Greece --- Vacation Spot of Europe?

Greece seems to be in a bit of a bind. One bailout, two bailout, austerity. The situation rather sucks. The Greeks don't seem to be helping the matter either. Taking to the streets in demonstration because your welfare is being squeezed isn't going to solve the problem. This is unfortunate, as Greece has some of the best food ever (baklava, etc.) and certainly some of the best sights (see: Akropolis, Delphi, etc.) and the  most important to Western people's heritage. Perhaps Greece should become the backyard vacation spot of Europe? This is what some have suggested. After these massive bailouts it will practically be owned by the rest of Europe anyway. Is this bothersome? Perhaps. But Greece has been a bit of a vacation spot ever since its one "Golden Time" way back when, from which it has basked down the centuries. Perhaps Now it will be a bit more, shall we say, "user friendly."

America --- the New Minotaur?

"Improbably enough, a Greek economist named Yanis Varoufakis has been drawing attention in many of the hot spots of global finance lately, offering the Minotaur myth as a metaphor for understanding recent macroeconomic events. As Varoufakis writes in his recent book, “The Global Minotaur,” the world in which we have been living until recently functioned thanks to the voracious consumption of a different kind of beast. After World War II, the U.S. built up the infrastructure of its European allies as well as its former enemies, all of whom became trading partners. The U.S., with its great industrial and financial might, became the world’s surplus nation: its profits flowed out to its allies in the form of aid and investments. By the early 1970s, however, other countries had robust economies, and the U.S. was a debtor nation. “At that moment, certain very bright men within the American financial hierarchy made a stunning realization,” Varoufakis told me. The realization was that it didn’t matter if the U.S. was the biggest surplus or biggest debtor nation. What mattered was controlling the world’s primary currency, which would allow the United States to continue to recycle the global economic surplus. The idea was not unlike the thinking behind a casino — whichever gamblers are winning or losing, the house, which sets the terms and takes its cut, always wins.

So a new system came into being, in which a huge part of the world’s capital flows went to service debt originating in the United States. American debt, and the need to feed it, would be the modern Minotaur. The Wall Street financial houses became the handmaidens of the Minotaur. “The massive flow of capital into Wall Street gave it the impetus for financialization,” Varoufakis said, referring to the creation of derivatives and other risky financial vehicles. “And so Wall Street created a great deal of private money, with which it flooded the world and created huge bubbles, in the U.S. housing market and elsewhere.”

When that system came crashing down in 2008, Varoufakis says, “it was then only a matter of time that the euro would come into crisis.” Europe’s powerhouse economies — essentially, the northern countries — no longer had a place to sell their goods." ~ Russell Shorto, The New York Times.

This was so interesting I had to post it in its entirety. 

lol

"Today, there is nothing particularly communist about the Chinese Communist Party."~ Ray Takeyh, The Washington Post

China, Meet Mr. Lewis Turning Point

"Numerous factors underlie China’s mounting labor woes. Until now the country has been able to achieve its stunning economic growth by shifting large numbers of farmers into nonagricultural jobs. Over the past several years economists have warned that China may be reaching the so-called Lewis Turning Point — the stage at which the rural surplus labor pool effectively runs dry and wages begin to rapidly increase." ~ Michelle Dammon Loyalka, Wall Street Journal

If Not Austerity, What?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/opinion/europes-failed-course-on-the-economy.html?_r=1&hpw

This article takes an interesting tack. It states that the current to attempts to get Greece, Italy and co. back on sound financial footing are failing because austerity is not the answer. It states that these austerity measures are, instead, worsening the financial crises in these countries, loading them with more and more debt. What the author does not do is put forth a viable alternative. He simply points out the flaws in this plan as is. So...what is a good solution? I can't answer either.

Greatest IPE Challenge in 21st Century? Energy

This question naturally begs the question --- who are the leading actors? Well, the great nations of the world. Currently, Europe, the US and other developed countries. But also, and increasingly so recently, China, Brazil, India, and other developing countries. Indeed many forsee China, with its immense population and rapidly growing economy, as a if not the leading force in years to come. Of course the interstate organizations that play a large part in IPE will also be important. The IMF, Worldbank, and others will continue to exert influence. International corporations, already strong, may very well grow in power and reach. OPEC will continue to grow in power.  Other bodies, as yet weak or perhaps un-thought of may also very well rise to prominence in the IPE.

