Time: Thu May 22 00:01:09 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA02625;
Wed, 21 May 1997 23:58:43 -0700 (MST)
by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA14872;
Wed, 21 May 1997 23:58:29 -0700 (MST)
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 00:00:19 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: What is the New World Order? (fwd)
<snip>
>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> What is the New World Order?
>>
>> By RICHARD MOORE
>> [ Extracted from New Dawn No.42 (May-June, 1997) ]
>> [ See Also Other Articles by Richard Moore ]
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> First Preface:
>> What is the New World Order?
>>
>>Few would disagree that the dominant trend of our day is globalization - the
>>elimination of trade barriers, the downsizing of governments, a greater
>>reliance on the private sector, reduced regulation of business, and an
>>increasingly global economy. A great many people interpret this trend as
>>economic progress, and see it is a basically good thing. This article will
>>argue that globalization is first and foremost political regression -
>>threatening to destroy our Western democratic institutions, and turning the
>>clock of human progress centuries backward to something resembling
>>feudalism.
>>
>>The role of the USA in the globalization trend is not entirely obvious. In
>>some ways, America seems central to the process. It is the leading proponent
>>of free trade; it provides the primary military muscle to shape and maintain
>>global order; when the American President speaks on international issues,
>>his words are taken as being decisive - he is (by virtue of his office)
>>far-and-away the most powerful and influential world leader.
>>
>>But at the same time, America seems hardly to be the primary beneficiary of
>>the globalization process. Other countries, notably Germany and Japan, are
>>faring better economically, while America suffers increasing debt and a
>>declining standard of living. America, though the dominant world power,
>>appears not to be exploiting its advantage in the traditional fashion of
>>dominant powers.
>>
>>The perspective of this article is that globalization is not about
>>competition among nations - but rather about the increasing power of
>>mega-corporations over nations, generally, and their peoples. America - the
>>hotbed of this trend - is in effect acting as a proxy for elite corporate
>>interests, not as a representative of the American people, nor even of
>>American national interests in any traditional sense. Seen from this
>>perspective, America's seemingly ambivalent role becomes understandable.
>>
>>In order to get a comprehensive picture of where globalization came from and
>>where it is going, this article makes a whirlwind tour of American history,
>>showing how that feeds into what has now become the mainstream of world
>>history. If sovereign national states, sometimes competing and sometimes
>>cooperating, have been the Familiar World Order, then globalization seems to
>>be leading us all inexorably toward a New World Order where
>>mega-corporations (and the wealthy elite who control them) reign supreme,
>>and nations are reduced to a vestigial, subservient, policing role -
>>controlling the populace on behalf of the elite - as we see already in much
>>of the Third World.
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Second Preface:
>> What and Who are the Elite?
>>
>>During the era of feudalism, there were three elites. There was the church
>>hierarchy, there was the landed aristocracy/nobility, and there were the
>>royal families, who might also be seen as the topmost layer of the
>>aristocracy. As feudalism ended, there was the rise of an additional elite -
>>the business wealthy - who gained their status and influence through trade
>>and manufacture, with or without benefit of inherited title. These elite
>>groups competed for power, and different accommodations occurred from time
>>to time and from place to place.
>>
>>>From the point of view of the general population, these elites represented
>>security or tyranny, depending perhaps on ones perspective - but it was
>>obvious to everyone that the elites ran society - no one pretended that
>>society was democratic. With the advent of "democratic republics", beginning
>>with the USA, the older elites were removed from power, but the wealthy
>>business elite, which had evolved into the capitalist elite, remained
>>relatively undisturbed.
>>
>>Did this transformation bring about democracy, in any genuine sense, or was
>>it merely the monopolization of power into the hands of the single remaining
>>elite? This is a question that remains open - and it is a question that can
>>be asked also of most of today's modern "democracies", which have each to
>>some degree been modeled on the American precedent.
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Part One:
>> The Birth of Democratic Republics
>> - American Independence -
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> The Colonial Context
>>
>>Although sentiment for independence in the American colonies was minimal
>>prior to the latter half of the 18th century, there were objective
>>conditions which made independence a natural, and comparatively
>>non-disruptive step. The colonies were already largely self-governing, had
>>their own social identity, had considerable natural resources, were mostly
>>self-sufficient economically, and had their own extensive trading fleet.
>>Boston was the third-busiest port in the British Empire.
>>
>>The colonies were seen by Britain as economic investments, more than as
>>administered territories. Some colonies, such as Pennsylvania, were
>>privately-owned corporations, and in general the colonies were expected to
>>take care of themselves. The colonies paid taxes to the Crown, lived under
>>restrictions such as a prohibition on industrialization, and received in
>>return the protection of the Crown and access to British markets. But in
>>fact the benefits of being subject to Britain were questionable. When
>>frontier war with French-backed natives occurred, for example, help from
>>Britain was slow in coming and the colonies were then taxed for the troop
>>expenditures.
>>
>>There were many vocal advocates for independence, and there was widespread
>>popular resentment of certain royal measures, such as the stamp tax.
>>Nonetheless, until nearly the eve of revolution, most colonists wanted to
>>remain subjects of the Crown, and sought reform of British policies toward
>>the colonies, not independence. Even with the stamp tax, it is noteworthy
>>that the tax burden of a typical colonist was less than that of someone of
>>similar circumstances living in England.
