"The new liberal imperialism "

[brindis_desala]

I posited in an earlier post the contention that labels such as "left" and "right" no longer bear great pertinence. One of the more humorous terms is the description of former Trotskyites and Straussians as "neo-conservatives" when in fact if they are "neo" anything they are neo-Liberal corporate imperialists. For those puzzled that Tony Blair, a Laborite, would align himself with the Republican "right" that vital understanding should clear up the confusion. One need look no further than what one of his chief advisers, Robert Cooper had to say right after Sept 11th:

snip< >
"The challenge to the postmodern world is to get used to the idea of double standards. Among ourselves, we operate on the basis of laws and open cooperative security. But when dealing with more old-fashioned kinds of states outside the postmodern continent of Europe, we need to revert to the rougher methods of an earlier era - force, pre-emptive attack, deception, whatever is necessary to deal with those who still live in the nineteenth century world of every state for itself. Among ourselves, we keep the law but when we are operating in the jungle, we must also use the laws of the jungle."
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,680095,00.html


As someone familiar with the skulduggery that buttressed the British Empire I take the neo-liberal's professed altruism with giant pinch of salt. If there are failed states persisting in the 21st century we can look no further than the gangsterism that drives Anglo/American foreign policy. It was the United Kingdom that bolstered the Muslim Brotherhood and reactionary Wahhabism in order to thwart Nasser's attempt to modernize the Middle East and foster Arab nationalism. And it was our own beloved Jimmy Carter who armed the mujahadeen to undermine the Soviets ushering in the destruction of Somalia and Afghanistan and the rise of the Taliban.
If we as progressives are to have a say in what our governments are doing we need to clearly understand the game as it is now being played. Ultimately it is we, the people, who will bear the brunt of their failures. Contrast the "make believe" that Cooper outlines in his article with the way an insider describes the actual thrust of the "neocon" agenda:

"We were driven by greed rather than any desire to make life better. ...the new elite had made up their minds to attempt to rule the planet... close fraternity of men moved between corporate boards and government positions."
"often results were a system that resembles medieval feudal societies" - John Perkins, from "Confession of a Hit Man"

The notion that preemptive war and crony capitalism can lead to postmodern global stability is a load of bull. But then the drivers of this policy are making a fortune. Far be it from me to say that for our modern day "neo" robber barons, the "War on Terror" has been anything but a "catastrophic success."

[annabanana]

1. a prime example of "neo-speak"

"The words mean what I want them to mean, no more no less. It's just a matter of who is to be master, that's all"

- Humpty Dumpty

[jurassicpork]

2. Fine post

World-building isn't necessarily progressive, especially when Halliburton and Bechtel get the contracts.

JP
http://jurassicpork.blogspot.com

[brindis_desala]

3. Apart from Latin America where the people seem re-energized

I get a sense of defeatism among most working people no doubt fostered by the psychological warfare being leveled against us. Of course with the corporate media's virtual blackout of the news it's difficult to get a true read of reactions

[omega minimo]

4. What DU you say to folks who say both "sides" lie/spin" "they all do it"?

was my question for DU this morning...... "most working people" -- the ones who ARE willing to look at a Bigger Picture of what's going on-- have absorbed this (RW, Limbot?) meme of moral ambiguitiy.... when some of the documented indictments against the WH or Repugs reach a certain level, this trapdoor opens and the Dems and RW all fall through (Humpty Dumpty?) to irrelevance as the lies cancel each other out and the point is moot.

They know the psychological warfare is being levelled against them and they still fall for it.

People I know who are open-minded enough to consider/discuss the information available beyond "corporate media's virtual blackout of the news" have enough difficulty facing the truth on a national level. The larger game being played may be even further beyond their willingness to view clearly.

On the other hand, these salt-o'-the-earth folks know that corporations run their government and are ruining their country. (This is why they view both parties in Congress and in elections as equivalenly corrupt). Perhaps that DOES prime them to understand your broader point of a bigger Big Picture.

(Randi Rhodes answer to "what do you say....?" is Yeah, president's have lied before-- usually the line is drawn at When You're Sending Soldiers To Fight And Die In A War).

