Globalization

[Rebelde para Siempre]

It seems that globalisation and free trade have both positive and negative effects.

Your thoughts on the matter???

[Bolschewik]

There are no positive effects of globalization. The only positive effect would be if you are one of the fortune 500, because now you would get a major taxbreak for moving your shit to the third world.

Any and all infrastructure built by the imperialists is made to be used directly by the imperialists. All globalization brings is corporate infestation of their culture, it takes their lands and gives it to the imperialists to be used for the interests' of the imperialists, not the need of the third world nation. I don't know how one can say free trade actually benefits the common people, both in America as well as the third world.

[mentalbunny]

Well I don't really know much about glabalisation so someone will have to fill me in. I don't really have anything against it as long as people don't suffer too much through it. I think fair trade is a good idea but i don't know much about it.

[Rob]

I'm totally opposed to globalisation. It ships American jobs away from American workers to places where the greedy corporate bosses can make more money by exploiting shithole countries' lack of workers rights.

[Pete]

My opinions on globilization are as such:
Nationalistic to Imperialistic Globalization
Internationalistic to Socialist Globalization

[Blasphemy]

globaliztion, in theory, is a good thing, in my opinion. the idea behind it is the nations of the world helping each other, supporting each other. the strong developed countries helping the weaker countries build a strong economy, rehabilitate the country and make it a fully developed country. something like that. that is socialist globalization - an international effort to help the weak.

globalization in its capitalist form, however, is an evil that must be stanched. it is used by the world's strong countries to exploit workers in developing countries.

[Iepilei]

there is a difference between globalisation and internationalism.

i'm against the though of globalisation, as it breaks the corporation away from any legal boundaries upheld by any state and gives them supreme power over the entirety of the world. No government would be safe.

[sypher]

I'm for globalization.

It will show the world how capitalism fails. there will be a massitve revolution and then maybe we'll have that global communist revolution the Marx held so dearly to his heart.

(Edited by sypher at 7:58 pm on Dec. 29, 2002)

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Why do u all want a revolution? Our maintask is educating the people, so they can choose the captalist or socialist side. We can run on the streets with rifles and manifests but we would be hunted down within days, even hours. CNN reports: Dangerous terrorist left radicals wanted to attack the White House. Luckily our troops could take them out. The American people and president are very thankfull and wants to reach out medals to...."

A revolution needs the total support of the people. The Russian and French revolution were full of blood and murder, but atleast 95% of the people supported them. It's only the people who can bring changes, not us, small group of leftists, outnumbered by rightwingers. Even if we succeed in a Revolution and take over power than the majority rightwingers will revolt against us and take their place back. The only result are a lot of deaths and that people consider leftists as "terrorists".

[Larissa]

The only benefit of globalization is the Internet > This site > All lefties sites > and I agree with building a revolution all over the world through the World Wide Web.
The problem with capis' globalized world is that they are not aware that they are only a mere bunch of ignorants who have not discovered yet that the only possible future is Socialism.

(Edited by Larissa at 5:28 pm on Dec. 29, 2002)

[Bolschewik]

The Revolution has already begun.

2002 is the year neoliberalism was slammed down in Latin America, with the defeat of the CIA coup in venezuela, with the massive protests and strikes which forced out the corrupt president in Argentina, and the election of anti-american leftist nationalists in Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru. This is a popular rebellion against the neoliberal policies brought forth by by Bush and Clinton through NAFTA and the FTAA.

(Edited by Bolschewik at 10:19 pm on Dec. 29, 2002)

[Larissa]

Agree with Bolschewik. Only, that Argentina is going through elections next March, and the favourites candidates ain't lefties...

At least, some of them belong to the "Justicialista" Party (founded by Perón in 1948) which is the closest thing to a Social Democracy.

I'm terrified at the idea that former president Menem may win, he sold the whole country to foreign Corporations. I wonder if he left something in my country without being sold.

