Let those against globalization disconnect from Facebook forever!
By BERTENI “TOTO” CATALUÑA CAUSING
Who must be afraid of globalization, corporatist agenda and credit-based economies? What are the credibility of those who claim to be right in insisting that globalization threatens “authority” and “sovereignty” of states?
I dissent.
These are very heavy topics. Every side one takes is more of an opinion of things or events that may come. But as we speak, no one is right until all see what happens when these things or events happen.
If we engage in discussions of these topics we will be falling into traps of opinions after opinions, oftentimes solidifying in the mind of most and the opinions that would linger depend on what minds that listen to them. The bias will never be avoided. For example, during my heydays at Mindanao State University (MSU) as a student of engineering, we often heard those LFS buddies (I was among them) denouncing capitalism, feudalism and whatever kind of "isms" one can think of, except communism and socialism.
But mind you, business cannot start without capital. Without business, there will be no jobs. Without jobs there will be no employment. SO WHAT'S WRONG WITH CAPITALISM?
But I premise that pure capitalism, as it shows over the years, is not good.
It has to be tempered with the principles of socialism to ensure that in matters where the underprivileged will always be underprivileged and that the fact of being underprivileged is a matter that is almost life or death, there has to be positive regulation actions.
You can see this in "health care" for all in the US that is still being opposed by the conservative capitalist minds for being suspected as a color of communism.
So that it is actually now clearer to see and to say that it is not correct to say: “All are born equal.” Think alone of the fact that there are morons or abnormally-minded persons. I cannot think of a way or an argument on how we can be justified to say that people who are born imbecile are equal with normal persons. If they grow together, the abnormal persons’ minds remain childish; the normal becomes educated and discerning adults.
Indeed, inequality is reality. Equality is mythology.
In the face of the truth that there is no such thing as equality amongst all men, the principle of capitalism or meritocracy loses its meaning.
So that from this, I can infer that in the never-ending search for better kind of government, it will always be based on performance economic-wise. So that eventually all classes of economies will converge in the middle: SOCIAL DEMOCRACY. To my mind, social democracy can be better called “social equality.”
This is so because my concept of truth about the kind of economies that will be acceptable to all is one characterized by an economy that is based on capital and tempered with the principles of equity where the objective is to make all playing fields level.
Remember the key word: it is making the playing fields equal.
Now, compare the activists against capitalism to the ACTIVISTS AGAINST GLOBALIZATION.
To my mind, these activists against globalization are actually people who are still opposed to the US economic play. Yesterday, they were activists against capitalism. Today when this activity has lost substantial appeal, they are now shifting to a new paradigm.
To believe in these “activists against globalization” or not, I concede, is neither correct nor incorrect. Only time can tell someday who are right.
Upon the other hand, in case of doubt or confusion, I would always lean on the principle that says: "No man is an island." One country can never claim it wants no interference on its economic activities so that they would curse its people from inter-commerce affairs with people from other countries through the internet.
One more thing that leads me to lean on globalization in case of doubt is the fact that all economic activities depend on environmental challenges.
IF CHINA PRODUCES SMUG AND SMOKES, IT WILL SPREAD TO OTHER COUNTRIES. If that is so, China cannot insist that it must continue its economic activity even if its activities poison the human life in other places.
The examples are many. But if those activists insist opposition to globalization: LET THEM DISCONNECT FROM THE INTERNET FIRST. UNLESS THIS IS DONE BY THEM THERE IS NO REAL AND NO LITERAL MEANING TO THEIR "ADVOCACY."
Now, every country has its own corporations. So why be afraid of any corporatist agenda? To tell you the truth, there are so many wars that were prevented from occurring because of corporatist agenda.
Notice that many corporations now are "multinationals." This means the stockholders are composed of people from different countries or of various nationalities.
The friendship and the intimately-related business interests that are binding them plus the fact these are leaders in their respective economic empires prevent war from happening amongst countries of these stockholders.
To the contrary, this corporate idea nurtures peace. And there can be no progress if there is war.
Now, talk about credits, they are not bad!
The bad thing with credits comes only when the creditor is taking advantage of the debtors or the debtors are defrauding the creditors.
