Via blogbharti, this photo essay of the sort areas I grew up and scenes that I remember. Similar distress and some of the consequences of globalization are now expressed in many quarters.
"The poor of the developing world and the middle classes of the developed world seem unlikely allies. But, according to economist Branko Milanovic - whose main field of interest is the relationship between globalisation and inequality - the two groups are the biggest losers as a result of globalisation. Milanovic is a lead economist at the World Bank research department and a senior associate at the Carnegie."
From a comments by John Quiggin in Why globalization is opposed:
"Among my people, globalisation has negative connotations because it takes away power from the individuals. As a consequences, the communality of daily life has become more and more frustrating and aggressive. If the crop fails because the neighbour is blocking the water stream, I could rely on local institutions-institutions that I contribute to shape- to solve the problem. If the crop fails because water has been privatised and sold to a multinational corporation, there is no local institution that can fix the problem. As a consequence, local diatribes over resource are exacerbated. In summary, globalisation is not just about prosperity and morality, it's also about power and control."
It seems that there will be more and more opposition from the countries which seemed to support globalization earlier.
Update: See also Bush's remarks:
and Guardian's remarks on Iowa farmers: