Hey! Let's Blame Them Foreigners

As one of the world's few advanced capitalist societies, the United States is currently in danger of reverting to a 20th century style economic scheme. The Democrats are traveling through the rust belt emphasizing the troubles that globalization has created for the manufacturing workers there. They promise the return of their jobs and make callous calls to stop exporting grunt work to China, Eastern Europe, and Mexico. But is that really where we want to go? It seems ironic that the same party which wants to take it easy on illegal immigrants is raising xenophobic fears about people in other countries working in labor jobs. Honestly, that seems quite....Republican.

It's widely understood that the average citizen, in any country, cares about themselves and their families first. So its expected that blue collar workers who haven't seen a consistent job or union paycheck in some 15 odd years would be disgruntled about their jobs being shipped overseas. However, the Democrats need to spread the message that globalization can be beneficial if the government took the right steps to help the middle class survive. Currently we ship jobs overseas and do nothing to bridge the gap between being an industrial economy to becoming a service oriented one. Ultimately, that is where advanced capitalist states end up.

But instead of talking about what the government is willing to do to help these families and regions succeed in the new economy, the pander to the fear and xenophobia that already exists. They say China is stealing their jobs and taking food off their tables. Where, in fact, we make goods cheaper because we export our manufacturing to developing nations. Why are things like cars and consumer goods consistent in price, save inflation, when things that aren't exportable, such as movie tickets and college tuition, have increased dramatically in the last decade? If we kept manufacturing in the US, the wages that the workers were paid wouldn't be able to pay for the goods that were still made here.

What the candidates, Democrats or Republicans, need to do is explain the logistics of the global economy to the American people and give them ways to help bridge the gap. The government needs to invest in infrastructure and industries that aren't constricted to certain geographical areas. Michigan has launched an enormous campaign aimed at attracting internet startup companies to operate there. They have passed legislation that provides that industry with an advantage and it seems like more and more companies are moving there. At the same time, the government needs to find more ways of getting people into college. An advanced economy is going to require its population to be educated to get jobs. We have to make college more affordable and accessible to the common person by giving tuition breaks to people who are willing to spend time doing community service or join the peace corps. We could increase the amount of ROTC scholarships so kids can get through college, serve their obligation, then enter the market with military experience and a college degree. By doing these two things, we can provide the labor market with more jobs so that current blue collar workers can send their children to school to succeed in the new economy.

These measure are not easy. Transitioning economies are painful processes and people do get left behind. Just look at India and China where the growth rate is phenomenal but there are shanty towns standing adjacent to skyscrapers. Those two nations realize that they need to give people a segue into the 21st century and they've invested in infrastructure to give less educated workers jobs to get them on a payroll somewhere. Its time that our politicians realize that pandering to xenophobic emotions will only set our economy backwards into the 1970s and not forward into the current century. America's power and wealth has always come from its ideas and ingenuity as well as hard work. Its time we stop blaming other people for our financial woes and start doing the things that can keep us on top. Lets do the things that made us great in the past to make us great in the future.

Editors Note: In this week's The Economist magazine (March 1st issue), there is a lead editorial discussing the pitfalls of the Democratic economic plan for the United States thus far proposed by the candidates. Check it out here.

Editor's Note: Jagdish Bhagwati, an economics professor at Columbia, recently wrote about the Democratic candidates' respective acumen on economic issues. Professor Bhagwati has written for such outlets as The Financial Times, Foreign Affairs Magazine, and The New York Times. He has also spoken at the John F. Kennedy School for Government and at the World Trade Organization.

The Incessant Immaturity of Millions

A few years ago, a Danish newspaper printed political cartoons (shown below) depicting the Prophet Muhammad and satirizing his appearance to reflect the violent nature of Islamic extremism. Now it seems that the cartoons are being reprinted in European newspapers that wish to chronicle the death threats received by the cartoonist Kurt Westergaard. Naturally this is going to have two possible outcomes: the Islamic world erupts in the same fashion it did before; or there is a minimal outcry and nobody pays attention. A betting man should take his chances with the former.

The Muslim world is a perpetual powder keg that seems to continually be on fire. Someone intermittently pours a few extra clumps of explosives in there and the scene really gets shaken up. The problem with this is that the region is extremely sensitive to religious statements. And markedly so after the events of September 11th. This is a sign of the glaring social immaturity of the Middle East and it's pervasive bleak "world vs. us" outlook". Is there a bit of social Darwinism in that statement? Yes, admittedly so. However, it isn't being used to promote eugenics, but an understanding of what is happening in the Muslim world.

The histories show that, for the larger part of the Classical Era, the Middle East was a hub of culture and science. They presented the world with advances in medicine, mathematics, social equality (one of the most celebrated Persian generals of the Battle of Salamis was a woman), and technology. And Europe, for all its historical glory, was mired in 1000 years of darkness after the fall of the Roman Empire. It was a continent ruled by divine right warlords, social oppression, and religious zealotry. Sound familiar?

The Middle East, during that time period, was going through an age of transformation and success. It was the corridor of trade between Europe and Asia. By using its geographical location as an economic advantage, the Middle East was able to fend off constant European transgression into the holy lands and ultimately lay a foundation for an empire that would last longer than the Romans. So what happened? Why is there so much religious fanaticism that has lead to the death of possibly hundred's of thousands of people? As Western society evolved out of religious extremism and into the Enlightenment, their new god became money instead of faith. And although racial and gender equality have only recently been achieved, money only knows money and does not see in colors or gender.

As the West was beginning to stage conflicts within itself over economics instead of God, the Middle East was devolving into what Europe was shedding. Now, it is completely unfair to characterize current Middle East as a product of its own devices. The treatment of the region during the peace conference at Versailles and Cold War allegiances did much to root anti-Western sentiment amongst the people. The advent of sea routes and other progressive technologies allowed the West to reach the East without the need to deal with the region. In other words, the Middle East's economic significance was marginalized heavily. And poverty is a fertile breeding ground for religious fundamentalism.

Even now, the Middle East is on the verge of squandering what is perhaps the greatest natural resource in history. As developed economies begin to root out their addiction to oil, the Middle East will once again become economically marginalized. The tenements of Sharia Law and tribal conflicts will likely push the region further into the abyss of political and economic insignificance. And even if the West leaves the region due to a lack of strategic importance, the United States and its allies will most likely be the scapegoat for the people's problems.

The aim of this piece is to single out the Middle East and Islamic culture. It does not matter that America has its own brand of fundamentalism; nor does it matter that perhaps only a small percentage of Muslims are extremists. What matters in the 21st century is perception. In the information age where mass media rules the day, perception is what drives popular opinion and policy making. If the average Islamic citizen wants to correct the world's view on their religion and culture, they must take action against the extreme elements and correct the perception themselves. Otherwise, the region will be viewed as nothing but a wasteland of insanity searching for any excuse to explode.

This is what the caricatures of Muhammad did two years ago, and it is what they are going to do when reprinted later this week. There will be a wave of childish violence staged by Muslims across the Middle East in the forms of effigy burning, flag torching, and death threats to liberal media across the world. How ironic. When the media satirizes Muslim's as being violent, they respond in kind. In essence, their outrage only furthers the stereotype and perception that Islam is a religion of the sword. Perhaps it is their privilege to be so righteously angry at the depiction of the Prophet. However, if the West were to appease this sentiment then we are only allowing these extremist groups to defeat us through the liberal channels that they simultaneously seek to destroy.

I applaud the Danish and other European newspapers that are reprinting the cartoons later this week. It shows a sense of Western solidarity and belief in our values as a culture. We should not compromise the rights that our society values for the incessant whining of a social structure which would take those rights from us without a modicum of thought. And if they continue with such a response, then they will be left behind as the world around them progresses.