SHARING EXPERIENCE AT A GRASS ROOT LEVEL
The total effect of globalization on the economy of federations, states and smaller systems like municipalities and neighborhoods is not easy to asses. Not for specialists and much less so by citizens at grass root level. Yet these citizens, which form by far the majority of the voters, have a right, and a duty, to start asking questions if they experience serious deterioration in the elementary survival variables of their direct living environment.
Their national systems, such as rail roads, electricity, postal services and telephone companies, national health services, you name it, which have been created out of taxpayers money, are being sold out by the States to the highest bidder on the globe. This is globalization.
If it leads to competition and the States and municipalities spend the sudden massive confluence of capital wisely globalization is a blessing.
But globalization under rule based free trade could easily become a nightmare for humanity if the rules are made so difficult that they can only be interpreted and enforced by a few magma conglomerates of lawyers at global level which only rich States and the largest multinational corporations can afford.
And if these rules are basically designed as complex smoke screens to serve hidden purpose which reveals itself only to corporate and State mega computers which benefit only the powers that be we have the nightmare scenario of what in fact becomes a marriage between a few global corporations and fascist democracies.
Now if this would ultimately result in the annihilation of the majority of the global population, for example through massive legalized euthanasia or comparable mechanisms carefully introduced, and leave the fittest to survive, perhaps one could say let the others go, it is the way of nature. But who will be the fittest? And will they always be? Will their loved ones be? Will their children, their grand children, be able to live in peace? Or at least . . . die in peace ? Would it not be better for everyone if a norm system was anchored in the minds of all men that would rebel if ones brother truly suffered . . . ?
One other problem is that human systems have to be carried by a human workforce and if this workforce is depleted or becomes rebellious the total system, after a period of increasingly brutal law and order enforcement, decompensates. Such is the lesson of history...
It is these particular developments that must be avoided since they benefit no one.
The question is to what extend our leaders in the new technology transition period can be the judges and controllers of so complex a totality.
One mechanism that could at least slow down such a development, perhaps until humanity, democracy. . ., has at least matured in globalization using the new technologies, would be independent, world wide web linked citizen involvement at grass root level on a global scale.
For if similar problems arose the world over, similar questions arose time and again, well . . . it would have to be something . . .
It would have to be on a global scale. Otherwise such a process would only slow down states and nations that favored such developments . . .
We now find that this policy is advocated by the United Nations and many major democracies.
But it has to be more then lip service . . .
It has to be a doctrine based on our deep down conviction that real opposition to change is a mechanism of evolution which may be one of the few mechanisms humanity can really not do without if it wants to survive the new technologies in the spirit of democracy under globalization . . .
Copyright protected J. P. Krol ©
THIS ESSAY HAS DIFFERENT LANGUAGES TO CHOOSE FROM: