by Celtic 6 Replies latest jw friends
What do you all think about the Anti-Global Capitalist Movement? Do you think they have a point? Do you think we as a community could organise similarly to them? Do you think people within this can benefit us, if so, how? For those not predudiced against them, especially I want to focus on your views.
Please, be as precise as possible, for a very strong reason, no quips, one liners need apply.
peace
celtic
I think given recent world developments that globalism should be questioned if only from a purely defensive / strategic point of view.
If the food source of a local community of poisoned then it would be a tradgedy.
Globalism makes it possible to poison the food of a nation. Where did the jar or tin of food that YOU had for dinner packed / prepared?
Does the label even tell you?
celtic,
To describe the whole anti-globalism/capitalism movement is not easy, since what unites them is only what they are against, what they want to reform or destroy, depending on position.
I can certainly sympathize with those who criticize the unethical behaviour of many multinational corporations or, even worse, the cleptocracies who have come to power in many 3rd world countries and especially the former East Bloc countries. I also think that some of the goals of a movemeent like ATTAC is at least worthy of a serious debate. Too much power has been taken away from democratic institutions and today decisions of life and death are taken in executive offices where ethics is at best a secondary concern and profit -- sometimes short-term -- is a #1 priority.
That said, I have little respect for by far the most of the vocal anti-capitalist groups who demonstrate every time the IMF or G7/8 has a meeting. These groups range from extreme nationalist/neonazi groups to militant marxists, and almost everything in between.
It is my strong opinion that while democracy and capitalism in particular has its dark sides and much work is yet to be done to improve both, it has proven to be by far the best economical and political solution, if we measure its success in securing life, health and prosperity for people. The solutions offered by anti-capitalists vary greatly, but many of them offer a form of neo-marxism that can only wreac a new round of disaster on those nations (if any) foolish enough to adapt its ideas. The other side, nationalism, which wants to turn back the time to closed (or semi-closed) national markets protected by toll barriers, has no better solutions either.
Mixed inside these groups we find anti-modernists and so-called environmentalists. The latter is a very diverse groups that includes zoologers and other knowledgable people who is well worth listening to, but seems totally dominated by "cute-animal"-loving fanatics who seems unable to understand the complex ethical issues involved. Anti-modernists and neo-luddites seems to believe that it's possible for humanity to live in any share of prosperity and comfort without modern industry. Yes, I agree that we need to take more care of the environment and limit pollution. But yes, I am also convinced that this can be done (and is constantly done!) within the framework of our existing political system. Corporations are under some democratic control, but this control can be strengthened. How democratic power and be made more international to deal with global issues is a very big question I have no good answer to.
One question, sometimes asked in wake of media hogging events like the Seattle demonstration is: who the heck elected all those NGO to speak for all human beings? The politicians (from the west at least) are at least elected by some form of majority of the population in their respective countries. When those issues anti-globalists raise are on election, the anti-globalist viewpoints rarely get a significant fraction of the votes. An NGO need be nothing more than a group of fanatics with zeal, an Internet site and a phone line. Fanatics are often zealous because they don't have a balanced view of issues that would cause some moderation of views, which is why extremists are often heard even when they are a small minority of the population.
- Jan
--
"Doctor how can you diagnose someone with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and then act like I had some choice about barging in here right now?" -- As Good As It Gets
What do you all think about the Anti-Global Capitalist Movement?
Luddites and hippies.
Do you think they have a point?
No
Do you think we as a community could organise similarly to them?
Smash the windows of Kingdom Halls instead of McDonalds, you mean?
Do you think people within this can benefit us?
No
Hey Stephanus,
Don't hold back son! When we gonna meet for a reconstituted genetically engineered gene spliced fat free bully beef bun with plasticised cheese and organically ground coffee?
organicly grown unclebruce
PS: Come down south some time soon .. i'll show ya my new toys (bob the cat and exca the vator ;)
Sounds like the best of both worlds, Unc: organically grown GMOs - I like that kind of thinking!
Looking forward to coming down - got to organise my transport. Your new toys sound like they can do some serious damage to the surrounding countryside - perfect for gold prospecting! LOL (I bet your Greenie neighbour's turning in his grave!)
Hi JanH: Excellent well-balanced post, and good explanation of the complexity of alliances between varying groups. I also appreciate your view of capitalism being the the better of all systems to date, but still needs much improvement.
I would like to suggest for discussion sometime, the idea that the vast majority of corporations are not as driven by profits as is believed by the general public. They are driven by various conflicting forces. Some of these are:
1. They are people too and do not want to live in a polluted world, even for profit.
2. They fear much government regualtion, often times excessive regulation, and will more often lean to comply than risk exposure for profit. Recent example are the firings and resignations of the CEOs of Ford and Firestone Corporations.
3. They have to make money or the laws of financial physics and blunt reality will force them out of business. And then everyone loses.
4. While corporate leaders make large salaries, they are responsible to their stockholders which are most often employee stock-owners through 401K programs and large mutual funds which largely have average people as investors, including a large contingent of elderly people needing these funds to be profitable so they can afford medical care, some level of a decent life. Government Social Security is never enough.
5. Corporations love a good image as part of staying in business and expanding. So, they often trip over themselves to comply with laws, and even donate to fighting for tougher laws to promote this image. For example, the National Association of Realtors in the USA along with all the State Associations spend enourmous amount of political action money (often called 'Special Interest Groups') to fight for tougher laws. It was this associations that forced Realtors to be trained and licensed buy the states to weed out the bad guys. And Realtors are not alone in this. The National Association of Engineering Examiners, and all the various discipline associations, the AMA, the ABA, and Almost every industry, such as manufacturing, farming, etc. all fight for tough and good laws - but laws that make sense. 90% of the good laws on the books were inspired by capitalist industries, rather than some do-gooder politician.
Thanks again for a very good post, and I will look to see if you have any comments on what I wrote. - Amazing
