I'm not sure I agree with your point about this being beneficial from a "world point of view." Even assuming that the USA and UK go down and are no longer a factor or very high on the world pecking order, I don't see any evidence that anything more "honorable," "noble," or "decent" will take its place. It'll probably be even more of the same - cold, bloodless corporate greed and amorality on a global scale.
I could not agree more that something needs to be done about the "Globalised" Corporations.
At the moment they are largely above the law and answerable to no one.
"what to do" is going to be more controversial. For a start I would make them subject to the laws of where ever the operate, and pay taxes where ever they employ people and wherever they make sales. In both cases equivalent to the levels that apply locally. That might be complicated costly and inconvenient for them. but tough.
It'll probably end up something like corporatized feudalism with the characteristics of organized crime - not too dissimilar to what we have now. Although, instead of Western-style Mafia families running things, it'll be Chinese warlords.
There have not been Chines war lords since before the first Emperor Unified China. That is long before the USA even existed.
A larger majority of Global enterprises have western origins. However their ultimate ownership and all shareholders should be in the public domain. and subject to the laws of where ever they operate both collectively and individually, so that there is no means of avoiding laws, taxes or regulations.
The Chines set up operating companies in the countries that they operate in, with a full local company structures. eg. Huawei UK is an example with a local managing director subject to UK law.
China also requires foreign companies that invest and set up in China to have Chinese partners, so as to be accountable to the Chinese state.
I look at it as being analogous to a drug addict quitting cold turkey. There may be a rough withdrawal period in the short-term, but in the long-term, a person is better off being drug-free rather than still wallowing in addiction.
There is absolutely no need to destroy international trade, it just needs to be properly regulated as above. This would remove the advantages that they now hold. It would make them accountable to every country the operate in. rather than no one as at present.
No doubt they would squeal very loudly, and fight very hard against it.
So, yes, banning or restricting free trade and moving away from globalist policies might produce some temporary difficulties, but we will be far better off in the long run if we relearn how to be more independent and self-reliant. It really shouldn't matter where we rank in some global "pecking order," as that should never have been a priority in the first place.
In the long run the USA needs to stop looking backward to the few years after WW2 when it was fabulously wealthy on the back of its war efforts. And look to the future of its people by building up its education system and modern industries. The heavy industries are all but gone all around the world. They only survive in a few places where all the raw materials, energy and transport links coexist. The people that operate them are almost always migrants from many different countries who have the necessary skills.
America has historically depleted its resources not conserved them. Its dominance of the world leather trade ended with the total destruction of the Bison herds and Fur animals. Its agricultural bonanza ended with the Dust bowl. Its oil fields were depleted to their present levels in 150 years of exploitation. And its gas and shale oil are going on much the same trajectory. Its war resourced steel industry was unsustainable in peace time.
and its strip coal mines then had insufficient demand to keep it sustainable.
Its car industry lost its way and was out sold by more modern, far more reliable and more economic to run and service imports from Europe and the far East. Who were prepared to offer what the customers wanted, rather than what the domestic motor companies wanted to sell them.
All the while the country stopped investing in the infrastructure and the educated workforce necessary to to keep moving forward.
Only a few liberal minded places like silicone valley held the torch high to show the way. but that never happened.
Is it any wonder that all these newly developing countries have shown how it should be done and surged ahead. they have invested in education infrastructure research and development, and developed the necessary tooling and built the factories and trained the staff to make it happen.
Nothing that they have done could not have been done in America.
Globalisation was not the cause of America's woes, it was the symptom.
Entrepreneurs as always saw their opportunity and invested where their money was safe from governments and invented Global corporations.
As a byproduct, Globalisation enabled the new tiger economies to flourish. and raised the level of world trade massively.
America should be taking advantage of that trade. it is not. it no longer knows how.
It has proved incapable of investing in its own future, its own people, it is no longer capable of even keeping up, it does not have the will or the supply of skills and educated people to do so.
China is not your problem. China has its own problems.
Your problem is one of inertia, bad politics, and bad leadership.
The USA has neither the long term plans nor infrastructure, nor the necessary employable skilled people to make it happen.
The UK is doing its best to follow you into that abyss.
Our future is in our own hands
we gain nothing by damaging the futures of anyone else.
If you want to know where your infrastructure and future has gone.
Look first at your uniforms, the oceans and the sky's.
You have invested in death.
