The Impact of Globalization on Indigenous Peoples in Mexico and Bolivia

The following is a paper written for the author’s PLS 315 – International Political Economy class.

Abstract
Globalization has presented itself in many different forms, affecting nearly all people of the planet. While much attention is paid to the extreme positive and negative impacts, the process has created both winners and losers. The same mixed result can be seen amongst the indigenous peoples of Mexico and Bolivia. These two significant indigenous populations have faced sizable challenges due to the integrating economic, political and cultural landscape. Nevertheless, the forces behind globalization have not only provided a means for resistance, but also a chance to confront the long-standing marginalized status of indigenous peoples. Despite these efforts, the effectiveness of political and social leaders as well as the policy of developed nations and multilateral institutions will determine the lasting impact of globalization.

View the PDF

CBO Blasts Ethanol

An article published last Thrusday by the Washington Times suggests that federal support for corn ethanol has large negative consequences and a dubious impact on the environment. It seems that the Congressional Budget Office is catching up to the many critics of ethanol (for some of our own criticism of ethanol, feel free to check here). This should be the final nail in the coffin for aggressive corn-based ethanol policies.

Green-tech investment falls 50%, but it’s no time to worry

The first quarter of 2009 saw a sharp decline in all forms of investment in clean-tech and energy both compared with a year ago, as well as the fourth quarter of 2008. Overall, the $13.3 billion invested was down 53% from the previous year and 44% from the last quarter. Investments in new renewable-energy projects led the decline, with venture capital investments also dropping 22% and a near evaporation of all investment in pure-play clean energy companies. However, this raw figure does not tell the entire story for the industry, nor is it necessarily indicative of a trend.

Story

G-20 Protests – Just Say No to Capitalism

As world leaders, activists and the media descend on London for the G-20 summit, there seems to be a clear message from all parties involved:  something needs to be done.  The real question is not whether action is necessary, but rather what is the problem what is it’s cause.  Politicians have turned their attention to greater macroeconomic stability and recovery while many disagree with merits of recent actions taken by governments, as well as the ignorance of other real problems that should be at the forefront.    Certainly the process reeks with unfairness, but must that be endured to preserve our economy and prevent a disaster?

It’s important to ask ourselves what we are trying to preserve.  GDP?  Employment?  Companies on the brink of ruin?  The “greater good” is certainly not fully measured by any one statistic or indicator, and any attempts to quantify it would be inherently misrepresented.  Many activists present in London clearly seek anything but the preservation of the current system perverse with oppressive and unfair structures that place value in many questionable areas while undervaluing community, equity and the general public good.  The ranks of those vulnerable to exploitation of all kinds would grow tremendously under any transition away from a capitalist system.  There can be hope for a benevolent and autocratic government or an anarchic utopia free of consolidated power, but these hopes are no more realistic than free market idealism.  As it seems to be quite often, the answer (if there is one) lies in the middle ground.

However, these views are surely not the only ones in the crowd of thousands of protesters.  Many others seek to place these values back into the system, making the rules of trade fair and demanding consideration for the unemployed, underappreciated and underprivileged in society.  For those sharing these views, it would not be beneficial for capitalism to collapse, but rather for there to be reform and rethinking.  It is paramount that we ask if the current strategies put forth will truly create results in line with our values.  Only then can we put aside preconceived assumptions on all sides and work towards solutions and a better future.

Crunching Sustainability Pt. 1: Iceland

Smash the Mirror tries to bring solid economic and rational thinking to sustainability, geopolitics, and current events. To that end, this is a pilot post for a new series on how the Credit Crunch of 08-09 will impact the environmental sustainability of human life. Posts in this series will appear under the tag “Crunching Sustainability“.

By now, the collapse of Iceland’s governing coalition has been circulating through the media for a while. To sum it up in a single phrase, the cause of the fall was the economic crisis and monetary policy. That is why, according to the Washington Post article, there is a new push by some citizens and the country’s Democratic Socialist Party to join the European Union.

Fishing boats tied up along a pier.

The Euro has rapidly cemented its reputation as a stable currency, and that appeals to the Icelanders who feel they have been betrayed by inadequate policy-making. Unfortunately, the EU also has its failures, and the fishery management policies are foremost among them.

Transatlantic Carbon Trade

New York Times

Out of Brussels comes word that the European Union wants to work with the United States to lead a cap-and-trade emissions system for wealthy nations. A well-implemented cap-and-trade system has the perks of providing an absolute maximum for the traded emissions, and of taking advantage of the efficiency of the competitive market equilibrium (the CME is always in the Core, to put it technically). In short, an ideal cap-and-trade system allows for fully effective environmental regulation within the market system, rather than throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Unfortunately, the EU plan previously has been the model of how not to implement a cap-and-trade system. Individual countries would routinely demand vastly overinflated quotas so that they would not have to make an effort to actually restrict emissions. The New York Times says however, that word out of Europe is that they are well on their way to improving the system:

Intimacy Instead of Consumption

“Have More Sex to Save The Planet” reads the headline on this Times Online Green Central Blog Post. Certainly, it’s quite an attention grabber. Unfortunately the post itself is quite simplistic and does little to create a positive image of sustainability and environmentalism. Humans will have to grapple with shrinking the environmental footprint of our activities, and soon. As the Times Online post highlights, drawing happiness from non-market goods such as family time, or intimate relationships might provide greater fulfillment and less waste.

One wonders though, what kind of imagery that language conjures. The modern environmentalist community has been careful to avoid associations with so-called “hippies” of the 1960s. Talking about sex saving the planet evokes images of utopian communes. Still more alarming is Flintoff’s unsubstantiated, doom-and-gloom assertion that emission cutbacks will cause wholesale economic collapse

Toyota Electric Car Unveiled in Detroit

Posted on the Australian CarsGuide website, comes the interesting headline “$20,000 electric car: Toyota FT-EV“. It gets more interesting: since it’s an Australian website, presumably that is the Australian price tag, which makes the American figure $13,162 at the time of this writing (via Google), although the price is still speculation.

If Global Warming Is Real Then Why Is It Cold

An amazing collection of idiotic political cartoons pushing the “If Global Warming Is Real Then Why Is It Cold” talking point:

http://ifglobalwarmingisrealthenwhyisitcold.blogspot.com/

Bill Gross on CNBC (1/8/2009)

William Gross, founder of Pimco was interviewed on CNBC today about the federal government’s role in solving the financial crisis. Obviously, Mr. Gross is a very smart man, and he discussed a number of issues.  I do, however, have to take issue with one of his points:

If you have to put 20% down on a new home, that becomes a struggle in these times and to the extent that the FHA can come in there and allow a 3 or a 4% down payment, then that combination–I think–can support the housing market.

Certainly it is true that there must be liquidity for the economy to come back, and many leading economic thinkers such as Paul Krugman believe the US Economy is in a liquidity trap and needs a sustained, extremely loose money supply. Even so, it is difficult to accept that the solution to the mortgage crisis is to create new, unconventional mortgages with little payment upfront and huge amounts of debt. Gross is certainly right that loosening the standards for loans will keep housing prices high, but perhaps prices before the crash were just unrealistic, the product of fervor and lax appraising standards. Does chasing these inflated prices risk another wave of foreclosures in the future?