AuthorTopic: Joe's Newz Channel  (Read 17603 times)

Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Toxic Culture II
« Reply #285 on: October 17, 2012, 05:32:01 PM »
Spinwatch: What The Bankers Did Next…
By Tom
15 October 2012


Our friends at Spinwatch have produced a short film on lobbying by the City of London called ‘What The Bankers Did Next…’  It takes a look at the government’s close relationship with the finance industry, some of the key players involved, and their efforts to manage public opinion and shut down debate.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/L1-HT_loJDA?feature=player_embedded" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/L1-HT_loJDA?feature=player_embedded</a>

http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/blog_comments/spinwatch_what_the_bankers_did_next
 

Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
India: miscalibrated expectations = delusion = intense disappointment
« Reply #286 on: October 18, 2012, 05:09:13 PM »
India: After the blackout

As India’s growth rates hit the buffers, the poor are sinking beneath a tide of seeming government indifference to their plight as politicians focus on looking after their cronies. Is it goodbye to the Asian tiger?

By William Dalrymple
Published 11 October 2012



Portable power generators in use in New Dehli. Photograph: Getty Images

Early last summer I went trekking in the Hima­layas high above Dharamsala. I had just finished a book and wanted to get away from the heat of the plains and clear my head in the clean air and crystal silence of the mountains.

Within a day, I had walked beyond the last metalled road. Along with the tarmac, I left both the telephones and the electricity grid far behind me. Soon I was heading into an apparently premodern world: up in the hill villages, the harvest was being cut by hand with sickles and bound in sheaves, stacked one by one into stooks. Oxen ploughed the narrow terraces with wooden ploughs. In the villages, stone houses with wooden fretwork balconies like those in Mughal miniatures tumbled down steep mountainsides, slate roofs alternating with roof terraces where the women were drying apricots and stacking kindling for the winter. You could almost taste the woody resin-scent of the deodars and the warm peach-brandy aroma of the drying fruit. One of the goatherds who wandered past our camp the second evening said he was on his way to consult the local oracle, a shaman who channelled a Pahari deity and was celebrated for the accuracy of his prophecies. It was trekking as time travel: I seemed to have walked up into a Jack-and-the-Beanstalk world about as far as I could imagine from the noise and pollution of New Delhi.

It was therefore something of a surprise the following morning to be woken by the sound of passing schoolchildren. Looking out of the tent, I saw a party of 20 immaculately dressed children with beautifully laundered uniforms – white trousers and white shirts for the boys and white salvars for the girls – heading down the hill on their way to the new private school that had, they said, just opened up in the valley below. Not one of their parents had had any education and the older generation in the village was entirely illiterate, but this school would teach them until fifth grade. After their 13th birthdays, they said, they hoped to continue their schooling up to the age of 18 in the senior schools of Dharamsala.

Later that morning, at the top of the pass, I stopped in at the village they came from, Shakti Dehra, and fell into conversation with the head­man. Within minutes, Joginder Raj­put had whipped out a cellphone and begun talking to his younger brother who needed him to send down some bullocks for the ploughing. The government telephone network had failed to get landlines up to the village yet, he explained, but there was a good signal from one of the private cellphone companies and about half the households in the village now had mobiles. Two or three also had Tata Sky satellite television, he added. The government had not provided electricity – something that is still true in about one-third of India’s villages – but the villagers had pooled their resources and bought a diesel generator and now they could gather to watch the Indian Premier League cricket matches. On winter evenings when they were snowed in, they could pass the time with old Bollywood movies.

None of the basic services that the villagers needed – roads, sanitation, education, health, electricity or telephones – had been provided by the state, yet the villagers had found a way around most of their problems. Despite the government inaction, they were determined to educate their kids and inch forward. They were not going to allow themselves to be left behind.

***

How far Shakti Dehra was typical of a much wider scenario in India became clear this August after the country suffered what the international media soon christened “the largest power blackout in human history”. India’s creaking electricity grid had finally collapsed in the middle of the hot summer, due to the load of supporting hundreds of thousands of air-conditioners, and had supposedly plunged 700 million people across 21 of India’s 28 states into darkness.

In reality, however, bar worse-than-usual traffic chaos, thousands of stranded commuters and a coal mine full of trapped miners in Bengal, India carried on much as it usually did: it muddled through. It was able to do this as the government provision of power is always so inadequate that the rich all have their own generators or “inverters” – a sort of giant rechargeable battery that can keep the fans going until power returns – while most of the poor get so little electricity anyway that its disappearance was barely noticed: of the 700 million people allegedly left powerless, in reality only 320 million had electricity in the first place. The situation varies from state to state, but in some of the more backward areas the provision of power is quite amazingly hopeless. In Uttar Pradesh, the largest state of all, 125 million people – 63 per cent of households – still have no power at all.

Life went on as before; but what the power failure did was expose to international scrutiny the scandalous state of Indian infrastructure and the failure of the Indian state a full 65 years after independence to provide even the basic necessities for modern life across most of the country. It also highlighted the growing sus­picion that India’s dream of a rapid rise to the international top table might be just that – a dream. It didn’t help that the power minister insisted that “India has the world’s best and largest power grid”. When power returned, New Delhi Television aired a show entitled Powerless Superpower: Are India’s Superpower Dreams a Joke?. The Wall Street Journal pointed out that since 2006 China had added about six times more power to its grid annually than had India: an average of 84 gigawatts against 14 gigawatts for India.

To add to the growing sense of depression felt by India’s middle class, the power failure came at the time India had just produced its lamentable performance at the London Olym­pics where the nation of 1.2 billion won only four medals – two silver and four bronze. Even Grenada, with a population of 105,000, won a gold medal. India’s supposed rival China narrowly lost first place to the US, but still came home with 88 medals, 38 of them gold. For over a decade now, India has marketed itself as the coming superpower, placing itself in the same league as Europe and the United States, and hyphenated with China as the dominant force of the near future. Indian futurologists have projected that China will overtake the US in gross domestic product between 2030 and 2040, and that India will follow suit by roughly 2050, as measured in dollar terms. They have pointed out that, measuring by purchasing power parity, India has already overtaken Japan to become the third-largest economy in the world.

India’s aspirations have been endorsed not just by David Cameron, but more importantly by the United States. In 2009, Hillary Clinton told an audience in New Delhi: “I consider India not just a regional power, but a global power.” A year later when Barack Obama came to Delhi he announced his enthusiastic support for a permanent seat for India on the United Nations Security Council, declaring the US-India relationship “the defining partnership of the century ahead . . . India is not simply emerging,” he told the national parliament, “India has emerged.”

The statistics are impressive: India is said to train a million engineering graduates a year, against 100,000 in Europe and 70,000 in the US, and the country stands third in technical and scientific capacity – behind America and Japan but well ahead of China. In the course of the past decade, as the Indian economy trebled in size, India’s information technology sector alone has earned the vast sum of almost $50bn annually, mostly in export revenues. Some of the profits have been spent buying prestigious foreign businesses, as in the much-trumpeted acquisition of Jaguar and Land Rover by Tata Motors in 2008. Average incomes are projected to continue doubling every ten years. The number of cellphone users has jumped from three million in 2000 to 100 million in 2005 and 929 million by 2012. The number of television channels rose from one in 1991 to 150 by 2007 and more than 500 today. In 2006, 23 Indians appeared on the Forbes list of the world’s billionaires; last year the number had more than doubled to 55.

India’s remarkable growth figures have, however, successfully masked a far less appealing set of statistics which shows that, despite the success of India’s middle class, when you look at government delivery of basic services to the poor, India has been struggling against being hyphenated less with China than with its more desperate and impoverished neighbours – Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan – and by some indices has been failing to compete with the poorest in sub-Saharan Africa.

