The taxi driver at Washington Airport detoured the trip away from the established route to my hotel thereby avoiding probable delay caused by any possible anti-globalization demonstrations. This decision resulted in an increase in the cost of the trip to which the driver alerted me. I was asked to advise him whether to pay him in accordance to the meter or on what the trip would have cost had we followed the more direct route.
I left the decision to him. I thought and accepted to pay whatever he considered correct and fair. He went for the (meter) which was, as advised by him, at least 10 percent higher than the normal fair.
The decision was for me to make. However I accepted to delegate it to his judgement on a matter relating to both of us. He had to go for one of three alternatives. Instead of charging the average, or the lower he went for the higher cost.
This reminded me of the Arabic saying not to allow your beard to be held by somebody else’s hand otherwise his justice will favor him rather than you.
How much justice, by the wealthy industrialized countries, go to them when arranging their relationship with the greater number of countries and bodies of the under privileged world depends on how many of the beards are held by them.
The economics of globalization make a lot of sense. Achieving its results is hard to see or feel. It seems that the industrialized wealthy countries are competing among themselves to streamline their relationships and making the maximum gains from the underprivileged developing economies.
In dealing, as a block, with individual less developed countries, the developed are united to (squeeze) as much as they can get away with. Between blocks there seem to be great clarity who does what. When it comes to delivery, governments of the (rich) countries become determined to receive on their terms and before delivery.
These developing countries, for the past fifty years, followed western economic ideas and ideals in conflict to their own inherited customs and traditions. The outcome is highly criticized by the West, which unfairly blame it on the underdeveloped for poor results achieved.
The developing countries have gone a long way to demonstrate economic responsibility more ably and seriously. However, the developed are dealing with the issues of globalization among themselves and towards developing countries with colonialist aspirations rather than capitalistic.
The line between the two is too thin to be recognized. The terror of the gun is not more lethal than taking the (bread) of the hungry. It adds insult to injury to mobilize the world after an undefined enemy but neglecting the real target. Globalization is being shot in the foot by the hand that claims to feed it.