Globalization
Today’s advocates of globalization, whether politicians, WTO officials, or
neo-liberal economists, claim that globalization will lead to greater
equality and freedom for all participating nations and peoples. However,
official documents of these same institutions reveal just how much they
believe their propaganda. As an example, the United States Space Command
in its document titled Vision for 2020 states verbatim, “The globalization
of the world economy will also continue, with a widening between ‘haves’
and ‘have-nots.’”
That’s putting it rather plain and simple - and dead on! Taking into
consideration the fact that this document is more an advertisement for the
US war department, advocating the development and deployment of space-based
weaponry, let’s look to a more composed document.
The US National Intelligence Council (an organization under the CIA’s
authority) produced a document under the title, “Global Trends 2015: A
Dialogue About the Future With Nongovernment Experts.” Here is a document
that states flat out that its in favor of continued globalization.
However, here is was it has to say about the economic effects of
globalization: “…economic liberalization and globalization entail risks and
inevitably will create bumps in the road, some of them potentially highly
disruptive.” Specifically, it goes on to outline that there will be
economic crises due to the fact that individual countries will have exposed
themselves to swings in the global market. Furthermore, through the
increased integration of global financial markets a crisis in any one
country will quickly transmit into turmoil in another country, region or
internationally.
The NIC document then develops possible scenarios that could lead to
alternative global changes. One such scenario foresees that, “Global
elites thrive, but the majority of the world's population fails to benefit
from globalization.” Continuing on, it foresees a period when, “The global
economy splits into three: growth continues in developed countries; many
developing countries experience low or negative per capita growth,
resulting in a growing gap with the developed world; and the illicit
economy grows dramatically. Governance and political leadership are weak at
both the national and international levels. Internal conflicts increase,
fueled by frustrated expectations, inequities, and heightened communal
tensions; WMD [ed. Weapons of Mass Destruction] proliferate and are used in
at least one internal conflict.”
But that was just one of the possible scenarios. Are any of the other
scenarios promising? No. All of the four scenarios take as a given that
some countries will fail to benefit from globalization. Hm? And I wonder
which will?
Finally, the report documents possible trends that could adversely affect
the realization of their predictions. One such threat is the growing anti-
globalization movement, which may become, “a powerful sustainable global
political and cultural force—threatening Western governmental and corporate
interests.” Nation-states may also threaten US global hegemony: e.g.
should “China, India, and Russia form a defacto geo-strategic alliance in
an attempt to counterbalance US and Western influence”; or should the “US-
European alliance collapse, owing in part to intensifying trade disputes
and competition for leadership in handling security questions”; or,
finally, should “Major Asian countries establish an Asian Monetary Fund or
less likely an Asian Trade Organization, undermining the IMF and WTO and
the ability of the US to exercise global economic leadership.”
Maybe there is some hope….
(Thanks to the head-up on these documents provided by Noam Chomsky,
“Militarizing Space,” as published in International Socialist Review, Issue
19)
neo-liberal economists, claim that globalization will lead to greater
equality and freedom for all participating nations and peoples. However,
official documents of these same institutions reveal just how much they
believe their propaganda. As an example, the United States Space Command
in its document titled Vision for 2020 states verbatim, “The globalization
of the world economy will also continue, with a widening between ‘haves’
and ‘have-nots.’”
That’s putting it rather plain and simple - and dead on! Taking into
consideration the fact that this document is more an advertisement for the
US war department, advocating the development and deployment of space-based
weaponry, let’s look to a more composed document.
The US National Intelligence Council (an organization under the CIA’s
authority) produced a document under the title, “Global Trends 2015: A
Dialogue About the Future With Nongovernment Experts.” Here is a document
that states flat out that its in favor of continued globalization.
However, here is was it has to say about the economic effects of
globalization: “…economic liberalization and globalization entail risks and
inevitably will create bumps in the road, some of them potentially highly
disruptive.” Specifically, it goes on to outline that there will be
economic crises due to the fact that individual countries will have exposed
themselves to swings in the global market. Furthermore, through the
increased integration of global financial markets a crisis in any one
country will quickly transmit into turmoil in another country, region or
internationally.
The NIC document then develops possible scenarios that could lead to
alternative global changes. One such scenario foresees that, “Global
elites thrive, but the majority of the world's population fails to benefit
from globalization.” Continuing on, it foresees a period when, “The global
economy splits into three: growth continues in developed countries; many
developing countries experience low or negative per capita growth,
resulting in a growing gap with the developed world; and the illicit
economy grows dramatically. Governance and political leadership are weak at
both the national and international levels. Internal conflicts increase,
fueled by frustrated expectations, inequities, and heightened communal
tensions; WMD [ed. Weapons of Mass Destruction] proliferate and are used in
at least one internal conflict.”
But that was just one of the possible scenarios. Are any of the other
scenarios promising? No. All of the four scenarios take as a given that
some countries will fail to benefit from globalization. Hm? And I wonder
which will?
Finally, the report documents possible trends that could adversely affect
the realization of their predictions. One such threat is the growing anti-
globalization movement, which may become, “a powerful sustainable global
political and cultural force—threatening Western governmental and corporate
interests.” Nation-states may also threaten US global hegemony: e.g.
should “China, India, and Russia form a defacto geo-strategic alliance in
an attempt to counterbalance US and Western influence”; or should the “US-
European alliance collapse, owing in part to intensifying trade disputes
and competition for leadership in handling security questions”; or,
finally, should “Major Asian countries establish an Asian Monetary Fund or
less likely an Asian Trade Organization, undermining the IMF and WTO and
the ability of the US to exercise global economic leadership.”
Maybe there is some hope….
(Thanks to the head-up on these documents provided by Noam Chomsky,
“Militarizing Space,” as published in International Socialist Review, Issue
19)
Comments
Post a Comment