>>
>>In any case, it was independence that was at issue, not a social or
>>political revolution. The existing colonial assemblies would presumably
>>continue if independence occurred, with more or less the same people
>>stepping forward as leaders, and with land ownership and economic activity
>>continuing more or less as before (but without Royal interference).
>>
>> The Colonial Elite
>> - Differing Attitudes Toward Independence -
>>
>>As mentioned above, independence didn't promise most colonists that much of
>>a change. But for the elite - who possessed a highly-disproportionate
>>concentration of wealth, land ownership, and influence in local affairs -
>>there were more compelling economic considerations.
>>
>>With independence, industrial development would be possible and
>>international trade wouldn't be directly limited by the vagaries of Britis h
>>imperial entanglements. The resources of the new continent could be
>>developed without sharing the spoils with England. For the elite, a divorce
>>from the empire represented profound and immediate economic opportunities.
>>
>>The turning point in radical consciousness, when a majority of the populace
>>came to favor independence, occurred in the form of a single earth-shaking
>>essay: Tom Paine's Common Sense. This essay, written in an unprecedented
>>popular style that anyone could understand, broke all existing publication
>>records and was read aloud in villages and towns everywhere, and not only in
>>America.
>>
>>Common Sense created in the popular Western mind, for the first time,
>>perhaps, since the early Roman republic, the notion that government arises
>>from the consent of the governed - that the people are the state. It marked
>>the beginning of the popular concept of nationalism - the notion that
>>citizens find their identity in their nation and its interests, rather than
>>in their role as subjects of a domain belonging to royalty and nobility.
>>
>>Paine was popularizing - and expanding the scope of - some of the radical
>>ideas that had been developed by Enlightenment thinkers generally. He was
>>concerned with promoting personal freedom, popular sovereignty, and - most
>>particularly - creating an ironclad case for the legitimacy of a government
>>based on the will of the people rather than on divine right or inherited
>>dominion.
>>
>>Paine was much less concerned with the other major thread of Enlightenment
>>thinking, regarding market forces, the "invisible hand", and laissez-faire
>>economics. Paine was so little motivated by economic gain, in fact, that he
>>refused to accept royalties for his all-time best seller. He was, by
>>personal disposition, much more interested in ending tyranny than he was in
>>opening up opportunities for capitalist development.
>>
>>The wealthy, and literate, elite did not need Paine to tell them about
>>Enlightenment thinking. Nor were they as focused as Paine was on only the
>>anti-tyranny ideas. They were at least as much taken with the laissez-faire
>>thread, which justified their natural eagerness to pursue unfettered their
>>economic opportunities. Many of them, in fact, were so afraid of the
>>possibility of "mob rule", that they preferred that an American monarchy be
>>established following independence, rather than a democracy.
>>
>>Thus the War of Independence had different shades of meaning for two
>>different constituencies. In both cases the rallying cry was "Freedom!" -
>>but to the populace, this meant primarily personal freedom and popular
>>democratic sovereignty, while to the business elite the emphasis was more on
>>commercial freedom and the ability to pursue capital investment unfettered
>>by the old regime's elites.
>>
>>In the end, the spectrum of visions for the new nation had to be pinned down
>>into a single Constitution. This was a task that fell, as one would expect,
>>to members of the elite. The resulting document was a compromise that
>>included elements of democracy, but that included sufficient buffering
>>mechanisms to insure that the elite, if diligent, could control the
>>government sufficiently for their purposes.
>>
>>The rule of Crown, Nobility, and Church was definitely ended, and the
>>principle of popular sovereignty was definitely established - as an ideal.
>>But, to repeat our earlier question, had the old tyrants been in effect
>>traded for new tyrants, namely the capitalist elite?
>>
>>In partial answer to the question, it seems fair to say that the new
>>constitutional regime provided a forum in which the elite and the people
>>could peacefully vie for control, and in which checks and balances attempted
>>to prevent either side from fully dominating the other. And all would agree,
>>presumably, that the new regime offered better opportunities for genuine
>>democracy than the one it superseded.
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Part Two: Capitalism Unleashed
>> - The American Experience -
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> The Elite vs. the People
>> - An Ongoing Struggle -
>>
>>Whatever one might think about the intentions of the (mostly elite) Founding
>>Fathers - or of the theory of the Constitution - the actual fact is that
>>American history has been characterized by a see-saw battle for control
>>between the people and the capitalist elite.
>>
>>At times, as in the late nineteenth century robber-baron era, the elite have
>>brazenly ruled - J. D. Rockefeller bragged about how many government
>>officials were "in his pocket". At other times, as during the presidency of
>>Franklin Roosevelt, government policy seemed more responsive, instead, to
>>the needs and wishes of the general population.
>>
>>One can debate whether the elite exert influence through secret
>>conspiracies, or whether they simply act straightforwardly in their own
>>perceived interest. The answer, surely, is that both mechanisms are and have
>>always have been at work. Numerous conspiratorial "scandals" can be found
>>throughout American history, but few would argue that without those episodes
>>the elite would have been without major influence.
>>
>> Propaganda & Credulity
>>
>>Propaganda played a pivotal role in the birth of America and has been part
>>of the American scene ever since. It was the elite, in pursuit of commercial
>>self-interest, who were the vanguard of the revolutionary movement, while
>>the populace was stirred up by high-sounding democratic principles and
>>sensationalized rabble-rousing around the issues of Royal oppression and
>>taxation.
