2007/11/01

Start Now - Hurry!

In Seth Godin's book, Small is the new big, there is an essay called Start Now - Hurry! (pp.225-230). I found a very interesting definition of Communism. Now, Seth is an extroverted Capitalist. But when I read the conclusion to his essay, I found myself nodding in agreement as he wrote about starting your own business:

The best part of this exercise [starting your own business] comes when you realize you are smart enough, motivated enough, and focused enough to actually do this. Once you decide that you could actually run the place, you'll realize that no other option is satisfying.

...

Here's the crux of the matter: Organizations where the people doing the work are the very same people who are making the decisions are more likely to succeed in the long run. Just about all the sins of American business (from environmental despoilation to accounting fraud can be pinned on the anonymous bureaucracy. Entrepreneurs can't be anonymous - it's your decision, your policy, your work, your business - and so you're fast and honest, or you're out. There's nowhere else to pass the buck.

...

pp.229-230
small is the new big,
by Seth Godin
Penguin Books (2006)

Emphasis Mine

The essential definition of Communism is that the two (2) classes of Capitalism, owners and workers, have merged into one (1) class - worker-owners. That is it.

This also why a Communist society can only emerge out of a Capitalist one. The two (2) classes have to emerge from a lower economic system and develop. Once the development proceeds far enough, these two (2) classes have to make a conscious decision to merge. There is no automatic process.

The real question is how much development of the two (2) classes is enough before the amalgamation can proceed? I don't know but Mr. Godin is probably saying that workers should be considering starting their own businesses. I would say that workers should start planning to take over the businesses instead. The same development of the worker is required.


Read more!

2007/10/31

Blank Books

I made the following comment about Blank Books at Ted Rall's blog:

Arthur Silber would like to nominate Andrew Meyer as an American hero for he did Break the Goddamned Rules. For that, Andrew Meyer was broken. He may never resist again, but he did resist once.

I think we all should realise that we live in occupied countries (USA, Australia, UK, etc). The occupation forces are the rich elite (aka Capitalists aka International Bankers). The forces of occupation are the police and the right-wing thugs. The collaborators include the MSM, the Democrats, the GOP, and all those who want to play safe.

We must learn to think and live as insurgents. There is no other way to keep one's honour in these times. The ways of resisting will change from day to day, and even hour to hour.

I don't think I will be very proud of what I have to do to survive these times. There will be many acts of cowardice and silence for every act of courage. I will be broken once, or even twice. Can I go on? I don't know.

One advantage of a blank book is that anyone write in it. The smallest mark is noticed.

The problem is that we all know something is wrong but we have been trained to let someone else fix the problems.

We have to learn to be responsible adults. There is no one else.

In the movie "Zulu", the following exchange takes place:

Pte. Thomas Cole:
Why is it us? Why us?
Colour Sergeant Bourne:
Because we're here, lad.

These are our times. We are responsible for this part of history. Our predecessors may have stuffed up. We cannot change how we got here. There is no point wishing otherwise.

We could dodge our responsibility and pass the buck to our successors. Could we live with ourselves if we did so?

As Seth Godin says in Thrill Seekers, Now, of course, safe is risky. Apologies to Seth as this quote is taken of context but is entirely appropriate for my point.


Read more!

2007/09/26

Limousine Liberal

I made the following comment to Ted Rall's post about Limousine Liberal:

Thank you for calling Commies-R-Us. All of our revolutionaries are currently busy or in prison.

We at Commies-R-Us do not believe in outsourcing revolution. You can be assured that we use only indigenous revolutionaries although we do use the experience of others throughout the world.

For those of you who insist on waiting for someone to answer your call, may we suggest reading Can American Workers Make a Socialist Revolution? By George Novack?

Have a nice revolution.

And now for something completely different.

According to The CIA World Fact Book, the average GDP per person is USD10,200 (2006 est.). So we have a disparity between the $8.50 derived by dividing up someone's wealth and the average GDP.

I think people tend to obscure the difference between the wealth created by people working and the wealth that is stolen from them by the Capitalists.

Some of that wealth the Limousine Liberal was gained by his own effort but the rest was gained by the exploitation of others. So, in dividing it up is one way of returning but it is still a more part.

A better idea would be to do without the Capitalists. Cut out the middle men.


Read more!

2007/09/23

An Examination of Bush Fascism

Tj Templeton does An Examination of Bush Fascism (picked up via Diogenesian Discourse: Is HoWARd easing us into fascism? at) which is a continuation of the check-list political analysis I ranted against in Fascism Anyone? Tj Templeton writes that:

The expansion of democracy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries intensified the antidemocratic reaction of conservative authoritarianism. Starting first in Italy as an antidemocratic and antisocialist movement after WWI, fascism is in essence the twentieth century version of age old tendencies in politics. Like democracy, it is a universal phenomenon, and it appeared in different forms and varieties in accordance with national traditions and circumstances.

