Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Tania Bruguera: The contemporary economic system is corrupt because it´s a system regulated by the monetary profit. And it´s precisely regulated by the [inaudible] of wealth and it´s almost as if it was a system in which one hoards objects and not knowledge, in which one doesn´t hoard other things. I think that one of the [inaudible] to show would be that this same economic system has in itself to [inaudible] all its structures in which one can, one develops and what are the bases and laws [inaudible] and develop. But it would also be good that creating a regulated system had importance, the importance and when I [inaudible] I say a system which regulates that it´s important and why it is important and for what it is important, that not only the coin was a criteria and with the hoarding of [inaudible] materials but that this system had importance, importance to the actions they are doing and it´s a system which also regulates the ethic of exchange.

by Tania Bruguera

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Tavis Smiley: Economic systems are not my area of expertise. But one doesn’t have to be an economist to know that our economic systems are inherently corrupt, always have been. And I suspect for the foreseeable future will be until we start talking about the kind of priorities that we have, or quite frankly the kind of priorities that we need to have but in fact don’t have. How we go about dismantling it, again, not something that I can address with any level of expertise. But I think that just acknowledging that our systems are corrupt and getting more people to raise those kinds of questions, not just at IMF conferences but indeed in the barrios and the ghettos and the streets of our cities and towns around the world, trying to raise this issue higher up on the American and on the world agenda, I think is important. But just acknowledging that these systems are corrupt and starting to have some real dialogue about it, I think, can advance the cause of creating a system, whatever that might be, that is more fair and that is more equitable. But I think it starts with valuing the least among us. Minimum wage. Livable wage for those who are doing the real work, the hard work of making cities and countries well. But it’s about our shifting our priorities, and that’s something that we have not yet found the courage to do.

by Tavis Smiley

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Tegla Loroupe: Answertext will be available soon.

by Tegla Loroupe

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Thenmozhi Soundararajan: There is no question to me that the current economic system is corrupt. I think what we really should look at is like what are the levels of action you can have. Once again, I think one of the themes I’m always going to be talking about is instead of going global or local is to look at ways that you can act locally that will then have impacts globally. One way, I think, is to really think about really shifting our language around how we want to talk about our action toward the system. I don’t think we should talk about lifestyles that are alternatives to consumerism. I think we need to talk about lifestyles that are parallel to materialism. What would be those parallels? Really think about the definitions and the vocabulary that you use, so that every time you talk about that you subvert the ideology, you subvert the mythology that they created around making what is unjust palatably and morally for us. I think that what’s also really important is that we move away from binaries. I think there’s a sense as movements that you have more street credibility if you’re in the streets versus people that are doing electoral work. I think what we need to do is be strategic and use the strategy that make sense, use that tactic that make sense for our strategy at the moment. I think there’s no question right now we need to take back our governments. I think that as young people we feel like we have very little electoral control, and even as countries’ populations are getting younger, the people in power are getting older. So, I think we need to re-engage with the political system, but not in a way that de-radicalizes us. I think we need to take the slogans and language that we have in the streets into their boardrooms and into their house of representatives, but as leaders and as peers. I think one thing that really happens in this conversation is that we get caught up into a frame around age where young people are framed in the media as apathetic. Young people are not engaged in these issues. But almost all of the anti-consumer movements that I’ve seen and all of the movements that result from corporate globalization and their impacts on the ground are fundamentally led by intergenerational and youth-led movements. And so, I think we need to take that political power that we have and translate that into an ideological vision that we manifest in a decentralized way in our local communities. In the ways that we may like locally raise our own food, that we might share services with each other or barter that work, and really look at the creating of a culture that’s a parallel to the lifestyle materialism and consumption that they’ve set up for us.

by Thenmozhi Soundararajan

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Tu Weiming: Economic system that has evolved over a long period of time, it’s not the question about corruption, it’s the question that the economic system is predicated on various kinds of forces and these forces actually unintentionally have led to all kinds of negative consequences. And the – there are many, many economic systems functioning and the most powerful economic system is the one that is embodied by the United States and of course by some of the western countries that’s so-called free trade market economy. Unfortunately, we know there's no perfect market, there's no comprehensive market, there's no equitable market. As a result, those who are powerful become the beneficiaries of this process and those who are marginalized, those who are eradicated to the background will not be able to really understand and to take part in this particular process of benefiting from the economic system. So this economic structure is flawed in a very fundamental way, but it’s too idealistic or even romantic to believe that this system can be easily dismantled. Of course it’s not good enough simply to fix that or incrementally. Their conceptual and total re-conceptualization of the economic system is absolute necessary. One feature of globalization as a result of science and technology, especially communication and information technology, is that the economic system is not only receptive to these kind of changes, it is necessary for a vibrant economic system to be responsive to these kind of systems, this kind of science and technologies. And if this spread of science and technology is fast, is comprehensive and then there are possibilities of restructuring this particular system, and it is not dismantling.