>>
>>Propaganda is by no means unique to the American experience - all
>>governments and elites employ propaganda - but propaganda has played a
>>uniquely intimate role in the American experience. Because America is
>>endowed with democratic mechanisms - the government is elected, after all -
>>such propaganda has been essential from the beginning in order for the elite
>>to exert the influence to which it feels entitled. Propaganda is one of the
>>elite's primary antidotes to the dreaded disease of actual democracy.
>>
>>America is the land of Hollywood, advertising, public relations,
>>sugar-coated fairy tails, cult religions, the "Defense" Department,
>>Disneyland, and "progress". It was of Americans that it was said "A fool is
>>born every minute", "You can fool all the people some of the time", and "You
>>can never underestimate the intelligence of the public". Certainly not all
>>Americans can be so characterized, but in a land where majority rules, the
>>effect is not much different.
>>
>>The rhetoric of liberation and democracy captured the imagination not only
>>of Americans, but of the whole world. America became an almost mystical
>>symbol, spoken of in fable-like imagery: "the land of freedom", "the land of
>>opportunity", "the American Dream", "streets paved with gold", "bastion of
>>democracy". America was something people everywhere yearned to believe in -
>>it seemed (and claimed) to be the fairy tale kingdom of everyone's childhood
>>dreams.
>>
>> The War Culture & Expansionism
>>
>>America was born out of a war it initiated and it has achieved its growth
>>through periodic warfare ever since. There has been a significant war
>>approximately every thirty years, often initiated (overtly or covertly) by
>>America and more often than not achieving a new stage in the growth of
>>American power and the expansion of American-based elite interests. Such
>>aggressiveness is not particularly unusual among nations; what is unusual is
>>the propaganda mythology that would have America acting always in "self
>>defense", and in defense of "freedom and democracy".
>>
>>A common scenario typically underlies American involvement in wars: there is
>>usually an incident which is perceived as an outrage against America, and
>>the populace then rallies to the common defense with a characteristic
>>ferocity and self-righteousness. America's contribution to causing a war is
>>seldom acknowledged.
>>
>>The incidents may be provoked, as with the Mexican War, arranged, as with
>>the Lusitania, or fabricated, as in the Gulf of Tonkin - but they are always
>>deftly exploited and enable the elite expansionist agenda to be further
>>advanced, under cover of yet another crusade for "freedom and democracy".
>>The elite is always well-prepared for the incident, has a plan ready for
>>execution and its propaganda machinery goes into full gear as the incident
>>unfolds.
>>
>>The use of outrage-incidents to launch elite-planned military campaigns
>>accomplishes several objectives. It triggers the in-built American war
>>spirit, and channels the resulting righteous wrath toward the nominated
>>enemy. It also concentrates power in the executive branch, where elite
>>control is usually most undiluted by popular influence. Congress - where
>>popular will is most likely to find expression - is then relegated to the
>>role of loyal stores-supplier for the duration of the crusade.
>>
>>This process is exemplified by the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which enabled
>>full-scale U.S. military involvement in Vietnam. The incident itself was
>>faked, but Congress promptly issued its usual knee-jerk Resolution,
>>authorizing the President to "act in defense". The "authorized actions" were
>>then incrementally escalated into a full-scale war, with Congress having
>>minimal additional influence and popular will finding expression only in the
>>streets.
>>
>>The eventual scope of the war was completely beyond anything authorized by
>>the original Congressional Resolution, but once America is on the warpath,
>>its war-culture ethic does not include room for official dissent or
>>reconsideration - it would be "betraying the boys at the front". Even when
>>the fake incident was exposed, it was too late to put the war genie back in
>>the bottle.
>>
>> Immigration and the Melting Pot
>>
>>While immigration to America has been heralded as "welcoming the huddled
>>masses" - inspired presumably by humanitarian concern - the effect was to
>>provide a constantly renewed pool of exploitable cheap labor. Instead of
>>Britain's static class system of tiered exploitation, America evolved a
>>dynamic class ladder system (the Melting Pot), where new (ethnically
>>identifiable) lower classes were continually placed on the bottom rung,
>>willingly trading their home-country cultural identity to struggle for
>>acceptance as bona fide Americans.
>>
>>Ethnic rivalries helped divide-and-conquer the masses, preventing democratic
>>solidarity. Each segment of the American socioeconomic ladder seemed willing
>>to see lower rungs suppressed, while it viewed higher rungs as its future
>>opportunity. Thus the prisoners of the class ladder system were motivated to
>>embrace their own exploitation and the elite was spared the development of a
>>general popular socioeconomic consciousness.
>>
>>The Horatio Alger myth was born, of the poor immigrant who achieves immense
>>wealth in one lifetime. Thus was fostered a "lottery" mentality regarding
>>economics - attention is focused on the rare individuals who win big,
>>distracting attention from the overall pattern of systematic subjugation and
>>exploitation. The victim takes the blame for his own predicament: if he
>>isn't well-off, it's only because he's not clever enough. The question of
>>why most things are owned or controlled by the elite goes unasked.
>>
>> Capitalism, Development and "Progress"
>>
>>Capitalism has only one goal: the increasing of a pot of gold into a larger
>>pot of gold. National economic development, back when such was typical
>>government policy, had the touted goal of providing general prosperity, but
>>it also facilitated the growth of elite capitalist wealth. Now that the
>>elite prefers global investment as a way to grow wealth, national economic
>>development seems, significantly, no longer to be an objective of
>>governmental programs.
