Bulletin 206
Subject: LONG-TERM
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES ON CONTEMPORY POLITICAL EVENTS : FROM THE
CENTER FOR
THE ADVANCED STUDY OF AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS,
30 October 2005
Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,
From an historical perspective, World
Capitalism is now entering a crisis more problematic than any it
has
undergone in its long and turbulent history. What new outlets can be
found to
maintain the rule of the private profit motive over human needs
is
anybody's guess....
Five hundred years ago, the European quest for commodities from Asia
(known in
the West as the "commercial revolution") led inevitably to a search
for reduced transportation costs, via a sea route to India, but
also to
an aggressive search for new sources of precious metals to
supplant the
exhausted gold and silver mines of Western Europe, which had been
heavily
exploited for more than two centuries in order to purchase Asian
commodities.
The European fiscal crisis toward the end of the 15th century resulted
in
genocide for untold millions of indigenous peoples who inhabited the
In the 18th century, the Industrial Revolution, which was mostly funded
by
profits from the slave trade and labor exploitation on the early sugar
plantations
in the Caribbean, gave birth to an expanded form of democracy in
Before the end of the 19th Century, corporate elites had gained
monopoly
control of production in every sector of the industrial economy, and by
the
turn of the century all levels of government were taken hostage by
corporate
interests. For nearly a century this control was largely compatible
with
traditional middle-class values --the sanctity of private property,
individual
rights, indirect democracy, etc., etc....
But as the end of the 20th century grew near, it became increasingly
evident
that individualism and democracy could no longer be counted as an asset
to
corporate interests. Corporate capitalism ("corporatism") came to be
acknowledged as the political force ruling society. "Citizenship"
gave way to "consumerism" and concepts such as
Security, Loyalty, Obedience, and just generally "getting
along" came to displace traditional virtues like "honesty,"
"independence," and critical thinking. A new ethos for running the
state-capitalist machine came into full view: the former concepts
quickly
became the guiding virtues of corporate society and bourgeois virtues
vanished.
In most cases today, it is simply Silence that rules --silence without
debate.
. . .
Out of this centuries-old matrix emerged Margaret Thatcher and Ronald
Reagan in
the late 1970s. If looked at from an economic viewpoint, the continuity
is
remarkable: Thatcherism and Reaganism are
but moments
in which western ruling classes simply did what they had to do in order
to
protect their interests. The problem, of course, is that most people
living on
our planet do not share these interests, and they do not benefit from
the
policies promoted by this small social class of owners of capital.
Given the new technologies in the communication industry (known as the
"communication revolution") it appears that a new age of democracy is
about to emerge into the light of day. It may take the form of a
world-wide
movement where no one can be excluded legitimately from public
discussions on
economic and political policy. This development presents serious
problems for
those elite who control, among other things, nuclear weapons. What they
intend
to do about this problem remains uncertain.
. . .
Joining in our search for perspectives, the following four authors have
written
essays on the contemporary political economy in America
:
Item A. is an
article by James Quinnery discussing the
general
alarm that has been aroused by "the world's best kept secret", i.e.
the recent anti-terrorist legislation in England that is now perceived
as an
assault on the very roots of Anglo-Saxon democratic traditions. By
reversing
King John's historic agreement at the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215, Tony Blair has suspended the
right of habeas
corpus and trial by jury. "Terrorist suspects" (a term as
vague as you wish it to be) are now ferried off from
Item B. is an
essay by David Martin, describing the historical significance of the
"Reagan Revolution" up to today's constitutional crisis in the
Item C. is an
article sent to us by Michael Albert, in which Girish
Mishra of
Item D. is an
article by Jeff Cohen, founder of the media watch group FAIR. In
this
piece Cohen celebrates the current White House scandal and explains
what we can
expect from the mainstream media during this criminal investigation.
Sincerely,
Francis McCollum Feeley
Professor of American Studies/
Director of Research
Université Stendhal-Grenoble
III
http://dimension.ucsd.edu/CEIMSA-IN-EXILE/
_______________
A.
from James Quinnery :
October 27, 2005
ZNet
|
Europe
The
World's Best
Kept Secret
by James Quinney
In 1943, as Britain was facing the threat of Nazi
invasion,
Winston Churchill wrote: "The power of the executive to cast a man in
prison without formulating any charge known to the law and particularly
to deny
him the judgment of his peers is in the highest degree odious and is
the
foundation of all totalitarian government, whether Nazi or Communist."
