But it also produces losers - those who pay, in every aspect of their lives, for the fortunes of others. Last year, as a Senate Committee heard submissions from around the nation, specifically in rural and regional areas, as part of an examination of the causes of unemployment and possible solutions. Nearly every submission pointed to globalisation as a primary cause of rural and regional decline, and there were many calls from people pleading to be remembered when treaties and trade deals were being signed. Most realised that international competition meant their markets were no longer guaranteed, and were seeking new ways of sustaining their communities in the wake of the demise of former industries. These are sentiments that have been echoed by the new Minister for Trade, Mark Vaile, but apparently, not shared by other senior members of the Federal Government.
Globalisation is powerful, and some have argued that it has rendered the nation-state redundant.
This argument has flowed from a misplaced fatalism - that globalisation is inevitable, that Governments are powerless to prevent it and must therefore embrace it as enthusiastically as possible. The argument allows its proponents to advocate such an embrace without having to provide justification. It is a basic tenet that political legitimacy for change is rooted in popular participation. Like people around the globe, Australians have watched markets for their goods disappear, investment vanish overseas to cheaper and more competitive labour markets, and seen familiar, home-grown brands gobbled up by overseas conglomerates. Today, national governments control less than one third of global investments, where as private business controls two thirds of the capital generated.