Still sings loudly

Jonathan Strauss reviews Gone for a Song: A Death in Custody on Palm Island by Chris Waters in Still sings loudly. The book is available at these Australian libraries.

Waters discusses the circumstances of Mulrunji’s death and the two coronial inquests into it. But he also expands from this to concise accounts of the record of race relations in Queensland, the history of Palm Island as a state concentration camp for Indigenous people resisting their oppression, and current social conditions on the island.

Read more!

Paulson Reverses Course

Stormy at Angry Bear asks as Paulson Reverses Course :

Whom are we bailing out? Who is getting the cash? Are they going to play the old "me first" games?

Not that I want to, but I am going to suggest a radical alternative. This ship is going down, fast. Financial capitalism is broken. (Note the adjective, please.) Nationalize the banks and all lending facilities. Just do it. Set a reasonable rate for credit cards and other types of loans--and mortgages. Set up real lending standards. No one gets ten credit cards; they get one, if that. No more multi-billion dollar CEOs and their cadres of wolves. No more figuring out ways to game the credit system.

For those of you who still believe in free market banking and lending, here is the bottom line: If you thought Ben Laden was a threat--or that Saddam Hussein, a third world dictator was a threat--, well, I have news for you. We are looking down the barrel of a real threat.

If this system really crashes, you will know what a security threat really is.

How about your homes, your jobs, your retirement?

We have met the real enemy. It is time we faced facts, hard facts. The guys in charge still want the old system to work, still want the lending boys to make a bundle.

Even if we nationalize the entire lending system, we will be a long time in recovering from this mess. But at least we will have understood our problem and took steps to rectify it.

The consequences of not facing it are too dire to contemplated.

Emphasis Mine. Italics in original

Stormy assumes that you can nationalise the financial system and keep Capitalism. Good try. Unfortunately, the investment decisions would no longer be done by the Capitalists but by bureauscrats: a form of Socialism.

As we are finding out, the amount of private capital pales against the amount of capital available through the financial system. This is why the current system is called financial Capitalism.

Read more!

Obama's First Test

William S Lind proposes that Obama's First Test:

...in the national security arena is likely to come not from al Qaeda or Iran or the Taliban but from within his own Democratic Party. Powerful constituencies in that party, the Feminists and the gays, will demand that he open the ground combat arms to women and allow acknowledged homosexuals to serve in the U.S. armed forces. If he agrees to either of these demands, or both, he will begin his Presidency by doing immense damage to the fighting ability of the America military.

Emphasis Mine

His argument proceeds from the Capitalist understanding of sexuality:

One of the most basic human factors is that men fight to prove they are real men. They join fighting organizations, whether the U.S. Army or U.S. Marine Corps or MS-13, because those organizations are made up of fighting men. Their membership is a badge of honor that says, "We're not sissies or pansies. We are men who fight, serving alongside other men who fight." That tells others and themselves they are real men.

Emphasis Mine

His view of masculinity is confined to anti-feminineness. It is not a positive definition rather defining maleness as not being something. Plus the definition requires that males exhibit aggression to prove themselves.

So the military exists to define and prove masculinity rather to protect society. If a conflict should arise between being masculine and protecting society, then I would assume that Lind would prefer masculinity be asserted.

The idea of the military in a Capitalist society is that of a profession rather than a duty. Military people are a separate caste in society with their own values and needs.

In a Communist society, military obligations apply to everyone. Society is protected by the members of society itself. There is no need for a subset to be charged with these obligations. Membership in society requires that military obligations be undertaken. This is similar to Robert Heinlein's idea in Starship Troopers that citizens defend the body politic except that I propose that all are citizens and therefore obliged to do military service, rather than military service grants citizenship.

Again, we come up against what is maleness? Is it anti-femaleness, or something else? If I do not display the attributes of a woman, am I therefore male?

Is this a dumb question? Does maleness matter? Rather should we concentrate what it means to be human, and leave gender as a biological fact not a cultural construct? I am human because I live in a society and contribute to its culture by propagating its values and suppressing harmful actions. To do so requires that I perform my duty to that society through contributing to the economy that sustains the society.

I think Lind is wrong but his is a Capitalist opinion that requires a military caste to defend the interests of the Capitalist against other Capitalists and the Proletariat. He cannot have a citizen-based military because they would turn their guns against the purported rulers.

Read more!

Getting Ready for (Economic) Winter

Financial Armageddon is Getting Ready for (Economic) Winter by examining how A Snowblower Maker Braces for Slump's Blizzard of Woe.

I was intrigued how the owner was getting productivity improvements:

Every two weeks, small groups of workers are assembled and assigned to tackle a new set of problems. One group, for instance, was recently assigned to figure out how to reduce the number of steps needed to collect the parts for an edging machine. Mr. Ariens says he would be pushing for these incremental changes even if business was booming. However it's even more crucial now to cut costs, he says.

The important thing is the workers know enough to devise ways of productivity improvement but have to be pointed in the right direction.

This passivity of the proletariat in the face of change has to be overcome before Communism can be implemented. Union activity enables workers to stand up to owners. This gives the workers confidence in themselves and their ideas.

The workers need to know how the economy works. It is no good to say that something will come along. Always waiting for someone else to start doing things.

The current economic crisis is a good start for workers to examine the current economic system and start devising alternatives.

The Capitalists will be hoping for a short recession so that the workers can be put back to sleep. A prolonged recession means that workers may start to wonder about the system.

Read more!

Chloe Hooper: The Tall Man (3)

In another chapter of the saga started in The Tall Man, Peter Robson & Paul Benedek write that:

Palm Island Aboriginal man Lex Wotton was sentenced to six years’ jail for “riot with destruction” on November 7 — just four days after 22 police officers received “bravery awards” for their role in the 2004 Palm Island protests.

This juxtaposition of sentencing a protestor and awarding the police is a political statement of the Queensland government about the occupation of Aboriginal lands.