Fascism is a postdemocratic political system and cannot be understood except as a reaction to democracy. Fascism is not possible in countries with no democratic experience at all: in such countries dictatorship may be based on the army, bureaucracy, and church, but it will lack the element of mass enthusiasm and participation characteristic of fascism. Fascism learned from democracy the value of popular support for national policies, and it sought to manufacture popular support by propaganda and fear. ...

Emphasis Mine

What Tj Templeton refers to as Democracy is to be interpreted as the Capitalist political system. Fascism is not a reaction to Capitalism but rather its defense against the workers.

Fascism is a mass movement of the petite bourgeoisie and their adherents. That mass movement reflects the interests of that class. Thus, Fascism can only arise in a Capitalist or Socialist economy where the mass of the petite bourgeoisie is sufficient to be able to take power in its own right.

Historically, the petite bourgeoisie exists as a class in Feudal, Capitalist and Socialist systems. Not all revolutions staged by the petite bourgeoisie are retrogressive. When the petite bourgeoisie revolted in a Feudal economy, this class was advancing the progressive agenda of Capitalism.

Within the Capitalist system, a revolt of the petite bourgeoisie can either be progressive (if it involves the workers) or retrogressive (if it is against the workers).

Since the composition and consciousness of the petite bourgeoisie class varies for country to country and over time, the lists of characteristics of Fascism will display the same variation.

After the lists of characteristics, Tj Templeton continues:

The hallmark of fascism is a merging of state and corporate power coupled with the transfer of power from the individual to the government and corporate elite. It is for this reason that liberals as a whole must be purged or at the very least, marginalized. Taking a look at the liberal achievements of the past century reveals a common theme. The civil rights movement, equal rights movement, free speech movement, environmental movement, the labor movement, and others all have one thing in common: They put power in the hands of the individual. This is incompatible with the fascist ideal of the transfer of power to the state elite and the individual serving as the raw material for the state machine to function on. Most often, fascist propaganda places the lump sum of the blame for a nations troubles on the shoulders of the liberals. It's worth noting that in Nazi Germany the communists, labor organizers, and liberals were purged before the gays, Jews, gypsies, and homosexuals.

Emphasis Mine

This is not Fascism - this is the normal growth of Capitalism. The State exists to protect the interests of the ruling class (i.e. the Capitalists aka corporate elite). What is described above is the struggle between the classes (Capitalist and Proletariat) for their interests. The ruling class does not grant concession because they are nice, they grant concessions because they want to survive.

Tj Templeton concludes:

The United States is not a fascist nation nor is the republican party a fascist party. The conclusion drawn here is that a small cadre of corporate elite have formed a fascist organization which has usurped the United States government through a questionable election and sympathetic court, installed their members in the top levels of the executive, diplomatic, and military offices, and have hijacked the nations policy to fit their fascist agenda. If actions are not taken to end and reverse this trend, the United States will meet the inevitable collapse met by all fascist regimes.

Emphasis Mine

While the first sentence is true, the second is nonsense. Because the Bush presidency is part of the Capitalist class, they are not members of the petite bourgeoisie and thus members of a Fascist cabal.

My opinion on this is in Proto-Fascism in USA where the petite bourgeoisie are mobilising but not moving against the establishment. As long as the GOP continues to deliver, the petite bourgeoisie will rumble but not revolt.

The situation is the same in Australia. We are not in danger unless the ruling class is unable to perform.


Read more!

2007/09/21

Fascism Anyone?

Crooks and Liars' post about The Colbert Report: Naomi Wolf on Fascism in America had a reference to Laurence W. Britt's article about Fascism Anyone?. Mr. Britt's analysis is:

Beyond the visual, even a cursory study of these fascist and protofascist regimes reveals the absolutely striking convergence of their modus operandi. This, of course, is not a revelation to the informed political observer, but it is sometimes useful in the interests of perspective to restate obvious facts and in so doing shed needed light on current circumstances.

For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities, cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all followed the fascist or protofascist model in obtaining, expanding, and maintaining power. Further, all these regimes have been overthrown, so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and abuses is possible.

Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level of similarity.

Emphasis Mine

What follows is a list of characteristics without any explanation of why these characteristics define Fascism. This is really a case of check-list political analysis (If it quacks like a duck and it walks like a duck, then it must be a duck).

The main problem with this sort of analysis is that you had no idea of how to fight Fascism. Which points are most important? What if thirteen out of fourteen points are achieved, does stopping one (1) point alone defeat Fascism?

At least in this respect, Dr. Fernandes' analysis is deeper. See Fascism: are we there yet? Although Dr. Fernandes listed caharacteristics, he attempted to form some narrative around them, and came close to establishing the class basis of Fascism.

And how does Mr. Britt conclude his analysis?

Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.

