If economic globalization is inevitable, should it primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of transnational corporations?

[HawkPerception]

Political Compass series: Question 1

Yes, definitely.

Yes.

No.

Definitely not.

Updates

5 mo

I didn't make the question up. This is literally on the political compass test at politicalcompasstest. org

You need to be able to think in hypotheticals.

Updates

5 mo

Correction... politicalcompass. org
Not politicalcompasstest. org

[Chazmatazz269]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
It’s only “inevitable” as long as consumers continue to condone supply side economics and the infinite profit growth business model. Which means that economic globalization is diametrically opposed to the service of humanity. It ONLY serves the people and organizations that monopolize resources.
The time for consumers to turn the economy back to demand side is long past. Now we get what they give us; love it or hate it. Even if younger people had the discipline to stop filling their homes and their lives with useless crap, the corporations own the necessities too. Some communities have even outlawed gardening and collecting rainwater. The industrial farm companies are suing anyone who tries to farm independently. If you buck capitalism, you will be marginalized.

[exitseven]

economic globalization is not inevitable. Nationalism is making a comeback

[HawkPerception]

The key word is "if" here. Think hypothetically

[exitseven]

Thanks for the MHO😎

[FreyaRed]

Yes, it should but this way of thinking is naive. We get few Mega corporations in the future which compete with each other but work together in matter of fighting everyone who dares just to think wrong about them. Cyberpunk 2077

[DextroShade]

I reject the premise that it is inevitable and will fight it to my last breath!

[FunkyMonkee]

You mean, the new world order?

[Mike_Hum]

Globalization isn't inevitable.