[1]
Recent Anti-terror legislation in the UK (such as the Bill on Civil
Contingencies which the Guardian's editors called "the greatest threat
to
civil liberty that any parliament is ever likely to consider")[2] includes the right to detain people without
charge and
without access to legal council, thus, by Winston Churchill's
standards,
elevating the UK to the status of Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia.
Perhaps Ian Macdonald, one of the government's own Special Advocates
authorized
to work on "terrorism related issues", was reminded of Churchill's
comments when he said that the government's new Anti-terror laws are
"an
odious blot on our legal landscape". He said this as he handed in his
resignation "for reasons of conscience" adding that his "role
has been altered to provide a false legitimacy to indefinite detention
without
knowledge of the accusations being made and without any kind of
criminal charge
or trial." [3] He joins a host of other prominent critics such as the
former leading anti terrorist police chief, George Churchill Coleman,
who
warned that the Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, is "transforming
Britain
into a police state'". George Churchill Coleman, who headed Scotland
Yard's anti terrorist squad as they worked to counter the IRA during
their
mainland attacks in the late 1980s and early 1990s said Mr
Clarke's proposals to extend powers to include, for example, the
ability to
place suspects under indefinite house arrest, were "not practical"
and threatened to "further marginalise
minority
communities." He went on to say "I have a horrible feeling that we
are sinking into a police state, and that's not good for anybody. We
live in a
democracy and we should police on those standards... I have serious
worries and
concerns about these ideas on both ethical and practical terms. You
cannot lock
people up just because someone says they are terrorists. Internment
didn't work
in
"Terrorism jolts most people, but a few react by calmly seizing the
opportunity to push long nurtured demands" reads the cover story in the
August edition of Economist. However, the "few" they are referring to
are not government Ministers, but the "notoriously militant RMT
transport
workers' union" who after the recent threat to the capital's transport
system have "insisted on a flurry of opportunistic demands" such as
"plans to reduce station staff be put on hold and extra guards be added
to
trains." It should be of no surprise that the business community's
leading
journal is reflexively anti-union to the point where even ideas that
would seem
quite rational must be vehemently rejected. However, what is
interesting is
that even the Economist concludes: "Of all the shocks caused by the
bombings, none will endure as long as the measures that are put into
place to
stop them... In the aftermath of terrorist attacks, the extravagant use
of...
police powers might seem tolerable, or even desirable. In the long
term, the
consequences are more likely to prove otherwise." [5]
After September 11th, harsh, repressive forces have "reacted calmly by
seizing the opportunity to push forward long nurtured demands" all over
the world. In a recent interview, Boris Berzovsky
(one of
Leading human rights groups have reported that "Russian forces have
carried out indiscriminate attacks or direct attacks on civilians,
which are
grave breaches of international humanitarian law" but this has met with
little concern from
Other consequences of new measures announced by the Prime Minister in
the wake
of the July bombings of
In his regular report, Alvaro Gil-Robles (the Council of Europe's Human
Rights
commissioner) did not fail to comment on this chasm between
The Blair government has created an impressive arsenal of legislation
with
which to deal with political dissent, although it must be noted that
much of
this legislation follows on from reforms brought in by the previous
Conservative government in their attempts to repeal the rights that
were won in
the 1960's, or as Tony Blair shamefully refers to it as marking "an end
to
the 1960s liberal, social consensus on law and order" as reported in
the
Guardian's Leader, which goes on to note in the same article that
despite
"the largest and most sustained fall in crime for over a century... we
are
still sending proportionately more people to prison than the most
repressive
foreign regimes: Burma, Saudi Arabia and China." [10] Meanwhile the
charity Prison Reform Trust comments that "Prisons are the most shaming
of
all our public institutions. The
This is deemed by many to be an acceptable form of state action,
serving the
social function of population control and providing yet another
stimulus to the
economy. Security is a growing market for British corporations, both at
home
and overseas, as they are lured by the promise of large subsidies
provided for
by the tax-payer. An industry circular with the dubious title of
"Business
Continuity and Corporate Security" optimistically announces that now is
the time to get in on the act: "Budgets for corporate security are
increasing... This is your opportunity to get on the 2006 budget with
major
corporate decision-makers. Katrina and the London Tube events are
game-changing
circumstances that will increase budgets for 2006." [12]
The effect of these values are essentially that people no longer have
any other
rights than those you can buy on the market. The Journal of Law and
Society in
a 2001 article noted that since the 1980s "with increasing frequency
individuals and corporations" have been "filing retaliatory lawsuits,
usually claiming libel, against individuals and organizations whose
lobbying
campaigns, protests or demonstrations were perceived to threaten the
filers'
economic interests." These are often referred to as "'strategic
lawsuits against public participation,' or SLAPPs..."
