NOTES
Introduction
1. imf Staff, ‘‘Globalization: Threat or Opportunity?,’’ April 12, 2000, http://www.imf
.org. This optimistic perspective on globalization is also promoted in popular works
like Friedman, The World Is Flat, and Barber, Jihad vs. McWorld.
2. See, for example, Tonelson, The Race to the Bottom. Barber’s Jihad vs. McWorld
portrays the contemporary world in similar terms.
3. The critical perspective on globalization underlies a worldwide popular movement
challenging the global economic institutions that promote it. For an example of this
critical view, see Brecher and Costello, Global Village or Global Pillage? The debate
on globalization draws on many of the themes of previous opposing approaches to
economic development, perhaps most recently reflected in Landes, The Unbound
Prometheus, which frames development as beneficial for all, and A. G. Frank, Re-
Orient, by one of the founders of dependency theory, which emphasizes the in-
equalities and exploitation at the heart of economic development.
4. Economic Development Data and Information, ‘‘Doing Business in Connecticut,’’
http://www.youbelonginct.com.
5. Héctor Mondragón, presentation at ‘‘Voces por la Vida’’ conference, Bogotá, Au-
gust 26–28, 2004.
6. Piore, Birds of Passage, 4.
1. The Draper Company
1. Hartford, Where Is Our Responsibility?, makes this argument most explicitly with
respect to the New England textile industry and its unions. Others, including
Bluestone and Harrison, The Deindustrialization of America, argue that dein-
dustrialization began in the post–World War II period, precisely the period that
many analysts identify as the golden age of collaboration between labor and man-
agement. Both Cowie, Capital Moves, and Hartford emphasize that interregional
Previous Page Next Page