In the neoliberal era, western- style representative governments have largely abandoned their (at least theoretical) roles as representatives of and mediators among a range of social actors. Joachim Hirsch refers to the . The role of the state is limited to administering poverty and managing social discord so that neither interferes with corporate profits. Disputed social territory - including personal security, public education, social security, public health programs, environmental protection, labor rights, etc. Neoliberalism is characterized by easy movement of money and goods across borders, but strict control of people (or . The South provides cheap labor, cheap commodities and, increasingly, cheap industrial products for consumers in Europe and North America. Neoliberalism finds its roots in the so- called Washington consensus, which is nothing more than a class consensus that extends across borders. Conniving governments from the South are often representative democracies, but only in the formal sense of a democracy that can be purchased by local elites and . The governments are indeed representative. The problem is who they represent! Democracy is a principle worth defending and, in fact, worth dying for. There are no better examples than the United States and Mexico. In the constellation of forces during most of the last decade, neither president George W. Bush nor presidents Fox or Calderon even won a majority of the vote in their respective elections - not that voting has a whole lot to do with democracy when nearly unlimited money can build a surrealistic view of the most important political issues of the day that often bares little resemblance to reality. In the final analysis, Wall Street own Barack Obama, the Sinaloa cartel owns Felipe Calderon, and the rest of us are left with precious little to say about the important affairs of our countries. Essential Action >Structural Adjustment and Labor: Mexico. Carlos Heredia and Mary Purcell, Structural Adjustment in Mexico. Structural Adjustment by SAPRIN, 9781842773888, available at Book Depository with free delivery worldwide. THE BANK'S CONTRIBUTION Ecuador 694.4 36.9 731.3 El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Mexico. Structural adjustment. These programs include. While military power is occasionally (and from recent experience, increasingly) necessary to maintain the Washington consensus, economic power exercises day- to- day control. Corporate- centered globalization, the everyday operational face of the neoliberal model, is impressive in its reach and level of absolute greed. The neoliberal model has been predominant in this hemisphere for a third of a century (depending on the country in question) and there is sufficient data available for an even- handed evaluation. Though the elites throughout the hemisphere exercise their influence through the mainstream media to obscure reality with platitudes and slogans in an effort to convince the masses that the neoliberal model is the only and best model, the facts speak eloquently. In the 1. 97. 0s, countries in this hemisphere averaged 4. In the 1. 98. 0s, average growth declined to 3. And with increasing concentrations of wealth in the hands of a small elite, growth in GNP correlates even less with the economic well- being of the masses. But as a general marker it gives us an idea of where we're headed. And even by neoliberal standards, we appear to be headed in the wrong direction!)So why is there a Washington consensus if economic growth is actually slowing? The key element here is the understanding of the Washington consensus as a class consensus across borders. While most of us are treading water or getting progressively poorer, the neoliberal model has resulted in an historically unparalleled concentration of wealth and power in the hands of transnational corporations, their shareholders, and the political and technical elites who oversee the system. Again, the facts speak eloquently. Between 1. 98. 2 and 1. Zimbabwe - Structural Adjustment Program Project (English) Details. Document Date 1995/01/03; Document Type Project Completion Report; Report Number 13842. Mexico decreased by an astounding 8. In 2. 00. 4, the minimum wage in Mexico is equivalent to about US$3. In a country where prices at Wal. Mart, the largest retailer and employer in Mexico, are typically equal to or higher than Wal. Mart prices in Houston, Mexico's minimum wage doesn't buy much. Yet Mexico's minimum wage remains among the lowest in the world. The US working class fares better, but not by much. Between 1. 97. 0 and 1. US decreased by 1. And the poorest half of the population continues to lose ground. On the other end of the champagne glass (to borrow a common metaphor that portrays the wealthy at the top enjoying oodles of bubbly while the poor share the dregs in the confined neck at the bottom), the rich are doing quite well under the neoliberal model, thank you very much. In 1. 99. 7, the richest one- fifth of the world's population owned an astounding 8. United States where the wealth of the top 1% of households now exceeds the combined household financial wealth of the bottom 9. The absolute concentration of wealth and power at the top is unparalleled. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, and the illusionary . The rich constructed the Washington consensus. The poor majorities are left only with the consensus that neoliberal . Perhaps we should be asking ourselves, first, why do these wonderful programs always involve adjustment pains, and second, why are we always the ones who suffer these pains? The United States and Mexico have been central to the development of the neoliberal model. We share a 2,0. 00 mile border, the only place in the world where the Global North meets the South. The US- Mexico border is unique, and the relationship between the two nations is equally unique. In many ways, this geographic marriage represents the most important relationship in the world - a laboratory that is defining the neoliberal model. Three historical markers stand out as central to the development of neoliberalism: the establishment of free trade zones and maquiladoras in 1. Structural Adjustment Programs initiated by the International Monetary Fund in 1. North America Free Trade Agreement in 1. The US- Mexico relationship has been the proving ground for the practical realities of the Washington consensus: production- for- export replacing production for internal consumption, the use of debt as a lever to force structural adjustment programs, loose investment rules that allow hot money to cross borders in seconds, and a trade agreement (read NAFTA) that is the model for a new legal framework that expands the rights of corporations at the expense of civil society. Experiments that . This implies a complete restructuring of the economies, politics and cultures around the world, to make them consistent with the neoliberal vision. Nearly everything is on the table for reform: economic policy, public subsidies, social programs, industrial policy, government procurement, intellectual property rights, patents, banking and financial services, agricultural policy, foreign direct investment, energy policy, labor regulations, environmental protection, public education and health care - and the list goes on. Twenty- first century neoliberalism is a project for world domination, and the US and Mexico are at the center of the vortex. Free Trade Zones and Maquiladoras. While most observers mark the early 1. Latin American debt crisis as the beginning of neoliberalism, the seeds were firmly planted in 1. Border Industrialization Program (BIP). The BIP represented an important change in the relationship between labor markets and production, moving factories to the source of labor rather than the other way around. Initiated at the end of the Bracero Program (in which Mexico sent cheap labor northward, mainly to harvest fruits and vegetables, under short- term contracts), Mexican politicians hoped the BIP would provide jobs for former Braceros, though ultimately the program, in combination with other neoliberal policies, actually increased immigration from Mexico to the United States, especially undocumented workers. Foreign production for the United States market certainly existed before 1. Total US imports grew from $1. In constant 2. 00. Today about one- third of everything produced in Mexico is exported (an amazing statistic, the implications of which take a moment to fully sink in). Given Mexico's decreasing real wage rates (and decreasing living standards), this means that Mexico's working class is fighting a losing battle, each year paying relatively more, measured in hours worked, for imported goods while selling relatively less in exports. From the perspective of a traditional capitalist model of development, the BIP marked a clear step backward in the industrialization of Mexico. Production for internal consumption, also known as import substitution, was Mexico's predominant economic model from the 1. The import substitution model protected strategic industries with tariffs, and required increasing levels of technology and concomitant increasing levels of education among workers. In contrast, the production- for- export model, of which maquiladoras are the centerpiece, rely on cheap labor and low technologies, and the vast majority of production is exported. It is a model the United States itself pointedly avoided in its own process of industrialization. While there are a number of reasons behind the rapid and successful industrialization of the United States, trade policy has to be considered among the most important. For the better part of two centuries, US trade policy was characterized by high tariffs and other measures that protected young industries from international competition. Since the mid 1. 96. US has taken exactly the opposite position with non- industrialized nations in the South. Rather than encouraging protective trade policies like those that assisted US industry, the new neoliberal mentality calls for open borders and free flows of goods, services and finance. Neoliberal economists are bothered tremendously by anything that gets in the way of the pure functioning of open markets - like the annoying needs of real people in their day- to- day lives. If it weren't for those bothersome people, especially the poor masses with their constant demands for food, housing, education and health care, the neoliberal model could work with scientific precision. That's what the textbooks say!
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |