Reviews for Politics and Economics Forum
angel24 chapter 3 . 3/22/2005
I have no idea about Wolfowitz and I have to take you at your word. You do seem to be provising facts and comparisons which adds to your credibility.

I don't see a reason to argue against any of this points which might be due to your well rounded presentation of facts or my apparent illiteracy about this subject.

-Angel24
Samuel T. Findlay chapter 2 . 3/5/2005
Your theories on right and wrong and the how subjective each term is are absolutely correct. There can be no absolutes in any area of inductive logic - as 'right' and 'wrong' surely are. Only mathematical equations, straight scientific observations, etc. can be considered absolute... and then of course we could take them to an extreme of metaphysical and epistemological theorizing and say that nothing we observe can be said to be an absolute certainty due to any number of unlikely, but possible, circumstances... but for practicality's sake we must assume mathematical deduction is absolute and so forth.

With regards to capitalism, once again I agree. You have effectively pointed out the fundamental flaws of a system that devours itself. However, it must be remembered that absolute capitalism - that is the dog-eat-dog system you describe - existed perhaps in the nineteenth century, but has since been restricted (to some extent) by various laws and regulations. This said these laws and regulations fail to abbrogate the suffering and exploitation of the peoples of the third world - which are viewed as little more than material goods, by capitalistic corporations. I essentially agree with the key tennets of this essay.
angel24 chapter 2 . 3/3/2005
"Do you at least understand the nature of what I’m saying? As in, the nature of the caste is analogous to that of the class system."

Yes, I understand the point that they are both forms of distinction (and discrimination) but they are not the same. Their differences are greater than their similarity. It bugged me anyway.

"The class system inherit of capitalism is developed by exploitation and renders unequal opportunity for those born into different classes."

Yes, it renders unequal opportunity. But it renders Opportunity. The rest is up to you. True, they are people who are born with a silver spoon in the mouth but it doesn’t mean that the poor, if they work hard, cannot reach the level of the rich.

"This means that the lower class members have less opportunity to achieve more money than say a person born to the middle class."

Yes. Point conceded.

"The most obtainable qualities are categorized in two spheres – equal citizenship rights, pertaining to voting, housing, etc., and equal worth (for lack of a better word), meaning equal monetary ownership."

Wrong! Even supposing that it happens, unless you freeze the economics of the country, that people don’t trade, that the all lands have the same monetary value, that you can’t allow people to grow crops or build houses or renovate so that the land value remain statistically the same, that all people are in the same class and are rewarded for mediocrity, and since no one can improve, no one does, no one innovates, …an utter impossibility , it just can’t happen without disaster and the only place it does happen is within families and religious communities because they involve relationships not the economy. It sounds too much like Plato’s “Republic”, a tyrannical collectivist government which is an utter impossibility.

"So I was right in saying Caste does have economic consequence."Caste can have economic consequences, just as Race can have economic consequences.

"Read more of Marx’s works. Better yet, read someone else who clarifies his ideals more (e.g. reading Lenin made me understand much of the Marxist theory).The least you can do is knowing your enemy. I plan to read some capitalist books in the same note.”

I will. While you are reading books and videos about Free Trade, I recommend that you see “Commanding Heights” which basically details the 20th century Free Trade and read Hayak’s “Road to Serfdom” which is available online.

“True, outsourcing isn’t as large of a problem as, say, Big Business ousting the small business. But aside from innovation, America also has more money and a head start on India’s technologies. Partially, this is due to capitalism.”

Capitalism! You are freaking kidding me. Capitalism saved India. It was because of colonialism by the British and then by the socialism of Nehru and Indira Gandhi that India did not get a head start. Capitalism more than tripled the GDP of India (Individual states that accepted Capitalism anyway) after opening up the economy.

“Pragmatic, as in analyzing mistakes and righting them. Capitalism is an ideology, but it isn’t like a religion. Neither is communism. I’m glad you recognize that religions are irrational however. Nonetheless, they provide mental help and morals for people, not to mention aid to the poor, so I’m fine with it.”

Capitalism is an Economic System but Communism is an Ideology (and yes, a psuedo religion). No one believes in Capitalism because it is a proven fact that it works. But people believe in Communism because it hasn’t worked till now. It’s like the evolution debate. No scientist believes in evolution.

Just as a side note, irrationality is not a bad thing, especially in its proper sphere, which is religion. Irrationality is a degrading term for mystics that rational people put because they don’t understand emotions. All human ideals are irrational (freedom, democracy) because they involve emotions and aspirations. Irrationality is superior to Rationality in the next world (moksha, nirvana, heaven, Tao etc.) while Rationality is superior in this world.

"Limit economic globalization so it doesn’t create a one-business system. Competition is encouraged in capitalism – globalization rids of this competition, and thus restrictions must be set.”

You cannot limit Economic Globalization! It is like controlling the waves in a sea, an utter impossibility. How does globalization rid itself of competition? Sorry, but I totally cannot get what you meant by this statement which is just…absurd.

“Communal luxury is not impossible.”

I do not know what it has to do with my previous statement.

"Capitalism is imperialism. As capitalism manifests itself in the economic portion of globalization, globalization thus receives imperialistic nature that is the shadow of capitalism.”

