Obama’s Unprogressive Foreign Policies

by L.C. Larsen / December 20th, 2008

Humanitarian Aid

The Obama campaign has said, due to military spending and the bailout, they “probably won’t be able to meet our commitment” to raise foreign aid. Unfortunately, what foreign aid currently exists is often systematically designed to bankrupt farmers in the developing world, since the US is the only aid providing country that refuses to buy food aid from local farmers, instead using hunger as a cynical excuse to dump excess inventory from large, subsidized agrobusinesses, who claim this as a tax writeoff.

Military Waste

Obama wants to increase the size of the military, even though we spend more than all the rest of the world combined on “defense,” and it actually makes us less safe. Solving world hunger, transitioning to sustainable energy, industry, and communities, providing health care for all and promoting R+D and sustainable employment might seem to you to be more important priorities to which the trillions of dollars being burned up in military spending (when the full costs are counted) might be better dedicated. But you, my friend, are not Barack Obama.

His choice for Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, wants the US to make new nuclear weapons and maintain all our old ones.

Pro-War

Obama lied about his commitment to have US soldiers out of Iraq within 16 months, and he was dishonest to begin with since he fully intended private mercenaries to continue on there even after said “withdrawal.”

He wants to ramp up the war in Afghanistan, despite the fact that history has shown that only real social investment and not military force can bring peace to the region, one of the poorest and most miserable on earth.

He has expressed a willingness to bomb Iran and won’t rule out a first strike nuclear attack.

Middle East Peace

Obama’s anti-Palestinian stance is in some ways the strongest of any US president ever, and directly opposed to opinion of the people’s and governments of every other nation on earth. He does not seek a two-state end to the Israeli conquest, says he will not negotiate with the elected government of Palestine, and claims that Jerusalem should be considered the capital of Israel, something no other president or world leader has ever before seriously proposed.

The plight of the Palestinian people is a huge cause of foreign support for anti-US terrorism (due to our government’s financing of the majority of the military operations against them).

Latin America

Obama regards the democratically elected (in a landslide) governments of Venezuela and allied nations as “enemies of the United States,” and has urged sanctions against them. He has ruled out the possibility of ending the cruel embargo against the people of Cuba, despite the worldwide consensus that the embargo is illegal, hurts common people, and has been counter-effective in bringing political freedoms to the island.

Obama supports Colombian attacks of soveigern nations like Ecuador, in which civilians are killed. He considers the drug-and-death-squad dictatorship in Colombia to be America’s best friend in the region. He supports bringing the “Colombian solution” of military response to the drug trade into Mexico.

Selling Out

Martin Luther King Jr., a REAL AGENT OF CHANGE, said “My government is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world.” Obama, a false prophet of progress, says the opposite, “We lead the world in battling immediate evils and promoting the ultimate good.”

That is why Obama is president and MLK was, very likely, assassinated by our own intelligence agencies.

piefy09

Total US military spending per year is now over $1.4 trillion. That’s enough to solve every major material problem of humanity.

L.C. Larsen is concerned about the unprogressive dangers of the new administration that we can fight against now (and effect some real change). Read other articles by L.C., or visit L.C.'s website.

This article was posted on Saturday, December 20th, 2008 at 9:01am and is filed under "Aid", Anti-war, Central Ixachilan (America), Democrats, Israel/Palestine, Middle East, Military/Militarism, South Ixachilan (America).

39 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

Brian said on December 20th, 2008 at 9:18am #

This is why I voted for Ralph.
Jason Oberg said on December 20th, 2008 at 10:01am #

Some months ago, I began having my doubts about Obama and his manipulative “change” B.S. I figured he was just another Democrat poser, telling the people what they wanted to hear. I figured that, at best, he would be an ineffectual president, like Carter and many Democratic hypocrites before him. However, I had the mind frame that at least the Bush administration would be gone; perhaps the economy would stabilize; maybe the United States would stop terrorizing the rest of the world and let us all catch our breath. I see now that I couldn’t have been more wrong. Obama is a monster. People in the mainstream media and the American public in general talk about how wonderful it is that we finally elected a black president; how it’s a true sign of progress. Does this feel like progress? When I look at Obama, I see the man that could very well lead us to World War III. It terrifies me. What the hell ever happened to America.
Erroll said on December 20th, 2008 at 11:06am #

Good points by Jason. It should also be pointed out how liberals, and especially the liberal blogs, were so quick to back Obama, the [alleged] agent of hope and change, instead of a true progressive candidate. Because they have now gone against their [alleged] principles, they are now reaping the whirlwind.
Rahb said on December 20th, 2008 at 6:25pm #

Brian: Sadly Ralph and other independents/ “true progressive candidate[s]“, had no chance in this election.
Progress is necessarily slow in society, as it is extremists that gain power (the squeaky wheel gets the grease and heavily funded hatred turns out to be very squeaky). This is the same in most countries. I realized that Obama wasn’t the great agent for change as soon as I noticed who his advisers were (i.e. Michael Ross). Every time Kissinger endorses one of Obama’s appointees I cringe. Nonetheless, if Obama is 100% evil I’d give McCain 110% for extra effort. With either of the official parties there is very little difference in foreign policy and both say whatever they need to to get elected. With all of that said, for Americans to elect a black(ish) president is some progress (just too bad people are still looking at skin tone instead of educating themselves properly).
Jason Oberg said on December 20th, 2008 at 10:19pm #

Rahb mentioned that the truly progressive candidates had no chance in this election. True. But they had no chance in any of the elections before, either. The point is, you keep plugging away. I’m glad that Ralph Nader has been there in Washington’s well-fed face every four years for the past decade, speaking for me when nobody else did. The man is a hero to me for his determination in righting this heartless, inhumane and almost surreally corrupt system we live in. I consider him the Martin Luther King of our time. The day the Naders of the world throw in the towel is the day the final flicker of hope fizzles out.
Leif said on December 20th, 2008 at 10:36pm #

I also respect Nader a lot, but I feel should be careful not to limit our hopes and change-making energies on electoral politics. Even the best policies are usually just responses to social pressure for change rather than gifts from great visionaries.

I would like to learn more about this, here are my favorite four options…

1) Buying and selling through cooperatives, sharing stuff, replacing the pleasures of consumerism and status with the pleasures of creativity, friendship, nature, faith, and health.

2) Raising money for the best causes by bringing people together in enjoyable ways, like parties, picnics, yard sales, concerts and similar events. Giving our time when possible to face-to-face acts of kindness and friendship to people left out and trampled on by the current evil system, foreigners, immigrants and refugees, the poor, abused and depressed.

3) Bringing up the most serious political issues tactfully but without shame when friends and acquaintances indicate interest in them, leading people who really want answers to the best information sources.

4) “Counter-recruiting”: Meeting ideological opponents (in a non-aggressive way) directly to tap into a bigger audience of on-the-fence observers. For example, setting up tables in schools and any events where the military recruits to a) show how war and military spending negatively effect the world, b) show alternatives to a military and better uses for military spending and c) show better options for young people considering military careers.

The military example is just one, counter-recruiting could also take place in the face of political events and intrusions into the public sphere by particularly unethical corporations.

I think this would be far more effective than street protests and letter writing, which are in turn more effective than voting and canvassing, although I think friendships, co-ops, and mutually enjoyable events are the most effective long-term ways to spread progressive ideals and radical social progress.

What do you all think about this?
Jason Oberg said on December 20th, 2008 at 11:37pm #

Leif,
I of course agree with you. What you suggest brings humanity back to a society that has become far too detached and inhumane. Learning to care for one another again, in communities across the country, and for people to become civically involved would lead to a greater consciousness and awareness of the evils being perpetrated on us. Not since the late 60’s/early 70’s have Americans held these values dear. Of course, since the Nixon/Agnew regime, we’ve steadily become isolated from one another because the ability to survive in society has become increasingly more difficult. What we’ve been left with is a society of “Me and mine” rather than having a sense of community. This isn’t the people’s fault; they forced us into this Darwinian “survival of the fittest” way of living. Our true guilt comes from doing nothing to reverse it. We continue to go to the mall and consume, and ignore our neighbors. “Strength in numbers” is a phrase that seems to have lost its meaning in America. We’ve forgotten that it is us against them. We recognized it 40 years ago; we need to find it again. So yes, I agree with you: Mobilizing communities to come together once again is the first critical step toward progress. The government loves having us divided. It works in their favor astronomically. People must realize this. We have to defend ourselves, and we have to do it together.
Ralph Nader realizes it, as well. I don’t know the man personally, of course, but I’ve listened to, read, and supported him long enough to be certain that he wishes desperately that we find that sense of communion as well.
Jason Oberg said on December 20th, 2008 at 11:45pm #

I would like to say further, Leif, that I agree with you in the sharing of creativity and culture among people as well, for this, too, is a great seed for change. Not to mention the fact that sharing the pleasures of creativity, the appreciation of nature and living, and the overall sense of communal culture is infinitely more fulfilling than anything that can be purchased at Wal-Mart. And your ideas of counter-recruiting are a breath of fresh air as well. What better way to save a young man’s life than talking into his left ear while some sleazy recruiter has his right?
So, again, thank you.
Petronius said on December 21st, 2008 at 12:27am #

It seems to me that Obama, whom I call the Great Accommodator, is an idealist. That is why he cannot be compared to either FDR or JFK but looks much more like President Wilson. Many liberals are idealists and that is dangerous because they believe that reality can be changed by wish fulfillment. Much like Wilson tried to bring nations together after World War I, Obama tries to bring all factions together in his government. Which as seen from the Wilson example may end in disastrous results, because none of the factions will ever give one inch. The idealist Obama thinks that he can bring about a right centrist political program with such as Gates and his ilk on board, placating the religious right with having Warren officiating at his inaugural, rewarding Caroline Schlossberg with a senate seat to balance the decline of her uncle’s left centrist influence in the senate and so on. But I do feel that Obama is truly a sincere man with intelligence, however the danger exactly lies in the fact that he believes in his own propaganda, the half African American conciliator, who will bring this country together after the political schisms caused by the Bush administration. That is the pipe dream which is being cynically exploited by the power holders at the cost of so many hopeful citizens here and foreigners abroad. The image of a minority president, young, energetic and charismatic is the pied piper for keeping the system running while it is being exploited for deeper concentration of financial power through Wall street manipulation, a Shock Doctrine method (cf Naomi Klein’s book). The only hope for change lies in the fact that Obama’s strategies will backfire because one can fool so many people only part of the time and dissatisfaction may grow if the public sees how it has been manipulated to no great effect.
Jason Oberg said on December 21st, 2008 at 12:48am #

Petronius,
I can understand your reasoning with Obama. And just maybe, you’re right. Maybe this is a man so brilliant that he’s playing the game that he has to play in the corrupt system that he’s been given to deal with in oredr to finally achieve the greater good. Unfortunately, even if this were his M.O., it would be a sadly misguided one. Political pressure in this system is a mammoth, you know. The more he concedes, the more he says, “Sure, we’ll nuke Iran if necessary!” the more he’s giving leverage and encouragement to the status-quo powers that be. It’s a “strategy” that will blow up in his face (literally). So I’m not so keen on this idea, that he’s really a good guy trying to work the system. I believe fully that he’s a hypocritical, callous monster. I mean, come on, he won the Democratic nomination by reminding us for months upon months that Hillary voted for the war, Hillary voted for the war, Hillary voted for the war. Then he gets elected, and what does he do? Secretary of State Hillary! Take over for Condi! Come on, Petronius, face it already. The guy’s full of it. He siad what he had to say to get elected, and he’s gone back on every bit of it before he’s even gotten into office. I mean, maybe if he were steadfastly defending at least some of the things he claimed to believe in when he was campaigning, I could give him the benefit of the doubt. But he’s already a damn Bush clone. So an idealist? No. Unless of course the ideal in question is an imperialist, oppressive, plutocratic America. In which case, he hasn’t got much to worry about achieving.
Rahb said on December 21st, 2008 at 5:18am #

