What's wrong with Globalization?

Superacid - You are a breath of fresh air. It's a pleasure to read your posts and you get a lot of agreement from me on many of your positions..except one! If we were to leave it up to the WTO to sort it all out and provide the drive and/or regulatory means to achieve fair and balanced global economic partnerships, we would be in for a long wait that in the end would fall short of any desirable results or solutions. To me the WTO is not efficient enough to handle the problems. The solution, in the long run, lies in the very same corporate make-up that supports the promises of globalization. In other words, it has to come from the same businesses and financial concerns that benefit from the world markets to also provide the security and longevity of their enterprises within those markets to everyones benefit, the large market nations as well as the poorer producing and resource nations. Governmental or multi-national bureaucratic regulatory oversight commissions (UN) are inefficient and usually corrupt, especially to underdeveloped nations that do not get the same care and protectionist concerns that the larger, prosperous nations do. In a perfect world the WTO would at least seem to work as advertised, but in reality it is as effectual as a guys promise to respect the girl in the morning. Granted, as we speak, it would be a hard-sell to convence anyone that multi-national corporations would be anything but cut-throat about providing any level of commited self-regulation, but in many areas of world trade it does exist, and the benefits over a world market helps to provide the incentive. Some government oversight is necessary and foolish to operate without, but I see globalization getting it's primary support and regulation from within. Let business take care of business. There is precedence for this occuring in Africa where UN mandates and efforts have failed, but private or commercial enterprises are showing the most promise and successes.

 

You are right.. The WTO doesn't respect the girl in the morning. Great points..

 

This is a new era we live in. There are so many new issues resulting from Globalization. I recently wrote an article about it that I hope you may find interesting. It's called Globalization, The Brave New Universe

 

Mystic - Read your piece. First off, I am glad you are interested in the Globalization aspect of the worlds endeavors, however, and I hope you take this as a constructive bit of criticism, you sound like a liberal. You make statements to point out the problems and some situations as they exist, but you don't say anything about the causation (justified, unjustified) and you don't go anywhere near a proposed solution. You cannot understand nor judge the impact of globalization without addressing either one and a whole train load of other factors. There are plenty of people who can point fingers and state the obvious. Also, I believe some of the things you listed are not connected to globalization at all, but are the normal results of bad management of/by governments, industries and just good old careless human waste. These exist whether there is any form of globalization or not. You're on a good track, you just need to broaden the whole thing and get through the sales pitch and drive this baby home! Good luck! I really look forward to reading what you find! And I agree with your header, it is inevitable to a degree, but I believe the field to be limited. What do you think I mean?

 

Well, lets talk about the trade blocks that have been put into the picture. These regional trader blocks are the result of groups of countries who limit themselves to buying from one another, excluding and/or taxing imports to a ridiculous degree.

Then we have the Far Eastern nations who are devaluating their own currency exchange rates to give themselves an unfair advantage in the global marketing arena. These nations have been draining our monies into their own pockets at an alarming rate, and during the last 40 years we have lost more currency to this than for any other reason since the United States became a nation.

The WTO would love to maintain control over this scenerio. After all, I am sure it could be very profitable to do so. However, with situations like the Russian aluminum cartel putting U.S. workers out of employment by selling it at a drastically discounted rate to our own corporations, I can't have a lot of confidence in the powers that be to handle it well. If that labels me a liberal, then I have to say it would be more accurate to call me someone who is trying to think outside the confines of traditional paradigms.

There is a lot more to globalization and it's effects that what was touched on here, though. I live in Ohio and just read the this state is leading the way towards globalizing educational standards by pushing towards what they are calling "global benchmarking". It certainly shows initiative.

I think that as we become more capable of transcending our geographical limitations, the more we need to be aware that it is our responsibility to make sure we address the issues the come out of globalization.

While it is true that crime did not come from globalization, it certainly exploits it. As for other issues, no one has really come up with anything except for some eggheads that keep writing drafts. I am trying to put a little webpage together about it on windows live spaces. Someday maybe it will get somewhere, but just like everyone else, I am a small candle in immeasuable darkness. We need a visionary.

I believe that, ironically, the internet will be a superior venue in which we can step around existing governmental infrastructure and form one global nation. Without that, we are doomed to keep wandering around in the dark and bumping into one another in chaos.

 

Well timetraveller - you dont appear to do much of that yourself either and infact concentrate, like a lot of people do, on glossing over the fact that you are not privvy to the meetings at the G8, WTO, G7, European Summits, Bildeberg group meetings, world bank and all that other sack of shit etc etc etc so basically anything anyone says on the issue of fiscal policy is speculating. The point being its not a common currency or a single economy that they are aiming for, its a common understanding of tarriffs and duties that each member state of those bodies will perform. Its not about a single world power but about a common agreement between trading blocs.
The fact is that I dont believe globalisation is such a bad thing but only for this reason. Its not whether you globalise or not - its who is in charge of that globalisation and what does it mean for ordinary people who seem to be becoming enslaved by NATIONAL politicians so that the rich may effect their global plans. Globalisation affects everyone at a national level but believe me thats all the need because this is about seriously rich individuals and businesses agreeing on how to carve up the world and how to force the populace of those trading blocs into dire working conditions and with fascist social laws. Britain is engineering the police state so America will follow shortly Its about homogenisation of policy to dictate control over a populace in order that they can trade virtually unrestricted with no moral opposition
The reason that I say it might not be such a bad thing is because if it were socialists globalising I wouldnt have too much of a problem - but the world is being turned into a fascist police state so that gangsters can rip us off
The solution is below this line

 

Well Mysticbren Time magazine agrees with you and makes the internet brethren their person of the year.

