Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Globalism, Corporatism and Open Source

JonKatz posted more than 12 years ago | from the can-open-source-save-the-networked-world? dept.

Technology 633

(Second in a series.) Globalism is the least hip political idea around at the moment, perhaps because it has been hijacked so completely by the multinationals. Herd-like college kids and knee-jerk political activists associate the term with a broad range of bugaboos, from cultural imperialism to sweatshops to environmental destruction. But others (like me) see it as the best hope for a world in which gaps between the tech and non-tech worlds are widening, and the have-nots are increasingly enraged at the haves. Philanthropist and open-society advocate George Soros is an ardent supporter globalization, despite its shortcomings. In response to this series, Niklas Saers e-mails this question: "Do you think developing countries will be able to use open source to develop and keep pace with the western world?" My answer: not unless they get open governments to support it. Soros supports globalism, and not only because of the new wealth he believes it can produce. Along with many Open Source advocates -- he believes in what supporters call a global open society that could ensure a greater degree of freedom than individual states can or will. Is it already too late for that?

To Soros, the current state of globalism -- capital is free but social concerns are underfunded -- represents a distortion of globalization, not its true promise.

Corporatism and globalism have become hopelessly confused in the public mind.The many excesses of valueless, greedy, proprietary and unrestrained multinational corporations have become enmeshed with tech-driven networked economies. It's difficult to even imagine what an effort it would take to separate one from another, sadly.

In his book George Soros on Globalization, the billionnaire asks for institutional reforms to address some of the many political concerns globalism raises:

l. Contain the instability of financial markets.

2. Complement the World Trade Organization (WTO),which is supposed to generate equitably-distributed global wealth, with equally powerful international organizations devoted to social goals, like reducing poverty and making necessary goods available all over the world.

3. Improve the quality of public life in countries suffering from corrupt, repressive or incompetent governments.

Free software advocates have argued for years now that open software could help create wealth and promote open societies in once-repressive, impoverished and technologically-primitive regimes. This idea is exciting. It attracted non-geeks like me to Open Source and Slashdot in the first place. That they are right is almost beside the point. How will proprietary software be curbed, and open software developed, in regimes that are corrupt and repressive? Why would these noxious governments support the use of software to develop an open society any more than they would encourage free speech or abandon censorship?

Legal scholars like Lawrence Lessig see the GPL as a major cornerstone of a vast, global "digital commons." So far, this vision has failed to materialize. In fact, new software is creating personalized, fragmented, narcissistic media in which screening and blocking (products, people, differing opinions) has become widely accepted, even epidemic.

In his terrific new biography of Richard Stallman, Free As In Freedom writer Sam Williams quotes Stallman: "What history says about the GNU project, twenty years from now, will depend on who wins the battle of freedom to use public knowledge. If we lose, we will be just a footnote. If we win, it is uncertain whether people will know the role of the GNU operating system -- if they think the system is 'Linux' they will build a false picture of what happened and why. But even if we win, what history people learn a hundred years from now is likely to depend on who dominates politically." So far, the big winners are the big corporations.

But Stallman, the Thomas Paine of the Net, is obviously right in some ways. To many people on Wall Street and in Silicon Valley, the GNU project is already a footnote. It remains the most vibrant and exciting political idea on the Net, whatever the obstacles. But it seems that corporatism is too deeply entrenched to really change, and who is going to make it change? Few governments in the world as as powerful as Microsoft or AOL-Time-Warner. The multi-nationals are, in a way, the new nation-states of globalism. In recent years, they have been the primary beneficiaries of globalism -- as Soros concedes -- and for much of the undeveloped world and many political activists, they are the spawn of globalism's first generation of existence.

Soros skirts some major obstacles to his proper and idealistic vision. He recognizes that the networked global economy is forcing market values into areas where they don't properly or historically belong, from copyright to publishing to medicine to the law. These intrusions also occur in foreign cultures where they are distinctly unwelcome. Anti-Americanism has become a staple of life in many parts of Europe, and even more virulently elsewhere, where the United States is equated with evil, greed, corruption and blasphemy.

One of the great -- and widely foreseen -- political consequences of the rise of the Net was a widening gap between developed and undeveloped countries, many of which simply lack the infrastructure to wire up their populations and economies. How can governments in places like Afghanistan embrace open software and an open society if they can't even bring electricity and telephones to most of their citizens?

There's already enormous opposition to ideas like the ones Soros proposes. Market fundamentalists and conservatives object to tinkering with the global marketplace. And the broad range of people who call themselves "antiglobalization activists" don't buy the idea that globalization could conceivably improve lives in impoverished parts of the world. Many don't believe meetings should even be held by governmental officials to discuss globalism.

Soros argues that the world's worst conditions aren't necessarily caused by globalism. It's bad governments that are responsible for exploitive working conditions, lack of social and economic capital, and political repression.

Soros's primary argument is that globalism could be used as a powerful social tool, one that could undermine or circumvent incompetent or repressive regimes. The increased wealth globalization produces, he maintains, could make up for the inequities and other shortcomings of networked, global economies. The problem is that the winners don't compensate the losers, says Soros. "There is no international equivalent of the political process that occurs within individual states. While markets have become global, politics remain firmly rooted in the sovereignty of the state."

The Net becomes a significant political factor in this evolution, because it is both individualistic and trans-national. It permits the rapid movement of capital and, if open source activists are correct, could also use free software and other technologies as a powerful tool for developing nations who want to join the globalization movement.

But it's difficult to see by what process this is going to occur. As a result of globalization, the divisions between the world's rich and the poor continues to widen. According to the United Nations Development Program, the richest one percent of the world's population receives as much income as the poorest 57 percent. More than a billion people live on less than a dollar a day; nearly a billion lack any access to clean water; 826 million suffer from malnutrition; 10 million die annually due to lack of basic health care. Some of these conditions pre-dated globalization, but the new economy has hardly improved matters. And it seems to be generating hatred of the United States, where contemporary notions of globalism were born and shaped.

