>>[snip]
>>>>Most of us ex-ACTUPer's are alive, well and back to work. So we don't have the time anymore. Plus the issue has passed. Except for some environmental concerns I actually think globalization is a good thing. (ducking...) Okay, I've become part of the "system". :)
>>>
>>>Good for you. But it's just pissing the rest of the world off, and will bite you from behind later.
>>
>>Some people do that straight up, into the air, and then wonder why it is always raining. ;-)
>
>In this case, the rainfall will come from the children of those who felt the most of the globalization's benefits - namely, the aforementioned rest of the world. It won't come soon, but it will come. You can fool some people some time, ..., but you can't pretend they're not hungry when they starve. Look at a small sample at http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=10706

mmmm.... are you aware of a cure for AIDS, or a psychology that would convince folks to remain faithful to their spouse or chaste if single? I'm not, and I've been told repeatedly that "you can't legislate morality", even though we do it all the time in other areas of behavior.

Even here, in the USA, the latest drugs are losing their effectiveness due to mutations of the virus. The AIDS community has spent a large amount of time and money selling to the public the idea that AIDS wasn't communicable. If they are correct then what your story says is that folks are spreading that disease by their behavior behavior, not some western plot aimed at genocide. Now, in South Africa for example, infants and babies are the targets of sexual assult because the preditors believe they are AIDS free. All the money in the world won't cure that epidemic because it is being spread by diliberate behavior.

Folks starving due to dought or war, usually things beyond their control, is a greater concern to me. When we (the USA and Allied countries) tried to do something about it in Somolia, for example, we end up getting shot at and killed by the people we are trying to help. So, why bother?