 |
|
THE HANDSTAND |
AUGUST 2003 |
|
Are smashed windows
more newsworthy than destroyed lives? > Private morality, world morality: Since man no longer believes that a god is guiding the destinies of the world as a whole. or that, desite all apparent twists, the path of mankind is leading somewhere glorious, men must set themselves ecumenical goals, embracing the whole earth. The older morality... demands from the individual those actions that one desires from all men - a nice, naive idea, as if everyone without further ado would know which manner of action would benefit the whole of mankind...It is a theory like that of FREE TRADE, which assumes that a general harmony would have to result of itself according to innate laws...Perhaps a future survey of the needs of mankind will reveal it to be thoroughly undesirable that all men act identically... In any event, if mankind is to keep from destroying itself by such an overall government, we must discover first a knowledge of the conditions of culture, "civilisation", a knowledge surpassing all previous knowledge as a scientific standard for ecumenical goals. F.Nietzsche > The main focus of anti WTO protester's rage. > > by Yves Engler* > > > Montreal July 30 2003: While smashing windows is most probably a result of testosterone-hyped male juvenile anger, the origins of destroying countries and even entire continents economies are more obscure. But which should be more newsworthy? On Monday in Montreal 700 or so protesters marched to oppose meetings of the World Trade Organization, but we were blocked by hundreds of well-armed riot cops in our attempt to disrupt an undemocratic institution. > Frustration mounted as the police read the riot act followed by an immediate attempt to encircle the demonstration. Fortunately, most protesters were able to escape, but subsequent events were disappointing to those of us who want to target the violence of the world economic system rather than a display of marginalized anger. Yes, a few windows of certain bad companies were smashed but most protesters consider these marginal acts. Destroying property is a misguided form of rage that hinders the broadening of the global social justice movement. Nevertheless, the anger that underlies these acts is understandable. And last Fridays comments by Canadian Trade Minister Pierre Pettigrew only fuelled this fury. According to Pettigrew disruptive protesters would screw the African cotton farmers and the African HIV victims since negotiators plan to discuss farm subsidies and generic drug access. Now they care. Contrary to Pettigrews claims, the plight of African cotton farmers and AIDS victims is not attributable to protesters, but the consequence of Western African countries following the very neo-liberal policies that the WTO supports. The devastation felt by African cotton farmers is the outcome of following International Monetary Fund policies of increasing cotton production for export while reducing the production of food for internal consumption. Similarly, at best, current WTO negations will return to African countries much-needed drug access that the WTO has already taken away. Aside from being angry with Pettigrews recent statements, protesters are mad that political officials continue to advocate the system the WTO represents and implements. The WTO is part of an agenda of economic transformation, which for the past 25 years has re-shaped the world economy in the interests of transnational corporations and international investors. Ideologically this agenda is underpinned by what is commonly referred to as neo-liberalism, a political option whereby trade a investment is liberalized, state-owned companies are privatized and social spending is reduced. Countries are supposed to find their niche selling goods into the world market. After last years political explosion in Argentina, neo-liberalism as a route to development should be completely discredited. However, if that is not enough to convince Pettigrew and others, one need only look to Mexico a country that through the North America Free Trade Agreement has implemented far-reaching neo-liberal reforms. After the 1982 peso devaluation, Mexico, under pressure from foreign investors and governments, began to reorient its economy towards attracting foreign investment and transnational corporations. A central component in this process was the expansion, through tax subsidies and infrastructural development, of Mexicos export processing zones, called Maquilladoras. The underlying logic of Maquilladoras was to attract foreign capital by using a cheap, compliant labour force. The problem is that if labour costs increase beyond what the companies could pay elsewhere (transportation and raw material costs being equal), they would move elsewhere, which they have now done. Since 2000, with the entrance of China into the WTO, 250,000 Maquilladora jobs have disappeared. (La Presse, January 12.) While some of this job loss is a result of the downturn in the U.S. economy, most of the work has simply moved to China. Mexican workers make $1.47 (U.S.) per hour whereas Chinese workers can be paid a third this rate. (La Presse, January 12.) But not only are Maquilladora jobs leaving the country, the Financial Times reports that better paying manufacturing jobs that support entire families are fewer now than when the [NAFTA] agreement was signed. (Financial Times, July 1.) When Mexico signed NAFTA, proponents both within and outside the country claimed Mexicans were set to join the ranks of the worlds wealthy. If defined by the percentage increase in the number of billionaires, this is correct. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of Mexicans are not billionaires and are no closer to joining their ranks. Instead, desperate Mexicans are now fleeing to the U.S. in record numbers. The number of illegal immigrants doubled in the 1990s to seven million. Recent estimates put the number of undocumented Mexicans in the U.S. at 4.8 million, most of whom work in extremely low wage jobs. (LA Times Magazine, July 20.) Last year Mexicans in the U.S. remitted a total of $10 billion US, which many say is the lifeblood of the Mexican economy. (LA Times Magazine, July 20.) So a decade after joining NAFTA and after two decades of neo-liberal reforms, Mexicos economy is dependent upon people sneaking across the U.S. border. That is the result of the real agenda of the WTO and the main focus of protesters rage. *Yves Engler is a member of the popular mobilization against the WTO and is currrently working on a book about student activism. He sent MMN this article, which appeared in a more edited format in the Globe and Mail on July 29, 2003. He can be reached via e-mail at: yvesengler@hotmail.com http://www.montrealmuslimnews.net/smashedwindows.htm |
|