Shortly before he died in 1918, the American critic Randolph Bourne penned an incendiary essay laying bare the monstrous duplicity at the heart of Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy. We know Wilson from school history as the champion of national self-determination. Bourne regarded such high-minded talk as a hollow ruse. History will record, he wrote, that “when the American nation had… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (27)Page 1 of 1 pagesI’ve read about something that strikes me as similar these ideas: “permanent war economy”. Charles Wilson, CEO of GE coined this phrase and warned the US that it should not return to a cilivial economy at the end of WWII.
I’m probably over simplifying this, but it essentially means social spending has a democratizing and redistributive effect, while military spending is a gift to the corporate manager. Take Reagan’s (and the current numbnut’s) huge military budgets for example. High-tech industries have profitted through increased R&D;, and the risk is far less when the government forces privitizaton of profit.
This process is but one cog in the machine of war that obtains the resources that fuels the machine of war that obtains the recources.
With such a military force, individual development is repressed, rivals contrained, regimes topple, leaders of nations “resign” and access to markets and their recources remain open. Anyone who gets in the way is labelled one of the many childish labels the current failed leadership is quick to give.
And with control of the media, this war and all in the future become “operations"--far more antiseptic. Air strikes are carried out from ships offshore on an enemy seen only because of the advances of technology.
Posted by Windex on Aug 17, 2004 at 12:18 PM “It is the eternal struggle between these two principles --- right and wrong---throughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time; and will ever continue to struggle. The one common right of humanity, and the other divine right of kings. It is the same principle in whatever shape it develops itself. It is the same spirit that says, ‘You toil and work and earn bread, and I’ll eat it.’ “ (Abraham Lincoln)
Yes, there is truly a case of Great Ideas clashing and the battles today and covered by these writers resounds with who shall run the Empire, the whole world?! The US govvernment has the singular distinction of being the only country with the resources, attitude and skill to be the New American Rome, the imperialist power of the 21st century, continuing the English, Russian and Spanish previous players of that role in history and the Roman Empire aspirations.
Then there is the United Nations, the self professed seeker of world control via unelected bureaucrats running the world on the socialist agenda that they perpetuate and opening in 2003 admited is thier goal.
The idea of a New World Order has been in the back of the minds of many of the most inner cirlces of governance, as noted in Quigle’s book “Hope and Tragedy.” The myth of power elites and international bankers whether CFR, Trilateral Comission, et al, are quiet realities that are hushed and strongly down-played.
Collectivist versus New American Empire, neither betting on free markets, private property and economic prosperity, but both betting on Command and Control by governement, in one form or the other ruling men and property for ‘a better world.’
Sad times, for Mises and the Austrian School have it right, as does the Heritage Foundation on free and unfree countries around the world: economic propserity comes from removal of government regulations and control, encouraging free property and letting entrepreneurs and business operate. But that, is the issue, isn’t it? Then government’s don’t get to live off the sweat of the masses?!
Noel Berge
Posted by Noel Berge on Aug 18, 2004 at 10:03 AM Ah, but if government regulations are relaxed, under the guise of the company’s re-investment in it’s workers and in America, it’s becoming clear that isn’t the case.
You’re suggesting, Noel, one of the solutions is becoming one of the daggers?
Posted by Windex on Aug 18, 2004 at 10:42 AM Noel,
You are out of your mind if you think people like myself are going to just sit idly by while you try to impose your toxic free market ideology.
You cannot discredit socialism. When was the last time Sweden went to war? Why do Europeans live longer than Americans? Why do they experience less crime? Why are they better educated? Why do virtually all of them have health insurance? Why is the gap between rich and poor closing instead of widening like it is doing in the U.S.?
You think Americas should take its rightful place among a list of imperial powers, but don’t you realize that we’re actually moving away from power? We’re becoming more like Brazil or Poland economically. Europe is coming together. The EU is a larger economy than that of the US, and it encompasses far more people. We may make a big show of power, but I don’t know by what measure you would consider them to be less powerful.
You sound like someone from the religious right who thinks a secret satanic cabal is running the world. Oh, by the way, did I mention that in Europe people are far less religious than they are in the United States? This probably means that, in general, they have a tendency to think more rationally about things, and are less prone to superstition.
Posted by dan on Aug 18, 2004 at 9:34 PM dan - Your statements, and assessment, are succinct and correct.
Posted by elita rr on Aug 19, 2004 at 2:40 AM It’s truly amazing that the species,Homosapien, has evolved intellectually and physically over the eons, but tribes still kill, at the decision of their leader(s), members of other tribes who maintain different philosophies and life styles.
Civilization? Hoo Ha!
Posted by Art on Aug 19, 2004 at 4:56 AM “Power does rest with the people” as quoted in the article at the end. That power, for me, is not the abusive power of cumbersome government, two wolves and one sheep talking about what is for dinner, but the power of individuals living free and letting others live free, bartering in the market place and founded on private property principles.
I do not favor what is going on in Europe nor America at this time. Europe is forming a union, not of liberalization, free markets and exchange, but some form of governance with ever greater bureaucratic control over peoples of the member countries, ever greater government layers and incumbrances of business, individuals and life.
And America is moving toward ever greater forms of socialism as one can witness in the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto alive and well and it is the Bill of Rights that is literally being eliminated, amendment by amendment and is literally lying on the side of the road, possibly mortally wounded. An accounting is very sad indeed, unless you believe in socialism. I do not.
But you have identified me somewhat correctly. I am for freedom and prosperity, individual sovereignty, free trade and the cooperativeness that comes from free exchange. I absolutely have observed in my travels around the world, including Europe, that the findings of the Heritage Foundation survey on economic freedom that the freest countries are the more economically prosperous and reflect the following traits: less goverance over time, less taxation, less regulation in all area especially the establishment of a new business, and less constraints on property and travel.
As to which countries are the ‘better’ place to live, depends on your ideals. Give me freedom, individual freedom; leave me along and let me do business and make my way in this world and I will do the same for you.