Obama may be an idealist of sorts, monster or not he probably believes that the implementation of his views are “for the greater good”, that still doesn’t make him correct. As long as we’re squabbling over the things most important to the elite <5% (money and power) and coming up with solutions that ultimately continue to benefit those elite, we’re missing opportunities to think outside the box and identify the real values of real people in our communities.
Leif’s points 1, 3, and 4 are great! 2 is good minus “raising money”. Sometimes we may need money I guess, wouldn’t it be nice though if there was another tier to the economy allowing us to pay for basic necessities, food and shelter etc. using legitimate (could be fiat or tally system) nationalized money gained by working within the community, such as getting trained to and actively maintaining neighborhood wind and solar generators etc., and still allowing the other crap money for luxuries? As more things can be paid for by the real money we could more and more quickly pay back the other crap money to the Fed and World Bank groups etc… As long as we’re encouraging the country’s use of borrowed fake money (fractional reserve lending to “stimulate”/ control the economy) much of which comes from other borrowed fake money (from the World Bank groups etc.) we are promoting systems of abuse. Who benefits more from wars than those that profit by funding both sides (claiming interest along the way) and those that deal arms to both sides of a conflict (the funding to create which also comes at an interest cost)?
I believe, we need complete transparency in any government and a means of keeping them accountable to the actual values of the community (the trick then is identifying those values while dumping several generations of brainwashing… As a start, a good question to constantly ask is, “did I want and think about this much before someone sold it to me?”) Then we need better identification of who our governing bodies are. Did you know that in addition to the big “think-tanks” (AEI, Brookings etc.), even 7-11 has a government affairs department (it’s on their website under corporate jobs), whose purpose is to keep an eye on the US government and make sure that it is working in the best interest of 7-11? When a corporation employs a certain percentage of people in a community, controls wealth distribution in a community, has enough clout to influence government in a community (i.e. Dell rented a space from my city at $1 / month but my rent’s a hell of a lot more), controls food and shelter distribution in a community, affects the environment within a community, so on and so forth, has it not purchased a constituency without truly being elected in? In fact neither the employees nor the customers really have any influence on the business or “non-profit” “think-tanks”, only those with 10% or more shareholder interest have any ability to direct the company which brings us back to old Aristocracy except even they have little influence if it interferes with profit motive (Exxon seems to influence AEI pretty directly, but Exxon is controlled by the bottom line…) So, the bourgeoisie at the top don’t even have control over their systems anymore, it’s kind of taken a life of it’s own. Initially they thought that self-interest could govern corporations etc. (sending them, via invisible hands and luck, in the “right” direction). It turns out that these systems don’t have self-interest though, they only have that profit motive. Anyway, we should get our neighborhoods identifying their real values and then call out the various governing bodies for what they are and insist on democracy so that if they don’t add real value (in addition to money flow) to our communities, out they go.
Jason: I definitely don’t support people like Nader “throwing in the towel” either, it’s just that the system is SO damaged and corrupt that there is no choice for real change aside from that which starts at home and in our neighborhoods. Even the elite are confused and subject to their own propaganda. You may be surprised at the ability those powerful “think-tanks”, “interest groups”, etc. have to manipulate and influence even a Ralph Nader (if he got in). They dump tons of cash into research just to determine the best way to control and influence certain people on their most unconscious basic levels. All in the name of the bottom line. That said, don’t stop signing petitions, writing letters, attending rallies, etc. (we still need to put pressure on these people outside of all that).
Irony: Walmart employees shop at Walmart ’cause that’s what they can afford but those on top at Walmart, who’s work is far less painful, get paid enough that they don’t have to shop there.
Sorry for being so long-winded, kept it as brief as I could. Also I’m way tired so sorry if none of it make sense.
PEACE!
Rahb said on December 21st, 2008 at 5:27am #

dang-it! I was mentioning transparency, which I got side-tracked from. Is it not a sad truth that no matter the intent, once a governing body is too large and deals with too much territory, transparency is automatically lost (If by nothing else than the average Joe’s ability to keep up with and keep interest in all of their actions)?
Petronius said on December 21st, 2008 at 8:30am #

PS I meant being an idealist in the pejorative sense. I have no illusions whatsoever about the next four to eight years.
bozh said on December 21st, 2008 at 10:05am #

let us look at an obvious fact: all lands,empires, wld-be empires have always been ruled by in ancient and modern times (until 20th cent) by one party.
when socalled democracies were instituted, nearly all lands formed more than one party.
it was always the king’s party that ruled and oft by repression/high taxes, etc.
numerous peasant revolts in europe testifies to this fact.
and this is what the ruling class in US grasped: we must have only one party; a two winged party oft at odds over cosmetics/taxes so as to convince joes and josephines that US is not a plutocratic but democratic.
they thought people ruled US, who wld ask such profound questions as, What is zionism? where is gaza? what’s Rome? and many other such weighty matters.
to render amers that much unknowlegeable, the oneparty launched a masssive misteaching curricula in schools and at the same provided higher education only to those who cld pay for it.
this cld have never happened if US had two+ parties.
but even on DV we find people who approbate more of the same; tho w. minor changes that wld leave basics unchanged.thnx
Petronius said on December 21st, 2008 at 10:15am #

