Go to Eight Your Home Town
- Add a comment
- Go to 60 Words or Less, Kingmi's Thoughtful Global Question of Yesterday
Interconnectedness of economies defines globalization, D.
What you are espousing are the negative by-products of globalization. You embody the arguments against. But I did not mean to say that globalization was only trade. I said interconnectedness of economies, which cannot be apart from either their languages or cultures. What comes next are the interconnectedness of cultures, and that's where Osama freaked out.
I thank you for your ideas. We know how strongly a massive number of people are feeling about this issue. That is why we want to talk about it. Like racism, globalization is one of those issues better to leave out at parties, so that the haves can continue to out-have the have-nots. It is more talk, not less, I contend, that we need about both.
posted by
kingmi
on December 17, 2004 at 12:37 PM
| link to this | reply
It may be useful...
...to take a quick look at defining globalisation.
First, it's not trade. Trade has been going on for thousands of years, and international trade at least since the Phonecians and Polynesians were hitting the high seas.
What it is, is the denial of decision-making at the local and national level. Local councils and national government are progressively handing over all decision-making powers to the WTO, IMF and the like.
David Corten says "As corporations replace workers with technology, they gain even more clout. Local governments are now forced (see above) not only to give them tax breaks but to subsidise directly their operations as well. This is what global competion is really all about - communities and workers competing against each other to absorb even more of the production costs of the worlds most powerful and profitable companies."
So I think the end-game has little to do with happy nations, and everything to do with sucking up wealth from anywhere and everywhere and increasingly concentrating it in the hands of the very few.
Here's one more quote, this time from Michael Chossudovsky, economist at the University of Ottawa...
"The expansion of exports from developing countries is predicated on the contraction of internal purchasing power (within those developing countries). Poverty is an input on the supply side."
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on December 17, 2004 at 4:15 AM
| link to this | reply
Damon, now I'm home I can inculcate some on my response to you.
Globalization is the inter-connectedness of economies. Countries which have cultural issues so extreme that they wish to remain excluded from the world's economic connectedness, feel threatened by globalization. Certainly, that includes extremist Islamic groups like the Taliban. Iran had problems with Western culture and had Barbi Doll, first replaced with an Iranian model, then banned outright.
Osama Bin Laden has frequently said "America out of the Middle East". Whether this is really his true religion, as he states, we can only judge in retrospect. But the harm done to non-progressive countries which are excluded from globalization or otherwise harmed, by pollution or using up natural resources, will push them into the political sights of the terrorist movement. Indeed, strange bedfellows are the green movement and the non-integrated cultures who wish us harm. This is unsettling, as it requires a conflict in beliefs to be addressed by people who are being loyal to their environmentall beliefs and their patriotism to their respective countries. I thank you for the participation, and I hope I have addressed this issue objectively, as I have no loyalty to either the greens, or to internationl markets, excepting that I believe it is in America's best interest to include the best part of the world's nations into economic development, to produce happy countries and not angry ones.
posted by
kingmi
on December 16, 2004 at 3:18 PM
| link to this | reply
Damon, that's not simplistic. that's the exact reason that Osama attacked
NY. You got it right the first time!
posted by
kingmi
on December 16, 2004 at 9:42 AM
| link to this | reply
Can I Play! Actually...
...this is a HUGE question, so I'll mainly direct you to my blog 'Making Free Marketeers Angry'. But it's a big blog, ranging over a large area, so here are some specifics.
On how Coca-Cola is shafting Indian farmers and villagers by removing their water supplies in order to make bottle Coke.On why Hugo Chavez has looked at the wreckage left in latin America by the IMF and told them that, as far as Venezuela is concerned, they can get lost.An overview of the current paradigm, and two rich and successful men who are predicting it's imminent collapse.On how morally bankrupt and undemocratic the WTO is - and that's from the mouth of a delegate!Now, while non of these addresses your question directly, you'll see the link works something like this...
US = IMF/WB/WTO = wealth creation for Wall Street, poverty and loss of dignity for Majority World citizens = desperate, voiceless citizens = desperate acts to try and
redress the balance.
I know it's simplistic, but it's a good place to start.
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on December 16, 2004 at 6:17 AM
| link to this | reply