>>
>>Progress, says the myth, is about improving the quality of people's lives.
>>But from a capitalist perspective, progress is about continually scrapping
>>one infrastructure (or product portfolio) for another - thereby allowing
>>capital to go through another cycle of re-investment and profit-taking. Thus
>>rail is superseded by highways, coal by oil and electricity, home-made by
>>store-bought clothes, ovens by microwaves, main streets by shopping centers,
>>small farms by agribusiness, family doctors by medical corporations, home
>>remedies by high-priced pharmaceuticals, etc.
>>
>>In most cases, people willingly go along with such "progress" because of
>>perceived or actual advantage. In some cases, however, implementation of
>>"progress" requires covert elite intervention. Functioning intra-city light
>>rail systems, for example, were purchased (in Los Angeles and other urban
>>areas) and dismantled, by automobile-related interests, to be replaced by
>>far less efficient, more polluting, oil-hungry bus and auto traffic.
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Part Three: World War Two
>> - America Gains Global Dominance -
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Background of the War
>>
>>The rise of communist and socialist movements, following World War One,
>>created considerable fear in elite capitalist circles. Marxist ideology
>>emphasized the tyrannical aspects of the capitalist elite, and issued a
>>strident call for solidarity among common workers, who Marx credited with
>>creating all real wealth. This ideology, which was simplistic and one-sided,
>>had nonetheless taken firm root in Russia and seemed poised to spread
>>further.
>>
>>In German, Italy, and Spain, in particular, anti-elite movements gained
>>popular strength under the banners of socialism, communism, or anarchism. It
>>is not surprising that the elite in those and other countries welcomed and
>>encouraged the rise of fascist movements. Fascism was virulently
>>anti-communist, pro-capitalist, and fully willing to brutally suppress any
>>who opposed its agenda.
>>
>>Hitler began his political career as an operative of German military
>>intelligence and received funding and support from elite Western
>>industrialists. While in prison, writing Mein Kampf, he kept a portrait of
>>Henry Ford on his desk. During the Spanish Civil War, the Western elite kept
>>the anti-fascist opposition disarmed, while it approvingly observed the
>>efficiency of Hitler's growing war machine. American volunteers who fought
>>against Franco found their patriotism questioned when they returned home.
>>
>>Mein Kampf made it unambiguous that the primary strategic objective in
>>Hitler's mind was the subjugation and economic exploitation of Russia. By
>>ignoring their own prohibition on German re-armament, and providing loans,
>>the Western elite were in fact collaborating with Hitler in the development
>>of an invasion force targeted on Russia - socialism's bastion.
>>
>>Meanwhile, the West was watching with discomfort Japan's growing economic
>>power and imperial scope. Japan was building a formidable Asian economic
>>zone backed up by a large, modern navy.
>>
>>This was a significant threat to Western, and especially American, elite
>>interests and designs. Not only would markets and investment opportunities
>>in populous Asia be highly curtailed, but Japan would be dislodging the West
>>from its accustomed role as collective master of the seas and arbiter of
>>global imperial arrangements. And who knew what would be the bounds of this
>>Asian empire? The aggressive expansionism of Japan seemed destined to force
>>a war with the West, sooner or later.
>>
>>America handled this complex situation with all the finesse and subtlety of
>>a skilled martial-arts expert, guided by a strategic vision unsurpassed by
>>the imperial masterminds of any previous age.
>>
>> America Orchestrates Global Domination
>>
>>In the prewar years, Japan and Germany enjoyed credit and trade with the
>>West, while their aggressive designs and military machines were allowed to
>>develop. They were being given enough rope to hang themselves with. Then, as
>>was completely predictable, Hitler became embroiled in a war with Russia and
>>Japan became similarly entangled in China and Southeast Asia.
>>
>>It was only after this anticipated scenario had unfolded that Uncle Sam
>>unholstered his guns and prepared to take charge of the sequel. The
>>traditional war-popularizing incident, in this case, was the inevitable
>>Japanese strike on America's Pacific fleet. The incident-facilitating
>>provocation, in this case, was the cutoff of Japanese oil supplies, which
>>America convinced Holland to undertake.
>>
>>When the anticipated incident occurred, President Roosevelt feigned surprise
>>and outrage, and the most formidable, popularly supported military crusade
>>of all time was launched. The well-funded and well-armed G.I. was loose on
>>the world, and because of the eagerness with which Germany and Japan had
>>hung themselves in world opinion, he was welcomed as a hero wherever he
>>went.
>>
>>While Japan was contained by rear-guard actions, peripheral pressure was
>>applied against the Nazis. The full-scale landing in Europe was carefully
>>withheld, to enable Germany to keep most of its troops on the Russian front,
>>so that Hitler and Stalin could decimate one another to the maximum extent
>>possible. Only when Stalin turned the Nazis around, and began to advance
>>toward Berlin, was the landing carried out. D-Day, it would seem, was timed
>>to minimize the Russian advance more than to hasten the demise of Nazism.
>>
>>At the end of the war, America had managed to put itself in a position which
>>was very close to total global hegemony. It had the run of the seven seas,
>>an intact military machine and national infrastructure, a monopoly on
>>nuclear weapons, greatly expanded influence in the oil-rich Middle East, and
>>the lion's share of the world's disposable wealth and industrial capacity.