So we all need to keep up the work and our communities, we can make a difference.

 

Ha Ha Ha - yea but I think time magazine IS being ironic but mystic isnt. Its a disheartening point to have to make but I think Time Mag knows just as we all do that the golden era of the internet is over - free speech is going to be a thing of the past and all dissenting voices will come from disputable sources - the opposition will be wipede out because the internet is a force of control not chaos anarchy or liberty but its becoming controlled, monitored, right wing. Enjoy it while you can but it aint always gonna be like this
The only laws in Britain that allow liberty now are freedom of speech and freedom of the press - and how soon till that goes - I'd say 5, maybe 8 years !

 

If we can maintain accountability and responsibility globalization might be a great economic term, but if it's defined and monitored only by those that tend to profit in the short term, then it's no less than mediating for mob profits at the expense of the general public.

 

Thats what I'm saying though - dissent is dissent against the prevailing morality of mob profits at the expense of the general public. What dissent is there to be had in a internet where all its propoganda is right wing - like all china allows its citizens to see is what they dont mind them seeing - ha dont think that could happen - well you dont have a RIGHT to be on the internet - its a privaledge there are no laws that say you have a right to access the internet is there?

 

Well as long as those rights are still alive we the people can have a voice. I for one am not calling "Uncle" yet. And I will not let myself be controlled by the right fanatical fringe on the net. Call me a blockhead, and I've been banned from a few boards, but the world wide web is wide, and I continue to find new forums for discussion. And I think the net is where the new power of the people will emerge. Can they shut all the blogs down, turn off all the youtube crap? Not quickly they can't. They shut down Napster, but they didn't kill p2p.

 

But theres no denying big business and government hate the idea of that freedom is all I'm saying and if they hate it too much - well goodbye global anticapitalism
As usual the poll on this forum is naive and geared to the right wing view
I just saw that poll

 

Thast's true and that's what Gingrich was spouting off about on Meet the Press this morning. He wants to control the internet and free speech. But guess what I think... that fat boy has bitten off more than he can chew. It's through widening education of the masses as to the motivation of these "gurus" and corporate money brokers that the populus will win out. And the internet is the most open source of communication at the moment.

And as to polls, I only give them as much credence as they are worth. PR firms came up with them and they like to use them against us, but if we refuse to take part their stats will be skewed.

 

Gingrich? where can I find out about him?

 

google.... Freedom to fascism....the whole thing can be watched on google....check it out!!!!

 

Mystic - Now that's a bit more like it. Enjoyed your post. I agree with what you said about the global benchmarking in higher education being at the very least a starting place. But the down side, or limited side of the concept is that it is geared for areas of higher education and doesn't address the preperational process that we would need to feed QUALIFIED kids into scholastically challenging schools. Benchmarking only wants to support the developement of students in the top of the class. To me benchmarking has many side-effects, one being an attempt to stop the brain drain by the technological nations on the lesser developed nations. A good concept in fairness, but that means the tech nations need to produce from their schools the talent required to carry their industries forward. We are having trouble doing this, hence the brain drain of places like Asia and India where they have educated people, just no industry to employ them in. The fact that our primary schools are not producing educated students has always been the key problem and the mind-set of our educators seems reluctant to make the obvious changes to our education system to address it. We don't stress the basics enough during the early developement years of kids and we pay the price with unprepared kids for the upper grade classes. For any tech based nation whose global economic position is based on technological industries this is suicide. Benchmarking doesn't seem to address this part of the total equation. It becomes a short term bandade with serious consequences if additionally we don't address the key problems.

 

I find it strange that you youngies haven't heard of the Newt. Here's a link to start you off:

http://www.nysun.com/article/44302

He proposes seperate rules for terrorist, but like most neo cons he never defines what a terrorist is, so his proposals can float and encompass anyone he feels is a detriment to his interests.

 

Mystic - The other thing you mention is directly aimed at China. Their government has controlled the value of the Yuan (or RMB) for quite some time. They also don't open up their markets to trade items from places like America. When I was in China last year I was amazed at the variety of goods available to the Chinese everywhere and by western prices they were very cheap. I can see their reluctance to import items when it behooves them to bring the industry that produces them to their own people. Problem is, Chinese leaders know about successful business practices as I do about brain surgery. China has the market potential that makes western industries drool, we just can't get in the front door. But once we do, globalization will be vital to our economy. It's already there to a limited degree in places like Shanghai and Guangzhou.

 

You know what I see are young people deciding what to study and where to study it, by how much they feel they can earn after they buy their education.

What's wrong with that picture, that no one seems interested in following their "bliss" only in following the almighty dollar? You tell me? How much creativity and innovation will happen if everyone is so focussed on making a buck? You can target your educational systems, but IT changes so fast with those that don't follow the buck, that by the time you educate your drones, their education won't be worth much.

 

Sentient - I don't mean this in a way of criticising you personally, but like with a lot of people with your view of how the world works, your 'philosophies' get in the way of your 'realities'. Nothing new. Castro has the same view point. Again, that's not to slam you, but Castro was one of those socialist visionaries who has spent the past fifty years proving that his 'vision', like many of the socialist doctrines that emerged during the last century, looks good on paper, sounds good in speaches, but damns people to exist in a controlled state that crushes everything within us as individuals. It does it mentally, spiritually, economically and as groups/nations. All you have to do is look at Cuba or any one of a hundred failed socialist states. Why in the world are you trying to push a failed concept? You sound like a Yugo dealer who keeps shouting, "But it really is a good car!" Came, failed, got forgotten. You need to move on, mate. By-the-by, all those summits that you say we don't know anything about what is in their agendas? Where do you think they get their data from? It's all available. There are no secrets about what they are dealing with.