Prometheus 6

Trying to pay off one of those I.O.U.s, I find that James' distaste for the term "cultural imperialism"

I have issues with the term "cultural imperialism." It occurs, but the phrase can be interpreted very broadly. Also, it implies a sort of nation-culture identity, as if cultural diffusion is a monstrosity if it crosses national boundaries.

…requires a clearer statement than this (mine):

Even Japan, the model for such head transplants, is dealing with the social, political and economic repercussions of flipping its economic model after World War II.

I think the best approach to take is to explain what I see that I'm calling cultural imperialism. It's very possible I'm not using the term the way it's generally used.

When a nation joins the world-wide free market, it is on the terms set by developed nations. That's because developed nations own and control the market, as well as flex all the enforcement power.

Decision-making in the two financial bodies is far removed from the principle of one country-one vote.

The 46 sub-Saharan African countries, for example, have only two executive directors representing them at the World Bank and IMF, while eight northern nations have a single executive director each.

Directors from countries of the Group of Seven (G7) most industrialised nations now control more than 60 per cent of votes at the bank and fund, while the U.S. administration has veto power over any extraordinary vote.

The bank and IMF each have 184 board members from developed and developing countries and 24 members who represent countries or groups of nations.

That system has deprived more populous nations like India and China, which combined represent more than 2.3 billion people of the world's six billion people, of an influential say while giving countries like the United Kingdom, France and the United States greater clout.

Because NO ONE actually wants competition (in fact, that's a good way to recognize the whole deregulation scam is a scam—any business claims to support a law because it increases competition is lying, both about its reasons for supporting the law and the effect they expect it to have), those terms will be offered to those the owners of the market feel will be of benefit to themselves.

Sometimes that's raw material. Sometimes that people to buy their stuff. In either case, left up to the IMF and World Bank all the emerging economies will emerge just enough to provide service for the developed nations of the world.

Archer Daniels Midland says they see a future where everything grows where it grows best…and they sell it, of course. They envision a world where everyone else's growth depends on exports…which will put them in a situation similar to Japan's sooner or later. In fact, I suspect Japan has taken this long to become unbalanced because they joined the game while Europe was rebuilding.

As I wrote this, I realize "cultural imperialism" isn't the right term. Economic sphere of influence is better; economic gravity well is almost exact.