Some call it treason – Econlib

It has been disappointing to see that the lessons learned in the first half of the 20th century have now been forgotten, as nationalism grows in many areas. And now we are seeing a repeat of the McCarthyism of the early 1950s. Here it is Foreign Policy:

Not so long ago, consultancies and other information brokers could easily work with different clients in different countries. Just as they talk to competing companies, they advise competing governments. In 2015, when McKinsey senior partner Lola Woetzel hoped the think tank’s book would “provide useful ideas for the planning and development of China’s technology enterprises and government institutions,” she probably didn’t think she was making a controversial statement.

But what seemed inappropriate at the time can now be seen as smoking gun evidence that corporations are helping the enemy.

Senators Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley suggested that McKinsey was helping America’s enemies and should be barred from receiving government contracts. This appears Marco Rubio’s website:

Although the report was written in the strong language of management consultation, it was ultimately an attempt to help the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to control the United States and other countries in high-level fields, including cloud computing, the Internet of things, large. data, mobile internet, robotics, 3D printing, advanced materials, self-driving cars, artificial intelligence, unconventional oil and gas, electric vehicles, energy storage, renewable energy, and human genomic technology. The results go beyond economic competition. The report notes that technology like this “will have a major impact on future wars and the development of the national defense industry.”

The concept of globalization is that international trade and investment is a win-win process—both sides benefit. But when globalization is replaced by nationalism, economics becomes a zero-sum game. Any improvement in China’s economy looks bad for the US, as our relative position drops in global power rankings. As such, any company that trades with the “enemy” is at risk of being considered a rebel.

Ironically, Foreign Policy reports that the most aggressive accusations against McKinsey relate to language suggesting that China would benefit from going down a more communist path:

I Financial Times reported that their China branch was proud in 2019 of its economic advice to the Chinese central government, and a think tank led by McKinsey prepared a letter advising China to “deepen cooperation between business and the military and exclude foreign companies from critical industries.”

In fact, China’s rise as a superpower began when it abandoned Maoist-era communism. After 1978, China began to allow more foreign participation in its economy, and privatized more businesses. If you are an American diplomat, you should welcome China’s return to a state-directed model cut off from foreign investment.

But the biggest problem with this new McCarthyism is that it inevitably leads to an increase in the risk of war, as states stop seeing each other as mutual beneficiaries of economic growth. Back in the 2000s, China’s growth was seen as good news for the US economy, and American businesses increased sales in that fast-growing economy. Today, many people in America view China’s economic growth as a threat, and anyone who helps China’s economy is seen as a traitor in the US.

I do not accept the framework of international affairs. But if the senators really believe their theory, then they might consider giving the Congressional Medal of Honor to the McKinsey administration, for encouraging China to go the math route. Instead, they should focus their anger on people like me, who have given talks in China advocating things like free market reforms, monetary tightening and nominal GDP concentration. These ideas will actually make China’s economy stronger. If trying to develop the economy of a nation of 1.4 billion people makes one a traitor, I am guilty of treason.


Source link