Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: How does OWS Feel about Globization

Posted 2 years ago on Sept. 21, 2012, 11:58 a.m. EST by DanielBarton (1345)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

So i noticed a lot of people here have been saying that they think we should tax and tariff companies that have moved overseas.

So does this mean the the this movement is anti globalization in definition?

Does this also reflect towards your feeling of people working in other countries

46 Comments

46 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

All imports from foreign corps/businesses should have to comply with American labor standards.

If you can't legally do it here... you shouldn't be importing from doing it over there.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

thats a realistic thought i agree with labor standards but i dont think pay could be the same

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

they should have to abide by US standard minimum wage equivalent in their currency.

That's how you bring jobs back to America. Make them abide by American standards. Anything else is unAmerican in my opinion.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

ok i think America is past that point. i don't think it is even feasible that we can become a manufacturing power house that employes as many people as these foreign countries do.

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

Ows has stated its' opposition to neoliberalism. read this link, and you should have your answer. http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

Globalization in regards to communications is OK. Maybe we take this for granted in the US. The rest of globalization is rapacious.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

why is it "rapacious"

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

ccupywallst.org/forum/the-real-question-why-dont-people-make-enough-to-p/#comment-839658

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

"When we allow our companies to close factories here, where people have a say, and move them there, where people don't have a say, and then bring the same goods back here to sell, we are allowing them to escape the borders of democracy."

Slave labor is illegal most foreign companies pay twice the national average

The other day i got to talk to a member of John Deere who is responsible for building a factory in china. Now most think the parts are just going to be made in china then sold to the united states now the actual opposite is true they are building parts in china to sell to china. Now that is a prime example of globalization is it wrong to move and advance technology in other countries.

[-] 2 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

No,I don't have a problem with JD building parts in China for China. That however, is not globalization. It is localization. "Slave labor is illegal most (sic} countries" I guess that depends on what you define as slave labor. $1 a day? 13cents an hour? I guess paying twice the national average wouldn't be too costly. http://www.independent.org/publications/working_papers/article.asp?id=1369

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

no it wouldn't and you have to remember these places haven't gone through unions and industrial revolutions.

its still globalization yes it is localization of a product but globalization of an idea and business. Its something that is very beneficial to man kind

Ben Powell the guy who wrote your article very smart man. here is a video that he did http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2sW2wt3nLU

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

Beneficial to outsourcing corporations, not Mankind. Not gone through unions? That can be a hard row to hoe. Seems a lot of foreign citizens don't think it's so great https://www.google.com/search?q=anti+union+violence+in+Columbia&sugexp=chrome,mod=2&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-zapatistas-struggle-against-free-trade/ http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2011/11/201111315724551676.html

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

yes and their revolution will happen we rioted many times in America due to bosses and pay. Believe me this benefits all of us by stirring the pot and placing ideas in these people heads.

with out these companies going there this revolution could of never happened

[-] 2 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

"......with out these companies going there this revolution could of never happened" Sorry, I don't buy that. I don't believe US businesses that are profiting through exploitation are at all in favor of these workers organizing. In fact, there is a very active attempt to suppress unions here. That should be blatantly obvious to anyone that doesn't live in a cave.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

its living proof these people are rebelling against corporations to start their own its wonderful. Yeah unions have a purpose and so does management both are needed in our world

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

The Israelite s rebelled against Rome in 66 CE. By 70 CE. they were slaughtered. by Vespasian and Titus. Rebellion does not assure success..

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

no it doesn't but this is a social revolution not a militaristic one

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

In China protesters were met with tanks. In Columbia, union organizers are being murdered by the hundreds. At what point would you call it militaristic?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

people have a say everywhere

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

yes they do

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

Yes, these Columbians can have a say, right before they are murdered. http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2011/10/02/study_colombia_anti_union_violence_undeterred/

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

The Human Rights Watch study found "virtually no progress" in getting convictions for killings that have occurred in the past 4 1/2 years.

It counted just six convictions obtained by a special prosecutions unit from 195 slayings between January 2007 and May 2011, with nearly nine in 10 of the unit's cases from that period in preliminary stages with no suspect formally identified.

can't keep the press down

[-] 1 points by MarcusYoung (-1) 2 years ago

An anti-globalist stance is ridiculous just like an anti-technology stance is because globalism and advances in technology cannot be stopped. Every day people are working on better modes of transportation, soon we'll have vactrains that will move people across the world in the fraction of the time modern planes do. Add to that modes of communication which are becoming faster and faster and it becomes quite obvious that globalism is here to stay. It's a non-issue. Globalism has already happened and will only continue to become more evident as time progresses. The next big thing is the rise of the machines which also cannot be stopped.