what rahb says about the system being beyond control is correct, because the corporations who all are run along the bottom line, namely profit, have become monstrosities, extending their tentacles well beyond even their basic activities as set out by their own charters.
that is why their chief executives when pressed for accountability like the car manufacturers, look like deer in the headlights. the fact is that the corporate mythos, once established, is incontrovertable, and so
they lumber on to where the competition from other corporate giants
drives them into insolvency. the pressure of labor for survivable wages
weakens them further, so the only option was to move to regions where the cost of production was lower, i.e. South America or the Far East.
Capitalism’s decline is built into its own system, but there is the central government (reason why Federalism is so dangerous for the health of wage earners), to bail them out again and again. This is becoming far too costly for the state to support, because the banking system which extends credit for corporations to expand, has been hollowed out itself
by profit taking, which consists of speculation because Wall Street does not produce, but has to invent schemes for usury. Capitalism has a conundrum on its hands, which is very clear at present, namely how to keep itself going and the only recipe understood by the free marketism of the pernicious Chicago School, is to use public moneys to shore up the wobbling banking system. That is where we are at presently and it is a strategy that Obama supports and for that he counsels the citizenry to tighten their belts, i.e. we will suffer much lower wages to support those institutions that should by all normal reasoning disappear from the economic landscape. That is my strong objection to Obama’s economic policies and as far as his foreign policies go, that remains an altogether other matter, though it is as venal…
Petronius said on December 21st, 2008 at 10:29am #

PS The free market economy as enforced by the Chicago School is a bunch of bollocks of course, but highly praised by capitalists because it allows for plunder of other countries who are held to open their markets for ‘fair’ competition, while at home protectionism from the central government shores up what is erroneously marketed as free enterprise. Free it is for the powerful, a bondage for the wage slaves.
Nothing is free in life for those who have abandoned their power, that is the power of the people. Once convinced of their dependency on what is dictated from above, they have relinquished their birthrights to join together in opposing the expropriation of their labor.
Max Shields said on December 21st, 2008 at 11:33am #

Petronius,

To your point about the Chicago School, I agree. That is the home of neo-classical economics.

If you follow the history of how corporate charters evolved (they actually replaced the power of monarchies in Britain when their empires became too much for them to manage) in conjunction with the privatization of the commons, you’ll have a clear picture of our current state.

We should all understand the history of corporations, modern day empires, and their confluence with the privatization of the commons. Understanding this is critical. No real change can happen until a thorough understanding of these powerful forces that drive everything that happens is grasped.

You are absolutely right, Petronius, when you say: “Nothing is free in life for those who ahve abandoned their power, that is the power of the people.”

I just posted something similar a few minutes ago. We give away our power and hand it over to Obama and the duopoly every election. We are like trained seals who keep doing this nonsense every 2 to 4 years and we expect change?!?
Petronius said on December 21st, 2008 at 11:41am #

PS PS
How blind can one be ? Here we have witnessed the biggest rip-off of public funds by the Federal government and Wall street. While workers get blackmailed in order to keep their jobs at the defunct auto makers. That Obama gives his vote to the bank bail-out makes him in my eyes share those public enemies. The bail-out theft does nothing to ameliorate the coming depression hitting working people, but Goldman Sachs has admitted it had a bonus pot of $2.6bn – around a quarter of its total compensation and benefits bill. Morgan Stanley’s compensation and benefits amounted to $12.2bn, suggesting a bonus pool of around $3bn. The pool at Merrill Lynch, which is yet to report fourth quarter figures, is likely to amount to $3.5bn on the basis of a total compensation bill of around $13bn. (guardian.co.uk). The false premise is that lowered Wall street bonuses result in lower taxable income for the state of New York, therefore taxes on every day living necessities go up to support the true culprits of this calamity. Their motto: Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiator !
Petronius said on December 21st, 2008 at 11:48am #

more power to you max for pointing out that we need to study the history of corporations and their charters as well as the privatization of the commons (jeffrey st. clair has excellent analyses of this on cp).
there is no strength in being uninformed.
Deadbeat said on December 21st, 2008 at 12:15pm #

We should all understand the history of corporations, modern day empires, and their confluence with the privatization of the commons. Understanding this is critical. No real change can happen until a thorough understanding of these powerful forces that drive everything that happens is grasped.

There is an excellent movie called The Corporation that presents and excellent analysis of the corporation and its origins. In fact they abused laws that were passed to protect the freed slaves in order to allow corporations to become quasi-humans.

But the issue is NOT just about corporations. Corporations is just an institutional form constructed under our capitalist system. In many areas you have rich families and plantation owners controlling everything. So corporation is only one way that the rich and elites control the means of production. If corporations were outlawed tomorrow the wealthy would just construct new forms.

In addition there are other detrimental forces in the U.S. Economy that has to be challenged in addition to “corporations”. The Left’s focus on “corporations”, IMO, is another way to obscure Zionism’s powerful influence on the U.S. political economy.

IMO, racism and capitalism has to be confronted holistically rather than compartmentalizing issues like Liberals often do in order to confuse the public into “reforming” the system.
bozh said on December 21st, 2008 at 12:45pm #

nobody promised us a bed of roses. there is no promise in US constitution that a son of a laborer will be equally powerful w. a son of kennedys or bushes.
and son’s father is a dirty commie or socialist, he’l lose what little respect/love/power he hade unless he joins the crowd.
an editor of the msm may boast, That’s democracy. i got that retort decades ago.
in a crowd of 1K people 2,3, 4 well-organized people can take control over them by, among many other ruses, just one lie.
just one; it’l suffice.
but when u have a million+ fraudsters, they can easily grab by the balls 200mns.
and all it takes to that is by simply using the language. u, having money, hire a speaker. and who wldn’t speak or write for easy money?
and it’s not just editors who r speaking volumes for the uncle. entertainers, advertisers, ‘educators’, clergy, generals heap accolades on the uncle and proclaim coming of genghis, attila, mohammed, who r now flying on flying persian carpets towards US in order to destroy it.
anyhow, the fraud had been going on for millennia.
just a curioso? wld the fraudsters in US have succeded to this degree if amers were mostly of one ethnos; let’s say, english, german, norwegian only,
i think not. but in US w. so many aliens: blacks, latinos, asians, e. euros, it is easy for one folk to take over not only america but also the planet. thnx
Jeremy Wells said on December 21st, 2008 at 1:00pm #

“Total US military spending per year is now over $1.4 trillion. That’s enough to solve every major material problem of humanity.”