[Pete]

Quote: from CCCP on 3:14 pm on Dec. 29, 2002
Why do u all want a revolution? Our maintask is educating the people, so they can choose the captalist or socialist side. We can run on the streets with rifles and manifests but we would be hunted down within days, even hours. CNN reports: Dangerous terrorist left radicals wanted to attack the White House. Luckily our troops could take them out. The American people and president are very thankfull and wants to reach out medals to...."

A revolution needs the total support of the people. The Russian and French revolution were full of blood and murder, but atleast 95% of the people supported them. It's only the people who can bring changes, not us, small group of leftists, outnumbered by rightwingers. Even if we succeed in a Revolution and take over power than the majority rightwingers will revolt against us and take their place back. The only result are a lot of deaths and that people consider leftists as "terrorists".


The 4 Steps to Revolution Model favoured by one of my history teachers.

1. Flaw in the System-> How can you say capitalism is not flawed?
2. A new/radically different ideology-> is that not what we debate and discuss here?
3. A dedicated core to the ideology-> Us.
4. Mass support -> what comrade CCCP was talking about. Education first. Action later.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

I am getting sick of those newcomers here, who shout in every replie of them that we must revolt, grab arms,kill captalists. Would be very brave ,but also very stupid. You would get hunted down in hours ,maybe days.

[Rob]

Quote: from sypher on 7:56 pm on Dec. 29, 2002
I'm for globalization.

It will show the world how capitalism fails. there will be a massitve revolution and then maybe we'll have that global communist revolution the Marx held so dearly to his heart.

(Edited by sypher at 7:58 pm on Dec. 29, 2002)

As nice as a revolution may seem, we can't rely on the system's failure to be successful, and I don't think Marx should be taken as the only path to justice, just because he said it, it doesn't make it guaranteed to bring justice to the majority, which is what really matters.

[Larissa]

Maybe not all of us CCP.

I have been actively fighting for almost 20 years now and had to hide in my country and leave my country afterwards because the Military Dictatorship wanted to "hunt" me, and they just couldn't.

And I'm not speaking about a group of "tough guys" who would arrest you, I'm speaking about GORILAS who tortured and "disappeared" 30,000 citizens in my country.

Check: http://www.yendor.com/vanished/index.html

Quote: from CCCP on 9:06 pm on Dec. 29, 2002
I am getting sick of those newcomers here, who shout in every replie of them that we must revolt, grab arms,kill captalists. Would be very brave ,but also very stupid. You would get hunted down in hours ,maybe days.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Not all, your posts are very good. Good arguments, friendly and easy readable. So I surtainly didn't ment you. I think that you know who/what I mean with:

I am getting sick of those newcomers here, who shout in every replie of them that we must revolt, grab arms,kill captalists. Would be very brave ,but also very stupid. You would get hunted down in hours ,maybe days.

[Larissa]

CCCP, sorry about my post then.
:wink:

[sypher]

Quote: from Rob on 12:18 am on Dec. 30, 2002

Quote: from sypher on 7:56 pm on Dec. 29, 2002
I'm for globalization.

It will show the world how capitalism fails. there will be a massitve revolution and then maybe we'll have that global communist revolution the Marx held so dearly to his heart.

(Edited by sypher at 7:58 pm on Dec. 29, 2002)

As nice as a revolution may seem, we can't rely on the system's failure to be successful, and I don't think Marx should be taken as the only path to justice, just because he said it, it doesn't make it guaranteed to bring justice to the majority, which is what really matters.


I agree that it isn't the best way to achieve socialism but, I fear that it may be the only way. I don't think any other scene would work. sure you could get socialism in one country at a time but, what are the chances of that spreading to engulf the entire world under one coomunist banner? very little.

[PlasticJesus]

The revolution will be achieved through self-education.

KNOWLEDGE IS POWER ARM YOUR SELF

[PlasticJesus]

The best way to achieve socialism is through knowledge.

KNOWLEDGE IS POWER ARM YOURSELF!

[Rebelde para Siempre]

True, revolution should be a last resort.

Globalisation in a socialistic sense would be great (isn't that what we always wanted?), but globalism on a capitalistic model seems to work sometimes in helping a country's economy.