            What seems to be a key feature of all these “leading actors” is their dependence or relation to one thing: energy. Our world runs on energy. More particularly at this time, it runs on oil. Look around you. The room you are in, the plastic cup you drink out of the, the iPhone by your side, the shirt you are wearing, all would be impossible without oil. Plastics come from oil. Oil is used to manufacture machine parts. Oil transports these things to you. Oil is everywhere. Well, at least for now. Oil is a non-renewable resource. We use it at a rate 10,000 times faster than it can be made. The earth is only so big. Eventually, we will run out of oil. This is simply a fact.

            I believe energy will be the biggest challenge facing the leading actors in IPE in the 21^st century. There is simply no other way to think about it. Oil cannot last forever. It affects all parts of the economy, both internationally and domestically. Also, it is not distributed equally.

            Certain parts of the world contain vastly more oil than other parts (and some parts none at all). The Middle East has gigantic conventional reserves. (Conventional, meaning that it is easy to get from the ground. Not to be confused with unconventional oil, such as tar sands or shale.) Canada has large amounts, although much of this is in tar sand and so relatively hard to get out and use. Mexico has some, but a dwindling amount. Europe has very little. Russia has large amounts. Parts of South America, especially Venezuela, have large amounts (mostly unconventional). A few African countries have a good amount. The United States still has some, and a good deal of shale still to mine, but it is still a huge importer, mostly because it uses so much (as much as a third of all oil produced every year). The Middle East is certainly the winner, however, both in volume and accessibility of getting it’s oil from the ground.

            What is the issue with this? Why does it matter that these resources are distributed unevenly? Well, being human beings we have a tendency to fight when we do not get what we want. Oil will become scarcer and scarcer. The amount left will become more precious. Let’s look at the example of Iran. Iran has large amounts of oil. Iran is also a semi-nuclear dictatorship state with a long history of radical Islam. It recently stopped shipments of oil to several countries in retaliation against an embargo. Iran is an example of the dangers and potential conflicts and wars that may arise out of oil. Will the US, with its size and might, continue to allow states such as Iran to do what they wish with their resources when these wishes so go against theirs? Only the future will tell. Things will most certainly get heated.

            Not that the US will be the only nation coveting oil. China has a booming economy, as well as India, Brazil, and others. As these nations get more affluent they will want to claim more of a share of the limited energy resources (oil and others). Will this put them in conflict with the traditional power-users, the US, Europe, and others? It is certainly a possibility.

            Yet even with all these potential dangers and wars, oil cannot last forever. It must give out sometime. What will the world do then? Are there alternatives to oil? In fact, there are. But are they good, viable alternatives? That is another question. Wind, solar, fuel cells, hydro, nuclear, all these are ways to get energy from sources other than non-renewable resources such as oil, natural gas, coal, and the like. But what these resources are not is economically viable (at least not for now). In general, they are too expensive and too “spotty” to be well relied upon. The wind does not always blow, the sun does not always shine, etc. They are simply not as easy to use as pulling up to a gas station and filling up your car. But when this is not an option, we will have to find another way.

            I imagine it coming to be the “billion dollar question.” As oil reserves dwindle and an alternative becomes more necessary, it will become more and more worth people’s time to develop these “other” forms for getting energy. Eventually, it will become so worth people’s time that, well, a discovery will be made. With all the most brilliant minds at work on it, and so much money at stake, I imagine we will find viable alternatives. If not, our world will not be able to continue functioning as it does.

            Our world will also not be able to continue functioning as it does if it is completely polluted. The forms of energy that we are currently using are incredibly polluting. While global warming is a very hotly debated topic, it does appear that it must have some validity. It claims that as CO(2) is released into the atmosphere in large amounts (from our cars, anything that runs on oil) it is creating holes in the ozone layer that allows more sunlight in and so heats up our world. The world has purportedly gotten one degree hotter because of this, and will continue to heat up as we burn more fossil fuels. This will start melting glaciers in the arctic and so start flooding our world. While others say this is not based on fact, it is at least an issue to think about. What is not contested is the other effects of pollution. Pollution creates the smog that hangs over many cities, choking both plants and animals. Toxic waste is created from nuclear reactors. More recently, huge amounts of polluted water is being created from the new methods for mining the “shale gas” that is the last large repository of oil.  Will our world be worth living in when we finally run out of oil? Or will it be a barren landscape devoid of life as Al Gore and Wale would have us believe? There cannot be any international political economy if there is not inhabitable world.

