Rampant Capitalism Emboldens Global Basket of Deplorables to Hate Each Other.All around the world, nationalists are gaining ground. Why
( Read more... )
This is a very complex and nuanced topic, so inevitably blanket statements are going to come across sounding a bit tone-deaf. I am also not a macro-economist, so it's hard for me to discuss the details with confidence. What I will say is that I definitely understand the arguments of those on the left who are scared of trade deals.
Here in Europe there is a strong leftist movement against TTIP for exactly the reasons lollycunt mentioned below - it risks inflicting America's woefully inadequate environmental and labor laws upon those of a far more progressive EU. This is a problem, for sure. But I would rather that the left try to amend trade deals to ensure we get the best environmental and labor protections worldwide than echoing the nationalist/populist position that we pull out of them altogether.
With regard to Brazil, I admit complete ignorance about the country and the South American region in general. I have never traveled there, and have done very little reading about it. I really appreciate the posts of international people on this forum because it exposes me to viewpoints I might not otherwise encounter, so thanks for sharing yours.
Outside of Brazil, though, this article specifically does show data that indicates belief in globalization as a force for good is higher in Asian developing nations and newly industrialized countries than in "traditional" developed nations. I think you would find very few people from the poorest countries of the world who would say that immigration and finance laws allowing their family members to work in more developed countries and send money home are a bad thing. Or that the idea of developed countries scrapping agricultural subsidies and tariffs would hurt and not help their domestic farmers. Or that foreign companies opening plants or offices in their countries is somehow retarding development.
Of course, like I said at the start, this is a super nuanced issue. For example, in parts of sub-Saharan Africa there is an ongoing debate about the value of cash crops vs subsistence farming. Although cash crops can greatly improve the lives of farmers living in extreme poverty, trading on the global market means they risk losing it all at the whims of people on the other side of the world. So I agree with you that it's not realistic to imply that all economic globalization legislation is implicitly successful at lifting people out of poverty. There is lots we can improve on. But I do believe that globalization in general - cultural and political as well as economic - has been a net good for humankind, and I don't think that's a view exclusively held by privileged "First World" folks like me.
Here in Europe there is a strong leftist movement against TTIP for exactly the reasons lollycunt mentioned below - it risks inflicting America's woefully inadequate environmental and labor laws upon those of a far more progressive EU. This is a problem, for sure. But I would rather that the left try to amend trade deals to ensure we get the best environmental and labor protections worldwide than echoing the nationalist/populist position that we pull out of them altogether.
With regard to Brazil, I admit complete ignorance about the country and the South American region in general. I have never traveled there, and have done very little reading about it. I really appreciate the posts of international people on this forum because it exposes me to viewpoints I might not otherwise encounter, so thanks for sharing yours.
Outside of Brazil, though, this article specifically does show data that indicates belief in globalization as a force for good is higher in Asian developing nations and newly industrialized countries than in "traditional" developed nations. I think you would find very few people from the poorest countries of the world who would say that immigration and finance laws allowing their family members to work in more developed countries and send money home are a bad thing. Or that the idea of developed countries scrapping agricultural subsidies and tariffs would hurt and not help their domestic farmers. Or that foreign companies opening plants or offices in their countries is somehow retarding development.
Of course, like I said at the start, this is a super nuanced issue. For example, in parts of sub-Saharan Africa there is an ongoing debate about the value of cash crops vs subsistence farming. Although cash crops can greatly improve the lives of farmers living in extreme poverty, trading on the global market means they risk losing it all at the whims of people on the other side of the world. So I agree with you that it's not realistic to imply that all economic globalization legislation is implicitly successful at lifting people out of poverty. There is lots we can improve on. But I do believe that globalization in general - cultural and political as well as economic - has been a net good for humankind, and I don't think that's a view exclusively held by privileged "First World" folks like me.
Reply
Leave a comment