Sam Watson says to Protest Lex Wotton's shameful conviction!

Testimony from Robinson and other Palm Island police alleged that Wotton was wielding weapons, smashing police station windows, and distributing tins of petrol.

Watson commented: “Wotton's barrister, Clive Steirn, accused Queensland police of ‘lying through their teeth’ to convict his client. He said that ‘not only was Lex Wotton never a part of any riotous assembly, he did his level best to stop the violence.”

Watson concluded: "A white police officer admits he caused an Aboriginal man's death, yet he walks free. A black man, who can't be connected to anything except that he was on Palm Island on the day, is fitted up for jail.

At the meeting called on 26 November 2005, Chloe Hooper writes (p,64), that after the mayor had read out the Coroner's saying that the death was an accident,:

'Come on, people!', Lex calls. 'Will you accept this as an accident? No! I tell you people, things are going to burn. We'll decide when. I'm not going to accept it and I know a lot of you other people won't. So let's do something!' Half of Lex's eloquence is in his body. Instead of decrepitude there is strength and muscle and presence. He is a fantasy of a figure before white contact.

Emphasis Mine. Italics in original.

So Lex was organising a protest against the inadequate Coroner's report. There was anger at the blatant lies and cover-up of violence against Aborigines.

As the protest got out of control with the Police station and Sergeant's residence being burnt down, the police were barricaded inside their barracks, the green zone of Palm Island. They thought they were about to be massacred by the islanders. At point, a truce is negotiated (p.68):

But Lex Wotton, who had been trying to jemmy open the gate's padlock, now ordered the crowd to stop throwing rocks. They did so. 'You've won! You've won! [Senior Sergeant Roger] Whyte called. He negotiated for sixty minutes' grace, sixty minutes to get off the island. The Torres Strait Islander cop, Bert Tabaui, heard Wotton yell, 'We'll give you an hour to get off the island, then we'll kill you!'

The police managed to retreat to the hospital (p.69)

Lex faced the police. He was still angry, but the anger was now controlled. 'Time's up! he called to the cops. 'All I wanted was for you to get off the island!'

Emphasis Mine

However, the women objected to this demand. They wanted police protection against the men. (p.69) The police said they could not leave because [t]hey had no transportation Lex arranged for two cars to made available for their escape, but the police were fearful of an ambush on the way to the airport. (p.70)

The confrontation ends with the timely arrival of the airborne (p.71):

The thunder of helicopters filled the smoke-clouded sky. Extra police had now arrived and still more were coming. Inspector Richardson came outside and told Lex. 'We are not leaving this island. We are the police. You are the ones causing the problem...we are not going anywhere! No way in Australia!'

Lex Wotton froze. He turned around and faced the crowd. The revolution had failed. His idea that the police would leave the island had been biblical in ambition and naivete, a declaration of war that he had no chance of winning. His actions would draw national attention to Cameron Doomadgee's death, but at that moment he knew he would soon be the one inside a jail cell.

'The prty's over,' he called, 'we'll all go home!' Then he turned around to the police. 'You can come around later and pick me up.'

Emphasis Mine

The occupier is not easily dislodged from his conquests. No dissent is allowed.

However, in case, the resolve of the occupier is weakened by the crackdown and the relative leniency of Lex's sentence. Future oppression is assured but it could be one foot on the throat too many.

Other posts in this series are at:

• Chloe Hooper: The Tall Man (2) is my review of the book.
• Chloe Hooper: The Tall Man was about an article in the Big Issue.

Read more!

Theory of Victory

J.Boone Bartholomees advances his Theory of Victory (Parameters, Summer 2008, pp. 25-36) by distinguishing between winning and victory. He is of the opinion that one can win without achieving viotory.

He equates victory with the collapse of your opponent's will to continue the struggle. If one achieves one's objectives without breaking your opponent's will, then one has won without victory.

On p.26, Bartholomees writes that:

Victory in war is at the most basic level an assessment, not a fact or condition. It is someone’s opinion or an amalgamation of opinions. Victory in war may or may not have anything to do with objective criteria such as casualties or territory taken or lost. In winning a war, those things matter—at least at some level and always in terms of their effect on perception—but what matters most is the ultimate perception of the situation, not the facts. Different people, depending on their perspective, can legitimately differ in their assessment. The assessment aspect complicates the issue of winning exponentially since it introduces the uncontrolled variables of whose assessment takes precedence, for how much, and based on what criteria.

Emphasis Mine

Here we have the subjective determining the objective. Perception is important.

In discussing the three (3) levels of perspective (tactical, operational, and strategic), Bartholomees contends that the first two (2) have quantifiable conditions for success (p.27). He then asks:

Which level is most important? It is tempting to respond that all are equally important, but that would be incorrect. What counts in the end is the strategic outcome. The story comes to mind of Colonel Harry Summers talking to a North Vietnamese officer after the Vietnam War. Summers commented that the United States had won all the battles, and the North Vietnamese replied, “That may be so, but it is also irrelevant.” Tactical and operational successes may set the stage for strategic victory, but they are not sufficient in themselves.

Emphasis Mine

No matter how many strikes are broken, demonstrations suppressed, activists arrested, publications suppressed, victory by the state is never assured. The state can win through maintaining itself while allowing a level of dissidence to be accommodated.

On p.28, Bartholomees puts forward two (2) components of success in war: achievement and decisiveness.

Decisiveness also reflects a range of potential outcomes. The decisiveness scale (Figure 2) shows potential outcomes varying from completely resolving the political issues at stake through various degrees of partial resolution to no effect (or status quo), worsened or deteriorated political conditions, to the final potential outcome that the war does not solve the problems for which it was fought, but actually exacerbates them. Decisiveness assesses the effect on the political issues.