by Tu Weiming

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Udi Aloni: First answer is yes. The answer is it corrupt? Definitely it is corrupt. In order to change it we have to go deep to how the system work. I think even though Marxism failed it is a productive thing. We should learn a lot from the criticisms in it's had on the capitalist system. The corruption is so inherent that it's not built by one conspirator, one corrupted person, one corrupted corporation. There is something built in that it's using and the greed is the main system that the West is working. I think all of us have to try to think from the beginning. To go back to as [Valtrebinimen] said we should go back to revolution that fails and try to fix them. I know that alternative to capitalism failed and that the main power of capitalism is that there is no other alternative. Of course there are other alternatives. I'm sure that some of them exist in a Marxist way of thinking. But more to understand religion, humankind, human needs. And it's a long process of revolution and evolution together. This system has to end. And one way is just to fight it. And another group should rethink what we can offer to make it better. Maybe in a certain time we should have again conviction that it can be changed, because the system built itself to hold the corruption forever by making us very pessimistic. They gave us conspiracy theories so we think we cannot fight the power. They make us very cynical. And they taught us that there is no other alternative. I think it's time to bring hope that there is alternative. That there were radical changers. That we should start this today. And there are tools in the past already that help us understand how to do it.

by Udi Aloni

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Valentina Melnikova: Yes of course, modern economics is corrupt because business cannot develop itself freely and often depends on decisions of officials. And it's clear that positive decisions can be bought. My answer would be that we don’t need to destroy anything. We can develop economical systems so that they could serve not only business owners but also to the benefit of all population on Earth. Of course, it would take very much time to change this, and great efforts are necessary which often bring no success. But we cannot get the Paradise on Earth in one single day. Conflicts, popular discontent and changes in economical systems move our life. The reducing of corruption is a question of time and of people’s endeavours. How could we achieve that time doesn't reinforce corruption but reduces it? This is the question of our intellect, our arrangement with business and politicians.

by Valentina Melnikova

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Vesna Pesic: Answertext will be available soon.

by Vesna Pesic

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Viviana Figueroa: I think that the economic system, actually our system, the economic system of my village [ referring to the participation of everyone of the members] know what we do with our economic resources, the system isn’t per se corrupt. In the general level maybe you can say that’s a corrupt system… but no generalisation, because there isn’t only one reality, there are many realities, because there are many cultures, there are many villages in our world. If our system is per se corrupt, how must we [re-explain / rebuild] it. I think that …. with the [simultaneous participation], with the participation of everyone in an informative way, in an engaged way. In the case of the indigenous villages this participation was actually refused for us. In the case of my country, Argentine, in the year 94 the constitution was reformed, specific rights for the indigenous villages were [re-conceded], our right to participate in all the areas which concern us was [re-conceded]. This was one [exception] of the rarely respected occasions; it’s very difficult that we indigenous villages have that active participation, because we have 31 villages and everyone of these villages has a different vision. It was very difficult for the provinces (“Provincias”), for the national state per se to establish an efficient and permanent mechanism relating to the participation in all governmental matters and in this way to the promote transparency and to progress actually [in internal terms]. So I think that the participation is very important and [there is still more space]. The indigenous villages, we have obtained participation. To grant this participation there are growing important progresses in national as much as international level, but this participation, this right wasn’t still completely granted, isn’t it? So if we really want to obtain something in the economic system, to [re-explain / rebuild] it and to create new alternatives, it will be necessary that we ourselves obtain a completely efficient participation of every social participant / actor, including all its cultural diversity and visions.

by Viviana Figueroa

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Wim Wenders: This cannot be better seen anywhere else than in the work of Sebastian Salgado. This great contemporary photographer has started the immense and utterly necessary work to change our perception. The great myth of capitalism is that it allows a single person to become stinking rich. I did already answer that. Is the kind economic system inherently corrupt? It can only be dismantled on the smallest level in your own life by tackling any signs of it that you have incorporated into your own behavior, into your way, your very own economic structure works, in your family, your own company if you employ others. And it can be dismantled on the largest level super-nationally, globally in the structures of world economy. In order for that to happen, huge masses of people have to be informed definitely, and this table is helping. The Internet could be such a new global source of information and a global solidarity that might follow out of it. Is that wishful thinking? Not necessarily. Informed people can become a very powerful world influence. Disinformation, infotainment are the greatest obstacles to change. But again corruption; fight it around yourself first; fight it on the smallest level. And if you see this slightest change in your family, at your workplace, in your own bones, act against it, give an example, denounce it.

by Wim Wenders

Sep 9, 2006 10:40:00 AM cite

Yungchen Lhamo: Yes, the system is corrupted. Because I think that the [inaudible] and think for different reason, yeah.

by Yungchen Lhamo