Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 19:10:09 -0400 To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Paul Riesz Subject: Re: (1/n) "Globalization and the Revolutionary Imperative" Dear Mr. More: I read your posting about "Globalization and the Revolutionary Imperative" with great interest and though my views are much less radical than yours, I do agree with many of your ideas; especially on the excessive influence of wealth in Western democracies, indicating an urgent need for reforms (you use the term of plutocracy, which seems to hit the nail on the head, but might cause negative reactions from people, who remember that is was a mainstay in German propaganda against the allies during World War 2). As to your absolute opposition to globalization and your opinion that it is a strategy by multinational corporations to take over the world, I have some reservations. In my opinion the liberalization of trade brought great benefits to all of us during a long time and if now some harmful consequences have appeared, it only shows, that Free Trade, just as many other great ideas, has limits beyond which it becomes counterproductive. As to multinationals they DO take great and undue advantage of globalization, but probably only because their executives need to maximize profits for their shareholders (and themselves) if they want to retain their positions and not as part of a worldwide conspiracy. Therefore measures should be taken to keep the liberalization of trade within reasonable limits, to pay more attention to the concerns of ordinary people and to curb the excessive power of multinationals, which could be done, not through revolutionary means, but through REFORMING institutions such as the WTO and the IMF. The way to achieve such reforms might be, to make the voice of the majorities heard, when members of their governing boards are appointed or when it comes to approve financial contributions of member countries. As long as only "Chicago boys" sit on such boards, their policies will not favor the interests of common people. To do all that would certainly be difficult, but nowadays it should be somewhat easier through using Internet. As a reference I can point out an initiative to introduce an "electronic democracy" in British Colombia, which might be approved in the near future; for more info contact Dr, Frankilin Wayne Pole at "culturex@vcn.bc.ca". The same means should be applied to achieve a thorough reform of campaign financing in the US (see enclosure). Finally some remarks why I feel justified to issue opinions on such weighty matters, though lacking an academic background and not having really studied these subjects carefully on my own. This is based on my conviction that on matters of public policy, the only thing that counts is simple common sense, since the greatest experts, such as holders of Nobel prices in economics give diametrically opposed advice to governments, with often disastrous results. Whether or not my own opinions are based on such common sense is not for me to decide; therefore I have written down my ideas on several such subjects and posted some of them for discussions on Internet groups, but either no response did come forward or comments came only from radical Marxists, who do not accept any ideas, unless they are entirely based on the works of their idols. Hopefully they could receive some more objective comments on your discussion group; I shall therefore subscribe and later post them there. In order to find out, what the reactions might be, I am now including the latest one about the need for reforming liberal democracies. Here are my positions in a nutshell on a few other items on which I wrote down my ideas for discussion: 1. Trade relations: "Trade between countries can only be reasonably free, if it is also reasonably balanced. 2. The increase of juvenile violence: "As long as the airwaves are inundated with scenes of unprovoked extreme violence and/or irresponsible driving, kids must come to the conclusion, that such behavior is absolutely normal, that to become rich or gain attractive bed-partners on MUST use violence". 3. Drug addiction: "fighting SUPPLY is an unwinnable war, as long as so much money can be made with little effort though selling drugs. Drug addiction should be treated as a dangerous, communicable disease; therefore the community can DEMAND that it be treated, in order to reduce DEMAND. Please let me know what you think. Greetings Paul Riesz ENCLOSURE: During several months, WORKFARE has been discussed on several Internet groups, becoming apparent, that a considerable number of labor activists and supporters of the poor feel, that the actions of Western democratic governments and legislators have become very unfair. Many of them seem to have given up hope, that this situation can be improved through regular mechanisms of correction and are proclaiming the superiority of a Marxist alternative. They concentrate on pointing out real or imagined shortcomings of democracy and with such arguments are able to attract a great many people, who