“Progressives” are forever making these observations as if this is a great discovery.
But the article stops here. NEVER is there any attempt to go beyond this truism to analysize WHY this is the case and has been the case for decades!

To go to the root cause of “every major material problem of humanity” is to finally to examine the nature of U.S. and global capitalism. This critical and scientific examination of capitalism, first carried out by Karl Marx, has gone on for over 150 years. Marxism today provides this understanding of WHY the U.S. foreign policy is forever a reflection of the interests of the capitalist ruling elite.

Obama is a perfect facilitator to continue the same foreign and domestic economic policies of class war against working people here. His election to President was promoted by these same corporate interests to disarm and diffuse the massive opposition to these economic policies.

For a Marxist understaning of the anti-capitalist, socialist perspective check out the World Socialist Web Site, http:www.wsws.org

In particular, check out this multipart series which gives a quick introduction to the basic Marxist understanding of capitalism.

The questions which PROGRESSIVES are forever ignorant are answered below.
————————————————————————————————————
(The following is the first part of a lecture delivered by Nick Beams, national secretary of the Socialist Equality Party (Australia) and a member of the International Editorial Board of the World Socialist Web Site, to audiences in Perth, Melbourne and Sydney in November and December, 2008. Part 2 will be published tomorrow and subsequent parts over the next few days.}

A lecture by Nick Beams
The World Economic Crisis: A Marxist Analysis
Part 1
By Nick Beams
19 December 2008
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/dec2008/nbe1-d19.shtml

Lecture by Nick Beams
The World Economic Crisis: A Marxist Analysis
Part 2
By Nick Beams
20 December 2008
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/dec2008/lect-d20.shtml
Max Shields said on December 21st, 2008 at 1:02pm #

Deadbeat, you can believe what you want. It is not simply a movie that makes clear the role of corporations and their tie with the British empire and how that empire was extended at the birth of the American empire.

Your explanation for everything says life began in 1948 and everything else is just a fairytale.

Your arguments are superfluous because that start with a simpletons dismissal of facts so you can trumpet your usual zionism/left shit.
Jason Oberg said on December 21st, 2008 at 1:51pm #

I think we’re all in agreement that this corporate empire needs to be toppled. A good start would be to boycott these monstrous entities, starting with the more monopolistic ones. Microsoft would be very difficult, since it is a monopoly (one of those things that used to ne unconstitutional), so let’s try Wal-Mart. Everyone says that the poor have no choice but to shop at Wal-Mart. Why is that? I look around and see dollar stores everywhere. Everywhere. There’s at least five just where I live, where you can get anything you need, other than furniture. So what good is Wal-Mart? It’s more expensive than these places, and you’re getting cheap crap made in China. Twice I’ve bought a DVD player there and got screwed. The first one lasted a few weeks; the second one didn’t work when I got it home. The guy at the customer service desk said, “Yeah, that happens a lot.” I am dumbfounded by America’s love affair with Wal-Mart. Boycottee #1, I say.
The point is the only way to take back the power from these corporations is for dumb Americans to stop giving them all their damn money. I know, we’ve been told that we have to keep consuming to keep the economy going. Well, that did loads of good, didn’t it? No, in fact it merely perpetuates the corrupt system, and gives the corporations greater and greater influence over the politicians and over us.
So, this is how I try to live my life. I buy my books at the used book shop in town, for far better reading material and humanly affordable. To hell with Border’s. I eat only at small-business restaurants, and eat much better food than the garbage at Applebee’s. So on and so forth. This isn’t, of course, the ultimate cure-all for our ills, but definitely step one in the right direction. Ending this idiotic fascination with professional sports and talentless celebrities would help, as well. Everytime I flip by the “Today” show in the morning and see all those directionless people standing outside, behind Matt Lauer and whatever brainless actor, staring in the window for hours, I just want to vomit. Such damn sheep they’ve turned people into. Americans need to reclaim their pride, and realize that pride doesn’t come from being able to blow a few hundred dollars at Wal-Mart, unlike those poor wretches in Africa. Nor does it come from an ugly flag flapping in the breeze. It comes from taking control of your life and standing up for yourself.
If I’ve gotten a bit preachy here, sorry, choir.
Jeremy Wells said on December 21st, 2008 at 2:51pm #

Jason — “It comes from taking control of your life and standing up for yourself.”

Individualism such as expressed here is completely impotent in struggling against the vast economic and political power of capitalism. Impotent individualism is all too often an escape mechanism of individual working people and their families to try to ssurvive economically where their is little or no help in society.

The barbarity of existing capitalism must be confronted by all working people as a collective political struggle at every level of existence, nationally and internationally. There is no realistic individualistic escape in “green” consumerism, religious fanaticism, racism, etc. that doesn’t tend in destroying the humanistic values of the individual.

When 45 million people cannot afford health insurance in this country, Thus 45 million individuals try to solve poorly their own health needs as best they can. But if the 45 million were to regard themselves as a collective with a common interest, then perhaps a national solution could be accomplished promptly.

“Divide and Conquer” is the key practice of capitalists to maintain their class rule. Thus working people are forever being artificially divided by religion, race, language, national origin, immigration status, political parties, etc. to prevent their common majority interest from asserting itself against the capitalist minority.

No meaninful “reform” of capitalism or “change” of the corporate controlled Democratic Party is possible, especially as an “individual” such as Nader, Kucinich, or McKinney. Perhaps no change is possible as long the organized
labor movement views itself as a “business partner” of corporate capital and
supports the Democratic Party.