>>
>>Meanwhile, most of the rest of the world was in shambles, in deep debt
>>and/or under occupation. America had the prestige, power, and resources to
>>guide the construction of post-war arrangements largely according to its own
>>designs.
>>
>>Hitler had threatened to conquer the world and lost a generation of his men
>>instead; Uncle Sam lost a comparatively minuscule number of troops, with no
>>proclaimed territorial ambitions, and yet world domination seemed to fall
>>into his lap.
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Part Four: The New World Order
>> - The Global Consolidation of Elite Power under Neo-Feudalism -
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> The "Free World"
>> - A Global Playground for Capital -
>>
>>Following the war, the Western elite, led by America, drew a line on the
>>globe, separating the part they dominated from the part they didn't. The
>>"free world" (doublespeak for "elite-controlled zone") was organized into a
>>new kind of global capital investment realm. While capital investment was
>>afforded a new kind of global commercial freedom, much of the "free"
>>population was systematically subjected to military dictatorships responsive
>>to elite interests. The doublespeak usage of "freedom", originating during
>>American independence, had now been globalized.
>>
>>Meanwhile the "communist block" (doublespeak for "beyond elite control") was
>>contained: ostracized, pestered around its periphery by provocative military
>>deployments, and subjected to chronic economic destabilization by means of
>>the "arms race", expensive brushfire engagements, and trade restrictions.
>>
>>America could have used its position of strength to establish a traditional
>>American-centered imperial system in the "free" world, relegating Europe to
>>a secondary position, keeping Japan underdeveloped, etc. Instead America
>>implemented a bold new global scheme. The elite had grander plans for
>>capital growth than simply a larger American economy. The old European
>>empires were disbanded and a seemingly democratic United Nations was set up,
>>promising to maintain orderly international relations.
>>
>>The "free" world seemed to be entering an era of national self-determination
>>and democratic renaissance - a bright new day following the fascist
>>nightmare. But the reality - as elite designs unfolded - turned out to be
>>quite different from that.
>>
>>Instead of an end to imperialism, as the propaganda myth would have it, what
>>was introduced was a collective imperialism. Under a pax-americana military
>>umbrella, an international economic infrastructure was established (IMF,
>>World Bank, et al). Investment and trade were free to flow, increasingly,
>>around the "free" world at will, without the territorial partitions
>>traditionally imposed by a competitive European imperial system.
>>
>>The result for the ex-colonies (soon to be dubbed the "Third World"), was
>>that they found themselves dominated by the capital elite generally, rather
>>than by the business interests of a single national power.
>>
>> Megacorps
>> - The Elite's Frankenstein Monster -
>>
>>This semi-homogenized, semi-pacified, investment environment enabled large
>>corporations (elite-controlled money-multiplying machines) to develop
>>orderly operations on a global scale. Thus arose the era of megacorps (aka:
>>multinationals, transnationals) - mammoth corporations with wealth and
>>influence on a scale comparable to nations.
>>
>>While Third-World peoples were acutely aware that megacorps were becoming
>>the overlords of the "free" world, the First World did everything it could
>>to encourage their growth - they were seen as the agents of First-World
>>economic domination and necessary to maintaining "home-country" prosperity.
>>
>>Megacorps are much more than simply giant units of economic enterprise,
>>capable of executing large-scale business transactions. They are also
>>significant political and economic powers in their own right on the world
>>stage. They increasingly have outgrown any sense of home-nation loyalty,
>>view regulations and trade barriers as provincial interference, and see
>>themselves as autonomous masters of the globe. Their needs and demands are
>>more often than not the hidden agenda behind the policies of the Western
>>powers.
>>
>>The rise of megacorps must be viewed as an historically momentous
>>development: the emergence of a new species of political entity, a species
>>in direct competition with its ancestor species, the modern nation state.
>>Born out of limited-liability laws, nurtured in a capitalist culture, and
>>lacking any natural bounds to growth or restraints on behavior, megacorps
>>extend themselves as would cancer cells, poisoning and strangling their host
>>planet in the process.
>>
>>Megacorps, in the end, are capitalist investments, and their motivation,
>>pure and simple, is to increase their own market value on behalf of their
>>absentee owners. This means that the primary "drive" of the megacorp species
>>is growth. Unlike natural species, where individuals grow only to a certain
>>size and mating habits typically limit population to what the environment
>>will support, megacorps are driven to grow without limit and have no natural
>>concern with whatever stands in their way.
>>
>>What would be the nature of a megacorp-governed world? There is no need to
>>speculate or theorize about such a future - we can simply look at
>>Third-World countries, many of which have been dominated by megacorps for
>>some time now. What we see there are minimal regulation and taxation of
>>megacorp activities, along with repressive regimes which are subsidized,
>>armed, and otherwise bolstered by outside elite interests.
>>
>> The Neoliberal Revolution
>> - The Elite Changes Horses -
>>
>>For thirty-five years megacorps continued to spread their tentacles in the
>>"free" world. Pressure was kept up on the "communist" hold-outs and the
>>elite-controlled regions were increasingly consolidated into a tightening
>>noose of international financial arrangements and dependence on megacorp
>>operations.
>>
>>Then in 1980 a new phase of elite power-consolidation was launched
>>simultaneously in America and Britain, under the stage-management of Ronald
>>Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, respectively. This new phase was the
>>"neoliberal revolution" and its platform was lower corporate taxes, reduced
>>corporate regulation, privatization of public services, elimination of
>>international trade barriers, and the self-demonization of democratic
>>political institutions - "The only good government is less government"
>>became the official kamikaze agenda in both countries.