Do not treat me as if I am a sheep and you are the wolf in any form, whereby, with political force, you can decide what is best for ‘us’ and thereby deprive me of my life, limb or soul. Don’t ever touch my personal property and claim sovereignty as some political Taker.
Yes, I believe in the rule of law and not political law. I will honor all my contracts and I will not encroach on you if you do me the same. The U.S. government and the American mind set today ignores this as well as any collectivist, whether socialist, interventionist, welfarist or anyone of the form of Fabian persuasion, seeing the massas as needing guidance from the elite and select few.
I also agree that it is big government and big business that has have fallen into bed together and the dark side of their union has been birthed.
And, yes, but to read the excellent works of history like Hope and Tragedy and not conclude that there is a most interesting and rather frightening conspiracy is to be looking a worms and your head buried deep and you would have to like the smell and feel of dirt in your nose.
I will take and I will defend freedom and liberty any day againnst any aggressor assuming they have a right or hold over me due to politics smelling or reflecting any form of collectivist right over me or mine. What is an immoral act by an individual is made hideous when done by governments and bureacurats. War without cause is surely one, the taking of property, whether via taxation or eminent domain and ‘the social good’ is rarely ethical.
and you?!
Noel
Posted by Noel Berge on Aug 19, 2004 at 6:11 AM Although none of these places have an irrisistible appeal for me, according to the 2003 Heritage Index of economic freedom, for those seeking same, the following 9 countries (in order of rank) are ahead of the USA:
Hong Kong
Singapore
New Zealand
Luxembourg
Ireland
Estonia
United Kingdom
Denmark
Switzerland
Posted by elita rr on Aug 19, 2004 at 6:57 AM re: story on another world possibly
I am always so amazed at articles like this in the alternative press. And they happen all the time. Where ARE these people? They are ostriches with their media heads in the sand.
The other possible world is obviously Green!! The political project Dave Mulcahey wants is not only out there but functioning and growing as the Green Party. All that is needed to make it happen is a willing media to provide the attention it clearly deserves.( See the GP platform at www.gp.org )....nancy
Posted by Nancy on Aug 19, 2004 at 6:59 AM Noel,
I have to admit I understand your point of view, but I do not accept it.
I strongly encourage everyone--and I mean everyone--to read Lori Wallach’s seminal work on the WTO, “Whose Trade Organization?”
I mention this because the link between the present “new Imperialism” and Neoliberalization (or “globalization") is not clearly defined in America like it is in the rest of the world. That’s quite intentional on the part of our Govt., transnational corps., and media, all of whom profit from Neoliberalization.
The fact are indisputable: Neoloberalization and Free Market economics lead to a massive polarization of income, redistributes the finite Middle-Class to the cheapest labor market (which means the US, Japan, and Europe loose their Middle-Class while China, India, and Central America gain one), and undermines environmental, health, and labor standards. In fact, the WTO and its GATS agreement itself undermines the very soverignty of democratic nations by trumping or “deregulating” many necessary protective “barriers”.
But...this is all acceptable to those who posses capital, own property, own stock, because they profit from this system. This is in part because Capitalism places wealth and profit as its key moral value, which causes all other moral or ethical concerns to become subordinate, including concern for ones fellow man.
Conversely, Socialism, or any other heavily centralized bureaucracy (including some vestiges remaining in America like our public school system) places too much control in the hands of the State and is largely an instrument of social and political indoctrination. Just look at any of us born and raised in the Cold War era. We were so heavily propagandized and conditioned. I had never even met a Russian, but I hated everyone of them until I grew up and woke up.
I support what nancy said, the clear third alternative is the democratic, decentralized, community-based platform of the Green Party. if you want to see what the future will look like, look at the Green Party. The ideas and issues they consider most relevant are those that are in their ascent in the 21st Century. State Socialism and Free Market/corporate/privatized economics are both eras that will pass, as neither are sustainable.
As a parting note, think about this period of Imperial expansion and contrast it with the historical periods thet preceeded the Spanish
-American War, WWI, WWII, Vietnam, and the Balkans/Caspian Basin. The similarities are chilling.
Posted by Charles Shaw on Aug 19, 2004 at 7:47 AM Shaw;
The green party is some form of local-adaptation of the principles of collectivism. Please call it what it is.
More to the point. Honor your cotracts, do not encroach on the natural and inalienable rights of any other person, especially by government/democracy using force or coercion. It is immoral.
AS for reading, try Mises “human Action.” There is no 3rd way as advocated by many mainly in Europe and exporting such crap. Even more to the point, read Mises “Socialism” which destroys any rational or intellectual attempts at defending the collectivist model.
WTO? Any such attempt at determining or regulating prices via tariffs, etc. is a form of socialism.
Again, try the Mises. org for articles on any of these topics.
And try to stop seeing capitalism as defined and presented by Marx to destroy the word and idea. Don’t sneer when talking about ‘profit’ and the idea that free exchange between consenting adults is some how inferior to ‘others’ determing what is right for YOU.
As for decentralized governance, a republican form decentralized down to the country or town level is, I think you would agree, where people can and should elect and establish governance: you know and live with those who are being chosen to handle communal issues.
Green Pary? check out http://bureaucrash.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=269&keyword=GreenPar rtyCrash and get a feel for their liberal/do good ways and how they want to control and negate the principles I stated at the opening of this message.
Stick with me on principle. Practice living your own life, protect you and yours with vengence if necessary, protect your mind, body and soul and any property you have against any coercion from others seeking to control you through false ideologices of environmentalism, eminent domain, taxation and regulation from thousands of miles away or another planet!!
Live and let live,
Noel
Posted by Noel Berge on Aug 19, 2004 at 8:32 AM Noel,
You keep referring people to books you’ve read all written by the same author, Mises. Is that who we need to read to understand more fully why Western European governments aren’t working, or why they are increasingly long-lived, healthy, productive, engaged, tall, safe citizenry? My question to you is, why can’t you explain it? Citing this author, by the way, is a classic example of an error in argumentation: appeal to authority.
Nevertheless, I’m curious about your beliefs. I do hope that you will supply more detail, and even take the opportunity to quote liberally from your source(s), Mises, for example.
1. Please explain what place, if any taxation does have. Is it something necessary for basic infrastructure, or might its uses extend to other things as well, and in what circumstances?
2. Are what point, if at any, would inequalities in wealth seem unfair? For example, in this country there has been a decades old trend that is increasing wealth polarization. I don’t have the statistics before me (I would have to go into the other room and reference Kevin Phillips book, Wealth and Democracy which as all of the pertinent ifno) but it’s something rather shocking like 80% of the wealth belongs to the top 10%. Perhaps since you worked for the world bank you might know the exact statistic. Of course, as skewed as this is, it is even more distorted in other places like Brazil. So does increased wealth polarization concern you at all? It is even something that is perhaps even desireable (poor people, after all, don’t know how to properly manage their money which is why they’re poor in the first place, right?).
3. To what extreme would you tolerate wealth polarization? Let’s say theorhetically that one person could own 99.9999% of everything. This person would live in oppulent splendor, and everyone else is lives in squalor. Imagine further that the person that ones virtually everything is non-violent, and has complied with all laws in obtaining this wealth.
4. Do you think corporations should have the right to patent living things like the human genome. If so, why?
5. Do you think the free market is always right, and we should just follow it wherever it leads us. Do you think the free market is, in some sense, an expression of democracy? Do you see it as a benevolent force, or indiffernet to human either individually or collectively?
6. Do you think any government can be a force for good? Can governments do somethings better than free enterprise?
7. If corporations are not always benevolent, and actually do things to harm people to acheive their mandate to obtain the greatest profit for shareholders, who or what should serve as a check on this power? Do you think that the choices consumers make can effectively regulate abuses of the system? If so please provide proof of this actually ever happening (without any government intervention whatsoever).
8. Should Bill Gates and the poorest person on the planet share the same tax burden?
9. Do you believe that the free market system has any flaws at all?
10. Explain the success and prosperity of highly socialized countries like England, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Germany, France, Canada, Japan, Ireland, Italy, Spain. According to your anti-socialist views, shouldn’t these countries be repeaing a harves of doom from their decades-old socialist systems? Yet they seem to be getting stronger year by year. The crime rate is low, people earn living wages, the citizenry is well educated and engaged, the longest lifespans can be found among this group as well as the lowest infant mortality, they get adequate vacations, the middle class is growing and thriving. In order for any of your argumenst to have any credibility, you have to answer this question at the very least!
11. Explain why Europeans are less free than their American counterparts.
12. Is is possible that Americans who work more hours, die earlier, are subject to higher crime rates, who find healthcare increasingly out of reach, who have a much greater chance of dying as infants, who are generally less well educated are the ones in greater need of the liberty that you speak of? Of course I’m not talking about the ones who are not in any of these categories--the rich, generally--but what about the millions of people who are?
13. What is your tax bracket, and how much do you stand to gain personally by lower taxes on the wealthy?
That’s it for now. I’ll look forward to your response!
Posted by daniel luke on Aug 19, 2004 at 6:32 PM Daniel Luke;
Wow, you are adamant about insisting that you or others with what they consider ‘better ideas’ have some sort of right to dictate, demand or force ‘others’ to do what you think is best. That you know better than me how to live my life in this world and that if necessary, you will have your ‘friends’ with guns, force and the threat of prision make me a better person and this a better world?
As they say, hey, the communist and socialist have only killed 100 million, give them another chance!!
All I advocate is that individuals have life energy, and make commitments, not societies or groups of people. That large groups practicing democracy results in tyranny over minorities. Live and let live, honor your contracts and do not encroach on the rights of others.
And you have a problem with this? (As stated above?)
As to each of your questions, I try as short an answer as possible in hopes of encouraging understanding and possibly a breakthrough in your desire to control and command. (I’ll use CAPS as answers.
You keep referring people to books you’ve read all written by the same author, Mises. Is that who we need to read to understand more fully why Western European governments aren’t working, or why they are increasingly long-lived, healthy, productive, engaged, tall, safe citizenry? My question to you is, why can’t you explain it? Citing this author, by the way, is a classic example of an error in argumentation: appeal to authority. I HAD HOPED TO INDUCE YOU TO READ THE 450 PAGES OF ‘SOCIALISM’ BY LUDWIG VON MISES TO GRASP HIS EXCELLENT THRASHING AND DESTRUCTION OF THE UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES OF SOCIALISM. THAT WITHOUT THE DETERMINATION OF PRICES IN THE MARKET PLACE RESOURCE ALLOCATION OF THE SMALLEST TO THE GREATEST THINGS CEASE AS THERE IS NO VIABLE COST MECHANCISM. PER ONLY ONE EXAMPLE.
SECONDLY, MYSELF CAN ONLY STAND ON THE SHOULDERS OF SUCH GREAT WORKS.
1. taxation does have. Is it something necessary for basic infrastructure, or might its uses extend to other things as well, and in what circumstances? TRULY NOT MUCH!! DEFENSE FROM AGGRESSION. DEFENSE OF CONTRACTING RIGHTS AND SECURING PRIVATE PROPERTY ENCROACHMENTS. ALL KNOWN INFRASTRUCTURE SUCH AS ROADS, HEALTH AND SOCIAL SECURITY CAN BE DONE AT LEAST 2-4 TIMES MORE EFFICIENTLY. THIS HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED IN THE usa AND AROUND THE WORLD THRU PRIVATIZATION PROGRAMS AFTER GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS FAILED DUE TO CONTINUED FUNDING, CORRUPTIONS,ETC.
