[Politech] Competitive Enterprise Instit. on the "New Protectionism"

From: Declan McCullagh (declan@private)
Date: Mon Jan 12 2004 - 07:30:33 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "[Politech] Richard Rahn on markets, monopolies and government abuse of power"

    ---
    
    Subject: CEI's C:spin-The New Protectionism
    Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 11:38:23 -0500
    From: "Richard Morrison" <rmorrison@private>
    
    CEI C:\Spin
    
    
    
    This issue:  The New Protectionism
    
    
    
    By Neil Hrab
    
    Warren Brooks Fellow
    
    CEI
    
    1/07/2004
    
    
    
    By all indications, 2004 should be a banner year for America’s movie, TV 
    show and music producers. DVD players continue to become more popular 
    around the world, and this increases chances for consumers everywhere to 
    enjoy recordings of American TV programs, rock videos and films. The 
    International Recording Media Association projects projects global 
    production of DVDs could grow from 2.7 billion discs in 2003 to 7 billion 
    discs by 2008. If that forecast holds true, that means that before the 
    first decade of the 21st century is up, American movie studios, singers and 
    others could be earning as much as $70 billion per year from global DVD 
    sales alone.
    
    Most Americans see the billions of dollars in entertainment that the US 
    exports each year as a benign form of free exchange. Foreign consumers can 
    buy copies of American motion pictures, concerts, etc., and absorb American 
    culture without having to leave home. The money they spend supports 
    American jobs and bolsters the US’ balance of trade. Everybody wins.
    
    But a growing number of foreign governments, in developed and Third World 
    countries alike, don’t see this as a win-win situation. While consumers 
    everywhere from Tokyo to Timbuktu may lap up American popular culture, many 
    of their rulers and leaders see it as an annoying form of cultural 
    pollution. As one former Canadian prime minister put it, “images of America 
    are so [globally] pervasive…that it is almost as if instead of the world 
    immigrating to America, America has immigrated to the world, allowing 
    people to aspire to be Americans even in their distant cultures.” It's hard 
    to see the harm in individuals deciding, of their own free will, to adopt 
    aspects of American popular culture (fashion, slang, etc.), depending on 
    their preferences -- but let that pass for now.
    
    One proposed solution for this alleged American cultural onslaught has 
    emerged. Through an inter-governmental body called the International 
    Network for Cultural Policy International Network for Cultural Policy 
    (INCP). This alliance wants to pass a global treaty that would declare 
    “cultural goods and services” to be “distinct” from “ordinary goods and 
    services,” with a “specific nature” that must be “respected.” That doesn’t 
    sound very threatening, but such a treaty could hurt America’s ability to 
    export its cultural products.
    
    Once INCP’s hypothetical treaty is passed, it would guarantee that trade in 
    cultural products be exempted from global free trade talks. This, in turn, 
    would allow foreign governments to start imposing measures reducing 
    consumer access to American entertainment products. (Many American allies 
    throughout Europe, as well as Canada and Mexico, already have such measures 
    on the books.) The passage of a global cultural protectionist treaty would 
    make thus it impossible for the U.S. to press for further liberalization in 
    global cultural exports in future trade talks. The treaty would act as a 
    shield for protectionist actions wrapped in stealthy rhetoric about 
    preserving “cultural diversity.” If all goes according to plan, INCP aims 
    to open negotiations on the treaty in March 2004 and secure its adoption no 
    later than the autumn of 2005.
    
    The Bush Administration has been quiet about INCP’s quest for global 
    cultural protectionism. The longer the U.S. delays its response, the more 
    it feeds the cultural protectionist camp’s hope that it can use weight of 
    numbers to force Washington to accept its specious arguments. In order to 
    cure INCP of this illusion, Washington must commit itself to global free 
    trade in cultural and entertainment products, and vow not to support any 
    initiative that undermines this goal. Time is running out.
    
    
    
    C:\SPIN is produced by the Competitive Enterprise Institute
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    Politech mailing list
    Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jan 12 2004 - 08:10:36 PST