trc (04/19/83)
Response to Jeff Myers: Thank you for your correction re the Phillipines. (As I said, I DON'T believe the US has always done the right thing - just much more frequently than Russia.) I would like to first point out one very important difference between the "economic imperialism" you describe and the sort of actions Russia takes - namely that force is not used, and that the country "attacked" can easily toss out the "invaders". Bribery is wrong, but would not be very effective if the government were not already corrupt. Note that the under-developed economy expands - something that was generally not occuring before the "economic invasion". This beneficial effect is mainly due to the greater efficiency of laborers using modern equipment. The economy does become more dependent upon international trade. The small country gets tired of its role as employee and decides to "nationalize" - IE steal the assets of the foreign companies. It does so, and the foreign companies pull out. Without their cash and experience, and now in competition with it, the country's industry suffers. Meanwhile the government is finding itself sufficiently unpopular that it does a heavy military build up. The combined poor economy and military expense rapidly leads the country into debt. And the nations whose companies' assets were stolen get mad and withdraw aid, or worse. Now consider what could have happened if the companies had not been kicked out. The economy keeps growing. Local government officials gain experience and soon grow capable of controlling foreign investment in a way that benefits the country as well as the investors. Eventually employment and wages rise so that no major new foreign capital flows in. The country has achieved a balance with the rest of the world and can concentrate on improving its "gross national profit margin" by reducing imports. The country may go somewhat into debt, but not so grossly that it needs a loan in order to pay the interest on a loan. By minding its own business, and not bugging its neighbors, it avoids needing a big military. With regard to Chile, I would still like a summary of what the US did, but also a summary of the events leading to those actions. Other nations have gone socialist without the US interfering - what led us to attack Allende? Only when that is known can it be judged whether the actions were not just. Tom Craver houti!trc