For, even at the height of India’s boom, amid talk of space missions to Mars and fleets of nuclear submarines, and as the country tripled its defence budget to become one of the world’s top ten military spenders, it has also been home to one-third of the world’s poor. A full quarter of its population – about 310 million people – live in poverty.

Sixty-nine per cent of Indians live on less than $2 a day, and roughly 35 per cent on less than $1 a day. India ranks 66th out of 88 vulnerable countries listed in the Global Hunger Index. India has the highest number of children dying anywhere in the world. Every year, 1.7 million children under the age of five die from easily preventable illnesses such as diarrhoea. Of those who do survive until the age of five, 48 per cent are stunted due to lack of nutrients: child malnutrition is sadly something for which India wins a gold medal every year, while Eritrea takes the silver.

Likewise, the most basic health measure that any government can provide for its people is to immunise very young children. In India, however, only 60 per cent of all infants are completely immunised, compared to 86 per cent in Bangladesh. Even in sub-Saharan Africa, only eight out of 25 countries have immunisation figures as bad as India’s. Its adult literacy is not quite the lowest in the world, but at 63 per cent India is lagging behind Malawi and Sudan. Adult literacy in China, by comparison, is 94 per cent.

With India adding 18 million people – more than the population of Chile – to its total every year, the country needs to grow at roughly 6-7 per cent just to keep standing still and provide jobs for the hundreds of millions of young people who will be pouring on to the labour market in the next decade. It therefore matters very much when the same year that India suffered the power failure and the Olympic debacle, it saw its annual growth rate sink from a peak of 10.4 per cent in one quarter of 2010 to 5.5 per cent, slipping from the world’s second-fastest-growing economy to ninth place.

Other economic indicators are equally alarming. Public borrowing has quadrupled in the past five years, the national deficit is growing, inflation is high and the value of the rupee plummeted by 20 per cent in the course of the summer. In a few years India has gone from what seemed to be imminent domination of the world economy, the Maharajah of the Brics, to what the emerging-markets analyst and author of Breakout Nations, Ruchir Sharma, has called merely a “50-50 bet”.

***

The slowing of India’s economy is part of a global malaise, outside its control. According to Sharma, almost all the main emerging markets were growing at roughly 7 per cent between 2003 and 2008; only three contracted. India did well to have an average 8.9 per cent growth rate during these boom years, but it was hardly a huge surprise. Thanks to the global recession, growth rates are down across the board: this year China’s growth will fall to 7.5 per cent (down from 11 per cent in 2007) and Brazil’s to less than 2 per cent (from 6 per cent in 2007).

“The boom wasn’t made in India,” Sharma told me over the phone from New York, “and nor is the current recession. The global tailwinds are now acting strongly against it, and that is why the Indian economy is struggling to inch forward.”

The intense disappointment now being felt across India is partly due to unrealistic ex­pectations. According to the political analyst Pratap Bhanu Mehta, president of the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research, “Melancholy about India’s economic prospects is a result of miscalibrated expectations.” The political columnist Swapan Dasgupta puts it more bluntly: “We are just deluding ourselves if we ever thought we were a potential competitor to China. China is a world power, in comparison to which we are merely a glorified Rotary Club.”

Yet the inept way that India has handled its succession of crises, especially the novel move of promoting the power minister Sushilkumar Shinde to home minister within 24 hours of the summer blackout, has meant that domestically the finger of blame was pointed at the inept, Congress-led United Progressive Alliance coalition government. This now-floundering coalition is headed by the 80-year-old prime minister, Manmohan Singh, the man once credited with masterminding India’s liberalisation from 1991 onwards but who of late has turned into an exposed and vulnerable target. “He is increasingly becoming a sulky and embittered old man, angry with the world,” I was told by Arun Jaitley, the leader of the opposition in India’s upper house, the Rajya Sabha. “The bubble of his reputation has been punctured and he still doesn’t seem to understand where his government has gone wrong.”

More neutral observers are equally unimpressed: “He is a very weak prime minister,” says T N Ninan, chairman of Business Standard Ltd. “He is unable to impose his will either on his coalition allies or on his own ministers. The job of a prime minister is to persuade his team to follow his vision. Manmohan seems to have lost his way.”

A succession of corruption scandals has not helped the government’s reputation. The rot set in four years ago with the first hints of a telecommunications scandal, as it emerged that one of Manmohan Singh’s coalition ministers had been corruptly underselling the 2G telecom spectrum. The flawed auction may have cost the treasury as much as $40bn. This was followed by the crooked and wasteful mismanagement of the 2010 Commonwealth Games in New Delhi, when contracts to build stadiums were awarded to government cronies who built blatantly substandard facilities at inflated prices; several national teams declared on arrival that their accommodation, filled in some cases with rubbish, human faeces and even the odd snake, was “unfit for human habitation”. Since then a new scandal has emerged after it became clear that between 2004 and 2009 state-owned coal deposits were corruptly sold to friends of ministers for well below market price and without any attempt to have a competitive auction. This time, according to the comptroller and auditor general of India, the state watchdog investigating the allocations, the hard-pressed Indian treasury may have lost another $34bn.

Only one thing seems to keep the current coalition in power: the ineptitude of the main opposition, the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party. Tragically, the only thing saving the present set of corrupt politicians is the equally abysmal performance of their rivals.

***

What happens in a bustling, ambitious, entrepreneurial country such as India when the government ceases to govern? When there is no delivery of public services but people continue to yearn for development and self-improvement?

Just south of my farm outside Delhi lies the cyber-Gold Rush, shabby-glossy boom city of Gurgaon. The first time I lived in Delhi in the late 1980s, Gurgaon was a small, semi-rural Haryana market town with a single large Maruti car plant to one side; it was home to no more than 100,000 people. When I moved back to India eight years ago, from the end of my road you could just see a now much bigger Gurgaon in the distance, a mirage of gigantic cranes constructing rings of new estates full of call centres, software companies and apartment blocks.

Since then the cranes have galloped towards us at such a speed that Gurgaon now virtually abuts the edge of our house. What was farmland and a pool for water buffaloes when I moved in is now the largest mall in Asia, flanked by billboards advertising the latest iPhones and iPads. The pace of development is breathtaking to anyone used to the plodding growth rates of western Europe: the sort of construction that would take 25 years in Britain comes up here in five months. There are still no accurate figures but the city’s population has probably topped five million.

Here an increasingly wealthy middle class has precariously settled inside an aspirational bubble of fast-rising shopping malls (there are 26 up so far and more on the way), golf courses (seven at present), espresso bars, designer labels, restaurants and multiplexes. These new neighbourhoods, most of them still half built and ringed with scaffolding, are invariably given unrealistically enticing names – Beverly Hills, Windsor Court, West End Heights. “Come to Gurgaon,” read the adverts. “Come Live the Good Life.”

But as well as being a boom town with a growth rate equal to anything in China, Gurgaon is also a catastrophic mess. There is no working drainage system; pools of black sewage lie hidden behind the tower blocks advertised as millionaires’ dream homes. No one collects the rubbish and drifts of waste float through the rutted streets from the roadsides where they are dumped. There are no reliable supplies of water or electricity, barely the beginnings of a public transportation network and virtually no government housing, or health or education provision. Private electricity generators provide power, private borewells provide water, fleets of private buses provide transport and are directed by private security guards who act as traffic cops. It is, in short, a vast example of the same self-help spirit that has brought satellite television to the Himalayan fastness of Shakti Dehra, but on a monstrous, mega-city scale.

