Add a Comment
Email This
Statistics
RE: Hang on a minute...
But the thing that really bothers me about this is the underlying assumption of globalization & FTA's--that the market can decide what works best. I mean, no offense guys, but what makes you think the whole world wants or needs "blue jeans and Bill Cosby tapes"? Or that Walmart & McDonald's will, in serving their own self-interest, make the world a better place? (Do you really want to live in a world run by McDonald's or Starbucks?)
That's just it, dude. The market deciding means that people decide what they want to buy. That means if you, of some guy in Bangladesh decides they would rather not have blue jeans and Bill Cosby tapes, then buy what you want. Contrast this with the central economic planning model employed by the Soviet Union. They decide what you will buy because that's all there is. In a market economy, the guy who makes what you want stays in business, and the guy who isn't responsive to the consumer goes away.
And embedded in this is the assumption that the rest of the world can and should adopt Western (particularly American) cultural patterns.
Yes and no. Certainly there is the concept of "inalienable rights" that are "self-evident" and all that in our Constitution that we believe applies to everyone. That said, democracy is a reflection of the will of the people, and different people and cultures have various values reflected in their practice of democracy. For example, many European societies are culturally put a higher priority on law and order, while Americans tend to focus more on individual liberties. So yeah, generally speaking I think the most Americans, Europeans, etc. DO think that the rest of the world should adopt democracy, but that democracy could and probably will have its own character reflecting the culture.
globalization has increasingly led to the ownership of the means of production by small numbers of people
Um, I wouldn't be so sure of that. The most nimble competitors have been small businesses and entrepreneurs. There's also a lot of evidence that globalization has vastly improved the standard of living for a lot of people around the world and spread prosperity. The Economist has two great articles laying this out. The first tackles BS politicians are spreading about NAFTA, the second deals with the myth of globalization and the alleged loss of prosperity at home. The same is true outside Europe and the US--it's a great time to be an entrepreneur, and frankly, in many places you could make a case that a small number own the means of production, but that's because there previously WAS NO PRODUCTION. The way theory works, and in a small way, Marx was partly right, even with centrally owned means of production the government must treat its workers well because of the need for their skills, versus a commodity market where I don't need you at all.
RE: Hang on a minute...
but what makes you think the whole world wants or needs "blue jeans and Bill Cosby tapes"? Or that Wal-Mart & McDonald's will, in serving their own self-interest, make the world a better place? (Do you really want to live in a world run by McDonald's or Starbucks?)
But we already do. I acknowledge this fact with some chagrin, but then again, I wouldn't trade places with someone living in a country where the thought of these things is only something seen in a tattered magazine, either (or at best a spotty internet connection.) What I don't like about the Wal-Mart's of the world (I only use that store as an icon), is the complete homogenization of the entire populace. For example, Joe in Arkansas is wearing the same shirt as me right now and probably has the same sneakers also. Soon Delgerbayar from Outer Mongolia will be joining us. But, regardless of this possible dilution of culture, I'll take it if it turns out to be a means to stop the violence in so many places. If the trade off is to move from poverty, dismay and wretched desperation to just simple quiet desperation sipping Starbucks and Sam's Club soda; isn't that a lot better?
RSS
Hang on a minute...
It's hard for me to know where to begin, this is such a large topic; but this whole discussion so far disturbs me.
While I found the YouTube video extreme, it was not entirely off the mark. The world is largely run by bankers and businessmen. I don't think it's a conscious conspiracy to take over the world per se, but it's definitely a pattern of behaviour which leads to the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few.
But the thing that really bothers me about this is the underlying assumption of globalization & FTA's--that the market can decide what works best.
I mean, no offense guys, but what makes you think the whole world wants or needs "blue jeans and Bill Cosby tapes"? Or that Walmart & McDonald's will, in serving their own self-interest, make the world a better place? (Do you really want to live in a world run by McDonald's or Starbucks?) And embedded in this is the assumption that the rest of the world can and should adopt Western (particularly American) cultural patterns.
I'm no communist--Marx made many mistakes--but I'm no fan of capitalism or globalization either. Marx did have one thing right--globalization has increasingly led to the ownership of the means of production by small numbers of people; and frequently foreign people--especially if you happen to live in the outside of Europe and North America (and in some cases even there).
Sure, globalization appears to increase democracy, according to one particular notion of what democracy looks like, but that doesn't make it the only, or the best system for ensuring human prosperity and happiness. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that there will never be a "best" way--that there will always be good solutions for particular situations, but no one-size-fits-all social system. And with that in mind, I think people must be very cautious in exporting culture, even if only economically.
View Full Discussion