Developing countries want more, not less free trade. They hate the tariffs imposed by rich countries to protect their economies. Capitalism is not Imperialism. Capitalism is just that: Free Trade.

- Angel24
holocaustpulp chapter 2 . 3/1/2005
angel24: "I don't think there could be something as a theoretical Caste. Caste describes the varna (the color, nature) of a person. Economic difference is called class. Caste is something more akin to race."

Do you at least understand the nature of what I’m saying? As in, the nature of the caste is analogous to that of the class system.

"I could see that you are trying to say to me that the caste distinction could somehow develop into a economic distinction. It is a possibility if the cuurent system of globalization is not extended to the masses."

No – here I’m talking about class. The class system inherit of capitalism is developed by exploitation and renders unequal opportunity for those born into different classes. This means that the lower class members have less opportunity to achieve more money than say a person born to the middle class.

"Yes, it does because there are a lot of idiots who won't accept that Caste isn't hereditary. (And for the misconception that it is common only to the higher class, watch the different tribes of "untouchables" battle each other because each one thinks there are superior. Disgusting)"

I’m glad you clarified the role of Caste in India.

"There is no true equality among humans. Some are faster, better or more intelligent."

The most obtainable qualities are categorized in two spheres – equal citizenship rights, pertaining to voting, housing, etc., and equal worth (for lack of a better word), meaning equal monetary ownership. Physical aspects are unavoidable when considering human equality. However, the above mentioned spheres are conscience choices, and therefore acceptable. Equality in its full form doesn’t exist – yet.

"It is only if globalization does not extend to the masses [ending Caste]."

So I was right in saying Caste does have economic consequence.

"I read the works of Marx and though initially he impressed me with his intelligence, he tends to make extrapolations and unjustifiable theories with no proof - kind off like reading Freud. I realized he has the disease of the "Psuedo scientific writer." So I stopped reading his works. "

Read more of Marx’s works. Better yet, read someone else who clarifies his ideals more (e.g. reading Lenin made me understand much of the Marxist theory).The least you can do is know your enemy. I plan to read some capitalist books in the same note.

"Azim Premji, the chairman of Wipro, the largest company that is receiving these outsourced jobs said that America will remain in lead in science and technology because of innovation (and encouragement for innovation in the land) and that only a few jobs in the long run will be lost."

True, outsourcing isn’t as large of a problem as, say, Big Business ousting the small business. But aside from innovation, America also has more money and a head start on India’s technologies. Partially, this is due to capitalism.

"There can be no "pragmatic" is an idealogy like all faiths are. Communism is irrational like all faiths and religions are."

Pragmatic, as in analyzing mistakes and righting them. Capitalism is an ideology, but it isn’t like a religion. Neither is communism. I’m glad you recognize that religions are irrational however. Nonetheless, they provide mental help and morals for people, not to mention aid to the poor, so I’m fine with it.

"If you limit globalization, it will destroy you. It is the other way around."

Limit economic globalization so it doesn’t create a one-business system. Competition is encouraged in capitalism – globalization rids of this competition, and thus restrictions must be set."I cannot say anything about the American poor because (1) I have not met any (2) I have not watched any documentary or read a book about them (3) Thus, I cannot talk about them"

I haven’t met any Indians (living in India)… but I see your point.

"The luxury of the US is envied by the world. The only reason people think it is an atrocity is because they can't have it."

Communal luxury is not impossible.

"Globalization is not imperialism."

Capitalism is imperialism. As capitalism manifests itself in the economic portion of globalization, globalization thus receives imperialistic nature that is the shadow of capitalism.

"The Caste system is a byproduct of the Indian Society ( that is why even Muslims and Christians have caste in their mosques/ churches)."

Good to know.

"Thank you"

You’re welcome.

- Holocaustpulp
Angel24 chapter 1 . 1/9/2005
"In any city, there is always a theoretical Caste (economic, that is)."

I don't think there could be something as a theoretical Caste. Caste describes the varna (the color, nature) of a person. Economic difference is called class. Caste is something more akin to race.

"If one doesn’t grow up with equal circumstances (in capitalism, equality is defied by classes) then "what it takes" is leans toward he who had a better head start."

I could see that you are trying to say to me that the caste distinction could somehow develop into a economic distinction. It is a possibility if the cuurent system of globalization is not extended to the masses.

"Yet the Caste exists, no?"

Yes, it does because there are a lot of idiots who won't accept that Caste isn't hereditary. (And for the misconception that it is common only to the higher class, watch the different tribes of "untouchables" battle each other because each one thinks there are superior. Disgusting)

"Caste or no Caste, equality is something nonexistent."

There is no true equality among humans. Some are faster, better or more intelligent.

The reason I object to the Caste system is that it is hereditary - by birth. If i is by merit and by examining if one's nature is good worldly or bad like it actually was before - I would have no objections."Despite your extensive knowledge on this topic, I believe that Caste does afford for some economic sidings in capitalism."

It is only if globalization does not extend to the masses.

"The US workers aren’t horribly underpaid. That is then not exploitation. Oh, and Marx uses many facts for his arguments."

I read the works of Marx and though initially he impressed me with his intelligence, he tends to make extrapolations and unjustifiable theories with no proof - kind off like reading Freud. I realized he has the disease of the "Psuedo scientific writer." So I stopped reading his works.