2. Are what point, if at any, would inequalities in wealth seem unfair? PARATO FIRST COVERED THIS WELL IN ABOUT 1880. SUCH DISTRIBUTIONS DO EXIST AND EVEN THEN HE CONCLUDED THAT THE REMOVAL OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION AND INTERVENTION WAS THE BEST FIRST STEP. SECONDLY, EACH PERSON AND EACH LOCAL COMMUNITY KNOWS NATURALLY WHAT AND HOW TO BEST APPLY THEMSELVES AND THEIR NATURAL RESOURCES TO THEIR OWN BETTERMENT. AS PETER BAUER AT THE WORLD BANK HAS DEMONSTRATED REPEATEDLY, SUBSISTANCE TO EXPORT OPPORTUNITIES ARE ABOUT THE BEST WAY OUT OF ANY LOCAL AREAS DEPRESSION, BUT IT IS GOVT REGS AND TAXATION THAT BLOCK IT.
3. To what extreme would you tolerate wealth polarization? YOU REFFUSE TO ADDRESS PRINCIPLES AND KEEP DEBATING OFF POINT, A CLASSIC SOCIALIST ARGUMENT STRATEGY. I ACCEPT THE NATURAL WEALTH POLARIZATION, WHATEVER THAT IS, REALIZE THAT GOVT AND BUSINESS COLLUSION HAS SET THE BALANCE OF SUCH IN THE FAVOR OF WHOMEVER. I KNOW THAT EACH AND EVERY CASE OF FREE MARKET AND FREE TRADE, NO GOVT INTERFERENCE, THAT THE WEALTH FLOWS MOST FREELY AMONG THOSE WHO APPLY THEMSELVES,4. Do you think corporations should have the right to patent living things like the human genome. I THINK INDIVIDUALS SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO MEET THE DEMANDS OF OTHERS SEEKING THEM. THE HUMAN GENOME LIMITED VIEW OF THE WORLD WERE OIL, WE WOULD BE IN HORSE DRAWN CARRAGES TO DAY. LET THE HUMAN SPIRIT AND ENTREPRENEUR, COOPERATION AND COMMUNICATION FIND IT’S OWN WAY AND STOP THINKING OF WHAT ‘YOU’ WOULD NOT ALLOW AS IF YOU ARE ON SOME CLOUD LOOKING DOWN ON THE REST OF THE WORLD!!
5. Do you think the free market is always right, and we should just follow it wherever it leads us. BETTER THAN HAVING SOMEONE ELSE ARBITARILY DO IT, ESPECIALLY GOVT. Do you think the free market is, in some sense, an expression of democracy? THE FORM WHERE EACH PERSON BUYS WHAT HE/SHE WANTS AND CHOICES ARE AVAILABE Do you see it as a benevolent force, or indiffernet to human either individually or collectively? SYSTEMICALLY, IT ALLOWS INDIVIDUAL CHOICES TO PROVIDE THE FINEST TUNED INSTRUMENT TO OPTIMUM ALLOCATION RESOURCE.
6. Do you think any government can be a force for good? CAN’T THINK OF ANY AND HAVING WORKED IN 75 COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD, HAVING STUDIED WORLD HISTORY, NOPE!! OCan governments do somethings better than free enterprise? AYTHING ECONOMICALLY VIABLE CAN BE DONE BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND VIA THE DATA, 2-6 TIMES MORE EFFICIENTLY AND DEFINITELY MORE EFFECTIVELY. EVEN ASSITING THE POOR, IN USA WAS BEATEN SADLY BY THE PRIVATE CHURCHES AND CHARITIES UNTIL THE GOVT FOUND OUT THAT THERE WERE VOTES OUT THERE AND PASSED LEGISLATION AND REGS THAT MADE IN VERY HARD FOR PRIVATE CHARTIES TO CONTINUE. GOVT CREATES POOR AND ADVOCATES IT. PRIVATE SECTOR ADDRESSES IT.
7. If corporations are not always benevolent, and actually do things to harm people to acheive their mandate to obtain the greatest profit for shareholders, who or what should serve as a check on this power? THE MARKET AND PEOPLE NOT BUYING THE PRODUCT OR SERVICES. THE PRICING MECHANISM AND THE OPPORTUNITY OF ANY ENTREPRENEUR TO ENTER THE BUSINESS AND TAKE MARKET SHARE AWAY Do you think that the choices consumers make can effectively regulate abuses of the system? YES, YES, YES If so please provide proof of this actually ever happening (without any government intervention whatsoever). MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM AND LINUX. FORD FAILURE IN THE xxx CAR BASED ON ENGINEERS ASSUMING WHAT PEOPLE WANTED RESULTED IN ASKING THE FOLK AND THE CREATION OF THE GREATEST SELLING CAR IN AMERICA HISTORY THE THUNDERBIRD; THE PENCIL; THE CHEAPNESS AND QUALITY OF COMPUTERS; DIAMONDS IF GOVT AND BUS STOPPED THE LEGAL CARTEL/MONOPOLY; REAL MONEY IF THE CENTRAL BANKS STOPPED FORCING FIAT MONEY AS THE ONLY LEGAL TENDER; AND ON AND ON. READ PETER DRUCKER ON THIS.
