In our society, we visualize victimization as women being battered in their homes, elderly citizens being mugged on city street corners, and innocent bystanders harmed in gang shootings. To most Americans, victims are those who are hurt when a law is broken. Victimization, however, has far more to do with the structure of a society as a whole than simply with the rules of the legal system. In fact, at times victimization can be a product of something that may be viewed by the public as harmless and even positive: in particular, globalization.

            Globalization, the process of creating a world economy, has been responsible for the victimization of millions. Not only does the process affect Americans, it exploits people worldwide. No one person is responsible for the massacre of culture and freedom we call globalization, but it will take strong, hardworking, and convicted individuals to change the direction of the process and end the suffering it has caused.

            In chapter four of Derber’s The Wilding of America (1996), Derber looks back on a tragic event. In 1993, a factory in Thailand burned to the ground during a workday. Nearly 200 workers were killed, most of them young women. The factory was owned by a toy corporation whose main contracts were with American companies like Toys ‘R’ Us and Fisher Price. The women who lost their lives in the fire were certainly victims of a terrible accident. What may be more alarming, though, and perhaps just as tragic, is that these women were victims long before there was any fire. They were victims of corporate greed and oppression.

            Derber explains that Kader Industrial Toy Company had used the women as semi-slave laborers. They were paid extremely low wages and worked under hideous, dangerous conditions. The women at the toy company were treated more like machines than people – what mattered was that they pumped out goods, not that they were given a decent workspace or paid enough to live. Although local factory management undoubtedly played a part, lack of international workplace regulations and “a new age…of global wilding” (p. 61) were ultimately responsible for the cruel treatment of the Thai workers. Sadly, the women at the Thai factory were not and are not the only human beings subject to such oppressive practices. “The historical record suggests that the Thai sweatshop is more the rule than the exception” (p. 64).

            “The seductions of such cheap and degraded labor have proved irresistible to multinational companies,” says Derber (p. 61). Large American corporations use the free market policy as a reason – or excuse – for exploitation of workers at home and abroad. Technological advances have made it possible for corporations to outsource production and marketing to foreign countries, where regulations on labor are less restrictive or even absent. Though this brings down costs for corporations and, in theory, for product consumers, it also results in the unfair treatment of innocent people worldwide. For example, Indonesian peasant girls are paid less than one dollar a day to manufacture shoes for Nike, and the going wage rate for American corporations in some parts of China is just fifteen cents per hour. In Guatemala, workers may be kept in multinational factories by force until two o’clock in the morning. Why is it that all people are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness unless they are not American?

            Derber compares the new global economic practices to a giant game of musical chairs. This game is regulated as long as the stakes are national, but under global capitalism the rules disappear. Corporations that have established themselves as providers of (low-wage) jobs in communities on the other side of the world use their power as an intimidation tool. They may threaten to leave a community (which would eliminate jobs and effectively cause the collapse of local economies) unless workers agree to lower pay or local governments submit to giving incentives. Entire nations become victims of this practice, in which corporations pit local and national governments against each other in order to gain and maintain economic power. 

            Foreigners aren’t the only victims of globalization. Living standards of the United States’ poor and working class have been pushed down. We are now seeing the kind of “polarized class structure prevalent in the Third World itself” (p. 67). Outsourcing of factories has eliminated jobs for working-class Americans and sent them to places where labor is cheaper. Sweatshops in the United States have seen an increase. Immigrant workers are exploited, as many will work under conditions that most U.S. citizens would refuse to tolerate. Even middle-class workers are being affected, due to downsizing and a corporate loss of interest in individual workers and gain of interest in capital.

The idea of a global economy is not inherently bad. In fact, Derber points out that there are many potential benefits. Created independent of egoism and harsh capitalist practices, a global economy could result in economic growth in impoverished areas and the development of a world community. However, globalization has failed to realize these goals and instead has become a predator to societies and local economies worldwide. In today’s world, the poor become poorer, and the rich become richer.

In chapter twenty-two of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (2004), Perkins explores the devastating effects of globalization from the perspective of an insider.

Perkins differentiates between the “old America” and the “new America”. The old America, he says, was a republic. This republic had a moral foundation rather than a materialistic mindset. It “offered hope to the world” (p. 127). Based on equality and justice, the old America was both an inspiration and a nation willing to fight for its principles. The republic’s institutions functioned as its strongholds. Banks, bureaucracies, and corporations had the potential to make positive changes in the world – perhaps to end suffering and bring about peace. According to Perkins, the old America was on its way to becoming a sort of realistic utopia.

Today’s America is much different. An empire striving to grasp and hold onto global power, it is the enemy of the republic. The empire, based on capitalism, is greedy, selfish, and materialistic. It serves its own interests at the expense of the rest of the world. It seeks to hoard resources in an effort to make its rulers rich and powerful, says Perkins. The global empire is not a bearer of peace and justice – it is a warmonger.

