The Myth of Emerging Markets

The Myth of Emerging Markets

There are several puzzles for kids that involve guiding our attention. The trap is always something very obvious that grabs our attention, preoccupation, or concern to distract us from what is important. A hat and a box so we can’t see the movement of the magician’s fingers. It’s odd that the first to guess are usually the ones who don’t necessarily want to guess or be the first, but the good observers.

For example, if a well-known and respected politician tells us from the screen: “We all understand that the economy comes first” and those of us who don’t understand anything immediately believe what “we all understand” , although actually economy always comes first in everything and for everyone. This is a classic example of manipulation.

Political analysis in recent years has increasingly referred to “countries” or “emerging economies”, almost always with a consistently positive connotation, pointing to the possibility of development for those who were previously backward and poor. A very simplistic view is applied, comparing the traditional economic empires to their former colonies or semi-colonies, and then the story is built on opportunities for development and growth for all.

And the mere fact of the usual semantic confusion of “the countries” with “the markets” suggests that this is a political trap. The trap is called neoliberalism.

If we look for the origins of the term “emerging markets” we will find that it emerged in the 1980s when the Pinochet military dictatorship gave Chileans courses on “popular capitalism” and the reputable international press lied to the world about “Chilean Economic Miracle” (as it lies today about Russia and Ukraine) and Francis Fukuyama wrote his menacing millennial delusions about the “end of history”. The term “emerging markets” was coined by World Bank economist Antoine van Agtmael and so it was decided to refer to those countries that were characterized by their rapid economic growth, together with their ongoing internationalization and sometimes industrialization.

One of the world’s largest banks, BBVA, says: “Experts predict that by 2050, six of the world’s seven largest economies will be emerging markets.” Its rapid growth brings with it a challenge: sustainability. The roadmap consists of sound governments, investments by multinational corporations that help expand sustainable criteria, and conscious citizens.” And then on its official site, under a futuristic photo reflecting sustainable modernity or modern sustainability, it says: “The World Bank has no doubts . In 2050, 85% of the world’s population will live in emerging markets. And the Global Compact, an initiative of United Nations promote the goals Sustainable development (SDGs) in the corporate sector admits that half of the opportunities for sustainable economic growth lie in these developing areas.” “Serving these markets today – officials assure – enables them to position themselves in the markets of tomorrow and enables the companies at the same time to make a contribution to overcoming the challenges of sustainable development.”

It’s okay that unlike people, banks have no doubts. We thinking and doubting beings have an opportunity to reverse history whenever we realize we are threatened.

What is special and most egregious about neoliberalism is that it fails to recognize the difference between a country (and, when it takes over or controls, a state) and private enterprise. That is why it is so logical that a beautiful speech about progress and opportunity for all, within the bounds of its logic, inevitably leads to prisons, torture, wars, censorship, the destruction of culture, the abolition of education, and ingenious commercial strategies to eliminate the excess population for the god Mercado.

One of the main tasks of the media controlled by the transnational corporations was to convince us that rapid economic growth should be the ultimate goal of our miserable life and that increased consumption would meet the basic needs of every human being.

The same was done by the Spanish-language media in Latin America in the 1980s, and the same was repeated by other media, literally translating this speech into Russian in the 1990s. That was the most poignant way of putting it, putting an end to all philosophical discussions and ethics of mankind and paving the way to artificial intelligence, as ours (intelligence) clearly has not reached us.

It is very strange that whenever the topic of “Emerging Markets” is discussed, they almost always talk about their markets and great business opportunities and almost never about the human development of their people. The great master of the market economy, Augusto Pinochet, spoke of the drip theory and asserted that the richer the richer were, the more crumbs from their table would fall onto the table of the poor, who would therefore have to take care of the rich.

I really like the idea of ​​developing countries America, Asia, Africa and Oceania, which yesterday were very poor and totally dependent. I just don’t believe mechanical economic growth through the magic of money alone can bring about human development, that of beings who think, feel, and dream of anything other than new consumer credit or personal success in perpetual competition with others.

The “emerging markets” defined and cataloged in this way by various international financial institutions, and whose number usually does not match for reasons of political affinity, are very diverse in their cultures, traditions and social models. Applying the same economic logic to all, as demanded by the corporations and governments they control, means the destruction of their peoples over time, even as their states formally achieve their highest macroeconomic goals.

What do we do now with what is really urgent, what is humane and ethical? Although the shell is shiny and everything is thriving due to the economic growth of our countries, which used to be “backward”, have now become too “advanced” … but advanced, where to?

By Oleg Yasingsky/RT

Post views: 22