Next: Getting specific about reforming globalism.

cancel ×

633 comments

frist ps0t (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309743)

this is the first anti-katz post. jeez, what an idiot. he's already posted this comment 80 times on /.

Re:frist ps0t (-1, Offtopic)

TheAnonymousCoward (572253) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309751)

Thank you for your help. please stop using my name.

Thank You,
TheAnonymousCoward

is it? is it ? (-1)

corniche (207397) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309745)

first?
Spongy fingaaaz

First Katz sucks! (-1, Flamebait)

Klerck (213193) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309747)

Katz sucks!

Also, isn't he tired of writing about globalism yet? Who the fuck cares!

asdf (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309749)

FROST PIST?

john katz (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309760)

is a weenie

repeat (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309761)

this seems like an exact repeat of an article a few months ago....

I am sure there are dissenting opinions here (0)

moldar (536869) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309762)

But Stallman, the Thomas Paine of the Net Not that I have a personal preference here . . . But that alone could bring the Trolls and Flamers out in droves!

But wait - that was Jon Katz!

(ducks and runs)

51. (-1)

GafTheHorseInTears (565684) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309764)

The fact that faith, under certain circumstances, may work for blessedness, but that this blessedness produced by an idee fixe by no means makes the idea itself true, and the fact that faith actually moves no mountains, but instead raises them up where there were none before: all this is made sufficiently clear by a walk through a lunatic asylum. Not, of course, to a priest: for his instincts prompt him to the lie that sickness is not sickness and lunatic asylums not lunatic asylums. Christianity finds sickness necessary, just as the Greek spirit had need of a superabundance of health--the actual ulterior purpose of the whole system of salvation of the church is to make people ill. And the church itself--doesn't it set up a Catholic lunatic asylum as the ultimate ideal?--The whole earth as a madhouse?--The sort of religious man that the church wants is a typical decadent; the moment at which a religious crisis dominates a people is always marked by epidemics of nervous disorder; the inner world" of the religious man is so much like the "inner world" of the overstrung and exhausted that it is difficult to distinguish between them; the "highest" states of mind, held up be fore mankind by Christianity as of supreme worth, are actually epileptoid in form--the church has granted the name of holy only to lunatics or to gigantic frauds in majorem dei honorem. . . . Once I ventured to designate the whole Christian system of training in penance and salvation (now best studied in England) as a method of producing a folie circulaire upon a soil already prepared for it, which is to say, a soil thoroughly unhealthy. Not every one may be a Christian: one is not "converted" to Christianity--one must first be sick enough for it. . . .We others, who have the courage for health and likewise for contempt,--we may well despise a religion that teaches misunderstanding of the body! that refuses to rid itself of the superstition about the soul! that makes a "virtue" of insufficient nourishment! that combats health as a sort of enemy, devil, temptation! that persuades itself that it is possible to carry about a "perfect soul" in a cadaver of a body, and that, to this end, had to devise for itself a new concept of "perfection," a pale, sickly, idiotically ecstatic state of existence, so-called "holiness"--a holiness that is itself merely a series of symptoms of an impoverished, enervated and incurably disordered body! . . . The Christian movement, as a European movement, was from the start no more than a general uprising of all sorts of outcast and refuse elements (--who now, under cover of Christianity, aspire to power)-- It does not represent the decay of a race; it represents, on the contrary, a conglomeration of decadence products from all directions, crowding together and seeking one another out. It was not, as has been thought, the corruption of antiquity, of noble antiquity, which made Christianity possible; one cannot too sharply challenge the learned imbecility which today maintains that theory. At the time when the sick and rotten Chandala classes in the whole imperium were Christianized, the contrary type, the nobility, reached its finest and ripest development. The majority became master; democracy, with its Christian instincts, triumphed . . . Christianity was not "national," it was not based on race--it appealed to all the varieties of men disinherited by life, it had its allies everywhere. Christianity has the rancour of the sick at its very core--the instinct against the healthy, against health. Everything that is well--constituted, proud, gallant and, above all, beautiful gives offence to its ears and eyes. Again I remind you of Paul's priceless saying: "And God hath chosen the weak things of the world, the foolish things of the world, the base things of the world, and things which are despised": this was the formula; in hoc signo the decadence triumphed.--God on the cross--is man always to miss the frightful inner significance of this symbol?--Everything that suffers, everything that hangs on the cross, is divine. . . . We all hang on the cross, consequently we are divine. . . . We alone are divine. . . . Christianity was thus a victory: a nobler attitude of mind was destroyed by it--Christianity remains to this day the greatest misfortune of humanity.--

Re:51. (-1)

corniche (207397) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309791)

I kep Telling you

Spong3 FINGAAAAAAAZ

Get (-1)

corniche (207397) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309767)

Back to writiong about your doggies [amazon.com] katz

Buzzwords (1, Flamebait)

sandidge (150265) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309768)

In the Slashdot "Buzzword Bingo Hall":

Caller: Globalism
Caller: Corporatism
Caller: Open Source

Me: BINGO!

Re:Buzzwords (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309916)

Seems that anything I post with my normal account now gets modded Flamebait... wow... how curious, especially since this post is of the same nature of the following two in this discussion:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=30574&cid=3309 777 [slashdot.org]

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=30574&cid=3309 851 [slashdot.org]

ESAD (-1)

Guns n' Roses Troll (207208) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309770)

JonKatz, please eat shit and die. You child-molesting sack of pig guts.

john katz (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309774)

I love John Katz! He is easily the best writer on slashdot. As a matter of fact, his insightful and timely articles are the only reason I even come to this shithole. But anyways, thanks Slashdot for another dead on article by Katz.

Re:john katz (-1, Offtopic)

TheAnonymousCoward (572253) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309809)

Speak for yourself, I for one cannot stand this dribble. He says the same things OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER *whack* sorry. And they are boring.