As a self-described economic hit man, Perkins understands the power and responsibility individuals hold within the context of globalization. Working within a system of mass oppression certainly left Perkins with guilt. It also left him with “employees, countries, and shares of stock [added] to [his] various portfolios and to [his] ego” (p. 129). Most Americans are essentially living in the same situation. Though we have a less direct tie to tyrannical economic practices, we wear clothes made in sweatshops, buy products manufactured by workers paid unfair wages, and drink coffee grown on farms stolen from foreign owners and sold by their governments to large, U.S. corporations. We ignore our responsibility and impact on globalization because we live comfortably.

To Perkins, whose involvement in oppressive and cruel practices was direct and obvious, the “money, adventure, and glamour” was not worth “the turmoil, guilt, and stress” (p. 129). He refused to be blind to the consequences of what he had done as an economic hit man as many other men and women had been and continue to be. Perkins eventually realized that working for large corporate interests was causing him to help a handful of the wealthy population and literally kill off many of the lower, working-class citizens in smaller, less powerful nations.

Whether we are working for a huge, multinational corporation or simply wearing clothes made by workers who are paid too little, when we submit to globalization without conscious contemplation of the consequences we are turning our backs on justice and on the “old America”. Capitalism and free trade may seem ideal in theory; played out in reality they lead to harsh and manipulative practices that serve to perpetuate injustice and disparity worldwide.  If we allow ourselves to believe that corporate and bureaucratic actions as they are practiced now are for the good of the global economy, we not only allow our worldwide neighbors to be victimized, but we, ourselves, become victims of globalization’s web of deceit.

Collins and Yeskel (2005) discuss methods to reduce inequality and build a fair economy in chapter four of Economic Apartheid in America. Though their techniques are essentially geared toward establishing justice within the U.S. economy, they can be utilized as tools to create a more fair global economy, also. Collins and Yeskel assert that the first step to reducing inequality is to “remind ourselves that there is an alternative to the current way the economy is organized” (p. 126).  Many people feel hopeless about the state of the United States economy. Others are discouraged by the oppression and disparity caused by globalization. Say Collins and Yeskel, we must remember that historically the U.S. has seen cycles of economic inequality.

Several times in the history of our nation, large social movements have arisen and taken necessary measures to correct the problem. In these social movements, citizens have come together to change the cultural rules, fix what is wrong and make it right, and have organized themselves to become a powerful body.  Social movements may not feel coherent, and not everyone within a movement has the same ideals. At times, participants may become discouraged, as early stages of movement growth are hard to recognize. But when people come together with a unified purpose, eager to address problems, there is potential for change. We need not be discouraged to the point of hopelessness.

Through several phases, a social movement can be successful. The first phase involves cultural preparation and organization. In this phase, messages must be developed that counter the ideas of the dominant culture. In the beginning, attempts at change may be unsuccessful and political support may not exist. Eventually, grassroots organizations working from low-budgets and donated time will begin educating, organizing, and plugging their views to the mainstream media. With this extra push, the movement’s issues may see their way into politics.

In the second phase, the movement builds public support after a trigger event. After the trigger event, the majority of public opinion favors the movement. People join organizations and participate in rallies and actions in favor of the movement. The movement gains media coverage and politicians begin to speak out about the issues.

In the third phase, consolidation, “a movement enters a long period of consolidating the gains, instituting policies, monitoring compliance, and engaging in a larger cultural paradigm shift” (p. 135). Even after cultural acceptance of an issue, it may take years before change is institutionalized and long-term goals can be envisioned and accepted.

Social movements are the result of hard work through many sources. Grassroots organizations, coalitions, research organizations, media, educators, and cultural work are all components of a successful movement, national or worldwide. A large-scale movement to change to reverse the powerful and devastating effects of globalization will require an enormous amount of dedication and work on the part of Americans and other nations around the globe. Finding common ground may be one of the most difficult tasks when it comes to promoting a social movement, as classism, racism, and sexism still pervade dominant U.S. culture, and ethnocentrism separates America from much of the world.

But maybe most important to making a social change is a change in attitude. Although empirical data shows that inequality is not the fault of the poor, Americans still seem to idolize the rich and criticize the poor. Until we stop victimizing those who are already victims of a flawed social structure, we will not see change.

Collins and Yaskel claim that we are in an early stage of movement-building in the U.S.  It will take mass organization, education, and a change of attitude among citizens for the movement to take hold and result in change. The same ideas are imperative to stopping the harmful effects of globalization on both Americans and people worldwide. Victimization is not always the result of one individual harming another by violating the law. It can be caused by entire economies taking advantage of less powerful systems. Injustice does not create itself, so we cannot expect it to cure itself. Globalization will continue to create victims as long as we allow it to do so.

 

           

           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Collins, Chuck and Yeskel, Felice. 2005. “Building a Fair Economy Movement.” Pp.

127-146 in Economic Apartheid in America. New York, NY: The New Press

 

Derber, Charles. 1996. “U.S. Business vs. Us: Global Capitalism and Corporate

Wilding.” Pp. 61-80 in The Wilding of America. New York, NY: St. Martin’s

Press, Inc.

 

Perkins, John. 2004. “American Republic versus Global Empire.” Pp. 124-130 in

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler

Publishers, Inc.