Look at China: it holds trillions of dollars of credits against America. This fact prevents China from warring with any country being protected by the USA or America will have a reason to default on payment by way of economic blockade.
We small people cannot start business if we have no capital. But if there are credit lines available, we can gamble on the risks and try to succeed based on our respective formula of success.
So that if we ask if ever there is an effect on the sovereignty if the credit-based financial system is strong, let me answer this after defining the basic definition of "sovereignty" or "authority" of any state.
Sovereignty simply means "the capacity of one state to do what it wants." Authority also means the same thing but the latter is more emphatic for the word itself reflects the true source of powers or sovereignty, the people.
Take note that "authority" comes from the word "author", the originator. And the originator of power in every state is the group of majority of people in that state.
Now, after knowing what is sovereignty and authority, we ask again: "WILL THIS GLOBALIZATION AFFECT SOVEREIGNTY OR AUTHORITY?"
Globalization, limiting it on economy, will certainly affect the capacity of any state to decide what to do.
For instance, the credit that China holds in the US affects China's ability to impose its will to take "Spratlys" by force or the US will declare an economic blockade and will not pay its trillions of dollars in debts.
So that if we look at small nations, like PHL, of course it will affect the capacity of little governments to decide to impose their will.
The credit PHL owes from Japan, IMF and World Bank control our actions. BUT BEHIND THESE CONTROLS BRIGHT MINDS SHOULD NOT CRY: THERE IS ALWAYS A WAY OF MAKING THE CIRCUMSTANCES INTO BENEFITS FOR THE PEOPLE AND THE STATE.
The entire effect, therefore, of a globalized economy, is a creation of an unseen “SAFETY GUARD” against bloody wars between nations.
Under this regime, let the GENIUS AND THE BRIGHTEST AMONGST MEN SHINE.
And if the best and the brightest do shine, don't worry because there is always that "unseen safety guard."
Created by the obligations that bound all members of a global economy due to already interlocking business interests, this safety guard will always be there to defeat the most ambitious of men.
I hope, without elaborating further, you get my NATIVE IDEA about globalization.
So let those activists against globalization disconnect from Facebook forever.
Let those against globalization disconnect from Facebook forever!
By BERTENI “TOTO” CATALUÑA CAUSING
Who must be afraid of globalization, corporatist agenda and credit-based economies? What are the credibility of those who claim to be right in insisting that globalization threatens “authority” and “sovereignty” of states?
I dissent.
These are very heavy topics. Every side one takes is more of an opinion of things or events that may come. But as we speak, no one is right until all see what happens when these things or events happen.
If we engage in discussions of these topics we will be falling into traps of opinions after opinions, oftentimes solidifying in the mind of most and the opinions that would linger depend on what minds that listen to them. The bias will never be avoided. For example, during my heydays at Mindanao State University (MSU) as a student of engineering, we often heard those LFS buddies (I was among them) denouncing capitalism, feudalism and whatever kind of "isms" one can think of, except communism and socialism.
But mind you, business cannot start without capital. Without business, there will be no jobs. Without jobs there will be no employment. SO WHAT'S WRONG WITH CAPITALISM?
But I premise that pure capitalism, as it shows over the years, is not good.
It has to be tempered with the principles of socialism to ensure that in matters where the underprivileged will always be underprivileged and that the fact of being underprivileged is a matter that is almost life or death, there has to be positive regulation actions.
You can see this in "health care" for all in the US that is still being opposed by the conservative capitalist minds for being suspected as a color of communism.
So that it is actually now clearer to see and to say that it is not correct to say: “All are born equal.” Think alone of the fact that there are morons or abnormally-minded persons. I cannot think of a way or an argument on how we can be justified to say that people who are born imbecile are equal with normal persons. If they grow together, the abnormal persons’ minds remain childish; the normal becomes educated and discerning adults.
Indeed, inequality is reality. Equality is mythology.
In the face of the truth that there is no such thing as equality amongst all men, the principle of capitalism or meritocracy loses its meaning.
So that from this, I can infer that in the never-ending search for better kind of government, it will always be based on performance economic-wise. So that eventually all classes of economies will converge in the middle: SOCIAL DEMOCRACY. To my mind, social democracy can be better called “social equality.”
