So'nggi o'n yillikda kapitalizm xalqaro taraqqiyot sohasida hukmronlik qilib kelmoqda. U iqtisodiy taraqqiyotni butunlay o'z qo'liga olgan va o'z formulasini dunyoga majburan joriy etgan. Xitoy, Janubiy Koreya, Tayvan, Singapur va Gonkong kabi Osiyo "yo'lbars" iqtisodiyotlari liberalizmni qabul qilib, rivojlangan davlatlar sifatida muntazam ravishda namuna qilib ko'rsatilmoqda. Xalqaro valyuta jamg'armasi va Jahon banki sanoatlashtirish hamda liberal iqtisodiy g'oyalarning tarqalishi an'anaviy iqtisodiyotlar va jamiyatlarni o'zgartirishini e'lon qilgan. Bu ta'sirlar kambag'al davlatlarni Sanoat inqilobi davrida G'arbdagi sanoatlashgan davlatlar boshdan kechirgan taraqqiyot yo'liga o'xshash yo'lga solishi kerak edi.

The last three decades have seen Capitalism dominate the international development scene. It has completely monopolised economic development and enforced its formula upon the world. The Asian tiger economies of China, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong are shown regularly as successful nations who adopted liberalism and progressed. The IMF alongside the World Bank proclaimed industrialisation and the diffusion of liberal economic ideas would transform traditional economies and societies. These influences would place poor countries on a path of development similar to that experienced by Western industrialised nations during the Industrial Revolution.

Bugungi kunda dunyo aholisining aksariyati uchun qashshoqlik holatga aylangan. Dunyoda uch milliard kishi kuniga ikki dollardan kam pulga yashaydi; yana 1,3 milliard kishi esa kuniga bir dollardan kam pulga yashaydi.

Today poverty is the state for the majority of the world’s people. Three billion people in the world live on fewer than two dollars a day; another 1.3 billion people live on less than one dollar a day.

1,3 milliard odam toza suvdan foydalana olmaydi; uch milliard odamda sanitariya xizmatiga kirish imkoni yo‘q va ikki milliard odam elektr energiyasidan foydalana olmaydi. Liberalizm aslida dunyodagi boylik tafovutlarining va ko‘pchilik dunyo aholisi duch keladigan qashshoqlikning sababi bo‘lgan. Liberalizm G‘arb dunyosining qolgan dunyo hisobiga boyishiga olib keldi. Liberalizm qashshoqlikni kamaytirishga hech qachon yordam bermagan, aksincha, unga hissa qo‘shgan; shu sababli uchinchi dunyo mamlakatlarida liberal iqtisodiy siyosatning davom etishi kambag‘allarning yanada kambag‘allashishiga olib keladi.

1.3 billion have no access to clean water; three billion have no access to sanitation and two billion have no access to electricity. Liberalism has actually been the cause of the wealth disparities in the world and the poverty the majority of the world’s people face. Liberalism has resulted in the Western world feeding off the remainder of the world. Liberalism has in no way helped alleviate poverty, it actually contributed to it, and hence any continuation of liberal economic policies in the third world will result in the poor getting even poorer.

Liberalizm G'arbda hatto katta boylik tafovutlarini ham yuzaga keltirdi, buni faqat AQSh va Buyuk Britaniyaga qarab ham ko'rish mumkin. Masalan, Buyuk Britaniya 2005 yilda 2,2 trillion funt sterling miqdorida boylik (YaIM) yaratdi. Bu oldingi yildagiga nisbatan o'sish edi, liberal iqtisodchilar uchun esa bu odamlarning boyligi ko'payganini, ko'proq sarflay olishlarini va demak, baxtli bo'lishlari kerakligini anglatadi. Ammo agar biz eng pastdagi 60...