The journal goes on to describe SLAPPs in
more detail
as: "private lawsuits filed against individuals or groups in response
to
political activities such as 'circulating a petition, writing a letter
to the
editor, testifying at a public hearing, reporting violations of law,
lobbying
for legislation, peacefully demonstrating, or otherwise attempting to
influence
government action.'" They also report that these cases are nearly
always
successful due to the fact that the "plaintiffs had considerably more
resources to pursue their claims than were available to the targets of
their
law suits." [13]
This is very rarely reported because, as Greg Philo of the Glasgow
University
Media Unit observes, "Journalists work with routine assumptions about
status and who has the 'legitimate' right to speak... Broadcasting does
not
stray far beyond such parameters to criticise
or set
any independent agendas, even if many of the population do not feel
well
informed or properly represented by such structures. The decisions
which shape
our lives and indeed the whole global economy are often made out of our
sight.
To challenge such structures of power and interest and to ask
fundamental
questions about the allocation of world resources would require an
innovative
and critical journalism and a truly independent broadcasting. But at
present
the parameters and agendas of media comment are set by the political
and
commercial structures which themselves stand so much in need of
critical
scrutiny." [14]
Further scrutiny was provided by Dr Des Freedman from
The report was based on interviews with 40 leading media policy-makers
and
argues that "key decisions... are made by government insiders, often in
concert with industry lobbyists and sometimes against the wishes of the
public... This seems to be a process marked less by a commitment to
meaningful
forms of accountability than it is to ensuring the continuing influence
of a
restricted number of powerful stakeholders." [15]
Across most of the mainstream media, what we find is a flood of
patriotism that
assumes the government is identified with the population, the country
and the
culture and therefore criticism of these policies can be considered
anti-British - another profoundly totalitarian ideal. Instead the Sun
urges its
readership in one recent editorial to "write to your MP demanding that
this crazy [human rights] law is repealed." [16]
The journal Social Policy & Administration states that "Fewer than
half the public have heard of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights"
and only 58% have heard of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Presumably
even fewer know what it actually is. Amnesty International's Conor Foley and Keir
Starmer go on to note that The Universal
Declaration of Human
Rights has been described as "the world's best kept secret" but it
provides "the basis for an international system of protection by which
the
people of the world can hold their governments to account for their
human
rights records." [17]
As Karen Bartlett of Charter 88 observes. "Instead of heralding a new
era
in which rights are taken seriously, the Human Rights Act has
languished as the
kicking boy of everybody from the Daily Mail to Prince Charles in his
letters
to Ministers. The lamentable failure of most on the left to speak up on
its
behalf leaves the Act fated to be both toothless and vulnerable to
demolition
by a future government, even less likely to support it than the current
one.
Creating a separate Human Rights Commission would, it seems, simply
cause
Ministers too much inconvenience in the courts." [18]
Although the task of standing up to this renewed crack down on civil
and human
rights will not be easy, the matters at stake are crucially important.
The
leading science journal Nature observes: "The looming threat of
environmental degradation poses a complex and confounding problem for
all
humanity. Yet, many governments, policy-makers and societal actors are
unwilling or unable to make the changes necessary to prevent or lessen
the destruction
of our ecosystem... one doubts if those concerned with national
security as a
traditional great power endeavour will be
easily
swayed, particularly in the post-September 11 climate." [19] This is
because, as the Journal of Development Economics points out, the
"connection between environmental protection and civil and political
rights is a close one. As a general rule, political and civil liberties
are
instrumentally powerful in protecting the environmental resource base,"
logically because "more democratic governments respond favourably
to environmental demands by the populace." [20]
By comparative standards, we enjoy remarkable freedom in this country.
