Consumerism And Globalization

The new edition of International Forum on Globalization has a tone of guarded optimism: activists worldwide are not just against globalization any longer (as in Seattle in 1999), they are beginning to have a vision of a” better, more democratic, and ecologically sustainable world”. 1

Global Resistance:

Alternatives to Economic Globalization asserts that the year 2003 was a “turning point” in “corporate-driven economic globalization” because of three separate events which took place that year:

1) The U.S. invasion of Iraq in the spring of 2003 aroused global anger and bewilderment; millions of people worldwide protested against the invasion “in the largest peace demonstration in human history”. Most governments refused to give any support to the invasion, even countries that have historically close ties to the United States. “Thus emerged a new set of alignments led by Germany, Russia, France and China that stood firmly against the increasingly transparent aspirations of the Bush administration to build a global empire through economic and military coercion.” 1

2) WTO meeting of government representatives and NGOs from across the world resumed with negotiations of global trade agreements in Cancun, Mexico in the fall of 2003. But the world was not the same place it was just a few years ago: WTO’s collapse in Seattle in 1999 had taught important lessons - globalization is not inevitable and it can be resisted, and that little, powerless actors have power, if they collaborate and come together; the U.S. invasion of Iraq had just taken place six months prior, against the approval of the majority of the world’s nations and peoples; many developing nations had begun to take note of their own citizen activists, who had been working for years to convince their governments that economic globalization and WTO are not good for poor countries. This time around poor nations united and “negotiated as a bloc and would not accept a deal they had no part in creating, one that mainly served the corporate interests of the rich nations”. 1 With protests in the streets of Cancun and the poor nations’ rebellion against unfair trade agreements, the negotiations failed to produce any results.

3) The third significant event was the negotiations for Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) in Miami in December of 2003. Many South American governments had recently gone through radical changes. Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil and Equador had all elected new governments, who were more or less against economic globalization due to negative experiences with structural adjustment policies imposed by the IMF and the World Bank. “It would be fair to categorize the South American continent as the first major region of the world to turn away from neoliberalism in an active political way." 1 Many South American and Caribbean countries united against unfair U.S. – promoted trade policies and the negotiations failed - again.

Because of these momentous events in 2003 there is “a growing awareness on every continent of the failure of the present global economic system and its ruling institutions. The demand is growing for a global system grounded in new principles and institutions that embody values of justice, democracy and sustainability”. 1

An important note about the War in Iraq is that, according to Alternatives to Economic Globalization, the war is not so much an attempt by the United States to expand its empire, but it is rather a desperate attempt to resuscitate an existing economic empire in rapid decline! The “neoliberal project”, promoted most actively by American corporations, economists and politicians, is an impossible paradigm: it requires an infinite supply of cheap resources and labor, accessible new markets and willing nations (or at least corrupt governments) to participate in their exploitation. But nations of the world have opened their eyes and seen the naked self-serving motives behind the Iraqi invasion: cheap oil, accessible markets and free trade for American corporations, and they have become increasingly unwilling to participate.

Sold to the world as a panacea for all problems, economic globalization has not lived up to its advertising. It has not lifted the poor; it has instead brought record disparities in income and wealth between rich and poor nations, and rich and poor within nations. It has greatly inhibited democracy and social justice; it destroyed local communities and pushed farmers off their traditional lands. And it has accelerated the greatest environmental breakdown in history. The only real beneficiaries of globalization are the world’s largest corporations and their top officials, and the global bureaucracies they helped to create. 1

People across the globe have become emboldened and hopeful that change is on the horizon for a better, more democratic world. The World Bank and IMF are no longer trusted by citizens or governments because of their dreadful record in “helping” poor nations. Activists are organizing to promote civil society, self-determination and peace. The World Social Forum (WSF) is an annual gathering of thousands of grass roots organizations to discuss and share a “new vision of a world that can thrive if it is freed from the grip of corporate globalization”. 1

Global Homogenization:

One cannot underestimate the power of the media today. “Who controls the media controls the world.” The ownership of the global media is in the hands of just a few multinational corporations today. And their goal is not to promote diversity of cultures or opinions, but rather to make people alike.

