Wednesday, January 26, 2005

Davos, Social Security, Bush   The anti- US sentiment is building fast.   A Multi-Polar World - The Financial Times Weighs In by Ben P Over a month ago, I posted a diary arguing that the Cold War-style American century was over and that the world is entering a new multi-polar era. Well, it seems the Financial Times might agree. Yesterday, London's FT published a raft of opinion pieces arguing this point, including a piece by Michael Lind that I will quote a length below and which also happened to appear in today's FT US edition. (Thanks to Steve Clemons) What exactly does this mean? Well, I'd suggest the following: the US is not considered the "leader of the free world" in any meaningful sense by anybody outside its borders Thus, the US no longer commands global hegemony - BUT, it is still the world's most powerful nation   Pasted from <http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/1/25/191022/863>   Sometimes a great new peson view is priceless, inn theis case at the World Economic Forum in Davos.. I think he speaks for many of us.   my first WEF The WEF 2005 in Davos is my first WEF meeting, and it is quite a new experience. I am one of the Technology Pioneers for 2005, which I thought was somewhat of a big deal until I realized that I am surrounded by some of the most important people in the world today. It is pretty amazing to just randomly bump into Ted Turner and then amble into a talk by Tony Blair, followed by a short shuttle ride where I happen upon the Secretary-General of the ISO. These are all people who have a major effect and influence on my life, as well as on the lives of millions of others. What also stands out is a sense of grand self-importance and purpose, as well as pomp and circumstance. Is it real? Can the world really be made better by the people here, or is this just a giant networking event that allows those in power to stay there, and to keep contact with their peers. There are lots of flowerly words and speeches ("talk is cheap" comes to mind, but here talk is expensive!). This is a Big Issues meeting where topics such as Poverty and Global Governance and Islam are being tackled. But I wonder if many of the participants here would tackle poverty (in the lower case), such as helping out a homeless man in the street as they step out of their limo and onto his box that he sleeps in, or actually do something (like stop genocides such as happened in Rwanda) when it needs to be done, and not simply condemn it afterwards. I was also struck by the easy mingling of religious leaders with politicians and businessman - the differences seemed nominal. It reminded me a bit of the section in Animal Farm where the pigs, who had become more equal than the other animals, were standing on hind legs and mingling with the humans. Should religious leaders be so at ease with the power elite? What would Jesus or Moses have done? Would they give a speech or lead a protest against corruption? Would they have dinner with a powerful CEO or would they shame him into distributing corporate profits to those poor and starving so many of us talked about at the sessions here. What strikes me most is that the group at Davos truly has the full power to make any change in the world that could be for the better. The group assembled here has the financial resources to end poverty, or at least end poverty as we know it. It really could happen. But the power of the collective here is not fully harnessed. It is suggested that things can happen, and some things do, but the potential left at the table is beyond comprehension. This is like a group of the world's best surgeons meeting in a conference room while a patient lays on the table next door. For days the surgeons discuss what to do, they eat, they drink, and they enjoy themselves. Meanwhile the patient lays dying. Finally, at the end, one of the surgeons looks at the patient and maybe does a little work, but then he moves on to other things. It is a great honor and very exciting to be here and mingle among the smartest minds in the world. It is also a great disappointment to realize what could be, and to know that the practical reality will ultimately be a small drop. Why? -Rony Posted by Rony Abovitz on January 26, 2005 at 03:35 PM in Current Affairs | Permalink   Pasted from <http://www.forumblog.org/blog/2005/01/my_first_wef.html>   On Social security re indexing. The issue here is that prcies will rise faster than incomes. And so a shift from cost of living from prices to incomes will mean a decline in value relative to the market.   A better link to Davos videos is at <http://clients.world-television.com/worldeconomicforum_annualmeeting2005/default_new.asp>   And Billmon is back on line, stronger voice than ever,  http://billmon.org/       Posted by douglass carmichael 10:13:00 PM    comment []