In one way, however, Gurgaon is not typical. Its failures are largely due to the failure of the state-level Haryana Urban Development Authority, which has simply been unable to keep up with the city’s hyper-growth; but in many places in India it is the different provincial governments that are managing to save their regions from the mess created by the paralysis of the floundering central government machinery. Ruchir Sharma certainly believes that “state-level governance is improving, and it is this that is saving many parts of the country from complete collapse. On my visits, the longer I stay in Delhi, the more depressed I get with the government.

“But the further I go from Delhi, the more optimistic I become. Many of the states once regarded as the most backward – Bihar, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and Jharkhand – are the ones where governance is improving most strikingly, and where growth is now at its fastest.”

This is just as well, as strong central governments of the sort which ruled India from independence until the late 1980s are likely to be a thing of the past: since 1989, all Indian governments have been coalitions, and there has been a gradual waning of the popularity of the big national parties such as the Congress and the BJP. In their place there is a new patchwork of smaller regional parties that are perceived as being more reliable at guarding local interests. This means regional parties have become progressively more powerful and have taken over more and more of the administration of people’s lives. The best are doing very well indeed.

The state of Bihar, in the north of India, is a case in point. It was once regarded as the most dangerous place in India, with the most corrupt and violent politicians. Yet here, the government of Nitish Kumar is credited with turning the state around, building new roads, attracting large amounts of investment and transforming this former wasteland into the biggest engine of growth in eastern India.

Another state that has done much to attract investment and build infrastructure is Orissa, which like Bihar now has a 10 per cent growth rate. “Jay” Panda, one of Orissa’s most influential young MPs, is enthusiastic about how the basic infrastructure his state government has constructed has changed the lives of the people. “Building roads does far more for the poor than the kind of subsidies and handouts favoured by the Congress,” he says. “When I talk to my rural constituents they say that connecting their village to a good road network doubles their income as now they can get their produce to market when, before, half of it would rot before they could sell it.

“Cold storage and better roads – these things may not sound sexy, but they are the simple things that actually change the lives of the rural poor,” Panda says.

When even the state governments fail to step in and save those abandoned by the para­lysis in central government, the losers remain. And it is always the poorest who are most vulnerable: poverty remains India’s most pressing problem.

One of the saddest and most depressing features of India’s rise has been the way inequalities have grown almost as fast as the economy as a whole. According to a recent report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), inequalities in earnings have doubled in India over the past two decades. In 1990 the top 10 per cent of earners made six times as much as the bottom 10 per cent. Now those in the top 10 per cent earn 12 times as much.

In many places the state doesn’t provide for the poor at all, and almost everywhere access to water, health care and sanitation remains woefully inadequate. India is the only country in the world where as much as 80 per cent of health spending is in the private sector. As the state does not provide essential medical facilities for most of its citizens, a bad health episode can finish a poor family; if the wage earner becomes ill or needs expensive treatment, the rest of his dependants will quickly sink below the poverty line.

It is a similar story with education. A World Bank survey in 2003 indicated that among primary school teachers in the government sector there was an absentee rate of 26 per cent and about a third of those in attendance were not engaged in teaching; so, nationwide, less than half of the teachers in the state sector were present and engaged in teaching. Only 16 per cent of Indians with children in government schools were satisfied with the reliability of their child’s teacher, and in some states, such as Rajasthan, 6 per cent were satisfied. The poor, in other words, are left by the government to fend for themselves.

One of the most revealing recent microstudies of Indian poverty is Behind the Beautiful Forevers: Life, Death and Hope in a Mumbai Slum by Katherine Boo, the New Yorker writer and Pulitzer prizewinner. In her book, Boo examines the lives and dreams of the people of Annawadi, a single, tiny, suffocating “sumpy plug of slum” that squats between the glossy luxury hotels around Mumbai Airport and a fetid lake of raw sewage.

The shanty town was born in 1991, the year Manmohan Singh kick-started India’s economic liberalisation, when a group of migrant Tamil labourers reclaimed the land from a snake-infested bog on the edge of the airport. Boo sets out to study what she calls “the in­frastructure of opportunity” that allows these most economically marginalised of India’s dreamers – the rag-pickers and migrant labourers who have been thrown off their land and sucked into Annawadi – to survive as Slumbai attempts to reinvent itself as a glamorous world city. Here, she writes, despite all the deprivation and injustice, and the absence of any helping hand from the state, “hope is not a fiction”. Her scavengers can succeed in flourishing against all the odds, like the fish that somehow continue to swim in the junk-rimmed, excrement-filled swamp-lake that frames the slum.

Boo’s Mumbai, like the dark streets of Dickens’s London, is a place of violent inequality and discrimination. A boy loses a hand in a shredder and stands there “with his blood-spurting stump”, apologising to the factory owner for making a mess; long-term residents find their lungs clogging up in the “spoon-it-up air”, heavy with sand and gravel blowing in from a nearby concrete plant. Most nights “the place was bedlam: people fighting, cooking, flirting, bathing, tending goats, playing cricket, waiting for water at the public tap, lining up outside the little brothel, or sleeping off the effects of the grave-digging liquor dispensed from a hut”.

***

Mumbai is, after all, a city where more than half of its citizenry live in makeshift housing. Yet it is also, like Gurgaon, a place of rapid expansion and unlimited opportunity, irrigated by rivers of new money. Boo’s book shows that liberalisation is indeed slowly lifting millions out of poverty, but she is equally interested in the moral questions: why don’t more of our unequal societies implode, she asks, and how do individuals keep their humanity in “undercities governed by corruption, where exhausted people vie on scant terrain for very little”? This is also a question that has preoccupied the novelist Arundhati Roy, who has become increasingly anxious about the tens of millions of Indians who have internalised the unrealistically high aspirations of “India Shining” propagan­da, first spun by the BJP in 2004.

“In order to create a large middle class a much larger underclass has been pushed down into poverty,” she told me. “You now have huge cities populated by migrant labour living on less than 20 rupees [25p] a day. Growth rates are not an indicator of well-being – during the period of highest growth our per-capita food grain intake, which was already lower than sub-Saharan Africa, actually went down. Meanwhile real power has fallen into the hands of a corporate, middle-class oligarchy.

“A poor person can’t get a hearing, never mind justice. The frustrations which will come with the failed take-off are going to create strange and terrible kinds of violence. For a decade, the skies rained cellphones, TVs and cars, and now it has stopped. A whole variety of ancient enmities could rise to the surface. I think it’s coming to a stage where India could become ungovernable.”

Yet the same rising expectations that are to Roy a cause of apocalyptic anxieties are to other observers cause for optimism. Ninan hopes that the growth of the boom years has given glimpses of possibility to millions, and as a result people will no longer accept snail-like growth rates and inept governance. The tens of thousands mobilised by the anti-corruption campaigner Anna Hazare in 2011 showed the extent of middle-class frustration and anger at government graft and failures of governance. As a result, corruption is being exposed: Freedom of Information legislation introduced in 2009 allowed the 2G scam to be documented, and it was the comptroller and auditor general of India – the government’s own anti-graft tsar – who started the investigation into the coal scam and has pursued it and the audit into the Commonwealth Games deals with such vigour.

Just as the slowdown was due to wider forces outside India’s control, so at some point the world economy will turn the corner and high growth rates in the “breakout nations” will resume. At a recent New Delhi conference there was widespread agreement that an 8 per cent growth rate is still realistically achievable in the near future. “Once world financial instability settles down, India is well placed to be able to grow again,” announced Montek Singh Ahlu­walia, the deputy chairman of India’s planning commission and a close ally of Manmohan Singh in liberalising the Indian economy. “It may not be at Chinese levels of 11 per cent, but we believe we can return to at least 8.2 per cent.” Naina Lal Kidwai, the country head for HSBC, said that her economists had reached similar conclusions. If that happens, and the growth rate is maintained until the end of the decade, the Indian economy will more than double in size to $3.5trn by 2020.

