|

Recent
Stories
April
21, 2003
Elaine
Cassel
An Administration in Contempt
Edward
Said
Give Us Back Our Democracy
Gary
Leupp
Easter Thoughts on Liberation, Jesus
and Kanaka WaiWai
Roger
Witherspoon
Why Michigan Needs Affirmative Action
Uri Avnery
At Midnight, a Knock on the Door
Steve
Perry
Bush's War Web Log 4/19
April
19, 2003
Gary
Leupp
The Rape of History
Saul
Landau
Shop, Go to Church, Support Bush's
War, Wait for Armageddon
Michael
J. Fellows
Off With Their Heads: the Constitution According to Scalia
Pablo
Mukherjee
Roadmap to Resistance
Omar
Barghouti
Sharon's Bloody Beat
Anthony
Gancarski
Tony Blair: the Most Powerful Man in the World
Mickey
Z.
Animals: the Other Collateral Damage
Will
Potter
When Police Attack Journalists
William
MacDougall
America's In-Bedded Journalism
Neve
Gordon
Haunted by History
Adam
Engel
Wal-Mart and Peace
Dr.
Susan Block
Art Bombs: American Libertines for Peace
Poets'
Basement
Albert, Buono, Guthrie
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/19
Song of
the Weekend
Baghdad to Basra
April
18, 2003
Uri
Avnery
Operation "Syrian Freedom":
This One's Not About Oil
Jorge
Mariscal
"They Died Trying to Become
Students": the Future of Latinos in an Era of War and Occupation
Mickey
Z:
Coalition of the Unindicted: Only Losers Get Tried for War Crimes
Hussein
Ibish
Syria and the Road to World War IV
Reza Ladjevardian
Tarqeting Iran? Do It With TV, Not Cruise Missiles
Matania
Ben-Artzi
You Are Not Protecting My Son's Rights: a Letter to the President
of Israel's Supreme Court
Bruce Jackson
Jews Like Us
Joe
Allen
My Lai Revisited
Carl Estabrook
Support Our Euphemism
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/18
Website
of the Day
Meet the Victims of War
April
17, 2003
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Patriot Gore: the Fatal Flaws in
the Patriot Missile System
Joanne
Mariner
Looting Antiquity: the Legal Implications
for the Pentagon
Issam
Nashashibi
Zalmay Khalilzad: the Neocon's Bagman
to Baghdad
Wayne Madsen
Another Sign of the "End Times" for American Journalism
Robert
Fisk
The Army of Occupation
Boris
Kagarlitsky
Virtual Saddam Takes Aim
Biljana
Vankovska
A Personal View of Iraq: Where
is the Truth?
Dan Brook
Oil War: Fueling the Empire
Stanley
Heller
Bomb and Steal: This is What Privatization Looks Like
Tim Robbins
A Chill Wind is Blowing Through This Nation
Harold
A. Gould
Iraq After the War
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/17
April
16, 2003
Michel
Guerrin
Embedded Photographer Says: "I
Saw Marines Kill Civilians"
Jason
Leopold
Halliburton's Bloody History: They'll
Work for Anyone
Kurt
Nimmo
The Destruction of Iraq: Hey, It's
Good for Business
Stephen
Green
Dancing to Sharon's Beat: the Road
to Unilateral Pre-emption
Diane
Christian
The Devil in Bush's Details
Carol
Norris
Mourning Iraq
Anthony
Gancarski
They Call Themselves Economists?
Michael
Sells
Nero in Baghdad
Alexander
Cockburn
Contract with Iraq
Ninan Koshy
India's Devious Middle Path Through the Iraq War
Brenda
Norrell
Lakota Leader: World Must Resist
American Empire
Wallace
Gagne
End of History; More in a Moment
Stew
Albert
On the Road Again
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/16
April
15, 2003
Uzma
Aslam Khan
The Unbearably Grim Aftermath of War:
What America Says Does Not Go
Robert
Jensen
Self-Determination in Iraq? Then the
US Must Leave
Dr.
Susan Block
The Rape of Iraq
Ron Jacobs
Aiming at Syria: Stop Them Before They Kill Again
Robert
Fisk
The Final Sacking of Baghdad
Col. Dan
Smith
Post-War Iraq: Asking the Right Questions
Ali
Abunimah and Hussein Ibish
A Cycle of Chaos and Confrontation: Misadventures of the NeoCons
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/15
April
14, 2003
Chris
Floyd
Bush's War Without End
Uri Avnery
Gunboat Democracy: This is Only the Beginning
Wayne
Madsen
Americans: The New Mongols of the Mideast?
Shahid
Alam
Iqra: Iraq is Free
Hani
Shukrallah
Day of the Chicken Hawks
Terry
Jones
The Iraq Gravy Train
John
Chuckman
The Iraq War's Trashiest Piece of Propaganda
Patrick
Cockburn
US has a Lot to Answer For: Violence,
Misery and Poverty in Iraq
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/14
April
12 / 13, 2003
Carol
Lipton
Wag the Kennel: the Kenneth Joseph
Story
Wayne
Madsen
Meet the New Butcher of Baghdad: Maj.
Gen. Buford Blount III
John
Brown
"They Got It Down": the Toppling
of the Saddam Statue
Kathy and
Bill Christison
Final Thoughts from Palestine
William
Blum
Our Vulnerable Warmongers' Rush to Justify Devastation
Wallace
Gagne
Let the Stealing Begin
Ann
Harrison
Rosenthal Update: Judge Delays Ruling in Medical Pot Mistrial
Case
Henry Miller
What is the Greatest Treason?
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Render Unto Cesar
Zeljko
Cipris
Mocking Militarism: On Ishikawa Jun's Song of Mars
Ishikawa
Jun
The Song of Mars
Jamey Hecht
Chairman of the Sandwich Board
Adam
Engel
Hell of a Town: Mayor Bloomberg and
the News
Poets'
Basement
Chang Yang-Hao, Adam Engel and Hammond Guthrie
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/12
April
11, 2003
Omar
Barghouti
From Saddam to Uncle Sam
Ron
Jacobs
Greed is Rewarded
David
Vest
The Corporate War on Iraq
Paul
de Rooij
Propaganda Stinkers: Fresh Samples from the Field
Anthony
Gancarski
Foreign Aid: Embezzlement as Public Policy
Mas'ood
Cajee
Franklin Graham: Spiritual Carpetbagger
Michael
Neumann
Now What?
Michael
Berry
The Neo-Cons Have a Dream
Stew Albert
Oh Freedom
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/11
Website
of the Day
About Those Dancing Crowds
April
10, 2003
Zoltan
Grossman
The Perils of Occupation: the Easier
the Victory, the Harder the Peace
Uri
Avnery
The Night After
Wayne Madsen
The Telltale Signs of Empire
David Krieger
Before You Become Too Flushed with Victory, Think of Ali Ismaeel
Abbas
Jeremy
Brecher
What Can the World Do Now That Tanks Prowl Baghdad?
Robert
Jensen
The Unseen War
Geoffrey
Neale
Ashcroft's War on the Constitution:
A Patriot Attack on America
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Last Tango in Baghdad
Hammond
Guthrie
Rumors of War
Joseph
Heller
Nately's Old Man
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/10
Website
of the Day
The
Third Page
April
9, 2003
David
Lindorff
Secret Bechtel Docs Reveal: Yes,
the War Is About Oil
Doug
Lummis
Saving Private Lynch: Hollywood and
War
Susan
Davis
The New York Times and the Peace Movement
David Vest
Smoking Gun? You're Watching It
John
Chuckman
America's Sovereign Right to Do
as It Damn Well Pleases
Akiva
Eldar
Gary Bauer and AIPAC: an Unholy Alliance
with the Christian Right
Ray
Hanania
Suicide Bombers without the Suicide:
Racism, Hypocrisy and the War on Iraq
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/9
April
8, 2003
David
Lindorff
Killing the Messengers: It Doesn't
Matter If It's Deliberate or Accidental
Richard
Lichtman
Dr. Phil in the Trenches
John
Brown
Why Uncle Ben Hasn't Sold Uncle Sam:
a Former Foreign Service Staffer on Bush's Policy Failures
Ben
Terrall
Report from the Oakland Docks: "The
Cops Had No Reason to Open Up on Them"
Jason Leopold
FERC and Wall Street: Conversations
May Have Violated Federal Law
Anthony
Gancarski
Conyers Heeds the Call on Perle
Linda Heard
Journalists Die, the Networks Lie, Iraqis Ask "Why?"
