Maybe I am dense. I cannot figure out the difference between Bhoddi's response to the thread on Coke and the standard neo-liberal line. I would characterize the thrust of the rest of us to be wrestling with the idea that while outright theft is wrong, other forces offer the possiblity of either dangerous entanglements in a market economy that will prove disastrous or the possiblity of using technology to improve the life of the people. [Awkward sentence, but I hope that you understand]. The libraries are filled with examples of advisors selling developing countries on disastrous schemes and technologies. Also, marketers have sold such people on commodities, which only give the aura of westernization. I recall Johnson's Wax company having a successful African sales campaign selling floor wax to peasants withdirt floors. Parker pen used to sell pen caps to people in India [without the pens] so that people could signal that they were literate. In short, the sizzle without the steak. Again, I do not pretend to know the answer. We westerners often appear stupid when visiting far off lands in not understanding the ways of our hosts. They too misunderstand what we have to offer. Now, maybe Bhoddi is saying something deeper that I realize. To say, let them eat cake [drink coke] because it tastes good sounds to me to be something like saying let the multinationals determine our relations with the rest of the world. Have I missed something? I probably will not respond unless I hear something that appears to be different from what I have seen before. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
