Noam Chomsky: What Is Globalisation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdYwAXZh0ME TRANSCRIPT [for quotations, confirm audio] SOURCE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdYwAXZh0ME Noam Chomsky:  What Is Globalization? *needs proof-reading -------/\/\/   Noam Chomsky: Actually, the best definition that I know, if I can remember, is by a well-known Canadian development economist, Gerry Helleiner, who tried to summarise it in a little ditty, which went something like this (don't hold me to the exact words).  He said: The poor complain They always do But that's just idle chatter Our system brings rewards to all At least, to all who matter [Laughter] Essentially, that captures it.  OK, I can go home. [Laughter] Whenever I say 'globalisation', I mean in quotes:  now, what's called 'globalisation' is one specific modality of international integration. There's nothing wrong with international integration.  That's a great thing. It's nice to meet people from other countries and all sorts of other things. But there are various forms of possible international integration, and the one that's called 'globalisation' is one particular one. Like, it's not the new international economic order that the South was calling for, and it's not the new global system that they're now calling for; it's a different one. This new one, the one that is called, [is] the official one:  you know, the one that Thomas Friedman writes laudatory books about, and so on. Among its other properties are that a country has to open up their borders to free imports, so they have to accept imports from a highly subsidised US, and Eurpean and Canadian, agribusiness which, of course, instantly wipes out domestic production for domestic needs and that means that poor farmers are starving. One thing they can do is flee to the cities, which has the nice effect that they create a massive labour force which lowers wages, and it means that US and European manufacturers, or by now Japanese and Korean manufacturers, who are putting say assembly plants or whatever abroad, can benefit from cheaper labour and, consequently, wages can go down and, in fact, do go down while the economy booms. Mexico's a dramatic case. But if farmers don't move to urban slums to become an excess labour force and try to produce something, it can't be commodities for the domestic market for food, because they will be wiped out by imported goods. So, once again, they become what's known as a 'rational peasant' in the technical literature. A 'rational peasant' is a peasant who understands that you have to produce for export and you have to seek the maximum profit. OK, so you sort of spell that out, produce for export, stable markets, maximum profit. Well, you get the same answer as before:  cocoa, poppies, and so on. And that's what's happening. So, the globalisation and, in particular, the undermining of the attempts of the South 30 years ago to create a form of globalisation directed toward the interests of the developing word -- that means almost the entire world -- one of the major consequences of this (and it's no big secret, you can read it in standard books of political economy and so on), was to greatly accelerate production of what we call 'drugs'. I mean, not the most lethal drugs.  The most lethal ones are produced in places like North Carolina. But what we call 'lethal drugs' here, peasants have been driven to it.  They have no choices. In part by the choice by the powerful states 30 years ago to institute a particular form of international economic integration --  what's called 'globalisation'  -- in preference to another one. One which would have, for example, as one of its properties among many others, things like stabilisation of primary commodity prices and what we call 'the neoliberal programs', like opening up your borders to imports from subsidised agri-export from northern agribusiness that has the same effect. There's a lot more like this. I mean, a lot of the -- what happens to the 'rational peasants', incidentally, after they've learned their lessons properly, you know, they are kind of like the equivalent of going to Harvard or MIT, or  Chicago Graduate School, and getting a degree in economics, so they become 'rational peasants'. Well, once they've learned the lesson, they're rewarded. They're rewarded with helicopter and gun ships that you and I pay for, with chemical and biological warfare and putting experimental new biological techniques of who knows what effect, by what's called here a 'drug war'. That's the reward for having learned the lessons, after having been essentially forced into a particular kind of production by the way globalisation works out. That's one of its less discussed features. Going back to the declaration of the south:  the poor are complaining as they always do. They're calling for globalisation, for international economic integration, but are calling for a form that will be on the right of development and, in particular, the right of independent development. It means no external compulsion. SOURCE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdYwAXZh0ME -------/\/\/ Gerald Helleiner Professor Emeritus (ie. retired professor - fm. L. ēmerērī, to earn by service - TFD) Department of Economics Distinguished Research Fellow, Munk Centre for International Studies University of Toronto 1991 to 1999, Professor Helleiner: Research Director of:  Group of 24 (ie deveoping countries' caucus at IMF & World Bank) http://www.policyinnovations.org/innovators/people/data/07382 *By 'south', I first assumed Chomsky is referring to South America.  But I think he might be referring to the south of the United States, being (presumably) the centre of American agribusiness and perhaps biotechnology, as well?  So it's this US economic sector that would be seeking globalisation (I think). Biotech Industry North Carolina -- abt. 600 bioscience companies that directly employ over 60,000 -- in addition to, 2,000 additional North Carolina industry support companies     http://directory.ncbiotech.org/ -- many world’s largest biotechnology & pharmaceutical facilities are located in North Carolina -- home to:  Bayer (biggest plasma-based factory in world) -- home to:  Wyeth (largest vaccine facility in world) -- home to:  Baxter (largest intravenous solutions facility); -- home to:  Biogen Idec (largest manufacturing biologics facility) -- 2005:  USA 1,415 biotechnology companies, total revenue:  $50.7 billion -- of these 329 publicly held, total market capitalisation $410 billion -- North Carolina:  $3 billion annual revenue -- aiming to build biotechnology workforce at 125,000 in $24 billion industry by 2023 -- global biotech generates $40 billion in sales & expected to grow to $120 billion -- possibly as at 2007 estimate (undated document) - copyright is at 2007    http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-recent/6255 Biotechnology use of biological substances to engineer or manufacture a product or substance use of living systems and organisms -- ie.  use of microorganisms to perform industrial or manufacturing processes applications:  eg. drugs, synthetic hormones, bulk foodstuffs, bioconversion of organic waste     http://www.thefreedictionary.com/biotechnology Thomas Friedman Thomas Loren Friedman b. Minnesota 1953 resides:   Bethesda, Maryland (with wife & family) Jewish:  5 day per week Hebrew school to Bar Mitzvah St Louis Park High School 1968 Israel visit + following high school summers, at kibbutz (Haifa) high school years feature:  celebration of Israel victory Six-Day-War University of Minnesota - 2 years Brandeis University, Mediterranean studies degree (1975) University of Oxford (St Antony's College) -- at Oxford, earns Master Philosophy in Middle Eastern Studies -- Thomas Friedman attended Oxford as:  Marshall Scholar     Oxford University - Oxford England     world's oldest surviving university     Marshall Scholarship     -- post graduate scholarship (USA) for any university in UK     -- along w. Fulbright Scholarship, only broadly available scholarship for UK study     -- considered prestigious scholarship     -- as at current dates:  to 40 from pool of 1,000 selected     -- scholarship was created by the Parliament of UK     -- on passing of:   Marshall Aid Commemoration Act (1953)     -- 'living gift' to USA re post WWII 'Recovery Plan' aka 'Marshall Plan'     --  living memorial to George Marshall     -- inspired by Rhodes Scholarship     -- as well as academic pursuits, aimed to provide insight into British way of life     -- plus strengthen 'Special Relationship' b/w USA & UK         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Scholarship       George Marshall     George Catlett Marshall, Jr.     USA - 1880-1959     scion of an old Virginia family (ie. descended)     Marshall was a Freemason:  by 1941 Grand Master District of Columbia     WWI mentor:  General John Joseph Pershing     -- Marshall posted to HQ of American Expeditionary Force     -- key planner of American ops re defeat Germans Western Front 1918     -- Perishing known for:  training and teaching modern, mechanized warfare             Marshall:     Chief of Staff USA under x2 USA presidents     Secretary of State  - Harry S. Truman     Secretary of Defence - Harry S. Truman     US Army Chief of Staff - WWII     Chief military adviser -  Franklin D. Roosevelt     -- hailed by Winston Churchill for:     -- leadership of the Allied victory in WWII     -- received Nobel Peace Prize in 1953 for the Marshall Plan     -- but US State Dept. developed most of the Marshall Plan (for 'economic recovery')        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Marshall         -- Thomas Friedman married into Bucksbaum family     wife daughter of:  Matthew Bucksbaum (d. 2013)     2011, Matthew Bucksbaum was worth an estimated US$1.2 billion     Matthew Bucksbaum - co-founder General Growth Properties (w. brothers)     formerly US Air Forces -- a cryptographer, New Guinea     BA Economics University of Iowa     family owned chain of x3 grocery stores     1945 borrow $1.2 million for first shopping centre Iowa - expanded into enclosed malls 1960s     own & manage shopping malls throughout USA     120 regional shopping malls in forty states     Revenue     US $3.02 billion     Net income US $994 million     family business struck financial probs. 2008     *value of family fortune SHRANK by 97% since Dec. 2007     2009 Chapter 11 bankruptcy:  largest real estate bankruptcy since 1980     "Unlike most Chapter 11 bankruptcies, existing General Growth stockholders were not wiped out upon the company's exit from bankruptcy" - creation of new company as spinoff: Howard Hughes Corp.     Hughes Corp assets include:  91km squared Las Vegas 'master-planned community, & other shopping centres.     2011-2012, General Growth spun off 30 mall properties into a public company, Rouse Properties, Inc     What?  So it looks like a bankruptcy that wasn't a bankruptcy?     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Growth_Properties     Thomas Friedman -- career as journalist: -- United Press International (London) after obtaining Masters at Oxford -- dispatched to Beirut -- lived Beirut 1979 to 1981 covering Lebanon Civil War -- 1981 - New York Times - redispatchd to Beirut at start 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon -- covered Sabra & Shatila massacre -- won Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting (shared w. anor from WaPo) -- shared win with David K. Shipler - George Polk Award, foreign reporting -- 1984 - New York Times, Jerusalem Bureau Chief to 1988 -- yet another Pulitzer re coverage:  First Palestinian Intifada -- book:  From Beirut to Jerusalem (1989 US National Book Award for Nonfiction) -- George HW Bush admin,  Secretary of State James Baker - covered by Thomas Friedman -- 1992 - election of Bill Clinton:  Friedman becomes White House correspondent for NYT -- 1994 - more on foreign policy & economics - op-ed page NYT as foreign affairs columnist 1995 -- 2002 Friedman gets Pulitzer Prize for Commentary:     -- his supposed clarity of vision on 'worldwide impact of the terrorist threat' -- 2002 - met Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah & encouraged end of Arab-Israeli conflict -- sought normalisation of Arab-Israeli relations in exchange for return of refugees -- plus end to Israel territorial occupations -- Abdullah proposed:  Arab Peace Initiative at the Beirut Summit -- Freidman strong supporter:  Arab Peace Initiative at the Beirut Summit "Several days later, on September 11, all at once Saudi Arabia was transformed from a critic into an object of criticism. It emerged that 15 Saudis were involved in the terror attacks on the United States." "The following February, to soften the criticism, Abdullah invited columnist Thomas L. Friedman of The New York Times to dine with him." "Friedman wrote that he took advantage of the opportunity to tell his host that in one of his recent columns, he had proposed that the 22 members of the Arab League, who were to convene for a summit in Beirut on March 27-28, should offer Israel, in return for its withdrawal to the June 4 lines and the establishment of a Palestinian state, the establishment of full diplomatic and trade relations and the provision of security guarantees." Abdulllah:  "I have drafted a speech along those lines. My thinking was to deliver it before the Arab summit and try to mobilize the entire Arab world behind it. The speech is written, and it is in my desk. But I changed my mind about delivering it when Sharon took the violence, and the oppression, to an unprecedented level." " " ...  prince had authorized [Thomas Friedman] to quote his words. President Bush welcomed the initiative. So did prime minister Ariel Sharon. He sent a message to Javier Solana, the European Union foreign policy chief, and to President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, asking them to arrange a meeting between him and senior Saudis, either openly or in secret. At the end of February, Sharon offered to deliver a speech before the Arab League and present his conditions for peace. The Arab leaders rejected the idea on the grounds that it was just a maneuver to win recognition without giving anything in return. " Haaretz - March 6, 2007 http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/what-arab-initiative-1.214741 GLOBALISATION Thomas Friedman -- 2004 visits Bangalore, India + Dalian, China. -- globalisation discussed as far back as 1999 (The Lexus & the Olive Tree) -- writes follow-up analysis:  The World is Flat (2005) -- argues:  countries must sacrifice degree of economic sovereignty to global institutions -- eg. capital markets + multinational corporations -- referred to as the 'golden straitjacket' -- capital markets = financial markets -- buy / sell:  long-term debt or equity-backed securities -- Friedman an advocate of globalisation -- concerned re lack of independence re US energy -- Saudi's described as 'pushers' (oil producers) to consumer 'addicts' -- pro US energy independence -- ensuing petrodollar depletion PLUS growing population of young -- will coerce authoritarian rulers out of Middle East -- Friedman sees this as best way to:  spread stability & modernisation in autocratic & theocratic region -- would supposedly ease world tensions caused by energy demand -- which is worsened by India and China as emerging economies -- opponents of free trade say:  Friedman does not consider purchasing power of domestic labour as key driver in economic output -- Friedman says when low-skill & low-wage jobs are exported to foreign countries -- advanced, higher-skilled jobs will be 'freed up' and made available for those displaced (by outsourcing) -- Friedman views American immigration laws as too restrictive & damaging to economic output CENSORSHIP Friedman called for the U.S. State Department to --  "shine a spotlight on hate speech wherever it appears" -- said the governmental speech-monitoring should go beyond those who actually advocate violence -- ie should censor those Friedman considers 'excuse-makers' for terrorists (apologists) blaming third-party SERBIA During illegal 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia Friedman:  1999: "Like it or not, we are at war with the Serbian nation ... You want 1950? We can do 1950. You want 1389? We can do 1389 too." Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) labelled Freidman's remarks "war-mongering" and "crude race-hatred and war-crime agitation". Norman Solomon 2007, says:  "a tone of sadism could be discerned" in Friedman's article.     Solomon, anti-war campaigner     -- behind 14,000 person e-mail petition to govt of Ecuador     -- urging Ecuador to grant Julian Assange asylum     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Solomon IRAQ Friedman supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq: establishment of a democratic state in the Middle East would force other countries in the region to liberalize and modernize. 2003 - Wall Street Journal article:  re lack of compliance w/ UNSC resolution re Iraq 'WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION' Friedman later rebuked George W. Bush and Tony Blair for "hyping" the evidence Big on the 'converting Iraq to democracy' theme, which reminds me of the Goebbels propaganda swing lyrics: "Listen to the BBC, BBC, BBC, Listen to the BBC, tra-la-la-la, Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? Who wants to make free people free?" Friedman 2004:  dismisses the justification for war based on Iraq's lack of compliance with UN Resolutions --  "The right reason for this war ... was to oust Saddam's regime and partner with the Iraqi people ..." -- refers to Arab Human Development report -- claiming lack of freedom, women's empowerment & modern eduction cause of Arab ills -- Friedman's right reason for war was:  to partner with Arab moderates in long-term strategy of 'dehumiliation' and 'redignification'  "Listen to the BBC, BBC, BBC, Listen to the BBC, tra-la-la-la, Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? Who wants to make free people free?" ISRAEL --  according to FAIR, Friedman was explicitly endorsing terrorism by Israel against Lebanese and Palestinians -- Glenn Greenwald and professor Noam Chomsky also accused Friedman of endorsing and encouraging terrorism by Israeli forces -- Belen Fernandez:  Friedman's suggestion Israeli forces unaware re allied Lebanese militias carrying out out Sabra and Shatila massacre while under Israeli guard, contradicts other journalist assessments & observers. -- Belen Fernandez: Friedman most worried about successfully maintaining Israel's Jewish ethnocracy and actively opposing a "one-man, one-vote" system of democracy. -- critics on Israel side as well - eg. re suggestion Israel relinquish territory conquered 1967 -- Friedman wrote congressional ovations re Bibi Netanyahu "bought & paid for by Israel lobby" - sparked criticism.  Friedman suggests a more precise term:  "engineered" by Israel lobby. + more entries [I'm getting bored] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Friedman Arab Human Development Report sponsored by:  United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) platform for 'Arab scholars' Democracy & human rights angle. Education system requires transformation. Report calls for the adoption of time-bound affirmative action - re women contends that this is:  imperative to dismantle structures of centuries of discrimination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Human_Development_Report UNDP f. 1965 to help the economic and political aspects of underdeveloped countries 2013, UNDP’s budget - approximately 5 billion USD -- offices & staff are on ground in 177 countries --  links and coordinates global and national efforts re 'development priorities' of host countries --  supports national democratic transitions --  improving institutional capacity --  educating & advocating re democratic reforms --  facilitates consensus etc. re existing 'democratic institutions' -- works at the macro level to:     -- reform trade     -- encourage debt relief + foreign investment     -- facilitate benefit from globalisation by the poor -- coordinates efforts b/w governments, NGOs, + outside donors -- reduces risk of armed conflicts or disasters NSA surveillance -- Snowden 2013 -- British & American intel agencies NSA targets include:      -- UNDP     -- UN's children's charity Unicef     -- Médecins Sans Frontières     -- Economic Community of West African States   (ECOWAS) -- some criticism re irregularities in finances in North Korea -- mid-2006:  UNDP halted disarmament programs Uganda re human rights abuses -- in forcible disarmament programs carried out by Uganda People's Defence Force -- UNDP criticised [not clear to me why]    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Development_Programme ---------------------- ---------------------- COMMENT Really disliked the Friedman guy, as I was checking this out. Noam Chomsky's likeable and always interesting. Friedman sounds sort of mixed up and all over the place. Gets criticised by everybody. I'm wondering if this is what all White House correspondents are like: ie in the mould of Friedman? Anyway, that's a bit on what was supposed to be about globalisation ... but I went off on a tangent checking everyone out. I've looked at this in one sitting & I'm over it now.   Need a break. -------/\/\/ *I don't get the biotech revenues and estimates at all.  Numbers isn't my thing.  Don't get the comparison between the North Carolina figures & the world figures. *I thought Friedman's formative years, in terms of education and affinity with the state of Israel, was interesting in terms of his later becoming a correspondent re Middle Eastern affairs.  As in, Friedman would surely have a pro-Israel bias, as a result?   *United Nations Development Program, sound like just another way for Western imperialists to control the rest of the world.

