It is disheartening that the lessons learned during the first half of the 20th century have now been forgotten, as nationalism gains ground in many regions. And today we are witnessing a repeat of the McCarthyism of the early 1950s. Here is Foreign policy:
Not so long ago, consulting firms and other information brokers could easily work with different clients in different countries. Just as they talked with competing businesses, they advised competing governments. In 2015, when McKinsey senior partner Lola Woetzel hoped the think tank’s book would “make a useful contribution to the planning and development of Chinese technology companies and government institutions,” she probably didn’t mean to make a controversial statement. .
But what may have seemed trivial at the time can now be presented as irrefutable proof that corporations are helping the enemy.
Senators Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley suggested that McKinsey was helping America’s enemies and should be barred from receiving federal contracts. It’s from Marco Rubio’s website:
Although the report was written in the staid language of management consulting, it was ultimately an attempt to help the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dominate the United States and other countries in cutting-edge areas including cloud computing, Internet of Things, big data, mobile Internet, robotics, 3D printing, advanced materials, autonomous vehicles, artificial intelligence, unconventional oil and gas, electric vehicles, energy storage , renewable energy and human genomic technology. The implications go beyond economic competition. The report notes that such technologies “will have a great impact on future wars and the development of the national defense industry.”
The logic of globalization is that international trade and investment is a win-win process: both parties benefit. But when globalization is replaced by nationalism, economics becomes a zero-sum game. Any improvement in China’s economy is seen as negative for the United States, as our relative position declines in international power rankings. Thus, any company that trades with the “enemy” risks being considered traitorous.
Ironically, Foreign Policy reports that the most inflammatory accusations against McKinsey involve language suggesting that China would benefit from moving in a more communist direction:
THE Financial Times reported that their Chinese branch had bragged in 2019 about its economic advice to the Chinese central government, while a McKinsey-led think tank was preparing a book that recommended China “deepen cooperation between business and the military and keep foreign companies away from sensitive sectors.”
In fact, China’s rise as a great power began when it abandoned Maoist-era communism. After 1978, China began allowing more foreign participation in its economy and privatized many companies. If you are an American nationalist, you should welcome China’s return to a state-led model cut off from foreign investment.
But the biggest problem with this new McCarthyism is that it inevitably leads to an increased risk of war, as states cease to see each other as mutually benefiting from economic growth. In the 2000s, Chinese growth was seen as good news for the U.S. economy, and U.S. companies quickly increased sales in the fast-growing economy. Today, many people in America view China’s economic growth as a threat, and anyone who helps China’s economy is considered a traitor to the United States.
I do not accept the nationalist conception of international affairs. But if senators truly believe their theory, then they might consider awarding the Congressional Medal of Honor to McKinsey executives for encouraging China to move in a more statist direction. Instead, they should focus their anger on people like me, who have given lectures in China encouraging things like free market reforms, fiscal austerity and nominal GDP targeting. These ideas would actually strengthen China’s economy. If trying to improve the economy of a nation of 1.4 billion people makes someone a traitor, then I am guilty of treason.