So he has no fucking idea on what to do! This is more importatnt than playing a game of Spot the Fascist

Trotsky's analysis in "Fascism: What it is and how to fight it" describes the class nature and trajectory of Fascism. With this understanding, one can predict the growth of Fascism and determine how to fight it.


Read more!

2007/09/14

APEC: Neo-Nazis

There is a good article about APEC: Neo-Nazis.

I only saw about ten (10) Neo-Nazis by the time the end of the march reached the corner of Park and George Street. So, I agree with the estimates given in the article. I found the article interesting because it gave an Anarchist's perspective on Neo-Nazis pretending to be Anarchists, and a commentary on the Neo-Nazis' review of their experience at APEC.

I agree with the author's contention that the Neo-Nazis do not have coherent or mature politics.


Read more!

Two Messages for America

Frank Gaffney wonders which of the Two Messages for America will be heard. He is particularly worried that:

Or will it be that we must surrender Iraq to such enemies?  Of course, the latter choice will be dressed up as a "strategic redeployment," clearing the way for what is promised to be a more determined and successful effort to go after al Qaeda elsewhere, notably in Afghanistan and perhaps in Pakistan.

Whatever Democrats (and a few Republicans) may call it, however, the second choice is the one favored by Osama bin Laden.  It would be, as he has called it, a defeat for the United States.  Far from it being the end of the fight with Islamofascists like him and his enablers, such a choice would simply embolden them and result in an accelerated, global metastasizing of the struggle against their ilk.

Emphasis Mine

Already, Mr. Gaffney has conceded the strategic initiative to Osama Bin Laden. OBL is now dictating US policy by boasting about what he could do! No longer is the USA is shaping the events in the Middle East; they are reacting to videos from some guy in hiding.

Yet people, like Mr. Gaffney, do not see it that way. They think the US will have lost if their enemy says that the US has lost.

If people, like Mr. Gaffney, no longer believes the US can shape events at the strategic level, then the US ruling class is beginning to lose control. Why should anyone consider the US to be important if the US ruling class does not think so?

What Mr. Gaffney tried to do in his article was shame Americans into supporting the long occupation of Iraq by making the Americans think that everyone would laugh at them if the US left Iraq. Is the US so weak, that laughter can frighten them?

Even though I write about the eventual decline of the US, the US is stil a powerful nation, but only if it concentrates on its strengths and repairs its weaknesses. Unfortunately, the US ruling class considers military might alone to be America's sole strength without realising that the ideological strengths it still has in people like Michael Moore and Google. What other society could produce icons like these? Both of these came from nothing into world-wide dominance in their own fields.

Yet once again, the US ruling class demonstrates that it does understand the source of its own power, prefering to believe its own bullshit.


Read more!

2007/09/09

Understanding the "Victory Disease"

Major Timothy Karcher, US Army wrote Understanding the “Victory Disease,” From the Little Bighorn to Mogadishu and Beyond in 2004. He warns against using past success as a predictor of future success especially as it leads to the three (3) deadly conditions of "Victory Disease":

  1. Arrogance
  2. Complacency
  3. Using Established Patterns

What is interesting about this book is how relevant the philosophy is to the non-military realm. This is especially so in regards to the "Design Patterns" and "Agile" movements within computing.

If there is ever a way of dulling the intellect, then these two (2) movements are it. For more ranting, see Lefties and Conservatives.

The remedy Maj. Karcher is reading of history and always questioning assumptions. But, as Maj.Gen. J.F.C.Fuller says in Generalship: Its Diseases and their Cure - A Study of the Personal Factor in Command:

The first of these two problems depends upon a remodelling of our system of discipline, which is still largely eighteenth - century. In war, as in peace, individuality Is far more important than uniformity; personality than congruity, and originality than conventionality. 'War', writes Clausewitz, 'is the province of chance. In no sphere of human activity is such a margin to be left for this intruder.'1 As this is largely true, no regulations and no rules can cover the art of generalship. Like the great artist the general should possess genius, and if he does not, then no effort should be spared to develop his natural abilities, in place of suppressing them. Our existing system is, so I think, based on suppression, suppression to a large extent of an unconscious order. The old are often suspicious of the young and do not welcome criticism, yet without criticism, both destructive and constructive, there can be no progress. As I have already mentioned, the easiest course to adopt is to lay down rules and regulations which must be implicitly obeyed; yet chance knows no compulsion, and such rules and regulations are apt to cramp intelligence and originality. This is seen clearly from the frequent use with which 'Bolshevik' is applied to anyone who dares to think independently; yet if this 'vice' will teach us how to rely upon our common sense and how to speak frankly and without fear, what matters a name if common sense and self-reliance will help us win the next war. In place, so it seems to me, our present system of discipline, which is so truly Prussian and so untruly English, is responsible for creating what I will call the 'Cringe-viki', those knock-kneed persuasive tact-ticians who gut an army not with a knife but with a honeyed word.

