It’s a nice, elegant theory, but very simple, even black and white. There are so many other interest groups, like socialist governments who want to suck off profits to pay for their burgeoning welfare states.
Though he says it’s not a political debate, it is. He’s clearly a socialist.
Also, unfortunately, the “prescription” for curing corporate influence on an international level is worse than the disease. Why would you implement bone-headed economic policies that weaken everyone, including the wealthy, middle class, and poor, like Hugo Chavez? His economy is splintering:
How many people have died in communist governments in the interest of the advancement of the proletariat? Answer: 100 million people. Modernly, look at Hugo’s restrictions on the free press for a contemporary example.
Lastly, notice what he doesn’t talk about: India and Asia.
These countries have worked with Western Powers, adopted modern capitalist economies, and are now competing and beating this “Empire.”
It’s the recalcitrant third-world socialists who have destroyed their economies, repressed (and murdered) their people, and taken private companies and businesses that are far more destructive than a US led economic system that gives out loans in return for consideration and takes out an occasional left-wing nutjob who goes too far in repressing his people.
I typically find that left-wingers lack an ability to really examine issues in a detailed fashion. They say ALL war is bad, but never examine what is stopped by war or they say American corporations are bad, but don’t examine the record of past or contemporary socialist governments in the arenas of human rights or economic progress. In sum, I’ll take a Korea or Taiwan anyday over a Bolivia or Venezuela.
