Confessions of an Economic Hitman goes into great detail about the Bechtel Corporation. Very well written story about a guy who was unwarily caught up in instituting U.S. interests abroad.
Why change subjects? Can you point to concrete examples of so called Chinese "debt traps"? I can point to an entire book full of real examples of Western economic imperialism http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/
China's so-called Chinese human rights abuses are orders of magnitude less than America, but I don't hear you crying about America's human rights abuses that include an invasion of Iraq that killed about a million people, destroyed Libya, destroyed Syria, extreme police brutality/police state, global drone assassination programs, etc. Go ahead, prove me wrong.
US Sends weapons to Saudi Arabia to orchestrate mass killing and the biggest humanitarian disaster in recent history. They also overthrew Iran's democracy. Read this if you ever get the time to understand how shit like this works. https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins should be required reading as it seems to be China's playbook for all of this shit but they are replacing the assassination part with alternatives that don't piss off the natives nearly as much, which works better.
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
What China has done to Africa, is exactly what the US did to South America and countless other countries. Offered Debt denominated in USD and Yuan to build infrastructure then bilking the country for all its resources.
These are not projects of kindness. These projects are designed to enslave the country China and the US are claiming to help. Forcing a country to pay back its loans based on USD or Yuan currency that has been printed out of thin air, is designed to extract resources and labor form the targeted country.
Just colonization. The first step to colonization.
The U.S. did it to south america after WW2. Its all detailed here
If they can't corrupt the local leaders, they'll send in the secret hitmen. If that doesn't work, then the military.
huh, sounds like the read the manual the U.S. was using after WW2 with south america
If anyone hasn't read it yet, Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins. This is American foreign policy, take the bribe or get killed. If they can't kill you then they try to get permission to go to war.
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
No, I'm making it clear that your "source criticism" is your way of deciding and defending something as untrue.
This isn't my first rodeo with this.
Watch: I'll name a book written by a person who has actually worked for these intelligence agencies (I already have), and you will again dispute the source. It's all you have, and your cognitive dissonance is too painful.
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Meanwhile, the corporate media, owned by 6 huge corporations, must hide the truth to keep the money flowing, by omission and commission- and they're the only ones you'll believe.
I can't force you to open your mind; I just can't.
We are all being lied to , look it up yourself. Oh and don't use Google, use DuckDuckGo and even that is beginning to become censored.
Best of luck. The rabbit hole kind of blows bc it's really bad how far this has gone.
Sounds like a good read. Thanks!
EDIT: Another GREAT read on how the CIA really operates as the muscle for the NWO everybody should ready Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins.
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
> An empire is where the occupying force absorbs the country it has invaded,
Such a definition ignores over a century of real-life experience with and writing and theorizing about neo-colonialism.
For Americans, neo-colonialism is best illustrated by the Philippines. We supposedly gave the Philippines "independence" after WWII.
The reality is that we installed and supported a puppet dictator in the Philippines, giving him a cut of money for the trouble of ruling the country. Meanwhile, despite "independence" the US controlled the Filipino economy directly and indirectly pulled the strings in the country.
The US was a relative late-comer to neo-colonialism. The British Empire and others were using neo-colonial tactics long before WWII.
FWIW, the book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man may be an enlightened read for you...
It's not done until every member of our democracy accepts it. Until then its up for protest and debate. Do you respect that principle? Do you think our democracy is a joke? it's really not appropriate considering we have memorials for those who gave their lives fighting European fascism in almost every town. Those are our ancestors.
So far we have USA's surveillance policy, private prisons becoming a norm and now we have TPP to weaken our nation to multinational corporations.
If you know recent political economic history 1950-2016 you can see small nations getting ravaged by lack of restrictions from foreign privatisation quite frequently (especially in the third world).
In light of books like Confessions of an Economic Hitman we should be thinking about the Greek financial crisis and realising that our nation isn't immune to destabilisation.
> It's not like pharmaceutical companies have militaries.
This is the statement I was responding to... and in fact history shows us that national armies often act to enforce corporate interests. Do I think the US would invade Canada? The idea has been considered as a possible scenario the US many times. However I would consider it more likely that the US government would opt for regime change if Canada started balking at NAFTA or TPP. The realities of power in the modern world.
EDIT: An interesting read is this Confessions of an Economic Hitman
It's all a bit shady. But the world works and it's better than what we had only 100 years ago.
If you haven't already, you'll enjoy this.
Read Confessions of an Economic Hitman. It details how a country is basically treated like a mark in a confidence game. The mark is surrounded with advisers (trusted advisors) that will tell them they can manage the debt. That their economic growth resulting from the debt will be more than enough to cover it. http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1435887204&sr=1-1&keywords=confessions+of+an+economic+hitman+by+john+perkins&pebp=1435887205716&perid=0H4A7NTNH9B105K4...
But our rich banksters like exploiting the poor people of Nepal! :(
As former int'l banker John Perkins (and others) have documented, we have deliberately used a strategy of giving unpayable loans as a way to control other governments and to seize control of a targeted country's assets.
> "The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is slave to the lender." -- The Holy Bible, Proverbs 22:7.
> Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1429630744&sr=8-1&keywords=economic+hitmen
This one in particular I was looking for... thank you! I will check out all of them.
"I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply." - Nathan Rothschild
The people breaking the banking/money laws are also associated with those making the laws, thus they never get in trouble. Look who is in jail for the 2008 financial crash. This kind of economic warfare is arguable more destructive. Haven't read this book myself but it gets mentioned a lot when talking about "economic warfare" http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
And where exactly haven't "we" exported our brand of freedom yet either directly or indirectly? You don't have this many military bases all over the world without fucking things up in those countries.
Read Confessions of an Economic Hit Man before you sign up. Your intentions are more noble than some of the ways the U.S. military has been used.
This is not to say you shouldn't enlist; it's to say that you should do it with your eyes wide open.
In 1944, the countries that were poised to win the Second World War gathered in a hotel in rural New Hampshire to divvy up the spoils. With a few honorable exceptions, like the great British economist John Maynard Keynes, the negotiators were determined to do one thing. They wanted to build a global financial system that ensured the money and resources of the planet were forever hoovered towards them. They set up a series of institutions designed for that purpose – and so the IMF was delivered into the world.
The IMF’s official job sounds simple and attractive. It is supposedly there to ensure poor countries don’t fall into debt, and if they do, to lift them out with loans and economic expertise. It is presented as the poor world’s best friend and guardian. But beyond the rhetoric, the IMF was designed to be dominated by a handful of rich countries – and, more specifically, by their bankers and financial speculators. The IMF works in their interests, every step of the way.
