Many thanks to A. Kyrie for her fantastic quote from our late night/early morning conversation. I'm not sure why, but she veered from whatever we were talking about to observe, "When you flush the toilet, shit flies around the bathroom and lands on your toothbrush." That gets my coveted "Quote of the Day" award for Thursday, June 29, 2006.
On a very different note, this be my response to a letter from a perfect stranger who stated that globalization does not necessarily help the spread of democracy.
Dear Sir,
Any reasonable person would agree with you. I would go a big step further and say that capitalism acts as a cancer on democratic government. The inequalities that travel naturally with capitalism get extended to political democracy. As the markets of the world become less regulated, this becomes more of a problem. Globalization creates a toxic environment for the organic growth of republican government. Struggling nations are quaintly referred to as, "emerging markets" and elected leaders in those countries are forced to de-regulate and often ignore the wishes of the people they represent in hopes of attracting capital investment.
If an elected leader does stand up to foreign pressure and chooses to represent the best interests of his or her people, then he or she runs the risk of being branded as an enemy of freedom, even in the free media of western nations. I'm thinking of Hugo Chavez, who is funneling hundreds of billions of dollars back into the Venezuelan economy after decades of theft by those who profited by vast oil fields under that nation's western frontier. Even though Chavez has been elected repeatedly and with growing support in elections that are monitored by the OAS and Carter Center, he is labeled a "left-wing dictator" by many in the so-called "mainstream" media.
This is so ironic for those who are familiar with the history of capitalism. If you go back to the 18th and 19th centuries, and look at how France, Britain, and the US thrived via capitalism, you'll see that they certainly did not do so via a laissez-faire system. On the contrary, they embraced restrictions, tariffs and regulations on imports. When a young nation does that today, they do so at their own peril. Simply put, they must roll over for international capitalism or rot within their borders.
Once again, ignorance rules the day. The romantic notion that an elegantly-functioning free market made America wealthy simply isn't based in reality. I have a hard time seeing that as a debatable point. I would go a lot farther, of course, given that I'm a socialist. I'd start by pointing out that this little experiment called, "America" probably wouldn't be around if it wasn't saved from capitalism by, ironically, a wealthy capitalist named "Roosevelt" in the 1930's. Anyone remember him? He was hardly a radical socialist. But if it weren't for his government "intrusions" on the market, we'd probably be calling each other "comrade" right now. Heck, I would argue that the FDIC alone saved the banks by guaranteeing deposits, and that led to the restoration of an environment necessary for simple money investment that fuels entrepreneurship.
Unregulated (or perhaps "under-regulated") capitalism almost killed itself, but the republic saved it. Now we have money-soaked pseudo-intellectuals with no knowledge of history telling us that capitalism spreads democracy, and that regulation needs to be cut back to allow the market to flourish.
You can't buy irony like that.
In Solidarity,
D
No comments:
Post a Comment