Achievement considers how well one executes his strategy—in a sense, how well he did on the battlefield or campaign and in the immediate political realm. Achievement (Figure 3) can range from accomplishing nothing through increasing degrees of success until one is completely successful.

Emphasis Mine. Figures are in original, not reporoduced here.

What is ambiguous here is the definition of politics. I would propose that conflict aims to change the social relations within a society.

For example, if a worker wants to exchange each hour of labour for $20 instead of $15, then the worker enters into conflict with the employer who wants to maintain the current social relation between himself and the worker of exchanging $15 for every hour of labour provided by the worker.

Here there may be a political context, but the conflict involves identifable people not abstractions.

On p.36, Bartholomees concludes with:

The fact that war is about winning does not mean it is about victory. One can win a war, especially a limited war, without achieving victory; here the distinction in words becomes significant. Military force can legitimately be used to obtain goals short of total victory or for immediate political advantage with no intent of resolving the underlying issues. The point is that war is about politics, and consequently victory in the end is a political matter.

Emphasis Mine.

With the case of the class war, this ends with either the complete collapse of the Capitalist system into barbarism, or by its metamorphosis into Socialism. Either way, there will be a decisive outcome.

Read more!

If we only had a financial system

Steve Randy Waldman opines that If we only had a financial system, then Capitalism would really work.

The elephant that is not in the room is a financial system. By a financial system, I don't mean the tottering cartel of banks and insurers loudly sucking newly printed cash into "collateral postings" and "deleveragings" and other meaningless nonactivities. That is no financial system at all. It is an ecology of intestines and tapeworms, tubes through which dollars flow and are skimmed en route to destinations about which the tripe-creatures have little interest or concern.

No, a financial system would be forward-looking. A financial system would be interested in the world, rather than fascinated by the patterns that formed behind its own mathematical eyelids. A financial system would hunger for information. It would leave no human preference overlooked and no technological possibility unconsidered. A financial system would embrace us all, would want to learn from us all. It would not be something external, something outsourced to specialists in London or Manhattan. It would want "savers" to express what they plan to do, how they hope to live, rather than offering generic claims on money along a disembodied spectrum of "risk". It would thirst for proposals, ideas, business plans designed to meet the preferences thus expressed, or to achieve possibilities not widely considered. A financial system would be creative. No stock exchange could contain the vast and multifarious tapestry of investable ideas a financial system would educe. A financial system would offer us opportunities to invest not in distant opportunities where we are disadvantaged, but in projects that are informationally, if not physically, near to us. A financial system would be ruthless. It would allow us to have a voice in the most important decision we collectively make, but would force us each to bear the costs of our errors.

Emphasis Mine

In other words, Mr. Waldman wants the democratic control of the financial system so that investment decisions are made on the basis of human need not corporate greed.

An interesting concept - something that Marx and Engels raised in The Communist Manifesto over a 160 years ago.

If the financial decisions are too important to be left to bankers, why are the actual production decisions still left in the hands of owners?

As Mr. Waldman says, democratic control of the financial system means that people will have to take responsibility for those decisions. This is a welcome development in the people's consciousness. For too long, the mystique of representative democracy has allowed us to become lazy. Someone else makes the hard decisions. Someone else takes the consequences.

We cannot advance to a Communist society until the Proletariat develops responsibility for its existence and advancement.

Read more!

The Failure of Networked Systems: The Repercussions of Systematic Risk

aeldric discusses The Failure of Networked Systems: The Repercussions of Systematic Risk. He describes how an efficient system is more susceptible to systemic failure than an inefficient one. The pursuit of cost efficiency drives all components to operate at near-criticality.

This impetus towards maximal cost efficiency has been well known since before Marx's analysis of Capitalism. It is an inevitable consequence of the Capitalist production process. Competition drives profits lower, thereby forcing cost reductions.

The problem with a system operating at near-criticality is that is very vulnerable to "shocks". A minor change in an input or operating parameter causes the system to collapse. Actually, the system reorganises itself into a different equilibrium state which is no desirable to the users of the system.

In other words, the system undergoes a revolution. A new order has replaced the old order. Whether the new system is beneficial to the users of the system is immaterial to the operation of the system. The system has reorganised itself to accommodate the system inputs and operating parameters.

Since the inputs are external to the system, the only things that can be changed are the operating parameters. In a human system, these operating parameters are known as social relations. Theses are the rules under which we interact with each other on a daily basis.

To change a system that is working is not feasible because of the inherent risk in adjusting the operating parameters. To change a collapsed system is more feasible because of the desire to return to normalcy.

Sometimes, the system inputs are feedbacks from the system itself. Removing or adjusting the impact of the feedback can restore a system to desirable operating conditions.

In a Capitalist system, the most potent feedback is profit. We can eliminate profit through nationalisation, or adjust the impact of profit through taxation.

In other words, lower corporate taxation can lead to systemic collapse through unfettered feedback. This is the cause of the current crisis. The profits gained through home and commercial mortgages exceeded that of manufacturing leading to the distortion of the Capitalist economy.

Read more!

Informational Cascades and the Financial Crisis

Mark Thoma posts an extract about Informational Cascades and the Financial Crisis from Wall Street's Lemmings, by Cass R. Sunstein, TNR.

To get a sense of how cascades work, imagine that a group of people is deciding whether to invest in real estate or instead the stock market. Assume that group members are announcing their views in sequence. From his own knowledge and experience, each member has some private information about what should be done. But each member also attends, reasonably enough, to the judgments of others.

The author wants to believe that things are so simple:

As behavioral economist Robert Shiller has shown, ... people were greatly influenced by a process of social contagion that amounted to an informational cascade. ...

This is just simplified version of the Tipping Point theory. My conclusion was:

For us Communists, the message is that the mass-marketing of selling the party newspaper and mass rallies is still important.

There are no short-cuts: no magic viral marketing campaign waiting to be unleashed once get to the right people. The tipping point is just an anarchist pipe-dream of an influential event that triggers a magical transformation of society. People can be panicked for a time but then revert to old habits.