In the 1990s, the small country of Malawi in Southeastern Africa was facing severe economic problems after enduring one of the worst HIV-AIDS epidemics in the world and surviving a horrific dictatorship. They had to ask the IMF for help. If the IMF acted on its official role, it would have given loans and guided the country to develop in the same way that Britain and the US and every other successful country had developed – by protecting its infant industries, subsidizing its farmers, and investing in the education and health of its people.
But the IMF did something very different. They said they would only give assistance if Malawi agreed to the ‘structural adjustments’ the IMF demanded. They ordered Malawi to sell off almost everything the state owned to private companies and speculators, and to slash spending on the population. They demanded they stop subsidizing fertilizer, even though it was the only thing that made it possible for farmers – most of the population – to grow anything in the country’s feeble and depleted soil. They told them to prioritize giving money to international bankers over giving money to the Malawian people.
So when in 2001 the IMF found out the Malawian government had built up large stockpiles of grain in case there was a crop failure, they ordered them to sell it off to private companies at once. They told Malawi to get their priorities straight by using the proceeds to pay off a loan from a large bank the IMF had told them to take out in the first place, at a 56 percent annual rate of interest. The Malawian President protested and said this was dangerous. But he had little choice. The grain was sold. The banks were paid.
The next year, the crops failed. The Malawian government had almost nothing to hand out. The starving population was reduced to eating the bark off the trees, and any rats they could capture. The BBC described it as Malawi’s "worst ever famine."
At the height of the starvation, the IMF suspended $47m in aid, because the government had ‘slowed’ in implementing the marketeeing ‘reforms’ that had led to the disaster.
Then, in the starved wreckage, Malawi did something poor countries are not supposed to do. They told the IMF to get out. Suddenly free to answer to their own people rather than foreign bankers, Malawi disregarded all the IMF’s ‘advice’, and brought back subsidies for the fertilizer, along with a range of other services to ordinary people. Within two years, the country was transformed from being a beggar to being so abundant they were supplying food aid to Uganda and Zimbabwe.
In the history of the IMF, this story isn’t an exception: it is the rule.
Look at some of the organisation’s greatest hits. In Kenya, the IMF insisted the government introduce fees to see the doctor – so the number of women seeking help or advice on STDs fell by 65 percent, in one of the countries worst affected by AIDS in the world. In Ghana, the IMF insisted the government introduce fees for going to school – and the number of rural families who could afford to send their kids crashed by two-thirds. In Zambia, the IMF insisted they slash health spending – and the number of babies who died doubled.
The Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz worked closely with the IMF for over a decade, until he quit and became a whistle-blower. He told me a few years ago: "When the IMF arrives in a country, they are interested in only one thing. How do we make sure the banks and financial institutions are paid?... It is the IMF that keeps the [financial] speculators in business. They’re not interested in development, or what helps a country to get out of poverty."
Some people call the IMF "inconsistent", because the institution supports huge state-funded bank bailouts in the rich world, while demanding an end to almost all state funding in the poor world. But that’s only an inconsistency if you are thinking about the realm of intellectual ideas, rather than raw economic interests. In every situation, the IMF does what will get more money to bankers and speculators. If rich governments will hand banks money for nothing in "bailouts", great. If poor countries can be forced to hand banks money in extortionate "repayments", great. It’s absolutely consistent.
Some people claim that Dominique Strauss Kahn (DSK) was a "reformer" who changed the IMF after he took over in 2009. Certainly, there was a shift in rhetoric – but detailed study by Dr Daniela Gabor of the University of the West of England has shown that the substance is business-as-usual. Look, for example, at Hungary. After the 2008 crash, the IMF lauded them for keeping to their original deficit target by slashing public services. The horrified Hungarian people responded by kicking the government out, and choosing a party that promised to make the banks pay for the crisis they had created. They introduced a 0.7 percent levy on the banks (four times higher than anywhere else). The IMF went crazy. They said this was "highly distortive" for banking activity – unlike the bailouts, of course – and shrieked that it would cause the banks to flee from the country. The IMF shut down their entire Hungary program to intimidate them.
But the collapse predicted by the IMF didn’t happen. Hungary kept on pursuing sensible moderate measures, instead of punishing the population. They imposed taxes on the hugely profitable sectors of retail, energy and telecoms, and took funds from private pensions to pay the deficit. The IMF shrieked at every step, and demanded cuts for ordinary Hungarians instead. It was the same old agenda, with the same old threats. DSK did the same in almost all the poor countries where the IMF operated, from El Salvador to Pakistan to Ethiopia, where big cuts in subsidies for ordinary people have been imposed. Plenty have been intimidated into harming their own interests.
It's not only Strauss Kahn who should be on trial. It's the IMF itself : Johann Hari
More info here. http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/
No, It's real and it's by Westerners. What a surprise...
http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/
This is a good question. This is a shortcut https://np.reddit.com/r/ciwo/new. In general...
● Look for objectivity. Many China bashing articles lack objectivity/balance.
● Look at the source's credibility. This is one is not so easy as it requires memory of past events. [http://coat.ncf.ca/articles/links/how_to_start_a_war.htm]. So, I am skeptical of any news organization that peddled these fictions.
● Compare against other countries, usually Western countries I Again, this is not so easy as it also requires existing knowledge of Western machinations [https://i.imgur.com/OMawpLS.jpg, http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/, http://www.amazon.com/Rogue-State-Guide-Worlds-Superpower/dp/1567513743/].
Here's how I can tell a news article is bs based on the following themes:
● "China's human rights abuses". Use objectivity and comparison. 800 million lifted out of poverty, very low prison population, no foreign wars, rare police brutality, safe streets, etc. Compare that against Western nations where more people are entering poverty, unsafe streets, police brutality, high prison population, many illegal invasions, genocides, atrocities, etc.
● "China's Debt trap" - use objectivity and comparison. Find out what the nations dealing with China think of the situation? If China's "debt traps" are so bad then why are they choosing China over Western nations? Comparison. How has China performed vs the West? China does not overthrow governments. China builds affordable infrastructure. China does not plunder a nation's resources. Compare that against the West's behavior.
● "Chinese bullying/expansionism/militarism" - use objectivity and comparison. No foreign wars of aggression for decades. No expansionism beyond its own backyard [on features it claimed terra nullius hundreds of years ago]. Yet, it IS surrounded by huge US military bases that HAVE waged genocidal [http://www.amazon.com/Kill-Anything-That-Moves-American/dp/1250045061/] wars of aggression against most of Asia. Who is the bully here?
This is not easy without knowledge to compare things with though so building up a base is important. The sources I provided will help. Good luck.