"This opportunity is at the expense of people in the US. "Prosperity for everybody" is not possible in capitalism."

Azim Premji, the chairman of Wipro, the largest company that is receiving these outsourced jobs said that America will remain in lead in science and technology because of innovation (and encouragement for innovation in the land) and that only a few jobs in the long run will be lost.

"It can work, if people look at it pragmatically."

There can be no "pragmatic" is an idealogy like all faiths are. Communism is irrational like all faiths and religions are.

"Economic globalization may not be able to be stopped, but at least limited. This would be the proper thing to do: limit global economy so it doesn’t destroy itself."

If you limit globalization, it will destroy you. It is the other way around.

"In a third world country." – Does not India constitute as "developing"?

Yes, the politically correct term.

"The rich have luxury in the US – the poor, despite welfare, are extremely neglected and impoverished."

I cannot say anything about the American poor because (1) I have not met any (2) I have not watched any documentary or read a book about them (3) Thus, I cannot talk about them

"The luxury of the US is an atrocity. I can see why the world is upset about it."

The luxury of the US is envied by the world. The only reason people think it is an atrocity is because they can't have it.

"Economic and political globalization do go hand in hand – it is called imperialism and being subject to imperialism.

Globalization is not imperialism.

Is not the Caste System a by-product of Hinduism?

The Caste system is a byproduct of the Indian Society ( that is why even Muslims and Christians have caste in their mosques/ churches).

"By the way, I agree with your response to Logical-unreason’s review concerning East and West right and wrong."

Thank you
holocaustpulp chapter 1 . 1/8/2005
Angel24: "Caste exists. Caste "System" implies that the law is somehow involved in the seperation of the castes. That is why I said the Caste System ended. But I did not say Caste ended.I’m sorry that I couldn’t specify: I was unaware there was an absolute distinction.

"This is one of the best misconceptions. First - let me start by saying that though Caste was a means of segregation, it was not a segregation based on money. A Brahmin (priest) might be poor and a vaishya (trader) might be rich. It has absolutely no relevance to being higher educated and being in a city where capitalism on a large scale takes place. In a large city where globalization takes place, there is no Caste, there is only the question ‘Do you have what it takes?’ "

In any city, there is always a theoretical Caste (economic, that is). I know the Caste system is not an economic one, but it allows for capitalistic intrusion. Education has everything to do with opportunity, and therefore capitalism; no neglect one’s education in the capitalistic process is to neglect the capitalist process itself. If one doesn’t grow up with equal circumstances (in capitalism, equality is defied by classes) then "what it takes" is leans toward he who had a better head start.

"There is no ‘economic’ segregation. The Economic segregation only has relevance with the untouchables who don't move to the city where there is opportunity and are stuck in the village where there is prejudice. Now since you mentioned "Hindu social guidelines", I would like to mention that the "Laws of Manu" which has caste segregation (and segregation of woman) written on it. The most authoritative Hindu saint, Sankaracharya of Kanchi, told that the Laws of Manu has no relevance in the modern world."

Yet the Caste exists, no? Caste or no Caste, equality is something nonexistent. Despite your extensive knowledge on this topic, I believe that Caste does afford for some economic sidings in capitalism (class separations…)

"I repeat, Voluntary Trade is not exploitation. According to your definition, Toyota is exploiting the workers it hires in the United States. That is just absurd. And please, start quoting from an objective historian."

The US workers aren’t horribly underpaid. That is then not exploitation. Oh, and Marx uses many facts for his arguments.

"Yes, the goal of the Indian Government and the people who are well off (including me) is to open up globalization and economic prosperity for everybody, including the people in the villages where prejudice lingers."

This opportunity is at the expense of people in the US. "Prosperity for everybody" is not possible in capitalism. It is very possible in communism. And, as you may or may not see, the social segregation in the Caste will become the economic segregation in classes when capitalism begins to flourish in India.

"As I said before, It doesn't work now for the same reason theocracy does not work." - It can work, if people look at it pragmatically.

"Globalization is not a tool for the last time. It is a system of uncontrollable unbrindled change whose benefits and curses are far reaching. Both of us could not stop it even if we wished for it."

Economic globalization may not be able to be stopped, but at least limited. This would be the proper thing to do: limit global economy so it doesn’t destroy itself.

"In a third world country." – Does not India constitute as "developing"?

"Not in the US. There is a quote which people who come from other parts of the world use to describe the luxury of the US. ‘Even people who don't get work get money for not working.’ "

The rich have luxury in the US – the poor, despite welfare, are extremely neglected and impoverished. The luxury of the US is an atrocity. I can see why the world is upset about it.

"Rage against the Machine!" – A good band and a good phrase.

"Globalization economically and Globalization politically go hand in hand. That is why people who buy western clothes are more western than those who do not."

In reference to the latter comment, clearly. Economic and political globalization do go hand in hand – it is called imperialism and being subject to imperialism.

"Capitalism neutralImperialism EvilCapitalism is not evil. It is neutral." – Neutral in supposed theory, though theoretically and inevitably one-sided in reality. Imperialism is also ultimately one-sided.

"So Japan is exploiting the US with its cars." – No; you don’t understand my argument, which I believe I have adequately conveyed…

"Capitalism Neutral" - Actually, you’re factually wrong here.

