue to oppose globalisation, they have to come up with an alternative way of relieving poverty. It is a major shift that has not really happened yet in Australia.

It is interesting that Norberg comes out of Sweden, which for decades has been used by the left in Australia as proof that the welfare state can be combined with economic vitality. When I put this to Norberg he laughs and says the truth is the opposite. "We were a very free market country for the century up to 1970, when we were the fourth richest in the world," he says. "That's when our welfare state boomed, and since then we've dropped to the 14th most wealthy in the OECD. In net terms, our private sector hasn't created one new job since 1970."

Norberg's position on immigration distinguishes him from many other liberals: "If people were allowed to cross borders at will, they would take their ideas and their labour and skills with them. This is all part of free trade, and it's a paradox that many liberals don't see this."

He points to the second half of the 19th century, when large numbers of poor people in Europe emigrated to the New World.

"This benefited them, the countries they were leaving, and those they went to," he says. He advocates something similar now, but on a far larger scale. "At the moment there is a problem.

The right supports one part of globalisation — the free movement of capital and goods — while the left tends to support another part — the free movement of people. I think we're missing the fact that this is all part of the same process, of globalisation."

He believes that immigration is already so extensive it would be unwise to halt it. Pointing out that there are 15 million Muslims in Europe, he noted in a 2003 article: "If we close the borders, if we alienate this substantial minority, we risk creating resentment between ethnic and religious groups, and only the fundamentalists would gain." But the free movement of people must occur in a liberal context: "It is time for our liberal societies to stop apologising, to get back our self-confidence and state that tolerance and freedom is our way, and those who are out to destroy that deserve no toleration.

The idea that we shouldn't impose our values (on immigrants) is bizarre. Of course we should. We should force everybody to accept every other human being as a free and autonomous individual with the same rights as himself. That is the law of a liberal, open society, and that is what has created the most creative and humane societies in world history. Everybody who wants to enjoy that society must conform to it."

Norberg's enthusiasm for capitalism has recently taken him into a new area, happiness studies. After reviewing the growing body of research, he says prosperity does increase happiness, to a point.

People in wealthy countries such as Australia are usually much happier than those in poorer ones. But we reached a happiness plateau some time ago, which raises the question whether this is as good as it gets, or should we, as some on the left are suggesting, change our way of life in pursuit of more happiness.

Norberg says it would be unwise to abandon the work ethic, because once we have enough money to satisfy our basic needs, such as food and health, what makes us happy is not the money but activities we engage in to get it. Human beings like solving problems and planning and hoping for the future, and work and careers enable us to do this. Of course not all jobs provide these satisfactions, but more do today than ever before.

"I think," says Norberg, "modern working life gives us much more of this than the old jobs in agriculture and manufacturing." He even points to research that suggests work makes people happier than spending time with their families.

The implications of all this for government policy are interesting, to say the least. Norberg suggests evolution has made humans thrive on challenges. So when government expands its reach beyond providing the basic necessities of life, it threatens happiness.

"If government becomes too paternalistic," he argues, "it deprives us of the need to be responsible for ourselves. Then two things happen: we don't get those challenges that seem to make us happier.

"And after a while we might even lose our capacity to make choices, which in terms of happiness is the worst thing that can happen to a person."

MILESTONES JOHAN NORBERG

BORN
■ 1973 in Stockholm.

EDUCATED
■ 1992-99: Studies philosophy, literature, political science and history of ideas at Stockholm University.

■1999: MA with a major in the history of ideas.

BOOKS
■ In Defence of Global Capitalism, 2001.

IDEAS
■ Anti-globalisation is immoral.
■ Migration should be unlimited.
■ Free markets make us happy.

JOB
■ Head of political ideas at the free-market think tank Timbro in Stockholm.