Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NAOMI KLEIN MUST READ: economic democracy crushed by coups, tanks, & think tanks again and again

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 04:48 PM
Original message
NAOMI KLEIN MUST READ: economic democracy crushed by coups, tanks, & think tanks again and again
This is simply breath-taking in tying together what has happened to us her in the US since the Reagan Revolution, what neoliberalism and resource wars like Iraq have done to the rest of the world, and most importantly, how people fought back again and again and could only be deterred by economic or military force.

This is partly why Hugo Chavez is so terrifying to the corporate world: not that he is so far left but because their usual tools failed to remove him or bring him to heel. When they called their bought off generals for a coup enough of the Venezuelan people and even enough of the military saw Chavez was looking out for their interests and the economic elite were not.

Whether the Democrats will really put the people before their corporate donors remains to be seen, but this is the direction we MUST push them in if we in the middle and working class don't want to end up living in a cardboard box in a Third World slum in the middle of North America.



EXCERPTS:

Wednesday, August 15th, 2007

Naomi Klein: From Think Tanks to Battle Tanks, "The Quest to Impose a Single World Market Has Casualties Now in the Millions"


This idea of our intellectual and ideological failure is the dominant narrative of our time. It’s embedded in all the catchphrases that we’ve been referring to. “There is no alternative,” said Thatcher. “History has ended,” said Fukuyama. The Washington Consensus: the thinking has already been done, the consensus is there. Now, the premise of all these proclamations was that capitalism, extreme capitalism, was conquering every corner of the globe because all other ideas had proven themselves disastrous. The only thing worse than capitalism, we were told, was the alternative.

Now, it’s worth remembering when these pronouncements were being made that what was failing was not Scandinavian social democracy, which was thriving, or a Canadian-style welfare state, which has produced the highest standard of living by UN measures in the world, or at least it did before my government started embracing some of these ideas.
It wasn't the so-called Asian miracle that had been discredited, which in the ’80s and ’90s built the Asian “tiger” economies in South Korea and Malaysia using a combination of trade protections to nurture and develop national industry, even when that meant keeping American products out and preventing foreign ownership, as well as maintaining government control over key assets, like water and electricity. These policies did not create explosive growth concentrated at the very top, as we see today. But record levels of profit and a rapidly expanding middle class, that is what has been attacked in these past thirty years.

***

Now, I want to use the rest of my time just to say that this was not the first time, that this -- if we look back at the past thirty-five years, we see this slamming of the door on alternatives just as they are emerging repeating again and again. Many of you were here for the opening address from Ricardo Lagos, the former president of Chile, who talked about another September 11th, which was another one of those moments, a far more significant one, when a very important democratic alternative, the real third way, not Tony Blair's third way, but the real third way between totalitarian communism and extreme capitalism was being forged in Chile. And that was the great threat.

And we know that now through all of the declassified documents. There’s a really revealing one: a correspondence between Henry Kissinger and Nixon, in which Kissinger says very bluntly that the problem with Allende’s election is not what they were saying publicly, which was that he was aligned with the Soviets, that he was only pretending to be democratic, but that he was really going to impose a totalitarian system in Chile. That was the spin at the time. What he actually wrote was, “The example of a successful elected Marxist government in Chile would surely have an impact on -- and even precedent value for -- other parts of the world…The imitative spread of similar phenomena elsewhere would in turn significantly affect the world balance and our own position in it.” So that alternative, that other world, had to be blasted out of the way, and extreme violence was used in order to accomplish that.


***

We who say we believe in this other world need to know that we are not losers. We did not lose the battle of ideas. We were not outsmarted, and we were not out-argued. We lost because we were crushed. Sometimes we were crushed by army tanks, and sometimes we were crushed by think tanks. And by think tanks, I mean the people who are paid to think by the makers of tanks. Now, most effective we have seen is when the army tanks and the think tanks team up. The quest to impose a single world market has casualties now in the millions, from Chile then to Iraq today. These blueprints for another world were crushed and disappeared because they are popular and because, when tried, they work. They're popular because they have the power to give millions of people lives with dignity, with the basics guaranteed. They are dangerous because they put real limits on the rich, who respond accordingly. Understanding this history, understanding that we never lost the battle of ideas, that we only lost a series of dirty wars, is key to building the confidence that we lack, to igniting the passionate intensity that we need.

