Globalization
December 17, 2002 8:53 AM Subscribe
Nobel Laureate says it is right to rebel against globalization. "The protests against globalisation are often ungainly, ill-tempered, simplistic, frenzied and frantic, even highly disruptive. And yet, they also serve the function of questioning and disputing the unexamined contentment about the world in which we live." [Exact quote- British spelling]
A pleasant surprise to find it was the brilliant Amartya Sen.
Yes. And I might add that the FPP tagline - Nobel Laureate says it is right to rebel against globalization - is somewhat misleading. This is not an article that fits neatly into the usual pro/anti globalization arguments. In fact, he makes a strong argument for globalization - but it is a very nuanced argument that concerns itself with adjusting the particular directions into which globalization is flowing.
[NOTE: If anyone reading this article is impressed, and hasn't yet read Sen, this article is really just a sort of surface skimming of a thesis he develops far more fully in his superb 1999 "Development as Freedom".]
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:02 AM on December 17, 2002
Yes. And I might add that the FPP tagline - Nobel Laureate says it is right to rebel against globalization - is somewhat misleading. This is not an article that fits neatly into the usual pro/anti globalization arguments. In fact, he makes a strong argument for globalization - but it is a very nuanced argument that concerns itself with adjusting the particular directions into which globalization is flowing.
[NOTE: If anyone reading this article is impressed, and hasn't yet read Sen, this article is really just a sort of surface skimming of a thesis he develops far more fully in his superb 1999 "Development as Freedom".]
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:02 AM on December 17, 2002
Shoot. This FPP seems to be getting no attention. I sorta wish it would - as there are so many posts about globaization that are utterly superficial, polarized affairs, and Sen approaches the subject with a full understanding of the incredible complexity surrounding the topic. This could be a great thread. Anyone?
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:35 AM on December 17, 2002
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:35 AM on December 17, 2002
You piqued my curiosity with that, Mr M, but all I get is
Provider error '8000ffff'
Catastrophic failure
/connect.asp, line 5
Which doesn't inspire confidence, especially the Catastrophic failure bit. Might be why there's little discussion. Anything online by Sen you'd recommend?
posted by Grangousier at 10:43 AM on December 17, 2002
Provider error '8000ffff'
Catastrophic failure
/connect.asp, line 5
Which doesn't inspire confidence, especially the Catastrophic failure bit. Might be why there's little discussion. Anything online by Sen you'd recommend?
posted by Grangousier at 10:43 AM on December 17, 2002
An excellent article, and I think he's more or less right on (though I differ politically from him somewhat). What's important isn't to stop "globalisation", however vague a term that is. Rather, it's to ensure that "globalisation" is shaped in the ways that we desire.
Though not a big fan of the WTO myself, I always found the justifications of the anti-WTO riot in Seattle in 1999 to be fascinating, if somewhat bizarre. As I seem to be the only one to recall, the WTO had met with the intent of imposing basic international standards on all members - the requirement of a minimum wage, basic environmental and work-place safety standards, and several other similar policies. At the time, one branch of the WTO protestors (a significant one, I was given to understand) claimed that this was a ploy to keep the third-world poor by forcing it to spend its money paying to upgrade to these standards. Now, the same branch opposes the WTO because it has not gone _far_enough_ in imposing these standards. While both critiques have some basis in fact, it seems bizarre to advocate both and criticise the organisation for trying both at various times.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 10:46 AM on December 17, 2002
Though not a big fan of the WTO myself, I always found the justifications of the anti-WTO riot in Seattle in 1999 to be fascinating, if somewhat bizarre. As I seem to be the only one to recall, the WTO had met with the intent of imposing basic international standards on all members - the requirement of a minimum wage, basic environmental and work-place safety standards, and several other similar policies. At the time, one branch of the WTO protestors (a significant one, I was given to understand) claimed that this was a ploy to keep the third-world poor by forcing it to spend its money paying to upgrade to these standards. Now, the same branch opposes the WTO because it has not gone _far_enough_ in imposing these standards. While both critiques have some basis in fact, it seems bizarre to advocate both and criticise the organisation for trying both at various times.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 10:46 AM on December 17, 2002
I tried to read it but the server is in deep doo:
Provider error '8000ffff'
Catastrophic failure
/connect.asp, line 5
Good old M$ server!
Oh well, I bet the story would have been interesting, darn it. Perhaps the server will be fixed soon....
I enjoyed Palast and his investigations into globalization and so many people are totally unaware of the forces that shape their lives.
posted by nofundy at 10:49 AM on December 17, 2002
Provider error '8000ffff'
Catastrophic failure
/connect.asp, line 5
Good old M$ server!
Oh well, I bet the story would have been interesting, darn it. Perhaps the server will be fixed soon....
I enjoyed Palast and his investigations into globalization and so many people are totally unaware of the forces that shape their lives.
posted by nofundy at 10:49 AM on December 17, 2002
I got the first and last pages of the article, but no luck with the intervening six pages. Server problems?
posted by newlydead at 10:52 AM on December 17, 2002
posted by newlydead at 10:52 AM on December 17, 2002
Which doesn't inspire confidence, especially the Catastrophic failure bit. Might be why there's little discussion. Anything online by Sen you'd recommend?
Well, I do hope the article is reachable (it's quite good ... but MeFi FPP's has a nasty habit of collapsing websites that aren't used to high levels of traffic), but as an alternative, here's a 1999 interview with Sen, from the Atlantic, shortly after Development and Freedom was published.
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:57 AM on December 17, 2002
Well, I do hope the article is reachable (it's quite good ... but MeFi FPP's has a nasty habit of collapsing websites that aren't used to high levels of traffic), but as an alternative, here's a 1999 interview with Sen, from the Atlantic, shortly after Development and Freedom was published.
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:57 AM on December 17, 2002
Here is an alternative link, friends. I agree that the treatment is very nuanced. Excellent piece, IMHO.
posted by SandeepKrishnamurthy at 11:42 AM on December 17, 2002
posted by SandeepKrishnamurthy at 11:42 AM on December 17, 2002
Links to more articles by Sen.
Outlook India is an interesting magazine and worth checking out regularly if you're interested in India. I found this article on how dalits (untouchables) are converting from Hinduism to other religions to escape the stigma of their caste quite interesting (link should work when the server recovers.)
posted by homunculus at 12:03 PM on December 17, 2002
Outlook India is an interesting magazine and worth checking out regularly if you're interested in India. I found this article on how dalits (untouchables) are converting from Hinduism to other religions to escape the stigma of their caste quite interesting (link should work when the server recovers.)
posted by homunculus at 12:03 PM on December 17, 2002
Nothing terribly fresh or unorthdox here. It is inherently anti-corporate globalization, advocates a socialist agenda spurred by humane globalization, administered nationally. In essence, “globalization is a thing, it is not going away, can we maybe make it a nice thing?”
posted by raaka at 2:43 AM on December 18, 2002
posted by raaka at 2:43 AM on December 18, 2002
« Older The Blue Hole | 2002's worst Americans...are YOU on the list? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by languagehat at 9:20 AM on December 17, 2002