Evangelicals of Globalization

I heard Joseph Stiglitz speak for the World Affairs Council here in Seattle this evening, down at the town hall. Some notable quotes from the evening:
"One famous economist once said, 'In the long run, we're all dead'," "The IMF is poorly managed, it's not one country one vote, not even one $ one vote. It's more like one $ back in 1944, one vote." He raised some interesting points. Notably, the market failures that make government critical (at the national level), are only more pronounced at the global level. He painted a picture of MNCs with big interests, smart lawyers and well-funded lobbyists at in the driver's seat of globalizatoin. He pointed out that voting at the IMF is based on old, out-dated centers of power. And why is the head of the World Bank is always appointed by the US president w/o even congressional approval?

His critique of the global system hinges on equity, in the context of 'developed' and 'developing' nations. He noted how the pharma-lobby has kept generic drugs out of Africa, how NAFTA is 1000+ pages long (it's drafted to protect US special interests and has made life even harder for many Mexican small business owners, environmentalists, regulators), how 'globalization' increasingly makes it more difficult for state governments to correct market failures.

He made the case for why the 'global system' is even more corruptible than domestics systems, or domestic politics. It all comes down to who has money, who makes policy and who cares to spend that money to influence policymakers. Where are the checks and balances to the global system? Why are trade negotiations dominated by the rich countries, who are intern controlled by big money? The global system is a classic case of haves and have-nots. It's about a smaller number of the politically-motivated and organized dominating policy. MNCs and special interests are are clearly behind the wheel of the global system. How, otherwise, would agricultural subsidies be so built into the system? The sad reality is, just like in domestic politics, money is king. And again, just as in domestic policy, it's a question of who has the most to gain and who has the money. As in domestic politics, this tends to result in a small group of folks who speak louder and sit in the driver's seat... heading towards the non-optimal outcome.

How could we ever get the money out of policy-making? That's so fundamental to everything.