A Critique of the Anti-Globalization Movement (59284)
"CORPORATION, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility".
-Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary (1911)
On April 15, 2005 Reuters published an article entitled "Emerging Nations Push for More Say in Global Lenders" (www.nyt.com). The article quotes the chairman of the Group of Twenty-Four (an organization of poor Third World countries) on the appointment of Iraq War architect, neocon, and currently Defense Department Undersecretary Paul Wolfowitz to the position of World Bank President.
"I was not consulted as concerns the nomination of Mr. Wolfowitz, so I cannot say I am satisfied or happy about it" observed G24 chairman and Gabon's Finance Minister Paul Tongui dryly. "We want a multilateral system for international monetary cooperation in which everybody is represented in a fair and open way" added another G24 official.
Here on the front page of the New York Times, the unofficial newspaper of record for the nation, is at last a tacit recognition, however belated, of the concerns of the world's poor countries at being perpetually shut out of critically important decisions that directly affect their own people. And here in a nutshell in today's news are some of the central issues that have been fueling the so-called anti-globalization movement, which this paper will explore.
Both the strengths and weaknesses of this movement are discernable here. The power of its persistent and noisy global protests is illustrated by the fact that the story appeared at all in the Times. Conversely, it's weakness is shown by the fact that nothing has really changed û at least yet û in the allocation of power between the rich and poor nations of the world.
I will critique the anti-globalization movement from a Canadian perspective, in order to understand how one of the world's "middle powers" (neither Third World nor hegem...