>>
>>What the neoliberal (no relation to "liberal") agenda amounts to is a
>>wholesale transference of power, assets and sovereignty into megacorp hands.
>>The thrust of government activity under neoliberalism is embezzlement on the
>>grandest scale ever before attempted. Public lands, rights, responsibilities
>>and assets are being given into private elite hands at undervalued prices
>>and without effective public oversight. Government itself is being
>>dismantled, defunded and prepared for the scrap heap. By rights, neoliberal
>>government leaders should be indicted for conspiracy and high treason
>>against the state.
>>
>>The neoliberal revolution represents a declaration by the elite that nation
>>states are no longer their chosen tools of power, and that megacorps are to
>>become their primary vehicle not only of wealth accumulation, but also of
>>organizing global society. The elite are now making it clear, under the
>>rhetoric of neoliberalism, that First-World nations and their populations
>>are no longer to be privileged partners in the elite game - they are
>>scheduled to come under the same kind of corporate domination that the
>>Third-World has long been accustomed to.
>>
>>To this end, international arrangements such as the WTO, IMF, World Bank,
>>NAFTA and GATT have been set up so that economic, and increasingly social
>>and political, policies can be dictated on a global scale by
>>corporate-dominated commissions. Mega-corps and their commissions are
>>controlled directly by the elite - they include no democratic mechanisms and
>>no pretense that they represent the "will of the people".
>>
>>Neoliberal globalism, in all fairness, deserves the label neo-feudalism -
>>with the corporate elite ruling in place of the three elites which dominated
>>classical feudalism. Having served their purpose in dethroning the previous
>>elites, and no longer needed by the corporate elite, these nation states and
>>their populations are being betrayed and abandoned. "Democracy", the scam
>>which unleashed capitalism, has now become a hindrance to elite hegemony.
>>
>> Global Propaganda
>> - Exporting the American Model -
>>
>>There are striking parallels between the propaganda techniques ushering in
>>globalism and those which heralded American independence. On the one hand
>>there is a propaganda cover story - modernization, competitiveness, greater
>>efficiency, universal prosperity, reduced corruption - just as the earlier
>>cover story proclaimed personal freedom and an end to tyranny. On the other
>>hand there is the unspoken elite agenda - dismantlement of democratic
>>institutions, firmer elite control, expanded exploitation opportunities -
>>just as the earlier elite agenda unleashed capitalism from the shackles of
>>earlier elites.
>>
>>As happened in America, the myth-fantasy unfolds in the elite-controlled
>>media, while the hidden agenda is being systematically implemented behind
>>the scenes. The promise is to make the whole world a "land of opportunity",
>>but that opportunity is to be for elite investments, not popular freedom or
>>prosperity.
>>
>>The globalization of American-style propaganda was critical to the
>>orchestration of this scenario, and thus Milton Friedman and his Chicago
>>conjurers were dispatched to Downing Street to help sell the package in the
>>UK. Neoliberal mythology became a global media phenomenon, with CNN,
>>Hollywood, Murdoch, et al, deftly spreading the phony gospel of free-trade,
>>government inadequacy, deregulation and, as always, the American Dream. The
>>film Independence Day, in which the world's people are shown to embrace
>>American mythology, perfectly exemplifies this propaganda genre.
>>
>>A significant difference between the neoliberal and American revolutions, is
>>the lack of propaganda emphasis on democracy and freedom. Today's promises
>>are related to "land of opportunity" much more than "land of freedom". The
>>propaganda intent, here, is to portray neoliberalism as an economic
>>movement, and to keep its political agenda hidden. Citizens are encouraged
>>to assume that democracy is a fact of life, an unshakable institution,
>>secure from any fatal dangers.
>>
>>People are also, with mind-boggling irony, encouraged to perceive capital
>>exploitation itself as a sign of democracy, particularly in formerly
>>socialist states. As we watch those populations suffering under
>>intentionally destabilized economies, while megacorps organize their own
>>exploitive infrastructures, we are told that the locals are "slow to adopt
>>to democracy".
>>
>> The Police State
>> - Public Order Under Neoliberalism -
>>
>>Traditionally in "democracies", police forces have been small and order has
>>arisen from the spirit of citizenship - "This is our country", "We are
>>benefiting from its existence", and order comes out of "following our own
>>rules". Under neoliberalism, maintenance of public welfare is being
>>abandoned - undermining public satisfaction - and nationalist ideology is
>>being de-emphasized - undermining civic identity and voluntary compliance.
>>
>>The elite is well aware that massive economic suffering and political
>>discontent are an inevitable part of the megacorp future, with its obeisance
>>to the religion of market forces and its abandonment of citizen motivation
>>via democratic processes, as once-prosperous nations decline toward
>>Third-World status.
>>
>>Not surprisingly then, what we see growing up, in tandem with the neoliberal
>>revolution, are police-state systems and an intense propaganda-myth campaign
>>regarding crime, its causes and its cures. More police, longer sentences,
>>and more prisons are the elite's answer to the question of public order.
>>
>>Third-World countries show where this leads: military dictatorships,
>>systematic torture and killings, and suppression of unions, political
>>parties, and non-compliant publications. In America, the First-World's most
>>fully developed neoliberal state, we can see clearly how such regimes are to
>>incrementally impose on the First World.