On the other hand, it doesnt help third world countries increase their living standards ie. sweatshop labor.

For the most part, I am against it, but people should really read up on the subject. Especially stuff by Noam Chomsky.

[Larissa]

Here are a couple of interesting sites about Chomsky:
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/rbr/noamrbr2.html
and
http://www.rebelion.org/chomsky.htm

Quote: from Rebelde para Siempre on 11:53 am on Dec. 30, 2002
True, revolution should be a last resort.

Globalisation in a socialistic sense would be great (isn't that what we always wanted?), but globalism on a capitalistic model seems to work sometimes in helping a country's economy.

On the other hand, it doesnt help third world countries increase their living standards ie. sweatshop labor.

For the most part, I am against it, but people should really read up on the subject. Especially stuff by Noam Chomsky.

[Iepilei]

revolution will not be a last resort, but a final step.

[Pete]

"I am getting sick of those newcomers here, who shout in every replie of them that we must revolt, grab arms,kill captalists. Would be very brave ,but also very stupid. You would get hunted down in hours ,maybe days. "

Was that about my post CCP?

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

If you say that sort of stuff. But it was actually a reaction on someone else.

[Pete]

Then not me, thank you for clarification comrade.

[red warlock]

[quote]Quote: from CCCP on 5:02 am on Dec. 30, 2002
Not all, your posts are very good. Good arguments, friendly and easy readable. So I surtainly didn't ment you. I think that you know who/what I mean with:

I am getting sick of those newcomers here, who shout in every replie of them that we must revolt, grab arms,kill captalists. Would be very brave ,but also very stupid. You would get hunted down in hours ,maybe days.

YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!!EVERYBODY THINKS THAT IF HE AND OTHER DETERMINED COMRADES WILL MARCH IN THE STREET WITH GUNS THEY WILL OBTAIN A THING......IT'S STUPID AND THIS WAY COMMUNISM WILL BE REGARDED AGAIN AS GREAT EVIL,AS A TERRORIST ACT....
THE REVOLUTION STARTED,THAT'S RIGHT BUT IT AIN'T GOING TO PRODUCE IMMEDIATE RESULTS AS YOU HOPE..IT'LL TAKE YEARS AND YEARS.I HOPE I MADE MYSELF CLEAR ENOGH.
CHE GUEVARA SIEMPRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RGacky3]

Quote: from PlasticJesus on 4:33 am on Dec. 30, 2002
The best way to achieve socialism is through knowledge.

KNOWLEDGE IS POWER ARM YOURSELF!


We already have the knoledge, its the masses that need the socialist knowledge

[Doshka]

Globalization is terrible...it is corrupt and rotten through and through. It feeds on the weak and makes terrible countries like America and it's ape-president stronger. Mind you not even all of America, not the Americans themselves but the rich red-necks tht already own half of the world fortune through oil. The sooner the fall of globalization the better...any revolution against it will have my complete and total support. How will local stores ever get anywhere when places like Mcdonnalds and Gap are the only places people buy from? The people themselves need to be given a fair chance at making it somewhere. What is the point of educating the people if they are repressed by world organizations?

[antieverything]

OK, this is yet another sad example of ignorant punks who are parading around as leftists in order to piss off their folks.

There is no such thing as an "anti-globalization" movement aside from dumbasses like you guys who don't know anything about its effects. The argument is that globalization could be administered more humanely and more environmentally.

The jobs that corporations create in the third world are often the most sought after jobs...but they still often pay below a subsistance wage...but without them, the people would die that much sooner. It is exploitation, yes but it is the way in which globalization is instituted that is evil, not globalization itself.

The countries in the third world with the most foriegn investment have the most rapidly rising standards of living. Things are different in countries with somewhat advanced economies like Mexico, however. There we saw NAFTA cause a drop in standards of living, rises in unemployment, and drops in wages...

Once again, you guys have no idea what you are talking about...I'll bet none of you have ever read anything on the topic that didn't come from some shitty anarchist website or something. RESEARCH globalization and then come back and express SPECIFIC grievances.

...either that or just shut the fuck up.