8. Should Bill Gates and the poorest person on the planet share the same tax burden? YES, ZERO!!
9. Do you believe that the free market system has any flaws at all? YES, BUT FEWER BY FAR THAN ANY TYRANNICAL ALLOCATION VIA BUREACURATS!! THE VERY IDEA THAT A GOVT AGENT, A BUREAUCRAT WOULD TELL ANY BUSINESS WHAT TO PAY, WHO TO HIRE, WHERE AND TO WHOM TO SELL IS SO OUTRAGEOUS I HAVE TROUBLE SEEING STRAIGHT. I HAVE WORKED WITH BUREAUCRATS IN DC, ENGLAND, FRANCE, SWITZERLAND, MALAWI, GHANA, CHINA, MALAYSIA, VIETMAN, COLOMBIA, PERU, INDIA, BUT TO NAME A FEW. THEY ARE LESS INTELLIGENT THAN THE AVERAGE JOE, THEY LACK ANY INCENTIVES TO PERFORM WELL AND GRAFT AND COLLUSION WAS THE COMMON DENOMINATOR. HELL, EVEN TO GET A PROPOSAL REVIEWED BY A PRESIDENTAL CANDIDATE TO IMPROVE A AGENCY REDESIGN PRIOR TO AN ELECTION WOULD HAVE COST MY GROUP $50,000 TO GET THEM TO ‘READ IT.’ NO GOVT IS CORRUPT AND INEFFECTIVE AT ANY RESOURCE ALLOCATION, STEALS 1 1/2 TO 2 JOBS FOR EACH ONE THEY CREATE, ALLOCATE RESOURCES INEFFECTIVELY AND BASED ON SPECIAL INTEREST VERSUS NEED. EACH PERSON KNOWS THEIR OWN NEEDS AND WILL MOVE OR CHANGE JOBS TO FIND IT WITHOUT ANY GOVERNEMNT AGENT TELLING THEM.
10. Explain the success and prosperity of highly socialized countries like England, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Germany, France, Canada, Japan, Ireland, Italy, Spain. According to your anti-socialist views, shouldn’t these countries be repeaing a harves of doom from their decades-old socialist systems? Yet they seem to be getting stronger year by year. The crime rate is low, people earn living wages, the citizenry is well educated and engaged, the longest lifespans can be found among this group as well as the lowest infant mortality, they get adequate vacations, the middle class is growing and thriving. In order for any of your argumenst to have any credibility, you have to answer this question at the very least!
SAD TO SAY, THE DISTORTION OF THE ECONOMY ESPECIALLY VIA THE CENTRAL BANKS AND GOVT CREATION OF FIAT CURRENCIES IS ABOUT TO BE CORRECTED VIA THE GREATEST FINANCIAL STORM IN HISTORY. THE DISTORTIONS OF DEBT LEVELS AND EXTRAVAGANCES SHOWN BY THE COUNTRIES YOU MENTIONED ARE COMING TO AN END. THE EU IS NOT HEALTH ECONOMICALLY AND THE CREATION OF THE NEW LAYER OF BUREAUCRACY IS BUT THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG.
BUT DO READ THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION ANNUAL SURVEY AND LOOK AT THE VARIABLE USED AND WHY. STUDY AND THINK ABOUT. THE GROWTH OF FREEDOM WORLDWIDE, IN SMALL INCREMENTS AND LARGE COMES FROM THE REMOVAL OF CONSTRAINTS ON PEOPLE AND BUSINESSES, CUTTING REGULATIONS AND TAXATION, NOT THE INVERSE. A RECENT READ ON EU FOLLOWS CONCERNING IT’S GYRATIONS TOWARD NON FREEDOM:
New European Commission Faces Barriers to Freedom
8/18/04
by Norman Barry
Printable FormatNorman Barry is professor of social and political theory at the University of Buckingham in the U.K.
In the ambitious Lisbon Declaration four years ago, the European Union (EU) member states promised to make the EU the most dynamic and progressive economy in the world by 2010. Little has been done since to make it so.
The EU has dithered on international trade agreements and pursued an inward economic strategy seemingly designed to keep foreign countries, especially poorer ones, out of European economic markets, especially in agriculture. Europe remains the preserve of economic irrationality and anti-competitiveness. There are some nations that favor progress towards liberalization, but all such moves are hindered by the nature of the EU itself.
The European Commission, the premier economic policy-making body, has always been the product of the old-European bloc dominated by the big member states anxious to preserve the privileges of their pressure groups. Mario Monti, the previous competition-policy commissioner, had good free-market credentials and managed to secure small victories over insular member states, particularly France and Germany. He was, however, impeded by the ineffective Commission president, Romano Prodi, who made no progress toward even starting to fulfill the Lisbon agenda. Economically liberal member states were threatened by the advance of uniform taxation, regulation, and the emasculation of jurisdictional competition, the only way of freeing Europe from the sclerotic ancien regime. Member states gradually lost their power of veto over centralizing laws and became subservient to the ever-increasing regulatory demands of Brussels.
The new Commission president, former Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Barroso, has a good free-market background and, more important, has managed to keep out the Germans and the French from the top positions in the new Commission. Now that the EU has expanded to 25 member states, more free-market, ex-communist countries of eastern Europe are likely to bring some fresh thinking: hence important positions for Lithuania, Latvia, and the incredibly low-tax country Estonia in the Commission. Also, the Irish commissioner for the internal market, Charlie McGreevy, comes from a country with corporation tax of less than 12 percent. He won’t have any direct tax responsibilities, but he is likely to be a proponent of smaller government. Furthermore, the crucial post of commissioner for competition is to be held by Neelie Kroes-Smit. She is a Dutchwoman with a business background and is likely to resist demands for protectionism from lobby groups of the member states. This is something that the potential French candidate, Jacques Barrot, would have been incapable of doing.
The plum post, commissioner for trade goes to the controversial Briton Peter Mandelson. He will be in charge of the recently revived Doha international trade negotiations. These must succeed if we are to get a more liberal world trade order. Mandelson was instrumental in shifting the Labour Party away from its socialist past, but one can question his skills for the job. They are primarily political, and one wonders how he will cope with the intense economic arguments that his job will involve. He is just the person likely to go “native” in Brussels and get involved in the political horse-trading that characterizes European government. Europeans require a man of deep economic principles, unprepared to do sordid deals to appease pressure groups, especially farmers, from member states.