Ahmad
Faruqui
Wallowing in Hypocrisy
Wallace
Gagne
Baghdad Babble
Harry
Browne
Report from the Protests at the Bush/Blair
Summit
Larry Kearney
I Understand There's a Boy in
a Baghdad Hospital
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/8
M. Shahid
Alam
The Israelization of America
April
7, 2003
Todd
Chretien
Wooden Bullets & Grenades: Oakland
Cops Attack Peace Protesters and Dock Workers
David
N. Gibbs
Spying, Secrecy and the University:
The CIA is Back on Campus
Harry Browne
War and Peace Summit a Royal Farce
Gideon
Levy
America is Not a Role Model
Diane
Christian
A Scene from an Obscene War
Jules
Rabin
Remembering Deir Yassin
James Davis
Oddsmaking in Dublin: Will Bush
Shake Gerry's Hand?
Robert
Fisk
The Twisted Language of War
Patrick
Cockburn
Slaughter on the Road to Dibagah
John
Mackay
War and Art
Seth Sandronsky
Wars and the Color Line
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/7
April
5, 2003
Alexander
Cockburn
The Iraqi Humanitarian Relief is
in Shambles
Anne
Gwynne
A Drowning in Salem
Uri
Avnery
Roadmap to Nowhere
Chris
Floyd
Hell for Leather: Bombs, Bullets, Bibles and Bush
William
Cook
Would You Have Sent Your Son (or Daughter) Off to War If...
Gila
Svirsky
A Busy Day for Bulldozers
Mike Ferner
Back from Baghdad: What Next for the Peace Movement?
Joanne
Mariner
Civilian Deaths and Official Apologies
John Stanton
Bush Takes His Killing Orders
from the Lord
Romi
Mahajan
Learning to Count the Dead
Aluf Benn
After Iraq, US Vows to Deal with
Other Mideast Regimes
Mary
Ellen Peterson
Gay Marine Refuses to Fight
William
MacDougall
Country Music and the Crimes of Patriotism
Ron
Jacobs
War and Occupation
Bernie
Pattison
Aborigines and the Different God
Mark
Engler
Iraq War as Arms Expo
Adam Engel
Li'l Box of Love: a Novelini
Poets'
Basement
Tripp, Albert, Katz
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Flesh and Its Discontents: the Paintings of Lucian Freud
Norman
Madarasz
Canada and the War
April
4, 2003
Anthony
Gancarski
Colin Powell's Shame
John
Chuckman
Was Einstein Right About Israel?
David
Krieger
The Meaning of Victory
Tom
Gorman
The Mantra of the Troops: Support
or Treason?
Adam
Federman
The Absence of War
Vijay
Prashad
There Are No More Arguments
Tom
Stephens
The End of the Innocence
Mickey
Z.
Makes Me Sic (Sic): Copy Editing
Bush Speak
Pierre
Tristam
War Coverage: a Dishonest Reality
Show
Hammond
Guthrie
The Deadly Mihrab
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 04/04
April
3, 2003
Uri
Avnery
A Crooked Mirror: Presstitution and
the Theater of Operations
David
Vest
Can You Hear the Silence?
Anthony
Gancarski
Colin Powell Telemarketer
David
Lindorff
Takoma: the Dolphin Who Refused
to Fight
Michael
Roberts
War, Debts and Deficits
Ramzy
Baroud
Now That Iraqis Are Being Killed Is Israel Any More Secure?
Jo Wilding
From Baghdad with Tears
Anton
Antonowicz
Cluster Bombs on Babylon
Alison
Weir
Israel, We Won't Forget Rachel Corrie
Bruce
Jackson
Hating Wolf Blitzer's Voice
Eliot Katz
War's First Week
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 04/03
Hot Stories
Paul de Rooij
Arrogant
Propaganda
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.