There's so many articles and books out there written on these subjects. The earliest one I can think of is War is a Racket by Major General Smedley Butler. There's many articles on The Intercept about America's Imperialism, such as this fairly recent one as a sample. Confessions of an Economic Hitman is another good read. William Blum wrote several books on the subject. The list is endless; american history is far less noble then we were taught in schools. Power protects power, always has.
Because the West totally hasn't been and continually still exploiting Africa
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
In the West the story of the Sri Lankan Hambantota Port was shown to the world as "debt trap" and all doom and gloom by the Chinese. Whereas a more unbiased and learned source which focusses on the Asia Pacific had this to say on the matter.
America on the other hand spent "more than $2 trillion" in Afghanistan (where opium production has quadrupled) and "the war in Afghanistan is second only to the $4.1 trillion dollars (inflation-adjusted) spent during World War II.
Moreover, China is "outlining a $50 trillion plan to create a world electricity network" and is building the most extensive project of the 21st century where they plan to build a road network extending from the East corner of China to Europe, the Cape of Good Hope and south to Gwadar, Pakistan.
Finally, if you still haven't, I suggest you read Confessions of an Economic Hitman. The US state is a neo-imperialist-colonist with genocidal maniacs at the helm who have a god-complex of giving everyone their version of "democracy" and "culture".
<strong>Confessions of an Economic Hit Man</strong>
the world order is the way it is for a reason. lol
read this and report back: https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Do you normally make assumptions to drive a conclusion to fit your limited world view?
You're asking for a discourse, which I welcome. For simplicity I ask you, who stands to benefit from system. The shackles are evident, its in the WEF talking points.
There entire premise of ESG stems from the club of rome book "limits of growth (1973)", [go to WEF and read the transcripts don't take my word for it] which used deeply flawed data to say there will be a total population collapse by 2100, in the original modelling, it had China,GDP per capita behind India at 100 usd/person. Since the original book, in 2003 they adjusted 2100 to agenda 2030. The premise that resources are limited and the need to build a global system of governance to decide who can and will be allowed to utilize resources had to be created. In the 2003 update, ESG is born.
Klaus Schwab, in his book Stakeholder capitalism, breaks-down what merits a good ESG score. The use of NGOs interlaced with corporations to drive social change( e.g equality/lgbtq/ diversity), carbon footprint tracking of consumer and corporations and a need of digital currency and id for web 3.
Largest asset management firms (blackrock, Vanguard, fidelity, state street, UBS) are all pushing for ESG implementation. Combined they manage over 30 Trillion USD globally. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/24/blackrocks-former-sustainable-investing-chief-says-esg-is-a-dangerous-placebo.html probably least controversial source material, but read it for your own education. If it doesn't fit your taste feel free to google more.
I believe climate change is real and should be addressed, my argument is how we approach these solutions and who stands to benefit from this forced transition. Solar panels, wind turbines, EV, batteries all require significant industrial machining and only pay for themselves over 20-30 year periods. Take germany for example, they have one of the best rollouts of a green transition. Even with nuclear power plants, they are now forced to fireup coal powerplants because the wind isn't blowing hard enough to drive enough energy. An EV takes 35 times the power of a refrigerator, imagine each house having 35 fridges running at the same time in a city. Significant upgrades to the infra would require FDI to finance.
I'm glad you understand basic keynesian economics, the problem with a debt driven economy is we are under the assumption that the carousel will continue to turn at the same rate as it did when the model was first designed. As long as everyone buys into the same story the ride goes on, which in globalization worked well. Geopolitically we are uncoupling from this system, and are due for significant systemic shocks, which like 2020 could see a commodity collapse in the face of a global recession. Any conflict in the pacific would disrupt trade and thus force IMF bailouts or privatization of our local economy. We manage to dodge this bullet unlike Indonesia.
Now that the stage has been set, ask yourself a question. If you go to a bank for a loan, instead of looking at your financials and giving you a loan. The bank looks at you, asks your gender, your dietary habits, vaccination status, political ideology, what car you drive and what is your carbon footprint. Then takes a BLR + ESG rate. Why would a company or a person want this? Its just neo-colonization with extra steps.
​
I'm glad to continue this discourse, I look forward to your response. I kept my external sources to a digestible amount, feel free to ask for more.
You’re right, it’s worse than that. https://www.amazon.ca/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
This is a very interesting book on how the US traps 3rd world countries and fucks with them https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
First you privatize Power and Water, then unpayable loans to the World Bank and IMF. This is how you dominate an entire culture.
​
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Read this book and you will begin to see how deep all this goes. No tinfoil shit.
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
There is a reason it's so fucked up, and it's not just because some people are born greedy and evil. Even greedy and cruel behavior stems from somewhere. Have you ever considered that it is our monetary market system and its structural rules and design that breeds and guarantees these types of inhumane outcomes?
Seriously, think about it: when money is the singular factor that's behind virtually every decision made, what kind of world do we expect to have? Can we really expect peace, when the rich countries exploit the poor ones for the latter's natural resources and cheap labor? Can we really expect people to care for one another when we're all completing with each other for increasingly limited good jobs and opportunities? Can we expect people to be honest when lies and embellishments are more rewarding and incentivized? Can we expect children to grow up happy and healthy when millions of parents juggle multiple jobs and constantly stressed to afford one thing after another and barely even have time to spend at all with their own kids?
>What is the solution?
I am not proposing this as a permanent solution (because the universe is always changing), but we absolutely first need to start thinking way differently and imagine a world without money, job, or poverty, war, etc. I recommend watching the documentary Zeitgeist Moving Forward as a good start. Take care out there, all.
ok, start with these books:
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
https://www.amazon.com/Propaganda-Edward-Bernays/dp/0970312598
https://www.amazon.com/Creature-Jekyll-Island-Federal-Reserve/dp/091298645X
Also, watch this video. If they'll do this with aspartame, what will they do with a vaccine where they have no liability? I'm shocked this documentary is still on youtube.
I believe Confessions of an Economic Hitman covers South America. Any oil country has enough money to otherwise avoid the IMF.
>https://www.ft.com/content/3a820200-0128-42b3-be6c-f5abd6381efa
If this wasn't so true, it'd be funny...
Pretty much summed up in these two books, both great reads:
They should read Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins if they don't know. Especially because China seems to be copying it and using a better version.
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Yes, because you can increase interest rates even 6x times when your are IMF/ the World Bank on a mission of economic assassination in the name of imperialistic neocolonialism :)
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
First of all most of the agricultural vehicles were for internal use and managed to increase the agricultural output several fold, and second of all most of the projects like power plants, "Transfagaraseanul", oil refineries, steel mills, etc are projects every healthy economy needs. The only artificially inflated thing here is your allegiance to the murderous philosophy of capitalism, probably because you personally profit from it. But that just makes you one of the instances of the banality of evil.