"Free Trade is Neutral. It can go either way." – No no no – it goes ultimately one way: to the imperialist.

"Hinduism ReligionA Rigid Social System is not Hinduism." – Is not the Caste System a by-product of Hinduism?

"I said this because every state that has gone communist has become oppressive." – No states have "gone communist." Ever (as of yet).

"I Problem is capitalism and the solution is capitalism." – Again, thus the perpetual, regressive society.

By the way, I agree with your response to Logical-unreason’s review concerning East and West right and wrong.
angel24 chapter 2 . 1/4/2005
"Moral relativism is bullshit. Ignorance of truth and fact makes a bad morality, this is a wrong thing."

So, the east tells you that Ignorance of Truth should be encouraged, is it? Or is it as you put it the "amoral" muslims.

"The scientific west's view of right and wrong are the right definitions."

Science has nothing to do with morality. So the "West's" view of right and wrong which involves the Bible's version of "believe or die" is the right one is it?

"Let us say this, the east and the amoral muslims can disagree but I'd say this: Might makes right."

This is what the Islamic Fundamentalists are preaching in their mosques. Might makes right so they urge their followers to bomb themselves to make them "right".

"Rome, Sparta, Persia, Carthage. Might makes right, words are hollow things."

Without action, Words are hollow things. Words can inspire men to action.

- Angel24
angel24 chapter 1 . 1/4/2005
Sorry about the Delay. Went out, had fun, back to school, saw ur review.

"Well, according to National Geographic, the caste system does exist, just not constitutionally."

Caste exists. Caste "System" implies that the law is somehow involved in the seperation of the castes. That is why I said the Caste System ended. But I did not say Caste ended.

"arguing that the Caste system limits good jobs for all Indians is a logical one, because Untouchables don’t receive as good as an education compared to higher class members to receive such a job."

This is one of the best misconceptions. First - let me start by saying that though Caste was a means of segregation, it was not a segregation based on money. A Brahmin (priest) might be poor and a vaishya (trader) might be rich. It has absolutely no relevance to being higher educated and being in a city where capitalism on a large scale takes place. In a large city where globalization takes place, there is no Caste, there is only the question "Do you have what it takes?"

"The Caste system is the best example of socioeconomic segmentation that exists, though its economic aspect is consequential of the Hindu social guidelines."

There is no "economic" segregation. The Economic segregation only has relevance with the untouchables who don't move to the city where there is opportunity and are stuck in the village where there is prejudice.

Now since you mentioned "Hindu social guidelines", I would like to mention that the "Laws of Manu" which has caste segregation (and segregation of woman) written on it. The most authoritative Hindu saint, Sankaracharya of Kanchi, told that the Laws of Manu has no relevance in the modern world.

"The dictionary reports - Exploitation: an act that exploits or victimizes someone (treats them unfairly)."

I repeat, Voluntary Trade is not exploitation. According to your definition, Toyota is exploiting the workers it hires in the United States. That is just absurd. And please, start quoting from an objective historian.

"These Indian jobs only pertain to the adequately educated, and are still less paying than in America."

Yes, the goal of the Indian Government and the people who are well off (including me) is to open up globalization and economic prosperity for everybody, including the people in the villages where prejudice lingers.

"I’m glad you can admit it is win-lose, but you’re mistaken concerning the existence of a win-win system. Such a system is very possible, and it is the socialist/communist society (as presented by Marx), assuming that it isn’t subject to greedy rule or foreign interference."

As I said before, It doesn't work now for the same reason theocracy does not work.

"Globalization being a win-lose tool of capitalism is what I know, not what I assume."

Globalization is not a tool for the last time. It is a system of uncontrollable unbrindled change whose benefits and curses are far reaching. Both of us could not stop it even if we wished for it.

"You’re damn right it’s emotional – a lost job can mean a dead family member."

In a third world country.

"Those not qualified for new jobs are pretty bad off, and those who get terrible wages can’t conceive owning a computer."

Not in the US. There is a quote which people who come from other parts of the world use to describe the luxury of the US. "Even people who don't get work get money for not working."

"The Chinese/Indian/etc. does get a decent shot at life due to outsourcing, and the corporation heads get more money."

Rage against the Machine!

"I refer to globalization economically."

Globalization economically and Globalization politically go hand in hand. That is why people who buy western clothes are more western than those who do not.

"Economic ideas are also used for capitalistic, and therefore imperialistic, measures."

Capitalism neutralImperialism EvilCapitalism is not evil. It is neutral.

"The fruit of a company’s exploits goes to the country that it is most affiliated with, where its main, top employees are (the civilized state).Therefore, the company is separate from the state, but tied into the state process."

So Japan is exploiting the US with its cars.

"And, yes, people will always be exploited in capitalism."

Capitalism Neutral

"IMF promotes Free Trade. Free Trade takes India's Money. Free Trade gives India Money." – IMF promotes free trade. Free trade takes Filipino money. Free trade gives nothing back to the Philippines."

Free Trade is Neutral. It can go either way.

"HINDUISM (rigid social system). And it does exist, it just isn’t nationally recognized or uphold."Hinduism ReligionA Rigid Social System is not Hinduism.