Burn Your Sweatshop Clothes!
Buy Union Made Apparel!
|
April 23,
2003
Duck, Duck, Goose:
Financing
the War, Financing the World
By
STANDARD SHAEFER
(Interview with Michael Hudson, author
of Super
Imperialism, Pluto Press, 2003)
Now that even the LA Times has begun to show a
modicum of willingness to discuss US foreign policy in terms
of a potential imperialism, it has become clear that those on
the right have avoided this debate so far only by sticking to
the strictest, most out-dated notion of empire. The left, however,
for too long has been satisfied with talking about cultural imperialism
and corporate exploitation, both of which are serious problems.
Recently, however, the left has often clumsily explained the
economic motives for the war in terms of big oil, sheer greed
and more ephemerally as a desire to weaken the euro. This is
all likely, but it also reveals the degree to which the left's
understanding of finance is outdated. This is not their fault,
however. Not only do university economics departments remain
dominated by the ersatz laissez faire notions of the Chicago
School, but so are US Government, the World Bank, the IMF, the
WTO and the European central banks. The result has been the censorship
of those few economists willing to point out that the US is very
much the center of imperialism, unwilling to engage in the "free
trade" or laissez faire that it promotes abroad.
Only recently, when World Bank head and
Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz resigned in order to speak
out against the sister institution of the IMF did this get serious
attention. But Stiglitz remains defensive of the World Bank itself
and continues to believe its goals despite no evidence that anything
good has come from it, overlooking its complicity in promoting
structural adjustments that have proved ecologically destructive
and entirely in the American financial
interests. The real expose was published over thirty years earlier
despite an active campaign to keep the story out of the press,
out of the university and out of the government.
Shortly after the US was forced off the
gold standard, a young economist by the name of Michael Hudson
received a grant to study the effect of the demonetarization
of gold. His report was made not only to the US government, but
also to Wall Street firms such as his former employers, the Chase
Manhattan Bank and Arthur Andersen. The problem was that despite
his phrasing the situation in the most critical terms, his report
revealed that the US was on inadvertently on the verge of the
greatest boondoggle of all times.
Hudson himself describes resistance to
his message in a new preface to the recently reprinted ground-breaking
book Super Imperialism: The Origin and Fundamentals of US World
Dominance. Hudson's is an infuriating story, only partially available
in this volume, involving at least two incidents where university
board members and economic professors threatened to resign if
his books on trade policy were published. The US Treasury Department
even went so far as to alter the way it reports statistic on
the balance of payments impact of the u.s. government to prevent
further study into how the US government actually made money
on its "aid" programs. More important, prof. Hudson
explains how the US managed to use its debtor status to exploit
the world.
By going off the gold standard at precise
moment that it did, the United States obliged the world's central
banks to finance the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit by using
their surplus dollars to buy U.S. Treasury bonds, whose volume
quickly exceeded America's ability or intention to pay. All the
dollars that end up in European, Asian, and Eastern central banks
as result of American's excessive import-imbalance, have no place
to go but the U.S. Treasury. Because of the restrictions placed
on the central banks_ there is no place else for this money to
go_these countries were forced to buy US treasuries or else accept
the worthlessness of the dollars received through trade.
Like most people, I understood economic
imperialism as an open game. Any corporation could invest in
another country and extract profits, but apparently this is only
one level. 'Super' imperialism occurs and can only occur between
the U. S. government and the foreign central banks. To understand
this further, I decided to speak to Michael Hudson directly.
Standard Schaefer: How aware was the
Nixon administration of the balance of payments issue? Did they
realize that it would actually increase US economic dominance?
Michael Hudson: The Nixon people didn't
realize. I got an $80,000 grant from the Hudson Institute to
explain it to them. The Nixon people said, "Oh gee. That's
great". Then they turned my analysis of imperialism into
a "How To" book. I had written it as a "How Not
To" book, but the nation doing the exploitation was more
interested in learning how the system worked than were the countries
being exploited. I started to consult for Canada, Mexico and
other countries. Canada had been accommodating toward the World
Bank and IMF, but when they realized the extent to which these
organizations were rigged to further the balance of payments
problem, they felt exploited.