***

In the meantime, the hope is that the mass frustration felt across the country about the barriers blocking the progress of India’s economy will bring the pressure that is needed to make major reforms at the centre. India urgently needs to begin creating better infrastructure – its road, electricity and transport systems all need huge investment. Anti-corruption measures need to be beefed up and the Central Bureau of Investigation needs to be removed from government control so that it can independently investigate the corrupt, whoever they are, right up to the office of the prime minister – an important demand by Hazare that Manmohan Singh has so far resisted. Bids for government contracts all need to be held by competitive auctions and governments should have less discretionary power to award contracts to their friends, allies and cronies.

If this happens, things can only get better. In the longer view of history, India has only recently come to be seen as a poor country. As early as Roman times there was a dramatic drain of western gold to India; during the reign of Nero, the Pandyan kings even sent an embassy to Rome to discuss the latter’s balance of payments problems. A thousand years later it was India’s extraordinary wealth that drew in the merchant adventurers of the East India Company. They came to India not as part of some Tudor aid project, but instead as part of a desperate effort to cash in on the riches of the Mughal empire, then one of the two wealthiest polities in the world. In Milton’s Paradise Lost, the Mughal city of Lahore is revealed to Adam after the Fall as a future wonder of God’s creation: by the 17th century, Lahore had grown richer than Constantinople, and with its two million inhabitants it dwarfed London and Paris combined. It was, in terms of rapid growth, prosperity and opportunities, the Gurgaon of its day.

What eastern Europeans are to modern Brit­ain – economic migrants in search of a better life – the Jacobeans were to Mughal India. It was only after the arrival of the various colonial powers that India came to be perceived as poor. What is happening today is merely India’s slow return to its natural place at the forefront of the world economy. History is on its side.

In the long run, if India can learn to reform its institutions and clean out its political stables, it should not find it difficult to revert to its rightful and natural place as a rich country and a major power. After all, India’s people thrive wherever else they go in the world. India has the talent; and it has the resources. All it lacks is the political will.

William Dalrymple’s new book, “Return of a King: the Battle for Afghanistan (1839-42)”, will be published by Bloomsbury in February

http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/world-affairs/2012/10/india-after-blackout


Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
China: KIDS! It's What's For Dinner!
« Reply #287 on: October 18, 2012, 05:11:24 PM »
The Hidden Price of Food from China
By SPIEGEL Staff
10/17/2012


Part 1: You Get What You Pay For


A journalist takes samples from a polluted river in China: Now that they are aware of the harmful effects of pesticides, fertilizers, hormones and antibiotics, some Chinese farmers are reportedly producing a portion of their farm products for the market and a portion for their own families. The only difference is that the food for their families is produced using traditional methods.

In recent years, China has become a major food supplier to Europe. But the low-cost goods are grown in an environment rife with pesticides and antibiotics, disproportionately cited for contamination and subject to an inspection regime full of holes. A recent norovirus outbreak in Germany has only heightened worries.

Qufu, the city in China's southwestern Shandong Province where Confucius was born, isn't exactly an attractive place. But its fields are as good as gold. A few weeks ago, a shipment of strawberries left those fields bound for Germany.

The air above the cities of the Chinese heartland is blackened with smog, as trucks barrel along freshly paved roads carrying loads of coal from the mines or iron girders from the region's smelters. Fields stretch to the horizon, producing food to feed the world's most populous country.

The chili pepper and cotton harvests have just ended, the rice harvest begins in two weeks, and garlic will be ready in April. Thousands of female farm workers are kneeling in the fields planting the next crop of a particularly profitable plant in the international food business.

"Garlic is eaten everywhere," says Wu Xiuqin, 30, the sales director at an agricultural business called "Success." "We sell garlic all over the world, and increasingly to Germany." The going price of a ton of white garlic is currently $1,200 (€920). The Germans, says Wu, insist on "pure white" product, and they want the garlic individually packaged.

Well over 80 percent of the garlic sold worldwide comes from China. The "Success" farm produces 10,000 metric tons a year. Based on what she's seen at food conventions in Berlin and elsewhere, no country on Earth can compete with China. Her company supplies peeled, flaked, granulated and pulverized garlic, says Wu, and it has now added ginger, chili peppers, carrots, pears, apples, sweet potatoes and peanuts to its product line.

China, which already sews together our clothes, assembles our smartphones and makes our children's toys, is now becoming an important food supplier for Germany. Since China, as a low-wage country, doesn't exactly have a good reputation among consumers, the food industry usually doesn't mention the origin of the products it sells. Many Germans only realized how much of the food on their plates is harvested and produced in China when thousands of schoolchildren in eastern Germany were afflicted with diarrhea and vomiting two weeks ago in an epidemic thought to have been triggered by Chinese strawberries contaminated with norovirus.

A Growing Global Supplier of Food

There are some bizarre aspects to the global flow of food products. In some parts of China, the population still doesn't have enough to eat. To address the problem, the country is buying up farmland in Africa and importing massive quantities of powdered milk, chicken and pork. EU-based companies sold 393,000 metric tons of pork to China last year, an increase of 85 percent over the previous year. Food companies see China as an attractive growth market.

Conversely, China is also selling far more food products to Europe than it used to, as the world's top exporter recognizes a profitable growth market in Europe. From 2005 to 2010, the value of Chinese food exports worldwide almost doubled, increasing to $41 billion. And Germany, which imported €1.4 billion worth of food from China last year, is becoming an increasingly important customer. Although the country only accounts for about 2 percent of all German food imports, "China has moved into this market with surprising speed and momentum," says a food industry expert.

As always, the country has quickly adapted to the market's needs. While it was mostly Chinese specialties that were sold in German grocery stores in the past, there is now a growing market for cheap staple goods and prepared ingredients, such as the sliced strawberries in 10-kilo (22-pound) buckets that ended up in German school cafeterias.

Two things make China appealing for large companies such as Nestlé, Unilever or Metro: price and volume. "Of course we could buy our onions or mushrooms from 10 different suppliers, but that would entail a huge effort," says a food industry executive. Food companies have to familiarize each supplier with the market and then manage and monitor them.

China's farmland is as vast as its supply of cheap labor. "Picking, washing and cutting up strawberries is labor-intensive because using machines is almost impossible," says Felix Ahlers, the head of Frosta AG, a German frozen food company. This makes it more expensive to buy fruit from Europe, as his company does. But, as Ahlers points out, there are producers that only pay attention to price.

The diversity of products China has to offer also seems to be unlimited. For example, the country has become the world's largest exporter of honey. It is also starting to produce more and more finished products, a market with even bigger profit margins than food commodities. A significant portion of the world's salmon haul is processed in China, into smoked salmon, for example. The country famous for Peking Duck is now making frozen pizzas for the global market -- at a fifth of German prices.

Farmers Who Don't Eat Their Own Food

From an environmental standpoint, the production of pizzas on a global scale isn't all that worrisome. According to calculations by the Institute for Applied Ecology in the southwestern German city of Freiburg, shipping frozen products has only a minor adverse effect on our environmental footprint. Of course, it's "always best to eat regional and seasonal food," says Moritz Mottschall, a researcher at the institute. But if someone has a taste for strawberries in the fall, he adds, transporting 10 tons of product by ship from China generates only 1.3 tons of CO2 emissions. When trucks carry the same amount of product from the Spanish city of Alicante to the northern German city of Hamburg, they emit 1.56 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

The biggest problem with Chinese food products is the local production environment, which includes the excessive use of toxic pesticides for crops and of antibiotics for animals, sometimes coupled with a complete lack of scruples. In 2008, some 300,000 infants in China were harmed by milk and baby formula products adulterated with the chemical melamine. Chinese producers had added the substance, which is especially harmful to the kidneys, to powdered milk.