Compromised Institution
We must not forget that the Commission is a deeply compromised institution. It is not so long ago, under Jacques Santer, that the whole body was forced to resign over well-founded allegations of corruption among officials, and in the last few years there have been constant complaints over graft at Eurostat, the data collection body. And the EU has a brutal way of dealing with whistleblowers. It banishes them. Whether the fresh blood that is now there will be able to change the whole culture may be questioned. We must remember that in the language of economists, the EU attracts rent-seekers. They are the people who politically divert the extra economic value (rent) created by entrepreneurs and innovators to themselves. They are also certain to oppose any competition between member states over regulation and taxation because that would cut into their rents.
Looming over the whole of the EU is the promise, or threat, of a constitution. The present document due for ratification is heavily centralist and will reduce jurisdictional competition further. Even if there were serious constitutional protections for economic liberty and decentralization in the proposed arrangement, we can be sure that the European Court of Justice will be leading the way for “ever closer union.” The court has not been restrained by formal rules since it arbitrarily declared the supremacy of European law over that of the member states in ENEL v. Costa (1964). There was not a shred of justification for this in the founding Treaty of Rome (1957). This set a trend for the usurpation of power by the judiciary which the U.S. Supreme Court can only envy.
One fears that the changing of personnel in the Commission and the introduction of fresh faces with new ideas will never change the habits and practices of the Union. New thinking will come up against an entrenched bureaucracy formidable in the preservation of the status quo. Thus, while Barroso’s moves are to be welcomed, especially the blow to Gallic pride with the reduction of France to a lower position than Latvia in the rankings of the Commission, one doubts the long-term prospects of a successful wave of free-market thinking and policy-making. The Lisbon Declaration will be as far from commencement, let alone completion, as ever. Politicians are good about talking about the necessity for change but are not adept at achieving it. The only thing that will alter the conventional way of thinking at the EU is a serious threat of “exit by important member states. Over the long history of the organization, we can regularly observe the ineffectiveness of “voice.”
11. Explain why Europeans are less free than their American counterparts. BOTH MOVING TOWARD LESS FREEDOM, BUT AMERICANS STILL CAN TRAVEL GREATER DISTANCES WITHOU BORDERS OR ID CHECKS, ,MOVE FROM ONE STATE TO ANOTHER IF EITHER TAXATION OR REGS GET TOO LABORIOUS, PROTECT THEMSELVES AGAINST ANY CRIME WITHOUT DIALING 911, START A BUSINESS WITH LESS PAPER WORK, RUN THEIR BUSINESS WITH LESS GOVT INVOLVEMENT (HMM-M-M)--- BUT-T-T BOTH SIDES ARE GOING TOWARD STATISM WITH IMPUNITY…
12. Is is possible that Americans who work more hours, die earlier, are subject to higher crime rates, who find healthcare increasingly out of reach, who have a much greater chance of dying as infants, who are generally less well educated are the ones in greater need of the liberty that you speak of? Of course I’m not talking about the ones who are not in any of these categories--the rich, generally--but what about the millions of people who are? IF THEY DO OR NOT, ANY DISTORTIONS BETWEEN AMERICA AND EUROPEANS IS TRULY ANGELS AND PINHEAD COUNTS AS BOTH ARE SUFFERING INCREDIBLE GOVT INTRUSIONS AND DISTORTIONS THORUGHOUT THE ECONOMY. I KNOW OF NO GOVT PROGRAM THAT HAS MADE BETTER LIVES FOR ANYONE INVOLVED, BUT DO DAMAGE PRODUCTIVITY AND ECONOMIC PROSPERITY WHICH TRULY ACCRUES TO AND HAS A HIGHTER IMPACT AND CONTRIBUTION TO THE LOWER QUATILES. POINT IN FACT, SURVEYS OF ‘POOR’ INN AMERICA EVERY TEN YEARS SHOW OVER 75% HAVE MOVED OUT AND UPWARDS TO OTHER HIGHER INCOME GROUPS, THAT THE HARDCORE POOR STILL IN THE GROUP ARE TRULY INCAPABLE OF DOING ANYTHING.
13. What is your tax bracket, and how much do you stand to gain personally by lower taxes on the wealthy? WHAT DOES IT MATTER HOW I GAIN FROM AN TYRANNIES TAXATION? BUT FOR THE RECORD THE GAO GOVT ACT OFFICE RELEASED THE FOLLOWING: AN AMERICA MAKING $75,000 IN 1998 PAYS IN LOCAL, STATE AND FED TAXES 67% OF LIFETIME EARINGS TO THEM!! IF $100,000 EARNED IN 1998, IT’S 76%.
NOW THAT IS YOUR TYPE OF WORLD: GIVE THE GOVT 67-75 PER CENT OF EVERY DIME EVER EARNED IN A LIFE TIME. TALK ABOUT REVOLUTION TIME, SHOOT A BUREAUCRAT SPORT. THE SHEER SHAMEFULNESS OF IT…
FREE PEOPLE, FREE MARKETS AND TRADE AND THE WORLD WOULD BE 3-8 TIMES MORE PROSPEROUS, A LITERAL FACT. TAKE GOVT OUT OF EVERY ECONOMICALLY VIABLE ACTION AND THAT ALONE WOULD ALLOW THE CREATIVITY AND BEAUTY OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT TO FLOURISH.
LIVE AND LET LIVE, STOP AGGRESSING ON OTHERS AND HONOR THE SANTITY OF PRIVATE PROPERTY INCLUDING THE MIND AND BODY. GET OUT OF MY LIFE WITH YOUR RULES AND REGULATIONS AGAINST VOLUNTARY ACTS AMONG CONSENTING ADULTS AND LIFE STYLES.
NOEL
Posted by Noel Berge on Aug 20, 2004 at 7:25 AM finally;
Enough of the debates on-line. A die hard socialist wrapped in an aura of righteousness like a fundamental Christian or Muslim, wanting to sway anyone, by using force or corecion is verging on evil. There is no answer in any action that requires YOU to tell ME how to live, work and play.
