Debate: Globalization

[Alter]

I am doing a research paper for my Honors World Lit. class ad it happens to be about one of the most heated topics in a growing world economy: Globalization. I am mostly writing about how it needs to modernize and shift to support the third-world nations instead of crush them. I decided that this would be a good chance to get some good debates and arguments exchanged back and forth.

So therefor, do you think Globalization is a fair tool for the global economy? Do you feel it fits within the U.S business and economic agenda? Is it good for the American people? You can cover anything related within the topic and try to debate each other in a smart, cohesive(not like this paragraph) manner.

Anyways, is Globalization a good thing?

 

[Dak]

No it is not. Putting that much power in the hands of one person/group of people where-ever the "top" would be, is going to be asking for trouble.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Of course Dakryn is the first to jump in with one of his trademark generalisations.

I see nothing wrong with a global regulatory body for economic matters. Naturally we would still want states to have sovereignty, but having an institution to make sure everyone plays fair in the market is something we could really use.

 

[Zephyrus]

Corruption is too easy for a bunch of regulators to cap commerce and not be put into place by the very corporations such a committee is set to restrain. Globalization by its very nature is the triumph of economic powers over political powers, and appointing global regulators won't shift that inequality.

That said, the current financial crisis may be a cause for reconsideration of how the world economic engine functions, and perhaps some changes for the better are in order. More likely however we'll fuck things up even more, whether or not the corporate fat cats profit at the expense of the masses.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Corruption is too easy for a bunch of regulators to cap commerce and not be put into place by the very corporations such a committee is set to restrain. Globalization by its very nature is the triumph of economic powers over political powers, and appointing global regulators won't shift that inequality.

Well if they're appointed and not elected, then yeah that would be a problem. There's also the factor of how much secrecy is allowed in the organisation. Obviously there are ways to fuck up any form of government and make it corruption-friendly. I don't see how this applies to international institutions any more than it applies to regular governments.

 

[Zephyrus]

Well you either have a union of economic and political powers, which corrupts the latter, or a separation, which creates conflicting interests. You cannot win and nothing will fix that.

 

[genocide roach]

we already live in a global community. we may as well accept it. though total globalization may not be the way. though we should do our best to keep the rest of the world stable because in case you haven't noticed, if one countries economy fails, other suffer as well.
~gR~

 

[Dak]

That said, the current financial crisis may be a cause for reconsideration of how the world economic engine functions, and perhaps some changes for the better are in order. More likely however we'll fuck things up even more, whether or not the corporate fat cats profit at the expense of the masses.

Of course, one of my other trade mark generalizations is the conspiracy theory that the current economic crisis was engineered to create the situation where people would accept global rule by a selected elite. Which will be all kinds of fucked up for the group of people which will from that point on be known as serfs or dead.

Well if they're appointed and not elected, then yeah that would be a problem

Elections are a farce at this point. Even if the actual voting isn't rigged, thanks to the elementary level of media processing by the masses (due to incredibly degraded education), all that needs to happen for permanent control is the corporate nominated stooge get a catchy slogan and mass amounts of glowing press(and be a great speaker) and the masses will flock to his "charisma".

Wait....

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Man, this thread is not starting out well.

Maybe we should be looking at real-world movements toward globalisation and discussing the merits/flaws of those, instead of just generalising on the pros and cons of the concept itself.

Not that I feel like researching any of that crap.

Of course, one of my other trade mark generalizations is the conspiracy theory that the current economic crisis was engineered to create the situation where people would accept global rule by a selected elite. Which will be all kinds of fucked up for the group of people which will from that point on be known as serfs or dead.

That's kinda interesting to think about. Though still pretty unlikely.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Dakryn, I like how you're incredibly pessimistic and defeatist about everything, but buy easily into stupid conspiracy theories or just make your own. Never change man.

 

[Dak]

That's kinda interesting to think about. Though still pretty unlikely.

Obviously you have never read: the Georgia Guidestones, or maybe some alternative information about the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Comission or the Bilderberg Group.

Edit: 1st Line from the Georgia Guidestones:

MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000

There are currently roughly 6,710,926,117 people in the world.

That means a large group of people need to die in the view of a different group. Probably the group of people who don't think they are part of that group that needs to die. The group that doesn't think they need to die is probably the people currently with a lot of money and power who want to maintain their power/pass it on to their "superior posterity" forever.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

But ah hates reedin'!

...Yeah I'll try and check those out sometime when I have the brain power.

 

[MasterOLightning]

Obviously you have never read: the Georgia Guidestones, or maybe some alternative information about the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Comission or the Bilderberg Group.

Edit: 1st Line from the Georgia Guidestones:



There are currently roughly 6,710,926,117 people in the world.

That means a large group of people need to die in the view of a different group. Probably the group of people who don't think they are part of that group that needs to die. The group that doesn't think they need to die is probably the people currently with a lot of money and power who want to maintain their power/pass it on to their "superior posterity" forever.

Uh, those guidestones read like hippie crap that a handful people with money put together. You're making a fucking massive leap to associate some 30 year old carvings with any current conspiracy theories. As for those other think tanks, I don't see any evidence that they are anything more than that.

 

[unknown]

wtf does globalization have to do with world literature? (unless if you guys are doing some sort of new historicism critique of something written recently, but still...)

 

[skeptik]

Amazingly, I'm only posting in this thread simply to say I'm not touching it this time. Maybe the next time around.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

useful post bro

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Obviously everyone was dying to read what Dodens had to say on the matter.

 

[skeptik]

No shit, that's why I posted.

 

[waif]

Elections are a farce at this point. Even if the actual voting isn't rigged, thanks to the elementary level of media processing by the masses (due to incredibly degraded education), all that needs to happen for permanent control is the corporate nominated stooge get a catchy slogan and mass amounts of glowing press(and be a great speaker) and the masses will flock to his "charisma".

We get it, you don't like Obama. STFU now?

Uh, those guidestones read like hippie crap that a handful people with money put together. You're making a fucking massive leap to associate some 30 year old carvings with any current conspiracy theories. As for those other think tanks, I don't see any evidence that they are anything more than that.

Besides which, the georgia guidestones thing honestly seems pretty reasonable...not exactly "establish thought control, enslave the masses, institute communism" or anything.

Also, overpopulation is a real problem. However, it's not necessary to kill people to depopulate the planet, just lower birth rates and wait for old people to die (it would help if we cut them off from health care or put them to work but obviously that would be unconscionable).

 

[Zephyrus]

Overpopulation is bad, but the unequal distribution of wealth and resources is what's making it a greater issue than it needs to be.