As the evangelists keep pointing out, change starts from the heart and moves outward into the world.

Read more!

Saving The System

The Economist wants to implement item #5 of the Communist Manifesto in Saving the System

Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.(Marx 1959, 342)

The magazine diagnoses the problem as:

... Today’s failure of confidence is based on three related issues: the solvency of banks, their ability to fund themselves in illiquid markets and the health of the real economy. The bursting of the housing bubble has led to hefty credit losses: most Western financial institutions are short of capital and some are insolvent. But liquidity is a more urgent problem. America’s decision last month to let Lehman Brothers fail—and the losses that implied to money-market funds that held its debt—prompted a global run on wholesale credit markets. It has become hard for banks, even healthy ones, to find finance; large companies with healthy cash flows have also been cut off from all but the shortest-term financing. That has increased worries about the real economy, which itself adds to the worries about banks’ solvency.

Emphasis Mine

Credit allows the early conversion of commodities into money. Instead of waiting for the goods to be sold to the ultimate consumer, and money returned to the manufacturer, credit allows for the partial realization of profits at every stage of the movement of goods from the factory to the consumer.

Credit, in itself, is not the problem: it is the management and allocation of credit among the various debtors.

In a banks run along capitalist lines, credit is allocated where the preceived profit is the greatest, not where the need is the greatest. The enterprise must do this in order to survive otherwise another enterprise with a larger capital base innovate and undercut it.

The negative feedback to this progression is risk. The higher the rate of profit should be correlated with the risk that the investment may fail. Government regulation tends to make banks aware of what types of risks they can undertake.

The specifics of the plan are:

This analysis suggests that governments must attack all three concerns at once. The priority, in terms of stemming the panic, is to unblock clogged credit markets. In most cases that means using central banks as an alternative source of short-term cash. This week the Fed took another step in that direction: by buying commercial paper, it is now in effect lending direct to companies. The British approach is equally bold. Alongside the Bank of England’s provision of short-term cash, the Treasury says it will sell guarantees for as much as £250 billion ($430 billion) of new short-term and medium-term debts issued by the banks. That is risky: if left for any length of time, those pledges give banks an incentive to behave recklessly. But a temporary guarantee system offers the best chance of stemming the panic, and if it were internationally co-ordinated it would be both more credible and less risky than a collection of disparate national promises.

The second prong of a crisis-resolution strategy must aim to boost banks’ capital. A new IMF report suggests Western banks need some $675 billion of new equity to prevent banks from rapidly reducing the number of loans on their books and hurting the real economy. Although there is plenty of private capital sloshing around, there is a chicken-and-egg problem: nobody wants to buy equity in an industry without enough capital. It is becoming abundantly clear that government funds—or at least government intervention—will be necessary to catalyse the rebuilding of banks’ balance sheets. Initially, America focused more on buying tainted assets from banks; now it seems keener on the “European” approach of injecting capital into their banks. Some degree of divergence is inevitable, but more co-ordination is needed.

Third, policymakers should act together to cushion the economic fallout. Now that commodity prices have plunged, the inflation risk has dramatically receded across the rich world. With asset prices plummeting and economies shrinking, deflation will soon be a bigger worry. The interest-rate cuts are an important start. Ideally, policymakers would not use only monetary policy. For instance, China could do a lot to help the rest of the world economy (and itself) by loosening fiscal policy and allowing its currency to appreciate more quickly.

Emphasis Mine

This is socialist intervention of a colossal scale but without taking control of the banks. The governments are intending to be passive investors which means that the risk of moral hazard increases not decrease (as noted above).

References

Marx, Karl. 1959. Capital, the Communist Manifesto and Other Writings. Ed. Max Eastman. New York: The Modern Library.

Read more!

System not immune to shocks

Heather Ridout, chief executive of the Australian Industry Group, says that the System not immune to shocks and urges a more socialist approach to the crisis.

The Federal Government has a vital role to play. Economic management has got a lot tougher and the Government should be ready to take up the slack in the economy as business investment and consumer spending retreats. It should prepare to bring forward key investment projects.

Perhaps the most difficult thing will be for the Government to keep an eye on the need for longer-term reforms in areas such as the federation, skills development, innovation, infrastructure planning and taxation. We may be in a period of crisis management but these require attention now if they are to underwrite a sustained recovery and a new era of prosperity.

Emphasis Mine

Back in 2005, BCA Admits Failure of Capitalism - Calls For Socialist Intervention. The on-going lies are about how Capitalism is the superior economic system (except when it goes down big time!) And yet, these business groups are all in favour in the government getting involved once the Capitalist system seizes up.

This free market ideology is unstable because of the positive feedback loops where investment follows profit not need.

Read more!

Dabbawala

The Economist is impressed by the success of the Dabbawala (also see Wikipedia article) in The cult of the dabbawala as a new management trend.

As usual, the capitalist press fails to realise that the free association of independent worker-owners is greatly superior to an organisation divided between owners and workers.

AS THE warrior king who defeated the Mughals and founded the Maratha empire of Western India in the 17th century, Shivaji Bhosle is remembered as a tactical genius as well as a benevolent ruler. The direct descendants of his Malva-caste soldiers are also developing a reputation for organisational excellence. Using an elaborate system of colour-coded boxes to convey over 170,000 meals to their destinations each day, the 5,000-strong dabbawala collective has built up an extraordinary reputation for the speed and accuracy of its deliveries. Word of their legendary efficiency and almost flawless logistics is now spreading through the rarefied world of management consulting. Impressed by the dabbawalas’ “six-sigma” certified error rate—reportedly on the order of one mistake per 6m deliveries—management gurus and bosses are queuing up to find out how they do it.

