Current mood:

contemplative

Itaia and a response to KT
Yay Italia! Seing those blue and white jerseys, hearing those Italian family names... it was almost like watching Argentina play all over again! Two amazing goals at the last minute. Right after the both goals, you could hear fireworks and screaming through the neighborhood - a mix of payback and, well, everyone down here being of Italian descent.

You ever start to write too much on someone else's LJ, and then realize that you should just write it on your own? I did that to KT, so... everyone else can feel free to ignore the following... unless you like this sort of thing.


I'll start with this : There are three large assumptions that lots of anti-neo-liberalists make (including you, :o). The first is that those who support the Washington consensus promote it as an "ideal type" to be used accross the board (I for one, think think the privitization of water, buses and security goes too far). The second is that, when implimented, it does more social harm than good. The third is that, IF it does more harm than good, then it is inherently incompatable with attempts to counter social inequality.

Breuilly argues that nationalism is a political movement, and politics is about power, and power is about the state, so nationalism is about control of the state.

Wow. That's an interesting use of the transitive property. I just don't see how nationalism is a movement. It's a persistant force in all societies. To me, that's like saying patriotism is a movement.

I'm also confused about exactly what it is that nationalist movements want to hide from with respect to globalization. Marcos seems to love posing for a camera crew from France or China...

Does "Subcomandante" Marcos really want to control the state? If the post-dictatorship era of Latin America has taught us anything about the region it's this: Liberals, no matter how liberal you think they are, are forced to the center when they rise to power, not only because they become part of the status-quo, but because they are forced to flesh out beyond a narrow platform - which leads to lobbyists and outside influences, not indiginous farmers, to fill in policy gaps. Do the Zapatistas have a plan to increase Foreign Direct Investment? Is there even an "anti" neo-liberal way to do that? Or will they just assume that FDI is an evil influence from the outside world, even as their GDP shrinks?

Or worse still, what will happen when the WTO identifies that a protectionist regime is no longer giving MFN status to other WTO members? All of the sudden you've got 147 states augmenting tariffs against your goods - crippling an export-dependent state such as Mexico.

Check out what happened to Peròn when he returned from Spain in 1973. His return meant the undoing of the Washington-backed economic initiatives of the 55-73 dictatorship and a return to his "pro-worker," ISI-guided, somewhat socialist approach. Going back, or at least going back simply wasn't possible. When he wasn't able to deliver, his own Montoneros turned on him. In 7 months there were 400 terrorist attacks. All of the sudden, even the "liberal" masses that wanted to go back to ISI were calling for a dictatorship to restore order.

Now lets go back to modern Mexico, a state living in a post-GATT/GATTS/WTO/NAFTA/ world. Going back or changing the system (to what exactly?) the way Peròn wanted would require an incredibly costly transition period of immense social unrest that would lose not only the private economic sector, but many of those who would have supported a Zapatista regime.

At that point, isn't running from the assumed evils of globalization worse than working with it?

I look forward to continuing this one later... :o)



And I'm off to eat some hamburgers with yanquis at Hardrock Café! Merry Indy Day to all!
No spell check! I'm too lazy!!