We can
choose to throw away this legacy of hard won rights or we can make use
of it
and build on it to create the basis for a functioning democratic
culture. One
in which the public can play an active role that goes beyond putting a
cross in
a box every few years.
Notes:
[1] Telegram by Churchill from Cairo, Egypt to Home Secretary
Herbert
Morrison (21 November 1943)
[2] The Guardian leader - June 20, 2003
[3] BBC News - December 20, 2004
[4] Britain 'sliding into police state' - Alan Travis, Clare Dyer and
Michael
White, The Guardian, January 28, 2005
[5] Terrorism - Learning to live with it - The Economist, July 28 2005
[6] Putin Is Wrong in Chechnya - NPQ,
winter 2003
[7] The right not to be bombed outweighs liberties, says Clarke - David
Rennie, The Telegraph, July 14 2005
[8] BBC News August 23, 2005
[9] Coucil of Europe rebukes UK on human
rights -
Simon Jeffery, The Guardian, June 8, 2005
[10] The Guardian leader - July 20, 2004
[11] http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk
[12] Private Eye, 1142
[13] Public Protests, Private Lawsuits, and the Market - Douglas W.
Vick and
Kevin Campbell, Jounral of Law and
Society, Vol 28, 2, 2001
[14] Television, Politics and the New Right - Greg Philo, http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/sociology/units/media/
[15] Media policy dominated by 'cosy
cartel', says
report - Dominic Timms, The Guardian,
September 20,
2005
[16] The Sun, August 04, 2005
[17] Historical Significance of the Universal Declaration - Asbjrn
Eide, International Social Science Journal,
Vol 50, 158, 1998
[18] The Observer - October 27, 2002
[19] Small-minded government - Nature, Vol
437, 7056,
2005
[20] Democracy and environmental quality - Y. Hossein
Farzin and Craig A. Bond, Journal of
Development
Economics, 2005
_________
*Thanks to David Cromwell and David Edwards at Medialens
________________
B.
from David Martin :
October 26, 2005
damrtn48@ntplx.net
What
Reagan
Started, Bush Is Finishing
by David Martin
In recent weeks,
every mornings newspaper seems to carry
another headline
documenting the accelerating tailspin of George Bushs
administration into disastrous fiasco. Political pundits may attribute
the
ongoing self-immolation of George Bush to the general ineptitude of the
Mayberry Machiavellis with whom he has
surrounded
himself.
But there is another, more historically correct explanation for the
current
presidential unraveling: the disaster that is George Bush is the
inevitable
culmination of the revolution wrought by Ronald Reagan.
The Great Charlatan swept into office proclaiming that government was
the
problem. If only it got out of the way, the energy, creativity, and
entrepreneurial
spirit of the private sector would be unleashed and a golden economic
age would
dawn. A rising tide of affluence would lift all boats, and we would all
sail
off into a rosy sunset.
Now after eight years of the Gipper, four
years of
Bush I, eight years of Republican Lite
under
The bright and shining morning in
The trickle down promised by supply-side economists has diminished to a
slow
drip. The tax policies of George Bush have only exacerbated this
problem. The
combined effect of his tax cuts has been to reduce federal tax revenue
to its
lowest level as a share of the economy since 1950.2 The
inevitable result is the return of Reaganesque
tax
deficits that Bill Clinton worked so hard to erase. George Bush is
mortgaging
our future, and the Chinese hold the note.
Reagan came into office promising to shrink government to keep it from
stifling
private initiative. He and his successors may not have been too
successful in
shrinking the size of the government, but they have certainly magnified
its
ineptitude. The government that once put a man on the moon now cannot
deliver
ice to the
The American military that conducted a multi-front war to defeat the
formidable
powers of
Privatization was another of Reagans
sacred tenets. The theory was that privatizing services once provided
by
government would result in greater efficiencies at lower costs. The
Two years after the American invasion the Iraqis have only intermittent
electrical service and inadequate water supplies. But the construction
firms did
prove efficient in at least one area: ripping off the American
taxpayer.
