Readers of my book based on my PhD thesis (SANCTIONS ON IRAQ: FEMINIST ACTIVISM VS.PATRIARCHAL POLICY 1990-2003: A political-psychological analysis, 2010) will recall its principal thesis: that male elites suffer from cognitive dissonance. This is a form of psychosis identified by the organizational management consultant Chris Argyris. Essentially, it says that those in power adhere publicly to a set of morals but in practice, violate them. It's something we all do to an extent. For example, I might say I believe that animals should be not be killed inhumanely, but in practice, I don't change my eating habits.
So it was interesting to read of a study wherein it was found that one in 25 bosses 'is a psychopath' but hides it with charm and business-speak. This is from a Daily Mail article, by Duncan MacPherson, that appeared September 2, 2011.
"New York psychologist Paul Babiak has discovered how many psychopaths had infiltrated major firms.
'We have identified individuals that might be labelled "the successful psychopath".
'Part of the problem is that the very things we're looking for in our leaders, the psychopath can easily mimic.
'Their natural tendency is to be charming. Take that charm and couch it in the right business language and it sounds like charismatic leadership.'
Dr Babiak designed a 111-point questionnaire with the University of British Columbia's Prof Bob Hare - the world's pre-eminent expert in psychopathy and a regular adviser to the FBI - to determine how many industry bosses were psychopaths.
They found that nearly four per cent of bosses fitted the profile, compared with one per cent among the general population.
Workplace bosses, who are four times more likely to be psychopathic than the general population, climb the career ladder by charming their superiors
Workplace bosses, who are four times more likely to be psychopathic than the general population, climb the career ladder by charming their superiors
Dr Babiak said: 'These were all individuals who were at the top of an organisation - vice-presidents, directors, CEOs - so it was actually quite a shock.'
The results revealed that psychopaths were actually poor managerial performers but were adept at climbing the corporate ladder because they could cover up their weaknesses by subtly charming superiors and subordinates.
This, said Dr Babiak, makes it almost impossible to distinguish between a genuinely talented team leader and a psychopath."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2032912/One-25-bosses-psychopath-hides-charm-business-speak.html#ixzz1Ws5ReWxN
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Monday, August 1, 2011
US DEBT AND THE BALANCE OF POWER
The US military is the most powerful in the world, which gives it a hegemonic position. However, US is the world's largest debtor nation. This won't matter much (despite what the politicians say) if the debts aren't called in. A surprising array of countries could call in their Treasury Bonds, including a number of Less Developed Countries such as the Philippines, Brazil and Mexico. Third largest US Bond holder is a conglomeration of 'oil exporters' ( Oil exporters include Ecuador, Venezuela, Indonesia, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar,Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Gabon, Libya, and Nigeria.)
See this list:
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt.
Adrienne Reid (student, INTL 5400, Summer 2011) wondered why Greece's national sovereignty is at risk due to its debt, but not the US'. She writes that Greece has no competitive advantage. But the US has: its vast military expenditure, financed by taxpayers. She writes:
'The other major difference that distinguishes the U.S. from Greece, is that US debt is denominated by its own currency, over which it has sovereign control...The government holds within its ability to create money at will, to cover debt...When Greece replaced it national currency with the euro, the basis of its economic sovereignty was forfeited.'
I suppose the Federal Reserve, which is not a government institution, could deny the US government a request to print money. And, possibly, the US could one day face a fire sale.
In June 2011, Greece put €50bn of national assets on sale in hotel ballroom but private equity firms were not interested. But China, Japan etc will be very interested in any nationally owned US real estate up for sale. US national sovereignty will be also impaired by massive budget cutbacks curtailing military spending.
Feminist International Relations theorists sum up the changing balance of power of states, as a non issue. The King is dead, long live the King. In other words, a new type of hegemony composed of mainly male elites, will emerge. How enlightened it will be, remains to be seen.
See this list:
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt.
Adrienne Reid (student, INTL 5400, Summer 2011) wondered why Greece's national sovereignty is at risk due to its debt, but not the US'. She writes that Greece has no competitive advantage. But the US has: its vast military expenditure, financed by taxpayers. She writes:
'The other major difference that distinguishes the U.S. from Greece, is that US debt is denominated by its own currency, over which it has sovereign control...The government holds within its ability to create money at will, to cover debt...When Greece replaced it national currency with the euro, the basis of its economic sovereignty was forfeited.'