Yes, i get that sociopaths find pain and devastation funny.
It was not inflated artificially, it was real economic growth in the form of real new factories, power plants, agricultural vehicles, and other great projects that tripled the GDP (not to mention social programs like alphabetisation). And in case you don't understand the problem was not that they had to pay back the loans, but that the loan interest rates kept increasing artificially as a deliberate attempt to cause economic collapse. Who would have know the IMF is a tool of capitalist imperialism huh ?
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
I recommend Confessions of an Economic Hitman (book) regarding this subject.
There is an updated version too which I haven't read yet.
> Former economic hit man John Perkins shares new details about the ways he and others cheated countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. Then he reveals how the deadly EHM cancer he helped create has spread far more widely and deeply than ever in the US and everywhere else—to become the dominant system of business, government, and society today. Finally, he gives an insider view of what we each can do to change it.
> Economic hit men are the shock troops of what Perkins calls the corporatocracy, a vast network of corporations, banks, colluding governments, and the rich and powerful people tied to them. If the EHMs can’t maintain the corrupt status quo through nonviolent coercion, the jackal assassins swoop in. The heart of this book is a completely new section, over 100 pages long, that exposes the fact that all the EHM and jackal tools—false economics, false promises, threats, bribes, extortion, debt, deception, coups, assassinations, unbridled military power—are used around the world today exponentially more than during the era Perkins exposed over a decade ago.
> As dark as the story gets, this reformed EHM also provides hope. Perkins offers specific actions each of us can take to transform what he calls a failing Death Economy into a Life Economy that provides sustainable abundance for all.
Here. John Perkins might have all the answers you need:
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man https://www.amazon.com/dp/0452287081/
I highly recommend the book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.
Here is a map https://i.imgur.com/eOHJcyM.jpg of the trader's location from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Philippines_(900%E2%80%931521)#Chinese_trade_(982_onwards)
Notice, they are not in the SCS? They're in a lake. That has nothing to do with China's claims. Trading =/= claiming islands.
The modern dates of the Philippines laying claim are moot because China was going through decades of turmoil [eg Korean War, cultural revolution] and unable to worry about the claims at the time. They never relinquished those islands from their control.
>China didn't attempt to lay claim to the region until September of 1956
This is incorrect. China laid claims which predate the Philippine claims by hundreds of years. This was explained in the Forbes link.
This came from your own link.
>Presidential spokesperson Harry Roque said that if it were proven that the Chinese were getting fish, routinely as claimed by the fishermen, the government would file a protest. But the report, which aired on GMA News on Thursday, did not show the Filipinos being bullied, he said.
>“If established, it’s a ground for protest. I have asked GMA 7 to authenticate it, but the video that I saw was inconclusive. I didn’t actually see any bullying,” Roque said.
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/167617/chinas-slaves-filipino-fishermen-ask
Benham Rise sounds more complicated than you make it sound..
>'China was right': Roque says PH has no sovereignty over Benham Rise
>MANILA - The Philippines has sovereign rights, but not sovereignty over Benham Rise. This was clarified by Presidential spokesman Harry Roque after a May 2017 statement of the Chinese Foreign Ministry that the Philippine government cannot claim Benham Rise as its own territory
'China was right': Roque says PH has no sovereignty over Benham Rise | ABS-CBN News
>the difference is that China is in on it this time. They just can't wait to get us into their debt trap.
Please do not throw around baseless accusations without proof. I've heard this from western propagandists a lot, yet no one has furnished actual proof of so-called debt traps [which, unsurprisingly, the west is famous for, http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/].
One last point. Don't bring up the PCA. It is not a court, but an organization for arbitration [voluntary].
>The UN said the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, which issued the decision on the case on Tuesday, operated out of the same building, the Peace Palace, as the UN’s primary justice branch, the International Court of Justice, but the two agencies were unrelated.
United Nations stresses separation from Hague tribunal | South China Morning Post
This isn't by chance and it's not just the CF. Sadly this is the way the rich have stolen everything from the poor countries and even bankrupted them while helping them.
Confessions of an Economic Hitman
Not exactly what you're looking for, but I'd like to recommend Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.
Here is a short (2 min) cartoon video that covers the main theme of the book: The Economic Hitmen
I'd also recommend The Forever War.
You do realize the CIA does/has done this with great success many times in history...
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
It works.
"Confession of an Economic Hitman"(https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081)"
who do you think you are kidding? The function of the World Bank is to strip mine the world's poor countries of their resources, thru odious debt, for their real clients: the West's largest banking, government and industrial establishments, as they have managed to do now throughout Africa and South America by making loans to assholes who shaft their citizens on a regular basis.
http://almariam.com/2015/02/08/ethiopias-odious-debt-to-the-odious-world-bank/
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank#Criticism
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Poor World Bank, so often disappointed in their corrupt third world dictatorships. Thank god the World Bank solders on undeterred, looking for that one corrupt third world dictator who won't impoverish and enslave his subjects, sell off their physical birthrights, then take the money and run off to Switzerland.
No they won't. America is the boss. Anybody who tries to mess with American exports will get bounced out of office.
> a person is bigoted and racist if they support Obama because of "the war on terror"
First, note there is a huge difference in platform/framework/world view etc of "mainstream" politicians like Obama (or the Clintons or Bushes or Kerry, McCain, Romney, Warren, etc etc and even many non-mainstream ones like Trump) and outliers like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich.
The latter called for a radical restructuring of the international order. Close all US bases overseas, bring all US troops back home, stop intervening in other countries' internal affairs (e.g. regime-changing them or trying to destabilize them or laying economic siege to them (both as precursors to regime change, usually) etc etc.) and so forth. The former, even if they differed in details, packaging, put different stress and spin on things etc, clearly were okay/willing to continue the current international order, the network of bases, security pacts, US troops stationed overseas, etc etc. So on this big picture issue, there is essentially no debate, no difference of opinions among "mainstream" politicians. At best, prior to Trump (and more on Trump later) you might have gotten a debate over whether it was a good idea to go into Iraq in 2003, or whether we should have first prioritized Afghanistan. Which is basically what McCain vs Obama boiled down to in 2008.
So let's look at what this "big picture" thing is, really. Because it is actually the root of all the smaller foreign policy debates. "War on Terror?" Actually, it's blowback for American imperialism. The economic exploitation, environmental degradation, resource wars, economic refugees from the Third World, etc that drive the anti-immigrant backlash in the US and Europe? That too is a consequence, blowback of imperialism. Even decisions like the Iraq invasion, so excoriated by liberals and Democrats, flow very naturally from the overall policy of, acceptance of imperialism.