Four Horsement - Documentary - Notes Part 2

FOUR HORSEMEN DOCUMENTARY NOTES, part 2 - From:  44:22 - 1:38:53 ........................................................................... https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5fbvquHSPJU#t=319 ........................................................................... Democrats & Republicans beholden to corporate interests. Until this changes, we will never have a government for the public. See:  Top 100 Campaign Contributors [below is Politico's list, selected randomly.  However, this list did not appear in documentary.] Blue billionaires on top POLITICO’s list of Top 100 donors Source:  http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/blue-billionaires-on-top-114151.html ........................................................................... Terrorism see - political language / Orwell ... solidity to wind Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. George Orwell Military intervention in: > Iraq > Afghanistan > Pakistan justified as 'moral obligation' But who are the beneficiaries? 1.  Arms & Military Equipment Sales However, military intervention results in radicalisation. eg. Drone attacks (as opposed to surgical commando operations) seen as attacks on a sovereign Pakistan. 2.  Rebuilding of Infrastructure / Aid (ie loans) Beneficiaries of huge loans = own corporations Infrastructure built does not benefit the majority (benefits the elite); but majority/poor are left with a huge debt. Money goes to Western consultants and companies. Aid is a hindrance instead of a help.  ........................................................................... Is foreign policy based on altruism or in the benefit of corporations / money interests? US evangelicalisation of democracy is riddled with contradictions:  >democracy at the end of a gun >US opposing democratic regimes that aren't democratic in the way US wants them to be Promotion of free market capitalism riddled with contradictions: Countries on the cusp of change, structurally changing, not too free or transparent (opaque), is how the US companies make their money. Wall Street speculators (made billions 'riding the short' / massive short on housing market), but this does nothing to benefit the economy vs free market scenario: eg. benefit scenario = invention of, say, vehicle that is fuelled on grass clippings inventor makes money but society also benefits because of this needed invention  ...........................................................................   London, St Paul's Cathedral backdrop: Goldman Sachs Chairman & mouthpiece, Lord Griffiths, a devoted Christian, defended extortion and bonuses: "I am not a person of despair, I am a person of hope, and I think that we have to tolerate the inequality as a way of achieving greater prosperity and opportunity for all." [not in documentary] out of interest, note also:  Public Must Learn to 'Tolerate Inequality' of Bonuses - The Guardian Above is a self-serving argument. Financiers will twist the worlds of classical economists.  Adam Smith (philosopher, pioneer of political economy) mentioned. Will rely on arguments: 1.  Trickle down economics 2.  Horse & sparrow but by the time the money trickles down to the bottom of society, the money loses purchasing power. The political process is badly flawed (see lobbying), and requires restructure to give more voice to ordinary people and less influence to interest groups and lobby groups. Documentary tried to convey (I think) that terrorists see themselves as 'freedom fighters' and that they are motivated from positions of eg. loss of the farm or fishing waters (as result of Western corporate projects). Therefore, could this also be called 'terrorism': > Corporations > Speculators > Policy makers ........................................................................... Noam Chomsky was also interviewed. If I understand correctly, Latin Americans refer to US intervention in Chile as the 'First 9/11': Chile - 11 Sept 1973 Allende Coup Augusto Pinochet dictatorship installed (1973-1990) economists installed (driving worst conditions in history) Suppression of dissidents:  1,000s of political dissenters imprisoned & murdered Chomsky tried to convey that what was done in 9-11 was bad, but it could have been worse.  The Chile example was given:  as in, government could have been taken down, dictator could have been installed, economy could have been screwed by economists installed etc, but it wasn't. Chomsky: principle of ideology = never look at own crimes Instead:  exalt in crimes of others & our own nobility in opposing them. ........................................................................... [not in documentary] out of interest, note also:  Covert United States foreign regime change actions 1949  Syrian coup d'état 1953  Iranian coup d'état 1954  Guatemalan coup d'état 1959  Tibetan uprising 1961  Cuba, Bay of Pigs Invasion 1963  South Vietnamese coup 1964  Brazilian coup d'état 1973  Chilean coup d'état 1976  Argentine coup d'état 1979–89 Afghanistan, Operation Cyclone 1980  Turkish coup d'état 1981–87 Nicaragua, Contras List source: Wikipedia  ........................................................................... West will export injustice through finance. Root causes of terrorism will not be solved by increasing inequality. If government is serious about combating terrorism, must start with real structural reform on domestic front. "As long as banking empires chase infrastructure and debt deals in pursuit of profit, the West will continue to export injustice through finance, millions more will be displaced, terrorism will thrive, and neocolonialism will continue to end more and more lives around the world." ........................................................................... Resources World is being filled with more and more things: >more people (population growing at rapid rate, eg trippling in lifetime of speaker). >more and more man-made objects. The world is full of man-made capital. But the more we grow the more poverty we create. Royal Dutch Shell view of the future (ending year 2075): 1.  Blueprint view.  Bloody. 2.  Scramble view.  Substantially more bloody struggle for depleted resources. Oil supplies are dwindling.  Deep sea drilling for oil is taking place because most easily accessible oil has been found and consumed. Metal resources - new major discoveries are increasingly rare. 40% of worlds agricultural land is seriously degraded, causing volatile yields. Exhaustion of world's resources coming our way. Billions of Earth's population require farming lands; fossil fuels; water. Options (a) sharing resources or (b) combat/struggle/scramble. Shell's bettering on option (b) vs sharing. Antidote is moving from globalisation to localisation, promoting fellowship, responsibility, purpose (ie production vs consumption driven economies). In the growth economy, consumption is a way of life. Growth economy associated with: * military * production of what is not needed Documentary is saying that individual achievement without incorporating the needs of the vulnerable is a myth.  Human affection is missing.  Humans are propelled by affections.  