This is so because my concept of truth about the kind of economies that will be acceptable to all is one characterized by an economy that is based on capital and tempered with the principles of equity where the objective is to make all playing fields level.
Remember the key word: it is making the playing fields equal.
Now, compare the activists against capitalism to the ACTIVISTS AGAINST GLOBALIZATION.
To my mind, these activists against globalization are actually people who are still opposed to the US economic play. Yesterday, they were activists against capitalism. Today when this activity has lost substantial appeal, they are now shifting to a new paradigm.
To believe in these “activists against globalization” or not, I concede, is neither correct nor incorrect. Only time can tell someday who are right.
Upon the other hand, in case of doubt or confusion, I would always lean on the principle that says: "No man is an island." One country can never claim it wants no interference on its economic activities so that they would curse its people from inter-commerce affairs with people from other countries through the internet.
One more thing that leads me to lean on globalization in case of doubt is the fact that all economic activities depend on environmental challenges.
IF CHINA PRODUCES SMUG AND SMOKES, IT WILL SPREAD TO OTHER COUNTRIES. If that is so, China cannot insist that it must continue its economic activity even if its activities poison the human life in other places.
The examples are many. But if those activists insist opposition to globalization: LET THEM DISCONNECT FROM THE INTERNET FIRST. UNLESS THIS IS DONE BY THEM THERE IS NO REAL AND NO LITERAL MEANING TO THEIR "ADVOCACY."
Now, every country has its own corporations. So why be afraid of any corporatist agenda? To tell you the truth, there are so many wars that were prevented from occurring because of corporatist agenda.
Notice that many corporations now are "multinationals." This means the stockholders are composed of people from different countries or of various nationalities.
The friendship and the intimately-related business interests that are binding them plus the fact these are leaders in their respective economic empires prevent war from happening amongst countries of these stockholders.
To the contrary, this corporate idea nurtures peace. And there can be no progress if there is war.
The bad thing with credits comes only when the creditor is taking advantage of the debtors or the debtors are defrauding the creditors.
Look at China: it holds trillions of dollars of credits against America. This fact prevents China from warring with any country being protected by the USA or America will have a reason to default on payment by way of economic blockade.
We small people cannot start business if we have no capital. But if there are credit lines available, we can gamble on the risks and try to succeed based on our respective formula of success.
So that if we ask if ever there is an effect on the sovereignty if the credit-based financial system is strong, let me answer this after defining the basic definition of "sovereignty" or "authority" of any state.
Sovereignty simply means "the capacity of one state to do what it wants." Authority also means the same thing but the latter is more emphatic for the word itself reflects the true source of powers or sovereignty, the people.
Take note that "authority" comes from the word "author", the originator. And the originator of power in every state is the group of majority of people in that state.
Now, after knowing what is sovereignty and authority, we ask again: "WILL THIS GLOBALIZATION AFFECT SOVEREIGNTY OR AUTHORITY?"
Globalization, limiting it on economy, will certainly affect the capacity of any state to decide what to do.
For instance, the credit that China holds in the US affects China's ability to impose its will to take "Spratlys" by force or the US will declare an economic blockade and will not pay its trillions of dollars in debts.
So that if we look at small nations, like PHL, of course it will affect the capacity of little governments to decide to impose their will.
The credit PHL owes from Japan, IMF and World Bank control our actions. BUT BEHIND THESE CONTROLS BRIGHT MINDS SHOULD NOT CRY: THERE IS ALWAYS A WAY OF MAKING THE CIRCUMSTANCES INTO BENEFITS FOR THE PEOPLE AND THE STATE.
The entire effect, therefore, of a globalized economy, is a creation of an unseen “SAFETY GUARD” against bloody wars between nations.
Under this regime, let the GENIUS AND THE BRIGHTEST AMONGST MEN SHINE.
And if the best and the brightest do shine, don't worry because there is always that "unseen safety guard."
Created by the obligations that bound all members of a global economy due to already interlocking business interests, this safety guard will always be there to defeat the most ambitious of men.
I hope, without elaborating further, you get my NATIVE IDEA about globalization.
So let those activists against globalization disconnect from Facebook forever.
Comments