|
000067 Visit since
| Debate
on the nafta treaty - Part 4 | by Prof.
German Estrada
September 24, 2001. | I
often listen to people talking about NAFTA, and realize that most of us don't
really know too much about it. We usually talk about "our" own interpretation
of the treaty, or what we think is "reality" concerning the advantages
and disadvantages for all the countries involved. For that reason, I though it
would be good to read about some of the arguments that both sides - the pros and
the cons - have presented in the past, so that we can all see if the positive
results (after the years during which it has been in effect) have been in proportionate
to the negative ones. In the upcoming weeks, we'll be
reading some of the opinions expressed in discussions by people that supposedly
know about economics, as well as their ideas on how this treaty was going to impact
our three countries, and Mexico in particular. I hope
that after you read these "arguments", we all will be better acquainted
with what NAFTA has meant for some people with different ideas, and have a little
bit more information about what was going on in the minds of governments that
brought this plan to us. After the years during which this treaty has been in
effect, there are still two sides to the coin: one that says that it has been
really good for all, and the other whose proponents believe that it was a big
mistake. Make up your own mind... This
is a debate between Universiy Professors Harry M. Claver of the U. of Texas and
Victor O. Story of Kutztown University, and a third party, Ken Price, who also
enters the debate. Harry: "I would be most interested
in seeing exactly what economic system you propose as a substitute for both capitalism
and socialism. I do not claim that capitalism is the total answer to the problems
of the world, and I know that socialism/communism has created more problems than
it has solved. Your writings appear to indicate that you have some ideas that
are neither, but that you feel have a better chance of success. I am certain that
all readers are an anxious as I am to understand exactly how your economic theory
would work. ' Ken Price enters the debate:
"Hello,
As a supporter of the EZLN I remain optimistic about NAFTA and the Mexican economy.
I am no economic wizard though. My opinion on capitalism in Mexico usually inflames
my comrades. Victor: "Now, now, it usually doesn't
inflame us. It merely saddens us that you have given up imagining alternatives
to the current system." Ken: "Having made this
apology, may I argue that the crisis this winter was a result of short-term political
failures on the part of the Mexican government and the short-sightedness of North
American banks that tend to invest in speculative ventures instead of sound business
ventures - the bankers failed to treat Mexico as a decent place to invest." Victor:
"Short-term political failures? Yes, in the sense that Salinas mortgaged
the store in an unsustainable way in order to buy time to deal with his political
problems, especially the grassroots opposition whose activities accelerated in
the wake of the EZLN uprising, but also the internal conflicts in the PRI, etc.
No, in the sense that Salinas' strategy strategy of selling Mexican assets to
the highest bidder, i.e., neoliberalism, had been in place much longer and was
no short-term phenomena. That strategy assumed, on the
basis of the government's ability to impose austerity on the Mexican people during
the 1980s, that he could get away with the auction while keeping a lid on those
being screwed by it. He was wrong. He celebrated the wealth he and his friends
were making, the influx of multinational corporate investment, and apparently
remained blind, or uncaring, of the impact on most Mexicans. They
on the other hand were neither blind nor uncaring, and all during the crisis of
the 1980s were busy elaborating alternatives, from the bottom up, to selling their
land and their bodies to international capital." Ken:
"Nevertheless, NAFTA is preferable to the old protectionist policies of the
past, which have failed and faded into the past. " Victor:
"Here you mouth neo-liberal slogans but hardly make the case. Failed for
whom? In what sense? Don't answer! Those were rhetorical questions. I'm not interested
in defending the way the PRI has done things in the past. They have always acted
in their own interests and not in those of the Mexican people, then and now. But
you set up a straw man to suggest that the only alternative to current neo-liberalism
is neo-protectionism, old style. In so doing you exclude the consideration of
new alternatives, the ones people have been experimenting with these last years." Ken:
"NAFTA managed better is the path to a better Mexico, not because capitalism
is a positive thing, but because friendlier business relations between Mexican
and North American business interests, more open markets, less nationalist mistrust,
all tend to promote development more than the old pattern of mistrust and nationalist
protectionism. " Victor: "Development"
is capitalist development, there has never been any other kind. The very concept
of development has been intimately wound up in the elaboration of capitalism.
Think of the literature. From at least Rosenstein Rodan onward, economists have
discussed development in terms of achieving growth (more investment, more wage
labor, more profits) through the improvement in capitalist institutions (labor
markets, capital markets, government demand and supply management policies). Political
scientists, sociologists and anthropologists have discussed development in terms
of "modernization", i.e., the transformation of pre-capitalist institutions,
mindsets, behaviors, and other social behaviors into those of "homoeconomicus"
--that psychopathic construct built by economists to found their models. Even
so-called "socialist" development, upon closer examination, turned out
to be capitalist development, only with a stronger role for the state and a gloss
of pro-worker revolutionary rhetoric (somewhat like that of the PRI)." Ken:
"You say you support NAFTA because it, and everything that goes with it,
will result in more "development". Well, that means you support more
capitalism. Look around the world Victor. What has more capitalism gotten us?
The world has suffered through 300 years or more of "development" if
you take the long view, a few PostWWII decades if you take the short view of "development"
as a Third World phenomena. And the project has proven bankrupt. Everywhere "development"
has meant the same thing, the same thing capitalism has always meant: incredible
wealth and power for the few, poverty and suffering for the rest. And
don't say, well what about the US and Western Europe, haven't most people gotten
better off, at least in terms of life expectancy, calories of nutrition etc, if
not in happiness? Because the answer is this: capitalist development is not a
regional or national phenomena but a global one. It always has been. And the improvements
you would be speaking of (that many of us enjoy) occurred as an integral part
of a (development) process that impoverished and enslaved the rest of the world,
from formal slavery through colonialism to neocolonialism. Go into Chiapas, go
into the barrios of Mexico City, go into those of Juarez and other border towns
and look around. The poverty that you see is an integral part of development,
just as that of the slums of New York, L.A., etc. In a
very real sense, Mexico has had just about all the "development" it
can stand. The poverty of Chiapas is not the poverty of a lack of development.
It is the poverty generated by development, by that of agribusiness, whose bosses
stole the land and exploit the people, by that of hydroelectric power and oil
which has stolen the wealth of the land and left little behind except devastated
and divided communities. That IS "development". And you want MORE of
it? If capitalism is NOT a "postive thing", then don't desire more of
it!" The next and final part on this discussion will
appear next week…
gestrada@pvnet.com.mx
Prof. Germán Estrada is the
author of the best selling book, "México
Mágico: Everything You Wanted To Know About... But Nobody Told
You..." available in Puerto Vallarta at The Net House, Mail Boxes, Etc.,
Books, Books as well as directly from the author by internet. Archives
by date | 
Current
Weather Report