Purpose of life is outside of oneself. [Not certain if I have understood this correctly.  This caring/sharing bit of the documentary was lost on me.] ........................................................................... Progress Systemic problem is being ignored.  Clearing out a few bad apples will not cleans systemic flaws in the heart of the Western economic system. Four Horsemen 1.      Rapacious financial system 2. Escalating organised violence 3. Abject poverty for billions 4. Exhaustion of Earth’s resources The Four Horsemen gallop unchallenged because the cognitive map (shaped by schools, universities and the media) does not encourage us to question norms.  Instead, there is apathy and people take the depressive point of view that nothing can be done and that it's a dog-eat-dog world. We can, however, reach a more equitable society. Disinformation of the neo-classical school of economics is advanced by academia and the media. Education can be a form of mind control.  Banks often fund universities, educational foundations and think tanks.  Ivy league universities only teach neo-classical economics. Learn also about: 1.  Classical economics. 2.  System of money. The money system requires reform as we cannot function on the fiat money system, or it will spell the end of industrial civilisation. The fiat money system is governed by man-made law which is abused. Contrast:  gold standard @ growth of about 1.75% per annum, which is in approximate balance with supply/demand and average population growth, and is beyond the control of politicians. Fiat = chronic debt build-up.  Debt = form of slavery. Refer to German debt cancellations of 1947 to clean the slate, which would involve wiping debt & wiping savings. Taxation reform required.  Taxation based on consumption, not income. Classical economists - tax reform on resources / consumption. Wage labour (seen as 'temporary) is no different to slavery. Inequity in wages:  those at top 500-1,000 times more than those at bottom.  Commonality of interest is lost in this vast class difference. Hubert Spencer (classical liberal political theorist):  'survival of the fittest' does not apply; monopolists have too much because the system is rigged. Reforms: 1.  independent money system 2.  taxation reform - resources/consumption. 3.  employee ownership of means of production Boundaries can be withdrawn:  eg in the past, selling any chemical as pharmaceuticals, child labour, slavery. Same thing will be true of active money management. Breakdown seen in Depression and again at beginning of 21st Century, occurred because in the name of growth much was taken out of the system by those that contribute very little.  Multi-national corporates and banks will always want to grow without having to compensate the people who actually do the work to produce the surplus. In the past, every time too much was taken by those who contributed little, people rose up to halt the violent practice. Central banks unregulated cheap money, pumped up land values, which created an unsustainable 'asset bubble', in a world that once again operates a rigged tax system that enriches entrenched privilege. Neo-classical economics have ruined life for the bottom billions, tempted everyone into inter-generational conflict and created massive suffering that has no limits. There is a formless Wall Street enemy pervading every element of economic and democratic process: The following have trashed the economy: > central banking > rigged capitalism > land speculation > income taxation > neo-classical economics and have corporatised democracy, stunted progress, perverted the course of human destiny, and compromised the future of this planet. Status quo can be challenged. Essence of American democracy is the repeated confrontation / showdown: 1830s Andrew Jackson beat the Second Bank of United States. 1900s Teddy Roosevelt beat JP Morgan & JD Rockefeller. 1930s Franklin Delano Roosevelt beat everybody on Wall Street. If this Four Horsemen scenario not addressed, the next implosion will be on a scale unimagined. COMMENT I really enjoyed this documentary, but I'm not certain I've understood it all.   The 'caring and sharing' section is where I got lost.  Also, I'm not that clear on how a different taxation system makes a difference, but I know nothing about economic theory so it's not surprising I don't quite get that bit. I've provided links of look-ups within the notes about the documentary, for ease of reference (for my own benefit).  Found this interesting, while doing my look ups: [Look-Ups, not in documentary] Marshall Plan (refused by Soviet Union & its allies, to avoid US control over economies) Noam Chomsky wrote that the amount of American dollars given to France and the Netherlands equaled the funds these countries used to finance their military actions against their colonial subjects in East Asia, in French Indochina and the Netherlands East Indies respectively. The Marshall Plan was said to have "set the stage for large amounts of private U.S. investment in Europe, establishing the basis for modern transnational corporations". [Wikipedia] Germany's debt restructuring (London Debt Agreement 1953) mentioned here: Germany's post-war economic miracle Only 16pc of polled Germans currently think Greece should be the recipient of some form of debt cancellation from the eurozone. The irony of Berlin's obstinancy on debt relief may well be lost on some. Following the end of WWII, the London Debt Agreement of 1953 saw the abolition of all of Germany's external debt. The total forgiveness amounted to around 280pc of GDP from 1947-53, according to historian Albrecht Ritschl. The cancellation, along with an extension of its repayment schedule, allowed Germany to return to the financial markets, and become part of the IMF and World Bank. The London agreement also helped set in motion the country's incredible export performance as Germany was required to service its debt through money earned from foreign trade. In the words of historian Ursula Rombeck-Jaschinski, Germany's "economic miracle would have been impossible without the debt agreement." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11383374/The-biggest-debt-write-offs-in-the-history-of-the-world.html From what I've read elsewhere, it looks like Germany was being screwed by those giving Germany a 'helping hand', so the debt restructure can't have been much of a miracle: The Marshall-Plan Hoax Marshall Plan vs. Robbery, Murder and Destruction? An Eternal Mockery of the German People! http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/marshallhoax.html This is just a quick skim of the Chilean coup, the Marshall Plan (and the Marshall-Plan Hoax) etc.  An initial look and skim that will need to be followed up by some more reading. Need to also keep looking for Teddy Roosevelt the 'trust buster'. In the meantime, I've come upon this really cool summary of a book: American Oligarchy, J.P. Morgan, Bankers' Coup Creates Federal Reserve, Morgan's Fed Finances World War I excerpted from the book Gods of Money Wall Street and the Death of the American Century by F. William Engdahl http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Engdahl_F_William/American_Oligarchy_GOM.html SUMMARY - PART 2 - HERE.