Emphasis Mine

The capitalists are impressed by the Dabbawala's efficiency and want to study it. They will be blind to the key features of the success:

• Decentralised management
• Four (4) levels of organisation: (Ramasastry:2004A, p.4)
1. Workers
2. Team Leaders
3. Group Leaders
4. Central Committee
• Equal pay for all workers

References:

Ramasastry, C.S. (2004A), DABBAWALLAHS OF MUMBAI (A), Publication #904D11, Ivey Management Services, Ontario, Canada (Not available online)

Ramasastry, C.S. (2004B), DABBAWALLAHS OF MUMBAI (B), Publication #904D13, Ivey Management Services, Ontario, Canada (Not available online)

Read more!

Chloe Hooper: The Tall Man (2)

I have finished reading Chloe Hooper's latest book, The Tall Man.

I had posted my reactions to a radio interview with Chloe Hooper: The Tall Man

Hooper leaves out one word from her story: occupation. The State of Queensland is engaged in an occupation of Aboriginal lands in North Queensland for the benefit of white settlers.

The Wild Time was the invasion of whites into this area, and the Stolen Generations was the ethnic cleansing undertaken to consolidate white control of the area's resources. Palm Island is part of the gulag of the occupation.

And in enforcing this occupation, Senior Sgt Chris Hurley became brutalised by the frontier justice. Even though he acknowledged his own racism and worked hard for Aboriginal betterment, he could not escape the racism of the State of Queensland. In putting on his uniform, he was putting on a history of genocide, racism, and brutality.

Hurley's struggle against institutional racism showed the limits of individual change. He had to choose between his soul and his uniform. Palm Island made that choice very stark.

Cameron Doomadgee's taunt of "Fucking cunts" and his punch to Hurley's face caused Hurley to explode into a rage that killed Doomadgee. Doomadgee saw a blue uniform. Hurley saw an insolent, ungrateful blackfellow. They could not see each other as human beings.

Hurley may have been coerced into pleading not guilty to the charge of manslaughter in order to protect the honour of the Queensland Police. Hooper seems to imply that Catholicism guides Hurley's career in the Police Service as a mixture of duty and using power for social justice. He could have been persauded to cover up to protect the progress being made by the reforms in the Police.

My reading of Hooper's story is that the cases when Hurley was brutal towards Aboriginals, he was either enforcing frontier justice or he was under stress in a dangerous situation. One case could even have been an accident when he backed over a woman's foot. The failure to acknowledge the incident or to apologise made the situation worse. These cases became easy to cover up and Hurley was drawn into this world of half-truths and denials.

The problem is not with the Police nor with the Government, it is with the white people of North Queensland. This was shown by the quick verdict of not guilty returned by the jury.

The wealth of North Queensland depends on the secure title of land there: mining, agriculture, tourism. Racism justifies the theft of land from the Aboriginals and the exploitation of those stolen resources. If the Police and Government did not support this racism, they would be replaced by those who would.

Hurley was wrong to attempt to change the racism of the Police from the inside. The economic forces that depend on racism are just too strong for individuals to overcome. And now he has to live with the blood of an innocent man on his hands. Hurley would have done better to plead guilty and accepted his punishment. Even better would have been to control his temper and not killed Doomadgee.

Read more!

The Only Diet for a Peacemaker Is a Vegetarian Diet

Picked up The Only Diet for a Peacemaker Is a Vegetarian Diet from DrumBeat: July 12, 2008 at the The Oil Drum.

John Dear argues that:

But for me being vegetarian boils down to peacemaking. If you want to be a peacemaker, Bruce said, reflecting the sentiments of Leo Tolstoy, you will want to eat as peaceful a diet as possible. "Vegetarianism," Tolstoy wrote, "is the taproot of humanitarianism." Other great humanitarians like Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Schweitzer and Thich Nhat Hanh agree. The only diet for a peacemaker is a vegetarian diet.

Emphasis Mine

He states his vegetarianism began with reading Diet for a small planet by Frances Moore Lappe:

In it, Lappe, the great advocate for the hungry, makes an unassailable case that vegetarianism is the best way to eliminate world hunger and to sustain the environment.

The key points are:

1. The amount of plant food consumed by farm animals for human consumption is staggering (70% of US grain);
2. The amount of grain used for bio-fuels is not as bad but has an impact (10% of US grain);
3. The amount of greenhouse gas produced by farm animals is large (40% of methane - farts);
4. And there is the ancilliary impacts on water and land usage. (90% of water use in an industrialised country goes on agriculture)

In summary, vegetarianism reduces resource consumption and therefore the need for competition over resources.

However, vegetarianism goes beyond this to broaden our humanity through a connection with nature. Dear expresses this as a religious experience:

"Not to hurt our humble brethren, the animals," St. Francis of Assisi said, "is our first duty to them, but to stop there is not enough. We have a higher mission: to be of service to them whenever they require it. If you have people who will exclude any of God's creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity," he continued, "you will have people who will deal likewise with other people."

And yet there are people who see meat-eating as an expression of their personhood. My being a vegetarian threatens their self-worth. Some become quite vocal and passionate about eating meat. It is as if my mere existence dimminishes their self-worth in some way. It is equivalent to being a teetotaler among beer drinkers, or a non-smoker among smokers.

But a change in personal dietary habits is only a small part in the need to fix the world so that humans can survive. We also need to change how the system works. This cannot be done by individuals - only by the people united.

Read more!

Revolution of urban rebels

Mark Thoma posts an extract about the Revolution of urban rebels in recognition of the US Independence Day.

The conclusion from Edward Glaesar is:

Across countries today, there is a robust correlation between urbanization and democracy. This correlation reflects many things, such as the tendency of more urban places to be richer and better educated, but it also surely reflects the role that cities play in supporting the coordinated action that creates and defends democracies. So enjoy your Fourth of July with as much greenery as you like, but also remember that city air made you free.

