"FREE MARKET" CONTRADICTIONS

From ZNet:

Advocates of ?globalization? usually claim that economic advancement is the expected byproduct of international competition. This is why they want upcoming WTO negotiations to include ?competition policy?, which could force governments? to open up all public contracts to multi national corporations. Similarly, they call for a reduction in government spending, arguing that corporations provide services more ?efficiently? and, even if that were not the case, government involvement in the economy is burdensome.

Even opponents of ?globalization? (myself included) commonly summarize the ideology underpinning it: neoliberalism - as free trade and investment, privatizations, deregulation and a reduction in social spending. Basically, ?globalization? is survival of the fittest in the global marketplace.

While this understanding has some truth to it, a recent patent granted to the bio engineering company, Monsanto in Europe highlight its limitations. According to Seth Shulman in the September issue of Technology Review Magazine, Monsanto won sole legal control over all forms of genetically modified Soya within the European Union! This is only the latest example of the increase in corporate monopolies through strengthened patent laws and a broadening definition of patents. Corporations don't lobby for ?free? markets; instead they lobby for patent controls to drive up their profits, which ads to the ubiquitous process of ?privatizing the commons?.

For more on neo-liberal hypocrisy, click here. (By the way, I think that all the weird question marks are supposed to by quotation marks--a consistent typo problem, I suppose. Just ignore them.)

Neo-liberal philosophy is a lie. It is not at all about improving the economy. Rather, it secretly aims to strengthen the powerful and weaken the powerless. Like lascivious TV evangelists, corporations zealously preach the religion of neo-liberalism while quietly performing heresy. Noam Chomsky sums it up well: "Free markets are fine for you, but not for me. In other words, you have to learn responsibility and be subjected to market discipline... but me, I need the nanny state to protect me from market discipline." Indeed, corporations now gain so many benefits from government that laissez-faire is pretty much a relic these days. Those who truly support the concept simply have their heads in the sand, devoted to an idea that no one actually practices.

It's time to call a spade a spade: it is impossible to take government out of the economy; instead of intervening on behalf of private wealth, government should affect the economy in ways that actually help its citizens. Neo-liberalism must die.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$