Shrinking Violets in the Global Village

#38

..... i agree with you 100% ........ so there is really nothing to argue about

......... but i still don`t understand the complaint against globalization ......... it seems to me that the developing nations are the main beneficiaries of this phenomenon and if anyone was to complain it should be the auto workers in michigan, the textile workers in alabama, the orange growers in florida, the teamsters in new mexico and the programmers in california ........

........... hundreds of billions of dollars in fdi are flowing into china and the rest of the developing world from the west creating jobs for the natives - so what is the problem ?......... if there is ineptitude, corruption and waste it is a problem created by the leopard skin and pajama culture .............

Re: # 5

i dont know what i might sound like here but things wudnt be so bad in the developing countries if the west did not side with the local leaders read gang lords, fuedals, army chiefs, murderers to run the show for their own benefit.

examples include western influence in diamond rich countries in afrika, oil rich areas in south america, middle east, in fact all over the world. if there is an uprising, the west will provide the arms to let them fight amongst themselves for as long as it is possible. wen it comes down to genocide, the very same countries will have meetings and issue statements condemning the actions which were instigated by and continue to benefit the west in the first place.

looks like even ppl from third world countries who`ve done well for themselves, think this has happened bcoz they r better, and simply dont give a shit abt the rest anymore.

ya sheikh, apni apni dekh.

Re: # 35
That is precisely what I am talking about - the white man`s burden. Why should it be the white man`s burden? I can understand from a historical perspective but in these days of development and emerging superpowers and what not, why is it still the white man`s burden? In case you havent noticed when the White man handles his burden, he invariably looks for a solution that will suit him best rather than anyone else - and it ends up biting everyone`s shiny bottom. Look at Nigeria, Palestine, the Balkans, India-Pakistan.

Globalization is today myopically viewed as an economic concept although there is a growing number of people who would beg to differ. Can we have some leadership from the ``guys in leopard skins``, as you so charmingly put it, both inside their countries as well as outside, we might actually be in a position to do something positive for all of us.

Someone talked about the ineffectiveness of Mandela - why is he ineffective? Because his moral courage is not backed up by political will. Somebody else was talking about private funding and charities - what is the point? In the short term you can stop people from starving, in the long term...?

In both these cases you need political will to accomplish anything. Mandela can talk about AIDS all he wants but unless Mbeki stops sticking his head in the sand, there is no point because the govt will not act. On the other hand if the South Afrcan govt actually stepped up internally, then they could do some good in the region because then they would have a model to present to similarly situated neighboring nations. Again, sending aid to starving millions is of no use if corruption is not bridled. Mbeki has talked a lot about the African Union but the AU can do zilch without someone grabbing initiative.

Leadership - where is it? In the hands of Bush and Blair who are pushing their own agendas? That`s not leadership - that is furthering one`s foreign policy objectives.

``It is a fallacy to suppose that the creation of wealth must be the sole objective of modern governments participating in the global village. Creation of wealth means nothing to most of the 6.5 billion human beings alive today unless other economic factors are also looked after.``

The creation of wealth has to be the main driving force for everyone and every country. Until we reach the stage of Star Trek where money is not longer in existence, because anything can be created through molecular manipulations, in a replicator machine.

It is the distribution of wealth that needs to be made more streamlined. Infact that isn`t even it. It is the skills related to the creation of wealth that need to be distributed, across the world, in a more streamlined manner, i.e. free college education for the whole world........the ultimate utopia

The entrepreneur drives the society and the world. After having seen military folks, academicians, and having climbed (relatively high on) the corporate ladder, I am now convinced that, hands down, the most competent people in any society are entrepreneurs. Everyone else has their salaries paid by the wealth created by entrepreneurs.

The most difficult thing to do in the world, is to kill or be killed. Because one`s life is the most important thing one owns. The second most difficult thing to do in the world is to put one`s own money on the line and try to create wealth by becoming an entreprenuer.