So, a person who supports Obama (or Bush, or the Clintons, or Romney, or McCain, or Trump) is someone who accepts, is willing to overlook, doesn't find it completely intolerable, etc, that mainstream picture/framework/paradigm of American presence and foreign policy overseas. That is, viewing it as a natural and desirable arrangement for stability, prosperity (for whom?), and peace (but peace on what, or whose terms though?), rather than... just a plain old Evil Empire.
My contention is that the proper and indisputably correct way of viewing the thing is as an evil, exploitative, mass-murdering Evil Empire (see, e.g. results). And that the only reason why people view it the other way (stability, prosperity, countries holding hands singing kum-ba-ya, etc) is rooted in chauvinism, paternalism, and all kinds of nasty human psychological and emotional features (i.e. "racism") very similar to the things that made 19th century English and Frenchmen look at their empires and go "White Man's Burden!" or "Mission Civilisatrice!"
And that is why I say at the end of the day, the most important, deep-lying, fundamental, basic racism is that of e.g. Obama & Hillary supporters. Who cannot even recognize an Evil Fascist Mass-Murdering Empire for what it is, and keep going "White Man's Burden!" looking at it.
> the war that we are fighting in the middle-east and in places like Syria makes us just as bad, if not worse, than Nazi Germany.
I think the much more important similarity is that our Anglo-American empire and Nazi Germany had imperialist goals. In fact, one could characterize Nazi foreign policy as something like them looking over at the English and French and going "hey, those guys have great Empires. Now that we're finally a united German State, we should get an Empire too, otherwise we won't be able to compete with them. But they grabbed all the easy pickings, where can we go? I guess we'd better grab land in the East, and populate it with Germans, just like the English grabbed North America and populated it with their people, going 'Manifest Destiny!'"
The actual wars fought, techniques used, etc are of course going to vary as technological and political circumstances change. Like once you've successfully taken over a big chunk of territory that you want to fill with your own people, then you don't need to keep doing the genocidal ethnic cleansing thing. Instead you can fight resource wars to install puppet regimes that consist of brown people, or whatever.
> That anyone who calls themselves a liberal, who supports the Democrats
I blame Democrats and liberals first and foremost for the fact that the government structure of this country is so concentrated at the top, at the Federal level. Once you concentrate power and resources at the hands of the Federal government, it can do things that a lower scale government, like your city government, or even the government of Iceland, say, cannot do. E.g. maintain tens of thousands of troops overseas, regime-change countries the size of Iraq. You need money and revenues to engage in war and imperialism (Pecunia Nervos Belli), and it is liberals and Democrats who bear the brunt of the blame for why the Federal government has enough money and revenues with which to wage war and imperialism.
And then after all that, after making sure the government has the implements with which to wage war and imperialism, liberals and Democrats always, always, support and elect imperialist warmongers like Barack Obama, or the Clintons, or Kerry, or even Jimmy Carter, to run that government. Never anti-imperialists like Ron Paul, or Dennis Kucinich.
That is why I blame liberals and Democrats first.
> And that the reason Donald Trump is associated with racists is that the Democrats have cast in him a negative light.
No. I think if you demand that people keep electing/supporting Establishment/mainstream politicians that keep fucking them over on the grounds that if they don't do so they're being racists, eventually their resentment will boil over and they'll go "well fine then, I'll be a racist!"
> What's important is how he handles foreign policy, how he addresses the issues like poverty/jobs/healthcare/war. Am I right? Is this what you're saying?
No. What is important is the narrative that is being propagated for why he was elected, and why he is being opposed.
If you convince everyone that Trump was elected because of just racism, it permits the Ruling Class, in particular the liberal/Democratic Ruling Class, to believe/pretend that there was nothing wrong with their behavior and policy of the past 30-40 years, of being in bed with Wall Street banks, corporations, military industrial complex/national security apparatus.
Most critically, and what's making me gag the worst these days, is the complete lunacy of liberals and Democrats going along with the attempt to bring down the Trump admin on the grounds that he is a Russian Manchurian Candidate. I mean that's fucking nuts. These assholes are quite literally cheering for the pro-war anti-Russia Nazi Neocon warmonger nutters to win. People who want to push Russia so far that potentially a Nuclear WWIII might break out.
WTF can you do with people that crazy, stupid, and deranged?
I'm not aware of the exact details of this case, but this book is recommended reading for anyone interested in this type of Geo-Politics.
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
For everyone that 'agrees' with the sentiment of this meme, I highly recommend the book "Confessions of an Economic Hitman". It is an amazing book, and truly eye opening.
> EDITORIAL REVIEWS > > Amazon.com Review > John Perkins started and stopped writing Confessions of an Economic Hit Man four times over 20 years. He says he was threatened and bribed in an effort to kill the project, but after 9/11 he finally decided to go through with this expose of his former professional life. Perkins, a former chief economist at Boston strategic-consulting firm Chas. T. Main, says he was an "economic hit man" for 10 years, helping U.S. intelligence agencies and multinationals cajole and blackmail foreign leaders into serving U.S. foreign policy and awarding lucrative contracts to American business. "Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars," Perkins writes. Confessions of an Economic Hit Man is an extraordinary and gripping tale of intrigue and dark machinations. Think John Le Carré, except it's a true story. > > Perkins writes that his economic projections cooked the books Enron-style to convince foreign governments to accept billions of dollars of loans from the World Bank and other institutions to build dams, airports, electric grids, and other infrastructure he knew they couldn't afford. The loans were given on condition that construction and engineering contracts went to U.S. companies. Often, the money would simply be transferred from one bank account in Washington, D.C., to another one in New York or San Francisco. The deals were smoothed over with bribes for foreign officials, but it was the taxpayers in the foreign countries who had to pay back the loans. When their governments couldn't do so, as was often the case, the U.S. or its henchmen at the World Bank or International Monetary Fund would step in and essentially place the country in trusteeship, dictating everything from its spending budget to security agreements and even its United Nations votes. It was, Perkins writes, a clever way for the U.S. to expand its "empire" at the expense of Third World citizens. While at times he seems a little overly focused on conspiracies, perhaps that's not surprising considering the life he's led. --Alex Roslin --This text refers to the Audio CD edition. > > From Publishers Weekly > Perkins spent the 1970s working as an economic planner for an international consulting firm, a job that took him to exotic locales like Indonesia and Panama, helping wealthy corporations exploit developing nations as, he claims, a not entirely unwitting front for the National Security Agency. He says he was trained early in his career by a glamorous older woman as one of many "economic hit men" advancing the cause of corporate hegemony. He also says he has wanted to tell his story for the last two decades, but his shadowy masters have either bought him off or threatened him until now. The story as presented is implausible to say the least, offering so few details that Perkins often seems paranoid, and the simplistic political analysis doesn’t enhance his credibility. Despite the claim that his work left him wracked with guilt, the artless prose is emotionally flat and generally comes across as a personal crisis of conscience blown up to monstrous proportions, casting Perkins as a victim not only of his own neuroses over class and money but of dark forces beyond his control. His claim to have assisted the House of Saud in strengthening its ties to American power brokers may be timely enough to attract some attention, but the yarn he spins is ultimately unconvincing, except perhaps to conspiracy buffs.