USA - FATCATS OVER DEMOCRACY

Insight: Plutocracy trumping democracy Posted: Sunday, August 10, 2014 3:30 am By Timothy J. Barnett, Special to The Star A disquieting paradox is increasingly apparent. Americans hope for the self-respect and happiness that arise from a hearty sense of earned merit. Yet, we simultaneously desire greater wealth and advantages than deserved by any prudent measure of social responsibility. We reckon ourselves upstanding because of petty morality, while seeking to exploit lawful loopholes that aid wealth acquisition. Our strange sense of deservedness is rooted in strategic play and name recognition, not the true value of our contributions. Our bifurcated economic recovery — great for the top 5 percent while meager for the bottom 75 percent — belies claims that all is well. The spread of financial pragmatism (i.e., follow any working trend) has left most Americans inattentive to the morality of national laws that shape economic activity. Indeed, the ease by which we speculate in many markets has calloused us to the notion of earned merit. Ultimately, market opportunity is our moral compass; that is, when we’re not admiring the highly disproportionate rewards of celebrity. The notion of what constitutes fair opportunity and deservedness changes along with culture, religion and business conditions. This relativity causes many intellectuals to scoff at the idea that culture or politics could ever find sufficient consensus about merit to create an ethos by which various expressions of merit could be evaluated and fairly rewarded. Hence, our politics subsidize and reward financial power, corporatism, interest group demands and the growth expediencies that are allegedly necessary to underwrite entitlements. This system, as widely noted, is a model of unethical financial distribution. Until the industrial revolution in the early 1800s, Americans’ economic rewards were generally aligned with one’s prudence, labor, ingenuity and stewardship of resources — with a little luck thrown in. As the industrial age dawned, much of this changed, the outcome working to advantage those with capital over others with little but their labor. In Russia, the result was the communist revolution — a movement that endeavored to restore linkage between deservedness and labor. The mantra was: “All workers in a workers’ state.” In the West, most observers saw the workers’ adage as a deception arising from desperation, with party elites gaining advantage over their proletarian prey. Americans broadly viewed the communist ideology as economically inefficient. Additionally, communism was viewed as unfair to contributions arising from ingenuity, entrepreneurship, business management, the wise stewardship of property and earned capital. Europeans, not quite so enamored by free markets, looked to democratic socialism as a hybrid way. In America, we thought we had the best of all worlds with a wide-open market system, bounded only for a few robber barons and monopolists. Buoyed by rapid growth, inexpensive land, abundant low-cost resources and other helpful dynamics, the expansion of social mobility seemed to confirm our economic judgments. In short, we felt immune to any need for a national conversation on just deserts. Our market morality seemed amply moored by a robust work ethic, sense of self-responsibility and belief in business propriety (flaws aside). Why would we want big government to tell us what to do when we already knew the answers? In retrospect, we were caught off-guard by cultural and technological changes. Beginning with the computer age in the 1980s and the blossoming of electronic media shortly thereafter, tremendous leverage was created for exploiting vulnerabilities in our ad-hoc market architecture. Rampant diversity in ideals, orientations, ethics and goals left us with little cultural consensus apart from ambiguous generalities. This is the outcome John Jay feared most in his discussion of the American prospect (Federalist Paper No. 2). Lacking a unifying vision, our politics fell prey to the only commonality that remained: the chase for prosperity as subsidized by growth. The story of America’s last 10 years demonstrates this point. What we now call “merit” reflects a breakdown in the linkage between contributions and rewards. Nationally, we’re baffled, as nothing in our political toolkit addresses such a challenge. [...] EXTRACT ONLY - FULL @ SOURCE http://www.annistonstar.com/opinion/article_d1931214-1f4c-11e4-ac46-0019bb2963f4.html Timothy J. Barnett is an associate professor in the political science department at Jacksonville State University. His Ph.D. was earned at the University of Kansas.