I suppose the Federal Reserve, which is not a government institution, could deny the US government a request to print money. And, possibly, the US could one day face a fire sale.
In June 2011, Greece put €50bn of national assets on sale in hotel ballroom but private equity firms were not interested. But China, Japan etc will be very interested in any nationally owned US real estate up for sale. US national sovereignty will be also impaired by massive budget cutbacks curtailing military spending.
Feminist International Relations theorists sum up the changing balance of power of states, as a non issue. The King is dead, long live the King. In other words, a new type of hegemony composed of mainly male elites, will emerge. How enlightened it will be, remains to be seen.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
WHAT HAPPENS TO PETRODOLLARS?
I've always found in hard to research petrodollars...they are immured in secrecy. Last week, I received a paper from student Justin Alpert, that cleared up some of the history connected with this elusive albeit crucial form of currency. Here are some excerpts from Justin's paper:
The term “petrodollar” means quite simply a dollar that has been traded for oil. The “petrodollar standard” refers to the US dollar’s historical role as the currency of choice for virtually all oil producing nations around the world.No official deal to promote the petrodollar standard is known to have ever been formalized with the Organization of Oil Exporting Countries as a whole...The protection of the US military and favored access to US markets were the basic conditions offered by Washington to OPEC in return for their pledge to only accept US dollars in return for oil shipments. Larger OPEC nations like Iran (then ruled by the pro-western Shah of Iran) and Saudi Arabia were happy to oblige and the dollar became the only currency they would accept. Smaller producer states followed the lead of the larger producer states and the value of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency was saved from free fall. The added benefit of locking out the Soviets and their allies to OPEC oil reserves was also considered an important consequence of the agreement. (Gokay 2005)
In 1972, President Nixon sought to quell the possibility of a run on US gold reserves by removing the gold standard from the dollar completely. Shortly after the US floated its currency on the market, other developed nations followed suit leaving “EXCHANGE RATES TO BE GOVERNED BY RULES OF GOOD CONDUCT to STANDARDIZE CURRENCY EXCHANGE” per the IPE glossary. (Gokay 2005) While this prevented a loss to US gold reserves, it angered OPEC oil producers who were unhappy that the so many of their holdings had just been devalued. Already angry about the US rearming of Israel after the six day war, they demanded that oil be priced in relation to gold and implemented an embargo in protest.
While the resulting embargo crippled the world oil supply, the situation also presented both the US and OPEC with an opportunity. (Clark 2005) Rather than risk losing monetary credibility by creating “fiat” currency, a formal agreement was brokered between the US and Saudi Arabia (this was known as the U.S.-Saudi Arabian Joint Economic Commission and reputedly brokered by Henry Kissinger) at the end of the 1973 OPEC Oil Crisis that would give the US dollar a vital new role in the world economy and would prevent its collapse. (Gokay 2005) However, the rise of globalization, the current US deficit crisis, and the loss of the USSR and the bipolar hegemonic system turned what once was a very useful system to the US into an economic albatross. [It should be noted that Iran has opened its own oil bourse, PW, Ed]. As our IPE glossary (obtainable by emailing philippa.winkler@nau.edu) points out, “LIBERALIZATION PROGRAMS HAVE SPREAD WITH GLOBALIZATION.” This principal gave rise to the euro, which is now the chief competitor to the US petrodollar as the world’s favored petro-currency. This has created unfavorable complications for the US as oil producers and consumers no longer need to sustain American debt to procure this vital commodity. However, even oil producing nations not aligned with the cartel tend to follow the petrodollar standard, e.g. Brazil, Mexico, Post-Soviet Russia, and the US of course(Johnson 2008)...
The question at hand is whether the US can sustain the petrodollar standard in a liberalized economic climate and if so, would it be worth it to anyone else? To put it another way, the question in the 1970’s was how many barrels of oil could a dollar buy? Today, the question is rapidly becoming how many dollars can a barrel of oil buy?
Clark, William R. Petrodollar Warfare: Oil, Iraq and the Future of the Dollar. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society, 2005
Gokay, Bulent. "The Beginning of the End of the Petrodollar: What Connects Iraq to Iran." Alternatives - Turkish Journal of International Relations Winter 4.4 (2005). Print.