            It will be up to the leading actors in IPE to do something about this, if something needs to be done. Me using a recyclable cup instead of a normal paper one will not do much. If we want to limit pollution, etc., we must use large-scale measures. Most importantly, we would have to get China and other developing nations on board. There are very few pollution laws in many of these countries. When you only have two dollars a day to spend on food the pollution you are creating is probably the last thing on your mind.

            The problem of energy is one that may very well tear the world apart. It is also one that can, in a way must, bring us together. We may fight over oil but to save ourselves from the effects of burning this oil we must work together. There is only one world afterall.

            International political economy, well, the economy of the entire world really, is dependant on energy. The vast majority of this energy comes from non-renewable resources, many of which are polluting. These resources are also becoming scarcer and scarcer. This will create many conflict and problems in the world in the 21^st century. For these reasons, I think energy, its availability and use, will be the greatest challenge facing the leading actors in the international political economy in the 21^st century. 

Washington, DC --- Too Casual for Old Georgie Himself?

Do individuals really have power in our "international political economy"? Or does the power lie with great corporations, nations, and governments as a whole? I would argue that individuals can definitely have an influence. That is, some individuals. Presidents, Prime Ministers, the great leaders of the greater industrial countries can certainly be said to hold a good deal of sway. The question, then, of how they should deport themselves is relevant. The modern push, at least in Western countries, seems to be toward the casual. Obama playing basketball, Bush wearing jeans. On the campaign trails find politicians kissing babies and eating at the local barbecue joint. Is this proper? Perhaps not, one scholar would argue.  Ron Chernow, author of a biography of Lincoln honored with the Pulitzer prize last year, has a different view of leadership, and how it is best "pulled off." He writes of Washington's views on leadership, saying that he realized that "They don't need to like you—much less love you—but they need to respect you."

 This was something Washington really understood. "He realized that a leader should be neither too remote nor too familiar." Washington was careful in his dress, precise in his speech, and never too fast to show his emotions. He was undoubtedly a great leader. While his style may not appeal to the current generation it may certainly give us pause for thought. Isn't an alternative to Obama's bowing to the Japanese Emperor needed? Sometimes, a more formal deportment on the international stage might do America good. 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204369404577211010507347208.html?grcc=604a47345f07e5ab5368359abaacd399Z10&mod=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion

Wolf Quotes....Stiglitz

I think it is interesting that Martin Wolf quotes Joseph Stiglitz in his book Why Globalization Works. I wonder how many experts on globalization there are out there? It would seem few.

America; Central to the World Order?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203646004577213262856669448.html?mod=WSJ_World_MIDDLENews

Robert Kagan writes a very interesting article arguing that the world order as it is would not survive without America at its helm. What is this world order? One dominated by democracy and the prevalence of Western values (often diffused through pop culture). Kagan points to history, saying that when Rome fell so to did the world order it had created. Opponents of Kagan say that even if, say, China or Brazil were to surpass the US this would not create a restructuring of the way our world works. Only the future holds the answer.

American power may diminish, the political scientist G. John Ikenberry argues, but "the underlying foundations of the liberal international order will survive and thrive."

Saudi Women and Wheels

The right to drive is something we in America take for granted. There is no Constitutional amendment stating that this is a real right and we would laugh if there was. Enter, Arabia. The KSA or "Kingdom of Saudi Arabia" bands women from driving. It does not ban them formally, however, but informally. Every woman knows that to even apply for a license could mean jail time or whipping. This is now being challenged. A woman, with the aid of a lawyer, is attempting to bring a case against the state. It is crucial that this is being reported on international news channels. Without the knowledge and censure of the world this case might well be hushed up by less than honorable means. It will be interesting to see what plays out. Is Saudi Arabia finally ready to let a bit loose on its strict laws binding women to a life lived, in essence  inside the home and with the constant supervision of male relatives? Can and will it be able to stand up to the strict censure of the world if it rules unfairly in this case? Only time will tell. Suffice to say that next time I hop in my ride I will be thankful, and say a little prayer for all my fellow women who lack this ability.

Old School?

Just a note --- who says The Wizard of Oz is now a classic? Or perhaps it is now a "classic classic" --- one of those things, like War and Peace, we all know we should know but most fail to read. I maybe once saw Wizard of Oz when I was a child? It is certainly not something so much on the mind as when this was written over twenty years ago.

Jihad vs. McWorld

I was watching C-span and one of the commentators, speaking about American exceptionalism, mentioned this phrase as being the future of the world. This hit me as being the one big thing that is stopping globalism. Perhaps Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilization will be true afterall.