If you look, for instance, at calls for papers for major conferences in my field, what you’ll find is an almost desperate pleading for research that supports open borders, globalization, fluid identities, etc and condemns nationalism and any sort of rootedness or stable identities.
There is clearly a huge premium on exalting these neoliberal shibboleths because that’s what gets funded and touted as progressive.
But when you look at actual research that gets published and has an impact, it simply can’t find any reason to support the “rah-rah for fluidity and globalization” approach. And I’m not talking about conservative scholars. I don’t read or cite them. My research is publicly available, so look it up if you are in doubt. I work within a neo-Marxist framework. I can’t even think of a scholar among the multitudes I read and quote who doesn’t begin with Marx.
It doesn’t matter how you personally feel about Marxism. The point I’m making is that the only scholars who do argue that globalization is fantastic are all connected to the Chicago School of Economics and the Milton Friedman tradition. You just can’t create a convincing theory of how globalism and fluidity are amazing outside of a strictly libertarian position.
I’m now looking at the research into climate change. I didn’t even blog until the afternoon today because I was deeply immersed in this research. And as God is my witness, I have not found a single source that positions neoliberalism as great for the environment. Source after source I find tells us that the weakening of the nation-state is a disaster for climate.