============================================================================
A GUIDEBOOK: HOW THE WORLD WORKS AND HOW WE CAN CHANGE IT
(C) 2000, Richard K. Moore
http://cyberjournal.org
Chapter 1:
How does the world work today, and where is it headed?
a. Globalization and the West: a covert coup d'etat
b. Globalization and the third world: empire by another name
c. Kultur-kampf: enforcing the New World Order
d. Economic globalization: Robber Barons writ large
e. Decoding propaganda: matrix vs. reality
f. Capitalism's growth imperative and societal engineering
g. Elite rule and the Dark Millennium
----------------------------------------------------
1.b. Globalization and the third world: empire by another name
"Recommendation P-B23 (July, 1941) stated
that worldwide financial institutions
were necessary for the purpose of
'stabilizing currencies and facilitating
programs of capital investment for
constructive undertakings in backward and
underdeveloped regions.' During the last
half of 1941 and in the first months of
1942, the Council developed this idea for
the integration of the world.... Isaiah
Bowman first suggested a way to solve the
problem of maintaining effective control
over weaker territories while avoiding
overt imperial conquest. At a Council
meeting in May 1942, he stated that the
United States had to exercise the
strength needed to assure 'security,' and
at the same time 'avoid conventional
forms of imperialism.' The way to do
this, he argued, was to make the exercise
of that power international in character
through a United Nations body."
- Laurence Shoup & William Minter, in
Holly Sklar's "Trilateralism," writing
about strategic recommendations developed
during World War II by the Council on
Foreign Relations (CFR).
At the end of World War II, a grand new project of
world management was launched. The United Nations
was formed and the Bretton Woods Institutions (IMF
and World Bank) were set up for the purpose of
stabilizing currencies and providing investment
capital. European empires were gradually
dismantled, and dozens of newly independent nations
were formed out of the old colonies. The
establishment of the UN led to hope that world
peace would be achieved. The new independent
nations were generally seen as evidence of the
spread of democracy, and the beginning of a better
life for all. The third world became known as the
'underdeveloped world', and 'development' was
generally embraced as the obvious path to a better
future.
But what is 'development'? When Western nations
industrialized in the 1800s, those were examples of
development that led to strong national economies,
effective national infrastructures, and productive
industrial capacities. It was development aimed at
nation building. When a transnational corporation
buys land in Central America and raises cattle
there to make hamburgers, that is also
'development.' But instead of nation building in
Central America, this development extracts large
profits from local resources while creating very
little local wealth or long term benefit to the
local economy. Furthermore, it displaces farmers
and forces them into poverty, and it destroys
old-growth rain forests. In addition, repressive
local regimes are required to enable the extraction
of maximum profit from the capital investment
without interference from labor unrest or
environmental regulations.
The word 'development', when used rhetorically by
government officials and the media, implies
'advancement' and 'betterment' - such as was
experienced when the U.S. or Japan industrialized.
But in reality, when a corporation talks about
undertaking a 'development project', this means
only that the company is going to invest some
money, build something, and then extract more
profit than was invested. When it comes down to it,
the thing actually being developed is the
corporation's cash - it is being developed from a
huge stash into a still bigger stash. There is a
big difference between nation building and
corporate wealth accumulation - but both are called
'development'. The distinction may seem like a
minor detail of semantics, but the confusion
enables officials to say one thing and mean the
opposite.
The third world remains 'underdeveloped' - after
fifty years of intensive 'development' - because
'underdeveloped' refers to the strength of the
local economy and infrastructure, while 'intensive
development' refers to the number of corporate
projects that have been undertaken. In fact
'development', as it is practiced, is precisely
what prevents the kind of 'development' that is
promised by official mythology - and was hoped for
in the optimism following World War II. That is why
many third world nations today are demanding a
'right to development' - and why many of us in the
West would have a hard time understanding what they
are talking about.
America was once on the other side of this coin.
Before the American Revolution, Britain prohibited
manufacturing in the colonies, forcing the locals
to trade their raw resources to Britain for
finished goods - an exchange that worked
disproportionately to Britain's benefit. To a large
extent the Revolution was a struggle for the 'right
to development', and as soon as independence was
achieved, intensive nation-building development
began.
The actual experience of the third world in the
postwar era has been one of economic exploitation,
environmental destruction, civil suppression, and
continued underdevelopment. The economic
relationship between the West and the third world
remained substantially unchanged as colonial
empires were dismantled. New means of control were
introduced, such as replacing garrisoned imperial
troops with local client regimes, and employing
occasional intervention instead of ongoing colonial
administration. What looked like democratization
and the end of imperialism was in practice a
modernized, more efficient form of imperialism.
From available planning documents, such as the one
quoted above from "Trilateralism," it becomes clear
that this postwar version of imperialism was no
accident but was rather the result of an
intentional design. The planners _intended to
exploit and they _intended to deceive. While
avoiding the _appearance of "conventional forms of
imperialism", they sought nonetheless to exercise
"effective _control over weaker territories". While
publicly proclaiming an era of international
cooperation, they all the time intended the UN and
the Bretton Woods institutions to serve as a
framework for systematic global exploitation - by
means of "programs of capital investment for
constructive undertakings". 'Constructive
undertakings', like 'development', seems to imply
'advancement' or 'progress', but all it really
means is achieving profitable returns from
corporate investments.
From a third-world perspective, globalization
amounts to an acceleration of this postwar
imperialist program. Free-trade treaties and IMF
demands tighten the economic screws on the third
world, squeezing out increased profits by more
rapidly depleting local resources and impoverishing
local people. One might wonder how the West expects
to compel the third world to submit to this program
of rape and plunder by international capital.
----------------------------------------------------
Recommended reading.
Michel Chossudovsky, "The Globalization Of Poverty - Impacts
of IMF and World Bank Reforms", The Third World Network,
Penang, Malaysia, 1997.
This detailed study by an economics insider shows the
consequences of "reforms" in various parts of the world,
revealing a clear pattern of callous neo-colonialism and
genocide. Definitely red-pill material
Frances Moore Lappé, Joseph Collins, Peter Rosset, "World
Hunger, Twelve Myths", Grove Press, New York, 1986.
Another red pill. Debunks Malthusian thinking, among other
things. Here's a sample: "During the past twenty-five years
food production has outstripped population growth by 16
Percent. India - which for many of us symbolizes
over-population and poverty--is one of the top third-world
food exporters. If a mere 5.6 percent of India's food
production were re-allocated, hunger would be wiped out in
India."
William Greider, "One World Ready or Not, the Manic Logic of
Global Capitalism", Simon & Schuster, New York, 1997.
A tour by a superb journalist showing how the global
economy operates in various parts of the world.
"Third World Resurgence", a magazine published monthly by the
Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia,
http://www.twnside.org.sg.
This magazine deserves widespread circulation. It covers a
wide range of global issues, presents a strong and sensible
third-world perspective, and is a very good source of
real-world news. Martin Kohr is managing editor and a
frequent contributor.
"The New Internationalist", a magazine published monthly by
New Internationalist Publications, Ltd, Oxford, UK,
http://www.newint.org.
Another good source of real news and commentary, with a global
perspective.
============================================================================
Share: