Capitalism is system based upon freedom, and the ability of people to come together and exchange goods within a free market with fair laws. It's really that simple. You don't like people being able to trade goods? What exactly is the other option, except the before mentioned communism where the government redistributes everything? If you don't like the system then you are free to join an agriculture commune somewhere and wash your hands of it. However I suspect you will do no such thing, instead you will enjoy the huge benefits of capitalism and the freedom of choice it offers you and continue to compose little blurbs about how corporations and capitalism are out to get people. Corporations seek profit and by doing so hugely benefit society as any economist will tell you. Western quality of life and technology would be far worse without them, and yes that includes you. If you think they are doing something wrong I suggest you become politically involved, your political rights don't end with voting.
Yes globalization allows some corporations to do immoral things but no they don't secretly control the government. America is still a democracy, corporations can only offer people products and you don't have to bloody buy their stuff. Unlike governments which can arrest you, and Obama who can apparently force you to buy health insurance.
First off, this country is far from its capitalistic roots, Free Market? How is it free when large mega corporations can demand bail outs from the government for their failing business practices, while regular citizens go hungry in the streets in droves, with no such option.
as it stands right now, this country has fallen far from its capitalistic roots.
Capitialism, Communism, Socialism, Fasicism, even the Free Market system are all connected together because of currency, the only difference is the level of involvement from "The State" ranging from crushing total control to no control or very little control at all. All of these systems could be easily described as "Monetaryism"
Globalization is perhaps the greatest threat to human prosperity and freedom this planet has ever faced. Period. Its more then just a few corporations doing a a few immoral things. By lowering trade barriers it allos foreign corporations to take control of foreign economies, which in turn allows control of other aspects of the country to be controlled, IE governments.
"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws." - Mayer Amschel Rothschild
he said this, because the true power lies not in having a bunch of money, but controlling the paths, the rivers on which the money flows. without money governments are impotent. Policy means nothing unless you have the ability to back that policy up, and specifically have the means to pay for it.
more concisely, globalization allows foreign companies to sell for lower prices then local distributers through the use of mass production, the local distributers can not make a profit or even sell in this market and they go out of business. once the competition is eliminated, the foreign distributer becomes the sole producer and often what happens is prices go up in this de facto monopoly.
Even if the producer does not sell in that market, in any case, the producer is taking local resources, local work, and moving them to another market.
The true "wealth" a country has, is its resources IE, physical resources, Ore, Metals, Oils(plastics), People(labor), etc.
in the old days, countries would use those resources to make "products" the end result of the labor and resource chain. And sell them for other products that they don't make, Imports and Exports. Or sell locally to those that want or need it. Re divestiture.
In the case of globalization, foreign corporations are taking products, which are representations of resources and moving them out of the place that made them, which out giving the area that they took anything worth the loss of that resource. Thus the resource, or product simply is lost on the resource-product cycle of the given area. in other words, its just that much less resources they have access to. its simply gone.
the problem with globalization is that its not being used in the manner in which we have been told it is an actual fair and balanced network of resources that are criss crossing the globe, the idea is that you have a global version of smaller trading and barter networks that we have experienced before.
But the problem is, that is not what is actually happening, what is actually happening is a method for moving a product from one area to another selling it extremely high value, while at the same time, lowering the costs of production to extreme lows. by taking advantage of the fact that there are still exchange rates in good and services, and that the global marketplace is not truly homogenous.
in otherwords, if all money, or value, was at a 1:1 ratio, then the mega-corps couldn't do what it is they are doing and make the bucket loads of cash that they are making. because an ipad sold here would be the same as an Ipad sold anywhere else.
So while globalists say that they are looking to "homogenize" the world marketplace the truth is if they did that the money train would stop for them, so it is actually in their best interest to keep the global marketplace imbalanced.
And as the haves are taking all the wealth from the have-nots (thats you and me btw.), even governments are having to inflate their currencies to try and pay their bills, yet at the same time, shooting themselves in the foot because inflated currencies keep their respective populaces from being able to pay their bills and the economies of these countries starts to grind to a halt.
The end result is eventually there will be a total global economic collapse of the system, when all currencies reach their maximum inflation rate, where the interest on the currencies are unafforable to anyone, and all money is essentially worthless, while all resources have already been sold off in past crisis to stave off total collapse. And guess who will be holding the titles and deeds to all these resources.
the people who created the economic system in the first place, created it knowing it would be unsustainable and fail. And those people whom will be expecting to be called, by you and me, Master...
Foxconn and those like them are a small piece to a overarching machine that is designed to ultimately fail, the difference is Foxconn and pretty much Chinese business culture has simply seen which way the wind is blowing and are simply jumping on board the train before its left the station, because they know in the due course of time, not long now, the next 10 years or so. that manufacturing jobs the world over will become the sweat shop, indentured servitude labor we already see with them.
And society itself will reflect this "Neo-Feudalism" in which there won't be nation states and governments, but a college of corporations that own everything, and people will be more described by who they work for or owned by not by where they are from. Today we call ourselves, Americans, or Britians or Germans, in the future people will remark as they are owned/work for "Exxon" "Shell" "AT&T" "Apple Inc." and "Microsoft"
In fact now as am writing this, i remember an old TV series, SeaQuest, that dealt with exactly what I'm talking about, it was the third season, and once of the characters were talking to a waitress or something about why they had a tattoo of the company they worked for on their hand or something, and it was stated that its because of that tattoo is how she received her payment, and it was used as an ID to allow her access to the areas owned by her corporation, Deon International, IE you living quarters, work and recreation areas, and it was commented on that she was only allowed to recreate in those designated areas, of course only Deon International employees are allowed into those areas, so in essence she is only allowed to associate with other employees. And when asked why does she put up with this, she replies that its in her contract. and it was heavily implied that the only way out of said contract was feet first.
What I just described is essentially "Serfdom" from a globalist, corporatist point of view. I cant remember the specific episode, but it illustrates my point precisely.