Update April 20 2013. This really brilliant essay by Justin is further substantiated by the rise of the PetroYuan. Both Russia and Iran are trading oil for Yuan. Other countries are sure to follow. China is building up its blue water fleet to ensure protection of its sea lanes against Obama's Pacific military build up in the Pacific (the so called Asia Pivot).
Update April 3 2015 A year later, and we may be sighting the end of the petrodollar. In 2014, Russian President Putin announced a gas deal with China The 30-year deal states that every year, the Russians will deliver 1.3 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of gas to China. It is safe bet that income and expenses will not be in petrodollars.
The term “petrodollar” means quite simply a dollar that has been traded for oil. The “petrodollar standard” refers to the US dollar’s historical role as the currency of choice for virtually all oil producing nations around the world.No official deal to promote the petrodollar standard is known to have ever been formalized with the Organization of Oil Exporting Countries as a whole...The protection of the US military and favored access to US markets were the basic conditions offered by Washington to OPEC in return for their pledge to only accept US dollars in return for oil shipments. Larger OPEC nations like Iran (then ruled by the pro-western Shah of Iran) and Saudi Arabia were happy to oblige and the dollar became the only currency they would accept. Smaller producer states followed the lead of the larger producer states and the value of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency was saved from free fall. The added benefit of locking out the Soviets and their allies to OPEC oil reserves was also considered an important consequence of the agreement. (Gokay 2005)
In 1972, President Nixon sought to quell the possibility of a run on US gold reserves by removing the gold standard from the dollar completely. Shortly after the US floated its currency on the market, other developed nations followed suit leaving “EXCHANGE RATES TO BE GOVERNED BY RULES OF GOOD CONDUCT to STANDARDIZE CURRENCY EXCHANGE” per the IPE glossary. (Gokay 2005) While this prevented a loss to US gold reserves, it angered OPEC oil producers who were unhappy that the so many of their holdings had just been devalued. Already angry about the US rearming of Israel after the six day war, they demanded that oil be priced in relation to gold and implemented an embargo in protest.
While the resulting embargo crippled the world oil supply, the situation also presented both the US and OPEC with an opportunity. (Clark 2005) Rather than risk losing monetary credibility by creating “fiat” currency, a formal agreement was brokered between the US and Saudi Arabia (this was known as the U.S.-Saudi Arabian Joint Economic Commission and reputedly brokered by Henry Kissinger) at the end of the 1973 OPEC Oil Crisis that would give the US dollar a vital new role in the world economy and would prevent its collapse. (Gokay 2005) However, the rise of globalization, the current US deficit crisis, and the loss of the USSR and the bipolar hegemonic system turned what once was a very useful system to the US into an economic albatross. [It should be noted that Iran has opened its own oil bourse, PW, Ed]. As our IPE glossary (obtainable by emailing philippa.winkler@nau.edu) points out, “LIBERALIZATION PROGRAMS HAVE SPREAD WITH GLOBALIZATION.” This principal gave rise to the euro, which is now the chief competitor to the US petrodollar as the world’s favored petro-currency. This has created unfavorable complications for the US as oil producers and consumers no longer need to sustain American debt to procure this vital commodity. However, even oil producing nations not aligned with the cartel tend to follow the petrodollar standard, e.g. Brazil, Mexico, Post-Soviet Russia, and the US of course(Johnson 2008)...
The question at hand is whether the US can sustain the petrodollar standard in a liberalized economic climate and if so, would it be worth it to anyone else? To put it another way, the question in the 1970’s was how many barrels of oil could a dollar buy? Today, the question is rapidly becoming how many dollars can a barrel of oil buy?
Clark, William R. Petrodollar Warfare: Oil, Iraq and the Future of the Dollar. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society, 2005
Gokay, Bulent. "The Beginning of the End of the Petrodollar: What Connects Iraq to Iran." Alternatives - Turkish Journal of International Relations Winter 4.4 (2005). Print.
Update April 20 2013. This really brilliant essay by Justin is further substantiated by the rise of the PetroYuan. Both Russia and Iran are trading oil for Yuan. Other countries are sure to follow. China is building up its blue water fleet to ensure protection of its sea lanes against Obama's Pacific military build up in the Pacific (the so called Asia Pivot).
