Wednesday
01Jun2005
The G8 and Globalisation
Wednesday, June 1, 2005 at 11:50AM
The G8 are much like the other “international clubs†(such as the UNSC), where the only real agenda is protecting the status quo. No progressive agenda would ever gather much momentum, as this would require sacrifice and consensus, which is beyond the current global leadership.
The era of globalisation is exploitative and profit driven however there are positives from this phenomenon. While cultural diversity and identity are homogenised out of existence - as Starbucks and Nike brand the world - we have to realise that globalisation is probably the greatest force of peace in our history. Thomas L. Friedman once stated that there has never been war between two countries with a McDonald’s restaurant. I do not know if this is true, but I suspect it may be.
Economic stability thrives in a peaceful environment, and corporations ensure that markets are secure. If globalisation means an end to War, then I for one will challenge my own opposition.
There is of course a difference between globalisation and heartless capitalism (the sort that inhabits the Whitehouse, and can be identified by organisations such as the Carlyle Group, Halliburton, and Exxon-Mobil). Globalisation has evolved from capitalism but is aware of its own mortality, it realises that consumer power can make or break any organisation (look at Mattel’s protection of the Barbie brand).
In America the moral crusade of the right is now shaping globalisation and the products retailers sell. Wal-Mart may be able to turn a healthy profit on a saucy magazine, but its consumer’s en masses may object. The majority then has decided the corporation’s policy. Klein would of course argue that this impinges free speech and I would tend to agree, however we that consumer have a responsibility to be sophisticated in what we demand. Is this not democracy in action?
The French referendum is being labelled a vote against Globalisation. I don’t believe this. If Sarkozy were the leader the yes vote would has been victorious, the anti-Chirac vote was enough to swing the electorate in favour of a non. Chirac is a vulpine disingenuous opportunist with little charisma or ideology, he deserves like Schroeder to be resigned to the scrap heap. Globalisation cannot be dismissed anymore than burying ones head in the sand can avert an earthquake. Globalisation is the post-Cold War world, and to deny ones need to face up to it is to ignore reality.
The G8 have little control over the Globalisation juggernaut, it too easily crosses boarders and has become too powerful. The G8 represent a hangover from a previous global order that is as outdated as those that lead it. Globalisation represent like no other movement real power for the people, should we choose to use it.
Will we be a demanding consumer, who commands environmental responsibility from our suppliers, or will we be the supine advertising led commodities we have become?
The beauty of globalisation is it’s our choice….
--------------
I can see the major shortcomings of globalisation, and the short-term myopic view of shareholders, but my main point is one of consumer choice. This economic model has been forced across the world by American aid and influence, there are always string attached to American aid (it represents the main thrust of US foreign policy). And the corporations can now exploit both the consumer and worker in their quest for supernormal profits.
The consumer must take the lead here and see beyond the barrage of advertising and misinformation. Hence the necessity for the BBC – an oracle beyond the grasp of the corporate word, not at the behest of the advertisers and their purse strings - unlike say CNN and Fox. Lets not forget that advertising no longer informs but misleads, and an uninformed consumer is market failure by default as this corrupts the price mechanism (the reason people pay over £100 for a pair of trainers).
This is where the media must play a leading role in highlighting the injustices of the corporate world. The Internet can take a great deal of credit for allowing media outlets a cost-effective medium to operate within; the Net has led to an informed consumer who now knows of the great injustices and demands change.
If corporations refuse to change then we need governmental intervention, but again as voters the power is in our hands.
Observe, reflect, and vote.
The greater point is one of leadership. In the past great leaders have answered the call of destiny. Churchill was no peacetime leader but he answered a call when our country was in its hour of need. Where are today’s progressive globally savvy leaders? Blair for all his shortcomings is probably the closest to a modern leader– just a shame he wasted his political capital on a foolish jaunt with Messer’s Bush and Cheney.
It’s only just over decade since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the birth of this new global economy, so maybe we will have to wait for the next generation of responsible leaders. Leaders who realise the fragility of this earth and do not hide behind misguided sceptics and corporate sponsored research which echos the pro-smoking lobbies of the 50-80’s.
Politics again much like the market; we must demand change. Marx of course encouraged change and conflict as a way to break free from the shackles of the past, a way of evolution by revolution. So maybe the anti-globalisation protesters have an important part to play in the debate?
Does anyone else feel we maybe on the cusp of a great global change? One where the old system is brushed away to make way for a new progressive market economy? We may miss our chance as the neo-phobic masses recoil into themselves, thinking only of protecting the assets they own, as opposed to achievements we the greater global population could accomplish.
