Fwd: [lbo-talk] "globalization" is pretty popular

[Shane Taylor]

Dwayne Monroe wrote:
> I must admit that I found this surprising,
> particularly the results for thoroughly industrialized
> nations with deep experience with corporatism and its
> discontents.
>
> I believe a simple answer is available.
>
> Many (probably most) folks around the globe are in
> favor of and excited by the idea of our international
> order.  The flaws are immense but the neon glow still
> excites.
>
> Global computer culture, pop music, film, slick
> gadgets and all the rest of the contemporary whirl are
> exciting and dynamic distractions.  Young people in
> particular are attracted to this glittering world.
>
> As I've said before, I think this aspect of the global
> scene is better understood by novelists like William
> Gibson and Neal Stephenson than many activists who
> are, quite rightly, focused on corporate crime.
>
> Corporations still seem to be the vanguard of the
> modern to many people.
>
> Imagine you're living in a small town in Botswana or
> Hungary, Microsoft would appear to be the symbol of
> all that's new, titanium clean and forward looking and
> not an innovation-stifling monopolist.
>
> This would go for Nike, Coca Cola and the rest of the
> rogues' gallery.
>
> Until the "anti-globalization" movement (or whatever
> term is more accurate) understands this attraction
> efforts will be of limited effectiveness.

And that is exactly what I don't think of when I hear the word
"globalization."  Which is part of the problem.

Alternately, people simply see nothing inherently wrong with increased
commerce across boarders, and think their nation's can ultimately gain
from it.  The poll was specifically about trade, and the institution
mentioned was the WTO, not the IMF or World Bank.  Nor was it for
austerity programs or against debt abolition.  The poll also noted
concern over wealth disparities.  So, the numbers aren't for a vicious
"Damn the poor, I want mine!"  Perhaps the contrary.  For example:


> Public support for trade and multinational corporations
> and the lack of enthusiasm for protesters does not
> mean that people necessarily reject critics' concerns.
> Majorities, in most cases strong majorities, in 34 of
> 44 nations thought the availability of good paying jobs
> had gotten worse in the last five years. And substantial
> majorities--82% in France, 67% in the United States,
> 63% in Mexico--thought the gap between the rich and
> the poor had worsened. But, unlike trade's critics, the
> public did not blame globalization for these problems.
> People attributed such difficulties to domestic factors. 

But since Seattle, what are the most nefarious decisions of the WTO? 
They just okay the use of generic AIDS drugs in Africa.  Considering that
it's one nation, one vote, much like the General Assembly of the UN, and
that it's making decisions like these, convincing folks that it's the
vanguard of corporate tyranny is a much, much harder sell.  And part of
Doug's point is that it may also be false.  Better to argue over the
validity of "comparative advantage" than "globalization."

Besides, from cursor readings the Bush admin has been more on the defense
than offensive within the WTO.  When they pay attention to it.

-- Shane

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!