"And, oh man, WHO SAID COMMUNISM WASN’T FREE? A true communist society has not as of yet existed – a "communist" economy has, affiliated with dictatorships, but socialism itself and communism don’t lack the necessary rights of man."

I said this because every state that has gone communist has become oppressive.

I Problem is capitalism and the solution is capitalism.
logical-unreason chapter 1 . 12/29/2004
"So, ultimately, right and wrong are personal visions. These visions affect our circumstance, no matter how well intended or greedy they are."

Moral relativism is bullshit. Ignorance of truth and fact makes a bad morality, this is a wrong thing. The scientific west's view of right and wrong are thr right definitions.

Let us say this, the east and the amoral muslims can disagree but I'd say this:

Might makes right.

Rome, Sparta, Persia, Carthage. Might makes right, words are hollow things.
holocaustpulp chapter 2 . 12/23/2004
Angel24: "This was meant to be talked first about textile exploitation and then jumped to production is in China, Not India."

Textile production is also in (for example) Sri Lanka.

"What you are saying is absurd. I could argue like you that America is not a good example of a Capitalist system because of its history with the American Indians. It doesn't make sense."

Well, according to National Geographic, the caste system does exist, just not constitutionally. And arguing that the Caste system limits good jobs for all Indians is a logical one, because Untouchables don’t receive as good as an education compared to higher class members to receive such a job. The Caste system is the best example of socioeconomic segmentation that exists, though its economic aspect is consequential of the Hindu social guidelines.

"Didn't get your point here. Do you mean you don't get good pay if you lose your job to developing countries?"

I meant you get no pay if you lose your job to a developing country (in developed or developed countries). Then of course, a new job must be sought after. In the case of foreign labor, anti-trust laws are a good thing because they ensure that jobs wont be lost.

"If you earn good money and live the good life, you are not going to complain on what the money means according to the host country. I don't compare why my dollars has fallen compared to the Euro unless I go to Europe herself. I disagree with your definition of exploitation. Voluntary Trade is not exploitation. According to your definition, Toyota is exploiting the workers it hires in the United States. That is just absurd."

The dictionary reports - Exploitation: an act that exploits or victimizes someone (treats them unfairly). In the Communist Manifesto, Marx writes, "It [the bourgeoisie] has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionable freedom – Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation." And, of course no complaints are presented when one has a good life. If the pay is fair (meets economic means, those of civilized countries, which set the highest standards money-wise) then there isn’t exploitation. Free trade is a tool in which unfair conditions can (and are overwhelmingly) created.

" ‘And for the "educated middle class" Indians, I’m sure the pay is good – they’ve had good education, are socially higher up, and therefore are more qualified to receive better wages (due to outsourcing).‘ Exactly" – These Indian jobs only pertain to the adequately educated, and are still less paying than in America (which is why they got the job…)

"Finally, you told me why you hate capitalism/ Free Market. We are all a product of our circumstances. I am sorry about your mom. My dad also lost his job due to capitalism and got a job due to capitalism. Everything is win-lose in Capitalism but there is no win-win system anywhere that works better."

First of all, I’m sorry about your father as well. Secondly, I consider myself socialist – the fact that my mom lost her job had little (if any) influence in my philosophical decision. This is why I disagree with capitalism. I’m glad you can admit it is win-lose, but you’re mistaken concerning the existence of a win-win system. Such a system is very possible, and it is the socialist/communist society (as presented by Marx), assuming that it isn’t subject to greedy rule or foreign interference.

"That is what you assume." – Globalization being a win-lose tool of capitalism is what I know, not what I assume.

"Again, you are going on ‘I lost a job’ chord and tug for some emotional you lost a job, get your skills updated. Learn some new computer programs. Jobs are not leaving because of just money. I can reword this sentence and say ‘It also ensures a Chinese/Indian/*insert country name* to have a decent shot at life.’ "

You’re damn right it’s emotional – a lost job can mean a dead family member. Those not qualified for new jobs are pretty bad off, and those who get terrible wages can’t conceive owning a computer. The Chinese/Indian/etc. does get a decent shot at life due to outsourcing, and the corporation heads get more money.

"I already acknowledged this in the review. Why this repetition?" I must not have thought of this as repeating one of your own phrases. Anyway, my (and your) explanation is essential when consider the dependency of developing nations on developed, civilized ones.

"Again, you go off rambling about imperialism and globalization as if globalization is imperialism. Globalization includes the exchange of ideas. The Internet is one of the greatest gobalization tool ever."

I refer to globalization economically. Considering this, then yes it is imperialistic. Economic ideas are also used for capitalistic, and therefore imperialistic, measures.

"YOU see globalization as the tool of the company. Oh, those evil bastard CEO's!" It is the tool of the company, which operates internationally or domestically, and which is restrained by the state.

"NewsFlash: People are ALWAYS exploited (if I take your definition of exploitation) for the benefit of another x y or z. Again, ‘exploited by another country/countries’ is a contradiction of yourself. You said that Globalization is the tool of the company and then you revert back to the nation state."

The fruit of a company’s exploits goes to the country that it is most affiliated with, where its main, top employees are (the civilized state). Therefore, the company is separate from the state, but tied into the state process. And, yes, people will always be exploited in capitalism.