Chinese producers have also sold peas dyed green, which lost their color when cooked, fake pigs' ears and cabbage containing carcinogenic formaldehyde. Then there was the cooking oil that was captured in restaurant drains, reprocessed, rebottled and resold. The government newspaper China Daily has even reported on fake eggs.

Wu Heng has risen to become a prominent food-safety advocate in China. Last spring, Wu read about a strange powder that dealers were adding to pork so that they could sell it as beef, which is more expensive. Wu quickly developed an aversion to noodle dishes listed as containing beef.

He put together a website that includes a map pinpointing Chinese food scandals reported in the media. Wu called his website "Throw it Out the Window," an allusion to former US President Theodore Roosevelt, who is said to have thrown his breakfast sausage out the window in disgust after hearing about the appalling conditions in Chicago's slaughterhouses.

Animal products are the most questionable, says Zhou Li, a lecturer at Beijing's Renmin University who studies food safety. Meat is more profitable than vegetables, which only increases the incentive to maximize profits.

Zhou notes that farmers used to eat the same foods they sold. But now that they are aware of the harmful effects of pesticides, fertilizers, hormones and antibiotics, they still produce a portion of their farm products for the market and a portion for their own families. The only difference is that the food for their families is produced using traditional methods. In fact, many wealthy Chinese have bought their own farms so as not to be dependent on what's available in supermarkets. There are also reports of special plots of land used to produce food exclusively for senior government officials.


Part 2: A Porous Inspection Regime

The Chinese government introduced a new food safety law in 2009 and established a food safety commission in 2010. In addition, consumers who report illegal activities will reportedly receive monetary rewards.

But there are still many problems, as evidenced by an early warning system in Brussels designed to detect contaminated food and animal feed products for all EU countries, which disproportionately flags products originating in China. By last Friday, 262 reports on Chinese products had been received in Brussels for 2012 alone. They included noodles infested with maggots, shrimp contaminated with antibiotics, foul-smelling peanuts and candied fruit with an excessively high sulfur content (see graphic).

Ulrich Nöhle is very familiar with food production in China. A professor of food chemistry, Nöhle has worked for many years as an independent auditor in China, where he inspects products for quality on behalf of German retailers. He says that "you get what you order" from China, explaining that German retailers have to "specify how the product is to be grown or what standards are required to label a product as organic, for example." But, he adds, those who order products from China that are the cheapest possible and have not been inspected have only themselves to blame when they don't receive the goods they expected.

In one case, Nöhle discovered that sweeteners ordered in China by German customers had a strong odor of solvents. But when he spoke to the Chinese producers about it, they said: "It always smells like that." Nöhle had to have the production facilities reorganized until the product was up to German standards.

Once products are on their way to other countries, they are subject to very little inspection. At the port of Hamburg, which handles a large share of overseas food products destined for the European market, more than 15 percent of shipments containing animal products and 20 percent of those containing plant products are now from China.

In the case of fish, meat, honey and dairy products, an importer is required to report the products to the veterinary and importation office at the Hamburg port prior to arrival as well as to submit import manifests. The office then decides whether the products can be imported without being inspected. Sealed containers are only opened when there are doubts about their contents. When they are opened, veterinarians examine the containers to make sure that the refrigeration is working and that the contents were shipped at the correct temperature. Subsequent inspections are the responsibility of local food-inspection agencies, which are more knowledgeable about fast-food restaurants and farms than about global flows of commodities.

Plant-based food products are subject to even more lax monitoring, and they usually enter the EU without any inspection, whether fresh, frozen or preserved. The exceptions are only a small number of special food products that have attracted negative attention in the past or are currently under suspicion, and many of these products are now from China: peanuts, soybeans, rice, noodles, grapefruit and tea. These products are frequently inspected and, on rare occasions, individual countries even impose import bans.

Losing Faith in Inspectors

The inconsistent inspection regimen also complicates the search for the causes of problems. In about half of the 3,697 cases in which the EU issued warnings last year, consumer advocates "could no longer trace the products to the original producers," says Höhle, the food inspector. At least the supplier of the strawberries behind the recent norovirus outbreak in eastern Germany is now known. The fruit was grown, harvested and frozen in Shandong Province. And a Chinese company shipped it from the port in Qingdao to Hamburg.

In Hamburg, a German distributor, Elbfrost Tiefkühlkost, took delivery of and paid duties on the 44 tons. The next day, the company trucked the strawberries to Mehltheuer, a town in the eastern state of Saxony. Elbfrost's main buyer was Sodexo, an international catering company headquartered in France, which operates 65 regional kitchens in Germany. Officials with the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, together with prosecutors in Darmstadt, near Frankfurt, are now conducting a painstaking investigation to find out where the strawberries were contaminated.

Elbfrost management says that it will no longer buy products from China because it cannot guarantee that Chinese suppliers are shipping "product of flawless quality." But if quality is so uncertain, why did Elbfrost order products from China in the first place? The company, which is based in Saxony, has sourced strawberries, mushrooms and asparagus from China. Elbfrost claims that it is dependent on imports, and its management emphasizes the "attractive pricing" of Chinese products. Last year, Germany imported more than 31,000 tons of processed strawberries from China, at an average price of €1.10 per kilogram.

The world's largest retail chains, Walmart, Carrefour, Tesco and Metro, as well as producers like Coca-Cola, Unilever, Barilla, Campbell's and Nestlé, have recognized that they cannot rely on inspections from suppliers or governments. But they also can't afford to sell contaminated food products, given the potentially immense harm to their image. This is why the biggest companies in the industry have joined forces to form the Global Food Safety Initiative, with the aim of developing their own quality controls. "Together with our suppliers, we set certain standards that we believe to be correct," says Peter Overbosch, deputy head of global quality management at Metro AG.

The initiative doesn't include smaller companies, such as those that supply caterers and restaurants. In the end, however, the consumer also bears some of the responsibility. In general, China is certainly capable of producing high-quality products, says a food inspector from Hamburg, "but you get what you pay for."


A worker wearing protective gear prepares to confiscate bottles of a toxic pesticide in China in 2007: As always, the country has quickly adapted to the European market's needs. While it was mostly Chinese specialty foods that were sold in German grocery stores in the past, there is now a growing market for cheap staple goods and prepared ingredients, such as frozen pizzas.
 
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/europe-worries-about-health-hazards-of-cheap-food-from-china-a-861406-2.html


Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
FSA: La Serrata
« Reply #288 on: October 18, 2012, 05:13:38 PM »
The Self-Destruction of the 1 Percent


A painting of 17th-century Venice, with a view of the banks of the Grand Canal and the Doge’s Palace, by Leandro Bassano.

By CHRYSTIA FREELAND
Published: October 13, 2012


IN the early 14th century, Venice was one of the richest cities in Europe. At the heart of its economy was the colleganza, a basic form of joint-stock company created to finance a single trade expedition. The brilliance of the colleganza was that it opened the economy to new entrants, allowing risk-taking entrepreneurs to share in the financial upside with the established businessmen who financed their merchant voyages.

Venice’s elites were the chief beneficiaries. Like all open economies, theirs was turbulent. Today, we think of social mobility as a good thing. But if you are on top, mobility also means competition. In 1315, when the Venetian city-state was at the height of its economic powers, the upper class acted to lock in its privileges, putting a formal stop to social mobility with the publication of the Libro d’Oro, or Book of Gold, an official register of the nobility. If you weren’t on it, you couldn’t join the ruling oligarchy.