This is a fantastic article well worth a read.
Need to link to rest of it (above).

I'm amazed it's come out of the US!

Jacksonville State Uni is Alabama.

Market Morality

Advantage:          5% vs 75%
Advantage:   Capital vs No Capital

Free Markets

• Robber Barons 
• Monopolists

Argentina - what's likely to happen following default

 LAHT Article

"Barings tried for years to reach a settlement on the debt, repeatedly sending representatives to Buenos Aires, but it was not until 1857 – 29 years after the default -- that Barings and bondholders (backed by the threat of some stiff English gunpowder diplomacy) reached a settlement with what was now the Republic of Argentina -- by issuing new bonds, of course.

And with Argentina’s credit now restored with a £1.6 million Barings recapitalization of the arrears, Barings went on to market another £550,000 for Argentina in the first portion of a £2,500,000 33 year Argentina 6% bond maturing in 1899 and even more issuance followed.

By 1890, however, Argentina was on the brink of default again and almost took Barings down with it. With the Bank of England becoming the world’s lender of last resort, it was Baring’s old rival, Rothschild, who would persuade the British government to put together what became a £17 million rescue on the principle that the collapse of Barings would be a “terrific calamity for English commerce all over the world.” [LAHT]

-------------------------------------------------

COMMENT

The world of bonds/debt and investment seems to have:

* a villain (defaulting debtor)
* a victim (investor)
* a rescuer (financial group or even foreign government bank)

What seems to happen is that someone comes along (a group of big investors or a goverment) and offers a bail-out and restructured terms ... and the debt carries over in some shape or other.

If nations that are indebted aren't careful, they stand to lose territory (and maybe even sovereignty), is what I got out of it. 

So that maybe explains why people are prepared to continue to invest in a 'bad' lender.  Countries have value:  resources, territory, strategic location etc.

What's going to happen?  I'm guessing there's going to be a buy-out and restructuring on terms that probably aren't favourable to Argentina? 

But having read about the 65% 'haircut' or whatever it was, it doesn't sound like the terms are all that great for the lenders.  But it depends on how you view profits, I guess.  In other words, how much profit is enough profit?

ARGENTINA - $1 BILLION DEFAULT INSURANCE TRIGGERED ON BONDS

Argentina Default Triggers $1 Billion of Swaps After ISDA Ruling By Abigail Moses Aug 2, 2014 2:04 AM ET Argentina’s failure to pay interest on its bonds is a credit event that will trigger settlement of $1 billion of default insurance, according to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. ISDA’s determinations committee made the ruling in response to a question posed by Swiss bank UBS AG after the government missed a July 30 payment deadline on $539 million of interest. Argentina is the first nation to trigger default swaps since Greece restructured its debt in 2012. The ruling was seen by traders as complicated because Argentina made the required payment to the trustee for the bond, Bank of New York Mellon Corp. The bank said yesterday that a U.S. judge’s ruling bars it from passing the money to bondholders without a resolution of the nation’s dispute with hedge funds led by Elliott Management Corp., which sued the nation for $1.5 billion. “From the perspective of Argentina, you could argue they provided the payments and the transfer mechanism doesn’t work,” said Jochen Felsenheimer, the Munich-based founder of XAIA Investment GmbH, which manages 2.8 billion euros ($3.76 billion) in credit funds. “From the investor standpoint, you can argue they didn’t get the coupon.” ... Binding Decisions ISDA’s determinations committee was formed in 2009 and makes binding decisions for the market on whether contracts can be triggered. The 15-member group includes representatives from Bank of America Corp., Elliott Management, Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase and Co. There were 2,652 contracts covering $1 billion of Argentina bonds as of July 25, according to the Depository Trust and Clearing Corp. That compares with about $3 billion for Greek bonds when they were triggered in 2012 and $20 billion on Italy’s as of last week. ... EXTRACT ONLY ... FULL @... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-01/argentina-default-triggers-1-billion-of-swaps-after-isda-ruling.htmll

Argentina made the payment.

Bank of New York Mellon Corp didn't make the transfer.

Judge's ruling bars the bank.

Perhaps the State should pay the insurance then, because the matter isn't resolved.
One would think there would be avenues of appeal?

ISDA (International Swaps and Derivatives Association) make binding decisions ...but is ISDA impartial?  Is it supposed to be?

Check out the $20 billion bonds associated with Italy!!  That looks an interesting story.

Argentina - economy info

Argentina

Interest Rate	22.50%
Inflation Rate	10.90%
Debt/GDP	45.60%
Current Account	00.90

Sticky breaking to see what the go is with Argentina defaulting on bonds. It has a very high interest rate compared to the countries that are doing OK - eg. UK interest rate 0.5%, Germany and France both at 0.15% and Australia at 2.5%.

 Inflation rate is high (as is that of Venezuela and Iran). 

Countries with low inflation include US and its allies. Debt to GDP figure doesn't seem that high. 

Not far more than Sweden.  But Sweden has a positive current account figure, low inflation and low interest rates.

The current account is a country's Goods and Services figure minus Imports (ie what it's making vs what it's spending, and a few other things in equation, I think).  Current account explanation is here.

Argentina's current account being in the negative, it doesn't have foreign wealth.  It is a borrower from foreign sources.

So what has Argentina got?  Found a cool site that lists resources - here.  Bit too involved for me, but cool info.

