First, sorry that I haven’t posted in a good while. I’d like to blame the fact that I’m busy (and I am), but I found time to do it before. I think between finals, a high-tempo work and commuting schedule, and fruitless weekend excursions to New York, I’ve neglected to write even though it’s been bearing on my mind just how much I needed to post something.
And it’s been a pretty crazy last few weeks between the Democratic Primary (I don’t think I need to add anything to the gallons of ink already spilled), global food shortages (one sec), and this terrible natural disaster in Burma.
Real quick note about Burma: initial casualty estimates were in the low thousands, then the tens of thousands, and now we have some reports suggesting that as many as a half million people may have died in the cyclone. Now, it shouldn’t be a surprise to any casual observer that the military junta in ‘Myanmar’ unloads a great plenty of misery and brutality well-enough without the assistance of catastrophic natural events, but neither should it be surprising that it’s even less able to control the situation in the event of such things. Whatever the final death toll, so many people need not have died. The insularity and repressive inefficiency of the Burmese government, at the end of the day, is chiefly responsible for the fallout from this disaster, and even more so given that they have been very, VERY slow to accept international aid. As we speak, and from the very beginning, US naval assets have been standing by ready to move in and begin a massive humanitarian campaign to assist the tens of thousands of people in need of assistance. But, of course, the Burmese government is more worried about maintaining its ugly grip on power than helping see its people through this crisis. Again, no surprises there.
What we should expect, however, is that the awkward two-stepping by the Burmese military regime may weaken their hold on power as never before. Could there be some kind – any kind – of silver lining from this madness? It seems that it’s the best we can hope for.
This isn’t the only point of difficulty in East Asia. Among other things, Asia has been hit the hardest – though certainly not exclusively – by the dramatic rise in food prices. As Derek Murdock has so clearly articulated, this issue lies chiefly at the feet of the US and European governments, whose insistence on ethical posturing has overwhelmed the practicality of keeping people fed. Ethanol subsidies have clearly been a disaster; even if ethanol is part of the solution, the demand-side bumbling by the developed world has sabotaged global food markets, perhaps irreparably. This should make us furious. This, my friends, is what happens when the government’s pompous mandarins believe it can somehow do a better job distributing goods than the market. And they are horribly wrong, and now people are paying for our arrogance.
In other news, Paul Krugman must have been sad to learn that we’re not yet in a recession. At least, he should be, since he has predicted a recession for almost every quarter since 2003; realistically, he’s probably unfazed and banking on Q2. But, he’s wrong now, and there’s compelling evidence to suggest he’ll be wrong then too, along with his sanctimonious cadre of perennial naysayers.
A friend of mine, upon hearing the news, could hardly believe her ears. How can you blame her? The media has been feeding dire predictions of doom for months, and for it to not come to pass seems almost surreal. This, I think, defines political economy.