Emphasis Mine

How true is this of anything under Capitalism - the sin of thinking marks one as a revolutionary!

How long can an economic and political system survive when original and non-conformist thought and action is suppressed? Not very long as the fall of the USSR shows!

The problem then becomes how we manage the transition to either Socialism or Barbarism. We have to choose the future - not let the future be chosen for us.


Read more!

Protesters no match as police rule streets

Danielle Teutsch and Daniel Dasey crow that Protesters no match as police rule streets but admit

Despite fears the protesters would resort to violence, the main show of force came from heavily armed police who dragged a number of banned protesters out of the rally and into waiting vans.

The NSW Police says that there were Seventeen arrested in protest activity. Of particular concern is the following:

Two police officers were injured during today’s protests with one officer sustaining a head wound after being hit with an iron bar, the other sustaining a head injury after being hit with a dart.

I was at the protest from about 09:30 until 14:30. During that time, five (5) people were arrested before the rally reached Hyde Park. The protest was quiet until about 14:00 when the police made their first incursion into the crowd to arrest a prohibited person near the Cafe above St James Station. Then came another quick two (2) arrests: one man and a TV reporter. Another man was thrown to the ground by the police. The people then pushed us further back into Hyde Park. The action then moved further south towards Park Street.

There were eight (8) arrests that I know of before I left. The other nine (9) must have happened after I left or just before.

That only one (1) person out of 6,000 (or 10,000) hit a police officer is good on average (0.01%) but very bad in practice because it could mark the beginings of individual terrorism.

There was one group handing out leaflets saying that protest actions were no longer effective:

But after eight years of such demonstrations—starting in Seattle in 1999 and reaching a high point in the global demonstrations against the Iraq war in February 2003—it is time to draw a political balance sheet. International experience has revealed that, to the extent that protests are dominated by the conception that the political establishment can be pressured to change course, no matter how large they are, or how sincere their participants’ motivations, they cannot resolve the problems of war, repression and social reaction.

This group concludes by saying:

The urgent task faced by students and working people in Australia and around the world is the building of a mass international political movement of the working class guided by the program of socialist internationalism. This is the perspective of the International Committee of the Fourth International and its Australian section, the Socialist Equality Party, developed every day on the World Socialist Web Site.

Here, we have the conundrum of this stage in the struggle: the mass actions are becoming difficult and less effective while the oppression is increasing. This is what the title of the original article. We used to be able to say "Whose Streets? Our Streets!", but no longer.

This underlines the stupidity of the ruling class: they are now relying more and more on naked force to maintain their power, and yet they are destroying the foundation of that power in the Iraqi insurgency as the US Army disintegrates.

The Iraq War is the Battle of the Bulge for US Imperialism: the last grasp offensive to secure vital oil supplies to maintain its war machine and deny those oil supplies to its enemies. There can be no retreat! There is only victory or death. Either the USA will prevail or it will be destroyed.

It is time to start building a world without the USA. We should consider them already dead. This will give up time to try out solutions to the economic and military balances of power.

At this time of history, we will still have a Capitalist world system dominated by PRC and EU. The Russian Federation realises this and is trying to exploit its strategic position between two (2) powers and its proximity to the last remaining major oil fields in Central Asia.

The Communists can only scurry like mammals while the dinosaurs fight it out over access to resources.


Read more!

Policing? No one thinks big of you!

Miranda Devine nearly says "Policing? No one thinks big of you!" in her scathing attack on Pumped-up cops are stepping over the thin blue line. She concludes:

But the streets have been swarming with police all week, pumped up, and with nothing to do.

After Thursday's embarrassing security breach, when comedians from The Chaser managed to pass through checkpoints in a fake motorcade almost to the hotel where US President George Bush was staying, the police were even more aggro.

The stunt demonstrated that the security overkill in Sydney was just a big show, designed not to protect anyone from terrorists but to stymie protesters.

This is what happens when you appoint underwhelming neophytes, David Campbell as Police Minister and Andrew Scipione as Commissioner.

It's a sign of an emasculated, rudderless police force, with systemic small-man syndrome, acting like bullies in an attempt to cover up weakness, and chronic dysfunction.

Emphasis Mine

What raises her ire is the brutal treatment meted out to an accountant friend of hers. The police were more heavy handed with a meek white accountant than with those terrible Lebanese who devastated Sydney and left it a smoking ruin (not that anyone noticed - apparently we Syndeysiders are too blase about such things.)

Don't the police realise that they have to terrorise the non-white, non-rich, and non-sycophantic part of the population (aka non-people) and leave the real people unmolested to go about buying ice-cream. Really, what is the world coming to when the police start applying the law equally to all people (and non-people).


Read more!

2007/08/27

Lefties and Conservatives

Ted Rall has put up his latest cartoon about the difference between Lefties and Conservatives. My comment is below the fold.

