Much of the anti-globalization movement’s creed is based on sentimentalism, platitude or exaggeration - relying on flimsy, coincidental
or one-sided evidence.
The complicity of the modern media
The arguments of the anti-globalization movement make great copy. People like to tune in to reports on the broadcast media and read
stories in the newspapers which enable them to sympathise with a victim of a
cruel and unjust world. The media can increase its viewing, listening and
readership by playing to this human capacity for sympathy.
The anti-globalization movement can therefore use the media to its advantage. It can supply a glib
explanation for a set of circumstances which makes the busy reporter’s job
far easier.
Anti-liberalization
Opponents of globalization rightly identify free trade as one of its causes. Much of their activity therefore centres around attempts to prevent a
freer trading world. This explains their opposition to global economic institutions such as the World
Trade Organisation and the General Agreement on Trade in Services. Anti-globalization and anti-liberalization go hand in hand.
Health scares
Because health is an emotional subject, generating scare stories about people’s
health is a favourite tactic of campaigners. In recent years, the media has willingly reported stories about the
adverse health effects of foods, drugs, chemicals, computers games, rain,
smoke, electricity, silicon, radiation and many more. Many such stories have, on closer examination, turned out to be
exaggerated or untrue. This series is not concerned directly with these so-called
health scares.
Healthcare scares
This series is concerned with the examining the main arguments that have emerged
against the liberalization of trade in healthcare services across the world.
It takes the novel approach of ignoring the emotional or sentimental
content of each argument. Instead, it seeks to test the arguments against the criteria of validity, evidence,
causality and utility.
The series reveals how many of the arguments deployed by anti-globalization
campaigners turn out to be nothing more than “healthcare scares”. Every
month we will analyze arguments employed by opponents of healthcare
liberalization and offer an intellectual counterweight to these arguments.
Those of us who passionately believe in the capacity of human beings to improve
their lives through free market activity know that in practice, the market
is not perfect. But we also
know that you can only bring about improvement by trying new methods – be
they clinical, managerial or financial. The global liberalization of healthcare does not offer a panacea but
it does at least offer people the freedom and the opportunity to make the
world a healthier place.
Adrian Pepper, Executive
Director, GBRI