IMO you're looking for the book, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" by John Perkins.
Thanks. I wasn't sure after seeing this though http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/
in before white fuckers call this colonization.
http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/
http://nypost.com/2014/01/05/us-is-the-greatest-threat-to-world-peace-poll/
You've apparently missed the Washington Consensus or the book, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" by John Perkins. John Perkins used to be the Senior VP for a military-industrial company and he was personally involved in setting up the political climate that both created 9/11 and allowed the Saudi's to get out on flights that same day when everything else was grounded.
To call them terrorists and not trusted allies is to basically misunderstand American foreign policy from the 60s through to 9/11.
That's not to say that they're the good guys, but that it's way more complicated than you're giving it credit for being. I highly recommend that book. Once I was exposed to it, I genuinely felt like that missing piece of the puzzle for foreign policy in the 90s (which is when I became politically aware) fell into place.
and Arbenz in Guatemala and Torijillo in Panama, etc., etc, etc.
Of course they have been trying to overthrow Castro in Cuba since the 50's however have failed miserably.
They are doing the same thing in Venezuela today however methods have changed by the fact we live in a digital world.
Facist hypocritical USA only likes democracy when it suits us.
Here is a chronology of Americas adventures in Latin America over the last 100 years.
Here is a great book by a US operative who participated in the antics
I highly recommend http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
It helped change my world view, among other things like this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htF5XElMyGI
A lot of what is in the book makes sense when you can relate it to the real world of today.
You're right that bureaucratic management by small groups of people almost always fails, and history shows just that - as you've exemplified. However, that was not my intention when using the word "fantasy" to describe privatized forms of food distribution. I was using that term to describe the type of capitalism that is entirely devoid of regulation, control, and any form of government.
As far as an alternative to this mode of economic system, I agree with Jack Catran's position that the core systemic issue is the use of money itself, and not who controls it.
Additionally, privatization does have its downsides. How about the multinational corporations that have established themselves in the parts of Africa, India, China, etc. that are deeply in debt, and mine their natural resources at extremely low production costs and labor, then ship them to America and other more developed countries at higher prices. Sure, those resources are being utilized, but at a steep loss to the citizens that live in those areas, which acts, among other factors, as a brigade that keeps them locked into their conditions.
A specific example is Coca-Cola; they're privatizing millions of gallons of water in certain areas of drought-ridden India so that they can mix that water to create their products and then ship them to Europe and America.
I could give more examples, and there are plenty in this book, if you're curious.
The sad part is you think ANY of that is conspiracy. To each their own.
Here's the gold dinar "conspiracy". Yet, this guy wants us to believe Libya was so minuscule that the gold dinar would have no effect on the world economy and US dollar. Gaddafi was pushing for Muslim nations to trade in their own currency which would have absolutely devastated the dollar. It wasnt just "Libya".
"The US, the other G-8 countries, the World Bank, IMF, BIS (Bank for International Settlements), and multinational corporations do not look kindly on leaders who threaten their dominance over world currency markets,” wrote John Perkins, author of “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man,” It is redolent of Saddam Hussein advocating similar policies shortly before the U.S. invaded Iraq, he said."
A great listen and a great book if you havent read it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29GhXsx7-Rs&feature=youtu.be
http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/23387/lessons_from_libya.html
You know what this is?
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/16session/A-HRC-16-15.pdf
Its a document stating that Gaddafi and the Libyan government had been slated to receive a reward from the UN for their economic and social progress and for their commitment to human rights.
The fact is Libya under Gaddafi rule had the highest standards of living in all of Africa. Had the best infrastructure. Had the best educational and health system. Had the best water and had the best oil in all of Africa. Had the best social structure of all of African Muslim nations.
Hell. Gaddafi built the largest man made river in the world to supply his people with fresh water.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man-Made_River
This insane murderer of the people was such a tyrant he spent upwards of 25+ BILLION to supply the best clean water in Africa to his peoples and neighbors.
Compared to Saudi Arabia Libya under Gaddafi rule was like a Disney land for human rights.
Women in Libya were free to work and to dress as they like. Life expectancy was in the seventies. And per capita income – is estimated at $12,000 (£9,000),
Illiteracy was being wiped out along with homelessness.
Say what you want but to downplay historical fact as "conspiracy" is just ignorant.
While no saint, To suggest that Libya and Africa is now somehow better without Gaddafi is fucking ridiculous. Libya was left in ruins and is currently being sold off to the highest bidders. In a current perpeptual state of warfare and the majority of its people have been thrust back into poverty and a crumbling infrastructure.
Fuck. Gaddafi did everything the west asked. He negotiated and disarmed his WMD. He was deemed as a "model" for peace and nuclear disarmament.
"U.S. Points to Libya as Disarmament Model: An interview with Assistant Secretary of State Paula DeSutter "
http://www.armscontrol.org/print/1515
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nuke-teams-set-to-disarm-libya/
How ironic. We succeed in diplomatic measures to disarm Libya (A seat in the UN) only to invade them a few years later. If Gaddafi hadnt disarmed he would still be in power and Libya would still be setting a example in Africa.
And people wonder why Iran refuses to disarm...
http://fortune.com/2015/03/05/libya-oil-companies-isis-fighting/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/24/us-libya-usa-oilcompanies-idUSTRE71L5VI20110224
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/01/libya-investment-portfolio-us-banks-equity_n_829964.html
./PROGRESS
Are you from the Daily Mail? Good propaganda.
For a moron, let me explain. If insurgents who want "free elections" are blowing the shit out of your country, you have the right to blow them up to protect your people.
If the insurgents are armed and funded by USA et al are they justified in their insurgency of a sovereign country?
if there was an election involving the insurgents, do you think they would vote for Assad or a US puppet like in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia etc etc etc? Please read this book to learn about US intervention in destabilising countries: http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Your view is very simplistic and based on western media lies. I read the Kelly McEvers article you linked to but it only holds conjecture and no facts backed up by anything. Its mostly opinion and hearsay. Funny how an american journalist can make shit up to mobilise a nation on a lie, like is being attempted now. I wonder if there were WMDs in Iraq? I wonder about the Gulf of Tonkin and whether it happened. For reference, 41 fake events that galvanised populations for war: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/41-admitted-false-flag-attacks.html
People in the Uk are totally ok with murdering and maiming kids in the name of democracy. As long as shit we buy is cheap, why the fuck should we care who we bomb?
So you advocate bombing Assad and Syria? Very nice of you. Do you complain about immigrants too? Perhaps if someone house has been bombed, their family killed by inefficient drone strikes they deserve the right to come to Europe. Maybe im wrong and the bombs are invitations to come to Europe? You know, with little party invites attached? Like "Come to Eastern Europe where we wont let you in and we fucking hate muslims."
If someone bombed your mums house with American weapons, what would you do? Would you be a freedom fighter or a terrorist in your retaliation?
Sounds like someone in China read Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Book Link
This is an important book for historical context: http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1422297875&sr=1-1&keywords=confessions+of+an+economic+hitman
nonfiction/politique:
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins
Iran Awakening, Shirin Ebadi
Profit over People, Noam Chomsky
Eyes of the Heart, Jean Bertrand Aristide
Dreams from my Father, Brack Obama
....etc...
Queques fictions:
White Boy Shuffle, Paul Beaty
The Master and the Margarita, Bulgakov
...
si ça vous interesse je peux vous envoyer un list complet, mais je sais bien que ceux sont pas pour tout le monde...
Not directly related but eyeopening nonetheless... Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins
this sounds like something out of Confessions of an Economic Hitman
Actually we probably agree on most things (except the rioting, my heroes have always been pacifists Frederick Douglas, Susan Anthony, Thoreau, Gandhi and King). I have ordered the Marjorie Kelly book you recommended. You might be interested in this podcast or this book. I was suggesting we write to our representatives as a small step but most people I know are too lazy or brainwashed to even attempt any action. Good luck with the unionizing - here's some inspiration
Confessions of an Economic Hit man.
That's weird...when I searched Amazon (U.S.) just now, the Kindle Edition comes up cheaper than the paperback.
In a similar modus operandi, there's this.
This is precisely what the book, "Confessions of an Economic Hitman," is about. These American engineering firms are pseudo-govt agencies. They go into 3rd world countries promising to fix their infrastructure, build a dam, roads, etc. The price for these projects skyrocket beyond the estimation and these poor countries find themselves in debt to the USA. That debt can be leveraged into UN votes, political influence, and exploitation of the country's citizens by American companies.
In the book, the guy's job is to oversell the positives of letting American engineering companies come in and fix/build stuff. It's only later that these countries learn the true cost.
The Germans ran an ad in the New Yorker telling people that the Lusitania would be sailing (and sunk) through german military controlled waters, the captain has nothing to do with the story either. the "Official story" at the time was it was just a civilian ship, but sadly it wasnt because in order for the germans to actually want to sink it, it had to be a military ship....and lo and behold it was loaded with hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammunition headed to support US allies in the war.....and what is a ammunition or any military supply carrying ship considered in wartime? a military vessel.
and as for the golf of tonkin incident, just read the wiki, but you shouldnt have to since you know more about american history than most americans right?
and as for Pearl Harbor there ya go that should get ya off the "conspiracy" denial train.
as for over throwing sovereign goverments Here ya go..... and you should read this book or find a cliff notes to see how we have even used economic espionage to achieve these goals. not to mention all the proxy wars we have been involved in, but thats prolly too "conspiracy theory" for you. so how about the fact the US helped organize train and supply groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS (btw use google if my sources arent up to your standards.)
but i mean just only facts ever. NEVER would our government lie to us.
but please prove that none of it is true. again though prove it.
I read this one in a college course, and I was enthralled. It is hard to believe that it is all real. Another book that you may enjoy, a little off topic, is Confessions of an Economic Hitman.
You might enjoy this: https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
I have spent 8 years researching this. If you really want answers to your questions, and you really want to know how things work, I will give you some excellent sources. You need to read "Secrets of the Federal Reserve" by Eustace Mullins. It was published in 1953 and was banned in America. A judge in Germany ordered the book to be burned in 1955. All expose books on the Federal Reserve System published since then (for instance, "Creature From Jekyll Island) have ripped-off Eustace Mullins' work.
http://www.whale.to/b/mullins1.html
He also wrote "The New World Order", which was an extension of Secretes of the Federal Reserve, and it was published in 1958. Follow Eustace videos on youtube. He is correct on most things. He did excellent research and he knew personally the Royals of Europe and very wealthy people.
Read the book "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" by John Perkins. This book will explain how the Boys Upstairs exploit third world countries. But, things have changed since the book was released in 2004. The Boys Upstairs no longer create "Banana Republics" with tyrannical dictators, but create upheaval, anarchy, and chaos within a country to take control of a country's natural resources and assets (Libya, Iraq, for example).
http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Another good read is "They Knew They Were Right: The Rise of the Neocons" by Jacob Heilbrunn. The book gives a good insight on the history of the neocons, who also work for the Boys Upstairs.
http://www.amazon.com/They-Knew-Were-Right-Neocons/dp/140007620X
The info is there, if you want answers.
This is relevant.
Are you sure? Not trying to be rude, but there is ample evidence to suggest otherwise.
That last quote is from confessions of an economic hitman.
Here is a redacted document, still usefull
Here is even photographic evidence of zbigniew brzezinski meeting Osama Bin Laden
Here are some related news articles.
NBC - "His CIA ties are only the beginning to a woeful story
The Guardian -CIA agent alleged to have met Bin Laden in July
Globalresearch.ca - The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan
Liveleak - Osama bin laden ties
A blog, take it for what it's worth
I'm not trying to be intrusive, but are you sure they're all stupid idiots? I don't pretend I know the truth about Osama Bin Laden or anything, and I would really like to hear your honest opinion. I'm confused.