SS: Do you believe the neo-conservatives
advising Bush at the moment are more aware of "benefits"
of this balance of payments issue, what you call the US treasury
standard?
MH: They know it's a rip off, yes. And
they absolutely want it to continue. Being Chicago School monetarists,
they think that America's financial free ride should be built
into the world economy as if it were perfectly natural for the
rest of the world to adjust its economies to help the U.S. economy.
But among sovereign regional blocs this kind of subservience
can only be transitory.
SS: What is the role of militarism at
this stage? Can perpetual war be seen as a sort of imperial Works
Progress Administration that jumpstarts the domestic economy?
At what point does the cycle collapse and can it do so internally_or
as you've suggested, does it only stop when Asia, Europe, and
the East finally refuse to buy US treasuries?
MH: The US Treasury-bill standard finances
the military, but doesn't need imperial war to succeed. So far
it's being accepted voluntarily, as other countries have not
yet figured out how to extricate themselves from a system that
is bleeding them more and more.
To date they haven't tried very hard
to create an alternative, but now the system could backfire,
as Bush's aggressive diplomacy is prompting Europe, Russia and
China to stand up for their own self-interest. And that's what
they need to do. They didn't stand up for their self-interest
when the World Bank and IMF were formed, but now they have to
do so.
People are now beginning to raise the
question of whether countries really need their central banks,
which are essentially lobbyists for the Washington Consensus,
as are the World Bank and the IMF. They follow the Chicago School
in lobbying for high rates and a large cushion of unemployed
so as to maximize financial power relative to labor and the products
it produces. Financial exploitation now exceeds the old-fashioned
exploitation of labor by actually employing it, albeit for low
wages.
Central banks are staffed by Chicago
School monetarists, and are allowed to take only a 3% deficit
whereas in the US it is limitless. Europe and Asia should abandon
the false start with their central banks and should rely on their
Treasuries, which are Keynesian or could be Keynesian. The national
Treasuries should set up a credit system with bonds and IOUs
based on euros and other currencies.
SS: Okay, but isn't it most likely that
the whole thing ends in a crisis, one more devastating to the
US than the "Asian Flu"? What would this crisis look
like?
MH: There will be a crisis when Europe,
Asia and Latin America finally break away. The U.S. has said
it can't pay back its dollar debts and doesn't intend to. As
an alternative, it has proposed "funding the US dollar overhang"
into the world monetary system. Other countries would get IMF
credit equal to their dollar holdings, but these holdings no
longer would be US Treasury obligations. The US would wipe its
debt to foreign central banks off the hook. This would mean that
it would have got all the balance-of-payments deficits for the
past 32 years for free, with no quid pro quo.
The US has been proposing this for 30
years whenever Europe raises the issue of payment for its dollar
holdings. American diplomats have said that they won't allow
central banks to use their dollars to buy US corporations, for
instance. When OPEC countries proposed this after 1973, the US
Treasury reportedly informed them that this would be considered
an act of war. As for Europe, it never has pushed its own self-interest
in the World Bank or the IMF.
SS: How does is this related to the economic
bubble?
MH: Since Europe and Asia have financed
most of the US Treasury's budget deficits in recent decades,
Americans haven't had to do this. As a result, their bond market
has been freed from government bond issues, so US investors have
been able to put their money into the stock market and real estate,
for better or worse. As these markets rose during the 1980s and
'90s, they attracted foreign private-sector dollars into the
US market. This helped finance the bubble.
Meanwhile, America's federal budget deficits
can go on without limit, precisely because of the balance of
payment deficit. The larger the payments deficit, the more dollars
end up in the hands of foreign central banks, to be recycled
into the purchase of US Treasury securities. This means that
the US government's deficit - including the military spending
in Iraq, by the way - is financed by foreign governments. This
will continue despite the fact the debt already has grown greater
than the ability to pay, until these countries finally break
away from the system.