Strange as it may seem, I am actually commenting on the cartoon of 25 August not the one about Jenna Bush. Somehow, the comment threads got warped.

I think Cde Rall's cartoon about the difference between Lefties and Conservatives is one about the contradictory nature of Capitalism: the unrelenting quest for doing things better; and the mindless conformity of work.

What Cde Rall has described in the first five (5) panels is the essence of the progressive nature of Capitalism: you can always improve something. There is no finality to improvement. Relentless questioning of everything gives Capitalism its dynamism.

For those of us who work in these types of jobs, there is nothing unusual in this. Our employers gain a temporary competitive advantage of doing things better, faster, or cheaper. Then the process of questioning starts again. The only final authority is whether it works or not. Reputations are transient.

In contrast, Cde Rall presents the last panel in which the Conservative says 'Good enuff'. This is dead weight in the Capitalist world but essential for its operation. For without these people to do the mind-deadening drudgery of necessary labour, how can wealth be produced? If they are not willing to shorten their lifespan by decades by literally working themselves to death, how can the economy grow through Capital accumulation?

The work a conservative does follows the instructions given by someone else. As long as everybody does their part, everything works fine. Questioning disrupts the established order. Even though it will kill him, a conservative will follow orders because that is what he has been conditioned to do.

So Capitalism operates by killing off its most ardent supporters while rewarding its most vocal critics. You won't see me down a coal mine avoiding the collapsing rocks. This is a job for conservatives.


Read more!

2007/08/14

Responsibility for the death of an Iraqi Child

Ted Rall has put up his latest cartoon about Responsibility for the death of an Iraqi Child. My comments are below the fold:

I would like to think that the real question raised by Cde. Rall's cartoon is where responsibility for the death of the Iraqi child lies.

Under the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Articles 146 and 147), the primary responsibilty lies with the soldier who killed the child with secondary responsibilty devolving to the military chain of command. In other words, the soldiers in panels #2 and #3 as well as POTUS in panel #7 are exposed to criminal charges arising from the death of the Iraqi child.

The Nuremburg Principles state that following orders is not a defense at law (Principle IV). Indeed, Congress and the Media could be liable under Principle VII. At the Nuremberg Trials, one newspaper editor (Julius Streicher) was sentenced to death for his "...incitement to murder and extermination..." (Gilbert 1995, p.443), as well as several politicians (e.g. Fritz Sauckel and Baron von Neurath) were either hung or imprisioned.

All of these legal niceties avoid the central tenet of a Democracy: the people are responsible for acts committed in their name. So the responsibility for the death of the Iraqi lies with the people in panel #5. I believe some people understand Principle VII extends to all adults in a functioning democracy.

Gilbert, G.M. (1995) "Nuremberg Diary", Da Capo Press, USA.

In Section 3. For peace and international solidarity of the Party Program for the DSP, the warmaking powers should reside entirely with the people

War and preparations for war threaten the lives and welfare of the overwhelming majority. Decisions related to war must be taken out of the hands of the capitalists, their political representatives, and general staffs. Working people and rank-and-file soldiers have a right to know all the real aims and commitments of the government's military and foreign policy. All military and diplomatic treaties and agreements should be made accessible to the public. The people should have the right to vote directly on the question of war.

Emphasis Mine


Read more!

2007/08/12

Intellectual Obesity

Ted Rall has put up his latest cartoon Intellectual Obesity. My posted comment follows below the fold:

So, according to the last panel, I must be a liberal because I am not an American. Therefore 95% of humanity must be liberals as well as a consequence of being non-Americans. Thereby making Liberalism the overwhelming predominant philosophy of humanity, and relegating Consevatism to the fringe.

Or, as Mark Twain once said, "There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact."

Enough of my demonstrations of intellectual obesity!

What are the economic drivers for intellectual obesity? One would have thought that a Capitalist economy would perform far better with workers who are intellectual fit (to prolong the metaphor).

In my own "profession" of computing, we hold up bad examples to ridicule at sites such as Worse Than Failure. However, "professional" computer societies promote intellectual obesity through examples such as IEEE Ready Notes, or through cookbook approaches such as Design Patterns.

The cost of labour reproduction (cf "Capital" by K.Marx) is far higher for an intellectually fit worker than for an intellectually obese one. The latter can probably do hundreds of Google searches in the time it takes the former to understand the problem.

Hence the need for the pundit class of "experts". They provide solutions to classes of problems. Everyone else just Googles them and reproduces the results. This is far cheaper and thus creates more output than the master craftspeople.

You are not going to change the culture of intellectual obesity by individual examples any more than a gourmet restaurant has of putting MacDonald's out of business. This is how the economic system works.


Read more!

2007/07/22

Warnings over hedge fund crisis

Richard Gluyas raises Warnings over hedge fund crisis because:

They have had their values slashed since May because of their exposure to the CDO (collateralised debt obligation) market, which in turn was partly exposed to the US sub-prime mortgage market.