The political shift, which had begun nearly two decades earlier, was so striking a change that the Venetians gave it a name: La Serrata, or the closure. It wasn’t long before the political Serrata became an economic one, too. Under the control of the oligarchs, Venice gradually cut off commercial opportunities for new entrants. Eventually, the colleganza was banned. The reigning elites were acting in their immediate self-interest, but in the longer term, La Serrata was the beginning of the end for them, and for Venetian prosperity more generally. By 1500, Venice’s population was smaller than it had been in 1330. In the 17th and 18th centuries, as the rest of Europe grew, the city continued to shrink.

The story of Venice’s rise and fall is told by the scholars Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, in their book “Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty,” as an illustration of their thesis that what separates successful states from failed ones is whether their governing institutions are inclusive or extractive. Extractive states are controlled by ruling elites whose objective is to extract as much wealth as they can from the rest of society. Inclusive states give everyone access to economic opportunity; often, greater inclusiveness creates more prosperity, which creates an incentive for ever greater inclusiveness.

The history of the United States can be read as one such virtuous circle. But as the story of Venice shows, virtuous circles can be broken. Elites that have prospered from inclusive systems can be tempted to pull up the ladder they climbed to the top. Eventually, their societies become extractive and their economies languish.

That was the future predicted by Karl Marx, who wrote that capitalism contained the seeds of its own destruction. And it is the danger America faces today, as the 1 percent pulls away from everyone else and pursues an economic, political and social agenda that will increase that gap even further — ultimately destroying the open system that made America rich and allowed its 1 percent to thrive in the first place.

You can see America’s creeping Serrata in the growing social and, especially, educational chasm between those at the top and everyone else. At the bottom and in the middle, American society is fraying, and the children of these struggling families are lagging the rest of the world at school.

Economists point out that the woes of the middle class are in large part a consequence of globalization and technological change. Culture may also play a role. In his recent book on the white working class, the libertarian writer Charles Murray blames the hollowed-out middle for straying from the traditional family values and old-fashioned work ethic that he says prevail among the rich (whom he castigates, but only for allowing cultural relativism to prevail).

There is some truth in both arguments. But the 1 percent cannot evade its share of responsibility for the growing gulf in American society. Economic forces may be behind the rising inequality, but as Peter R. Orszag, President Obama’s former budget chief, told me, public policy has exacerbated rather than mitigated these trends.

Even as the winner-take-all economy has enriched those at the very top, their tax burden has lightened. Tolerance for high executive compensation has increased, even as the legal powers of unions have been weakened and an intellectual case against them has been relentlessly advanced by plutocrat-financed think tanks. In the 1950s, the marginal income tax rate for those at the top of the distribution soared above 90 percent, a figure that today makes even Democrats flinch. Meanwhile, of the 400 richest taxpayers in 2009, 6 paid no federal income tax at all, and 27 paid 10 percent or less. None paid more than 35 percent.

Historically, the United States has enjoyed higher social mobility than Europe, and both left and right have identified this economic openness as an essential source of the nation’s economic vigor. But several recent studies have shown that in America today it is harder to escape the social class of your birth than it is in Europe. The Canadian economist Miles Corak has found that as income inequality increases, social mobility falls — a phenomenon Alan B. Krueger, the chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, has called the Great Gatsby Curve.

Educational attainment, which created the American middle class, is no longer rising. The super-elite lavishes unlimited resources on its children, while public schools are starved of funding. This is the new Serrata. An elite education is increasingly available only to those already at the top. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama enrolled their daughters in an exclusive private school; I’ve done the same with mine.

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, earlier this year, I interviewed Ruth Simmons, then the president of Brown. She was the first African-American to lead an Ivy League university and has served on the board of Goldman Sachs. Dr. Simmons, a Harvard-trained literature scholar, worked hard to make Brown more accessible to poor students, but when I asked whether it was time to abolish legacy admissions, the Ivy League’s own Book of Gold, she shrugged me off with a laugh: “No, I have a granddaughter. It’s not time yet.”

America’s Serrata also takes a more explicit form: the tilting of the economic rules in favor of those at the top. The crony capitalism of today’s oligarchs is far subtler than Venice’s. It works in two main ways.

The first is to channel the state’s scarce resources in their own direction. This is the absurdity of Mitt Romney’s comment about the “47 percent” who are “dependent upon government.” The reality is that it is those at the top, particularly the tippy-top, of the economic pyramid who have been most effective at capturing government support — and at getting others to pay for it.

Exhibit A is the bipartisan, $700 billion rescue of Wall Street in 2008. Exhibit B is the crony recovery. The economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty found that 93 percent of the income gains from the 2009-10 recovery went to the top 1 percent of taxpayers. The top 0.01 percent captured 37 percent of these additional earnings, gaining an average of $4.2 million per household.

The second manifestation of crony capitalism is more direct: the tax perks, trade protections and government subsidies that companies and sectors secure for themselves. Corporate pork is a truly bipartisan dish: green energy companies and the health insurers have been winners in this administration, as oil and steel companies were under George W. Bush’s.

The impulse of the powerful to make themselves even more so should come as no surprise. Competition and a level playing field are good for us collectively, but they are a hardship for individual businesses. Warren E. Buffett knows this. “A truly great business must have an enduring ‘moat’ that protects excellent returns on invested capital,” he explained in his 2007 annual letter to investors. “Though capitalism’s ‘creative destruction’ is highly beneficial for society, it precludes investment certainty.” Microsoft attempted to dig its own moat by simply shutting out its competitors, until it was stopped by the courts. Even Apple, a huge beneficiary of the open-platform economy, couldn’t resist trying to impose its own inferior map app on buyers of the iPhone 5.

Businessmen like to style themselves as the defenders of the free market economy, but as Luigi Zingales, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, argued, “Most lobbying is pro-business, in the sense that it promotes the interests of existing businesses, not pro-market in the sense of fostering truly free and open competition.”

IN the early 19th century, the United States was one of the most egalitarian societies on the planet. “We have no paupers,” Thomas Jefferson boasted in an 1814 letter. “The great mass of our population is of laborers; our rich, who can live without labor, either manual or professional, being few, and of moderate wealth. Most of the laboring class possess property, cultivate their own lands, have families, and from the demand for their labor are enabled to exact from the rich and the competent such prices as enable them to be fed abundantly, clothed above mere decency, to labor moderately and raise their families.”

For Jefferson, this equality was at the heart of American exceptionalism: “Can any condition of society be more desirable than this?”

That all changed with industrialization. As Franklin D. Roosevelt argued in a 1932 address to the Commonwealth Club, the industrial revolution was accomplished thanks to “a group of financial titans, whose methods were not scrutinized with too much care, and who were honored in proportion as they produced the results, irrespective of the means they used.” America may have needed its robber barons; Roosevelt said the United States was right to accept “the bitter with the sweet.”

But as these titans amassed wealth and power, and as America ran out of free land on its frontier, the country faced the threat of a Serrata. As Roosevelt put it, “equality of opportunity as we have known it no longer exists.” Instead, “we are steering a steady course toward economic oligarchy, if we are not there already.”

It is no accident that in America today the gap between the very rich and everyone else is wider than at any time since the Gilded Age. Now, as then, the titans are seeking an even greater political voice to match their economic power. Now, as then, the inevitable danger is that they will confuse their own self-interest with the common good. The irony of the political rise of the plutocrats is that, like Venice’s oligarchs, they threaten the system that created them.