[brindis_desala]

5. The truth is the people are not being giving a true alternative.

Solutions are presented without any defining of the problem. We're told we live in a new global economy but no one bothers to give the average voter the foggiest notions of what that means or that there are different approaches. It all boils down to campaign finance reform, purging the big money influence state by state. If they could do it in Arizona they can do it in Ohio. It won't be quick or easy but I'm hoping Dean is both able and serious. He's off to a pretty fair start we need to support him.

[omega minimo]

6. There it is, then

"not being giving a true alternative."

"We're told we live in a new global economy but no one bothers to give the average voter the foggiest notions of what that means."

...even with the growing power of China (and U.S. dependence on it) being an open secret, "the average voter" hasn't connected the dots...that "what that means" is their position at the top of the consumer heap is precarious.

One bright spot that could be used to draw "the average voter's" attention is the fact that there are a few strong and courageous members of Congress standing up for The People and The Nation. Might cut thru a bit of the cyncism.

[brindis_desala]

8. "their position atop the consumer heap is precarious"

It means much more than that. The reason I maintain that notions of right and left are in many (not all) ways obsolete is that predatory capitalism (which is the neo-liberal model) is unsustainable, politically and environmentally. Rather than these massive energy intensive boondoggles we need to be exploring small regenerating projects with an emphasis on more local microeconomic systems. Plainly put we need to become more efficient which means creating narrower more integral markets then taking on the Goliath, that being Big Oil, Big Agro/Chemicals and Big Pharma.

[omega minimo]

9. ...or a Solutions Salon?

Indeed, "It means much more than that." In terms of reaching people though, that (lack of) a connection is key. When people say (about everybody ELSE of course) "Americans won't care until it affects them," they mean filling the gas tank and shopping for school clothes. They mean people won't care unless it is Really In Their Face, In Their Space. The Nuzak is an abstraction, infotainment. They Trust No One.

On some level, do people already know that "their position atop the consumer heap is precarious"? And because they feel powerless they ignore the consequences of following the lemmings to the cliff?

"...we need to be exploring small regenerating projects with an emphasis on more local microeconomic systems. Plainly put we need to become more efficient which means creating narrower more integral markets..."

When folks do connect the dots, they re-empower themselves by doing what you are suggesting on a personal/community level.

How do we take that further? How to implement the types of projects/programs you suggest? Will that come up from the grass roots or not at all? Have you seen it happen in the U.S. or elsewhere?

:kick:

"If we as progressives are to have a say in what our governments are doing we need to clearly understand the game as it is now being played. Ultimately it is we, the people, who will bear the brunt of their failures."



(Brainstorming Barn?)

[brindis_desala]

10. There are movements taking place. Unfortunately mostly in

places like Australia, New Zealand and Singapore and on a more limited scale in India and eastern Africa. There are discussions in the U.S. but so far left to academia. Here's an example of planning to "modernize" more cost efficiently while advancing local autonomy and democracy: http://nga.alga.asn.au/generalAssembly/2004/ngaBusiness/nationalAgenda/finance.php

[omega minimo]

12. These are creative solutions

In the States, we have communities and local governments held hostage by the agendas and the coffers of the dreaded Developers! Our local council members are owned by the fat cats and do their bidding. Cities starved for dwindling state and federal funds turning to the new Big Brother, corporate sponsorship!

We have a local shop that sells imports from around the globe. The owner visits and forms relationships with the artists who make his goods. He promotes fair trade and educates through the fantastic offerings in his beautiful shop.

This helps in the "connect the dots" point above-- it helps people understand better where things come from, as well as the fact that someone actually made the object with their hands.

Many beautiful items are made out ot discards, things Americans think are waste and MAYBE recycle.

Thanks for the link.

National Agenda

Principles of local democracy

1. Local government is the expression of Australia's commitment to community democracy.

2. The rights of citizens to the democratic pursuit of community values through elected local government must be protected in the Australian Constitution. State Constitution Acts must also entrench the existence and status of local government, and such provisions should be altered only by referendum.

3. Local government seeks constitutional recognition in the Australian constitution.

4. Local government calls for the immediate establishment of a national Constitutional Convention to specifically consider constitutional recognition of local government and review the efficiency, effectiveness and responsibilities of the three spheres of government.
......
7. A broad competence power must be granted to all local government authorities in Australia so that those authorities may respond to the needs of their communities in the most appropriate manner. There must be no limits imposed by other governments on the performance of local government's legitimate activities.
....
10. Restructuring of local government - owned utilities such as water and sewerage undertakings should also occur only with the concurrence of the councils concerned.
....
14. Local government supports efforts to ensure gender equity and will continue to pursue the implementation of the National Framework for Women in Local Government (2001).