As for the bubble economy, pensions and
Social Security will go first. The US can't afford to bail them
out and still plan the giveaways to the wealthiest 10 percent
of the population who are the net creditors to the bottom 90
percent. Pension obligations were expected to absorb only 5 or
10 percent of production costs, but now they are absorbing nearly
all the reported profits, and threaten to eat into the money
available to repay the banks and bondholders. The big investors
want to be paid, and this means taking money that was earmarked
for employees.
The only question is whether the US government
will bail out the individual wealthy investors. The working motto
in such cases is that big fish always eat little fish. Breughel
had a great etching on this topic.
The states and the municipalities will
go next. They are among the little fish. Bush's tax cuts have
slashed their tax receipts. Cutting taxes for New York City and
most other localities is causing layoffs and widening unemployment,
just the opposite from what Bush's economists claim to be the
case. Today's mode of supply side economics will lead to shrinking
markets, shrinking employment and intensify the financial squeeze
on California and other states, as well as cities throughout
the country.
SS: Are there people in Washington who
recognize this inter-relation?
MH: There are people in Washington that
see this. But they tend not to speak up, because most economists
or others who see what's happening - and write about it or otherwise
draw attention to it - are fired or blacklisted for not being
team players. There's a kind of censorship that happens if you're
not a Chicago monetarist. When the University of Toronto accepted
one my books for publication and the economics department there
heard about it, there were threats that faculty members would
resign if they published my book and that the editor of the University
of Toronto press would be fired if he went ahead with it.
SS: You're kidding.
MH: No. The Chicago School's monetarists
are intolerant and censorial. About the only alternative is the
University of Missouri at Kansas City which has a heterodox economics
department that teaches an alternative to monetarism. That's
where I have my current professorship.
SS: They're not Marxists?
MH: Marxists are not so much concerned
with finance these days. You have to work for some of the large
financial institutions to get a working knowledge of the balance
of payments deficit and the flow of funds. Their principles are
counter-intuitive. Even when one reads and understands the words
that describe them, it's necessary to wire up the brain to think
in terms of how international financial markets actually operate.
The recent investigations and prosecutions
of New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer have shown that the
largest financial institutions have operated much like criminal
enterprises, from Citibank/Travellers and Merrill-Lynch on down.
They've come under indictment, but when the problem is so widespread
they've decided that the only reasonable response is to begin
enforcing a new set of rules, and let bygones be bygones. The
bygones in this case have netted them billions of dollars, which
they will be allowed to keep. The small investors who've been
cheated will not get much after attorney's fees are paid.
All this seems to be the result of repealing
the Glass-Steagall Act. It was forecast to occur just in the
way it has, but the political campaign contributions by the large
financial institutions won the day, backed up by the Junk Economics
being turned out by the Chicago Boys.
The reason why Harvey Pitt was forced
out as the head of the <S.E.C>. was that his inaction led
to the state prosecutors as the only people willing to take the
lead in dealing with insider dealing, fixed markets, crony capitalism
and similar corruption. The best writer to expose this type of
operation is Tom Naylor, who wrote Wages of Crime and Hot Money.
But reformers are up against Chicago
School economists who have been endorsed because their anti-government
theories are so self-serving to economic groups that don't want
to be regulated at all. The important thing is that "free
enterprise" has only been able to be imposed at gunpoint.
In fact, as Milton Friedman himself observed, only a socialist
government can impose his kind of economics, without sunk costs,
with "pure" markets. To work properly, everyone who
doesn't believe in free enterprise has to be isolated, which
means in practice that free enterprise only works in a police
state.
Take the case of Arnold Harberger, the
University of Chicago professor who was brought down to Chile
right after the military junta overthrew its elected president.
The first thing that the Chicago Boys did upon overthrowing the
government was to close every economics department in the country,
except for the Catholic University where the Chicago Boys had
a stranglehold of true believers. In the late 1980s, a decade
later when Harvard brought Harberger over with the thought of
installing him as head of the HIID (Harvard Institute for International
Development), the students rioted, accusing Harberger (who is
married to a Chilean) of sitting in his hotel room with a list
of academic economists opposing the Chicago Boys and their free
enterprise evangelism fingering the ones who should be murdered.
