economic integument to put the fleshnof power on its ideological bones.nThe exponents of economic globalismndefend it with the argument thatnforeign investments and free trade creatennew jobs and provide sources ofncapital otherwise unavailable for economicngrowth, that the technologicalnand economic integration of the planetnwill engender peace, fraternity, andnopportunity for all human beings, andnthat democracy and human rights willnfollow such growth and opportunity asnthe night the day. Even if a newngeneration of Japanese warlords shouldncome to power, the globalists argue, itnwould be unlikely to bomb Pearl Harbornif the Japanese already own most ofnHawaii.nOf course, if the Japanese alreadynowned most of Hawaii, it would benproblematical to what extent Hawaiincould be said to be part of Americananyway. And Japanese ownership ofnthe pead of the Pacific is not out of thenquesdon. Earlier last year, HonolulunMayor Frank Fasi complained that Japanesenpurchases of nine billion dollars’nworth of real estate in the islands hadncaused the price of housing in his citynto rise 50 percent between 1987 andn1989. “They’re buying up our homesnand farmland,” the mayor said. “ManynHawaiians can no longer afford to livenhere.” Foreigners, mainly Japanese, alreadynown nearly 75 percent of thenofl’ice space in downtown Los Angeles,nup from 64 percent in 1988 and 51npercent in 1987. In the District ofnColumbia, foreigners own 23 percentnof the office property; in Maine, 10npercent; and in Atlanta, 25 percent. Innthe Farm Belt of the continental UnitednStates, the Japanese bought upn218,000 acres of farmland in 11nmonths in 1988 and 1989.nWhatever the material advantages ofnallowing foreigners to buy up our land,nclose out our industries, steal our inventions,ntake over our jobs, and moveninto our country, the economic globalistsnseem oblivious to the noneconomicnimplications of their ideologynand its practical consequences for thenindependence and integrity of the nationnand its culture. Their large errornconsists in their adherence to an economicndeterminism that they are thenfirst to denounce when it pops upnamong Marxists and other socialists.nGlobalists assume not only that eco­nnomic motivations are the chief springsnof human action, that the desire fornand pursuit of wealth and economicnopportunity are what all human beingsnat all times in all cultures and allncountries are seeking, but also thatneconomic considerations are paramountnin evaluating social and politicalnarrangements.nThose assumptions bring thenglobalists close to what both Albert JaynNock and the German free-marketneconomist Wilhelm Rdpke calledn”economism,” the “incorrigible mania,”nas Ropke defined it, “of makingnthe means the end, of thinking only ofnbread and never of those other thingsnof which the Gospel speaks.” Nock, anreligious skeptic who was less concernednbut no less knowledgeablenabout the Gospel, held that economismn”interpreted the whole of humannlife in terms of the production,nacquisition and distribution of wealth.nLike certain Philippians in the time ofnSt. Paul, its god was its belly.”nA nation, or even a planet, thatnrecognizes no god other than its bellynwill quickly start wallowing in the ignorance,ncrime, corruption, and avaricenthat today afflicts the United States,nand it will find itself unable to free itselfnof them. “After wealth, science, invention,nhad done all for such a societyn•LIBERAL ARTS-nthat they could do,” wrote Nock, “itnwould remain without savour, withoutndepth, uninteresting, and withal horrifying.”nWhat is horrifying about the planetarynUtopia the economic globalistsnenvision is not so much the impoverishmentnthat may yet be visited uponnthe United States as other nations, lessnenchanted by this dream of days toncome, gain wealth and power at ournexpense, but that Americans, whethernthey gain or lose, will cease to benAmericans at all and find themselvesnreduced to “resources,” stripped of thendistinctive set of norms that unite andnidentify them as a people and dispossessedneven of the memory of how tonmake themselves one. As resources,nthey will become interchangeable partsnin the global economic mechanism,nand their funtions in it can be performednjust as easily (or better) bynworkers from Latin America, managersnfrom Asia, or investors from Japan ornEurope. If whatever remains of thenMiddle America core of the Americannnation and its civilization is to preservenitself from the dispersion and dispossessionnthat the new global economynpromises, it will have to assert its nationalnidentity and interests in economicnno less than in cultural and politicalnterms. <^ncompany, intended to demolish thenA VIEW OF WAIKIKInchurch and build a luxury high-risenFROM A JAPANESE PEW?ncondominium complex on the site. Parishionersnopposed the deal, but the salenHonolulu’s outspoken mayor, Frank F. price — $45 million — apparently wasnFasi, continues his one-man campaign irresistible to the bishop, who claimednagainst Japanese investment in the Ha­ the proceeds from the deal were needednwaiian housing market, which he claims to pay for social .programs.nis responsible for soaring housing values As of late last summer the deal wasnand property taxes.nproceeding but had yet been finalized.nAs reported by The Bulletin of Mu­ In the meantime, a parish delegationnnicipal Foreign Policy, Fasi’s latest target traveled to the Vatican to express itsnis the Bishop of Honolulu, who recently displeasure, while Fasi pressured thenannounced his intention to sell to Japa­ state legislature to enact a bill thatnnese investors St. Augustine Catholic would limit foreign investment in resi­nChurch — just across the street from dential areas of Honolulu. But as thenWaikiki Beach. City officials were out­ 1989 legislative session came to a close,nraged to learn that the likely buyer, the the Fasi-supported bill had been killednTokyo-based Hama Kikaku real estate in committee.nnnJANUARY 1990/11n