Try http://www.TheAdvocates.org/quiz.html and get a feel for your ‘need’ for control at personal or macro government levels and then reflect on what is it that makes you so right about how others should live? Next you will tell me about global warming and their we go…
Having worked in economics and taught economics, mathematics, traveled and worked around the world and see what tyranny is doing and has done, I am not about to bend my head and acquiesce to tyranny in any shape, color or form. there are the Makers and the Takers. I am the former, too many are the latter.
Try to take my life, livelihood, hurt my family or friends, demand a world tax and you will feel my wrath. Otherwise, Golder Rule and Live and let live.
Now go in peace, but my way do not come with your programs of ‘what you can do for me’ or in any attempt to take what is mine,
Noel
Any further communication done only if you asked and send me a personal e-mail to which I would respond.
Posted by Noel Berge on Aug 20, 2004 at 7:43 AM Noel -
Just out of curiosity, were your travels/work/income generated by a government/private or religious beauracracy? Or totally self-employed? Are you a Libertarian or Federalist? Do you believe there is a natural aristocracy among men, on the grounds of virtue and talents?
Posted by elita rr on Aug 20, 2004 at 8:00 AM Noel,
I think I understand your positions a little better now. The faith you demonstrate in the free market, I must admitt makes me wistful. I haven’t had that kind of faith in anything since I was a small child.
Posted by daniel luke on Aug 20, 2004 at 8:44 AM Daniel;
Without passion, as Goethe says, there is nothing (Okay misquoting.)
My passion comes from myself as I am that way in my life, convictions and work. (I do group conflict resolution work, strategic planning and complex project design for clients.)
The growing of tyrany, collectivisism in all it’s forms is truly awesome in the world today.
All I do now is each day do something to support self responsibility, self reliance and promote the values of Live and Let Live. One day sees me rebutting some flippant remark about soicalism as good for people or more govt in our lives, not less telling us what to eat, ingest, who to hire, etc. ("There ought to be a law,” “we need more govt this or that"), or write an article or editorial, point out to a bureaucract how he or she has misapplied a statute and made it more restrictive, or train someone in self defense, or use of a firearm for home protection versus dialing 911, or read another pro freedom article or three.
Freedom is under assault and I do something each day to earn my own.
And thank you for the compliment(?) for we each see the world through different paranoias and realities, but I don’t assume to know what you life is about nor will I take any action to do for you what you should do for yourself. I will not rob peter to help mary cause I think that is social justice. It ain’t. It’s legal plunder.
Later, Noel
Posted by Noel Berge on Aug 20, 2004 at 9:06 AM What’s up with Bourne’s coiffure? Like, totally Katzenjammer. A ‘Dapper Dan’ man, perhaps.
Herman Melville wrote: “In truth, a mature man who uses hair-oil, unless medicinally, that man has probably got a quoggy spot in him somewhere.”
But then, Melville goes on to proclaim that the sweetest oil of all, is pure unadulterated sperm oil - the “ointment of kings”, and so on. Now, there’s something about Randolph....
http://melville.thefreelibrary.com/Moby-Dick-I-LXVII/1-25Sweet crude oil, today, was selling for just under $48 a barrel, down from a peak of $50, on good news that Shiite’s fighting in Najaf had agreed to a temporary cease fire. And so it goes....
That old timey photo of Bourne also reminds me of another author - L. Frank Baum.
Baum wrote “The Wizard of Oz”, one of the best stories in recent history, not to mention the classic motion picture version that continues to endear to this day.
How is it then, that Baum, the creator of such memorable endearment to so many, could have editorialized in his midwestern newspaper—calling for the “extermination” of all Native American Indians?
And similarly, [The Unforgiven]: (from the Seattle Post Intelligencer)
Speaking at the Unity: Journalists of Color convention in Washington, D.C., last Friday, President Bush, responding to a question about what tribal sovereignty meant in the 21st century, said: “Tribal sovereignty means just that; it’s sovereign. You’re a—you’ve been given sovereignty, and you’re viewed as a sovereign entity.”
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/186171_bushtribes13.htmlOuch. The king of the empire (Wizard of OZ?) has spoken.
NA-QOY-QATSI: (nah koy’ kahtsee) Noun. From the Hopi Indian Language. 1. A life of killing each other 2. War as a way of life. 3. (Interpreted) Civilized violence.
http://www.koyaanisqatsi.org/films/naqoyqatsi.phpAnd finally, “Bill The Butcher” from the Five Points in New York, representing the so-called “Native Americans”, also knew the secret of how to rule… FEAR: Translated today, as “shock and awe”, and a clockwork, orange alert.
Peace,
Posted by Tim Christopher on Aug 21, 2004 at 11:19 PM It is a shame that you neglected to post a link to Bourne’s famous essay. It can be found online at http://bigeye.com/warstate.htm
At the bottom of the essay can be found links to Bourne and related material.
Posted by Alfredo Traviata on Aug 22, 2004 at 12:58 PM The question is often asked, as here, “At what point, if at any, would inequalities in wealth seem unfair?” This is a red herring. The measure of the desirability (economically) of a system does not rest in comparisons between Bill Gates and me. Compare 3 systems. One ensures that Bill Gates and everybody else have $10,000 per year in disposable income. The second allows Bill Gates $1,000,000, while the common poor people have $20,000. The third allows Bill $1,000,000,000, while the common poor have $30,000. The inequalities get worse, but the state of the poorest is improved. I’ll take that any day. The issue to be measured is not inequality, but prosperity. The rest is just jealousy.
Second comment: as a Canadian, I wish Daniel Luke’s enthusiastic endorsement of the wonders of Canadian progress were true! I love my country. It’s a great country to live in. But our system (health especially) is on the edge of breakdown.
Posted by Don Codling on Aug 24, 2004 at 7:39 AM Respect other people’s choices; take responsibility for your own choices.
