Live From Death Row

February 18, 2009 by Marc Lamont Hill

Economy of Ashes
By Mumia Abu-Jamal
[col. writ. 2/4/09] (c) ‘09

What we are seeing in the economy is something not seen in this country since the 1930’s — the time of the Great Depression.

If we think of the companies shedding jobs like trees shedding leaves, they are so numerous that it may prove easier to name companies that haven’t — (if we could find any!)

In January alone, some 1/2 million workers got pink slips.

And this economic crisis is global. Europe is locked in a financial vise, and big countries, like England and France, have announced ambitious stimulus packages. England has openly nationalized prominent banks facing default. Iceland has, for all intents and purposes, declared bankruptcy — with not just banks, but government itself is failing.

And while China, the site of the world’s most robust economy is still growing, its rate of growth has fallen so fast that some 20 million people — 20 million! — have lost their jobs, a direct result of the U.S. economic recession.

Over a year ago, American economist Nouriel Roubini, speaking at a meeting in Davos, Switzerland, said the U.S. economy looked “like an emerging market.”

Roubini predicted that the U.S. would enter a recession which would last at least a year. he added, “The debate is not whether we’re going to have a soft or hard landing. The question is only how hard the hard landing will be.” *

A Chinese economist echoed that sentiment. Yu Yongding, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences described the Chinese economy as at “quite a delicate stage.” The problem, he concluded, was the “very bad situation” in the U.S.

Globalization was sold as the next best thing to the industrial age, when Americans would live in the warm glow of the information age, lit by computer screens, and the rest of the world would do scut work.

How’s that working out, as the economy crumbles?

–(c) ‘09 maj

[*Source: Landler, Mark, "U.S. Policies Evoke Scorn at Davos: Fed Caved In to the Markets (or Maybe It Dawdled), Critics Say, New York Times, Thurs., Jan. 24, 2008, p. C9.]

Categories: MLH
|

8 Comments

1. R.oB. wrote:

What I always find interesting is how people complain about results they don’t like about processes in which they are complicit. The Internet is a phenomenon of globalization. Would I be reading an article by Mumia Abu Jamal without it?

And where is the economic analysis? Since when has the coupling of economic fortunes caused meltdowns? How has the WTO caused this?

Ignorance and hypocrisy.

February 18, 2009 @ 7:54 pm

2. Dale J. Thomas wrote:

Hello Rob,

Can you paste the sections in the article here Mumia blames the WTO for the economic crisis?

And also, globalization is not a driving factor in the growth of the internet, could you explain this as well?

February 19, 2009 @ 8:30 am

3. R.oB. wrote:

Dale,

Globalization was sold as the next best thing to the industrial age, when Americans would live in the warm glow of the information age, lit by computer screens, and the rest of the world would do scut work.

I stand corrected: the American Enterprise Institute, Project for a New American Century, and other imperialist outfits in conjunction with the WTO sold this particular bill of goods on globalization as a nomer for the so-called “free trade” policies that we find less than moral. Mumia is absolutely correct to have an issue with them and that dross.

BUT that bill of goods is itself not at issue here. Globalization as a phenomenon is larger than the shitty trade policies of the WTO or the neo-con imperialism masked as American patriotism. It takes many forms: some good, some bad. The reason we are in global meltdown is that all the world’s economies are interconnected, coupled together to an unprecedented degree. Our financial markets, specifically the derivatives market in asset backed securities was the epicenter for what we are seeing these days. Our problems quickly became the world’s problems.

It is bad to have a global recession, but it’s not a bad thing to have our collective fortunes tied together in a way that demands more cooperation and communication, less tribalism, less protectionism, and basic fairness.

Further, the internet is the epitome of globalization. I would not be reading his articles without it. It would not be available to the world in such an accessible way without it. That’s where I see hypocrisy and ignorance. He’s using globalization to say globalization is bad despite it’s obvious benefits to him.

February 19, 2009 @ 4:00 pm

4. R.oB. wrote:

Sorry, I forgot to answer your last question. Globalization means that things take on global scale rather than be limited to geography or nation or principality. By definition, the Internet is a global phenomenon as it is an organic system of interconnected networks. International capital markets are another. The fact that my best friend has built a career in them living in Hong Kong but pays US taxes is another. Passports are another. International shipping another. The fact that I would lead meetings for a software development team in Amsterdam from my old apartment in University City is another. The fact that my wife could text me when I visited him is another. Hell, the fact that I could drive her around in Holland when she would visit me using my US license is another. And on and on and on.

February 19, 2009 @ 4:11 pm

5. jordan wrote:

R.oB. – I was a little confused at first, but I generally agree with your original comment that Mumia isn’t considering how he uses technology to deliver his message. At the same time, I think he’s also implying the many jobs in the U.S. that have been lost from the high tech industry and sort of blaming all of us for putting too much faith in those jobs. While it’s true that tech has shed lots of jobs, I think he’s ignoring all the jobs that have been lost in manufacturing, construction, and service. There are plenty of people in the U.S. who do “scut work” including those in the underground economy. Day laborers in the U.S. have been hit hard.
So for me (and maybe you) his final question becomes kind of an ironic one. How has the promise of a future lit by computer screens played out as the economy crumbles? Well, my white collar job is certainly in as much danger as my neighbor’s blue collar job, but I wouldn’t be reading that question if I weren’t sitting here lit by my computer screen reading Mumia.
So, I’m confused again. What answer to his final question do you think he was expecting?

February 20, 2009 @ 11:29 am

6. EminemsRevenge wrote:

As Yogi Berra said, this is déjà vu all over again…the crackhead economy done gone mainstream!

In the Eighties and Nineties the crack dealers didn’t give a damn who they sold to and the crackheads was hooked on the product—the “product” now is the dollar and a dream mentality—EVERYONE wants to be a millionaire, think it’s their DUE…yet no one wants to work.

All the three-card-monte get rich quick schemes and so many unregulated industries is what got US here.

February 21, 2009 @ 3:12 pm

7. Miriam wrote:

very very well written. thank you.

March 7, 2009 @ 3:22 pm

8. Sherwood wrote:

Excuse me but I am not feeling to sorry for the Chinese. We quit buying their crap and the worlkd goes into a nose dive, well, too damn bad!

March 11, 2009 @ 6:59 am

Now Reading

Beats, Rhymes, and Classroom Life: Hip-Hop Pedagogy and the Politics of Identity by Marc Lamont Hill
Buy Now
The Classroom and The Cell: Conversations on Black Life in America by Mumia Abu-Jamal & Marc Lamont Hill
Buy Now
View More