Summary of the speech

Events that have taken place recently in international markets have further amplified a feeling of fear in the media regarding globalisation processes. But the question I would like to put to you is "does globalisation imply that we must fear markets and that they can cause economic crises on a global scale?"

My answer is no, because the phenomena such as those that have recently affected the American financial market are a result of capitalism. They are intrinsic to it, not born of globalisation.

Crises of this type have also brought down economies very different from the extremely liberal and open American21^st century type, for example in Japan in the 90s, where on the contrary government control has been traditionally very strong. There are also cycles of capitalist speculation, which lead to regressions of this type. Globalisation is not a new phenomenon and has been with us from the dawn of trade. It does not introduce new categories of economic thought. Trade between Italy and China is no different from that between Lazio and Lombardy. What does change, however, is the psychology, the perceptions and the politics, which are locally based even in a globalised world. Elections affect defined zones, and even the media spread shock when they bring processes that have developed over decades, such as the growth of Chinese competitivity or global warming, to the attention of the public as though they were new phenomena. Globalisation made post second world war Europe and USA rich, just like medieval Venice and IX century England. And in the same way, it is in a position to mitigate the effects of a financial crisis today. The crisis in '29 was so severe in part because it struck a very closed economy. Today there is a large amount of foreign and especially Asian capital, which is ready to support the American financial system.