Billions of dollars have disappeared into the black hole of
The Bush administration may have fumbled relief efforts in the
immediate
aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. But it was well prepared to apply the
lessons
of
The same well-connected, underperforming firms from
Politicians and their supporters love to wax romantic about the legacy
they
leave behind. Heres the Reagan/Bush
legacy: failed
wars, support of terrorists, environmental degradation, the income
distribution
of a banana republic, a credit rating a third world country would be
ashamed
of, falling health standards, the disappearance of guaranteed
retirement
pensions, and corporate malfeasance on an unprecedented scale.
George Bush loves to end his speeches with a request for God to bless
the
Notes :
1 Figures taken from Congressional Budget Office report,
Historical
Effective Federal Tax Rates: 1979 to 2002, March 2005.
2 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Tax Returns, A Comprehensive
Assessment of the Bush Administrations Record on Cutting Taxes, April
23, 2004.
________________
C.
from Girish Mishra
:
gmishra@girishmishra.com
October 26, 2005
Criminal Capitalism and Quixotic Devotee
by Girish Mishra
Raymond W. Baker
knows of the
working of world capitalist system in all its intricacies to the
minutest
details as he worked for almost four decades in Africa and
The thesis, he has propounded in this book, is two fold: capitalism is
rotten
and badly stinking, yet it needs to be reformed, as there is no
alternative to
it. Baker, in his experience over a period of more than 40 years in
more than
60 countries, has seen the freemarket
system operate
illicitly and corruptly and its impact on the lives of disadvantaged
people on
all six inhabited continents. He very candidly admits that The
basic structure of our global economic system has fundamental flaws,
and the
accompanying risks are beginning to be evident to wealthy and
impoverished
alike.
When Baker, after finishing Harvard Business School and teaching a
course in
management at the University of New Hampshire, joined the business
world in
Nigeria, he was surprised to find that a lot of people invested their
money in
one place but reaped huge profits somewhere else through a complicated
mechanism based on over- and under-invoicing and transfer pricing among
other
things. To quote Baker, It took me two or three years to realize that
most
foreign-owned companies were doing largely the same thing. And then it
took
another couple of years to learn that most wealthy Africans involved in
foreign
trade were illegally moving money abroad by the same means. As the
decades
rolled on and my activities spread to dozens of countries across the
planet, I
observed that countless forms of financial chicanery are prevalent in
international business. Like an iceberg, the little that is visible is
supported by vastly more hidden beneath the surface.
Baker has found the reputation of free-market system, even in the West,
in the
mud as it abounds in all kinds of frauds, scandals and illegalities. An
assortment of frauds, thefts, corrupt practices, accounting
irregularities,
earning restatements, asset write downs, tax shenanigans, conflicts of
interest, and other charges, probes, malpractices, and allegations have
corroded the reputations of dozens of companies and sapped the net
worth of
untold numbers of shareholders and retirees. The list of financial
institutions
tarnished in the press reads like what should otherwise be the Whos Who of propriety: Citigroup, J. P. Morgan
Chase, Bank
of America, Bankers Trust, Bank of New York and some 55 more on the
roster I
maintain. The corporate rap sheet, ranging from spectacular failures to
merely
disgraced executives, includes Enron, WorldCom, Global Crossing,
Halliburton,
and nearly 100 more on my list. All Big 5 accounting firms have been
tarred and
feathered. The number of law firms taking heat is too long to recount.
It has been claimed time and again that uninterrupted operation of
market
forces globally will do away with all kinds of corruption and criminal
activities, which are supposed to arise from government interventions
and
regulations and the emergence of monopolies. What has happened in
practice is
quite the opposite. Baker has come out with a damning indictment: Since
the end
of the Cold War, the opening years of the globalizing era have produced
an
explosion in the volume of illegitimate commercial and financial
transactions. North
American and European banking and investment institutions have been
flooded
with laundered and ill-gotten gains. Totaling trillions of dollars,
most of
these sums generated through secret arrangements between cooperating
but
distant private-sector entities. Lagging legal codes have proven
inadequate to
deal with the situation. Much of the subject is a taboo in business and
government circles, yet this torrent of stolen, disguised, and hidden
resources
poses a major risk to state stability, corporate security, democracy,
and free
enterprise across the planet.
