Washington Week: Student Voices (O)

COLUMN: The world needs less poverty, not more voting rights
By Jay Richards
Daily Utah Chronicle (U. Utah)
04/12/2006

(U-WIRE) SALT LAKE CITY — The duty of the United States, according to the Bush administration, is to advance freedom around the entire world. Indeed, Bush said, "The greatest use of American strength is advancing freedom."

What is unclear, however, is what Bush means when he uses the terms "freedom" and "democracy."

The problem of the Bush administration and all those who seek to expand voting rights is that they are focusing on the wrong form of democracy.

With half of the world's population surviving on $2 a day, the people of the world remain untouched by rhetorical cries for increased democratic participation in the broader developing world.

A large majority of Earth's population suffers not from political repression, but from economic exploitation.

The answer of the Bush administration, and its predecessors, for the devastating poverty that plagues developing nations is always the same: the removal of trade barriers and trade liberalization among nations.

The problem with this is that free trade has increased the amount of poverty in the world, not decreased it. As a concept, "free trade" is ill conceived. The problem with free trade is that the majority of poor people in the world do not possess marketable skills that massive international capitalism requires for success. Instead, free trade creates a climate in which industrialized nations suck the labor, resources and capital out of developing nations.

Furthermore, the United States generally takes a double-standard approach to free trade. While we demand that other nations remove their trade barriers, we continue to protect our own industries from facing competition from developing nations — thereby crippling what industries a developing nation does have in place.

But theoretically, Bush is right. Democracy is the answer to the poverty that plagues most people in this world. But the type of democracy that is needed is economic, not political.

The answer that rice farmers in India, truck drivers in Africa and Wal-Mart workers in America are looking for is increased control over their own workplace and environment. Instead of "expanding" political democracy to other nations, U.S. foreign policy should be focused on expanding democracy to other facets of society — especially the economy.

As with political elections, the people who hire and fire administrators and officers in an economic corporation ought to be the entire workplace, not simply the elite.

As outsourcing has shown us, everyone is impacted by economic decisions, not just shareholders and CEOs. In essence, the creed of progressive democracy should be, "What affects all, should be decided by all."

Only then will real, meaningful political participation exist in this country and abroad. And only then will peace prevail over war.

Poverty is the worst form of violence — and the answer to all of these problems lies within the hearts of each of us. Real, meaningful, deliberative democracy that encompasses all areas of society will give each of us a voice over what happens in our lives. The poor people of this world work so hard and receive so little. Democracy is their hope. Democracy is their future.

[ Back to Student Voices ]