Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
tries, they do it. That's why, if you talk with people in El Salvador, even proponents of
globalization don't claim anything compassionate about it. It's presented simply as un-
stoppable: “Globalization is a big train, and it's moving out. Get on or get run over.”
In Central America, egregious examples of mishandled globalization are numerous.
An American biotech giant forced the people of Honduras to sell the patent rights for
plants that produce local folk cures. Now, those poor
campesinos
(who can't afford inter-
national pharmaceuticals) can legally be charged for using their own traditional remedies.
Another example: trade levies, which increase with processing, make it easy for a poor
country to export raw peanuts—but make it prohibitively expensive to produce far more
profitable peanut butter.
Many participants like to think of globalization as “tough love,” as the rich world tries
to pull up the poor world. The scorecard tells a different story. In the last 40 years, the
average annual income in the world's 20 poorest countries—places where people make on
average less than $1,000 a year—has barely changed. In that same period, the average per
capita income in the richest 20 nations has nearly tripled to over $30,000. The bottom 40
percent of humanity lives on roughly 5 percent of the planet's resources. The top 20 per-
cent lives on over 75 percent. The greatest concentration of wealth among economic elites
in the history of the human race is happening at the same time our world is becoming a
global village.
So what am I? Anti-globalization? No. I'm just anti-
bad
globalization. If implemen-
ted thoughtfully and compassionately, globalization could be the salvation of the develop-
ing world. Progress can include or exclude the poor. And, as wealthy people who reap the
benefits of globalization, I believe we have a moral obligation to be responsible.
As a businessman who manufactures some of my travel bags in South Asia, I'm
keenly aware that globalization can be either a force for good or a force for harm. I have
struggled with and understand the inevitability and moral challenge of it—there's simply
no way to produce a bag that will sell in the USA without finding the least expensive
combination of quality, labor, and materials. I contribute to globalization only because I'm
confident that the people who stitch and sew my bags are treated well and paid appropri-
ately. If I believed that the factory conditions were bad for that community or for its work-
ers, I'd take my business elsewhere. To ensure this, I fly one of my staff to the factory for
a periodic re-evaluation. It's a carefully weighed decision that I make with my humanit-
arian principles (and with the plight of Beatriz and Veronica) in mind.
Privilege brings with it the luxurious option of obliviousness. No comfortable Amer-
ican enjoys being told how her cat has more “buying power” than some hungry child just
south of the border, how his investments may be contributing to the destruction of the en-
vironment, how the weaponry we sell and profit from is really being used, or how—if you