Posted by David Aitken on Aug 24, 2004 at 6:39 PM Funny that Noel does not extend his critique of government/coercion to the bureaucracies of multinational or transnational corporations (often times commanding greater resources than most countries). I wonder too whether he believes union organizing a right? Or perhaps that too is a violation of “economic freedom”? Or does he mean “neoclassical economics”? He may actually believe all of these things. But what I find interesting is that the Hayekians and those influenced by Mises usually only target for criticism socialism and social democratic governmental policy, while leaving market-distorting monopolies and firms alone. This bullshit been allowed to ideologically reign for too long. Which is precisely why reading Marx, even with all of his errors, is valuable. I wonder if Noel has read all three volumes of Capital yet? I would hope to induce him to do so as Marx actually gives an excellent thrashing of capitalism. Or at least read some Stiglitz who has finally put to rest the notion of completely transparent market mechanism based upon costless information,etc.
Posted by Phil on Aug 26, 2004 at 4:37 PM Randolph Bourne (’Another World, Possibly’) definitely has the right kind of hero stuff that movies are made of. He’s bona fide. The only question remains, who’ll play his Esmerelda? Though any such dramatic production based on his experience would necessarily have to be a tragedy. Not the sort of project that would so capture the hearts and minds of Americans as to start a revolution—and not that the movie going public has all that much reverence for journalists, for that matter.
Now, you take the legend of Knute Rockne and the Four Horsemen of Notre Dame...combine that with the #1 fight song on a saturday afternoon in September, pitting the Fighting Irish against a gridiron foe like the Michigan Wolverines, and “whooooa, Nelly”, you’ve got national attention (and sponsors). Millions of viewers silently cheering for some miracle to happen. All hoping for some small glimpse, per chance, of that stuff that legends are made of.
Unfortunately, there wasn’t much of the stuff legends are made of at last months Democratic Convention, either, I’m sorry to say, though I did get a kick out of the “Ridin’ the Donkey” part; Al Sharpton’s, “Carpe Diem, ya’ll, but take my wife, please!” Still, progressive liberals like myself did go on to interpret the main event as: It’s a beautiful day...now, get behind the mule and plow.
And I loved John Kerry’s convention speech even though the premise has since been shot down by a well financed group of Texas Longhorns—all hat no cattle. (Cut from the shower scene at the Bates Motel to Bob Dole relentlessly stabbing John Kerry in the back with a sharpie.) Hope for the synergistic miracle then, rests on the battle cry: “Anybody But Bush; Or, “You can get anything you want at Alice’s Restaurant —except Nadar.” And this hope springs external, not from the mainline Democratic party, you see.
Right now, real progressives, with real progressive ideas, and with real talent to pull this thing off, are taking charge of the City Lights brigade and the total affect has yet to be uncovered by the Associated Press. This is Custer’s (Bush’s) last stand, it’s the battle of the Little Big Horn all over again.
And meanwhile, back at the ranch...all those phony, hackneyed tricks of Republican campaign operative’s used to garner a countrified constituency have begun to wither on the vine and die just like Lonesome Rhodes got his comeuppance in ‘A Face in the Crowd.’ “Win one for the Gipper” has about as much relevance anymore as another mediocre season from the Golden Domer’s. The Dixie Chicks are alive and well...and multiplying.
And I’ve always appreciated Bill Clinton’s headline statement on a visit here in Palm Beach County: GOVERNMENT IS NO SAVIOR. And so it goes, that the true soul of America is discovering the true nature of democracy...and the true reality of this political battle.
November 2, 2004...it’s a good day to die.
Posted by Tim Christopher on Sep 1, 2004 at 11:44 PM Noel,
You really tried to scare the be-jesus out of us, but you failed. You sure are a right-wing, christian-fundamentalist-corporate-warmogerer nut!
Posted by Phaedrus on Sep 2, 2004 at 9:48 AM For all of you skeptics and believers alike. Don’t chase misinformation, which seems to be the rule of the day… believing any and all anyone with a page can conceive of without even enabling our simple use of common sense. Don’t go blaming the jews nor the U.S. Blame yourselves and the masses as a whole. Whether this world conspiracy is true or not, we’re already doomed as a people. We have no power at all for a new revolution. All this information, regardless of how truthful it may be, is absolutely useless to the masses. We are under the control of a powerful few. There is no solution to what’s coming within the next decades. The power will be had and weilded by the ones with the money. The masses are inconsequential. Just know that there’s absolutely nothing all our cries of injustice will accomplish. The damage is done and the game’s afoot. Our children’s future is amiss and a very dark one at that. History has always been written by the winner. Wolloing in what these secret cults and societies will accomplish nothing. Do something with your lives and stop having babies. The future for us is now and we shouldn’t be breeding slaves for what is to come. Trust me… it ain’t pretty.
Posted by Tienne on Sep 6, 2004 at 8:25 AM ‘Although none of these places have an irrisistible appeal for me, according to the 2003 Heritage Index of economic freedom, for those seeking same, the following 9 countries (in order of rank) are ahead of the USA:
Hong Kong
Singapore
New Zealand
Luxembourg
Ireland
Estonia
United Kingdom
Denmark
Switzerland.’And how many of these countries are livable? Just two, by my count. (And BTW I’ve been to all of them.)
Posted by Carl Wernerhoff on Sep 8, 2004 at 5:41 PM Contrary to the authors’ assertions, social change will not come from the left. The left worships the cult of the omnipotent war machine just like the dangerous neo-cons. John Kerry voted to attack Iraq and John Kerry voted for USA-PATRIOT. For the left to fight the neo-cons would be unPATRIOTic. Both John Kerry and Hillary Clinton support foreign aid to Israel. So our only hope is to support fringe third parties like the Libertarian Party. Michael Badnarik (Libertarian candidate for President) would withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq immediately. Vote Third Party in protest of the two major parties.
Posted by Ben Parkinson on Sep 25, 2004 at 6:07 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Dave Mulcahey
- Tranche Warfare
Who will be left holding the bag as subprime mortgages go bad? - Hooray for Hookergate!
- Passion of the Right
The uses of persecution - Another World, Possibly
- The Wise Many
- Design Flaw
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2004 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
