Ann Pettifor: The COVID-19 crisis exposed the deep flaws in our capitalist systems, and the globalized financial sector’s greed, vulnerability, and detachment from the real economy. In fact, during the pandemic, free-market capitalism was suspended, and Wall Street, the City of London, and Frankfurt were effectively nationalized (albeit unconditionally) after the shadow-banking sector’s near-implosion in March 2020.

The Italian sociologist Paolo Gerbaudo described the public reaction to the systemic flaws the pandemic exposed as the “Great Recoil”: economies and societies turned away from the globalized system, and reoriented themselves toward the domestic, nation-state economy. Public support in the United States for the military’s withdrawal from Afghanistan partly reflects this recoil.

This is still simply reaction; it is not yet structurally embedded. But it is preparing the ground for a new economic transformation. That transformation could be ugly – for example, taking the form of nationalism, or even fascism. But it could also be progressive, like the transformation overseen by Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s, with the interests of the domestic economy prioritized over those of the financialized and globalized economy.

AP: I think that Matthew C. Klein and Michael Pettis, in their recent book Trade Wars Are Class Wars, have illuminated the folly of relying on central bank monetary operations to tackle deep and dangerous global economic imbalances. These imbalances are a result of globalized, export-oriented, over-producing economies drowning in goods and services, while purchasing power at home (and worldwide) is cut.

Germany and China are classic examples of this type of economic system, which is hostile to their own, domestic constituencies. Cuts in purchasing power prevent companies from making sales and therefore profits, and they impair the ability of individuals and households to pay their bills. Firms and households must borrow in order to maintain profits and income.

The combination of excessive production and purchasing-power cuts is deflationary. Tackling deflation with quantitative easing is, as John Maynard Keynes once argued, like pushing on a string. But central banks apparently do not view their role as helping to restore balance to a very imbalanced economy, or as prioritizing the domestic economy over the globalized economy. Technocrats at central banks act to sustain and protect just one sector of the global economy: the financial sector.

The financial sector has, in turn, abandoned the “free market,” and wants its risky activities to be guaranteed and protected by taxpayers. They call this “de-risking” investment. It is an extraordinary distortion of a system once defined as “free-market capitalism.” Even worse, as the financial sector demands protection from the taxpayer, it uses capital mobility to dodge taxation systems.

How can this be changed? By once again privatizing Wall Street and the City of London, and withdrawing subsidies, guarantees, and protection. This means, first and foremost, introducing controls over capital mobility, and obliging global corporations to pay their fair share of taxes.

Mamphela Ramphele: The most important lesson from the activism of the 1970s is that one needs to be centered inwardly, in order to be able to take a holistic perspective of the world around them. It was becoming conscious of our worth as human beings on the mother continent of Africa that made us rise up to name ourselves – to pronounce ourselves – black people and proud freedom fighters. Recognizing the absurdity of Europeans establishing themselves as the standard of what it means to be human – and that is what they did when they referred to us as “non-Europeans” – drove even the most timid black person to find their voice, to name themselves, and to recover their humanity.

Taking away the most effective weapon of oppression – the minds of the oppressed – made the oppressor lose control. So, now, like in apartheid South Africa, we must mobilize people by changing their ideas. This requires a powerful message that touches their hearts and minds, thereby setting them free from the fear of change. By giving people a taste of freedom from the absurdities that have been normalized in their minds, we will empower them to claim their freedom.

MR: Lasting partnerships need a shared vision to sustain them. Those “waging environmental wars” are often segments of business that deny the shared vision of a healthy biosphere, because of the attractiveness of short-term profits. The most effective way of pushing the business community out of denial – of getting them to acknowledge the interconnectedness and interdependence of all life of Earth – is to call out their shareholders, who often speak the language of our “shared vision,” as they reap profits from activities that undermine it.

Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reporting has become a powerful way of calling shareholders out when they fail to back their pronouncements with action. It helps that it is effectively their peers who are doing the calling out, much like when men who believe in gender equity and respect for human rights take the lead in calling out abusive men. Putting pressure on shareholders is the best way of driving companies to become good citizens and partners in the fight to ensure the well-being of all on a healthy planet.

Kenneth Rogoff: The progressive climate agenda in the United States has blinders on when it comes to the global nature of the carbon problem, and the imperative of finding ways to secure the buy-in of emerging-market and developing economies, which are by far the main source of carbon-emission growth.

In many parts of Asia – not least China and India – coal is plentiful and cheap. While carbon emissions in the US and Europe have been flatlining, they are still soaring in Asia, despite being briefly interrupted by the pandemic. Moreover, the average age of a coal plant in the advanced economies is more than 45 years. With many nearing the end of their useful lifespan, it is natural to start shutting them down. In Asia, the average age is 12 years, and there is no quick substitute.

Given this, the advanced economies need to take concerted action to support an energy transition in the emerging markets. The European Union plans to impose a carbon border tax on imports from countries that do not have in place their own carbon-pricing scheme (either a carbon tax or a carbon-pricing mechanism). This will provide an incentive for emerging markets to accelerate their decarbonization plans. But with limited energy alternatives – Africa is in even more dire straits – the transition will very painful. Easing this pain should a top priority for targeted Western assistance. A World Carbon Bank would be a valuable vehicle for achieving this.

KR: Let’s understand that a lot of what is happening in Washington today is being driven by political expediency. President Joe Biden’s administration is trying to push through a robust progressive agenda during 2021 and 2022. The hope is that it will have strong enough political legs to withstand a Republican assault should the Democrats lose control of the House of Representatives in the 2022 midterm elections – a very significant risk.

The infrastructure bill takes a very broad view of infrastructure. That is appropriate in a modern knowledge economy. Still, it includes many investments that are only very loosely connected to generating the increased growth needed to cover most of the costs.

As for the environmental impact, we economists tend to prefer a carbon tax to a command-and-control approach. A carbon tax would provide producers and consumers with incentives to conserve, while providing industry with incentives to innovate. It would also give the government tax revenues that could be used to pay for expanded social programs.