Dani Rodrik on neoliberal globalization

Dani Rodrik writes about the general rigidity introduced into the world economy by the neoliberal, corporate-deregulation brand of "globalization" (Globalization's Wrong Turn Foreign Affairs 4:2019):

... there was nothing inevitable about the path the world followed beginning in the 1990s. International institutions played their part, but hyperglobalization was more a state of mind than a genuine, immutable constraint on domestic policy. Before it came along, countries had experimented with two very different models of globalization: the gold standard and the Bretton Woods system. The new hyperglobalization was closer in spirit to the historically more distant and more intrusive gold standard. That is the source of many of today's problems. It is to the more flexible principles of Bretton Woods that today's policymakers should look if they are to craft a fairer and more sustainable global economy. [my emphasis]

He also has this comment on the outsized influence of "exporter and investor lobbies":

The clearest illustration of that power came when international trade agreements incorporated domestic protections for intellectual property rights, the result of aggressive lobbying by pharmaceutical firms eager to capture profits by extending their monopoly power to foreign markets. To this day, Big Pharma is the single largest lobby behind trade deals. [my emphasis]

Rodrik makes the important point that the trade rules that block or reduced national capital controls are a huge problem of the current neoliberal international arrangements. It makes individual countries subject to speculative movement of money in and out of a country that makes financial crises far more likely. The fact that the eurozone countries allow free movement of capital within the currency zone but without the safeguards against negative regional effects from such speculative flows was a huge reason that the effects of the 2008 crash were so devastating to countries like Greece and Spain.