"MF promotes Free Trade. Free Trade takes India's Money. Free Trade gives India Money." – IMF promotes free trade. Free trade takes Filipino money. Free trade gives nothing back to the Philippines.

"Yes, I am referring to this branch of socialism." – Thus proving India was in fact a significant case.

"Rigid Social System? What? Tying this back to Caste System again, I Caste System does not exists in India anymore. More on this in the next post." - HINDUISM (rigid social system). And it does exist, it just isn’t nationally recognized or uphold.

"You think I am ‘stereotyping’ despite your ‘stereotyping’ of India and your ‘stereotyping’ of capitalism. About the sentence, I was alluding to Thomas Friedman, the Foreign Affairs Correspondent fom the New York Times. If you read his articles, you know what I am talking about."

India and capitalism have ‘stereotyped’ themselves into presented structures. If you better explained what you were trying to convey, then perhaps I would have known what you were talking about.

"So, ‘Islamic Fundamentalists’ in your mind equates to ‘Muslims.’ This is the mentality that breeds more Islamic Fundamentalists or in your mindset ‘Muslims.’ And yes, those damned bastard commies are hated by freedom loving people everywhere."

"Islamic Fundalmentalistis" are Muslim extremists – I realize this. And, oh man, WHO SAID COMMUNISM WASN’T FREE? A true communist society has not as of yet existed – a "communist" economy has, affiliated with dictatorships, but socialism itself and communism don’t lack the necessary rights of man.

"There is no solution but capitalism. The Problem is capitalism and the solution is capitalism." – A perpetual cycle; you’ve proved my point even more. The solution is socialism.

- Holocaustpulp
angel24 chapter 1 . 12/23/2004
Angel 24: "Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis are Southern Asians. I didn't know Chinese were Southern Asians."

"Well they aren’t."

Angel 24:This was meant to be talked first about textile exploitation and then jumped to production is in China, Not India.

"First of all, India is a bad example because it follows the caste system"What you are saying is absurd. I could argue like you that America is not a good example of a Capitalist system because of its history with the American Indians. It doesn't make sense.

"(For example (though this is unrelated to globalization)"Yes, it is

"it is demanded of some to do terrible work, such as manually cleaning out sewers, and afterward not even being able to take a shower."Ignorance, Ignorance. I'll address you about the Caste System later on.

"See the movie the Corporation, from which I’ve learned many negative things about such a business. Oh, and that statistic is presented by an economist in that movie."I will love to rent the Corporation but it would be good for you to give stats about this.

"So good pay is no pay when companies leave millions jobless when they fleet to India and China for cheaper labor."Didn't get your point here. Do you mean you don't get good pay if you lose your job to developing countries?

"And exploitation is defined comparing the corporation natives, i.e. those who live in the corporation’s main base (a country) or those who represent the main base, to those who are foreign assets of the business."If you earn good money and live the good life, you are not going to complain on what the money means according to the host country. I don't compare why my dollars has fallen compared to the Euro unless I go to Europe herself. I disagree with your definition of exploitation. Voluntary Trade is not exploitation. According to your definition, Toyota is exploiting the workers it hires in the United States. That is just absurd.

"And for the "educated middle class" Indians, I’m sure the pay is good – they’ve had good education, are socially higher up, and therefore are more qualified to receive better wages (due to outsourcing). "Exactly

"What you fail to realize though is that people in say, America, lose their jobs (such as my own mother) to Indians to help their economy. Everything is win-lose in capitalism."Finally, you told me why you hate capitalism/ Free Market. We are all a product of our circumstances. I am sorry about your mom. My dad also lost his job due to capitalism and got a job due to capitalism. Everything is win-lose in Capitalism but there is no win-win system anywhere that works better.

"Actually, globalization is merely another win-lose capitalist tool." That is what you assume.

"In an economics book I have, the author notes that petitioners against globalization don’t realize the labor they were trying to ban from going to India actually helps the Indians. "The economist has some sense.

"Yes, it can. It also ensures another jobless American."Again, you are going on "I lost a job" chord and tug for some emotional you lost a job, get your skills updated. Learn some new computer programs. Jobs are not leaving because of just money. I can reword this sentence and say "It also ensures a Chinese/Indian/*insert country name* to have a decent shot at life."

"The countries that prosper now are the developed, who had more technology and money to economically advance" I don't deny this

"– the developing countries on the other hand in some cases didn’t embrace the economic surges throughout history or simply did not have the means to participate. The latter example is merely a subset of the most likely circumstance, which is that countries were already economically hindered by imperialistic nations that used the small nations as a means of ensuring luxury."I already acknowledged this in the review. Why this repetition?

"Globalization now is as imperialism always has been – it (globalization) is shared among the powerful few and imposed upon the poor majority."Again, you go off rambling about imperialism and globalization as if globalization is imperialism. Globalization includes the exchange of ideas. The Internet is one of the greatest gobalization tool ever.

"This is the historical system that has commonly existed throughout time."Yes, it has

"Now we see globalization as a tool not of the nation, but of the company."YOU see globalization as the tool of the company. Oh, those evil bastard CEO's!

