It’s a Global Thing, You Wouldn’t Understand

Inside the high-powered free-trade conference rooms, the rest of the world can seem very, very far away

Image: Andrew Lichtenstein

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


As delegates from 34 nations in the Americas and the Caribbean prepare to gather in Quebec City for the April 20-22 Summit of the Americas — a conclave designed to lay the groundwork for an eventual free trade zone from Hudson Bay to Patagonia — I find myself thinking about a meeting I attended last fall in Washington, D.C. I’d flown in from my home in West Texas at the expense of one of the nation’s largest philanthropic foundations to participate in a three-hour roundtable discussion on globalization.

Seated around the table in the private dining room of a swank hotel near Dupont Circle were a dozen or so brand-name academics and journalists — State Department types shuttling to think tanks, think-tankers shuttling to the State Department. As near as I could tell, I’d been invited as the author of Mollie’s Job, an account of the effects of globalization on two women: Mollie James, a Paterson, New Jersey factory worker who loses her job when her plant relocates to Matamoros, Mexico, and the young Mexican woman, Balbina Duque, who inherits that job. (See the Mother Jones magazine article on James and Duque).

The point of the meeting, other than munching on salmon and caramelized onions and fresh field greens, was to assist the foundation in identifying areas in which it might “contribute meaningfully to public and political discussion of globalization.” To that end, the foundation’s resident pollster asked us to opine about his proposed “global public opinion survey.” Did we think it worthwhile for the foundation to sponsor a poll to gauge public attitudes toward globalization? If so, how should such a survey be structured? What themes, issues or specific questions should be addressed?

I nodded in smiling agreement at most of the sentiments expressed, even when the Washington Post business reporter said, apropos of nothing in particular, “I think everyone here has been to China more than once.” It was such a great non sequitur that six months later I continue to use it. “See them clouds?” the cowboy in line behind me in the express lane of my hometown grocery inquires of the cowboy behind him. “Think we’ll get some?” “I think everyone here has been to China more than once,” I soothsay. The Stetsons nod affirmatively. Really. Try it sometime.

Where was I? Yes, the global survey: how to elicit the views of affected citizens around the world. Focus groups, someone said. Interviews with “opinion leaders,” another volunteered. “What about peasants, campesinos?” asked a former foreign correspondent. “Why bother polling campesinos?” scoffed the perfectly pleasant and coiffed gentleman on afternoon leave from the Council on Foreign Relations.

The sentiment was seconded by a chipper Young Turk across the table, an up-and-coming pundit who enjoyed quoting from his own writing. (“As I say in my Times op-ed piece…”) The foundation, he said, would just spend a lot of time and money in jungles and rural areas trying to elicit the opinions of people who wouldn’t understand the questions and issues anyway. The Turk said this with a tone of such absolute authority, it surpassed arrogance.

My first impulse was to stomp out of there, but I refrained — there was, after all, an honorarium to collect. “You’re kidding, right?” I blurted instead. “Look, I’m not sure why I was invited here, but I took my invitation as a proxy for the women I wrote about. And I can tell you that to sit here and categorically declare that workers don’t understand the consequences of free trade, don’t understand the degradation of their environment, of their civil rights and civil liberties.” I trailed off, face flushed, lips pursed, not quick enough on my feet to finish with a flourish.

A few days later I asked Mollie James what she would have said. “You think I don’t get what happened to me, brother?” she replied. “You think I don’t know that by paying Balbina slave wages, they could take away my job?” Judging from the official pronouncement leading up to this weekend’s summit — preparations included the selling of event sponsorships to global corporations — organizers indeed assume that the Mollie Jameses and Balbina Duques don’t know, and wouldn’t understand.

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE

We’re falling behind our online fundraising goals and we can’t sustain coming up short on donations month after month. Perhaps you’ve heard? It is impossibly hard in the news business right now, with layoffs intensifying and fancy new startups and funding going kaput.

The crisis facing journalism and democracy isn’t going away anytime soon. And neither is Mother Jones, our readers, or our unique way of doing in-depth reporting that exists to bring about change.

Which is exactly why, despite the challenges we face, we just took a big gulp and joined forces with the Center for Investigative Reporting, a team of ace journalists who create the amazing podcast and public radio show Reveal.

If you can part with even just a few bucks, please help us pick up the pace of donations. We simply can’t afford to keep falling behind on our fundraising targets month after month.

Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery said it well to our team recently, and that team 100 percent includes readers like you who make it all possible: “This is a year to prove that we can pull off this merger, grow our audiences and impact, attract more funding and keep growing. More broadly, it’s a year when the very future of both journalism and democracy is on the line. We have to go for every important story, every reader/listener/viewer, and leave it all on the field. I’m very proud of all the hard work that’s gotten us to this moment, and confident that we can meet it.”

Let’s do this. If you can right now, please support Mother Jones and investigative journalism with an urgently needed donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate