About Economic Globalization（2）
[align=left][align=left][b][font=Verdana][size=12pt]The assault on labor[/size][/font][/b][b][font=Verdana][size=12pt][/size][/font][/b][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]
[/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]One of the main objectives of TNC movement abroad has been to tap cheaper labor sources. Labor is often cheapest, and least prone to cause employer problems, in authoritarian states that curb unions and enter into virtual joint venture arrangements with foreign capital, as in Suharto's Indonesia and PRI's Mexico. Capital moves to such friendly investment climes in an arbitrage process, shifting resources from the more expensive to the less costly locale, in a process that penalizes and thereby weakens democracy. [/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]The actual shift of capital abroad, and the use of the external option to drive hard bargains at home, has weakened labor. Labor has also been weakened by deliberate government policies of tight money and restrictive budget policies to contain inflation, at the expense of high unemployment. These policies, and the incessant focus on labor market "flexibility" as the solution to the unemployment problem, reflect a corporate and antilabor policy agenda, fully institutionalized. There have even been more open and direct attacks on organized labor--both Reagan and Thatcher engaged in union busting, and the latter was quite explicit in her aim to weaken labor as a political force. Democracy, according to pluralistic theory, is said to rest on the existence of intermediate groups, like labor organizations, that can bargain and work on behalf of an otherwise atomized population. The deliberate weakening of such groups is thus an attack on democracy.[/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][b][font=Verdana][size=12pt]The ideological campaign[/size][/font][/b][b][font=Verdana][size=12pt][/size][/font][/b][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]In the United States, Britain, Canada, and other countries the business community has also mounted a sustained ideological campaign to make their preferred policies part of common understanding. These campaigns have proceeded in parallel with globalization and have been remarkably similar, reflecting the global flow of ideology and overlapping sources of funding. The favored neoliberal ideology pushes the idea that the market can do it all, that government is a burden and threat, and that deregulation and privatization are inherently good and inevitable. It presses an extreme individualism and the value of "personal responsibility," which is highly advantageous to corporate power, leaving bargaining between large firms and isolated individuals. Collective and community values, the threat of externalities and ecological damage from unconstrained business growth, free market instability--all are shunted aside in this ideological system. This ideological campaign has been highly successful, because vast sums of business money fed to intellectuals and think-tanks, and business domination of the mass media, has allowed their views to prevail. Heritage Foundation leader Edwin Feulner has described the strategy of his corporate- funded and globally linked thinktank as analogous to Procter & Gamble's in selling soap--saturate the market with messages that overwhelm any that are less well funded. But this is a corruption of democracy; it is a bought market of ideas, not a free market of ideas. [/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]Capturing or immobilizing governments. The business community has also mounted a powerful effort to dominate governments--either by capture or by limiting their ability to serve ordinary citizens. Globalization has contributed to this effort, partly by the arbitraging process mentioned earlier, which favors authoritarian rule. Apart from this, by enlarging business profits and weakening labor it has shifted the balance of power further toward business, so that political parties have been even more decisively influenced by business money in elections. In the United States, it is notorious that Mr. Clinton has sought and received enormous sums from business and serves their interests almost exclusively, with only token efforts on behalf of the major nonbusiness constituencies of the Democratic Party. The globalizing corporate media have added their growing strength to the advance of neoliberal ideology and opposition to any vestiges of social democracy, making social democratic policies difficult to implement. The Murdoch effect on British elections, and the current Murdoch-Blair connection illustrates the point. [/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]Another well-known and important antidemocratic force is the power of global financial markets to limit political options. Social democratic policies make for an unfavorable investment climate. Businesses will therefore respond to politicians and acts serving ordinary citizens with threatened or actual exit. Financial market effects on exchange and interest rates can be extremely rapid and damaging to the economy. Spokespersons for the new global economy actually brag about the ability of capital to penalize "unsound" policies, and the fact that money capital now rules. [/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]These business efforts, aided and validated by the IMF and by media support, regularly cause social democrats to retreat to policies acceptable to the rulers. Thus, in country after country social democratic parties have accepted neoliberalism, despite the contrary preferences of great majorities of their voting constituencies. But this means that nominal democracy is no longer able to serve ordinary citizens, making elections meaningless and democracy empty of substance. This helps explain why half or more of eligible U.S. voters no longer participate in national elections. [/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]Supra-national limits on democracy--the New (TNC) Protectionism. Not satisfied with this level of political control, the business community has pushed for international agreements, and policy actions by the IMF and World Bank, that further encroach on the ability of democratic polities to act on behalf of their constituencies. [/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][/align][/align][align=left][align=left][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b]These agreements and the demands of the international financial institutions invariably call for precisely the policies desired by the TNC community. The EMU conditions give primacy to budget constraints and inflation control, in accord with the neoliberal and corporate agenda. GATT, the WTO, and the NAFTA agreement also give top priority to corporate investor and intellectual property rights, to which all other considerations must give way. In the early 1980s, the IMF and World Bank took advantage of the Third World debt crisis and used their leverage with numerous distressed Third World borrowers to force their acceptance of Structural Adjustment Programs. These forced the borrowing countries to agree to give first priority to external debt repayment, private as well as government; it compelled them to adapt austerity programs of tight money and budget cutbacks focusing heavily on social expenditures affecting the poor and ordinary citizens; it forced a stress on exports, which help generate foreign exchange to allow debt repayment and that more closely integrate the borrower's economy into the global system; and it stressed privatization, allegedly in the interest of efficiency, but serving both to help balance the budget without tax increases and to provide openings for TNC investment in the troubled economy. The IMF is doing the same in Asia today. [/b][/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=12pt][b][/b][/size][/font][/align][/align] 顶楼
页:
[1]