What this means is that a whole lot of smarties got a lot of people with very shaky ability to pay to sign up for fixed rate, low-doc home loans in a rising housing market. These loans had their interest rates fixed for about three (3) to four (4) years. The buyers hoped to make a profit by selling their homes before the interest rate became variable and higher.

Unfortunately, the housing market was acting like a pyramid selling scheme. As long as there were enough mugs to pay ever increasing prices for houses, the market prices could keep on rising. When the market ran out of mugs, the bubble was bound to burst. The reason for the shortage of mugs is the relatively slow growth in supply because of immigration restrictions and native birth rate.

Even if these restrictions were overcome, the limit would still be reached. The great majority of home buyers can only afford one (1) home loan at a time.

Underlying this looming disaster is the mistaken belief that people can become rich by buying and selling. Here, people believed that, by buying a house for $250,000 and selling it for $650,000, they would become $400,000 richer. (Ignoring all of the costs associated with this - payments, taxes, etc.)

The problem is that the price of the houses have risen. To repeat the same trick, the punter would have to buy at $650,000 and sell at $1,050,000. This requires some other mug to raise a $1,050,000 loan. As the values rise in a stagnant wages market, the ability to pay off such loans becomes increasing unlikely.

In the owner's mind, his house is worth $1,050,000. In the lender's mind, the house is worth $650,000. So, the lender sells this loan along with other loans of the same ilk to another mug who thinks that he is buying the right to collect the interest and principal on these loans and as well as the collateral.

The lender wins because they are no longer exposed to these loans going bad, but they lose the income from the loans. So, they are making money off the fees for raising these loans and selling them. As long as there are mugs to take up the loans, and mugs to buy the loans, how can they lose?

They lose when they run out of mugs! This is what is happening at the loan buyer end of the market. The buyers are devaluing the CDO (bundle of loans) so much that the fee income for the lender is not covering the discount needed to on-sell the loan. As the lenders are unwilling to carry the risks themselves because of their low capitalisation, they have to restrict supply of loans by either increasing the interest rates or increasing the quality of the loan. Either way, the chances of finding mugs with $1,050,000 to buy a home are becoming very unlikely.

Thus, housing prices should fall thereby making existing loans far riskier because there are enough buyers to buy the house at the principal. This will further drive down the price of the CDO and cut the capitalisation of some hedge funds who rely on them as assets.

This is almost like 1929 with the high-leverage schemes masquerading as asset growth.


Read more!

2007/06/13

Loose Wheels

James Kunstler is worried about Loose Wheels:

I admit it was not a big deep thought, just an eerie one. Of course, one would have to begin by asking what kind of society would worship clowns like Donald Trump in the first place -- and the answer would be: a society of envious slobs deluded into thinking that they could become the next Trump if only the Baby Jeezus would whack them over the head with a sock-full of silver dollars. This is, after all, a culture currently fueled by two dangerously childish ideas: that it's possible to get something for nothing, and that when you wish upon a star your dreams come true.

People who believe that it's possible to get something for nothing can be persuaded easily that those who have gotten a lot have gotten it unfairly. And the flip side of wishing upon stars is that when your dreams don't come true you can only blame it on the stars.

Mr. Kunstler goes on to speculate whether these events parallel those leading up to the French Revolution.

He appears to characterise that revolution as one of class envy. Whereas, the French Revolution was the triumph of the Capitalists over their Feudal lords. The revolution happened because Fedualism was no longer good for business, and the Capitalists were able to persuade others that they would be better off under Capitalism than Fedualism.

The Feudal system could no longer deliver on its promises because the Aristocracy was full of dead wood, and people of talent and ambition were becoming Capitalists.

And Mr. Kunstler is probably correct in assessing that the Capitalist class in the USA is now full of dead wood like Donald Trump and Paris Hilton. So where have the people of talent and ambition have gone? I don't think they have been attracted to the Socialist cause.

If an explosion does happen in the USA, I would think it would be a populist revolution that may turn into a Fascist revolution. I think people of talent and ambition could be looking for a leader to get the Capitalist system back on track.

The analysis of politics in the USA leads me to suspect that people think the problems are due to moral failings. This has been the opening for a Fascist revolution in the past.


Read more!

2007/03/25

Our nation-building soldiers deserve unstinting support

Miranda Devine argues that Our nation-building soldiers deserve unstinting support. She appears to base this on three points.

  1. John Howard says that things are improving in Iraq
  2. Major General Jim Molan says that things are improving
  3. A recent poll shows that Iraqis wants the multinational force to stay

Ms Devine concludes by writing:

It is a worthwhile mission our soldiers want to do.

My problems with this piece by Ms Devine are:

  1. The Iraqis want the multinational force to stay.
  2. The soldiers want to stay to complete the job
  3. Sloppy attribution

Poll shows Iraqis Wants Troops to Stay

Ms Devine cites a poll.

