From colonialism to globalization<\/p>\n
By Franz Magnis-Suseno SJ<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Is globalization the continuation of
\ncolonialism? Is it the postcolonial form of colonialism? That was
\nthe central question of an international conference on
\nColonialism to Globalization that took place in New Delhi, India,
\nin the first week of February.<\/p>\n
It was jointly sponsored by the Catholic Indian Social
\nInstitute, University of Delhi, Jamia-Milia-Islamia and three
\nother institutions. The conference marked the fifth centenary of
\nthe beginning of colonialism, symbolized by the arrival of Vasco
\nda Gama in Calicut, Southern India, 1498; and the beginning of
\nits end, symbolized by the 50th anniversary of independence for
\nIndia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.<\/p>\n
For five days, 95 participants from 26 countries, mainly
\nAfrica and Asia, and different religions, analyzed and debated
\nthe colonial legacy and the impact of globalization. Highlights
\nwere the opening speech by Dr. Gamani Corea, former secretary-
\ngeneral of the United Nations Conference on Trade and
\nDevelopment, and a forum where Sulieman Najjab, member of the
\nexecutive committee of the Palestinian Liberation Organization,
\nHanna Nasir, mayor of Bethlehem, and Prof. Moshe Ma'oz from
\nHebrew University in Jerusalem sat together.<\/p>\n
But the real work was done in dozens of well-focused papers
\nand following discussions, all of a high standard, controversial,
\nsometimes emotional, but always in a positive and very focused
\natmosphere.<\/p>\n
To put the result first: it was not possible to place the
\nphenomena of globalization under one simple heading. Too
\ndifferent are its angles, its impact on different countries and
\nits degree of unavoidability. But one thing became clear during
\nthe conference: there is nothing innocent about globalization.
\nGlobalization, if not controlled and properly channeled,
\n\"perpetuates and intensifies poverty, exploitation and domination
\nas a permanent structural practice\" (final statement).<\/p>\n
That does not mean that globalization has to be demonized or
\nseen as a kind of sinister conspiracy to dominate the world. The
\nreason is simply that the only motive of economic globalization
\nis profit, therefore, common good, let alone social justice, do
\nnot enter into consideration.<\/p>\n
Or, in other words, globalization in connection with dogmatic
\nneoliberalism cannot avoid widening the schism between those
\ninvolved in the process of accumulation and the marginalized
\nmasses which are usually the great majority of the people in
\ndeveloping countries. Thus, \"globalization results in
\npolarization both between rich and poor nations and within each
\ncountry\" (final statement).<\/p>\n
Thus, and this was the second point of consensus at the
\nconference, globalization -- which cannot be completely avoided
\n-- should and can be controlled. Globalization is not a destiny
\nthat has to be passively accepted. Developing countries should
\nopen up selectively to the international flows of capital and
\ncommodities according to its own national interests (the
\nconference did not enter into the question whether the global
\ninformation network can also be screened). The most important
\ntask in facing globalization would be the safeguarding of the
\nwelfare of the poor.<\/p>\n
Some other points came up, including foreign debt as a major
\nsource of marginalization and impoverishment. Some countries,
\nlike Nicaragua, have no chance of climbing out of poverty despite
\ncontinued two-digit export growth because their foreign debt
\nstands at more than their national annual income, thus, all gains
\nare immediately siphoned off out of the country.<\/p>\n
Another point was the tendency to switch from food production
\nfor the domestic market to export crops, with the consequence
\nthat foodstuff has to be imported and thus becomes very expensive
\nfor the poor (from this point of view, President Soeharto's
\ninsistence on self-sufficiency in rice production was
\nfarsighted).<\/p>\n
What can be done? The first thing would be to realize that
\nsomething can be done. Globalization can be channeled and should
\nbe strictly controlled. The second point would be that since
\nglobalization is based on a coalition of interests of
\ninternational capital and the local elites, pressure must be
\nbrought to bear from NGOs, human rights and religious groups,
\ntrade unions, people's movements and workers.<\/p>\n
Civil society must be strengthened. Networking between
\ncommitted parties in developing countries, for instance Southeast
\nand East Asia, Southern Asia, the Southern Mediterranean and sub-
\nSahara Africa, would be helpful.<\/p>\n
Another point stressed was that international institutions
\nlike the IMF, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization
\nshould be made more representative by involving developing
\ncountries in their decision-making process.<\/p>\n
The conference closed with reaffirming that globalization
\nshould not be allowed to build up another net of domination of
\npoor countries and people by exploitative powers only a few
\ndecades after the end of colonialism.<\/p>\n
Father Franz Magnis-Suseno SJ is professor for social
\nphilosophy at Driyarkara School of Philosophy in Jakarta.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/from-colonialism-to-globalization-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}