A new internationalist and socialist political party is needed to bring millions of individualised working people together to demand the end of run-amok gangster capitalism. Socialism is now essential for the survival of humanity.

With this perspective, see the Socialist Equality Party at http://www.socialequality.com
Max Shields said on December 21st, 2008 at 3:18pm #

I must laugh, we talk about “capitalism” as if it’s a thing. It’s merely a word. Capitalism and Socialism (or Communism/Marxism) are words which provide some idea of an economics. These are human devised terms to lay forth a means of exchange and relationships. They are old and mostly outmoded to reflect what is called for.

Let’s start with what Mr. Wells suggested (I think an excellent suggestion) a couple of posts back when he talked about cooperatives. Coopertive models frame a particular relationship between people. Depending on how they are structured, they are meant to operate on democratic principles. Workers’ cooperatives are optimal for the workers involved. Than there are community owned cooperatives which have roots in the community and are, again, democratically operated. There are successful hybrids. Obviously the people involved are key to the governance that keeps this an open system of exchange is critical; but the business structure sets the stage for a non-hierarchical organization with a sense of community integral to its existence.

This is neither a capitalistic nor a socialistic form of economics. What makes this model different – and significant (while certainly not new) – is the relationship created and sustained between all of the participants. Such a model makes unions superfluous. A workers’ cooperative is by its very nature owned, operated and worked by its “employees”.

What we seem to miss as we bash capitalism is that it is the preditory and corporatization of capitalism which has been brutal. Corporatizm as I tried to explain is an extention of empire. All of our main stream organizations reflect the structure of empire. Corporations are a special extension of empire. The privatization of the commons is NOT a capitalistic creation; it is a empire/corporate creation. Let’s be clear otherwise we’ll be fighting windmills.

Again, behind the words socialism and capitalism is a legacy which most seem not to understand or to have studied. Marxism is in many respects passe beyond some of its critique of capitalism. The captains of industry are not the creation of capitalism per se. They are the creation of an elitism. The principles governing that elite is ownership of capital and production. To do that they must own land (natural resource) rights. The notion of land owners is not, in and of itself, a capitalistic precept.

Today, neoclassical economists (think M. Friedman), free market fundamentalist (who don’t believe in free markets unless the odds are stacked in their favor) and Wall Street hustler/gamblers have contrived a new version of capitalism that Adam Smith would find quite foreign.

I’m not defending capitalism. I don’t think any “ism” is worthy of defense. I do think economic principles of exchange and the relationships created are key. The “isms” are just ideologies that keep us from understanding and acting appropriately to solve the problem (once we’ve clearly defined it – which is far too infrequent).
Jason Oberg said on December 21st, 2008 at 4:04pm #

Okay, Jeremy, I should have said “stand up for ourselves” instead of “yourself.” I agree with what you’re saying. And Max, I realize you’re a very good abstract thinker, but “Socialism” is fine with me. I believe in the basic precepts of socialism, and I believe that every human society should live by them. Easier to talk about something if it has a name. I do understand what your getting at, though. Labels are often counter-productive and pigeon-holing. They limit where one can go from this place or that. Irrespective of being bought and sold by their corporate masters, I think this is what has also limited the duopoly parties from way back. If you’re a Republican you have to believe this; if you’re a Democrat you have to believe that; conservatives are “pro-life;” liberals are “pro-choice” and all that crap. Parties, labels, and rigid ideologies hamper all progress and just keep us divided. But again, that’s what they want, isn’t it?
kahar said on December 21st, 2008 at 4:37pm #

“Afghanistan…, one of the poorest and most miserable on earth”
This being 100% wholly attributable to the hard work of the Anglo-American morons.

Obama makes Hitler look like a little schoolboy.
Max Shields said on December 21st, 2008 at 4:38pm #

nothing “abstract” about a workers’ cooperative – and nothing particularly capitalistic or socialistic about it either.
bozh said on December 21st, 2008 at 5:38pm #

if my memory serves me correctly ‘education’ in US get’s a short shrift from almost all posters and journalists.
yet education is as powerful or even more powerful than the abuse of money.
i find astounding that people don’t talk ab. it. look, there must be by necessity an ideal societal structure.
certainly at least a better one than what we have now in US and many lands.
so, i suggest we study the existing social structures in all lands.
by doing this we wil discover that in many lands it had not changed an iota.
one of the structural members of a society is education; if people do not obtain it but get only disinformation, ‘promises’. etc.,
only a few people will rule.
and recorded history proves that only few rule; their will be done.
before i married i made only one promise: i said to my love that if she marries me she’l have lots of trouble. and she did!
and also made a statement, I came to make mistakes.
obama is not saying this; he plays god but he came to make mistakes.
as for promises, they r lies. even gods don’t make promises. thnx
Petronius said on December 21st, 2008 at 8:53pm #

please let me repeat: ‘there is no strength in being uninformed’. max and bozh understand that and knowledge is a fierce weapon because
it is unassailable. that is why the school system is so deplorable in america: keeping the public uninformed is an industry here and murdoch makes millions off it. and kahar, I understand your rage, but your simile of obama (as yet an unproven entity) and hitler is not
correct and unproductive. anger is good only if it is directed well and
not at random, then it becomes powerless. crimes against afghanistan and iraq go back a long way, well from before the full flowering of the american empire. barbarian europe has always envied the arab culture which transfered the best of ancient mediterranean civilizations over into europe via spain. the early crusades were fought over spoils in constantinople and jerusalem. later colonializations were for strategic reasons (to keep european competitors away from easy plunder) and
for cheap materials and goods to be found in the east and in africa (humans included as free labor). that dates from the capitalist expansions in the late eighteenth century to this day. once one can re-arrange the social contract at home, those cruel and rapacious excursions into other lands will cease. that is why it is imperative to join and educate, to free people from their accepted shibboleths and to deny the state its authority by invalidating consent.
Deadbeat said on December 21st, 2008 at 9:59pm #

Max says …

I’m not defending capitalism. I don’t think any “ism” is worthy of defense. I do think economic principles of exchange and the relationships created are key. The “isms” are just ideologies that keep us from understanding and acting appropriately to solve the problem (once we’ve clearly defined it – which is far too infrequent).