Read the book, Confessions of an Economic Hitman.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard66.html
http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2001/0911-Racket.html
http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org/2009/12/herrenvolcker.html
Finally, note Wall Street/Big Finance interests are ultimately behind things like: NAFTA, CAFTA, permanent most favored nation trading status for China, off-shoring of manufacturing jobs, easing of lending standards that led to the subprime mortgage crisis (no, it wasn't poor black people behind it. Poor black people have ZERO power and influence in our system. Fuck, even middle class WHITE people have ZERO power and influence in our system, you think our glorious congresscritters are going to do the bidding of a bunch of dirt poor MINORITIES? It was BANKS behind it all along, cause they stood to make a pile of money off of subprime mortgages. Messrs Barney Fag and Charlie Rangel weren't "helping poor black people" so much as "sucking Wall Street cock"), the Financial Services Modernization Act, the Commodities Futures Modernization Act - in short, ALL the pieces that set the stage for the financial collapse of 2007.
And whose side is Barack Obama on? I think this answers the question:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/04/obama-to-banker/
Obama isn't so much "picking his battles" as he is ON THE OTHER SIDE, you fool. HE IS ON THE SIDE OF THE BANKSTERS.
> and Obama's big choice was to fight the Healthcare system.
lol. No no no. You simply don't understand how our political system works. Read this:
http://www.amazon.com/Golden-Rule-Investment-Competition-Money-Driven/dp/0226243176
What was the Dem liberal base's demand when it came to health care reform? It was "cover more people, control costs" right? In other words, make health insurance corporations or for-profit healthcare producers take a haircut. Instead, what was actually delivered? An order to middle class Americans to buy health insurance, from these for-profit corporations, at rates profitable to them. Far from forcing them to take a haircut, Obama & the Dem leadership ensured they would continue to rake in steady profits for the time being.
How do you end up with such an outcome? The standards narrative is GOP obstructionism. But let's examine this narrative a bit more carefully. What was the GOP base's demand of its representatives? It was "Stop them. Make sure Obama and the Dems do nothing."
How do you have one side going "make health insurance take a haircut" and another side going "do nothing" and end up with a "middle ground" that is... "health insurance makes even more profits than before"?
And another thing. Dem party leadership is veteran, career politicians - Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Rahm Emanuel... hardly political noobs. You seriously expect people to believe that these career politicos had no idea that Republicans would oppose them, and so any "reform" would have to be pushed through over bitter GOP opposition, or would end up being some sort of corporate welfare scheme that would make the problem worse (because it is more wealth transfer from the 99% to the 1%, from middle class American families ordered to buy health insurance to investor class who own health insurance companies) than before?
So no, sorry, but you have the narrative completely backwards. The only logical explanation is that the Obama admin and the Dem leadership were working for health insurance and for profit healthcare producer interest from the get-go. As per Ferguson's thesis - it appears that health insurance/healthcare producer industries had a problem on their hands, and so they "invested" in some politicians (that would be Obama and the Dems) and got them to "solve" that problem for them - mainly by transferring more wealth from middle class to them.
So I repeat: the whole "healthcare reform" bullshit? Bankster whores putting on a charade.
P.S. Oh the timing of the gay marriage thing is easy. ObamaCo knew they'd need to throw their liberal base a bone, to get them to forget how he screwed them over in his first term. So they sat on gay marriage, DADT, etc., until the 2012 elections came up.
Libertarian books that helped shape my understanding of the world: http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/
http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/
http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-fdr.html
http://iamthewitness.com/books/Eustace.Mullins/The%20World%20Order.pdf
http://mises.org/rothbard/agd.pdf
http://www.whale.to/b/allen_b1.html#chapter4
http://library.mises.org/books/Robert%20P%20Murphy/Lessons%20for%20the%20Young%20Economist.pdf
http://www.capitalism.net/Capitalism/CAPITALISM_Internet.pdf
http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
http://www.amazon.com/The-Creature-Jekyll-Island-Federal/dp/0912986212/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_i
http://www.mutualist.org/id4.html
http://mises.org/books/mespm.pdf
http://www.amazon.com/Rollback-Repealing-Government-Before-Collapse/dp/B005CDT7WM
http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/
http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/
http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-fdr.html
http://iamthewitness.com/books/Eustace.Mullins/The%20World%20Order.pdf
http://www.whale.to/b/allen_b1.html#chapter4
http://mises.org/rothbard/agd.pdf
http://library.mises.org/books/Robert%20P%20Murphy/Lessons%20for%20the%20Young%20Economist.pdf
http://www.capitalism.net/Capitalism/CAPITALISM_Internet.pdf
http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
http://www.mutualist.org/id4.html
http://www.amazon.com/Rollback-Repealing-Government-Before-Collapse/dp/B005CDT7WM
http://mises.org/books/mespm.pdf
http://www.amazon.com/The-Creature-Jekyll-Island-Federal/dp/0912986212/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_i
Just some of the many books that blow your mind and teach you how "the system" operates. They teach you how the state loots you via taxation and distributes the ill gotten wealth to megacorporations and uber billionaires, while keeping you dumb and sick via their control over schools and medicine.
If you want conspiracies, you should read some John Perkins and learn about the International Monetary Fund.
All of the things you mentioned can be accomplished in the free market without the use of violence. Let me give you a couple minor examples.
This line really got me:
>and most importantly preventing private thugs from taking your money by force like in every third world nation on Earth?
Perhaps you should read Confessions of an Economic Hitman. The IMF and US Government are the two biggest thugs taking everybody's money by force. I am threatened with force everyday by the US Government. Currently I am forced to pay for wars I am profoundly against. I am against aggression in general. I am forced to give money to bail out banks. I am forced to pay to put peaceful people in cages. And local government isn't much better. I am forced to pay for a public education center that is inefficient and largely ineffective. My child is being home schooled, so on top of having to pay for public school I am paying for my own child's education. I have no problem paying for services that I want. I have no problem paying for my child's education. I do have a problem with being forced to pay for the governments crappy system. If I refuse to pay, the government will steal my property. Possible put me in a cage, or even kill me if I resist having my freedom taken away.
There are other resources you can check out such as The Market for Liberty. The link is for a free audio book download, so you don't even have to read it. If you give it a listen it might help to answer some of your questions.
> You expect the entire continent of Africa to somehow build their own infrastructure, computers, cars and airplanes with no help from the outside world?
Regarding 'helping'
the undeveloped world. Read and learn https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6qSmNzuBaM
I have no further interest in continued discussion with you. You write like a paid shill or a brainwashed dumbass. Go away.
> 'for the greater good'.
Oh you sweet naive child. You need to read this book.
p.s: if you were sarcastic you should have used " instead of ' or at least /s.
End the drug war. Stop sending economic hitmen to south american countries.
Notice how every country america goes to, south america, the middle east, they result in chaos? It's cause they kill the leaders that were elected. If you want to solve the problem, go after the roots, not the branches. The fact that this is even happening is insane.
This is a great book detailing the havoc north america has created for decades in south america
https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081
Not familiar with the way this works?- https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081