Emphasis Mine

The underlying assumption of the article is that rural communities are not democratic. In fact, throughout history, rural democracy has existed longer than urban democracy. The main reason for this is that rural communities tend to be collections of independent producers of roughly equivalent wealth (usually poverty).

In the original article, Athens is posited as the birthplace of democracy when, in fact, there are a major regression in democratic development. Some Athenians had become immensely rich off the debts of others. The agrarian democracy collapsed into three (3) classes: slaves (former debtors); freemen (debts could be extinguished); and aristocracy (debt holders).

The latter class afford to sit around all day and marvel at the wonderful democracy they had created while everyone else worked their guts out paying off their debts. And today people read this propaganda as the beginnings of democracy.

The American Revolution was one of the large land-holders (who were also slave owners) and the urban petty capitalists against an arbitrary government in London. The pretty words of the Declaration of Independence was issued to find enoughs mugs to die for the cause.

Urbanisation is more than just connections between people: it is about economic specialisation and dependence between people. What the urban population should be most keenly aware of is that they do not produce their own food. They are dependent on others for their sustenance.

Most of us cannot eat what we produce. Especially people like me who write computer programs. I need to exchange what I produce for money so that I can buy shelter, food, water, and other basic neccessities.

The urban connections spring directly from this need to sell what I produce and to buy what I need. I need other people in order to survive.

Read more!

Mongol

In the movie, Mongol, the rise to power of Temudjin revolves his love for Borte and his religious devotion.

Temudjin is presented as a combination of Moses, Joseph, and Joshua.

Sandra Hall reviews Mongol as well and finds:

Naturally enough, they're also out to humanise their hero, a job made easier by the decision to deal only with the story of his early life, when he was yet to become acquainted with the character-altering effects of absolute power. They keep it simple. Central to everything is his love for Borte (Khulan Chuluun), his lifelong companion - which, in itself, is enough to make him unique in a society where a man's wife is not nearly as valuable as his horse. He's a 12th-century SNAG in other words, so it hardly seems fair that the Japanese actor Tadanobu Asano (from Takeshi Kitano's Zatoichi) makes him such a stolid personality.

Emphasis Mine

Ghenghis Khan a SNAG! I hate to see a Mongol Rambo, then!

Anyway, back to my religious interpretation of the movie.

Temudjin retraces part of Joseph's journey by being sold into slavery by his blood brother. Whilst in the Tangut prison, he is mocked but a Buddhist monk bargains with Temudjin for the survival of the local monastery. Temudjin agrees if Borte comes. This occurs at the cost of the monk's life.

Instead of the wife having Joseph thrown into prison, the wife releases Temudjin through bribery and threats. And the prophecy concerns the destruction of the Tangut kingdom.

The aspect of Moses' life is that Temudjin is now an escaped slave who was once a nobleman and who had killed one of the slave overseers. He takes his family back into Mongolia. There he goes up to the holy mountain to conceive of the Law for all Mongols (Yassa). The movie only presents three (3) laws.

1. Women and children are to be spared
2. All debts are to be paid
3. Never betray your Khan

Moses got an extra seven. But Temudjin became the Mongol Law Giver. No burning bush or golden calf, though.

In the role of Johusa, Temudjin united the tribes to conquer the Promised Land (Eurasia). Johusa was more modest in his ambitions.

In all cultures, there are the heroic individuals who undergo great trials and betrayals (Joseph), rebel against the existing order to create a new one based on law (Moses), and unite their people in a singular purpose (Joshua).

Read more!

Art, Marx, and Bill Henson

In the June 2008 edition of Annals Australasia, Robert Tilley discusses Art, Marx, and Bill Henson (p.27)

A Catholic conservative agrees with Karl Marx!

In a famous sentence Marx wrote, "All that is solid melts into the air, all that is holy is profaned..." Marx was talking about the effect of capitalism on traditional social mores and manners. Critics were saying that the Communists were set on destroying religion, family, and property. And so they were. Only, it was Marx's argument that the Communists didn't have to do anything to achieve this aim for capitalism was doing it for them.

Leaving aside the questions of property, it is clear that free-market ideology is very effective indeed in destroying religion and family. But it does so under the name of freedom and not of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

Following the lead of earlier Christian socialists, Marx argued that capitalism is of the essence of liberalism and thus of the bourgeois state. It works to remove the substance from things like family and religion, replacing that substance with another value altogether: the value of a commodity that can be packaged, sold, consumed and, if we're suitably well-behaved, recycled.

Emphasis Mine

What Tilley overlooks here is that Capitalism is also very effective at destroying the private property of ordinary people. Witness the rising rates of home foreclosures here and in the USA and UK. Also the rising number of business bankrupcies as the capital of the middle is obliterated. The Communists are not this but the Capitalists.

Tilley is correct to point to commodification as the driving force of Capitalism. The production of commodities allows for profits and the accumulation of ever greater profits.

Tilley decries the intrusion of Capitalism into Art:

There may well be aesthetic merit in Henson's work but that is not really the point. Rather have aesthetics become the means to get to the point: the point being that all should be stripped of substance, made into a commodity, and be freely sold and consumed.

Tilley keeps to the standard Catholic position of critising both Capitalism and Communism without proposing any alternative. Although at times, I suspect that some pine for the High Middle Ages.

Read more!

From Marx to Morales: Indigenous socialism and the Latin Americanisation of Marxism

John Riddell describes the development of Communist theory From Marx to Morales: Indigenous socialism and the Latin Americanisation of Marxism.

Riddell contends that the retardation of Capitalist development in Latin America means that the peasants (along with the indigenous population) form the backbone of the revolutions there. This is akin to the Bolshevik revolution of 1917.

The development of agricultural cooperatives leads to a degree of Communist consciousness, but it is still limited by being local to the land. The difficulty lies with jumping from organising a farm on a cooperative basis to that of a society.

This difficulty is based around the awareness of dependence upon others. Farmers can produce all that they need. They can be self-sufficient.