Update April 3 2015 A year later, and we may be sighting the end of the petrodollar. In 2014, Russian President Putin announced a gas deal with China The 30-year deal states that every year, the Russians will deliver 1.3 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of gas to China. It is safe bet that income and expenses will not be in petrodollars.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT LOANS NOW FOR ADVANCED COUNTRIES
Updated 7/17/2011
Have you heard of the saying...'first they came for the Jews, then the Catholics, then the gays...and finally they came for me?"
No longer are SALs confined to lesser developed countries. Today, after the 2007-8 economic crisis, we are seeing quite advanced countries such as Iceland, Greece and Ireland, in line for the same treatment: loans with conditions.
See this from the IMF:
IMF Approves €30 Bln Loan for Greece on Fast Track
May 9, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2010/new050910a.htm
IMF and EU loans come with conditions: the cutting of social benefits to Greeks. We are witnessing vast protests in Athens this week due to this type of austerity measure. See this:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/28/news/international/greece_debt_crisis/
At this point, you might be interested in this:
http://www.myloansconsolidated.com/2011/06/26/gerald-celente-people-are-never-going-to-be-free-until-we-break-the-banks/
Say you have a mortgage, but you have fallen into financial difficulties. Your house then defaults back to the bank. This is, in a nutshell, how banks acquire physical assets. On the international stage, banks and countries that loan, can acquire physical assets if loans aren't paid back. In the future, I expect to see large chunks of US real estate being acquired by China and other countries which are in a more stable financial situation.
Greece's debt was at 127% of its GNP when it decided to take out more loans. The US' debt is at roughly 90% of its GNP. The so-called solutions are a) to pile on more debt to pay for the interest on the old debt; b) 'austerity' measures for the masses; and c) buying up the debtor country's physical assets.
I liked how Robert explained the blame game, as countries fail to repay their debt:
'It's remarkable that IOs like the IMF and WorldBank continue to champion SAPs as the vehicles for economic growth, given the obvious failures since the 1980s. Ha-Joon Chang's summarized the typical attitude of the IMF/WorldBank in his lecture. He talked about how, when SAPs were producing bad results early on, people kept saying, "we just need more time." Over time, when the programs still failed to produce positive results, they said its because countries did not abide by recommendations. Then, if a country did follow the recipe but the policies were unsuccessful, IMF/WorldBank folks would say the country's government was corrupt, that their culture is incompatible with the programs, or that the country suffered from bad geography. How long does it take before someone can step back and admit that the policies might just be wrong?'
|
|
How did LDCs get into this position in the first place? The causes can be traced back to European colonization of pre capitalist countries from the 15th century to the 19th century. The colonization disrupted and virtually ended, pre-capitalist economies which were largely based on subsistence agriculture. A capitalist economic model was imposed on these militarily weaker societies by the French, British, Germans, Japanese. These countries then became the resource basket for the wealthy. For example, Congo's agricultural crops were decimated to make way for the rubber industry.
Independence came after WWII, but it could be called an imperfect de-colonization. So while LDCs achieved a formal separation from imperialist powers, financial structures were set up to retain their dependency.
That's how the core dependency theory explains the situation. A class analysis does a better job to explain why the working masses will bear the brunt of a state's debt, whether it's a LDC or a powerful state like the US.
Have you heard of the saying...'first they came for the Jews, then the Catholics, then the gays...and finally they came for me?"
No longer are SALs confined to lesser developed countries. Today, after the 2007-8 economic crisis, we are seeing quite advanced countries such as Iceland, Greece and Ireland, in line for the same treatment: loans with conditions.
See this from the IMF:
IMF Approves €30 Bln Loan for Greece on Fast Track
May 9, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2010/new050910a.htm
IMF and EU loans come with conditions: the cutting of social benefits to Greeks. We are witnessing vast protests in Athens this week due to this type of austerity measure. See this:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/28/news/international/greece_debt_crisis/
At this point, you might be interested in this:
http://www.myloansconsolidated.com/2011/06/26/gerald-celente-people-are-never-going-to-be-free-until-we-break-the-banks/
Say you have a mortgage, but you have fallen into financial difficulties. Your house then defaults back to the bank. This is, in a nutshell, how banks acquire physical assets. On the international stage, banks and countries that loan, can acquire physical assets if loans aren't paid back. In the future, I expect to see large chunks of US real estate being acquired by China and other countries which are in a more stable financial situation.
