Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Free Trade is Squeezing You - Final Draft -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (19)	5/31/2001 8:51:40 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 33

'New Left' fuels anti-globalization Movement grows despite crackdown on violence May 31, 2001 Diane Francis Financial Post A "New Left," replacing communism and socialism, is forming rapidly and is behind the backlash against so-called globalization or free trade. Globalization is nothing new, by the way, and began seven million years ago when homo sapiens left Africa. But the backlash is real and has gained steam since violent protests erupted in Seattle, Davos, Prague, Washington, Quebec City and wherever else multinationals or governments gather. This movement grows despite crackdowns and disdain by many for the violence and often ill-informed rhetoric. Esteemed Canadian economist and trade expert Sylvia Ostry has been researching this phenomenon for some time and last week delivered her brilliant analysis of the situation in a speech given as part of The Walter Gordon Forum series of lectures. "What's clear is that the '90s was the defining decade, the transition to a new political economy of international policymaking," she said. "The Internet made the anti-globalization movement possible." She believes the new geopolitical fault lines are no longer drawn between communism and democracy. They are multinational enterprises (MNEs) versus non-governmental organizations (NGOs) comprised mostly of former communists, socialists and environmentalists. The NGOs have multiplied because they fill a vacuum created by governments, which overwhelmingly signed on to the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Most of these countries unwisely raised expectations locally because they failed to realize these new rules would be highly disruptive to their societies (albeit good in the long run). They also did not realize they would be subject to a "new intrusiveness" into their legal, social and regulatory systems as a result of the treaty, she explained. The "Grand Bargain" with rich nations was: "I'll open my market if you open yours." This has enhanced trade and improved living standards overall, but some unintended effects have been difficult for some. The treaty created the World Trade Organization (WTO), a dispute mechanism modelled on the rule of law as manifested in only the rich countries. Unsophisticated leaders either don't understand the institution or cannot afford to hire the lawyers to represent their interests. Still others don't even understand the significance of rulings or complaints. The result -- as witnessed in Seattle -- is that the "south" or poorer nations walked out of the WTO proceedings. The street protests did not shut down the meetings. The poor nations balked at rules. These NGOs are more effective than other capitalist opponents because their efforts are harnessed easily through the Internet. This allows them to easily and cheaply mobilize and propagandize, she said. The most effective NGOs are in the rich countries even though disruptions due to enhanced trade are minor and benefits greater. The reason for this is that rich democracies are going through a crisis of confidence and have created a political vacuum into which NGOs have rushed. Dr. Ostry calls these NGOs and their proponents "policy entrepreneurs" because they are able through this organizational heft to devise and influence policies, both locally and globally. But the New Left's flashpoints are no different than the Old Left's: the increasing gap between rich and poor as well as between big and little, said Dr. Ostry. For instance, the top 200 multinationals are bigger than every country in the world in annual revenue except for the 10 biggest economies. (The real culprit for the poverty gap is not uneven trade, but excessive population growth. But dissenters don't address that reality.) The anti-globalization forces also have their own "globerati." Most articulate is Sheba, an Indian spokeswoman who has exaggerated globalization as a "war against nature, women, children and the poor." Jumping on the bandwagon is Hollywood. Just as China Syndrome all but buried nuclear power with its alleged exposé of an environmental disaster that was covered up, Erin Brockovich -- in which a law office assistant takes down an evil polluter -- won the Academy Award this year. Even Cold War novelist John le Carré shifted his attention from stories about the Evil Empire of the Soviet Union in his latest novel, which is about an Evil Pharmaceutical Empire, Dr. Ostry pointed out. Her research has tracked the global dissent network's biggest players. They are well funded and multinational themselves. They know how to use the media and foundation money to further anti-globalization sentiment. Among the biggest players are Ralph Nader's Trade Watch, the World Wildlife Fund, Oxfam and Friends of the Earth. Many improved their skills at the June, 1999, Carnival against Capitalism, which staged training sessions, legal rights workshops and helped create mobilization networks. "Greenpeace Australia is now in 28 countries and the World Wildlife Fund is in 28 countries with a budget in 2000 of US$357-million, three times the size of the WTO's," she said. nationalpost.com