15. The role of local government must be given full recognition in campaigns and educational programs aimed at increasing community understanding of the Australian system of government

[omega minimo]

7. Maybe DU needs a "Policy Patio" or "Geek Gazebo"

Brandis, the article reference and your great post may be worth posting in Articles and Ed. where it won't fall off the page.

Your thoughts are always nom-worthy.

:kick:

[bloom]

11. All of these words

like "liberal" and "progressive can get really messed up - with people using them different ways.

You get some people being proud they are liberals because they are altruistic and idealistic.

Others because they think it means people can do whatever they want.

Some others because they believe in "classical liberalism" or "neo-liberalism" - in more of an economic imperialistic sense.




Seems like the DLC and Rush Limbaugh are against the altruistic, idealistic type of liberal. They are for themselves doing whatever they want and for - ends for themselves justifies the means - the effects on others.

DU tends to get a mix of altruistic and idealistic & "do whatever they want liberals" with a few DLC neo-liberals thrown in.


It is difficult for me to distinguish between a neo-liberal and a Rush Limbaugh type of liberal basher. Maybe the neo-liberals are nicer about their bashing. The DLC are just going to politely "distance themselves".


----

"Critics of neoliberalism associate it with globalization, and with the rise of multinational corporations, as well as monetary and fiscal austerity at the expense of social programs.'''

Anti-globalization advocates are the most vociferous opponents of neoliberalism, particularly its implementation as "free capital flows" but not free labor flows. They argue that neoliberal policies encourage a "race to the bottom" as capital flows to the lowest environmental and labor standards, and is merely updated "beggar thy neighbor" imperialism, dating back 200 years. In this they are in fundamental agreement with many of neoliberalism's supporters who argue that neoliberalism represents an updated version of classical liberalism."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

[brindis_desala]

13. The point i was making is that here you have a Labor government

trumpeting the humanistic qualities of imperialism. If one assigns Tony Blair the traditional meaning associated with "liberal" or "progressive" the suggestion sounds absurd but then we realize that because of the NWO and "globalization" liberalism in a political sense has been restricted to its classic economic meaning, that being unfettered free market capitalism. Under this "neo" dynamic unless the left takes up the cause to unite global labor we the people whether bourgeoisie or worker can expect to see our rights gradually erode and the few remaining left to the whims of the state.

[omega minimo]

14. There was a thread this week

suggesting that we "change the language" to appeal to _____ by referring to "employees" not "workers." It was hard to tell if it was serious or not. If so, it was an example epitome of the hazards of "framing'" that I have been DU-bashed for bringing up. It even mentioned the association that most people have with "workers" -- people who actually labor and make things-- as if it were a negative!

Last weekend a woman at a meeting pointed out the need for a global worker movement, as we discussed the American perceptual problems I brought up here. As foiks discuss how to reach spoiled, frightened, disenfranchised people, this woman raised the talk to the level you are warning about.

You mentioned above the implied altruism in globalized free market capitialism, which we know is a bait and switch (well, except for the folks who support NAFTA, CAFTA) but they still put the ;) on it.

The Orwellian nature of politspeak and spintalk today makes meaning arbitrary and people confused. Only distillation can combat it. "Liberal" as in "unfettered" free market capitalism is still being sold as a bill of goods.

Don't Americans remember "You can't buy a pig in a poke"?

[kodi]

15. they exhibit only cynical opportunism mascarading as coherent thought

a fig leaf of virtue to hide their whoring ways.

For them, everything comes down to attaining and retaining power and cashing in, nothing more.

It is not that the Right, or “conservative” is a dirty word, rather that it exemplifies a position of no coherent philosophy, except pure, unbridled greed.

[brindis_desala]

16. The danger is they have allied themselves with criminals and

doomsday fanatics. I see no way to end this well. They are greedy, yes but also ruthless and self-righteous- in Colin Powell's words "a bunch of crazies".

[omega minimo]

17. Oh, so what you mean is

pimp.

"For them, everything comes down to attaining and retaining power and cashing in, nothing more."


“There are many truths of which the full meaning cannot be realized until personal experience has brought it home.”
John Stuart Mill