Even in Iraq, while the coalition troops are unpopular, most people polled this month don't want them to leave until security is restored.

The poll of 2212 Iraqi adults across the nation by the BBC, USA Today and the American ABC network found that 67 per cent believed foreign troops should stay in Iraq until security is restored, the government is stronger and Iraqi forces can operate independently.

The poll Ms Devine refers to could be Ebbing Hope in a Landscape of Loss Marks a National Survey of Iraq via Polls show Iraqis live surrounded by violence, distrust US. P.7 of this report says:

Worsening views of U.S. and other forces in Iraq tracks the deterioration of conditions in the country. In the first ABC News poll in Iraq, in February 2004, 51 percent of Iraqis opposed the presence of U.S. forces on their soil. By November 2005 that jumped to 65 percent. Today, it’s 78 percent.

But how to proceed is complicated. Even as they express discontent with U.S. forces, Iraqis are equivocal about their departure – a reasonable compunction, given the uncertainty of what might follow. Just over a third (35 percent) favor immediate U.S. withdrawal, peaking at 55 percent of Sunni Arabs – fewer than might be expected given this group’s nearly unanimous anti-Americanism. About four in 10 – Sunni and Shiite alike – say U.S. forces should remain until security is restored.

“Leave now” sentiment is up, but not vastly, from 2005 – 26 percent then, vs., again, 35 percent now.

Emphasis Mine

This contradicts what Ms Devine says. She could be refering to another poll that I am unable to find.

There is another poll called PUBLIC ATTITUDES IN IRAQ - FOUR YEARS ON - MARCH 2007 also via Polls show Iraqis live surrounded by violence, distrust US. I am unable to determine if this is the poll that Ms Devine refers to.

In response to Q2. And thinking ahead, do you believe that the security situation in Iraq will get better or worse in the immediate weeks following a withdrawal of Multi National Forces? (p.4), the responses from 5019 Iraqis was:

A great deal better (5)144729%
A little better (4)119424%
A little worse (2)76315%
A great deal worse (1)56511%
Stay the same (3)2856%
Don't know/Refused57912%

So, in this second poll, 53% of Iraqis think they will be better off if the multinational forces leave.

Aust Soldiers Want to Stay in Iraq

Aside from the Major General, there is no evidence presented to support the assertion that Australian troops want to stay in Iraq to complete the job.

Maj Gen Molan (DFJ No. 171, p. 14) writes that:

So there must be the tightest link between national interest and military action. If force has to be used, then soldiers must be prepared to die for vital national interests. That is the warrior’s contract. All of us who went to Iraq agreed to this contract.

Ms Devine would appear to be of the opinion that decision to use is irrecoverable. However, Australia is a democracy and the people has the ultimate responsibility for the actions of the nation. If the ADF is used, then we must give consent. And when that consent is withdrawn, the ADF must desist and withdraw.

The ADF exists to serve the nation, not the nation to serve the ADF.

Unfortunately, the command and control of the ADF is not perfect. There is a problem in the chain of command: what the people want is not carried out by the government of the day.

Indeed, the Australian have never directy given consent either to war or peace. These decisions have always been given by our betters.

Sloppy References

Ms Devine says that:

In a speech late last year to the Chief of Army's annual military history conference in Canberra, and in an article at the same time in the Australian Defence Force Journal, Molan was reasonably upbeat about prospects in Iraq in the new phase of the war.

The article Ms Devine is refering to is at NÂș 171 - 2007 (1.19Mb) starting at p.8. (This is wrongly attributed as being published in 2007.) Ms Devine does quote accurately from this publication.

The second sloppy reference is to the opinion poll. See above for details.

Conclusion

Ms Devine cites a poll that says Iraqis want the multinational force to stay. I found two (2) other opinion polls from last month that contradict this.

The Australian people should decide whether the ADF stays or leaves Iraq not the Iraqis.


Read more!

2007/01/14

The Nativity Story

In the November/December 2006 Edition of Annals Australasia, James Murray reviews The Nativity Story on p.22. He concludes:

The work's verisimilitude may, however, create a problem of perception. Audiences are so conditioned, particularly in English speaking countries, to the overdecorated, sentimentalised Victorian-Dickensian version of the story that there may be difficulty in fully appreciating the merits of this more austere classic.

Emphasis Mine

I disagree that this movie is ...the true story told simply an powerfully. For all its exactitude, the movie skirts around the central issue in Palestine at the time: the Roman occupation and imposition of a puppet government (Herod).

Given the current brutal occupations in Palestine, Iraq, Kurdistan, Kashmir, etc., the challenge of the movie makers is to truly depict life under occupation without today's occuping powers.


Read more!

2007/01/01

Fascism: are we there yet?

Dr Clinton Fernandes asks about Fascism: are we there yet? in the Summer 2006/2007 Edition (No.22) of Dissent (pp.22-26).

