Thursday, June 05, 2008
Global Effect of the Day: The new world order
... notions of advanced economies being decoupled from global trends were misguided. Instead the new world order for developed countries was that they were no longer completely masters of their own destinies, but must accept the power of rapidly growing emerging economies to affect their rates of potential expansion and inflation, though [sic, "through"] demand for their exports and competition for consumption of commodities.
The venerable OECD, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, consists of 30 countries that "accept the principles of representative democracy and free market economy." Since the two concepts are by-and-large incompatible, you can probably guess which of the two principles prevails in practice.
The OECD is in reality the economic equivalent of NATO, allowing capitalists from first-world countries and multinational corporations to band together for the mutual defense of their acquisitiveness at the expense of national autonomy and the well-being of the local populations. Although each of the participating countries sends a representative holding ambassadorial rank, few Americans know anything about it.1
What captured my attention in the quote above was Elmeskov's infelicitous choice of words: "the new world order2 for developed countries." It isn't that he isn't speaking the truth. I'm just surprised he said it.
Maybe I should be more forgiving. Elmeskov is merely an economist and is probably not well attuned to the political ramifications of loose lips. And in all fairness he said it to a journalist from the Financial Times, which only insiders are supposed to read. But really! The whole point of conspiracy is to keep it a secret. I hope he doesn't lose his job or suffer an accident.
On the other hand, when conspiracy plotters have achieved their aims, the moment eventually arrives to announce the coup. Perhaps Elmeskov is the designated spokesman.
1To get some feeling for the OECD in action I very much recommend reading the story of the "Multilateral Agreement on Investment" (MAI), which was supposedly withdrawn after concerted opposition. But like the European Union's failed Constitution, which was defeated by popular vote in France and the Netherlands, the aims of the MAI have been implemented through bilateral and multilateral treaties such as NAFTA. [back]
2For years I have had to admire the work of capitalists, who managed to stir up fear in a significant minority of the American people that Communists and the U.N. were attempting to create "one world government." Meanwhile, out of the light, they were busily at work doing just that.
The issue for them, of course, was never that of the nation-state vs. world government. It was, rather, the kind of world government that would suit their purposes—a world government that would allow them to act across borders with unimpeded freedom. [back]