Role of Multi-National Companies in Maintaining World Peace
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:04 am
.
It is interesting that Adolf Hitler thought that international business did not want World War I interfering with profitable activities. So it had “knifed Germany in the back.” And since Hitler believed that international business during that era was controlled by Jewish people, he became virulently anti-Semitic, with tragic consequences producing The Holocaust.
Nonetheless, it has been true since World War II that international business has indeed abhorred war and its interference with profitable activities.
Indeed, too numerous to list would be the situations in which international business in the modern era has mediated disputes and tensions between nation states.
The materials for last month on “The Best Gov Money Can Buy – Bribery and Extortion” discussed how both European- and American-based multi-national companies have outsourced jobs to India and China whose economies have mushroomed almost solely as a result of the outsourcing.
Which is remarkable because India during the Cold War was viewed as part of Russia’s “sphere of influence” and China was viewed as irrevocably communist.
Especially when one re-reads such things as Foreign Affairs Magazine from that era!!!
How could India and China, nearly 1/3 of the world’s population, be lured into what might be called “Pax Corporatica”??? Which has now replaced “Pax Americana” which replaced “Pax Britannia”!!!
Indeed, there are two amusing aspects of China’s conversion to capitalism.
First, Marshall Goldman (Harvard prof & NY Times op ed writer on all matters China or Soviet during the 1980’s and 1990’s) was fond of pontificating how capitalist reforms in Russia and China were so radically different. That capitalist reforms in Russia, which was predominantly industrial, took the form of threatening to close business concerns that could not turn a profit – threatening job loss for the Russian public. While capitalist reforms in China, which was still predominantly agricultural, took the form of permitting Chinese farmers to retain the bulk of their production and dispose of it however they might choose – legalizing black markets AND ENDORSING (RATHER THAN OPPOSING) HUMAN NATURE.
Second, on the heels of Mao’s death, the ruling Central Committee immediately divided up among its members most large Chinese companies and each Central Committee member immediately became a billionaire by having his roster of companies taken public in the West – making China’s Central Committee the largest billionaire’s club in the world. One of my close personal friends who comes from Hong Kong but WHO attached himself to the international law firm of Jones Day, handled most of these public offerings for the Central Committee members. (My friend is an avid opera fan, which is how I know him.)
*****
There are occasional pieces written in the American and European media about possible future military conflicts with China.
But don’t bet on it – multi-national business would never permit the U.S. and China to squabble in any serious way.
It is interesting that Adolf Hitler thought that international business did not want World War I interfering with profitable activities. So it had “knifed Germany in the back.” And since Hitler believed that international business during that era was controlled by Jewish people, he became virulently anti-Semitic, with tragic consequences producing The Holocaust.
Nonetheless, it has been true since World War II that international business has indeed abhorred war and its interference with profitable activities.
Indeed, too numerous to list would be the situations in which international business in the modern era has mediated disputes and tensions between nation states.
The materials for last month on “The Best Gov Money Can Buy – Bribery and Extortion” discussed how both European- and American-based multi-national companies have outsourced jobs to India and China whose economies have mushroomed almost solely as a result of the outsourcing.
Which is remarkable because India during the Cold War was viewed as part of Russia’s “sphere of influence” and China was viewed as irrevocably communist.
Especially when one re-reads such things as Foreign Affairs Magazine from that era!!!
How could India and China, nearly 1/3 of the world’s population, be lured into what might be called “Pax Corporatica”??? Which has now replaced “Pax Americana” which replaced “Pax Britannia”!!!
Indeed, there are two amusing aspects of China’s conversion to capitalism.
First, Marshall Goldman (Harvard prof & NY Times op ed writer on all matters China or Soviet during the 1980’s and 1990’s) was fond of pontificating how capitalist reforms in Russia and China were so radically different. That capitalist reforms in Russia, which was predominantly industrial, took the form of threatening to close business concerns that could not turn a profit – threatening job loss for the Russian public. While capitalist reforms in China, which was still predominantly agricultural, took the form of permitting Chinese farmers to retain the bulk of their production and dispose of it however they might choose – legalizing black markets AND ENDORSING (RATHER THAN OPPOSING) HUMAN NATURE.
Second, on the heels of Mao’s death, the ruling Central Committee immediately divided up among its members most large Chinese companies and each Central Committee member immediately became a billionaire by having his roster of companies taken public in the West – making China’s Central Committee the largest billionaire’s club in the world. One of my close personal friends who comes from Hong Kong but WHO attached himself to the international law firm of Jones Day, handled most of these public offerings for the Central Committee members. (My friend is an avid opera fan, which is how I know him.)
*****
There are occasional pieces written in the American and European media about possible future military conflicts with China.
But don’t bet on it – multi-national business would never permit the U.S. and China to squabble in any serious way.