My friend Luke Phillips granted me permission to share his wonderful defense of global capitalism.
For more satisfying enjoyment, peruse over a cup of Starbucks coffee.
Mr. Phillips writes:
Most importantly, when I say “global capitalism” I don’t mean that U.S. companies should relocate abroad. I mean the people of India must start their own businesses. That’s the only path to prosperity. Their entrepreneurs must reap the profits as their workers earn the wages. The must develop their own technologies, create their own industries, satisfy their own needs, and pursue their own dreams. We cannot transplant our efficiency into their economy. They must do it themselves. That is what global capitalism means, and so it is the very opposite of imperialism.
Occasionally the United States and other developed countries, out of benevolence, have shipped tons of surplus food to developing countries. The results have almost always been disastrous. Except in emergency cases of famine, the food shipments do more harm than good. How? Ask yourself this: Why would a farmer grow more rice if crates of it were floating ashore every day? Why would you send your children to medical school when well-meaning Western doctors were parachuting in like manna from heaven? Thankfully, the U.S. has put aside its conscience-soothing program of global welfare and opened its eyes to the crippling effects of our high-minded humanity. This proves that we are not imperialists. If we were, we would crave the dependency of other nations and do everything possible to keep them as vulnerable accessories, enslaved in bitter gratitude.
The fact that the work of cultivating economic efficiency is best done locally is exactly why it doesn’t get done. Typically, third world governments consist of cadres of feudal lords whose only goal is to enforce the status quo. In most cases they have all the power, and the only way to foment revolution would be to depose the tyrants and start from the ground up. We did it in the U.S. when we kicked out the British. But we had a head-start because of all the natural resources of the New World. We still don’t know exactly how to help less developed countries evolve (which would be an unequivocal benefit to us, as we would have more trading partners and since all countries will inevitably produce some goods more efficiently than we can at home, we could buy cheaper goods from abroad). So our fault is the result of our ignorance, not our indifference.
Feel better about globalism? I do.