Alternatives to Economic Globalization states that “the external processes of homogenization” are to change the rules and regulations of media through the WTO, NAFTA etc. so that multinational media corporations can dominate local markets throughout the world and set standards for one mass culture. “…the assignment is also to make over the internal landscape, to remake human beings themselves – our minds, our ideas, our values, behaviors, and desires – to create a monoculture of humans that is compatible with the redesigned external landscapes. The idea is for our minds and values to match the commercial corporate system around us…” 1 By making people alike it is easier to market products and consumption to them. By owning all the media outlets it is easy to control access to information and manipulate the kind of information people receive. But it is not good for democracy or public debate.

Although the Internet can be a powerful force for democracy, it can be used as well – or better – for the benefit of the dominant corporations. Internet alone cannot fight the effects of media consolidation and homogenization. Although overwhelming, the problem of mass media influence cannot be ignored. “…all activist groups, whatever their primary issues, need to focus on the problems of media today or their own work [will] be continually hindered. Media reform needs to move to the front burner of every group working toward democratic outcomes and a free flow of information.” 1

Alternatives to Economic Globalization suggests seven ideas that promote more democratic media across the globe.

1) Pressure the Global Rulemakers;
2) Pressure Domestic Rulemakers;
3) Impose Fees on Commercial Broadcasters for Use of the Public’s Broadcast Commons;
4) Increase Subsidies for Public Broadcasting;
5) Set new limits on Advertising;
6) Support and Empower Alternative Media
7) Support Local Organizing.

It is indeed a daunting task to try to tackle the giant called the Mass Media; especially in the U.S., where there is no history of strong public broadcasting, and where the public is so indoctrinated and encultured by the mainstream media. But without change people will be unprepared to resist economic globalization en masse.

Alternatives:

Alternatives toEconomic Globalization in chapter five discusses the concept of
the Commons.

These are aspects of life that had been accepted since time immemorial as collective property, or the common heritage of all peoples and communities, existing for everyone to share… Obvious among them are the air we breath, the freshwater we drink, the oceans and the diverse wildlife and plant biodiversity of the world, the genes… human knowledge and wisdom…shared language and culture… 1

The commons is threatened by globalization and its attempt to commodify and make a profit out of every aspect of life. It is imperative to resist this trend. The book suggests several ways to accomplish this. The most important are the dismantling of the Bretton Woods institutions. These are the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO (previously GATT). Another important principle in resisting globalization is to support localization of decision-making as much as possible: democracy is at its liveliest at the grass-roots level. Nations need to achieve (at least in most basics) self-sufficiency in food, energy, water, education, health, culture etc.

1. Alternatives to Economic Globalization: A Better World Is Possible
Edited by John Cavanagh & Jerry Mander

http://adbusters.org/home/

Globalisaatio ja kulutuskulttuuri kulkevat kasi kadessa kohti sietamatonta tulevaisuutta. Kirjoitin taman jutun vahan yli vuosi sitten, mutta se on edelleen ajankohtainen, silla monikansalliset yhtiot valloittavat yha maailmaa median, WTO:n ja sotien avulla. Kuluttajien on itse otettava vastuu siita, miten rahansa kayttavat ja miten viettavat aikaansa ja mista saavat uutisensa. Yhdysvalloissa varsinkin "uutiset" eivat ole enaa uutisia, vaan media-viihdetta, jolla tuuditetaan kuluttajat tiettyyn mielentilaan (passiivisuuteen ja kulutukseen). "Oikeat" uutiset on itse aktiivisesti haettava internetista ja vaihtoehto-mediasta, silla valtavirta-media (mainstream media) toitottaa vain tyhjanpaivaista pulppua ja pelottelee kansaa kaikenlaisella vakivallalla.