The major portion of the book is devoted to a discussion of dirty
money, its
various components, the mechanism by which
it is
generated, how the tax havens and Western financial institutions
facilitate its
generation and its laundering, and the way the
There are three main components of dirty money, namely, criminal,
corrupt, and
commercial. The criminal component comprises wide-ranging evil
activities such
as racketeering, smuggling of men as well as material goods, all kinds
of
fraud, counterfeiting of goods and currency notes, embezzlement, fraud,
forgery, prostitution, piracy of all types and so on. It needs to be
noted that
most countries have banned proceeds of drug trafficking, bank fraud,
and
terrorism. The corrupt component has in its fold the yield of bribery
and theft
by foreign government officials. The commercial component is generally
the
result of tax-evasion and it does not find any place in official
records.
According to Baker, What is most striking is that all three forms of
dirty
money criminal, corrupt, and commercialutilize
basically the same subterfuges to roll through international channels:
false
documentation, dummy, corporations, shell banks, tax havens, offshore
secrecy
jurisdictions, mispricing, collusion,
kickbacks,
numbered accounts, wire transfers that disguise transactions, and more.
Whether
its moving drug money or tax-evading money,
whether
its a thug or tyrant or terrorist or corporate titan, all use the same
bag of
tricks. And the truth is, western business and banking sectors have
developed
and promoted the mechanisms for other countries for more than a
century.
There are many ways to get rich while the government and the society do
not
know where the money comes from. One of them is under- and
over-invoicing. This
is a very old tactics resorted to in international trade, real estate
deals,
purchase of services, etc. that form part of international business
transactions. To give an example, an Indian businessman may export
textiles
worth $10m but show in the invoice just $8m and understanding is
reached before
hand with the importer that he would remit to the exporter $8m and
deposit the
rest in some Swiss bank account or somewhere else after deducting his
commission or service charges. Similarly, some Indian businessman imports machinery and equipment worth $8m
but bills,
as per the secret understanding, for $10m. The Reserve Bank of
Baker has found that not only goods but services also can be mispriced or subject to over- and
under-invoicing.
Insurance is a regular candidate with premiums marked up to provide
offshore
kickbacks. Foreign advertising is another popular vehicle. Consulting
contracts
and advisory services are easy to load with kickbacks. Technical
assistance
agreements offer a regular outflow of money that can be shifted into
offshore
bank accounts. Similarly, royalties, patents, and licenses have become
a recent
favorite among skilled money shifters.
The
The Indian governments scheme of offering
subsidy to
exporters has led to inflating the items entering export trade to
corner as
much subsidy as possible. Lots of exporters continue to get rich off
their
governments programs, so be alert to this money-making opportunity.
This is one
of the findings of Baker so far as
Another very useful trick is transfer pricing by multinational
corporations who
resort to the use of trade to shift money at will between parents,
subsidiaries, and affiliates operating in dozens of countries. For many
multinational corporations, exaggerated transfer pricing is standard
procedure,
a major part of global strategies to minimize taxes and maximize
profits.
Further, Intracompany trade across borders
represents
about 50 to 60 per cent of all cross border trade. I have never known a
multinational, multibillion-dollar, multiproduct
corporation that did not use fictitious transfer pricing in some part
of its
business to shift money between some of its entities.
Consulting contracts claims arising out of imaginary damages, warranty
payments, countertrade deals, etc. are
some of the
other effective tricks to generate dirty money and fleece developing
countries.
Another frequently used device is the formation of dummy or bogus
companies. It
is very simple, a reinvoicing company is
formed that
buys, changes prices, issues a new commercial invoice, and resells.
This dummy
company requires only a computer, a letterhead, and a bank account to
come into
play. Baker has given a number of concrete examples to illustrate the
operation
of dummy companies.
Dummy companies play a major role in disguising the source of dirty
money and
then help launder it. Baker has named a number of delightful places
where you
can situate and purchase your secret companies. In all, they come
to 63
jurisdictions providing varying degrees of incorporation concealment
and
protection from probing eyes. There are printed manuals that guide all
the way.