YOU sir are boring and inane (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309881)

Even if you could match Katz's eloquent and flowery prose you certianly couldn't express the depth of his insights. Every single piece of his writing is a gem waiting to be uncovered. I like to print out Katz pieces and savor them in a comfortable armchair with a nice warm glass of cognac. Katz pieces also bear re-reading, and they get better with every time. I have spent many a warm summer afternoon sitting on my back porch reading older Katz pieces and softly chuckling to myself and nodding my head in affirmation. He has a wit and insight that is lacking from most of the other contemperary journalists. Your typical knee jerk anti-Katz reaction shows that you have obviously not delved deep enough into Katz's pieces. Perhaps you should spend some time in quiet reflection and study and then come back and attempt to express a more coherent thought.

Re:john katz (-1)

corniche (207397) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309839)

in that cas, you may wish to buy his book [amazon.com]


you los3r

Second in Series?!?! (-1, Offtopic)

Emugamer (143719) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309776)

Hehehehe.....
hehehehehe..........
hahahahahahah aha
hahahahahaha
hahaha
oh that was funny

Globalism, Corporatism and Open Source, eh? (4, Funny)

gowen (141411) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309777)

Jon ... I fear your slashdot headline generator [bbspot.com] has become jammed in the "on" position again.

Things To Do Today (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309887)

1. Drink beer

2. Urinate frequently

UNIX, outdated operating system, dead at 32 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309781)

I just heard the sad news on talk radio!! Antiquated operating system "UNIX" was found dead in it's Key West bungalo this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss UNIX -- even if you weren't a victim of it's convoluted user interface, there's no denying it's contributions to Microsoft's ascent to greatness. Truly a hero of yester-year. UNIX will be missed :(

quote (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309787)

"Herd-like college kids"

But then, for the most part, you repeat yourself. As a college student, I'm amazed how often kids who have led sheltered lives, upon finding out there is more in the world, latch onto every new idea they get like its the holy grail of modern thought. I think this explains a lot of the college protests going on.

Re:quote (1)

boltar (263391) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309922)

Kids always protest whether it be about what mummy has given them for dinner or about some
[insert right-on political agenda]. After a few years they grow up and grow out of it.

Re:quote (-1)

corniche (207397) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309930)

Moo Moo MoO Moooo MoOooO MooOooOMoo MooMOo Moo mOOoo Moo Mooo MooOm MooOmOm MOOO Mooo MooO

BAA!

Not again.... (1, Insightful)

drunkmonk (241978) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309789)

When is the JonKatz madness going to stop?!

Mentions globalism: check!
Mentions Open Source: check!
Mentions WTO: check!
Makes some strange connection between Open Source and social politics: check!

If only he could somehow blame Swaziland's continuing strife on Microsoft's business practices, he'd be set.

Re:Not again.... (0, Flamebait)

mvdwege (243851) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309934)

When is the JonKatz madness going to stop?!

When is the senseless Katz bashing going to stop?

For fscks man, if you don't like him, don't read him!. I mean, you can read, can't you? You could have seen his name on the front page, right?

Geez, how narrow-minded can you be? You are posting in a discussion of an article by someone you don't want to read anyway. Now if only you had something original to add...

Mart

This guy (4, Insightful)

SkyLeach (188871) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309792)

Sounds like a closet communist trying to show that the GPL and open-source support communism.

I think they are more like democracy, allowing everyone to know the truth and everyone to have a vote. Everybody knows humanity as a whole is greedy and collectivly ignorant of its own well-being. The only reason that open-source really works is because it has more of a republic-style structure. There are very smart people working in a tight-knit group for the good of the software and those that use it. They don't allow just anybody to get their hands on the code (read that as modify the CVS tree), and if the community doesn't like what's going on in it they fork and create a new small tight-knit group that does the same thing a different way.

The problem with extending this philosophy to government is that software can passively take away the goods of the closed-source guys by the rules of supply and demand. Try to take away governments candy and you are going to pick a fight. They don't have to compete, they RULE. :-)

This guy does sound commie like! (1)

nickyj (142376) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309862)

Open source is going to save the world?... Only if people that are going to work don't mind Open Salary, (working for free).

The GPL and open-source ARE communist! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309924)

But before I get moderated into oblivion, let me explain what I mean. Too many people, especially those in America, associate "Communism" with all sorts of evil things that have been pounded into their heads (i.e., torture, labor camps, atheism, etc.) The fact of the matter is that Soviet-style "Communism" had very little to do with little-c "communism" as envisioned by Marx.

Open Source is *very much* a philosophy that embraces "from each to his own ability, to each to his own needs." To that extent it IS communist. But it is not, and will never be, the big-C COMMUNIST that millions of Americans were taught to hate when they grew up. Because that was, by and large, evil, and OSS is not evil.

bugaboos? (1)

bludstone (103539) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309794)

"Herd-like college kids and knee-jerk political activists associate the term with a broad range of bugaboos, from cultural imperialism to sweatshops to environmental destruction."

Bugaboos?! BUGABOOS?!

oh come ON!

Re:bugaboos? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309902)

it's an economic fact that international trade ("globalism") increases *everyone's* standard of living.

Let's see how.

Farmer Brown has dairy cows. He can produce 100 gallons of milk a day if he milks all his cows. If, instead of milking, he tells them to lay eggs, he will have 0 eggs, and 0 milk.

His neighbor, Farmer Smith, has Chickens, and can produce 100 eggs per day, but no milk, no matter how hard the chickens try.

By trading, they can both have the benefits of milk and eggs.

WTH is a bugaboo? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309908)

It sure as hell ain't clear from the context. Does it mean a random negative thing?

Double edged sword (3, Insightful)

Clovert Agent (87154) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309798)

Like so many other things, globalisation can be good, or can be bad. Make that "can be great, or can be dreadful". Unfortunately, it seems to swing to one or t'other extremes, and the rhetoric certainly focuses on little else.

Certainly the removal of trade barriers should be a force for good all round, but not when unrestricted trade allows a masive multinational to come in and crush local industry by running at a loss until the market is "secure".

The only possible solution is a carefully moderated one, but that's what the EU was supposed to achieve, and it's proving a MUCH more painful process than expected.