FULL TEXT:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/15/1432250
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kimmerspixelated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for posting this!
Very powerful!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. Hugo Chavez is not a threat to Capitalism
To the extent that Hugo Chavez has been successful, he has been so for one and one reason only: the market price of oil has tripled during his time in power. A monkey could be successful swimming in so much oil revenue.

Capitalists therefore recognize that his success and his economic vision is an aberration. It that can only work in the short term and only work when a country has resources whose value increases (ironically) as a result of market forces. Hugo Chavez's "third way" therefore is not a threat as it is totally dependent on capitalism for its success.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. If Chavez Uses The Oil Profits To Build a Nation and Its People
he will have succeeded, and Capitalism will have had nothing to do with it. Since Capitalism is defeated by countries that build their nation and their people, Capitalists try to rub out such heathens wherever they arise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Capitalism will have had everything to do with it
Chavez's money comes from global oil markets and the trillions of dollars capitalist countries spend on oil. Take away Chavez's rich capitalist customers and he's just another leftist leader of a poor third world country. Capitalists enable his success.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Take Away the OIl Profits Around the World
and the only countries that come out ahead are those with healthy, educated and democratically motivated populations and minimal inequalities. That's Venezuela and its sister countries in South America, much of Europe, and not, for damn sure, US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-16-07 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Minimal Inequalities?
In Venezula? Please, it would be helpful if you understood a region before commenting on it.

The UN ranks the US #8 in equality, and Venezula at #72.

http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/pdfs/report/HDR06-complete.pdf#page=351
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. you could say the same thing about the US since we were the Saudi of oil until after WW II
After our oil supply peaked, we've gone pretty quickly from a creditor to debtor nation, so your criticism applies equally to this capitalist paradise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-16-07 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. Indeed it does apply to us as well.
The US owes it's economic success to Capitalism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. the Saudis are swimming in a bigger sea of oil, and barely holding on to power
they have to use their money to protect themselves from their own people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-16-07 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. True
Edited on Thu Aug-16-07 12:20 PM by Nederland
And I would happily say that Hugo Chavez is far preferable to Bush's best friends in the House of Saud. That, however, implies nothing about whether or not Hugo Chavez's economic policies are good ideas or not. The true test of his economic policies will come when his oil runs out. If Venezuela has a vibrant, rich economy even without its oil revenue (like the US did even after its oil ran out) then he we can say his policies have been a success. If not, he just got lucky. We will see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-16-07 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. our oil peaked in the mid-70s, we become net debtors a few years later, and then job draining trade
policies started around the same time. To the extent that we seem prosperous now, it's based on debt and cooked books, individual, corporate, and government-wise.

So the US fails the test you're setting up for Chavez. Probably the only countries that could pass that test are in Europe or Japan, and both are left of us in many ways and probably not that far from Chavez.

The difference is, we don't seem to want the peons thinking they deserve to live like human beings. Euro-socialism is fine for the white folks but not for the indigenos who pick our fruit and have the misfortune of living on top of the oil we want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. "Capitalism" and "the Market" are not the same thing at all.
There were markets long before there was "Capitalism", and there will be markets long after "Capitalism" is considered a long discredited religious fetish. No, I am not a Marxist, just an economic agnostic. It is true that Chavez is doing well because of the oil, it is not true that he is doing well because Capitalism is proping him up somehow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-16-07 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. True, they are not the same
However, the market is a key element in the Capitalist system. The two are therefore highly related and for the purposes of this discussion, interchangeable.

http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9359742/capitalism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. since we've got you here, exactly what is the DLC going to do for middle class?
Are you going to make it easier for us to get health care, send our kids to college, or own a home?

Or will you do just enough on those issues to placate us without offending your corporate owners?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-16-07 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. I'm not a big fan of the DLC
They don't really believe in Capitalism--they believe in government handing out benefits to their corporate sponsors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-16-07 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. I have more respect for your position than DLCers then
A lot of republicans claim to like unfettered capitalism, but in reality what they like is capitalism with the government helping the winners cheat.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-15-07 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
10. Naomi Klein is one of my favorites.....
She gets the big picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rAVES Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-17-07 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
18. Amazing read
recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC