« A New Context for Iraq 2004 | Main | Disclosure: Campaign Contributions »
February 18, 2004
Whence Globalization?
I had just read David McCullough's John Adams, when Esquire Magazine published The Pentagon's New Map last year. One of the thoughts in the piece concerns the understanding of the emerging global rule set of democracy, transparency, and free trade.
'Globalization' has always been around. And that 'America' is what emerged from connecting and harmonizing the flows of people and rule sets within the context of a new world conversation. America happened because people found a way to connect their energy from diverse flows of imagination.
The only way to stop America, to stop Globalization, is to isolate imagination.
February 18, 2004 at 05:08 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83456075769e200d8342335af53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Whence Globalization?:
Comments
Critt: It is always fun to read or discuss your erudite comments on the human condition, the political forest and socio-economic influences. You happen to be right on here. Isolationism is a historically proven short term mentality that doesn't build or contribute to anything.
We live in a global world. Trade is global. Communication is global. Get over it. That is reality. Free exchange of goods, labor and creativity is the infrastructure for the free exchange of ideas and ideals. Most every advance in a region's economics first was induced by what in retrospect would be called exploitation by a superior technical outside entity. It creates a bootstrap effect that pulls less developed entities out of the mud at a rapid pace. It happened in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, China, on and on. The result was a developed interdependency and a bond based on the flow of goods that transcended cultural differences. In areas that remained isolated, North Korea, advancement was retarded.
The one difference in this viewpoint is the difference in "exploitation" of labor vs. natural resources. In the middle East, oill companies have for decades exploited a region's natural resources, paying off those in charge for the right to do so. They did not need the people, so social advancing infrastructure was not invested in. This has lead to a vast difference in local populations outlook on their "exploiters". No jobs were created, no real advancement in lifestyle, unless the ruling parties shared the wealth (Dubai for example, has at least poured some of the gains back into the local economy). Thus, no cultural reason to exchange ideas, only build resentment.
"protecting" jobs in America is a short term expedient viewpoint. But inefficient, costly, unproductive jobs should not be protected. Every one pays for that in inflation eventually. Much of the work going "off shore" that politicians on the stump revile, are not jobs that Americans will do anymore. Stitching shoes,
soldering metal, etc. The plants in China by and large are much better than the manufacturing plants in America. We Americans have become paper pushers, not producers. We are technologists, not workers. It is what it is.
In any event, I thought you needed a posting and I am down here in the Nation's Capitol with a few extra minutes. So there it is. I hate to say it, but your Democratic ponies (K & D) are out of the race. Now, let the mud fly! It should be fun.
Posted by: Tom Carmody at Feb 19, 2004 11:08:38 AM
Hey Tom. Whadda ya mean my pony's out? He took third in Maine. :-)
Really, though, thanks for the comment. As always, you help me clarify what I'm thinking.
Let me know when you get back to town. I've got a video I want you to see.
Posted by: Critt at Feb 19, 2004 1:33:24 PM