>>
>>The media plays its part by ignoring the obvious fact that planned high
>>unemployment and the abandonment of national hope are primary causes of
>>crime and the erosion of civic compliance. In place of this obvious truth,
>>is offered a mythology which blames the victims: they lack "family values",
>>they are lazy, they have a genetic predisposition to crime, they are
>>habitual offenders - the only solution is to lock them up. How one can
>>follow "family values", when one has insufficient family income, is
>>strangely absent from "public debate".
>>
>>The nature of the penal system is rapidly changing in America, reflecting
>>the anticipated further increase in social unrest. A formidable prison
>>capacity is being built - prison construction is the largest growth industry
>>at present in the U.S. - and the concept of who the prisons are for is
>>undergoing radical change.
>>
>>It was formerly the case that punishment was a response to a crime, and when
>>the debt to society was repaid, the offender was expected to join the ranks
>>of the responsible citizenry. Increasingly, prisons are being seen as a
>>place to permanently house certain segments of the population: those who
>>can't or won't fit into the corporate system. That's what "three strike"
>>laws, mandatory sentencing, and soon, preventive detention, are all about.
>>
>>In a very literal sense, prisons are to be the concentration camps of the
>>neoliberal regime - a place to isolate and control those redundant to
>>corporate needs. Never wanting to waste an exploitable resource, the elite
>>in America are now developing an extensive prison-labor system, renting out
>>inmates to fill lower-rung corporate labor needs. Thus, in the "land of the
>>free", we see the development of a network of slave-labor concentration
>>camps, without the fact seeming to reach public awareness.
>>
>>In terms of America's traditional "class ladder" system, what's happened is
>>that the lower rungs of the ladder have been shoved down into the mud. As
>>feudalistic social arrangements are being re-introduced by neoliberalism,
>>there comes also a re-introduction of slavery, with, as it turns out, a not
>>unfamiliar ethnic bias. It is disproportionately blacks and latinos who are
>>confined to crime-likely life scenarios by corporatization and it is largely
>>blacks and latinos who seem destined to populate America's slave-labor
>>prisons.
>>
>> The Gulf "War"
>> - America Becomes the Official Elite Enforcer -
>>
>>With megacorps evolving into the world's dominant political-economic-social
>>institutions, and with their open grab for political power being reflected
>>in the neoliberal revolution, the question remains as to how order in the
>>world is to be maintained.
>>
>>If nations are to be weakened - and especially if identification with
>>nationalism is to be de-emphasized - then where are the armies to come from
>>to maintain the elite-architected system? Nationalist spirit - with a
>>feeling of everyone pulling together - has been central to modern war
>>efforts. How can a disenfranchised, betrayed populace be expected to rally
>>"to the defense" when the elite need their support?
>>
>>And if strong nation-states are to be dismantled, whence will come the
>>infrastructure to maintain systems of weapons and delivery? What will be the
>>command structure and on behalf of what political entity will military
>>operations be carried out? And what about public opinion? Even though the
>>police state will have the capability to suppress troublesome dissent, the
>>myth of continued democracy requires that some degree of popular sentiment
>>be roused for dramatic military interventions.
>>
>>The Gulf "War" and its aftermath demonstrate clearly how the elite has
>>chosen to deal with these problems. This episode was a major historic
>>precedent on several levels. It established new paradigms for global
>>propaganda, weapons technology, blitzkrieg tactics, and international law.
>>It established in the global public mind the principle that America has a
>>justifiable global policing role, and it exported to the global stage
>>America's traditional war-incident scenario.
>>
>>Technologically, the war was in fact a field test of significant new
>>blitzkrieg weapons systems. Precise night operations, stealth defenses,
>>guided weapons, satellite navigation, cruise missiles, bulldozers as
>>mass-murder devices, air-fuel explosives, uranium-weighted shells,
>>anti-nerve gas vaccinations - an entire new generation of weaponry - were
>>tested on a modern, supposedly well-armed, industrial nation. With almost no
>>loss of life in the elite forces, it was demonstrated that Iraq's
>>infrastructures could be systematically destroyed and that her population
>>could be subjected to relentless terrorism from the skies.
>>
>>This suite of technology and operating procedures solves the problem posed
>>by the demise of strong nationalism, which formerly provided massive,
>>motivated armies willing to risk their lives for "freedom". By emphasizing
>>hi-tech weapons, operated from safe havens - and by using blitzkrieg tactics
>>- the duration of an intervention is minimized, the number of casualties (on
>>the elite side) is kept low, and the need for a large, non-professional army
>>is eliminated.
>>
>>The elite no longer needs public support for its military ventures, it only
>>needs acquiescence. A gulf-style approach minimizes negative public
>>responses, making acquiescence easier to achieve. But acquiescence is too
>>important to leave to chance, and so the Gulf War also served as field test
>>for a new generation of propaganda techniques.
>>
>>Starting with the source of information itself, the propaganda was
>>characterized by a complete lack of information regarding the objectives of
>>the intervention, the targets of attack, the morale of the troops, the type
>>of operations being carried out, and the behavior of the enemy. From this
>>base vacuum of actual war information, an intensive PR campaign constituted
>>the fare from which war entertainment could be constructed.