On the other hand, workers in a manufacturing plant are keenly aware that they usually cannot eat what they produce. They need to depend on others for their raw materials and sustenance.

Unfortunately, I should say that industrial workers should be aware. Since Capitalism in Western countries has worked flawlessly for the past 60 years, workers are lulled into believing that there will always be food in the supermarket as long as they have money.

When a crisis strikes, it is too late then to work how interdependent we all are in an advanced industrial society.

Marx was right to say that only the Poletariat can lead a Communist revolution because they are the only ones who are capable of appreciating the need for social cooperation for survival and who do the actual work.

The question remains of how to awaken this awareness? Even now as the economic crisis looms, we are still blissfully ignorant.

Read more!

Chloe Hooper: The Tall Man

In this week's edition of Big Issue, the cover story is about Chloe Hooper's latest book, The Tall Man.

There was also an interview on ABC Classic FM today with her and Margaret Throsby. (Has not been uploaded at time of posting.)

As reported by Sarah Stephens in Palm Island: Police terror follows death in custody:

At 11.20am on November 19, a 36-year-old Aboriginal man, Cameron Doomadgee, died in the police watch-house on Palm Island, 70km north of Townsville. An hour earlier he was very much alive, singing along the street. He was arrested for public drunkenness and locked up as a ‘‘public nuisance’‘.

...

Koch wrote in the Australian on November 29: ‘‘Two Aboriginal men who were in the cells at the time have given statements that they saw [Doomadgee] being punched and beaten by Chris Hurley, a senior sergeant.’‘

Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley was acquitted of the charge of manslaughter in July 2007.

Hooper was unable to interview Hurley. But Hooper was interested because:

One intriguing aspect of the case is that Hurley, who had been working in 'frontier' communities like this one for several years, seemed to be a model of reconciliation: a man who had admitted to realising he was a racist and deliberately changing his ways. He was especially known for his work with Aboriginal children and his friendship with an Aboriginal activist, Murrandoo Yanner. (p.16)

However, Paul Benedek writes about Palm Island cop's violent history:

In evidence that was previously suppressed, but has now been allowed after a Supreme Court challenge, Palm Island residents are alleging detailing a history of violence by Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley, the officer who arrested Mulrunji and claims he “fell” to his death.

Looks like the only way for Hurley to escape racism is to leave the Police Service. The culture of police racism is so great that someone of Hurley's inclination is dragged back into its maw even as he struggles against it.

Read more!

Rick Shenkman, American Stupidity

According to Rick Shenkman, American Stupidity may well threaten the existence of the USA.

How much ignorance can a country stand? There have to be terrible consequences when it reaches a certain level. But what level? And with what consequences, exactly? The answers to these questions are unknowable. But can we doubt that if we persist on the path we are on that we shall, one day, perhaps not too far into the distant future, find out the answers?

"Stupid Americans" used to be a cliche uttered by the villian in many a B-grade movie. This would spur the American hero to feats of derring-do that would astonish and overpower his adversaries.

Alas, such sentiments today would only elicit cries of Anti-Americanism! And the populace would relapse into blissful ignorance.

Today, the USA stands on the precipice of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. And yet, wilful ignorance is proudly displayed. What a pathetic end to a once-great nation. The greatest Capitalist country ever is about to collapse into a dark age of fear and ignorance without nary a fight.

Shenkman writes:

Five defining characteristics of stupidity, it seems to me, are readily apparent. First, is sheer ignorance: Ignorance of critical facts about important events in the news, and ignorance of how our government functions and who's in charge. Second, is negligence: The disinclination to seek reliable sources of information about important news events. Third, is wooden-headedness, as the historian Barbara Tuchman defined it: The inclination to believe what we want to believe regardless of the facts. Fourth, is shortsightedness: The support of public policies that are mutually contradictory, or contrary to the country's long-term interests. Fifth, and finally, is a broad category I call bone-headedness, for want of a better name: The susceptibility to meaningless phrases, stereotypes, irrational biases, and simplistic diagnoses and solutions that play on our hopes and fears.

Emphasis Mine

In response to my post about No Blood for Oil!, the suggestion was made to drill off the US coast. Forty years after the oil production peaked in the USA (1970), there is apparrently oil just waiting to be discovered off the coast of the USA! Enough to stop all oil imports! Hah!

The USA is going to have to adjust to a lower standard of living. How low? No one knows!

Read more!

Annoy a pilgrim, face a fine: police

If you Annoy a pilgrim, face a fine: police.

The Catholic Church in Australia is now full of wusses!

New South Wales Police are defending the introduction of new regulations that will allow people to be arrested and fined for causing annoyance during World Youth Day.

Under the laws, police can direct people to stop engaging in conduct that causes annoyance or inconvenience to the pilgrims.

The laws take effect from today until the end of the month.

Emphasis Mine

Catholics are being persecuted and killed in Iraq, Pakistan, Sudan, Indonesia, and Palestine.

The previous pope survived persecution under the Nazis then the Communists.

For a religion that was persecuted from the very beginning, annoyance is now seen as an impediment to faith. What the hell is wrong with these Catholics?

So much for following the master to the end!

Read more!

23 June 1789

On 23 June 1789, King Louis XVI decided to show who was the boss. The National Assembly disagreed.

J.M.Thompson's opinion is:

It soon appeared that the king's stand had come too late, and could only be maintained by arms. A display of force was, indeed, made: when the deputies arrived at the Parliament-house on June 23rd, they found it surrounded by troops. But this threat of violence, and the absence of the popular minister, served only to strengthen the spirit of resistance. Nor did the Commons now stand alone. On the previous day they had been joined by the Archbishops of Vienne and Bordeaux, at the head of a hundred and fifty clerical deputies. After listening to 280 speeches in five days, these representatives of the First Estate had at last decided to throw in their lot with the Third. Thus strengthened, the National Assembly was in no mood either to be intimidated or to be cajoled. (p.22)

...

