In Chapter 3 we found the public were evenly divided on their attitudes towards an internal market, though more positive towards opening up to world markets. Even those who had, on balance, positive attitudes nonetheless had plenty of criticisms. Contentment was mixed with discontent. This chapter looks at public attitudes towards the articulation of that discontent, towards resisting the downsides of internal markets and economic openness – low wages, unsafe working conditions, pollution, or unfair international regulations.

International companies have faced both local and international protests against their alleged pursuit of global wealth at the expense of local interests. Oil companies like Shell have faced persistent local protests against their operations in Africa. Brands like Nike (in 2003 the largest private employer in Vietnam) have faced strikes by badly paid or badly treated workers across Asia – backed up by consumer boycotts and court actions in more developed countries. But the most spectacular ‘anti-globalisation’ protests have been the series of protests at meetings of international organisations or self-designated groups of ‘world leaders’, beginning with the Seattle riots of 1999.

The violence and disorder of ‘Seattle’ methods of protest provoked adverse reactions in the affluent West. Yet they might resonate with the frustrations of ordinary people in relatively poor, developing or transitional countries. Indeed anthropologists such as Scott (1985; 1990) have suggested that poor people in poor countries might be willing to use what he called the ‘weapons of the weak’ against their oppressors.