[Doshka]

oh shut up what the hell are you doing on this website anyway...'antieverything'? your so fucking full of yourself they are called oppinions and no not everything is black or white...learn to be open minded and stop jumping to conclusions

[antieverything]

Hmm...upon reading that again...damn, that was some fucked up shit, man. Talk about arrogance.

Sorry about that guys.

[hr]
I probably came across as if I was fully supportive of globalization which I am not. I am opposed to the policies of the WTO, World Bank, and IMF. The fact is, globalization IS inevitable...you could say that it has already happened. The thing is that globalization is like fire, it can cook food or warm a home; but it can also destroy.

Also, my major argument against globalization is that it doesn't democratize things like the proponents say...it puts more and more power into the hands of corporations accountable to no law (because there isn't any law to stop them).

[antieverything]

also, I recomend everyone read up on globalization (both sides) on the about.com site.

starting with this...

http://globalization.about.com/library/wee...y/aa080701a.htm (http://globalization.about.com/library/weekly/aa080701a.htm)

[truthaddict11]

Quote: from antieverything on 9:46 pm on Jan. 11, 2003
OK, this is yet another sad example of ignorant punks who are parading around as leftists in order to piss off their folks.

There is no such thing as an "anti-globalization" movement aside from dumbasses like you guys who don't know anything about its effects. The argument is that globalization could be administered more humanely and more environmentally.

The jobs that corporations create in the third world are often the most sought after jobs...but they still often pay below a subsistance wage...but without them, the people would die that much sooner. It is exploitation, yes but it is the way in which globalization is instituted that is evil, not globalization itself.

The countries in the third world with the most foriegn investment have the most rapidly rising standards of living. Things are different in countries with somewhat advanced economies like Mexico, however. There we saw NAFTA cause a drop in standards of living, rises in unemployment, and drops in wages...

Once again, you guys have no idea what you are talking about...I'll bet none of you have ever read anything on the topic that didn't come from some shitty anarchist website or something. RESEARCH globalization and then come back and express SPECIFIC grievances.

...either that or just shut the fuck up.


I disagree, what about Seatlle? Quebec City? sure as hell of a lot of people opposing globalization and they werent "anarchists" they were Unions, Labor Activists,Enviromental Groups, Human Rights groups, Student Activists, ect.

[antieverything]

"anti-globalization" is a title that is given to the movement by the media...nobody is actually against globalization. What they are protesting is the policies of the WTO, World Bank, and IMF and free trade agreements such as NAFTA and FTAA. They are protesting the globalization of political power, not the globalization of product.

[Pete]

The preface to the book Windows and Fences by Naomi Cambell (that is not right the author I mean) explains exactly what Anti-Everything is saying. No matter what Globalization is here, we just have to make sure that it doesn't turn into anachro-capitalism on us.

[antieverything]

Exactly, globalization is simply a phenomon created by the information age...the enemy is neo-liberalism.

[truthaddict11]

my belief that globalization in its form now is a race to the bottom. whoever will work for the least amount of wages and is willing to take the most sacrifices such as unions or workers rights are going to get the jobs, this doesnt just affect the people in those countries but the ones whos jobs are being taken away. the fact that these trade organizations especially the WTO have more power over Nations must stop.
If anyone has ever heard of the book Wealth of Nations this is the path we are going towards where companies have complete control to do whatever they please in order to gain a profit. This must be stoped and the only way to stop it is to stop this mirrage of globalization is to end the corporate rule.

[Doshka]

im sorry but i still dont understand..what exactly are you suggesting? we allow globalization but change the rules? or do we stop countries like the U$ taking advantage of the workers? ofcourse all this is idealogical...not realistic...but what are you proposing and what is ur stand?

[truthaddict11]

Doshka i see globalization as a new age imperialism. i am against it. i believe that there should be internationalism instead.

[antieverything]

You fail to recognize the fact that globalization often does great things for developing countries and their people...the problem is that we need to also focus on protecting (and building) the microeconomies of these areas so that they aren't completely dependant of a foriegn corporation.