The editor of Thomson Reuters Digital and the author of “Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else,” from which this essay is adapted.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/opinion/sunday/the-self-destruction-of-the-1-percent.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


Uncle Bob

  • Guest
Re: Joe's Newz Channel
« Reply #289 on: October 19, 2012, 04:25:30 AM »
I swear this newz channel should be on TV all these things shoud be the first headlines.  I feel really pissed off after reading those facts in India, Im already pissed off by the suicide rate of their farmers, and total death of life in pollution of the sacred Ganges and Yamuna rivers. also the previously unheard of crimes like you watch on CSI and all that crap, never used to happen. I hate that the poor dumb sudras and mudras wear the sorrow for all the up and coming western wannabes shitting on them.
What utter bullshit.

Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Joe's Newz Channel
« Reply #290 on: October 19, 2012, 06:47:07 AM »
I swear this newz channel should be on TV all these things should be the first headlines.

Thanks Uncle Bob.  And I appreciate the following analysis/recommendation you made:

So thanks but no thanks on reading up and reflecting on history and theology, I have done that longer than your life already I will wager. May I suggest in light of the necessity of having an appreciation for actual evangelism to register actual concern and warmth for your fellow man and his soul, as opposed to robotic fixation on its opposite, Do some reading up and reflection yourself on High Functioning Autism-Aspergers Spectrum and Pervasive Developmental Disorder.

As I’ve mentioned in past commentary, I no longer read Ash-Boy comments.  I think the “icing on the cake” was Watson’s childish commentary in the ‘Waste Based Society’ thread. For example:

JoeP,
Hope you got that out of your system, because it will be the last one you make to that effect. As you know, I will not hesitate to censor the crap out of you for that kind of stuff.

I guess I feel like El Gallinazo on this.  His description of his relationship with AshBoy -  “We have absolutely nothing to contribute to each other - just oil and water.” 
 
BTW, I might have more to say on “Oil and Water” later today.   :o

« Last Edit: October 19, 2012, 06:51:44 AM by JoeP »

Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Oil & Water Storiez
« Reply #291 on: October 19, 2012, 05:36:44 PM »
Strap yourself in - It's gonna be a slippery ride.  :icon_mrgreen:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/ShFAeNdiEiA?feature=player_detailpage" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/ShFAeNdiEiA?feature=player_detailpage</a>


When I was a bit younger ...say 25 yrs old, give or take seven years...I wouldn't think twice about seeking and and participating in an event like the one video'd above.  In comparison, I made MANY trips to the monolith waterslides in Myrtle Beach SC - for two summers in the college days.  But the activity above looks much more exciting to me.
 
Exxon OIL Co. Pouts and Takes "Slim Profits" Home

Pig Shit   Water = Diarrhea Fertilizer = Polluted Drinking Water

Tajikistan: 27 billion barrels of OIL could be a geopolitical game-changer

SeaWater levels rising faster than previously thought

HYDROFRACKING CATFIGHT!

565,000 pounds of OILed material brought to the surface

Hydrofracking Study - Yeah, I fucking trust the EPA

Shell OIL Co. and Blood Money

"Land of 10,000 Lakes" Needs To Conserve Water

Hydrofracking in the Schoolyard


Offline WHD

  • Administrator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1444
    • View Profile
Re: Joe's Newz Channel
« Reply #292 on: October 19, 2012, 06:20:06 PM »
Brilliant, Joe. That list alone is worth a feature. What was OWS about? OWS was about showing us that if we object to the polluting of the waters, we know what will happen, unto the very presence of fracking wells in the school yard. With America poised to elect a vulture capitalist President.

Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Joe's Newz Channel
« Reply #293 on: October 19, 2012, 06:55:35 PM »
Hunter, Thanks for the recognition.  I enjoy reading your analyses.  They just make common sense to me.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2012, 07:34:53 PM by JoeP »

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 5028
    • View Profile
Diner Newz Channel Promotion: Oil & Water Storiez
« Reply #294 on: October 20, 2012, 02:27:40 AM »
At the suggestion of Diner Admin WHD, I created a Blog Post to promote the Diner Newz Channels on the Diner Blog, featuring Joe's recent aggregation of Newz Stories on the Oil and Water issues globally.

The Diner Newz Channel article is now UP on the Diner Blog!

Joe, I also think the Graphic of a Newz Hound I dug up for the Slider for this article would be a GREAT Avatar for you here on the Diner!  I think it suits you better than the Cat.

RE

Offline WHD

  • Administrator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1444
    • View Profile
Re: Joe's Newz Channel
« Reply #295 on: October 20, 2012, 07:28:11 AM »
As for water, Washington's Blog has been hammering the continuing, ongoing, and perhaps beyond current technology to fix, Deepwater Horizon, Gulf of Mexico well-head leak. Regularly cross-posted on Zero Hedge.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/10/bp-oil-spill-case-not-closed.html

Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Storiez of Money, Gunz, Privacy...and other
« Reply #296 on: October 20, 2012, 05:16:53 PM »
Storiez of Money, Gunz, Privacy...and other

Dirtiest Congress in History

Putin Breakin' Bad with Weapon Sales

Mastercard & Private Data

Google & The Govt - A Blurred Image

Keystone XL Pipeline Historic Standoff
Security tackles a 70 year old woman...and a "tree-sitter" is threatened with terrorist charges in this story.  WTF?
I initially thought there were some interesting tidbits in this article.  Then I remembered this happened in Texas.  Might as well have been a different country to me.  Having spent some time in Texas, my experiences vomit the generalization of "too much fluff and posturing" as a starter.
 
 
Spain to ban photos or videos of police in action

Pictures of Space Spiralz
« Last Edit: October 20, 2012, 05:39:54 PM by JoeP »

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 5028
    • View Profile
Re: Storiez of Money, Gunz, Privacy...and other
« Reply #297 on: October 20, 2012, 05:57:07 PM »
Storiez of Money, Gunz, Privacy...and other

Newzhound Joe back on the Beat.



RE

Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Storiez of Interesting Weapons, Survival Shelters, Zoonoses, Disappearing Items...and more:
 
Weapon of choice - Sawfish bill

Post-Apocalypse Survival Shelters + 10 Acres

First 100 Items to Disappear from Stores

Myth That Morbid Wealth Is Just Fine

Attack Helicopter - Cute Killing Weapon

About the Next Pandemic


Offline JoeP

  • Global Moderator
  • Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
FSA: Imperialism Unleashed
« Reply #299 on: October 21, 2012, 04:48:35 PM »
Great Dubya quote in this article that I do not remember ever seeing...read on.


Toward Barbarism: US Imperialism Unleashed
by Ben Schreiner / October 17th, 2012

"The triumph of imperialism leads to the annihilation of civilization."

– Rosa Luxemburg, The Junius Pamphlet

With signs of a global economic downturn mounting, US aggression across the Middle East and North Africa ratchets up.  And once again, US imperialism stands poised to swing open the gates of Hell.

The choice presently confronting humanity, then, is one between imperialism on the one hand, and the struggle against imperialism on the other.  It’s a choice of socialism or barbarism.

Global Capitalism Imperiled

According to the IMF’s World Economic Outlook report released last week, the “risks for a serious global slowdown are alarmingly high.”  The report projects the world economy to expand just 3.3 percent this year and 3.6 percent in 2013—both projections down from the IMF’s July forecast.   As Joseph Davis, chief economist at the Vanguard Group, cautioned to the Wall Street Journal, “The odds of a global recession are not fully appreciated.”

Indeed, for as the Financial Times reports, the Tracking Indices for the Global Economic Recovery, the Brookings Institution-Financial Times index of the world economy, finds severe problems “in both advanced and emerging markets.”

“The global economic recovery,” Brookings’ senior fellow and index creator Eswar Prasad warned, “is on the ropes.”

And though in its latest report the IMF continued to peddle the harsh elixir of austerity for the depressed economies of the euro zone periphery, the Fund also came to tacitly acknowledge the limits of austerity.

“The IMF now says global efforts to slash deficits and debt may have hurt growth because they occurred too quickly and too widely,” the Wall Street Journal reported.

But with the limits of austerity as a means of resolving the present crisis apparent, the last remaining card for the capitalist elite to play in their attempt to regenerate global capitalism appears to be in unleashing the forces of “creative destruction” wrought by military aggression.  As Henryk Grossman warned in his Law of Accumulation, “The destructions and devaluations of war are a means of warding off the immanent collapse [of capitalism], of creating a breathing space for the accumulation of capital.”

It is thus out of the need to renew the impetus for capital accumulation that the iron fist of US imperialism gains free rein once more across the full spectrum of what American neo-conservatives deem the “arc of instability.”

US Imperialism on the March

According to the New York Times, the Pentagon is readying military strikes in Libya in retaliation for the September attack on the US compound in Benghazi.  As the paper reports, “The top-secret Joint Special Operations Command is compiling so-called target packages of detailed information about the suspects.”

“Potential military options could include drone strikes, Special Operations raids like the one that killed Osama bin Laden and joint missions with Libyan authorities.”

The Times goes on to report that the Pentagon is also rushing to train and equip a 500 member Libyan commando force to be used to combat “Islamic extremists” within the country.

At the same time, the Pentagon has reportedly dispatched a task force of 150 military “planners” and “specialists” (i.e., special operations troops) to a Jordanian military base along the Jordan-Syria border.  Speaking at a NATO conference in Brussels last week, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta claimed that the task force was sent to help Jordan “monitor chemical and biological weapons sites in Syria.”

The specter of chemical weapons has been increasingly used as a pretext by the Atlantic powers to threaten military intervention into Syria.  As President Obama declared in August, the use of chemical weapons by Syrian forces would be a “red line,” which would force him to change his “calculus” on intervention.

“Once again, Western powers are digging deep for excuses to intervene militarily in another conflict-torn Middle East country,” an editorial in the state-run Xinhua news agency of China read in response to Obama’s threat.

Sure enough, as the New York Times reported, discussions have already taken place over using the Jordanian-stationed US task force to help establish a buffer zone within Syrian territory.

(In addition to the deployment of troops along the Jordan-Syria border,  CIA operatives are presently active along the Syria-Turkey border, facilitating the flow of arms to rebel forces.  Meanwhile, a recent report in the Los Angeles Times noted that the US military is currently using aerial surveillance drones to monitor Syrian chemical weapon stockpiles.)

Of course, the stepped up targeting of Syria cannot be decoupled from the joint Israel-US campaign against Iran.  After all, as hawks Michael Doran and Max Boot argue in a New York Times op-ed, the first reason American intervention in Syria is now merited is because it “would diminish Iran’s influence in the Arab world.”

The road to Tehran, we see, may very well lead through Damascus; although, the urge to fly non-stop to Tehran may just prove too strong to resist.

Marching Toward Tehran

With Iran clearly in mind, the US and Israel are set to begin a massive three-week joint missile and air defense exercise later this month.  The exercise, Business Week reports, will include 3,500 US personnel and 1,000 members of the Israel Defense Forces, making it the largest joint military exercise held between the two nations.  The planned war game also occurs amid mounting speculation of a looming strike against Iran.

According to a report in Foreign Policy by David Rothkopf, the US and Israel are actively planning a joint “surgical strike targeting Iranian enrichment facilities.”  Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official and Editor-at-Large of Foreign Policy, cites his source as stating that “the strike might take only ‘a couple of hours’ in the best case and only would involve a ‘day or two’ overall.”

The strike, Rothkopf quotes an “advocate” of an attack as stating, would have a “transformative outcome: saving Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, reanimating the peace process, securing the Gulf, sending an unequivocal message to Russia and China, and assuring American ascendancy in the region for a decade to come.”  This, of course, being the essence of the proverbial neo-con wet dream.

Remarkably, Rothkopf even goes as far as to triumph the idea of a “surgical strike” as a potential October Surprise Obama could use to propel himself back to the White House.

It appears now, however, that Rothkopf’s “report” may have been little more than a plant by the Israeli embassy in Washington.  A move, perhaps, intended to further coerce Obama into adopting a more hawkish stance on Iran, while simultaneously serving to downplay the risks of an attack.

Of course, peddling the notion of a so-called “surgical strike” on Iran is nothing particularly new.  In March, Jeffrey Goldberg reported for Bloomberg that Israeli talk of striking Iran had assumed a rather optimistic tenor.

“One conclusion key [Israeli] officials have reached,” Goldberg wrote after a trip to Israel, “is that a strike on six or eight Iranian facilities will not lead, as is generally assumed, to all-out war.”

(One cannot help wonder if the Rothkopf and Goldberg share the same source.)

Such assessments, though, are rather dubious, given that they directly contradict numerous assessments determining that any strike against Iran would quickly spiral into a regional conflict.  A report earlier this year in the New York Times, for instance, noted a war game simulation run by the Pentagon forecast that an Israeli strike “would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States and leave hundreds of Americans dead.”

Likewise, a September war game organized by Kenneth Pollack, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy, resulted in a dangerous escalation from both sides.  As the Washington Post’s David Ignatius reported, “The game showed how easy it was for each side to misread the other’s signals.”

“Misjudgment was the essence of this game,” Ignatius continued.  “Each side thought it was choosing limited options, but their moves were interpreted as crossing red lines. Attacks proved more deadly than expected; signals were not understood; attempts to open channels of communication were ignored; the desire to look tough compelled actions that produced results neither side wanted.”

“War,” as Clausewitz wrote, “is the province of danger.”

Toward Barbarism

US imperial dreams, however, are hardly confined to setting the Middle East ablaze.  Imperial ambitions—rooted in the capitalist logic of endless expansion—are inherently limitless.  Thus, we see the US today readying to propel the greater Middle East into the abyss, while simultaneously “pivoting” to the Asia-Pacific in order to “contain” a rising China.

US imperialism, however, is destined for defeat (and sooner rather than later).  The US, after all, can only use its immense military power to keep potential competitors in check for so long.  The universal law of change cannot be held at bay by the barrel of a gun in perpetuity.  As Lenin asked and answered in his pamphlet Imperialism: “Is it ‘conceivable’ that in ten or twenty years’ time the relative strength of the imperialist powers will have remained unchanged? Absolutely inconceivable.”

But imperial powers are always dangerously deluded by the strength of their power—impervious to its ultimate limits.  As a George W. Bush administration official once remarked to the journalist Ron Suskind: “’We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

(One would be mistaken to believe that such hubris is not as present in the Obama White House as it was in the Bush administration.)

Such arrogance from the power elite—indicative of imperial rot—is but a byproduct of the imperialist imperative of endless expansion and conquest.  And it is this very imperative that today compels US imperialism towards igniting a military conflagration in the Middle East threatening to ensnare the global powers. “A great cemetery,” as Luxemburg warned nearly a century ago, awaits such a triumph of barbarism.

The only means with which to elude such a miserable fate is found in the revolutionary power of working people to resist.  As Luxemburg argued, escape from barbarism is only possible once the working class comes to seize “its own destiny and escape the role of the lackey to the ruling classes.”

The only genuine and enduring hope for humanity, then, lies is in the struggle for socialism.

http://dissidentvoice.org/2012/10/toward-barbarism-us-imperialism-unleashed/
 

« Last Edit: October 21, 2012, 05:02:18 PM by JoeP »

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
117 Views
Last post February 27, 2012, 03:55:15 AM
by Surly1
2 Replies
660 Views
Last post July 02, 2012, 10:02:35 AM
by WHD
60 Replies
2069 Views
Last post August 06, 2012, 04:10:27 PM
by agelbert