Clinton Fernandes discusses the history of fascism to show that the Howard government is simply trying to contain the power of trade unions and curtail civil liberties in order to strengthen capitalism rather than leading a counter-revolution against the Enlightenment.

Dr. Fernandes appears to be describing a disease by listing its symptoms without explaining the underlying cause. This is in contrast to Leon Trotsky's analysis of Fascism.

Dr. Fernandes describes the characteristics of Fascism to be:

Although there remains considerable disagreement over what Fascism is, there is general agreement that is a form of counter-revolution - a revolution against revolution. It includes economic corporatism, hostility to the labour movement, extreme populism, class-based resentment, ultra-nationalism and hostility to Enlightenment values. It is the last attempt to stave off revolution in the context of economic crisis and political upheaval. (p.26)

Emphasis Mine

Here Dr. Fernandes is describing Fascism through its extrinsic nature. He says that Fascism exists only in a dynamic sense. Take away what it is reacting to and it ceases to exist. This would mean that the success of a Fascist revolution would destroy itself. There has to be an intrinsic nature to Fascism because it is fairly durable: German, Italian, and Eastern European Fascism were destroyed by war; Spanish Fascism died with Franco.

As I wrote about previously in Proto-Fascism in the USA, Leon Trotsky emphasised the class nature of the rise of Fascism.

Dr. Fernandes alludes to this class nature though the lens of resentment:

It is instructive that fascists drew heavily for their membership on intermediate layers of the population such as small landowners and members of the lower middle classes. Intermediate layers felt a strong resentment towards the workers they employed as well as towards big businesses that were making their lives harder. They resented the banks that owned their mortgages, the big businesses that were taking away their market share, the unions whose strikes were interfering with their operations, and new movements such as feminism or environmentalism that threatened the social order. They were tehrefore attracted demagogic, charismatic politicians who employed anti-capitalist and anti-working class rhetoric. During the Great Depresion, thousands of middle-class conservatives feared the growing power of the left and saw fascism as the way out of economic crisis. (p.24)

Emphasis Mine

Dr. Fernandes is describing the characteristics of the Petit-Bourgeois. The intrinsic or objective nature of this class is that its member rely chiefly upon the active use of property1 to generate their income (Bourgeois) but the quantity of such property is at the lower end (ergo Petit or small). The division of the Bourgeois class comes about when the variance in the quantity of property is marked.

From this instrinsic characteristic of the Petit-Bourgeios, the other extrinsic characteristics can be derived. The existence and maintenance of their property is vital to their survival physically and psychologically. Their property is the means by which they feed, clothe, and otherwise care for their family. Their property is their independence from wage-slavery and their independence from masters.

Thus, the demands of the workers for better conditions threatens the existence of the Petit-Bourgeois through greater demands on their property, and through the psychologically challenge of the inferiors against their superiors. The employers care for their workers because their workers depend on them. This attitude emphasises the true independence of the Bourgeois: they are able to care for the less able. For if the workers were better abled, they would be Bourgeois not workers. This is an axiom of Capitalism.

The existence and increasing flow of property to the big Bourgeois affronts the Petit-Bourgeois because their self-image of the acquirer of wealth through hard work is daily being undermined. They cannot see that the operation of Capitalism neccessitates the concentration of Capital (aka property) into the hands of a clique.

The Petit-Bourgeois are then avid subscribers to any conspiracy theory that explains why, despite all that hard work, their property is being sucked by big business and the banks. Their blind faith in the fairness of the Capitalist system hides from them the ugly truth of the rate of accumulation of Capital determines success not ability. It is those who generate the biggest profits in the shortest time that win the race.

The key trigger to the growth of Fascism is an economic crisis that threatens the Petit-Bourgeois. A combination of economic contraction with foreclosures by banks ignites the movement. That a worker's revolution precedes a Fascist one just means that workers are affected much earlier by an economic collapse than the Bourgeois are.

All the other attributes Dr. Fernandes ascribes to Fascism arise from its intrinsic naure. Racism (p.24) and Nationalism (p.25) are emphasised because they are key results of the Capitalist system. (More of the same to overcome the problem).

The opposition to Enlightenment values (p.25) arises because the Petit-Bourgeois see themselves as doers not thinkers. The abstract notions of free speech, freedom of religious practice, etc. do have any practical effect on their daily lives. They are more seen as restrictions on their activities and an effort to keep them oppressed.

Fascism is then the rebellion of the oppressed small business person against their tormentors. They try to create a new society but end up in the same prison of Capitalism. And, as always, it is the banks and big business who have the last laugh.

Footnotes

1 The emphasis on the active use of property is meant to distinguish the Petit-Bourgeois from the Rentier class who derive their income chiefly through rents on their property. The Petit-Bourgeois do things with their property whereas the Rentiers let others do things with the Rentier's property.


Read more!