Theodor Roosevelt defined the role of developing countries best, that the responsibility of 3rd world nations is to supply labor and raw materials for Western nations to consume. This has pretty much been the case and the US has taken military action (in Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, Indonesia) to ensure that this status quo is upheld. This is why most manufactured goods have little 'Made in Vietnam' or 'Made in El Salvador' marking on them.
Many countries' foreign policy has been very linked with their economic growth from the time of the cold war and into today. Conflicts have actually been started"primarily during the cold war"in south American and Indochina due to CIA plotted coups of democratically elected leaders. The reason behind this was that their domestic economic policies would not cater to the rapid globalization undergoing in the US and other western nations' economies. This economic shift in many 3rd world countries devastated their populations. South Americans began only growing cash crops for export to the global markets leading to huge famine. In Chile the US actually installed the Fascist dictator Augusto Pinochet after a CIA involved military coup overthrew the democratically elected leader.
What this does to the workforce, both domestically and internationally is worse. Businesses who lobby for what is known as free trade agreements effectively allows them take the production jobs to countries overseas. The reason they would want to do this is that the US workforce have conditions. These being a certain number of hours worked a week, compensation for workplace accidents you get the picture. Now if these companies want to do business overseas? thats fine. If they want to take jobs away from their own country? Ok lets say thats fine. If they want to exploit the workforce over there too, ok lets for arguments say ok thats ok too. BUT AT LEAST the government should not subsidize after all this. But yet they do.
It would be somewhat redeeming...