seem to have forgotten, that all known Marxist societies had much greater shortcomings, among them a complete lack of checks and balances. Under such circumstances it might be opportune to analyze the situation in depth and I therefore hope to find groups or forums, where this could be done and where I should like to issue the following: INVITATION TO DISCUSS WHETHER OUR DEMOCRATIC SOCIETIES SHOULD BE REFORMED, IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THEIR PRESENT PREEMINENCE AND ENHANCE THEIR BASIC VALUES. To claim that such reforms might be urgently needed, at the very moment, when democracy is on a triumphant ascendancy worldwide, would seem to be completely unwarranted, almost ridiculous. After all, our Western liberal democracies have proved to be foremost in wealth-creation, through economies based on free markets and also respect human rights and individual freedom, conditions lacking in totalitarian alternatives. Nevertheless it cannot be denied, that they have lately developed some great shortcomings, that affect the vital interests of a great number of their citizens and might cause them to lose faith in the system, thus undermining the support of the great majorities and maybe threatening their very existence in the not too distant future, since: 1. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE RICH AND THE POOR HAVE BECOME ENORMOUS and 2. THEY FAILED TO OFFER REASONABLY EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES TO ALL THEIR CITIZENS, something many of us consider the most important issue of a democratic society: Unfortunately the normal checks and balances, which should have provided corrections and improvements, have lost a great deal of effectiveness, since lately WEALTH HAS ATTAINED AN EXCESSIVE INFLUENCE ON DECISION MAKING through a. financial contributions to election campaigns and b. very effective lobbies, representing powerful minority groups. Under such conditions, legislators feel obliged to give a great deal of priority to issues of interests to such groups and often neglect to deal with problems, that are bothering or even tormenting other, quite numerous sectors of the population. Such lopsided attitudes, caused despair among the underprivileged, inciting them to violence and criminality, with the loss of safety in the streets and whole neighborhoods and also fomented drug-addiction. The main problems refer to the fact, that ACCESS TO EDUCATION, HEALTH-CARE, JUSTICE AND JOBS HAVE BECOME MUCH TOO UNEVEN FOR A HEALTHY DEMOCRACY. There are a great many additional issues, that should also be addressed in a thorough program of reform, such as homelessness, a veritable blemish of society, Nevertheless to give such a program better chances to succeed, one should establish priorities for a step by step approach, among which THE REFORM OF CAMPAIGN FINANCING MIGHT BE CONSIDERED THE MOST URGENT, not only because it would eliminate the very root of many other problems, but also because such an initiative has already been proposed and seemingly enjoys majority support among voters. At a second level of priority, A MORE PROGRESSIVE RATE OF TAXATION SHOULD BE REINTRODUCED, with yields to be used to offer more equality of opportunities and better access to services, that by now are considered basic for a decent human existence. On the other hand, ONE MUST NOT FORGET THE NEED TO MAINTAIN INCENTIVES FOR INVESTMENT AND TO ALSO PROTECT THE VITAL INTERESTS OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND CORPORATIONS, WHOSE GREAT PRODUCTIVITY ARE CREATING THE SUPERIOR WEALTH OF DEMOCRACIES, thus preventing a large-scale transfer of wealth towards areas, where it might enjoy more favorable conditions. Furthermore significant exemptions should be granted for investments, that create new jobs for displaced blue collar workers. Therefore reformers must use a BALANCED approach for their proposals, in order to achieve really effective and enduring results. One should also provide measures to ensure the effective use of the higher yield of taxes, (maybe a mandatory supervision by independent local or regional bodies). Though the grave shortcomings of our societies should be eliminated for the sake of fairness alone, one must also consider, that the failure to address them might become dangerous to the continuity of free societies, since it might not be too farfetched to assume, that in that case A GREAT AND POSSIBLY RISING PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION MIGHT START TO GIVE THEIR ALLEGIANCE TOTALITARIAN ALTERNATIVES of the LEFT or the RIGHT. Since the regular avenues of change and correction have become somewhat less effective lately, unconventional types of actions should be preferred, e.g. the wide and varied use of the Internet for contacting legislators and for organizing and coordinating campaigns to make people aware of the danger to ignore such vital issues. I should appreciate comments on these points and especially concrete proposals for starting an interchange of opinions from as many different viewpoints as possible. Greetings Paul Riesz