Environmentalism vs. Economic Hit Men

     I have been reading a few books about economics and environmentalism and how the two interact with each other, and I thought it fitting to speak a little about the subject.  HOODWINKED: An Economic Hit Man Reveals Why the World Financial Markets IMPLODED-and What We Need to DO to Remake Them by John Perkins was one of the most intriguing reads as I started off in my research, but I was soon disappointed as I delved further into his work.  The book starts off almost as a James Bond movie full of secrecy, deceit, and even some questionable sexual encounters, but as the book moves forward the axe the author has to grind becomes all to apparent.  The question remains, when finishing reading a book such as this, why does it seem like every author has to fall to one extreme or the other when it comes to capitalism?
     John Perkins portrays himself as a misguided and completely gullible pawn in the greater game of competing economics theories, and after years of deceiving government, he finally comes to the light that what he is doing is wrong.  He started his career working for a highly secretive firm named MAIN that was  in the business of selling high dollar IMF loans to third world countries in exchange for allowing major corporations to come in and develop infrastructure that he claimed would help the people of these poor nations.  In retrospect he claims that he knew the loans were bad, and that eventually they would bankrupt the country and force the sale of economic assets to foreign corporations.  It is very well worded, and at times even compelling, but when you dig through the rhetoric, it is apparent that he is mistaken in his assessment of the outcome. 
     First, he contends that the companies came in and built the infrastructure and schools only to eventually exploit the natives of these countries, but even if true,  would it not be better for these countries to have these necessities than to have none?  And further more, even the countries that did default on the IMF loans, many are now refusing to payback the loans at all.  Also, would it have been better for these countries to not have had the jobs that were provided by the building of these vital structures? 
     His most laughable argument is in the low wages paid to third world countries by large international corporations.  Perkins argues that these workers are treated so terribly and that they make just pennies a day, but then later on in the book he recommends that people only buy responsibly made products from places such as Canada and Denver, CO.  So the question I have for the former Economic Hit Man is, are the poor third world citizens better off with no job and us buying our products from first world countries, or with the amount of money they're making currently?  I don't disagree with the fact that they should be paid more, but we do not live in some utopian fantasy, and never will!  Take whatever good we can from situations and don't take everything from the poor who would rather work for pennies instead of nothing.
     Another humorous hypocrisy is the love that Mr. Perkins shows for China and its' government, and the absolute hatred he has for the 'mutant capitalism' that America practices.  He goes into great detail about how wonderful China is, and how they're attempting to go green because they planted a few trees by the side of the road.  He also claims that the government in China has promised to go to electric cars, and that when the Chinese government promises something, it keeps its' word.  Great detail is paid to the glorious architecture and extreme economic growth that has sustained China and has made it the world's second leading economy.  He believes their Socialist government should be praised for how it controls its' finances, but in the same breath he slams the United States for its' over consumption and 'trinket' economy.  To be such a 'well known' economist you would think he would understand that without America purchasing all those trinkets from China, their economy would collapse!  And why does he praise a country that is hell bent on imitating American consumption by buying millions and millions of iPads and cellphones?  He fails to acknowledge the northeast corner of China which is referred to as the 'Rust Belt' due to all of the run down factories, and also fails to acknowledge the millions of starving farmers that are being taxed to extremes to where they can't even feed their familes.
     In conclusion, I found the book a very easy read, but highly prejudicial and lacking any economic depth.  If someone enjoys arguments, such as, that since a flowers leaves are wilting, then we should move a highway (which is suggested in this book), than this is a must read.  But for someone who is looking for a common sense answer, and not a communist utopian fantasy, then I suggest a different read.  God Bless!

By Jeffrey Brandon Lee