Greece's debt was at 127% of its GNP when it decided to take out more loans. The US' debt is at roughly 90% of its GNP. The so-called solutions are a) to pile on more debt to pay for the interest on the old debt; b) 'austerity' measures for the masses; and c) buying up the debtor country's physical assets.
I liked how Robert explained the blame game, as countries fail to repay their debt:
'It's remarkable that IOs like the IMF and WorldBank continue to champion SAPs as the vehicles for economic growth, given the obvious failures since the 1980s. Ha-Joon Chang's summarized the typical attitude of the IMF/WorldBank in his lecture. He talked about how, when SAPs were producing bad results early on, people kept saying, "we just need more time." Over time, when the programs still failed to produce positive results, they said its because countries did not abide by recommendations. Then, if a country did follow the recipe but the policies were unsuccessful, IMF/WorldBank folks would say the country's government was corrupt, that their culture is incompatible with the programs, or that the country suffered from bad geography. How long does it take before someone can step back and admit that the policies might just be wrong?'
|
|
How did LDCs get into this position in the first place? The causes can be traced back to European colonization of pre capitalist countries from the 15th century to the 19th century. The colonization disrupted and virtually ended, pre-capitalist economies which were largely based on subsistence agriculture. A capitalist economic model was imposed on these militarily weaker societies by the French, British, Germans, Japanese. These countries then became the resource basket for the wealthy. For example, Congo's agricultural crops were decimated to make way for the rubber industry.
Independence came after WWII, but it could be called an imperfect de-colonization. So while LDCs achieved a formal separation from imperialist powers, financial structures were set up to retain their dependency.
That's how the core dependency theory explains the situation. A class analysis does a better job to explain why the working masses will bear the brunt of a state's debt, whether it's a LDC or a powerful state like the US.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Technological Innovation and Capitalism
This week in INTL 5400, you discussed the differences between comparative and competitive advantage. Briefly, comparative advantage belongs to the liberalism school of thought. It promotes free trade, product specialization and cheap prices. Competitive advantage belongs to the realist school of thought, which promotes protectionism and government intervention that increases national security. As some of you noted, Japan’s economy reflects aspects of both theories. Most countries tend to blend aspects of both theories.
Both theories operate within the paradigm of capitalism, which promotes the private acquisition of capital, mass production and consumption, and intense use of technology. This is the modernist approach.
By now, you’ve understood that ‘political economy’ is the study of the political distribution of power as expressed through the economy. This has raised philosophical issues about who controls what resource, and who benefits from that control. In fact, there is a bachelor’s degree in the UK called Politics, Philosophy and Economics (PPE).
The question has become, in this day and age of protests against food prices and unemployment, is capitalism the most efficacious way of a) distributing resources, and b) promoting advancements in technology that improve our quality of life?
In Week 7, you will be studying these protests and how they are linked to economies that rely on food imports. In Week 8, we will look at the issue of global water.
Technological innovations are usually believed to be an outcome of capitalism. The idea is to produce advanced machines that lower labor costs, make cheaper widgets which then sell on a massive scale.
Historically we know that other economic models spur innovation. For example:the Romans focused on engineering, the Islamic Renaissance from 900 to 1200 CE, gave us much of our modern medicine and mathematics. The European Middle Ages spurred advancements in building construction.
Technological innovations also arise from:
1) Creativity combined with altruism. For example, the alternative energy industry in the US has been innovating for decades, but with very little promise of profit. It has to contend with the power of the oil lobbies, and lack of US government support. We will learn in Wk 5 that China’s government is financing research and development in this field.
2) Necessity is the Mother of Invention. Here we can look at prehistory: the success of agriculture is largely due to inventions by what have been mis-named ‘primitive’ societies.
3) Military Matters. Here is where you see protectionism at work. Most governments pour money into military research and development, which have benefits for civilian society. For example: the Internet. Marilyn Waring, as you know, critiques the ‘benefits’of weapons.
Both theories operate within the paradigm of capitalism, which promotes the private acquisition of capital, mass production and consumption, and intense use of technology. This is the modernist approach.
By now, you’ve understood that ‘political economy’ is the study of the political distribution of power as expressed through the economy. This has raised philosophical issues about who controls what resource, and who benefits from that control. In fact, there is a bachelor’s degree in the UK called Politics, Philosophy and Economics (PPE).