Countries with the best entrepreneurs are the most powerful. America is run by a goofball President. Its Defence dept and military, despite a $400 billion budget, is getting the asses handed to them, by a group of ragtag Arab fighters. Yet it still chugs along. Why? Because, hands down, America produces the best entrpreneurs, in the world. And it creates an environrment, where anyone can become an entreprenuer. The most talentetd Americans don`t go into politics, of civil services, or the military. They become entrprenuers (or they go into R&D - another thing in which America is hands down the best)........

It is the entrpreneurs who risk their life savings (or in my case, their house payments) to try to create wealth. Thereby giving jobs to consultants, receptionists, bank managers etc. The later use their salaries to buy books written by authors and poets. It is the taxes paid by the entreprenuers` creations that pay the salaries of the defence forces and beaurecracies...........

For those who take, ``generation of wealth`` for granted, I would like to challenge them to quit their cushy corporate job, or their leftist campaigns and risk their life`s savings to start a company and create wealth............

Low corporate taxes, high salaries, and free universal college education.............the basics of an ideal society..........in my opinion..............

for all the lazy people (the more excitable amongst you are asked to bear in mind that this is a speech by the Indian Finance Minister and as such ostensibly portrays the views of the Government of India) the end of this under-reported speech is particularly interesting:
**********

The European Think Tank with a Global Outlook
INDIA AND GLOBALISATION
Foreign Policy Centre Programme Launch Event
The Guildhall, London
3 February 2005
Speech by Shri P. Chidambaram, Finance Minister, India

Globalisation means different things to different countries. Within a country
too, globalisation means different things to different people.
Prior to World War I, the world had a high degree of globalisation of
finance. This gave way to capital controls in the inter-war period, and then
to Bretton Woods.
After World War II, at first, the globalisation process was focused on trade
in goods, fueled by dropping costs of sea and air transportation. Then, as
the economies of the developed world graduated into the post industrial
stage, they pioneered trade in services. The steep decline in prices of
telecommunications made possible trade in services in a manner that was
previously unimaginable.
The next two milestones were 1980 and 1990. First China, and then India,
began to integrate into the world economy in terms of trade in goods and
services and capital flows. Between the two countries, they have nearly 2.4
billion people. The story is yet to play out fully.
In this talk, I shall try to offer an Indian perspective on globalisation, and
how the story might unfold in India in the next few years.
The international architecture, comprising the UN, the World Bank and the
IMF, has served the globe reasonably well in the last 50 years. As we face
new kinds of complex challenges in the future, we need to find new ways of
organising the international architecture in response to the emerging new
poles of economic strength on the planet.
The India Story

India’s GDP, at market prices, is nearly $800 billion per year. Exports of
goods and services amount to $ 133 billion a year. Net capital inflows
average about US $ 19 billion annually.
The trade-GDP ratio (including both goods and services) has gone up from
25% in 1992-93 to 35% in 2003-04. In addition, gross flows on the capital
account went up from 15% to 20% of GDP. Summing up, the total
integration of trade and capital, increased from 40% of GDP to 55% of GDP
over an eleven-year period.
With exports continuing to grow at a brisk pace and capital inflows
continuing to remain robust, I expect that the ratio of total integration will
rise steadily over the next ten years.
A new aspect of India`s globalisation is outward FDI by Indian companies,
who are now enormously confident, and are in the process of becoming
multinational corporations. In 2003-04, outward FDI from India amounted
to a sum of $1.4 billion -- a small step by world standards, but a giant leap
for India. In my view this is only the beginning. Indian companies are
hungry to go abroad, acquire manufacturing firms as well as brands, and
position themselves at the doors of new markets. For the first time, Indian
companies are seen as potentially major players in the world market.
The traditional face of Indian business has changed dramatically in the last
few years. Indian firms are no longer only seekers of foreign technology or
producers of staple goods or providers of low-end services. Their
engagement with the world has acquired new dimensions.
Even in the traditional engagement in goods and services, India has become
the leading nation in software services – TCS, Infosys and Wipro are
acknowledged world brands. India is also a major hub for manufacturing
and export of manufactured products, especially in sectors such as
automobiles, auto parts and accessories, leather goods, textiles,
pharmaceuticals, petroleum products and machine tools. And if you will
add handicrafts and hand made products, flowers and herbs, the traditional
engagement with the world is quite impressive.
The Non-traditional Engagement
The non-traditional engagement that we have witnessed in the last few years
is even more striking. Spearheading this phenomenon are remarkable
individuals who have ascended the ladder of success and achievement in
areas ranging from education to medicine to consulting to finance to