Liberalism has even created huge wealth disparities in the West and this can be seen by looking at just the US and the UK. The UK for example generated wealth (GDP) of £2.2 trillion in 2005, this was an increase from the previous year which for liberal economists means people have more wealth, have more to spend thus they must be happy. However, if we look at how much the 60

Buyuk Britaniya aholisining million kishisi bu yaratilgan boylikdan bahramand bo'ldi. Qirollik daromadlar va bojxona xizmati (HM Revenue and Customs) ning 2005 yilgi statistikasi shuni ko'rsatadiki, eng boy 10% aholi millat boyligining 50% dan ko'prog'iga egalik qiladi, aholining 40% esa bu boylikning atigi 5% idan bahramand bo'ladi. Bu esa aholining aksariyatini hayot tarzini moliyalashtirish uchun qarzga botishga majbur qildi, shu sababli Buyuk Britaniyada iste'molchilar qarzi 1,3 trillion funt-sterlingdan oshib ketdi, bu esa haqiqiy iqtisodiyotdan ham ko'pdir. AQSh vaziyati yanada og'irroq: AQSh yiliga 13 trillion dollarlik boylik yaratishi mumkin, ammo milliy qarz 8,5 trillion dollarni tashkil etadi. Bu shuni anglatadiki, AQSh fuqarolari hayot tarzini iqtisodiyot yaratgan 13 trillion dollar hisobidan emas, balki qarzga olingan pul hisobidan moliyalashtirmoqda. 2005 yilgi Garvard hisobotida hisoblab chiqilganidek, aholining 10% i boylikning 71% iga egalik qilgan, eng yuqori 1% esa 40% ni nazorat qilgan. Boshqa tomondan, quyi 40% aholi millat boyligining 1% idan kamiga egalik qilgan.

million population of the UK received of this generated wealth, 2005 statistics from HM Revenue and Customs show that the richest 10% have more then 50% of the nation’s wealth and that 40% of the British population shared in only 5% of this wealth. This has resulted in the majority of the population resorting to borrowing to fund their lifestyles and this is why UK consumer debt is more than £1.3 trillion, more than the actual economy. The US situation is even worse; the US may generate $13 trillion a year in wealth but national debt is $8.5 trillion. This means US citizens are funding their lifestyles by borrowed money rather than the $13 trillion the economy generated. In a 2005 Harvard report it was calculated that 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth, and the top 1% controlled 40%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth.

Shunday qilib, liberalizm hatto rivojlangan dunyoda, bir asrdan ortiq erkin bozor sharoitida yashab kelayotgan mamlakatlarda ham ulkan boylik tengsizligini yuzaga keltirdi.

Hence liberalism has created an enormous wealth disparity even in the developed world who have lived under free markets for over a century.

G'arbiy dunyoning o'zi bugun targ'ib qilayotgan siyosatga butunlay qarama-qarshi siyosatlar bilan rivojlangan. Kembrij universitetining professori Xa Joon Chang o'zining "Narvonni tepib tashlash" (2003) nomli ulkan asarida barcha sanoatlashgan mamlakatlarning rivojlanishini hujjatlashtirgan va deyarli har bir holatda himoyachilik siyosati rivojlanish strategiyasining asosiy qismi bo'lganini ko'rsatgan. Ushbu hikoyadan kelib chiqadigan rivojlanish jarayoni qiyosiy ustunlikni maksimallashtirish emas, balki hisoblangan bozor buzilishlari orqali qiyosiy ustunlikni yuqori qiymatli mahsulotlarga o'tkazishdir. Buyuk Britaniya va Qo'shma Shtatlar holatida bu bozor buzilishlari dastlab mustamlakachilik va qullik shaklida yuzaga kelgan. Ammo bugun AQShda bozor buzilishlari qishloq xo'jaligi va po'lat sohasiga berilgan subsidiyalar shaklida davom etmoqda, bundan tashqari hukumatning biotexnologiya va mudofaaga ulkan xarajatlari ham bor, ular asosan ushbu tarmoqlar uchun subsidiya vazifasini o'taydi.

The Western world themselves developed with policies completely opposite to what they are propagating today. In his groundbreaking work, Kicking Away the Ladder (2003), Professor Ha Joon Chang of Cambridge University documented the development of every industrialised country, showing that protectionist policies were a fundamental part of development strategy in almost every case. The process of development that emerges from this story is not maximizing comparative advantage but rather shifting comparative advantage to high value goods through calculated market distortions. In the case of the UK and the United States, those market distortions originally came in the form of colonialism and slavery. But market distortions continue in the US today in the form of agriculture and steel subsidies, not to mention the tremendous government spending on biotechnology and defence, which largely serves as a subsidy for those sectors.

Demak, liberalizm uchinchi dunyoda taraqqiyot uchun to'siq bo'lib, yechim emas. U uchinchi dunyo qashshoqligining bevosita sababidir.

Hence liberalism is the obstacle for development in the third world not the solution. It is the direct cause of poverty for the third world.