Max makes an interesting point by saying that “corporations” predates capitalism and that “corporation is a function of empire”. I won’t debate his claims to knowing the history of corporations. But what does relate to his remarks is that “language” is also a function of empire.

My point is that if cooperatives threatens the ruling elites then “cooperatives” will be redefined and propagandized as a negative. This is why terms such as “socialism” and “anarchy” has become tainted. I recall that Michael Albert used a similar explanation (or excuse) when he defined his Parecon ideas of socialism being a tainted term.

My argument would be rather than abandon “socialism” is to fight the empire by reclaiming language and the true meaning of words.
Max Shields said on December 21st, 2008 at 10:26pm #

I think the kind of economic framework we can agree on does not have to be a contrast of what we think we don’t want.

What causes our dilemma is important. If we just think we’re going to knock off the ruling structure by yelling socialism in their face, it’s just not going to work. We have demonstrable evidence.

The failure is to understand that the language of empire is about forcing one side to win over another – to struggle and win. But the way to change, I think, is not to confront power with power but to create the alternative and let it become our reality.

One can readily create workers’ cooperatives, and local change such as deep living democracy that is truly an alternative to the power structure, while never confronting the empire head on.

My point is that we have inherited the legacy of the “battle” between capitalism and socialism. I say we need to think outside that legacy to achieve real deep sustainable change.
bozh said on December 22nd, 2008 at 5:31am #

max, but what happens when we think of socialism as long laborious process w. mighty enemies constantly trying to villify/destroy it?
natch, a better structured society wld be almost impossible to achieve.
let us entirely for the moment forget ab isms.
there r many isms but only one structure of society; in US also.
we can never end defining/undersatnding/elucidating any ism or any religion.
we can never understand what “fredom”, “free market”, “corporatism”, etc., is or shld be because we can’t see, hear, taste, smell, not touch them.
but we use the 5 senses to experience people and to learn how each tier functions.
eg, we have doctors. almost al r right wing; look dwn on us. the same observation applies to entertainment, advertising, clerical, political, and teaching people.
all of these look dwn of us and repress us; commands us to kill, (ab)use us, etc.,
a soldier will kill an unarmed civilian in name of his country; which by the way doesn’t exist (in nature); only people exist and only people order a soldier to kill unarmed people.
of course, always in name of s’mthing.
the bailout was done for the good of the country. but how ab hobos, housepeople?
so let’s stop hunting for the snark; one won’t find it. one will never ever find any ism or any religion, either. thnx
Petronius said on December 22nd, 2008 at 7:53am #

yes, language is extremely important and it is the basis for much misunderstanding. just the word ‘freedom’ has been misused for so many different interpretations. I also do not believe that any -ism is part of dis-enslavement. I do believe that worker’s solidarity is at the bottom for a change of the social contract (solidarity is the keyword in the struggle against seeing through a glass darkly and is not an empty slogan at all). old fashioned and often discarded ideas from marx do have power still and so one should read his books as well as articles by engels. surplus value theft is at the bottom of american society and poisons everything flowing from it. what we need to look for is a new model of society inclusive of all. the despair of bozh will not help and he surely cannot be serious writing that the bail-out was done for the good of the country ? these discussions on dv are useful in so far as it brings people together in searching for alternatives to the present very destructive structure within we try to survive.
bozh said on December 22nd, 2008 at 10:57am #

petronius,
i have said that in nature there is no such entity as a “country”
and i have clearly stated that bad thing r done in name of s’thing for misleading purposes, of course.
the two agressions going on now, the bailouts, killing off indigenes, slavery, civil war in US, etcetc., were done for the good of the country.
that’s what 98% of Usans believe.
perhaps, i shld have stated that according to 98% amers, it was done for the good of the country.
in actuality, it was hoped bailout wld be good for some people but not hobos or working people.
i think i have clarified what i meant. but i can see also that it was possible to misgrasp my intent. thnx
Petronius said on December 22nd, 2008 at 11:07am #

ok I got it bozh ! yes states (countries) are an anomaly by now. the fake globalism spouted by neo-liberals is pure bosh (no pun intended). and
the bailout, like you write with the civil war, killing of american indians and slavery were all done ‘for the good of this country’, but resulted in many deaths of innocents, torture and enslavement for others, eradication of a whole population and the coming impoverishment of many. what country would become ‘better’ by these means ? statehood is a perversion of human societies.
Robert David STEELE Vivas said on December 23rd, 2008 at 1:17pm #

I agree with the above. Obama has been captured and the election was theater. See the free book, ELECTION 2008: Lipstick on the Pig at http://www.oss.net/PIG.

The antidote is a citizens alternative government and open money that does not pay taxes to support a bloated military, an aggressive imperialist foreign policy, and secret intelligence against We the People. You all may be interested in the Citizens Summit in Denver in February 9009, details at http://www.transpartisan.net.

Below is an Op-Ed on what Obama would do if he were seriously interested in restoring the Republic.

—

Intelligence for the President—and Everyone Else
How Barack Obama Can Create a Smart Nation and a Prosperous World at Peace

By Robert David STEELE Vivas

Today’s secret intelligence community costs the U.S. taxpayer over $60 billion a year, and yet, according to General Tony Zinni, USMC (Ret), provides less than 4% of the decision support needed by a major government executive. The appointment of a Director of National Intelligence (DNI) is a turning point for the President-elect, but cannot as yet be said to be a constructive one. Absent firm direction, the incoming DNI is likely to continue the status quo ante, making changes on the margin. Absent a more open mind and respectful attention to what the iconoclasts—including General Al Gray, USMC (Ret), then Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps—have been saying since 1988, here are three things the incoming DNI is NOT expected to do:

1) Create the Open Source Agency as recommended by the 9-11 Commission on page 413

2) Create the Multinational Decision Support Center to replace the Coalition Coordination Center (logisticians) with intelligence managers and analysts from up to 90 countries.