politics. Behind these individuals are the millions of families which
constitute the Indian diaspora. Indians abroad are adding to their global
wealth. In the United States, the Indian ethnic community has the highest
average per capita income. So is it in many other countries. The Indian
diaspora remains attached to its languages, books, music and, above all, its
movies. As the influence of the Indian diaspora grows, one can perceptibly
feel the growing influence of India’s music, books and cinema.
I would identify four non-traditional sources of India`s engagement with the
world:
1. Outward FDI by Indian firms, and the rise of Indian multinationals
2. India`s prominence as a platform for R&D, and thus a source of new
ideas in science and technology,
3. The cultural influence of books, music and movies from India,
4. The role of Indian nationals in global corporations, particularly in the
fields of science, technology and finance.
These four aspects of globalisation go well beyond the traditional notions of
trade and capital flows. But there are strong synergies between these four
aspects and the traditional focus on trade and capital.
The Demographic Opportunity
India also enjoys, almost uniquely, what has been described as the
demographic advantage. It is perhaps the only large country where the size
of the working population is expected to grow over the next 20 years. It is
also perhaps the only large country where the average age will decline,
before it begins to rise after about 2030. We are in the process of ensuring
that every child is in school for at least 8 years and, if possible 10 years. We
will also continue to produce thousands of engineers and technologists,
doctors and nurses, accountants and managers, and teachers and
administrators. In sheer numbers, India’s human resources will dwarf that
of every other country, save China. A growing and educated working
population will, I believe, power India’s economic growth.
India’s opportunity is also the world’s opportunity. Where will the
developed countries of the world look to for satisfying their enormous
appetite for quality goods and services? Where will they find avenues for
investing their savings? Where will they turn to for recruiting the human
resources needed to run their hospitals and colleges and businesses?
The Other Side of the Story

My prediction is that globalisation will become a truly two-way street over
the next 20 years. When India plugged its economy into the world
economy, it marked the passage from childhood to adolescence for India.
When, over the next 20 years, the countries of the world plug their
economies into the Indian economy, it will mark the passage from
adolescence to adulthood for India.
However, I must enter a few caveats.
India’s producing classes range from the very poor to the very rich.
Needless to say, the rich will be in the first line of beneficiaries of
globalisation. The high growth rates witnessed in the industry and services
sectors will keep them in the vanguard. However, the Indian train is long
and, at the very end, are unskilled and semi-skilled workers who work on
the land or work with their hands. Their aspirations are modest and few –
reasonable wages, shelter, drinking water, electricity, schools, hospitals and
connectivity. As of now, many of them are sceptical of globalisation. The
Indian State cannot ignore their aspirations even while it integrates the
Indian economy into the world economy.
You will therefore, I hope, understand our concerns – and constraints --
when we argue the case of the developing world in the WTO. Or, when we
enact a law on patents. Or, when we seek new markets. Or, when we
suggest new ways for reorganizing the present architecture of international
institutions.
The issue is not globalisation. India accepts and willingly embraces the
imperative of globalisation. We do so in our self interest. The real question
is the terms of engagement in globalisation.
As of today, the terms are heavily weighted in favour of the developed
countries. Millions of people in the developing countries, and in the least
developed countries, watch in silence, and with a growing sense of
bitterness, that the Age of Prosperity is passing them by. This does not
augur well for either globalisation or stability.
I urge you to review the process of globalisation. And I urge you to renew
the process by making it more inclusive, more just and more equitable.
The Foreign Policy Centre is well placed to take a leadership role in this
behalf. I thank you for this opportunity and I urge you to seize the moment.
We, in India, will be very happy to work with you in these areas of mutual
interest.

* * *

``But this article was about the politician and his refusal to step forward in the global interest`` .............

........which politician ?..........if you are talking about bush and blair then i am afraid they have done more than enough to bear the white man`s burden ......... i think it is time the guys in the funny robes and hats and leopard skins stepped up to the plate to do something in the interest of their half-naked subjects ............ let`s cut to the chase and stop playing the blame game ........

.......back to the commune

...... on a recent trip to new york city, after we had gone up and down park avenue a couple of times without buying anything except except a thirty dollar yellow cab t-shirt , we headed down to canal street ............. and that`s where i discovered the joys of globalization - the same t-shirt was selling for five dollars ........... so in addition to half a dozen t-shirts we picked up an ugly ysl handbag for twenty bucks and even uglier burberry scarves for ten - all made in china, of course ......... my daughter picked up five pink, blue and yellow big wristwatches for another twenty and everything was going fine untill i offered to buy mrs hamidm a few pounds of jumbo shrimp from vietnam that was selling for a ridiculously low price ........ she was upset because i never get that excited at the sight of red roses ..... but that is another story .............

............ in all this excitement i never once thought about the poor chinese workers toiling in sweat shops in shanghai making bags and watches and t-shirts to satisfy the venal desires of fat white women in greenwich, ct and cheap paki-american tourists from the mid-west ...........but now that i think about it, what would the poor chinese migrant do if he didn`t make bags and t-shirts ?............ i guess he could stay on the commune and grow some rice in an idyllic setting ..................

Avenger,

the hole you dig just gets deeper with every post....its like we wind you up and let you go!

And in the meanwhile , we have more blah blah blah and I ME MYSELF from the writer....

Look. Paul Krugman talks keeping the American perspective in mind. My views are shaped by what I see in India. Its easy for those who are already wealthy or born into wealth to talk about how `Wealth Ain`t Everything` and that `There Is More To Life Than Money`. But the poor know better.


`What do they (my servants (haha)) think of globalisation` ?

There is only one servant actually. A muslim lady. She does the dish washing and gardening and house cleaning. I doubt if she understands the meaning of the term `globalisation` - but then neither does the respected Professor of Diasporic Narratives. But she should be undoubtedly happy with the skyrocketing of her monthly incomes over the last 5-10 years.

This wouldn`t have happened if India had not integrated with the global economy -> resulting in the entry of MNCs into the Indian market -> which set up offices / plants / productions all over India since manufacturing in India is cheaper than importing the same from US -> return of the prodigal sons and daughters - the NRIs to India to manage MNC operations -> huge demand for domestic help -> more money for the kaam wali bai -> not easy for my mom (just a banker) to hold on to decent domestic help because of the stiff competition from ex-NRI/MNC wives -> the kaam wali bai now in a position to dictate terms -> all because of globalisation....

Am I a socialist?
No. So can we pls not have more of the tired Socialists-ruined-my-country-and-my-world-why-don’t-you-build-a-shrine-to-Stalin tirade? I’ve already heard it and it makes absolutely no difference to me. But it’s your keyboard and your fingers: feel free to feed me more useless info.

Of course, I’m not a capitalist either. Come to think of it, I’m not any kind of an ‘ist’. Because it’s ridiculous to think that a single philosophy can solve the problems of our plural world. (Although the devil’s advocate might whisper “post modern” – but what does he know? Look at the company he keeps!)

Re: globalization. It is pretty obvious that it is here to stay. My problem is not with the process itself (which can potentially accomplish a lot of good) but what Chidambaram calls the terms of its engagement. It is still skewed in favor of the rich countries in direct violation of WTO rulings. In fact, I can’t put it any better than Chidambaram in his speech to the Foreign Policy Centre, an European think tank in London. The full text of his speech can be found on the net. Btw, I was highly interested to learn that there are those who do not really understand what ‘globalization’ is all about but they’re pretty sure that it’s good! Right.

Re: taxation. In the mostly accessible “Federal Taxation in America: A Short History”, Elliot Brownlee posits that real tax reform is only possible in times of national crisis. He was talking of the United States but it holds true for India as well and for all I know the rest of the world.