Did you know that if things keep going at this rate everybody will become like Brazilians? We talk about the extinction of species a lot, but we seldom talk about the extinction of genetic traits. Some traits are powerful and some regress. Brown eyes win over blue eyes. Before the invention of the bicycle a person's life partner was born in average less than 1km away. Nowadays, people from different continents often marry, plus immigration means that people of different races marry more and more. Nothing wrong with that, but it means that regressive traits are lost to the stronger ones. Blond hair is soon to be extinct, so are blue eyes and white pale skin. Brazilians are the society with the most dominant traits and evolutionist believe this is where we are heading genetically speaking.

This does not bother me one bit. Things change. And, like globalism and the advances in technology, the reduction of genetic traits cannot be stopped (unless we start playing with genetics to fashion our babies).

[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Globalism can't be stopped? Just watch us marcus.

I supposed you see yourself as one of the lucky sky people. Globalism would make the vast majority mud people.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

HAhahaha. Sky People. I love it. What better way to to descibe the lying, globalist, NWO, jet set, republicrat wankers who think they're doing us a favor. Lets get muddy.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

what does that even mean

[-] 2 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

I can't speak for nomdeguerre but saying there are mud people and sky people was inspired. Mud people have trouble finding work, holding a job, getting enough hours, making enough to get by, etc... Sky people travel in planes and go everywhere, dress and speak properly and they piss on the backs of the mud people and tell them it's raining.

[-] 1 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

You said it, brother!

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

why would you want to stop globalization

[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Simple, we ain't goin back to Massa's plantation.

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

Thats it, no other reason other than personal gain

[-] 0 points by MarcusYoung (-1) 2 years ago

No, globalism cannot be stopped. People travel more and more, and people communicate across the world more and more. The days of isolated tribes are long gone. Get with the times. Anarcho-primitivism and all other types of primitivism are dead. Sure, you can pop up some local projects here and there, but globalism will dominate.

[-] 1 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

You mean the Slave Planet can't be stopped? You want to live in a Foxxconn hell? Stop deluding yourself.

[-] 1 points by yobstreet (-575) 2 years ago

You know... the claim that blue eyes are recessive is a fallacy. My family has repeatedly produced blue eyed children, no matter what color the spouse, for four hundred years now. And blond is not recessive either - it is entirely random. So this researcher's assertions are entirely bogus - there has always been fewer blue eyed people in the US.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

It is true those on social means

But on economic means i think globalization is also a reat thing for the people of the world.

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

How does OWS feel about globalization? How do feel when a bird poops on you? You think, fucking bird, did you do that intensionally?

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

What justifies that claim whats wrong with globalization

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Stevie, your analogy sucks, considering a bird is not compelled to shit on you for its own profit.

[-] 2 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

Maybe not but it doesn't care where it shits, does it? Globalists are bird brains.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I can't work with Sarky anymore

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

I apologies. I thought you were saying that globalization is as uncontrollable as a bird flying over you when it decides to shit. Yeah, they are bird brains.

[-] 0 points by Orwellwuzright (-84) from Lockeford, CA 2 years ago

Globalism can be stopped VERY easily. Nationalism will do the trick. Those that scream globalism is inevitable are part of the problem.

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

nationalism is actually a very bad thing sometimes. Technology will spread so will processes of manufacturing. Right now we are moving globalization on by communicating on the internet.

It is impossible to stop the movement of people and ideas

[-] 0 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Well it's complicated, in point of fact a democratic society built on answering human needs as opposed to rule by corpoRAT profit, restoring the middle class, etc. dictate opposing globalization. However, OWS's hidden elite rulers, such as David Graeber, are all globalists.

We need to throw off Greaeber's protocols -- consensus decision making, etc. and make official OWS demands. An anti-globalization stance would be one of the main ones.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

And that's what i did assume all OWS people are like or most of them. I only say most of them because i know many people support the movement and advancement of technology in 3rd world countries

[-] 2 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

What you miss is the fact that "globalism" is used as a means to advance neoliberalism. One should distinguish between economic globalism and social globalism. Globalism has become an excuse for neo-colonialism. The term provides cover for labor arbitrage and the destruction of communities. http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376

[-] -1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

both are the same and move hand in hand