>>
>>The propaganda campaign was launched by an arranged war-provoking incident -
>>a direct exportation of the proven American scenario. The incident (Iraq's
>>invasion of Kuwait) was brought about by an economically provocative
>>oil-dumping policy by Kuwait, followed by a "go signal" from the U.S.
>>Secretary of State regarding the invasion. Once the incident occurred,
>>outrage and surprise were feigned, and a world-wide media/lobbying campaign
>>was launched to achieve UN approval of U.S. military action.
>>
>>Once the approval was obtained, the U.S. then launched on a military
>>campaign of its own design (the destruction of Iraq), and - as with the Gulf
>>of Tonkin Resolution - the UN approval turned out to amount to a blank
>>check, to be interpreted however the elite war-leaders wished.
>>
>>This Gulf-War precedent has established itself very firmly on the
>>media-managed "world stage". When the Bosnia situation advanced to the point
>>where the U.S. wanted to jump in and manage events directly, it was able to
>>get its way with very little fuss. The U.S. has all but been handed the
>>official title of "Judge Dredd" - judge, jury and executioner of
>>international law - and U.S. intervention, certainly not a new phenomenon,
>>seems no longer to be viewed as imperialism.
>>
>> The New World Order (NWO)
>> - Global Feudalism & Corporate Overlords -
>>
>>These then are the essential elements of what amounts to an historic New
>>World Order. Overall policies are to be set by non-elected,
>>corporate-dominated commissions; the world's economy, information and
>>working conditions are to be managed directly by megacorps; governmental
>>function is to shrink down to administrative matters and police-management
>>of the populace. All this to be enforced globally by an elite-dominated
>>strike force built around the U.S. military and NATO.
>>
>>America clearly has a unique role in this scenario. Partly this is because
>>America has the dominant military power. But it also reflects the fact that
>>America, compared to other First-World countries, is the most thoroughly
>>captured by megacorp interests (recall Eisenhower's speech re:
>>military-industrial complex), and that the American people, in their
>>habitual credulity, are the most effectively mesmerized by the media
>>mythology they are fed via television. America is a kind of "safe house" for
>>NWO operations.
>>
>> Humanity on the Precipice
>> - Is a Second Dark Ages Inevitable? -
>>
>>There is now a brief window of opportunity in which First-World populations
>>could rise up and reclaim their paper democracies through intensive
>>political organizing and the creation of broad coalition movements. Soon
>>their governments will be disempowered and that opportunity will be lost.
>>
>>Such an unprecedented peaceful revolution will only become possible if
>>people generally wake up to the true nature of the threat facing them.
>>Helping them wake up becomes a duty of citizenship for anyone who's managed
>>to grasp the situation.
>>
>>Given the dire consequences of globalization, one wonders why there seems to
>>be such global acclaim for its steady progress. The answer, of course, is
>>the sophistication and pervasiveness of the accompanying propaganda
>>campaign, and the absence of any effective forum for the expression of
>>alternate perspectives. If a Big Lie is repeated often enough, as the Nazis
>>proved, people believe it.
>>
>>Perhaps the single most telling observation, in countering the globalization
>>rhetoric, regards the corruption of governments and politicians. Although we
>>are reminded daily of such corruption, and invited to abandon our democratic
>>processes in order to "solve the problem", it is never mentioned that what
>>political corruption amounts to is the illegal intrusion of the corporate
>>elite into the political process.
>>
>>If people were to realize that government corruption is just another name
>>for corporate influence, it would be difficult for global corporatization to
>>pose as a "solution" to the problem.
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Bibliography
>>
>>Greider, William, Who will tell the People - The Betrayal of American
>>Democracy
>>(New York: Touchstone, 1993).
>>
>>Lederer, William J, A Nation of Sheep
>>(New York: Crest Books, Fawcett World Library, 1962).
>>
>>Parenti, Michael, Make-Believe Media - The Politics of Entertainment
>>(New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992).
>>
>>Parenti, Michael, The Sword and the Dollar - Imperialism, Revolution, and
>>the Arms Race
>>(New York: St. Martin's Press, 1989).
>>
>>Zinn, Howard, A Peoples History of the United States
>>(New York: Harper & Row, 1980).
>>
>>Keane, John, Tom Paine - A Political Life
>>(Little, Brown, and Company, Canada, Limited, 1995).
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Richard Moore, an expatriate from Silicon Valley, currently lives and writes
>>in Wexford, Ireland. He's currently running two "lists" on the Internet -
>>Cyber-Rights and Cyberjournal.
>>Email: rkmoore@iol.ie |
>>FTP: ftp://ftp.iol.ie/users/rkmoore/cyberlib
>>
>>Address: PO Box 26, Wexford, Ireland.
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
> To receive posts from this list send an E-MAIL to me with the word
>"subscribe" in the subject box.
> ==================================================================
> EAGLEFLIGHT
> ///, ////
> \ /, / >. David E. Rydel
> \ /, _/ /. *****
> \_ /_/ /. United States Theatre Command
> \__/_ < Voice-248-391-0798
> /<<< \_\_ Fax-248-391-6785
> /,)^>>_._ \ Alt.Fax-248-391-3528
> (/ \\ /\\\ E-MAIL: EAGLEFLT@FLASH.NET
> // ````
> ==============((`===================================================
> A VOICE OF THE MILITIAS IN NORTH AMERICA
>
>
>
========================================================================
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. : Counselor at Law, federal witness
email: [address in tool bar] : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU
web site: http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
========================================================================
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail