No one seems to be writing opinion pieces quite the way I would, so I decided to do it myself.

The name? Taverns are places where one goes to discuss the interesting events and things in the world, so this is my tavern.

I will offer my views on politics, economics, and whatever else strikes my fancy.
I will occasionally publish the entire article from another journal for purposes of causing discussion.

 

Can the World Effect US Policies?

The US under the Bush regime has been remarkably unresponsive to international opinion of their policies, and much of the American population has supported them. One response has been to suggest a boycott of American products.

Perhaps with a boycott of American Goods?

First, do you really think that there would be no economic reaction? Any single nation which tried to establish such a boycott could easily be singled out for economic retaliation. Second, such a nation which tried to stop buying products to the US would quickly find that some other more poor nation would be glad to pick up the slack. As two examples, I suspect that Bangladesh and Red China would each be quite happy to pick up the economic slack. The internal pressures from groups in those nations who were not allowed to sell their products (because of the inevitable retaliation) would be very likely to makes efforts to overthrow any government that attempted such a boycott. The power to conduct such a boycott simply isn't there at this time.

Second, international law includes the GATT, which makes such boycotts illegal.

What Else Might Work?

In my opinion, any efforts based on economic or political power will be useless. However, the US is probably open to an effort to provide honest and trustworthy information from the rest of the world. I suspect that a program similar to Radio Free Europe or Radio Marti would really pay major benefits. Because of cost considerations, American media organizations have been reducing their international bureaus for decades. Many in the WW II generation of Americans had spent time outside the US and were interested in what happened there. That is no longer the case, and Americans really don't know what TV doesn't show them. As a result, Americans generally have become much more insular than they were 50 years ago.

Suppose the European nations were to create a wire service similar to Reuters, but subsidize it. Smaller and more vulnerable US media organizations would be delighted to get reliable, honest and interesting news at a low cost. Right now the US depends on the Associate Press, United Press International (and one of those two is owned by the Moonies - I don't remember which one, but it is the one Helen Thomas quit.) and Reuters. In TV there is CNN and FOX News. Both are conservative. ABC CBS and NBC have all been cutting their overseas bureaus for years. So have ALL of the major newspapers, while cities have found that competitive newspapers are bought up and closed down, leaving a monopoly newspaper. The monopoly newspaper immediately raises advertising rates and cuts international bureaus and investigative journalism. When you are in a monopoly position, these costs to do not pay for themselves.

Or

Another suggestion would be to subsidize the overseas bureaus of smaller US news organizations. Don't go after the large news organizations. They are already committed to supporting the US government policies. Instead, compete with them and support their competitors.

The key to success would be to provide news that as unbiased as possible. The organization would have to build trust in the manner that Radio Free Europe did.

Since the US is such a militarily and economically dominating power in the world today, but is also quite provincial, insular, and relatively ignorant of the real conditions outside the US, this would seem to be almost essential. Personally, I would start with a totally unpolitical TV show that showed how the middle classes ~live~ in nations such as Thailand, India, Mexico, Central America, and other developing countries. I would also take a set of polls to determine how Americans believe foreigners in various nations actually live, then provide real facts instead of the fiction on which most Americans view their beliefs.

After a period of time, the local politics would become relevant to those who follow such news.

Like Radio Free Europe and Radio Marti, these efforts would never become profitable. They would always have to be subsidized. The education of the American voters would be more than worth it.

posted by Richard at 3:03 PM