Liberalism has been a dominant force in the structuring of the 21st century. The philosophy is founded on ideas of interstate harmony, yielding many economic, social and political merits. The presence of harmony amongst sovereign states has resulted in a lattice of interdependent states, alongside globalization. Both outcomes are evident today in the notion of “Commercial Liberalism” that can be traced back to the 19th century. The survival of Singapore, for instance, is dependent upon this theory. Having a key geographical advantage, Singapore plays the role of a port in the world’s fluid transportation of goods and services, and would much likely become a futile land of potential if not for (Commercial) Liberalism. The inhabitants of Singapore as well, would potentially starve and be forced to move out, due to her inability to produce food. Since globalization promotes the reduction of protectionist barriers of trade, such as tariffs or quotas, to encourage the free flow of goods and services, essentially boosting the general welfare of the people, it is especially pivotal in ensuring that Singaporeans can import food and other prerequisites.
So why is Liberalism believed to be in retreat? Well, that is likely the doing of one of the world’s superpowers, the United States. President-elect, Donald Trump, holds the power of a United States that has divided political institutions alongside a fragile economy. With an “America first!” motto, it becomes more and more evident that the US is no longer going to sacrifice its national interests to benefit other states. To realists, or at least globalization-skeptics like Trump that openly undermine the dire plea of their predecessors, the needs of the Americans come first, in a power-hungry, self-help governed global system. Trump is pledging to “terminate” the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), a trade agreement between the US, Canada, and Mexico. Trade agreements as such promote trade liberalization, as previously mentioned, that is significant in increasing globalization and interdependence. While the agreements has done wonders to the Mexican economy (who have a $60 billion trade surplus with the Americans) and other Asian economies (auto and manufacturing industries are far more competitive), Trump threatens to overhaul the deal as the Americans (who ended up with higher wages and more productivity) seemingly didn’t benefit from it.
I believe that Liberalism has been in retreat over the past few years, with the two leading powers of the world, the United States and the United Kingdom, suffering economic and political uncertainty. Although trade liberalization and investment across borders have increased the GDP of these countries, it has not been converted to gains for the majority of their populations with median wages remaining as stagnant as ever. The decision to elect Trump or to exit the EU is essentially a campaign to value national over the needs of other states. As the US and the UK transition to standing alone, the Liberal system of vast interdependence is going to be more and more disrupted. It is a concern for the community on a global scale if states choose to follow their example and shut their doors to other nations. It is already evident in Thailand and Malaysia, who choose to usher the Rohingya back to turmoil in Myanmar, rather than facing economic setbacks. Since when have people from other states not been eligible for obtaining help from other countries? With growing numbers of relatively small-scale conflicts affected separate parts of the world (in comparison to the World Wars), countries need to show some humanity and offer help to states that need it.