I began the taxation thread in my article because it was an example (btw, you did understand it was only an example and I wasn’t handing out a sure-shot formula for world peace, didn’t you? Of course you did!) that lay very close at hand. As a child of a highly capitalist family in a more than mildly socialist country, I have grown up with taxation issues dominating dinner table conversation. The model put in place by Pandit Nehru and continued by his daughter was often pointed out as an example of how NOT to tax people. Manmohan Singh’s economic policies didn’t stop at exim alone, it went on to things like taxes as he understood (and hopefully still understands) that trade alone can do little to advance a country. But nearly 15 years on, there is much that needs to be done in all areas including ... tax. :)

On the other hand, it is pretty much evident that the US model isn’t going great guns either. President Bush might make all the noises he wants to but tax experts on all sides are agreed on one thing – true reform will have to go far beyond what Bush and Co are thinking of, if not in completely different directions.

So what is the solution? I don’t know. I know when something is broke, but I don’t have the knowledge required to fix it. For that I’ll look to the professionals – you know, those fat cats I elected and the people they appointed?

There are so many things that would not have been out of place in the article – corruption, democracy, benign dictatorship, the relationship between MBA programs and the Third World… the list seems endless.

But this article was about the politician and his refusal to step forward in the global interest. Perhaps some of you are wondering why the Bharatiya Neta No. 1 or his Pakistani or American counterpart should give a damn about things that take place millions of miles away. I have no better answer than the one I provided in my article – because what affects one group of people in the global village will sooner or later affect everybody.

When Saddam Hussein came into power way back when, how many American mothers thought that it might have an effect on the lives of their kids? Today we look at the countries in Africa where corruption, internecine warfare and nature have combined to create Hell on Earth and most of us wonder what it has to do with us. We’ll find out when new and even more virulent strains of disease begin to spread, when more and more peacekeepers begin to die, when those countries begin defaulting on their loans and international lending institutions are thrown off skilter and we end up picking up the tab.

If you want to hear it expressed better then look for Kofi Annan’s essay in The Economist a few weeks back – I can’t remember the name of the essay but you should find it on the net.

In closing - Bono, Oprah, and the Gateses – I don’t care. They’re all private individuals. Where are the politicians? We’re only throwing good money after bad until and unless we get some political leadership going.

PS – to dear cranky Hamidm: if I want to weasel out of something I said, I can do it by myself, thank you. Very kind of you to take over for me, but sooooo unnecessary.

Regarding Oprah....Her advice (and likes of her) to women can be likened to a candy makers` advice to kids to eat more candy - lots of it. Of course kids will love the advice because it tastes sweet, but it is terrible for teeth and health. By the time they realize the truth, it is too late.

amrita rajan: i am sorry but you are merely repeating what the third world ``intellectuals`` used to talk about in the 1950`s and 1960`s - blame the west for everything, while ignoring your own problems.

Example: no doubt Mandela is a man of great character and highly respected. But - he has failed to do anything to stem the huge problem in his own backyard, namely the AIDs crisis. The most effective way to end this crisis is to introduce some morality - for people to stop screwing around to put it bluntly. THis is a cultural change. The west is givning hundreds of millions in public and prviate funds to end it. western firms develop new medicines to fight AIDS. but all this is proving ineffective unless there is the above mentioned cultural change. Has even ONE african leader (mandela included) taken the leadership to bring about this cultural change that only africans can do for themselves? Easy to call on the west to give more money to end poverty - the fact is that elites in poor countries pocket the money. mobutu of congo made 5 BILLION dollars from stolen money.

Globalization is the solution. THe problem is the lack of character of the ``intellectuals`` of the third world who refuse to face inconvenient facts.

End of Rant.

Thank you and have a nice day.

saminasha: Please ask hamidm to write a 5000 word essay on the evils of globalization over the weekend. Thank you.

hamidm: while in detroit, hope you did not forget to drop by urstruly`s place for dinner and an evening of lively political discussion.

in praise of heeng ........

.......... i was at the daimlerchrysler (please not the daimler+chrysler) headquarters recently and lo and behold, they have indian food on the meny everyday with hundreds of indian code coolies sitting in the huge atrium gorging on chicken vindaloo, bhaji, dal and naan .......... the only ill effect of globalization that i noticed was the smell of heeng hanging in the air and the rather disgusting display of finger licking ............ other than that everyone seemed to be happy ...............