The question has become, in this day and age of protests against food prices and unemployment, is capitalism the most efficacious way of a) distributing resources, and b) promoting advancements in technology that improve our quality of life?
In Week 7, you will be studying these protests and how they are linked to economies that rely on food imports. In Week 8, we will look at the issue of global water.
Technological innovations are usually believed to be an outcome of capitalism. The idea is to produce advanced machines that lower labor costs, make cheaper widgets which then sell on a massive scale.
Historically we know that other economic models spur innovation. For example:the Romans focused on engineering, the Islamic Renaissance from 900 to 1200 CE, gave us much of our modern medicine and mathematics. The European Middle Ages spurred advancements in building construction.
Technological innovations also arise from:
1) Creativity combined with altruism. For example, the alternative energy industry in the US has been innovating for decades, but with very little promise of profit. It has to contend with the power of the oil lobbies, and lack of US government support. We will learn in Wk 5 that China’s government is financing research and development in this field.
2) Necessity is the Mother of Invention. Here we can look at prehistory: the success of agriculture is largely due to inventions by what have been mis-named ‘primitive’ societies.
3) Military Matters. Here is where you see protectionism at work. Most governments pour money into military research and development, which have benefits for civilian society. For example: the Internet. Marilyn Waring, as you know, critiques the ‘benefits’of weapons.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
ARE POPULATION GROWTH RATES TO BLAME FOR GLOBAL POVERTY?
UPDATED OCTOBER 30, 2011
First of all, what are global population rates? Scary stories abound...usually headlined The Population Bomb. We are overpopulating the planet, apparently. But is that true?
A hidden revolution is going on around the world, and it's down to women being educated and controlling how many children they have. UN statistics say that the average woman today has 2.5 children. In Iran it's about 1.8. In India, it's 2.8. In Brazil it's 2.2. Also, see this: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110511/full/473125a.html.
The global population could very well go into reverse by the middle of the 21st century. That means, a glut of older people and not enough young people.
The UN Population Division in 2002, predicted a population decline, and many countries are not replacing their populations. See: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2002/WPP2002-HIGHLIGHTSrev1.PDF.
It remains to be seen if poverty will be reduced along with the global population, as it is currently believed.
What we do know is that there is over consumption by advanced countries.
“The richest 20 percent of humanity consumes 86% of all goods and services, while the poorest fifth consumes just 1.3 percent.” (Shah, Global Issues, 2011).
“The population of the U.S. tripled during the 20th century, but the U.S. consumption of raw materials increased 17-fold”.1 (Factoids, 2011).
Today we are in a period called ‘neo-colonialism” which refers to the institutional ways that the rich nations impose unequal economic relations on the former colonies. This is done through loans by rich countries that impose conditions that aren’t healthy for poor populations. These conditions (called STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT PROGRAMS or SAPs) often include the privatization of state services such as health and education, which puts them out of the reach of the poor. SAPS introduce cheap goods that undercut local production, or insist on cash crops like coffee for Western markets, rather than food stuffs to feed the population.
Western governments fail to offset over-consumption by Western nations.
Let's look at a case study: Niger.
The current population of Niger is 16,468,886 with a population growth rate of 3.643%. (CIA Fact book) The estimated life expectancy for the total population is 53.4 years with 14.11 deaths/1,000.(CIA Fact book)
Here is my question: Is a growth rate of 3.6 percent so terrible that it justifies the very high mortality rate and the extreme poverty of Niger? It's actually very similar (3.28) to the rate of the population growth of United Arab Emirates, which isn't known for its high poverty levels, and people can expect to live to 76 years of age, in the UAE.
See these statistics about population growth rates globally:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2002rank.html?countryName=Japan&countryCode=ja®ionCode=eas&rank=215#ja
My personal belief is that a woman and her partner, should both make decisions about reproduction. Clearly, there is a reason to restrict multiple and frequent births, given the impact on women’s health, but this needs to be balanced by a study of resource availability on a global scale. Before Malthusian type policies are enacted, it would be best to that advanced countries start consuming at a more sustainable rate.
First of all, what are global population rates? Scary stories abound...usually headlined The Population Bomb. We are overpopulating the planet, apparently. But is that true?
A hidden revolution is going on around the world, and it's down to women being educated and controlling how many children they have. UN statistics say that the average woman today has 2.5 children. In Iran it's about 1.8. In India, it's 2.8. In Brazil it's 2.2. Also, see this: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110511/full/473125a.html.
The global population could very well go into reverse by the middle of the 21st century. That means, a glut of older people and not enough young people.
The UN Population Division in 2002, predicted a population decline, and many countries are not replacing their populations. See: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2002/WPP2002-HIGHLIGHTSrev1.PDF.
It remains to be seen if poverty will be reduced along with the global population, as it is currently believed.
What we do know is that there is over consumption by advanced countries.
“The richest 20 percent of humanity consumes 86% of all goods and services, while the poorest fifth consumes just 1.3 percent.” (Shah, Global Issues, 2011).
“The population of the U.S. tripled during the 20th century, but the U.S. consumption of raw materials increased 17-fold”.1 (Factoids, 2011).
Today we are in a period called ‘neo-colonialism” which refers to the institutional ways that the rich nations impose unequal economic relations on the former colonies. This is done through loans by rich countries that impose conditions that aren’t healthy for poor populations. These conditions (called STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT PROGRAMS or SAPs) often include the privatization of state services such as health and education, which puts them out of the reach of the poor. SAPS introduce cheap goods that undercut local production, or insist on cash crops like coffee for Western markets, rather than food stuffs to feed the population.
Western governments fail to offset over-consumption by Western nations.
Let's look at a case study: Niger.
The current population of Niger is 16,468,886 with a population growth rate of 3.643%. (CIA Fact book) The estimated life expectancy for the total population is 53.4 years with 14.11 deaths/1,000.(CIA Fact book)
Here is my question: Is a growth rate of 3.6 percent so terrible that it justifies the very high mortality rate and the extreme poverty of Niger? It's actually very similar (3.28) to the rate of the population growth of United Arab Emirates, which isn't known for its high poverty levels, and people can expect to live to 76 years of age, in the UAE.
See these statistics about population growth rates globally:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2002rank.html?countryName=Japan&countryCode=ja®ionCode=eas&rank=215#ja
My personal belief is that a woman and her partner, should both make decisions about reproduction. Clearly, there is a reason to restrict multiple and frequent births, given the impact on women’s health, but this needs to be balanced by a study of resource availability on a global scale. Before Malthusian type policies are enacted, it would be best to that advanced countries start consuming at a more sustainable rate.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
SEX TRAFFICKING DESTINATION COUNTRIES
This week, I’ve come across a report that makes these basic points about the global sex trafficking trade: “The culture, particular mass media, is playing a large role in normalizing prostitution by portraying prostitution as glamorous or a way to quickly make a lot of money" (Hughes, Donna M, "The Demand: Where Sex Trafficking Begins",2004.)
My comment: Films like PRETTY WOMAN come to mind. Many US-made films propagate the myth of the ‘happy prostitute’. The Western media in general objectifies women’s sexuality to sell commodities to men, such as cars. Therefore we should not just blame the culture in ‘backward’ countries but also the mass media in Western countries.
The National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence in the US (http://www.ncdsv.org/ncd_linksprost.html) estimates there are between 100,000 and 150,000 under-aged sex workers in the US who generate billions of dollars in revenue for their pimps. The US is also a destination country to which prostitutes around the world, are sent to work.
Hughes' report focuses on ‘destination countries’: ‘In destination countries, strategies are devised to protect the sex industries that generate hundreds of millions of dollars per year for the state where prostitution is legal, or for organized crime groups and corrupt officials where the sex industry is illegal.” “I believe that only by going to the root causes, which are corruption and the demand in destination countries, will we end the trafficking of women and children.”
The full report is accessed at http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/demand_rome_june04.pdf.
SO, WHICH ARE THE ‘DESTINATION’ COUNTRIES?
The most common destinations for victims of human trafficking are Thailand, Japan, Israel, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Turkey and the US (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “UNODC launches Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking”, 2007).
