Capitalism
has been responsible for rapid economic growth and technological change. While
some of this has offered improved lifestyles to a growing minority in our
world, some of it has created dimensions of inequality from both an economic
and socio/cultural perspective. At several points throughout the book, serious
questions have been raised about the policies of international organizations.
It appears that those organizations’ policies are often directed at meeting the
needs of capitalism more than they are directed at meeting the needs of poor
people in developing countries.
I
agree that international organizations are too concerned with capitalistic
policies and are too focused on supporting the control of monopolies. Our
capitalistic government and monopolies have have the ability to dictate prices,
policies, and procedures with virtually no one able to deny them. This causes
the customer to suffer as well as people all around the world that even put
their lives in danger for the sake of capitalistic policies and monopolies. I
support my reasoning with our in-class article by McChesney in his chapter Digital Disconnect—How Can the PEC help us
understand the Internet?. He makes statements regarding that the lines
between producer and consumer should fade so that monopolies don’t control all
trading systems. He also stresses the importance of good and fair policy
making. “Armed with the insights of the political economy of communication, we can take a hard
look at the
marriage of capitalism and the Internet and the
resulting crisis of communication and democracy in the
digital era. There are alternative paths leading
to a much brighter future” (McChesney, 95).
Cudworth
agrees to the need of alternative paths and she suggests that human
intervention is the right path to mitigate and reduce some of these costs. It
is the job of such previously mentioned international organizations to act as
role models in helping shape a balanced world.
No comments:
Post a Comment