|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph Stiglitz, Globalization and its Discontents (2002) Throughout the decade of the 1990s, when the process of globalization began reshaping the world economic system, Joseph Stiglitz was the ultimate insider. As a former member of Bill Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers, the chief economist at the World Bank, and later an economics professor at Columbia University, Stiglitz participated in the major policy debates within the United States government, and within the global systems of trade and development. Because of these credentials, Stiglitz's master critique of globalization was bound to draw attention. However, coming at a time when increasing numbers of people worldwide were attacking the current models of globalization, Stiglitz's articulate and well-informed arguments held great significance. They have been received by many people opposed to the corporate model of globalization as a validation of what they've been trying to say for years, and given renewed confidence to a movement that was questioning its role in the post-9/11 world. Stiglitz argues that the model of development put forth by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the US Treasury has failed. He examines each of the pillars of the Washington Consensus _ privatization, trade liberalization, fiscal austerity and decreased capital market controls _ and argues that the IMF has pursued them to excess, without regard for the peculiar circumstances of the developing countries upon which they were imposed. Stiglitz illustrates how policy makers in the IMF repeatedly pursued misguided policies in places such as Russia, East Asia and Argentina. Because of their blind attachment to free-market ideology, they refused to admit to these mistakes even when they became clear. Furthermore, Stiglitz accuses the rich world of blatant hypocrisy: by setting up unfair trading rules on behalf of powerful financial and commercial interests, organizations like the WTO cause great harm to the very societies they are claiming to rescue. The disastrous results, Stiglitz concludes, call for a complete overhaul of international trading rules, and most importantly, for a through rethinking of the entire foundation of globalization. Because of this last point, big name economists such as Jagdish Bhagwati and Kenneth Rogoff have denounced Stiglitz, saying his vision is too radical and utopian. Others, such as Dani Rodrik, support his findings and are working with him towards articulating a new program that could fulfill globalization's untapped potential. (An article in the NY Times by Michael Massing examines the controversy Stiglitz has raised in academic cricles: http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/Business/Story/55314.html Stiglitz's work is a blessing to any journalist trying to make sense of globalization and the criticisms it has drawn. His arguments contain great detail and are bolstered by his insider knowledge of economic processes, yet his essential points are simple and clearly stated. Stiglitz has also assumed an important role in helping protestors better articulate their wide-ranging denunciations of the corporate globalization process. However, journalists should be wary of attributing the entirety of Stiglitz's systemic analysis to the diverse voices within the global justice movement. While some activists have embraced his ideas, it is important to remember that Stiglitz remains a firm believer in capitalism, Keynesian economic policy and globalization, all of which are highly contentious matters within anti-corporate circles. MORE: Piece by John Cassidy in The New Yorker, July 15 2002. Piece by Benjamin Friedman in the New York Review of Books Joe Stiglitz's Initiative for Policy Dialogue |
|
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||