Note that the majority of these countries are supposedly the ‘advanced’ nations. What does that say about their culture? From WIKIPEDIA (see source): “Of the 45,000 to 50,000 that are brought to the U.S., 30,000 come from Asia, 10,000 from Latin America and 5,000 from other regions e.g., the former Soviet Union. The primary Asian source countries to the U.S. are China, Thailand and Vietnam. Although trafficking into the U.S. and Europe has gained a lot of attention in recent years, anti-trafficking advocates in Asia have been addressing these issues on the continent for decades (FIROZA CHIC DABBY, TRAFFICKING: CONSIDERATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BATTERED WOMEN’S ADVOCATES, Revised September 2008, apiahf.org.)
The major sources of trafficked persons include Thailand, China, Nigeria, Albania, Bulgaria, Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine ("The Emancipation Network". Tenstudents.com. http://tenstudents.com/Source_Destination.html. Retrieved 2011-03-22.)
My solutions?
1. ERADICATE POVERTY WORLDWIDE. Only the fair distribution of wealth globally, will fund education, health and other social services for women. I know you've heard this before, but it bears repeating.
2. INCREASE RESOURCES TO COMBAT SEX TRAFFICKING. THE US SPENDS $20 PER HUMAN TRAFFICKING VICTIM BUT 350 TIMES THIS AMOUNT TO COMBAT DRUG TRAFFICKING (http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/896).
3. CHANGE THE PATRIARCHAL VALUE SYSTEM WORLD-WIDE.
MY THEORIES? SOCIALIST FEMINISM explains the underside of poverty, and how women are particularly affected. RADICAL FEMINISM explains the global nature of patriarchy, the rule of male elites over women and subordinated men. COMMENTS WELCOMED.
My comment: Films like PRETTY WOMAN come to mind. Many US-made films propagate the myth of the ‘happy prostitute’. The Western media in general objectifies women’s sexuality to sell commodities to men, such as cars. Therefore we should not just blame the culture in ‘backward’ countries but also the mass media in Western countries.
The National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence in the US (http://www.ncdsv.org/ncd_linksprost.html) estimates there are between 100,000 and 150,000 under-aged sex workers in the US who generate billions of dollars in revenue for their pimps. The US is also a destination country to which prostitutes around the world, are sent to work.
Hughes' report focuses on ‘destination countries’: ‘In destination countries, strategies are devised to protect the sex industries that generate hundreds of millions of dollars per year for the state where prostitution is legal, or for organized crime groups and corrupt officials where the sex industry is illegal.” “I believe that only by going to the root causes, which are corruption and the demand in destination countries, will we end the trafficking of women and children.”
The full report is accessed at http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/demand_rome_june04.pdf.
SO, WHICH ARE THE ‘DESTINATION’ COUNTRIES?
The most common destinations for victims of human trafficking are Thailand, Japan, Israel, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Turkey and the US (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “UNODC launches Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking”, 2007).
Note that the majority of these countries are supposedly the ‘advanced’ nations. What does that say about their culture? From WIKIPEDIA (see source): “Of the 45,000 to 50,000 that are brought to the U.S., 30,000 come from Asia, 10,000 from Latin America and 5,000 from other regions e.g., the former Soviet Union. The primary Asian source countries to the U.S. are China, Thailand and Vietnam. Although trafficking into the U.S. and Europe has gained a lot of attention in recent years, anti-trafficking advocates in Asia have been addressing these issues on the continent for decades (FIROZA CHIC DABBY, TRAFFICKING: CONSIDERATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BATTERED WOMEN’S ADVOCATES, Revised September 2008, apiahf.org.)
The major sources of trafficked persons include Thailand, China, Nigeria, Albania, Bulgaria, Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine ("The Emancipation Network". Tenstudents.com. http://tenstudents.com/Source_Destination.html. Retrieved 2011-03-22.)
My solutions?
1. ERADICATE POVERTY WORLDWIDE. Only the fair distribution of wealth globally, will fund education, health and other social services for women. I know you've heard this before, but it bears repeating.
2. INCREASE RESOURCES TO COMBAT SEX TRAFFICKING. THE US SPENDS $20 PER HUMAN TRAFFICKING VICTIM BUT 350 TIMES THIS AMOUNT TO COMBAT DRUG TRAFFICKING (http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/896).
3. CHANGE THE PATRIARCHAL VALUE SYSTEM WORLD-WIDE.
MY THEORIES? SOCIALIST FEMINISM explains the underside of poverty, and how women are particularly affected. RADICAL FEMINISM explains the global nature of patriarchy, the rule of male elites over women and subordinated men. COMMENTS WELCOMED.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)