Idolatry alive and well #2: thanks for commenting
In reference to the posting "Idolatry alive and well #2," Kelly12luv@yahoo.com writes: "Of course the institutions of the world govern according to this policy. Institutions (politics plus business) fundamentally lack ethics and morality because it is not tied to profit. Now ethical behavior may be governed through laws and legislation, and on the surface most MNC's preach ethical business behavior (a must in order to save face), but we all know there are MANY loop holes that these corporations exploit and go unnoticed to the average constituent and consumer. The sad truth is that unless ethical behavior can be tied to profits or regulated through laws, most corporations will rape, embezzle, steal, and exploit the unprotected and unrepresented (i.e., the poor, the environment, and the animals).... Thank god for the watch dog companies- these are the people we need to support. "
LHG: Yes, corporations often exploit and watchdog companies are important to monitor and inform the public of such behavior. From our perspective, however, the problem runs deeper. The LHG believes it's possible to argue that the institutions that govern the global economic order - the IMF, World Bank and the WTO - are creating a system in which it is harder and harder for poor countries to overcome their poverty. A simple example: today's rich countries weren't born rich, they grew rich through weak intellectual property rights and protected industries (not to mention slavery and colonialism). Yet today strong intellectual property rights - the same kind that condemns thousands to death in Africa through AIDS - and the opening up of national industries to foreign competition is the norm. The US, however, was famous for stealing technology from other countries and most European countries didn't set up a strong patent for pharmaceutical products until the 1970's - when they had a comparative advantage in the field. Another simple example: How can a country that doesn't produce anything other than, say, bananas, start to produce cars or computers unless it can protect the infant industry? It's impossible, it takes time to be able to compete with established producers.
Why the focus on depriving poor countries of the very same tools once (and often still) used by the rich? Here's one suggestion, penned by Friedrich List, a well known economist who lived in the 19th century:
"It is a very clever common device that when anyone has attained the summit of greatness, he kicks away the ladder by which he has climbed up, in order to deprive others of the means of climbing up after him...Any nation which by means of protective duties and restrictions on navigation has raised her manufacturing power and her navigation to such a degree of development that no other nation can sustain free competition with her, can do nothing wiser than to throw away the ladders of her greatness, to preach to other nations the benefits of free trade, and to declare in pertinent tones that she has hitherto wandered in the paths of error, and has now for the first time succeeded in discovering the truth."
Kelly12luv, thanks for commenting.
LHG: Yes, corporations often exploit and watchdog companies are important to monitor and inform the public of such behavior. From our perspective, however, the problem runs deeper. The LHG believes it's possible to argue that the institutions that govern the global economic order - the IMF, World Bank and the WTO - are creating a system in which it is harder and harder for poor countries to overcome their poverty. A simple example: today's rich countries weren't born rich, they grew rich through weak intellectual property rights and protected industries (not to mention slavery and colonialism). Yet today strong intellectual property rights - the same kind that condemns thousands to death in Africa through AIDS - and the opening up of national industries to foreign competition is the norm. The US, however, was famous for stealing technology from other countries and most European countries didn't set up a strong patent for pharmaceutical products until the 1970's - when they had a comparative advantage in the field. Another simple example: How can a country that doesn't produce anything other than, say, bananas, start to produce cars or computers unless it can protect the infant industry? It's impossible, it takes time to be able to compete with established producers.
Why the focus on depriving poor countries of the very same tools once (and often still) used by the rich? Here's one suggestion, penned by Friedrich List, a well known economist who lived in the 19th century:
"It is a very clever common device that when anyone has attained the summit of greatness, he kicks away the ladder by which he has climbed up, in order to deprive others of the means of climbing up after him...Any nation which by means of protective duties and restrictions on navigation has raised her manufacturing power and her navigation to such a degree of development that no other nation can sustain free competition with her, can do nothing wiser than to throw away the ladders of her greatness, to preach to other nations the benefits of free trade, and to declare in pertinent tones that she has hitherto wandered in the paths of error, and has now for the first time succeeded in discovering the truth."
Kelly12luv, thanks for commenting.
posted by elivo at 5:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home