Trouble is, the conglomerates only ever talk about the pros, and the protesters only ever talk about the cons. It's very very rare to encounter a forum which discusses both sides frankly, AND attempts to find middle ground. Which is silly - there's no fundamental reason why everyone couldn't benefit from the process.

2c, anyway.

Re:Double edged sword (1)

megalomaniacs4u (199468) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309954)

Certainly the removal of trade barriers should be a force for good all round, but not when unrestricted trade allows a masive multinational to come in and crush local industry by running at a loss until the market is "secure".

Certainly. But the ultimate goal of removing trade barriers is one planet = one company.

Globalism will just end up with a global corporate state.

New economy, of all evils! (1)

damass (532531) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309801)

>Some of these conditions pre-dated globalization,
>but the new economy has hardly improved matters.
>And it seems to be generating hatred of the United
>States, where contemporary notions of globalism
>were born and shaped.

It's hardly economy 2.0 that's causing the much-propagated hatred. US just reaps what it sowed through the 70's and 80's.

Great (0, Insightful)

l33t j03 (222209) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309802)

I got to the part where George Soros is lauded.

If there is anyone anywhere who comes closest to the Smoking Man in the X-Files, it is Soros. The guy is a genius, no doubt, and I'm all for rampant capitlism and money making, but Soros is just a son-of-a-bitch. Really. That guy would be more than happy to utterly destroy the economy of any third world country to make $50. Happily.

Come to think of it, maybe I actully like Soros and I'm just suprised to read a limp wristed, whiny, leftist, apologist like Katz stick up for him.

Hmmm... (1, Funny)

Ass-Gas-Istan (523702) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309807)

But Stallman, the Thomas Paine of the Net, is obviously right in some ways.

I've never heard him called a "Thomas Paine" before, but I have heard him mentioned as another type of "Paine".

John Katz's "A Dog Year" nominated for Pulitzer (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309813)

A Dog Year is a must read for every dog lover out there. Jon Katz writes about his beloved dogs in such a way that the reader can almost smell them. For me, the true test of a great book is how long it takes me to read it, and this one was a fast read. For anyone who has owned a challenging dog, you will certainly be able to relate to author Katz's fortitude and determination not to give up on his border collie. As you read A Dog Year, you may cry, you will certainly laugh and you will definitely be grateful to have found this gem of a book. And it will make you proud to be a true dog lover.

Rich to get Richer? (2)

FFFish (7567) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309815)

Soros supports globalism, and not only because of the new wealth he believes it can produce.

The cynic in me reads "new wealth he believes it can produce for him."

Re:Rich to get Richer? (2, Insightful)

FFFish (7567) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309914)

Hmmm. According to the United Nations Development Program, the richest one percent of the world's population receives as much income as the poorest 57 percent. More than a billion people live on less than a dollar a day; nearly a billion lack any access to clean water; 826 million suffer from malnutrition; 10 million die annually due to lack of basic health care.

George Soros has $3000 million to his name. He could rid himself of $2500 million and still be one of the wealthiest men on earth.

That's seven million people fed for a year at a dollar a day. That'd be clean water for every person on the planet (clean water is easy; there's a sand-filter technology that's perhaps a hundred bucks a pop); that's all malnutrition eliminated; that's basic healthcare for everyone.

George Soros could singlehandly wipe out most of the starvation/dire health problems on this planet. But he doesn't.

For that matter, George is #60 on the Forbes list. Imagine if all those ultra-mega-elite rich were to get some compassion and donate 10% of their unimaginable wealth to solving these basic problems of human needs.

Globalism isn't going to fix a damn thing. The rich will get richer, and the impoverished will continue to drop like flies because the rich don't care to share enough. (Which isn't to say that non-globalism is a cure. It isn't. The only cure is for the ultra-rich to become ultra-generous.)

Re:Rich to get Richer? (-1)

l33t j03 (222209) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309955)

Why don't the impoverished just make more money? That way they wouldn't have to depend on the generosity of others.

Corporations bad? (1)

Yoda2 (522522) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309818)

You say valueless, greedy, and proprietary like they are bad things. Have you been talking to Ralph Nader?

OT: Slash pr0n (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309819)

No joke:
http://teen-movies.adultbouncer.com/
(ok, not really slashcode)

Hard to believe! A slashdotter AND a pimp.

What is this? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309821)

If I subscribe do I get articles like this one filtered?

FSTFUKP! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309822)

First STFU, Katz post!

Come on folks.. (-1, Offtopic)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309829)

Most countries have bigger problems to worry about than choosing between open source software and winblows.

Re:Come on folks.. (0)

sheean.nl (565364) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309946)

do you meen this in: they'll choise for Windows anyway? What I don't like is that a country choices for Windows and later says about it: "awh, how cares", quite some taxes can be saved between choising for it and not (especially really poor countries wich can probably offerd a single computer and a simple printer to do their country's administrative stuff), the government(s) must stop their ignorance about that fact (especially my Dutch government wich sometime is bothering about really unimportant stuff). Let's save money, let's make people smarter, let's choice for open-source, isn't it?

What kind of Globalism does Soros really want? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309835)

When talking about George Soros, the Asian Crisis around 1998 comes into mind. Before being to accepting of his ideas, remember that he and the funds that has made him a billionaire where suspected in taking part in currency specultions that helped deepen/cause the southeast asian currency crisis. (Currency selling/buying to increase the values of the funds).

On the same note, he and the same funds were suspected of being involved in the heavy Swedish krona speculations that caused a major currency crisis in Sweden in the early 90's.

/Mattias

The worn out "theyre poor cos we're rich" ideology (1, Flamebait)

boltar (263391) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309836)

Anyone who thinks that if the west hadn't got rich through the industrial revolution , and
science and technology in general then the 3rd world would somehow have inherited that wealth
and would all be living in some happy nirvana right now is either a fool or living in some hippy
cloud somewhere south of reality.
I get sick and tired of people trying to make me feel guily because I can afford a computer and
some kid in africa is starving to death.
Povery is caused by a combination of degradation of the enviroment, despot dictators, poor economic management, religious zealotry and plain old overpopulation.
Fuck the 3rd world, its not our fault the state they're in. We dragged ourselves out of a stone
age culture, they didn't. Well thats their damn problem.