Sadly with leaders like the ones who make up the G8, we will never evolve…
The era of globalisation is exploitative and profit driven however there are positives from this phenomenon. While cultural diversity and identity are homogenised out of existence - as Starbucks and Nike brand the world - we have to realise that globalisation is probably the greatest force of peace in our history. Thomas L. Friedman once stated that there has never been war between two countries with a McDonald’s restaurant. I do not know if this is true, but I suspect it may be.
Economic stability thrives in a peaceful environment, and corporations ensure that markets are secure. If globalisation means an end to War, then I for one will challenge my own opposition.
There is of course a difference between globalisation and heartless capitalism (the sort that inhabits the Whitehouse, and can be identified by organisations such as the Carlyle Group, Halliburton, and Exxon-Mobil). Globalisation has evolved from capitalism but is aware of its own mortality, it realises that consumer power can make or break any organisation (look at Mattel’s protection of the Barbie brand).
In America the moral crusade of the right is now shaping globalisation and the products retailers sell. Wal-Mart may be able to turn a healthy profit on a saucy magazine, but its consumer’s en masses may object. The majority then has decided the corporation’s policy. Klein would of course argue that this impinges free speech and I would tend to agree, however we that consumer have a responsibility to be sophisticated in what we demand. Is this not democracy in action?
The French referendum is being labelled a vote against Globalisation. I don’t believe this. If Sarkozy were the leader the yes vote would has been victorious, the anti-Chirac vote was enough to swing the electorate in favour of a non. Chirac is a vulpine disingenuous opportunist with little charisma or ideology, he deserves like Schroeder to be resigned to the scrap heap. Globalisation cannot be dismissed anymore than burying ones head in the sand can avert an earthquake. Globalisation is the post-Cold War world, and to deny ones need to face up to it is to ignore reality.
The G8 have little control over the Globalisation juggernaut, it too easily crosses boarders and has become too powerful. The G8 represent a hangover from a previous global order that is as outdated as those that lead it. Globalisation represent like no other movement real power for the people, should we choose to use it.
Will we be a demanding consumer, who commands environmental responsibility from our suppliers, or will we be the supine advertising led commodities we have become?
The beauty of globalisation is it’s our choice….
--------------
I can see the major shortcomings of globalisation, and the short-term myopic view of shareholders, but my main point is one of consumer choice. This economic model has been forced across the world by American aid and influence, there are always string attached to American aid (it represents the main thrust of US foreign policy). And the corporations can now exploit both the consumer and worker in their quest for supernormal profits.
The consumer must take the lead here and see beyond the barrage of advertising and misinformation. Hence the necessity for the BBC – an oracle beyond the grasp of the corporate word, not at the behest of the advertisers and their purse strings - unlike say CNN and Fox. Lets not forget that advertising no longer informs but misleads, and an uninformed consumer is market failure by default as this corrupts the price mechanism (the reason people pay over £100 for a pair of trainers).
This is where the media must play a leading role in highlighting the injustices of the corporate world. The Internet can take a great deal of credit for allowing media outlets a cost-effective medium to operate within; the Net has led to an informed consumer who now knows of the great injustices and demands change.
If corporations refuse to change then we need governmental intervention, but again as voters the power is in our hands.
Observe, reflect, and vote.
The greater point is one of leadership. In the past great leaders have answered the call of destiny. Churchill was no peacetime leader but he answered a call when our country was in its hour of need. Where are today’s progressive globally savvy leaders? Blair for all his shortcomings is probably the closest to a modern leader– just a shame he wasted his political capital on a foolish jaunt with Messer’s Bush and Cheney.
It’s only just over decade since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the birth of this new global economy, so maybe we will have to wait for the next generation of responsible leaders. Leaders who realise the fragility of this earth and do not hide behind misguided sceptics and corporate sponsored research which echos the pro-smoking lobbies of the 50-80’s.
Politics again much like the market; we must demand change. Marx of course encouraged change and conflict as a way to break free from the shackles of the past, a way of evolution by revolution. So maybe the anti-globalisation protesters have an important part to play in the debate?
Does anyone else feel we maybe on the cusp of a great global change? One where the old system is brushed away to make way for a new progressive market economy? We may miss our chance as the neo-phobic masses recoil into themselves, thinking only of protecting the assets they own, as opposed to achievements we the greater global population could accomplish.
Sadly with leaders like the ones who make up the G8, we will never evolve…
Reader Comments