3) Fund the office of the Assistant Secretary General for Decision Support at the United Nations, with a US Ambassador as the Deputy and also Director of the U.S. Department of State Office of Information Sharing Treaties and Agreements.

In other words, we carry on with secrets for the President at grotesque expense with marginal result, and ignore both the needs of the President for truly multinational insight (using sources in 183 languages we do not speak) and also the needs of Congress, Cabinet officers, commanders, and action officers at every level of government.

In 2000, after a decade of articles and chapters on the subject of reinventing intelligence, I published ON INTELLIGENCE: Spies and Secrecy in an Open World, with a Foreword from President David Boren of the University of Oklahoma, past Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI). In 2002 I published THE NEW CRAFT OF INTELLIGENCE: Personal, Public, & Political, with a Foreword from then Chairman of the SSCI, Pat Roberts (R-KS). Other books followed, on peacekeeping intelligence, on information operations, on creating a Smart Nation, and most recently, with 55 contributors, COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE: Creating a Prosperous World at Peace. Impact? ZERO.

Why? Easy. The current Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and past leaders operate on the Washington paradigm: maximizing budget share and managing inputs. They do not manage to achieve outcomes, and past Presidents have been content to let them be. Presidents, Cabinet officers, and Members of both the Senate and the House are abysmally ignorant of global reality and they are also ignorant of how national intelligence need not be federal, secret, nor expensive. We can fix that.

President-elect Barack Obama has an opportunity, within a week of inauguration, to create a Smart Nation virtually overnight, and in the next eight years, to lead all other nation-states, corporations, non-profit organizations, and publics at large, in creating a prosperous world at peace. Here’s how.

1) Sponsor the Smart Nation Act (now the Smart Nation-Safe Nation Act) as developed by myself in partnership with Representative Rob Simmons (R-CT-02), one of America’s most faithful legislators and retired military officers with an appreciation for intelligence. Here is a snap-shot of the differences between what we have now (20th Century intelligence, 1950’s mind-sets with 1970’s technology) and what we could have.

20th Century Intelligence (TIRED) 21st Century Intelligence (WIRED)
Secrets for the President Decision-Support for every official and citizen
Obsession with Seven “Hard Targets” Global Coverage—all information in all languages
Management of Inputs or Budget Share Management of Public Interest Outcomes
Reliance on centralized secret analysts Reliance on distributed public intelligence
Support to military plans for armed actions Support to President in building the right military
Ignore Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Provide decision support to every element of OMB
Ineffective in support to state & local government Create 50 community intelligence networks
Excessive expense on secret technical collection Focus on public processing & multinational sharing

With this one Act submitted and passed the first week in office, President-elect Obama will reinvent America and position America to lead and empower all others in creating a Prosperous World at Peace.

2) Direct the next Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to support all of the provisions of that Act from the very large secret intelligence budget. The three most important provisions are those calling for the creation of the Open Source Agency (OSA) a badly-needed capability recommended by the 9-11 Commission on page 413; and within the OSA network, the creation of a Multinational Decision Support Center relying only on unclassified information and providing decision support to the United Nations and all parties engaged in peace and stabilization operations; and the creation of a diplomatic Office of Information Sharing Treaties and Agreements whose Director, an Ambassador, also serves as Deputy Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations for Decision Support, an office to be funded by the OSA.

With this one enterprise, completely open, transparent, and accountable, the President can bring to life the wisdom of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison:

A Nation’s best defense is an educated citizenry Thomas Jefferson

A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives. James Madison

National Intelligence in this era cannot be about “secrets for the President.” It must be about empowering the President—and everyone else—with the extraordinary personal and organizational power that comes from information that has been discovered, discriminated, distilled, and converted into actionable intelligence—decision-support.
Operating under this new paradigm, the DNI would be the President’s chief aide in harnessing the distributed intelligence of the Whole Earth, and in creating a “Smart Nation” that will be secure as well as competitive in what is clearly the age of intelligence.

A truly inspired DNI would ask that the OSA, while funded by the DNI and totally responsive to the DNI’s severely deficient access to global multilingual open sources of information, be a completely independent agency, a virtual “fourth estate” willing and able to ensure that every citizen has access to real-world, real-time intelligence, arming America with the power unique to an informed citizenry.

The author is a 30-year veteran of government service across intelligence, information technology, military, and policy support functionalities. He is the founding CEO of OSS.Net, and of the Earth Intelligence Network, a 501c3 Public Charity devoted to creating public intelligence in the public interest.
Max Shields said on December 23rd, 2008 at 2:21pm #

Robert David STEELE Vivas

You’re about half way there in determining what’s up.

First, “restoring” the republic is hardly the issue. The republic is and has always been a plutocracy led republic. What we don’t have is democracy.

As far as what “Obama” should do, why waste time. You’ve already acknowledged that he is part of the system that put him and the line of POTUS before him in power. What’s the point?

The only reasony why we keep obsessing over Obama is because he is everywhere being foisted as the messiah. That needs to be refuted on the one hand, but on the other, we’re wasting precious time.

He is the alternative to Bush which is Clinton III. It’s that simple. What are you expecting, surgical removal of his brain and replacement with a “progressive” agenda?

Please…so much work to be done locally. In DC we’ll continue to be an imperial empire driven by corporate elites and plutocrats.

Are we going to talk about Obama as if he’s going to become something else over the next 4 perhaps 8 years!!!!

Get real!!!!

Latest Articles

Recent Discussion

Browse by Topic

The Military Death Toll While Enforcing the Occupation of Iraq

Obama’s Unprogressive Foreign Policies

39 comments on this article so far ...

Add to the discussion