Harberger denied that he ever fingered anyone to get killed,
but what is known is that there followed a wave of arrests, killings
and disappearances. The Chicago Boys held up Pinochet's Chile
as a model - one to be emulated, not shunned. Yet their first
wave of privatizations collapsed in a wave of corruption, and
their privatization of social security became a new way of exploiting
labor, via forced savings that were channeled into the stock
market. Insiders gained and the middle class, which had been
stronger in Chile than in any other Latin American country, lost
out.
The moral is that free enterprise economics
only works when you have authoritarian control to suppress opposition
seeking to place economic relations in a broader social context.
The point I want to make is that the
economists who call themselves free enterprise actually are defenders
of the financial industry and the sacrifice of economies to pay
their debts, regardless of how wastefully these have been entered
into. Their idea of the market means that the "market"
should adjust itself to debt claims growing exponentially, in
excess of the economy's ability to pay. The consequence is a
transfer of property. This is how privatization should be seen.
To the Chicago Boys, it is all part of the adjustment process.
SS: Am I correct in thinking that the
US Treasury-bill standard you describe in Super Imperialism and
the sequel Global Fracture victimizes the taxpayers IN the EU,
Japan, etc., more than older forms of imperialism? Is what makes
this imperialism "super" the fact that it exploits
not just workers in poor countries, but all workers everywhere?
MH: That's true, but my point is somewhat
different. The older theories of imperialism saw private corporations
running the system to profit, so that profits by global companies
were the measure of how much imperialism was occurring. My point
is that the largest form of exploitation, quantitatively speaking,
now occurs among governments. Another word for Super Imperialism
would be Inter-Governmental imperialism. The United States exploits
the rest of the world above all via foreign central banks accumulating
dollars.
As for your other points, imperialism
always has exploited mainly the rich countries, for the same
reason that Willy Sutton is said to have robbed banks: That's
where the money is. The richest nations are the ones with the
most economic surplus to appropriate. That is done not via the
repatriation of profits, but by the Treasury-bill standard and
the free ride that it gives the United States.
Michael Hudson is the Distinguished Professor
of Economics at the University of Missouri (Kansas City) and
has published widely on U.S. financial dominance. He also consults
with various foreign governments regarding the need to set up
an alternative center of finance to the U.S. Treasury. He first
attracted my attention during the recent war with Iraq when he
was on KPFK in Los Angeles explaining how this system has forced
other governments, in effect, to pay for our wars since Vietnam.
Whether or not there are more U.S. military
adventures in the Middle East, it seems crucial to expose to
the world not only the lives lost, not only the private profits
being made, but also how the U.S. Government has managed to fund
these wars at everyone else's expense. At the moment, it seems
these wars only send more dollars abroad_both in IMF, World Bank
loans, but also in U.S. humanitarian "aid" and military
personnel expenditures. Thus, the dollar surplus abroad only
creates more demand for U.S. Treasuries and more foreign dependence
on the continuing existence of the U.S. Empire.
Standard Schaefer is an independent journalist, free-lance financial
writer, poet, and cultural historian based in Pasadena, California.
He can be reached at ssschaefer@earthlink.net
Yesterday's
Features
Uri
Avnery
Operation "Syrian Freedom":
This One's Not About Oil
Jorge
Mariscal
"They Died Trying to Become
Students": the Future of Latinos in an Era of War and Occupation
Mickey
Z:
Coalition of the Unindicted: Only Losers Get Tried for War Crimes
Hussein
Ibish
Syria and the Road to World War IV
Reza Ladjevardian
Tarqeting Iran? Do It With TV, Not Cruise Missiles
Matania
Ben-Artzi
You Are Not Protecting My Son's Rights: a Letter to the President
of Israel's Supreme Court
Bruce Jackson
Jews Like Us
Joe
Allen
My Lai Revisited
Carl Estabrook
Support Our Euphemism
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 4/18
Website
of the Day
Meet the Victims of War
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|