By Guy Verhofstadt http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/editorial2/en834604.html
IN Seattle, Gothenburg and Genoa tens of thousands of people took to the streets to express their views. A real breath of fresh air in this post-ideological age. If only there had not been all that meaningless violence we could almost have applauded them. Anti-globalisation protests are a welcome crosscurrent at a time when political life has become rather dull, sterile and technocratic. Indeed, this crosscurrent is good for democracy. But what is your actual message? Do you espouse the views of the 'Black Block,' which violently opposes any form of private property? Or perhaps your views are better presented by the 'Slow Food' campaign, a mundane club that spreads chic pamphlets invariably stressing the importance of eating correct food in the better restaurants?
What is suddenly so wrong with globalisation? Until recently even progressive intellectuals were singing the praises of a worldwide market, which, they said, would bring prosperity and well-being to countries where before there was only poverty and decline. And they were right. Experience has shown that the per capita income of a country's population rises by one per cent for every one per cent that it opens up its economy. This explains the wealth of Singapore, which contrasts so sharply with the poverty of a closed economy such as Myanmar. In short, prior to Seattle, globalisation was not a sin but a blessing for mankind. This was in stark contrast to the dissenting voices on the far right that bemoaned the loss of identity in a globalised world. But ever since Seattle, you have been shunning globalism as if it were a modern-day form of bubonic plague, sowing poverty and ruin.
Of course, globalisation, as a movement that disregards national borders, can easily deteriorate into a form of "selfishness without frontiers." For the rich West, free trade is naturally something that should be embraced wholeheartedly... as long as it is not in products that can harm Western economies. No sugar from Third World countries. No textiles or manufactured garments from North Africa. In this regard, then, your anti-globalisation protests are well founded. The much vaunted free world trade moves largely in one direction: from the rich Northern countries to the poor South.
But I would also like to point out a number of contradictions in your way of thinking. You oppose American hamburger chains, reject soya that has been genetically modified by multinational corporations, and condemn worldwide brand names that influence buying habits. Many of you feel that everything must return to a small, local scale. We must go back to the local market, to the local community. And yet not when it comes to migration... Then, globalisation suddenly becomes an aim. Large numbers of homeless people drift along the borders of Europe and North America, staring into the shop window of a prosperous society. Millions of illegal immigrants live as homeless pariahs, in pitiful conditions, hoping against hope that somehow they can tap into Western riches. But it is precisely the absence of free trade and investment that drives them to the West in the first place.
Another contradiction resides in the fact that, while opposing globalisation, you strongly urge ...
Full Story: http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/editorial2/en834604.html
===== Kevin Dean Buffalo, NY ICQ: 8616001 http://www.yaysoft.com
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com