According to another site, country reports org - here:

Argentina - Exports
Major Exports soybeans and derivatives petroleum and gas vehicles corn, wheat	Top Export Partners Brazil .... 21.6% China ....  7.3% Chile .....  5.5% US  .......   5.5%

So Argentina's main big dollar export potential would be the petroleum and gas? However, Argentina also imports:

"machinery, motor vehicles, petroleum and natural gas, organic chemicals, plastics"

Confused now that 'petrolum and natural gas' is on the list.

Think it might be best to just try to find the 'why is Argentina in default' information in a news article, because my snooping's getting nowhere.

At this rate, I'd take days to make out what's going on -- and I haven't got days, I'm starving now.

Argentina - Defaults on Debt Repayments on Bonds - 'Vulture' Hedge Funds

Argentina Defaults: Three Points

July 31, 2014

... Argentina failed to reach an agreement with several hedge funds holding its bonds and it defaulted on its debt payments. First, S&P  lowered the country’s rating to “selective default,” which means that Argentina had failed to make some interest payments on its bonds. Then, Argentina’s economy minister ... Axel Kicillof, said that the “vulture” hedge funds had declined to accept Argentina’s offer to swap out their bonds for new ones, and that he was therefore heading home.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-07-31/argentina-defaults-three-points

Default is a major disaster for a government, but not much will happen right away now that Standard & Poor’s has declared Argentina to be in “selective default.”

S&P (MHFI) took the action today after Argentina’s talks with holdout creditors continued past the end of the 30-day grace period for a $539 million bond payment.

Defaults are usually bad for bond prices. But prices for Argentine bonds soared today ... because investors are increasingly optimistic that Argentina will strike a deal with its creditors. ...
 
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-07-30/what-happens-now-that-argentina-is-in-selective-default

This sounds exciting. 

I've not read up on bonds, but there's a link - here - for anyone that's keen.

Looks like Argentina's borrowed money that it can't pay back.

Doesn't sound too good.

Too tired to try to figure it out beyond that.

IMT - Trotskyism

Alan Woods is a 'political theorist'.

Curious about him because he got a mention in an economics article relating to Venezuela.

Described as 'one of the leading members of 'International Marxist Tendencies' (IMT).

Wikipedia:

The International Marxist Tendency adheres to orthodox Trotskyism, emphasising the education of cadres of workers and youth.

The IMT manifesto makes demands such as "the end to privatisation and the abandonment of market economics", "the nationalisation of privatised companies without compensation" and "the reintroduction of the state monopoly of foreign trade".

The IMT has spread to parts of Latin America, where it now has groups in Venezuela, Peru, Argentina, Mexico, Bolivia, Brazil and El Salvador. At the end of 2002 it promoted the launching of the solidarity campaign at Hands Off Venezuela, which is now active in 30 countries and has had resolutions passed within the trade union movements in Britain, Canada, Italy and other countries.

So that is:

• education and training of labour force.
• end to privatisation.
• abandonment of 'market economics' - supply and demand market / prices determined in free price system (contrast fixed price system - govt set price).
• nationalisation of privatised companies without compensation.
• reintroduction of state monopoly of foreign trade.

2009 dispute IMT leadership and leaderships of it's groups in:

• Spain
• Venezuela
• Mexico

In 2010 these (or portions) broke with IMT and established new international body, 'Corriente Marxista Revolucionaria':

• Spain
• Venezuela
• Mexico (part)
• Columbia

Thereafter break aways form 'Towards a New International Tendency' in:

• Sweden
• Poland
• Britain

Iranian section splinters off to form Marxist Revival ('with co-thinkers in Britain'), over IMT position on Venezuela's 'friendly relations with Iranian regime'.

Sounds like keeping everyone happy and united ain't easy.

Not really sure what this is all about.  Suppose it is some kind of interest/lobby group of supporters of 'orthodox Trotskyism'.

What is 'Trotskyism'?

Marxist theory:

Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism as advocated by Leon Trotsky. Trotsky identified as an orthodox Marxist and Bolshevik-Leninist, and supported founding a vanguard party of the working-class, proletarian internationalism, and a dictatorship of the proletariat based on working-class self-emancipation and mass democracy. Trotskyists are critical of Stalinism, as they oppose the idea of Socialism in One Country. ... [wikipedia]

So they don't just want socialism in one nation; it's a worldwide effort?

International revolution

According to classical Marxism, revolution in peasant-based countries, such as Russia, prepares the ground ultimately only for a development of capitalism since the liberated peasants become small owners, producers and traders which leads to the growth of commodity markets, from which a new capitalist class emerges. Only fully developed capitalist conditions prepare the basis for socialism.

Trotsky agreed that a new socialist state and economy in a country like Russia would not be able to hold out against the pressures of a hostile capitalist world, as well as the internal pressures of its backward economy. The revolution, Trotsky argued, must quickly spread to capitalist countries, bringing about a socialist revolution which must spread worldwide. In this way the revolution is "permanent", moving out of necessity first, from the bourgeois revolution to the workers’ revolution, and from there uninterruptedly to European and worldwide revolutions.

I'm getting lost now.  Don't know enough to grasp this stuff.

Worldwide anything doesn't seem a realistic goal.  

Also, nothing is 'permanent'.  All empires crumble.

Really surprised to see Iran get a mention.  

I don't associate the Middle East with socialism, although Latin America and socialism compute because of all those cool pics of  Che Guevara.  LOL

Wondering what happens to revolutionaries when they attain their goals and no longer have the fun of the chase.  

Are they content?  Or is there always some other chase to be had?  

Is everyone chasing their own idea of nirvana?