Re:The worn out "theyre poor cos we're rich" ideol (2, Insightful)

wilde73 (146714) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309888)

Take a look at your clothes tag. Were are they made?

Re:The worn out "theyre poor cos we're rich" ideol (-1)

l33t j03 (222209) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309928)

So because a rich American bought a product from them they are poor?

Help me with that one, it seems to fly in the face of basic econimics.

Re:The worn out "theyre poor cos we're rich" ideol (1)

boltar (263391) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309951)

Who cares? Its that or no job at all for them. If their countries had half decent economies it
wouldn't be an issue. THEY undercut US. We didn't FORCE them to charge low prices for their work.
WHat about the western workers put out of work because of that? Bet you won't be doing a fist
salute for them will you mate?

Re:The worn out "theyre poor cos we're rich" ideol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309943)



not quite. I agree with your first point, that if the west hadn't developed mathematically based science (adopted from the arabs, adopted from the greeks, adopted from the egyptians,babylonian, dravidians ....) there is no evidence that any other culture would have made these advances in the 19th century.

That said, I don't agree your second point 'we dragged ourselves up from the stone age, its here fault if they can't do it themselves'. After all, we are supporting the repressive, despotic, wasteful governments in the middle east and elsewhere.

Re:The worn out "theyre poor cos we're rich" ideol (2)

lysurgon (126252) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309958)

Anyone who thinks that if the west hadn't got rich through the industrial revolution , and
science and technology in general then the 3rd world would somehow have inherited that wealth
and would all be living in some happy nirvana right now is either a fool or living in some hippy
cloud somewhere south of reality.


Now, I don't think we'd have nirvana anywhere if the industrialized nations stayed out of other countries, but to argue that centuries of exploitation have nothing to do with the dire situation in most of these countries is plain blindness.

Where pray tell did the vast majority of raw materials and cheap (e.g. slave) labor that powered the industreal revolution come from? Hmmm... the third wold. So, if the industrealized nations colonized (directly or by economic corporate proxy) other countries, dismantled their subsistance-based economy and set them up to export their natural resources to be refined and used by industreal nations, it's their own fault?

Povery is caused by a combination of degradation of the enviroment, despot dictators, poor economic management, religious zealotry and plain old overpopulation.

All of which are direct results of colonialism. I mean, really, you think we didn't step on a few hands while "dragging ourselves out of the stone age?"

WTF! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309838)

Who the fuck says the whole world rates its 'success' by wether it has a DVD player and enough spendies to buy LOTR???

Globalism is a stupid term being hijacked by any number of minority interest groups. ANY wealthy individual with broad commercial interests sees Globalism as a way to expand markets for consumer goods beyond the 'west'.

"If only those Africans and Chinese would stop being so fucking self sufficient we could sell them burgers and running shoes! DVD players and Graphics Cards!" - Are we any better off for having these things?

Admittedly I've just swallowed Noami Klein (tasty!) so I'm a bit fired up on this one - but come on guys - Open Source bringing the 'poor people' up to 'our' standards of living. Get a fucking life!

Re:WTF! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309879)

NAOMI is I MOAN spelled backwards, you know!

Klein is a twat anyway.

umm, what is Katz trying to say? (5, Interesting)

killthiskid (197397) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309840)

So OSS had (has?) a chance to change the world, but is failing due to the cooperate-states that globaliazation has created?


Is that what Katz is saying? This isn't a big surprise to anyone. Multi-national corps. are the new big power. They work outside the realm of any governing body... they can pick and choose the laws & regulations they want to effect a specific activity by choice of location. And what they can't escape, they can easily buy now aday.


It seems that the trend is to remove the possibility of any significant number of people using 'free' software. I'm not saying it can be done away with all together, if nothing else OSS will move underground.


And I stuggle to find any a real way in which free software will help those who don't have the fundamentals in life: food, shelter, medicine, etc... who gives a damn about OSS if you're starving? I stuggle to see the connection between the too...


Sigh (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309851)

Stories With keyword Globalism by Katz 9
Stories with keyword Corporatism by Katz 49
Stories with Keyword "Open Source" By Katz 173

What a load of bullshit. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309853)

...please...

What we need is good education in developing countries, we need equal possibilities to trade under similuar sets of trade-rules.

Open source (the idea that people should give their work away for free) has abolutely NOTHING to do with this. Giving work away for free doesn't create welth.

I'm sick and tired when not-so-serious articles tries to connect one thing that they support with something else thats really has nothing to do with it.

We aren't living in a Utopia! (4, Insightful)

MonkeyBot (545313) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309854)

First of all, globalism is as much of a dream as communism. It looks good on paper, but people in general are too corrupt to make it work properly, so it will fail. Many Americans fail to see this because we live in a nation where our government's corruption is minimal RELATIVE TO MOST OTHER COUNTRIES (not meant to be flamebait--if you don't believe me, stop over in any South American or African country for a few days). Globalization will merely turn into an excuse to basically turn third world countries into slave nations. There will be no point in the rich trying to make themselves richer by exploiting people in their own country; they can already exploit the wealth gap that will be readily available in other countries! Don't believe me? It's already happening! And don't kid yourself with reform--PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY POLITICIANS, ARE INHERENTLY CORRUPT!
Secondly, how is this "news for nerds" or "stuff that matters?" Just because you mention RMS doesn't mean we're interested!

Globalism (2, Insightful)

mbbac (568880) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309856)

Globalism's whole premise is based upon the presumption that so-called third world countries want to join us in becoming increasingly technologized.

Secondly, it drives large corporatists crazy with dreams of raizing new nations of consumers -- ready to purchase their wares without sophistication or restraint.

ain't no lovin like j0n katz lovin' (-1)

neal n bob (531011) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309861)

cause the j0n katz loving don't stop - at least until you are bleeding out your butt and the police have been called by the parents of the 11 year old boy he has kidnapped.

