|
|
The Other View |
||
|
Issue No.6 Autumn 2001 Is Globalisation the new ColonialismBy Billy Mitchell Globalisation is a specific economic strategy
developed by established industrialised countries and transnational corporations
to control access to, and exploitation of, the worldıs markets. Because the
primary beneficiaries of global economics are the transnational corporations and
their shareholders, it is a strategy that works well for profits, but not for
people. Fifty-one of the world's top one hundred
economies are companies, not countries. Their only allegiance is to their
profit-seeking shareholders. The worldıs top three billionaires have assets
greater than the combined GNP of all the least developed countries and their 600
million people. Multinationals think globally, and have the
economic muscle to make governments listen. Economic decision-making is more and
more being transferred away from national governments to multi-national
corporations and to unaccountable bureaucrats in the World Bank, the IMF and the
World Trade Organisation. In their quest for market dominance they are
prepared to use whatever means necessary to sweep aside smaller local
competitors and to trample underfoot the social and environmental needs of whole
countries. They also have the power to get away with corporate murder, slave
wages, child labour, intimidation of union officials and high levels of
pollution. This issue of globalisation is not just an issue
for the developing third-world countries. Those who control the global economy
are not just creating an ever widening gap between the richer and the poorer
countries, they are also widening the gulf between the rich and the poor within
countries. Even in those countries that have benefited from the global economy
there is an inequitable distribution of those benefits. Clearly it is an issue
for us here at home. The poor within both the United Kingdom and the Republic of
Ireland are not faring well under globalisation. Both countries have the highest
poverty levels in the industrialised world outside of the United States. A recent United Nations report on Human
Development placed the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland fifteenth and
sixteenth respectively out of seventeen Western countries with over 15% of their
population living in human poverty. Many of us have long argued that the
so-called ³tiger economies² do not really enhance the lives of the poor, and
the benefits of the Celtic Tiger have certainly not benefited the marginalised
poor in the Irish Republic. The United Kingdom fares little better. The
difference between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland in terms of
human poverty is a mere 2%. The UK is reported as being the most unequal in
terms of the distribution of wealth with the richest 10% of the population
having ten times more than the poorest 20%. The success of the global economy requires
national governments to force down labour standards in order to attract
investment. We have seen some of the effects of this in the United Kingdom with
increasing demands for deregulation, the creeping privatisation of public
services, resistance to demands for a living wage and the refusal of New Labour
to repeal the plethora of anti-trade union laws brought in under the previous
Tory government. There is also a growing health and safety issue for workers and
consumers everywhere which demands solidarity within and across nations. Figures
issued by the HSE for the year 2000/01 indicate an increase of 34% increase in
workplace fatalities across the United Kingdom. It is also estimated that more
than 3,000 workers die each year in the UK from asbestos-related diseases. Human
life is cheap when you put profits before people. The only international industry police force with
real, enforceable sanctions, the World Trade Organisation, uses its muscle to
protect trade at the expense of workplace safety and environmental standards.
Poisonous exports and toxic materials can have global protection, while workers
cannot. Deregulation within the food industry will
substantially increase the danger to public health. What could be more
disastrous than allowing the powerful meat industry to inspect its own produce?
The conflict of interest between the provision of safe produce and the
maximisation of profit is just too great. The meat industry is just not
ethically equipped to regulate itself. If you think that is too strong a
statement I recommend that you read the Swann Report into hygiene practices in
slaughterhouses and the more recent BSE Inquiry Report that was published last
October. Yet that is what the government, under pressure from both the European
Commission and the World Trade Organisation, plans to do. Workers everywhere are told to expect worse
conditions, less security and lower wages because "that's the reality of
global trade". Make no mistake about it these global trends do affect us in
both Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. The British poor and the Irish
poor will continue to get poorer while the rich in both jurisdictions will
continue to get richer. The latter will rest safe in the knowledge that the
divided poor will never be in a position to mount a serious political challenge
to their system of inequality and legalised corruption. If Irish patriotism and Ulster loyalism mean
anything, surely they mean working for the social and economic emancipation of
the underprivileged in both jurisdictions and in challenging those who have
embraced the new colonialism of global economics. This is what our priorities
should be as we struggle to find an exit strategy from the cycle of alienation,
conflict and violence that has beset us for so long.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||