Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 21:07:00 +0000
From: "steve.devos" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.com>
Subject: Re: Greenspan: Globalisation vs Terrorism.


Judy

yes the Baudrillard piece was good...  I enjoyed the reading you make of 
the Greenspan piece - howvever 'trickle-down theory and debateable' ???

http://slash.autonomedia.org/search.pl?topic=Theory

for anyone that hasn't read it...

incidentally Baudrillard's new book 'impossible exchange' dec 2001 Verso 
looks good.... '...Current humanism, in its extended version, is more 
concerned with conserving the organic being and the species...' (p35)

regards
steve

Judy wrote:

>>
>>     Terrorism poses a challenge to the remarkable record of 
>> globalisation. A
>> global society reflects an ever more open economic environment in which
>> participants are free to engage in commerce and finance wherever in thw
>> world the possibilities of increased value added arise. It fosters ever
>> greater cross-border contact and further exploitation of the values of
>> specialisation but on a global scale.
>> ...
>>
>> I wonder what he means by "further exploitation of the values of
>> specialisation"?
>> Personally, I don't think the wolf in granny's bed of globalisation 
>> is that
>> different from terrorism.
>
>
>
> Yes, I wonder...What might he mean by "further exploitation...but on a 
> global scale?"  It has an ominous sound from the standpoint of whoever 
> is not included in what Greenspan means when he says "we" and "us."   
> When Greenspan says:
>
>
>> If we allow
>> terrorism to undermine our freedom of action, we could reverse at 
>> least part
>> of the palpable gains achieved by postwar globalisation. It is incumbent
>> upon us not to allow that to happen...
>
>
>
> by "we" and "us", I don't think he has in mind most of the people in 
> places like Afghanistan for example.  When he says
>
>
>> A
>> global society reflects an ever more open economic environment in which
>> participants are free to engage in commerce and finance wherever in thw
>> world the possibilities of increased value added arise
>
>
> by  participants, I get the sense that he is thinking of certain but 
> by no means all of the world's people having freedom to engage in 
> commerce wherever possibilities of increased value arise.   He speaks 
> in generalizations and abstractions but what he's talking about 
> implies a fair amount of conflict, of winners and losers.  To the 
> extent he wants to imply that globalization of specialization and the 
> division of labor with its corresponding characteristic distribution 
> of wealth and power, is good for all the people in the world, based on 
> the "trickle down" theory, this is at least debatable. I think by 
> further exploitation on a global scale, he just means the ever-more 
> efficient administration of the existing and centuries old global 
> program by and for the people he means by "we" and "us".  The posting 
> of this piece alongside the Enron article is especially telling.
>
> Did anyone read the Baudrillard thing on "911" as a phenomenon of 
> globalization that Paul Tarry posted?  For me, that was a really 
> powerful and reorienting thing to read.
> Judy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>