Damn. (1)

buzzbomb (46085) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309865)

I wish I could get paid weekly to sit on my ass and churn out stupid little articles like this...

What in the hell is Katz's salary anyways? I'll do it for half...and people won't hate me as much! Not even the anti-globalism, post 9/11 terrorists who code open source software to avoid another Columbine.

Check, check, check, check. ;)

I think it's time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309866)

...to give Jon Katz the first annual Wate of Bandwidth Award for both his incessant harping on the same topics and his utter resistance to learning anything about how the world really works.

The award, which consists of a 6-inch piece of CAT-5 cable (that's obviously been ripped out of a piece of equipment) mounted on a plaque, suitable for display.

Stallman is the Thomas Paine of the net? (1)

Zico (14255) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309867)

I can't believe I just read that. I've never really gotten into the whole Katz-bashing thing, but that one little phrase makes it perfectly clear to me why so many do. The guy definitely needs to have the shit beat out of him with a clue stick, if not a baseball bat.

Especially as RMS is speaking at the DNC this week (1)

Salgak1 (20136) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309961)

Well, then Thomas Paine must be a Democrat. . .


Please Let It Be Known That:

Richard M Stallman
of the
Free Software Foundation
will give a speech entitled

Copyright vs Community in
the Age of the Computer Networks

at the Headquarters of
The Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol Street, SE
Washington DC 20003

on Tuesday Night: April 9th 2002 at 7pm

THE PUBLIC IS INVITED

This event is co-organized by the
DC Perl Mongers http://dc.pm.org
&DC Sage http://www.dc-sage.org
free & open community computer user organizations
w/ magnanimous support from
the Democratic National Committee.


This is probably... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309872)

the most stupid Katz article I have ever read. Please stop insulting our intelligence with your badly written capitalist propoganda.

OS may help! (1)

TulioSerpio (125657) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309874)

...but only to 20% of the global population, if no less!

Re:OS may help! (1)

user flynn (236683) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309935)



Bill Gates says "Don't you mean %20 of the global population?"

Great title (2)

aozilla (133143) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309876)

"Globalism, Corporatism and Open Source"

Nuff said...

Serious Journalism On Slashdot? (2, Flamebait)

Mr.Phil (128836) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309882)

For the life of me, I keep wondering why JonKatz continues to post stories on Slashdot, even though the majority of posts in a JonKatz article are basically cat-calls and color commentary on his relations with *insert any item here*. Is it possible that the editors of Slashdot have bought into the same line that JonKatz believes, that he is a serious Journalism/Editorial Writer?

I click on ads on Slashdot daily, mainly because I don't want to pay for "editorial content" provided by JonKatz.

Flamebait, troll, whatever I don't care. The author sounds like my cousin who got hooked on drugs in college and joined the Communist Party of America because they had some "really cool ideas about stuff."

Re:Serious Journalism On Slashdot? (1)

boltar (263391) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309910)

Funny , I thought it was quite an incisive piece. What is the problem you people have with this
guy? Is it the standard issue teenagers having a go at someone older routine? It getting *really*
old and stale these days.

Open Source is great, but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309885)

it can't solve all the world's problems. Seriously. It sounds to me like someone is trying a little too hard here. You can have all the open source software in the world but it still won't provide food, shelter, doctors, etc. It might help kids learn some things, but it's not going to be able to put a dent in any of the problems these countries face.

Globalism = Exploitation (2, Insightful)

joshgunnar (545126) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309889)

Globalism is great for multinational corporations. Big business depends on cheap labor as a commodity to be sought out and exploited. Globalism removes the weak boundaries that might prevent a company from laying off it's entire domestic workforce and shipping it's jobs and money overseas... ala Nike. A strict utalitarian might argue that it betters the lives of workers in other nations by giving them a slightly better wage. Given the current climate of flag-wavin, USA-cheerin americans, it's hard to imagine people getting excited about allowing more US workers to get the axe just so that corporations can improve their bottom line.

AT SHIT KATZ (-1)

corniche (207397) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309890)

I was lucky enough to get my hands on an advanced copy of this book. Don't be fooled - this is a lot more than just a "dog book", although it is that too, and a great one. Katz touches on all kinds of topics, and the book is by turns touching, funny and profound, while avoiding sappiness and cliches. By the end of it I almost felt like I knew Katz, his wife and their great daughter, and especially his dogs; the two pairs Katz describes, his labs and his border collies, have more personality than many people I know. This book really hit home for me, and I'd recommend it to just about anyone.

I believe in Lower Class Technocratic Globalism! (2)

Com2Kid (142006) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309892)

Muahhahhahaha! Title says it all!

Fuck the middle / upper class, let the Nerds rise up, w00t!

Anyway. In all seriousness, I DO believe that the only halfway decent hope for a future that this already royally f'ed up planet has is to let the academics in charge, but NOT the bureaucratic ones, because bureaucrats suck, something awful. And they blow. At the same time. Yes folks, bureaucrats blow AND suck.

They need to be shot into the moon with lawyers.

Oddly enough if you let the Nerds into control you would find yourself in a Globalization style of a world rather quickly, as Nerds generally don't give a fuck about things like artificial boundaries and what not. Hell just look at the Chess masters during the Cold War. . . . ^_^

(or Scientists during almost ANY war. The idea of cutting off science journal entries and such just because somebody was on an enemy side was / is abhorrent to the large majority of Scientists.)

Anyway. That is my own personal wacko socio-political theory, what's yours? :)

Order-independent content! (2, Funny)

JuanGatosElGaseoso (558364) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309893)

After randomly rearranging the words in the first paragraph, I've found that, amazingly, they make about the same sense as the original version; they have roughly equivalent signal to noise ratios: range that? and multinationals. produce. new moment, "Do world society wealth of and individual perhaps keep least by think cultural western supporters which advocates what others only he a not the develop e-mails he My world?" shortcomings. call haves. it to the open Is it political with late governments to and between Soros the will and Open to it in kids with or it. Source this widening, at political developing able Saers greater best believes been is Soros (like In the the in around have-nots are environmental a series, believes can despite be you has its knee-jerk increasingly the is hijacked countries the hip open-society could as response from activists that George open to bugaboos, of non-tech states enraged Philanthropist many globalism, supports degree the Herd-like tech a an with use Globalism imperialism already than global because this because and the term are But a answer: hope to Along broad unless completely source will. to open can freedom me) they globalization, college ensure the it too idea and Niklas -- worlds gaps at not pace so get associate destruction. for supporter ardent see support for advocate sweatshops of question:

Communism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309895)

This is all well and good, but Katz fails to address the role of Communism in much of this, particularly in the propagatation of open source software. I am a big proponent of OSS and use it on a daily basis, but there can be no denying that it uses a fundamentally different model than the one that our capitalist (Western) society is built on. Now certainly it is not the same as old Soviet-style Communism because the OSS community has (I believe) a general interest in the welfare of the collective whereas the Stalinites were just out for a power grab.

At any rate this appears to be little more than typical Katz flamebait, intended to generate pageviews for /.'s advertisers. I would imagine that he has succeeded, congratulations Jon. The truth is that we really should have a real debate on some of these issues because they (particularly globalism) can and will severely impact the way that people live. Especially those in poor/3rd world countries.

Globalism is simple (3, Insightful)

cryptochrome (303529) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309896)

People too often confuse globalism with some of its results. But globalism itself is rather simple. Throughout very time an improvement in transportation, shipping, and/or communication came about, the ability of an individual to trade goods and information got wider, leading to new opportunities for collaboration and new sources of conflict. As one region finds itself in a common market with another, it finds differences in culture that both enrich and enrage, and a market in which it may excel or suffer in due to natural advantages or disadvantages. The net result is generally a richer and more productive lifestyle on average - that frequently comes at the costs of individuals, cities, and now whole nations in the process.

All globalism is is the latest and perhaps last ('til space) iteration of this process. It's just as inevitable as it was before. Fighting against it with favoratist practices just makes things harder. The less competitive nations and companies will naturally have a problem with it, as will anyone opposed to the market system in general (which explains all the neo-marxist college students). One thing is clear: your comfortable and predictable lifestyle (for however long you've had it) won't be there for you forever. Preserve the unique things that matter most, and be prepared to adapt to change and compete in the world.

Interesting (1)

2cool4school (569274) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309898)

It's nice of Mr Soros to attempt to share his wisdom with us. He undoubtedly knows a lot about the advantages of globalism; he's done very well from it! Computing *might* provide the answer to helping developing countries improve their lot, or at least part of the answer. A big part of the answer would be the developed countries being nicer to them. Don't lets forget though that the only reason we can have computers (as well as cars, TVs, healthcare, education, etc.) is that a great many people don't have these things or, in plenty of regions, shoes, enough food or clean water. It's a pyramid, dudes, we're at the top and George Soros is standing on the top and no amount of navel gazing from him is going to change a blasted thing.

Redundant (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309900)

Why isn't Katz modded down as Redundant every time he opens his mouth. Everytime he write something, it's the same fucking thing. Find something new to write about Katz!!

Dude, go take a graduate course in economics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309903)

This watered down, pseudo-preaching-teaching-get-up-on-a-god-damn-soa p-box is getting really old. Nothing new here, just the tivo version of a highlight real of current pop bs intellectual masturbation. Until katz does his research and provides the history of "first world, third world" terminology, how it relates to colonialism and the protestant idea of manifest destiny, it's never going to amount to piss.

Geez, Jon (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309905)

You really are a pompous ass. You'd think your neoliberl crapfloods would have died with wired. Isn't it obvious that your theoies don't fucking work.

Moderation (0, Offtopic)

burts_here (529713) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309909)

-1 flamebait

Governments and Nationalism as inhibitions (1)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309915)

"Soros argues that the world's worst conditions aren't necessarily caused by globalism. It's bad governments that are responsible for exploitive working conditions, lack of social and economic capital, and political repression".

I used to visit Thailand on business and I have expat friends that live there and the best they could get was 56K dialup that kept disconnecting.

The root of the problem was the fact that Thailand (like most countries) control the phone system and use it as a cash cow. No incentive to upgrade the system. So now developed countries like the US are ahead on the phone system.

Next: a great new technology (to developing countries) like the internet comes along and it depends on the phone system to get out to the common people. Doesn't work well with phone system in place.

Many of the common people can't afford phones because of their government controls that make it too expensive, thus they can't get the internet either. Those who can, get lousy internet service because the phone system at best can't handle a decent throughput. The developed countries of the world inch further ahead.

I remember when I mentioned to my Thai friend that they needed some good old competition to better their infrastructure and my Thai friend said "We can't do that because the Americans and Europeans would own everything".

Then I realized that the people have their wishes too. Seems as though nationalism amongst the people can be an inhibition as well.

Utter crap... (1)

kayser_soze (54474) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309919)

The arguments and connections Katz makes in his article are about as far from reality as the notion that human nature can be changed "if we all really try".

Open Software is not the answer to the world's problems. It is just a development made possible by the unique nature of the computer world. It cannot and should not try to be applied wholesale to everything, especially politics.

The whole "have vs. have nots" issue is ridiculous. The have nots are more worried about finding a plce to live and food to eat...daily subsitence issues. They are not concerned with "gee my computer isn't as fast" or "I wish I had a computer" issues.

Frankly, I thought the whole I-hate-Katz thing on Slashdot was way out of hand. Now hearing these inanities makes me think I was wrong. This guy would test the boundaries of negative moderation on kuro5hin.

globalism and globalization (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309921)

can we please learn a new buzzword?

i think we've had our fair share of globalism [slashdot.org] stories already..

problem with benevolent globalism (1)

TRACK-YOUR-POSITION (553878) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309926)

People protesting globalization aren't JUST protesting multinational corporations. They're protesting large, nondemocratic institutions dominating communities and individuals. These institutions are governments AND corporations AND strange multi-national bureaucracies no one understands and no one votes for, such as the IMF and the WTO. That's why both Left and Right people are upset about globalism.

Globalism, whether corporate-oriented or not, is always the enemy of democracy, simply because different democracies will always decide things differently, which is incompatible with global lawmaking. Anyone who claims people are confusing gloablism with "corporatism" is the only one confused--corporations don't matter. The issue is global control vs. local and democratic control, not corporations vs. governments.

Whatever you do, don't let globalism seduce you with, "Well, gee, maybe a world government will make everyone use MY solutions to global social problems!" Because, being that there are so many solutions proposed, the chance of that happening is nil.

Katz on form (1)

mapnjd (92353) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309927)

Mr Katz is really on form in this article - being a European, it's all to easy to see the loathful corporate-cultural-imperialism that is invading our society and to equate that with being "American".

I also like the main point of the article: the (free) re-distribution of technology and ideas promotes the re-distribution of wealth.

Unregulated mega-corps (mainly American) rely on keeping information, technology and ideas to themselves (via patents, copyrights, and various MS methods :-) to keep the wealth to themselves. Whilst I realise that's fairly obvious - it needed stating.

Great article Jon!,
nic

Is this geek news? (1)

VPN3000 (561717) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309938)

Not to sound harsh, but I could have gone to CNN for this type of thing. Sure, open source was mentioned but the folks in the 3rd world could care less about GNU, as they are a little more concerned with their own survival. Not to mention the cultures in such places tend to embrace spiritual understanding over technology and american dollars.

Your article seems to be fostering the idea of 'how can we make them more like us?' instead of actually understanding why the United States and other rich countries are hated by these people. Not everyone wants to play the capitalism game. Some folks want to be left alone to herd their sheep and cattle.

Who here thinks /. should have a slashpoll to see if Katz should be replaced with someone who has a little better grasp of reality? If so, let's make our voices heard!

Regards,
Victor

No more Please!!! (0, Offtopic)

ivanandre (265129) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309939)

I cant stand another Jon Katz Globalismo, corporations, new order, open source history...

ARRRRGGGGH!

Katz Buzzword Bingo (4, Funny)

Knunov (158076) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309940)

Globalism

Top left square.

Imperialism

Bottom right square.

Open Source

Center square.

Corporatism

2nd row, 2nd column square.

Multi-nationals

4th row, 4th column square.

BINGO!!!!

If he somehow included 'Post-Columbine', 'Hellmouth' and 'Post-911', I could have filled the entire card.

Knunov

Practice what you preach (2)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309941)

How can governments in places like Afghanistan embrace open software and an open society if they can't even bring electricity and telephones to most of their citizens?

How can JK embrace open software and an open society when he doesn't even license his harangues under an open content license?

Bleeding Heart?? (1)

blankmange (571591) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309944)

I understand and can empathize with Katz, but my read on his stand is that we should all feel guilty about making money and living in the greatest country on the planet, where consumerism and greed and $$$$ run the show. I am afraid not -- I pay taxes, vote, and voice my opinion - I have a right to my money and a right to choose how I live. Granted, Katz has a right to his opinion as well, but pouring money down the bottomless hole that has become the "3rd" world is simply a no-win situation. We have done this for decades, and no changes have occurred; if anything, the situations have worsened. Corporations, greedy governments, and the like will continue to conspire to keep their $$$$ in any way they can. To run around crying that the sky is falling without a workable solution is just that - crowing to hear your own voice....

Who needs that type of World View anyway? (2)

Rahga (13479) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309947)

But others (like me) see it as the best hope for a world in which gaps between the tech and non-tech worlds are widening, and the have-nots are increasingly enraged at the haves.

We'll be in the trouble if the have-nots decide to fight amongst each other and, in some cases, the rest of the world because of some sort of perverted religious motivation rather than just pure greed... oh.

10 million die annually due to lack of basic health care.
According to my calculations, that's roughly 1 out of every 700 people. Heck, I'd say that's a remarkable acheivement on behalf of the worldwide charities and modern medicine.

Some of these conditions pre-dated globalization, but the new economy has hardly improved matters. And it seems to be generating hatred of the United States, where contemporary notions of globalism were born and shaped.
Well, the United States as we know it started hardly a few centuries ago from scratch with a handful of political ideas to empower the people and encourage trade and economic growth. Other nations who have followed this example tends to prosper. The "winners versus losers" view is mostly a sad argument. The fact that the USA started capitalist and is still capitalist attests to the fact that it works and it benefits EVERYBODY. If I had to choose between a world where both Bill Gates and me were forced to live dirt poor, or a world where Bill Gates was mega-rich and I was pretty dang well off, I know which world I would choose.

Found yourself a new hero, hey Jon? (1)

Malc (1751) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309948)

Globalism is the least hip political idea around at the moment

It doesn't help when the leader of the biggest economy in the world doesn't understand free trade and practices protectionist practices, e.g. with respect to softwood lumber and steel.

"Philanthropist and open-society advocate George Soros is an ardent supporter globalization."

You do know how much he's made exploiting the global economy? Think of his speculation on the Lira and Sterling a decade ago which cost those respective governments huge amounts of money, and forced their withdrawal from the European Exchage Rate Mechanism. I think he can afford to be philanthropist, although it might be a tax dodge.

My name is Jon (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3309950)

Katz, I rote o buk onez that u cnt evn find in the bargun cection no more. They jus kint shut me up, Ima jest gonna keep on talkin, an talkin,an talkin, an talkin, an talkin, an talkin, an talkin, an talkin, an talkin, ...................

April Fools again already? (1)

Bartacus (40172) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309957)

Has it already been a whole year?

I thought the lame stories [slashdot.org] were over!

wow (2)

Lord Omlette (124579) | more than 12 years ago | (#3309962)

http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=Globalism
http ://www.dictionary.com/search?q=Corporatism
http:/ /www.dictionary.com/search?q=Open%20Source

I thought he was just making words up...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...