"People are still being exploited in countries for the benefit of another country (countries), or people in the traditionally rich countries are now losing jobs to the economic powers, which habitually choose cheap labor."NewsFlash: People are ALWAYS exploited (if I take your definition of exploitation) for the benefit of another x y or z. Again, "exploited by another country/countries" is a contradiction of yourself. You said that Globalization is the tool of the company and then you revert back to the nation state.

"Perhaps the IMF was the savior of India, but it is well known to actually progress on the win-lose mentality of capitalism. "IMF is the savoir of India

"That is, countries can’t repay loans to the IMF because business wasn’t successful in the country where money was loaned. "I am aware of that. This happened in Jamaica.

"India paying off loans with gold reserves is a classic example of the fruits of the IMF."IMF promotes Free Trade. Free Trade takes India's Money. Free Trade gives India Money.

"And if you’re referring the common socialism (some businesses are state run, others are privately owned), then India is a significant case, because this socialism does not endorse protectionism."Yes, I am referring to this branch of socialism.

"In the end, India is still the developed world’s fool, and though it has experienced benefits, its rigid social system allows no full redemption in capitalism."Rigid Social System? What? Tying this back to Caste System again, I Caste System does not exists in India anymore. More on this in the next post.

"Globalization is a beginning at an end, enough said about that."ok

"and I love how you manage to stereotype people ("The greatest battle that is going on right now is the battle between those you accept Globalization (Like the Chinese) and those you reject it (Communists, Socialist and Islamic Fundamentalists who hate the influence of foreign culture")."You think I am "stereotyping" despite your "stereotyping" of India and your "stereotyping" of capitalism. About the sentence, I was alluding to Thomas Friedman, the Foreign Affairs Correspondent fom the New York Times. If you read his articles, you know what I am talking about.

"Capitalists of course cannot agree with those damn Muslims or commies."So, "Islamic Fundamentalists" in your mind equates to "Muslims."This is the mentality that breeds more Islamic Fundamentalists or in your mindset "Muslims." And yes, those damned bastard commies are hated by freedom loving people everywhere.

"The problem at hand is one that has no solution within capitalism, and it is in fact the perpetual cycle which fuels capitalism."There is no solution but capitalism. The Problem is capitalism and the solution is capitalism.

- Angel24
Joshua Brown chapter 2 . 12/22/2004
If these are your personal views, you are a socialist.
holocaustpulp chapter 2 . 12/21/2004
Angel 24: "Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis are Southern Asians. I didn't know Chinese were Southern Asians."

Well they aren’t.

"I don't know about China, but in India there are one of the best paying jobs."

First of all, India is a bad example because it follows the caste system (though outlawed by their constitution, the caste system isn’t well enforced by police or courts), which upholds discrimination in that it naturally distinguishes classes. For example (though this is unrelated to globalization), it is demanded of some to do terrible work, such as manually cleaning out sewers, and afterward not even being able to take a shower. Thus, the economic benefits to the Indians are as you put them: supporting the bustling middle class.

"This may or may not be true...back it up with Stats." See the movie the Corporation, from which I’ve learned many negative things about such a business. Oh, and that statistic is presented by an economist in that movie.

"Depend on your definition. Suppose I told you there will be no food for you till you work in my company for 15 hours a week, that is explotation. But these companies that outsource give good pay and benefits and that is why educated Indians are joining these companies. If you have any doubt, visit Bangalore and the bustling middle class there (due to outsourcing) will surprise you."

So good pay is no pay when companies leave millions jobless when they fleet to India and China for cheaper labor. And exploitation is defined comparing the corporation natives, i.e. those who live in the corporation’s main base (a country) or those who represent the main base, to those who are foreign assets of the business. Basically, those who receive higher wage domestically and those who are screwed internationally. And for the "educated middle class" Indians, I’m sure the pay is good – they’ve had good education, are socially higher up, and therefore are more qualified to receive better wages (due to outsourcing). What you fail to realize though is that people in say, America, lose their jobs (such as my own mother) to Indians to help their economy. Everything is win-lose in capitalism.

"*sigh* First, you are talking about the 20th century concept of Capitalism. In the 21st Century, Capitalism in almost indistinguishable from Globalization. Most of the points in this essay is about Globalization more than capitalization and you bring up the argument that the developed countries exploit the developing countries. Yes, I will not deny that explotation of the undeveloped and developing happens. Now, can you guess the way the developing countries can stand on their own feet?Globalization (Free Market)The countries that prosper now embraced globalization and the countries that suffer now embraced do I know this?Take for example India (I might use China as well but let us stay consistently with one country) India was a Socialist country to begin with. By 1990's, after the reign of Indira Gandhi (pro-socialist) and her socialist party/father, India and many of the developing countries (like Jamaica) experienced a crisis. There was no money (and I am not kidding here) and India was in the brink of a diaster. Now, the only way They could survive was getting the loan from the IMF and that means - opening up the country to foreign markets. Was it painful? Yes, undeniably. The Business Sector (which trived from protectionism) was overwhelmingly against it. People lost jobs. Lots of jobs. Indian Gold Reserves were sold to make payments to the IMF and World Bank. But that is not all Globalization created new jobs since foreign companies came there. It brought technology and ideas. It changed people's lives. Now, you can infer how the rest of the story went. Communism and Socialism are dead theories and so is Protectionism. The greatest battle that is going on right now is the battle between those you accept Globalization (Like the Chinese) and those you reject it (Communists, Socialist and Islamic Fundamentalists who hate the influence of foreign culture)"