These dummy companies have a number of variations such as trusts,
foundations,
and so on. Offshore dummy companies are known as international business
corporations (IBCs) or personal investment
corporations (PICs). If we believe Baker,
then the
What Baker says is beyond any dispute. To quote: Use of instruments in
the
dirty-money user kit carries a high price. The price is damage to the
capitalist system. The price is bolstering international crime and
terrorism.
The price is deprivation for billions of people. The price is
heightened risk
to the shared security of a globalizing world.
Raymond W. Bakers study presents in great details how corruption
industry has
flourished over the years in
Prestigious banks and financial institutions of the world actively
helped all
these plunderers of public funds. Take, for example, the case of Sani Abacha of
Criminal component of dirty money has its source largely in drug
trafficking,
mostly from
Baker, in the context of what happened on 9/11, asks: Was it just
religious
extremism that brought on the terrorists, power disparities, income
imbalances,
and social disaffections evident in their motivations?
Baker thinks that, in spite of all its rottenness, capitalism has no
alternative and it can be reformed and rejuvenated to take the humanity
forward. It is difficult to accept this proposition because it is
nothing but
pure and simple quixotic.
Before we conclude, let us draw the attention of our readers to a
write-up in
Guardian (October 25, 2005), which says that the Mayor of London is
ready to
welcome the robber barons fleeing from Russia after plundering it
mercilessly.
Obviously, capitalism feels at ease with criminals of all kind.
________________
D.
from Jeff Cohen :
(www.jeffcohen.org)
28 October 2005
by Jeff Cohen
I admit it: I'm gleeful about the White House scandal, as indictments
appear
imminent. These last days have been some of the happiest since
Team Bush
seized power 57 months ago. It couldn't happen to a more reckless
bunch
of bullies-- who launched one of the most disastrous wars in history.
It's traditional in elite punditry to grouse about how such a scandal
hurts our
country or our image abroad. I take a different view: If the
White House
is demoralized and paralyzed, our country and world can breathe
easier.
But there's a special reason this scandal is so
personally satisfying to me as a media critic. It's because elite
journalism is on trial. Powerful journalists are playing the role
usually
played in these scandals by besieged White House operatives.
They're in
the witness dock. It's a New York Times reporter who is failing
to recall
key facts...mysteriously locating misplaced documents...being leaned on
to
synchronize alibis.
Elite journalism is at the center of Weaponsgate,
and
it can't extricate itself from the scandal. Because, at its core,
Weaponsgate (or, if you're in a hurry, "Wargate") is about how the White House and media
institutions jointly sold a war based on deception -- and how the White
House
turned to these media institutions to neutralize a war critic who
challenged
the deception.
When the Nixon White House went after war critic Dan Ellsberg, it
turned to
former CIA guys, specialists in break-ins. When the Bush White
House went
after war critic Joe Wilson (and his wife), it turned to journalists
like Bob
Novak and Judy Miller.
Today, elite journalists can't pretend to be on the outside looking in
at a
scandal that doesn't involve them. This scandal is about them --
it's
about White House-media cronyism, about journalists on the top rung of
the
phone trees of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, two of the dirtiest smear
artists
in
In the past, elite journalists were up to their neck in scandals -- but
they
were deft about writing themselves out of the story. That can't
happen in
this scandal involving the origins of the
It did happen in the scandal at the origins of the Vietnam War: the
But there'd been no such attack on the
When the truth on
Around the same time as the
When the FBI's anti-King operation became public years later,
journalists
largely avoided scrutiny of their own role. But in the words of
black
novelist John A. Williams, they'd been the FBI's "silent partners."
Decades have passed since the scandals of
***
P.S. Friday's Wall Street Journal reports that
the
special prosecutor may charge White House officials "with leaking
garden-variety classified information" under the vaguely-worded,
rarely-used 1917 Espionage Act prohibiting disclosure of "national
defense" information. If so, glee could turn to gloom.
Since
too much is classified, such a prosecution would chill legitimate
whistle-blowers, not the Roves and Libbys.
________
Jeff Cohen (www.jeffcohen.org)
is
founder of the media watch group FAIR (www.fair.org).
*********************
Francis McCollum Feeley
Professor of American Studies/
Director of Research
Université Grenoble
III
http://dimension.ucsd.edu/CEIMSA-IN-EXILE/