Understanding how all the crap goes down in the world requires an integrated approach; there are no single reasons for things. Answers are complex but not very complex.
Ultimately the problem is that humanity has departed the natural scheme and hence defeated evolution, not by stopping it but by reversing it. That is called "de-evolution" or devotion by many (including the 80s band) but is actually called evolution by those who support the "blood model" of human development. They dominate the Wikipedia, and provide good examples where they show that cruelty provides benefits. When confronted with the obvious reality that the global summation of continual cruelty is causing the whole world damage, the argument is that the destruction of the world is a natural process of evolution: circuitous logic.
Fortunately the discovery of specific empathic neurons in humans, whales, and elephants, defeats this argument. Evolution has created compassion at a neural level along different evolutionary paths, easily proving that compassion is the goal of evolution, and not blood. Chaos theory, the beauty of fractals almost supports evolution with an "intelligent design" model.
Integrating the neurological empathic model in supporting behavior models can be complex, but has proved impossible in online discussions because the "blood model" supporters tend to get violent, which suggests that they themselves lack these important neurons, or theirs' are dysfunctional.
My feeling, even in 2000, was that American corporations exported US jobs to China and India because those nations are historically repressive, where repression gives capital what it whats: unquestioned cooperation, rather than negotiated collaboration. That easily explains China as communism today provides capital with a beaten-down rank and file.
The absorption of technology jobs into India is a little more difficult to explain in these terms, since all technology workers are well paid within their economic contexts. Still, management is not looking for arguments, they want cooperation with their plans, as illogical as they may be. The Indian culture is based purely on a structure that punishes upward mobility, and rewards compliance with a better "next life." If you are an upper-caste Indian, in effect a light-skinned descendant of the dominant ancient Aryan invaders, then your compliance is rewarded with riches--resources drawn from the nearly purely poverty-stricken Indian sub-continent. This arrangement could only please American capital; it is the best of all worlds. It is a culture based on compliance that supports a purely capital model in a way that can only be found in a purely preserved ancient culture, one that has not been impacted by the modern thoughts of freedom initiated by Christ and the Buddha. (It is interesting that both Buddhism and Christianity thrive everywhere except in their birthplaces.)
Capital is ancient; it is defined by the ancient Roman empire, and by showing how Indian "Aryan" has control over American technology, we show how capital predates Rome. Modernity started two to three thousand years ago, with the initial development of compassionate religions. Religions older are purely capital-based, and many capital-based religions have formed since then, such as Islam's perpetual expansionist violence. Their enemy Israel also predates compassion, and these two preserved empires continually threaten to bring down the world--both are to blame, and neither can change.
The big change has been the adaption of empathy in human thought, and the biggest change is happening right now: neurological proof of how we work best. This is both new and old, but not ancient. Ironically, the most empathic cultures are the Tribally Native, and they are the oldest. But in our culture they are presented as modern in both art and music. In art we see the cubist revolution; in music "post punk" or super-modern is usually Tribal.
In our society native tribal constructs are found in the family, the community, and many unique individuals. So complying with nature, rather than capital, is deceptively easy. It means giving self-determination to local communities, and slowly reducing the pyramidal economic structure that is usually called a ponzi scheme on OpEdNews.
A key component of my argument comes from Michael Moore's Roger and Me, where he shows how the top of the capital structure has zero, or perhaps negative, empathy for the worker. This is mathematical in its simplicity; the structure above the worker is twice as large as the worker base; I am sure you have seen this in communist literature.
Decentralization simply eliminates this this inefficiency. What happens to the discarded management levels then? Well, it is happening right now, and they appear to be adapting to failure, and they are attempting to flip burgers.
What we need to do is reopen the factories they closed, and put them on the line. They may think this cruel, but as I am hopefully successfully showing; they are mechanical in nature, and should adapt well to serial production with us more "feeling" people guiding their lives.