Actually, globalization is merely another win-lose capitalist tool. In an economics book I have, the author notes that petitioners against globalization don’t realize the labor they were trying to ban from going to India actually helps the Indians. Yes, it can. It also ensures another jobless American. The countries that prosper now are the developed, who had more technology and money to economically advance – the developing countries on the other hand in some cases didn’t embrace the economic surges throughout history or simply did not have the means to participate. The latter example is merely a subset of the most likely circumstance, which is that countries were already economically hindered by imperialistic nations that used the small nations as a means of ensuring luxury. Globalization now is as imperialism always has been – it (globalization) is shared among the powerful few and imposed upon the poor majority. This is the historical system that has commonly existed throughout time. Now we see globalization as a tool not of the nation, but of the company. People are still being exploited in countries for the benefit of another country (countries), or people in the traditionally rich countries are now losing jobs to the economic powers, which habitually choose cheap the IMF was the savior of India, but it is well known to actually progress on the win-lose mentality of capitalism. That is, countries can’t repay loans to the IMF because business wasn’t successful in the country where money was loaned. Therefore, businesses continually plague citizens and force them into poverty until the loan is repaid. Look at Africa, look at the Philippines. The IMF is hell to them. India paying off loans with gold reserves is a classic example of the fruits of the if you’re referring the common socialism (some businesses are state run, others are privately owned), then India is a significant case, because this socialism does not endorse protectionism. Concerning true socialism, India must not have set their priorities right for it to work (such as liberating property, so on and so forth…)In the end, India is still the developed world’s fool, and though it has experienced benefits, its rigid social system allows no full redemption in capitalism. Globalization is a beginning at an end, enough said about that. Oh, and I love how you manage to stereotype people ("The greatest battle that is going on right now is the battle between those you accept Globalization (Like the Chinese) and those you reject it (Communists, Socialist and Islamic Fundamentalists who hate the influence of foreign culture"). Capitalists of course cannot agree with those damn Muslims or commies. The problem at hand is one that has no solution within capitalism, and it is in fact the perpetual cycle which fuels capitalism.

- Holocaustpulp
angel24 chapter 2 . 12/20/2004
I don't know about the situation in China but I am going to give you the POV from India.

"One recent example of labor lost for being “too expensive” can be attributed to Southern Asians. Textile, among other business are simply cashing out of the area for Chinese labor, that of which offers a more agreeable and affordable price for the corporate heads."Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis are Southern Asians.I didn't know Chinese were Southern Asians.

"The wages already paid to these laborers are incredibly outlandish."I don't know about China, but in India there are one of the best paying jobs.

"When one compares the amount of which the made item is sold to the amount of money that the worker receives, it is a stunning gap, the worker in some extreme instances being paid half percent of what the item sold."This may or may not be true...back it up with Stats.

"This is exploitation." Depend on your definition. Suppose I told you there will be no food for you till you work in my company for 15 hours a week, that is explotation. But these companies that outsource give good pay and benefits and that is why educated Indians are joining these companies. If you have any doubt, visit Bangalore and the bustling middle class there (due to outsourcing) will surprise you.

"Capitalism is then a backward system, which widens the class gap between societies and in the end is a self-implosion."*sigh* First, you are talking about the 20th century concept of Capitalism. In the 21st Century, Capitalism in almost indistinguishable from Globalization. Most of the points in this essay is about Globalization more than capitalization and you bring up the argument that the developed countries exploit the developing countries.

Yes, I will not deny that explotation of the undeveloped and developing happens.

Now, can you guess the way the developing countries can stand on their own feet?

Globalization (Free Market)

The countries that prosper now embraced globalization and the countries that suffer now embraced protectionism.

How do I know this?

Take for example India (I might use China as well but let us stay consistently with one country)

India was a Socialist country to begin with. By 1990's, after the reign of Indira Gandhi (pro-socialist) and her socialist party/father, India and many of the developing countries (like Jamaica) experienced a crisis. There was no money (and I am not kidding here) and India was in the brink of a diaster. Now, the only way They could survive was getting the loan from the IMF and that means - opening up the country to foreign markets.

Was it painful? Yes, undeniably. The Business Sector (which trived from protectionism) was overwhelmingly against it. People lost jobs. Lots of jobs. Indian Gold Reserves were sold to make payments to the IMF and World Bank.

But that is not all Globalization did.

It created new jobs since foreign companies came there. It brought technology and ideas. It changed people's lives. Now, you can infer how the rest of the story went.

Communism and Socialism are dead theories and so is Protectionism. The greatest battle that is going on right now is the battle between those you accept Globalization (Like the Chinese) and those you reject it (Communists, Socialist and Islamic Fundamentalists who hate the influence of foreign culture)
J. Stein chapter 2 . 12/20/2004
"Capitalism is then a backward system"

Capitalism may be backwards, but it offers people the opportunity for betterment. The majority of people living in Capitalist society have nothing wrong with it.

The vast majority of people living in communist regimes, however, hate it, and wish death to all communists. I don't know why you'll disagree with the people who see it firsthand.
22 | Page 1 2 Next »