Thus, in terms as clear as French could make them, the Assembly was reminded that it was only being allowed to play at reform. Louis could refuse to sanction what the deputies proposed: he could force them to accept what they disliked. He claims to have done everything hitherto by himself: he will, if necessary, dismiss them, and proceed alone. He will do for France what Frederick has done for Prussia, Catherine for Russia, Joseph for Austria. He will be the Benevolent Despot for whom the country has been waiting so long. (p.23)

Emphasis Mine

The French Revolution
By J. M. Thompson

Louis wanted to manage incremental change. The new Capitalists wanted to get the priviliged bludgers off their backs.

Historians, such as Thompson, reviled Louis as weak and indecisive. The system failed Louis by placing him in that position. A heriditary monarchy has only one path of succession. It cannot consider better candidates.

And yet the system expected the monarch to be far better because they are the monarch.

The evolution of French Feudalism has reached a dead-end in Louis XVI from a mob of lawless ruffians posing as lords of the castle to an ossified system of privileges that depended on the character of the monarch for its survival. (An 18th century version of the CEO myth.)

Even then, the Third Estate wanted to proceed incrementally. Revolution was not thought of yet. This was to change dramatically in the space of a few weeks.

The Third Estate were not intellectually prepared for what was about to explode. The American Revolution had been about a colony seeking self-government and ending up with independence.

The English Revolution had been almost rolled back by the Restoration. The ideals of the Levellers and others were too dangerous.

And yet, without class analysis, one must resort to conspiracy theories about secret societies controlling human destiny. There were secret societies because revoultionaries in an authoritarian state must work underground.

But the French Revolution was about people taking control of their destiny for a short time before the new ruling class wanted to stay in power instead of following the monarchy.

Tom Peters says to do it All At Once! He gives a good analogy of the difference between Reform (incremental change) and Revolution (change everything).

I'm an avowed incrementalist—even if the aim is stratospherically high. That is, get going ASAP—and quickly experiment your way toward/to success.

...

Between my little project and Wendy Kopp's Richter 8.0 project, and Dubai and Korea, I am pondering the circumstances when "do it all at once and figure out what 'it' is and how to do it on the fly" is the right answer. There is no doubt that such conditions exist—though the key, beyond the compelling dream, is the raw talent and energy and enthusiasm and obsession and resilience of the participants. It is 99.99% (or more) a matter of raw emotion—not a matter of analytically identifying a big opportunity, assigning "good people," and then proceeding based on state-of-the-art project management software.

Emphasis Mine

I suppose the Party should invest in some project management software??

Read more!

No Blood for Oil!

Remember 15 February 2003 when 10 million people said, "No Blood for Oil!".

Well, five years later, we got plenty of blood and we are running out of oil!

Yves Smith asks "Did the Iraq War Cause High Oil Prices?"

An oil economics specialist, Mamdouh Salameh, who advises the World Bank and the UN Industrial Development Organisation, contends that oil prices would be at less than 1/3 of their current level had the US not invaded iraq.

Emphasis Mine

Prof Juan Cole lists the costs to Iraqis in The Real State of Iraq:

By now, summer of 2008, excess deaths from violence in Iraq since March of 2003 must be at least a million. This conclusion can be reached more than one way. There is not much controversy about it in the scientific community. Some 310,000 of those were probably killed by US troops or by the US Air Force, with the bulk dying in bombing raids by US fighter jets and helicopter gunships on densely populated city and town quarters.

...

The wars of Iraq-- the Iran-Iraq War, the repressions of the Kurds and the Shiites, the Gulf War, and the American Calamity, may have left behind as many as 3 million widows. Having lost their family's breadwinner, many are destitute.

...

In these situations, typically 3 persons are wounded for every one killed. In Iraq, I suspect it is higher, because US bombings and guerrilla bombings are such a big part of the violence. But let us be conservative.

That would mean 3 million Iraqi wounded in the past five years.

...

As for the displaced (i.e. homeless), they amount to a startling 5 million persons. There were 1.8 million internally displaced in January of 2007, and by December it had risen to 2.4 million. There are 2.3 million externally displaced, 2 million of them in Jordan and Syria.

Cole translates these figures into equivalent numbers for the USA by using a factor of 11. For Australia, we should use a factor of 5/7 (according to CIA World Factbook) This would mean everyone in Sydney, Newcastle, and Woolongong would be either dead, wounded, or a refugee. There could be an overlap between wounded and refugee.

Cole concludes that:

I do know that the apocalypse that the United States has unleashed upon Iraq is among the greatest catastrophes to befall any country in the past 50 years. It is a much worse disaster over time than the Burmese cyclone or the Mississippi floods.

At least, the Australian Combat mission over as Iraq troops return except for those not classified as combat troops!

While Rudd vindicates anti-war movement — bring all the troops home

However, most Australian troops in Iraq will remain. While not classified as “combat” troops, the 800 remaining armed forces personnel are not deployed to help with reconstruction. They include soldiers guarding Australians in Baghdad’s fortified “Green Zone”, sailors guarding maritime oilfields, air force units, and advisors and trainers of death squad-linked, pro-occupation Iraqi forces.

We have the appearance of withdrawing without really withdrawing.

Read more!

Why the Celtics Won—From Auerbach to "Unbuntu"

Bill Taylor explains Why the Celtics Won—From Auerbach to "Unbuntu". (The Celtics are an American Basketball team). The key elements were pride and community.

The legendary coach, Red Auerbach, was interviewed in 1987:

“How do you motivate the players?” Alan asked, expecting, I imagine, a complicated, multi-faceted answer. “Pride, that’s all,” Red answered. “Pride of excellence. Pride of winning. I tell our guys, ‘Isn’t it nice to go around all summer and say that you’re a member of the greatest basketball team in the world.’”

Emphasis Mine

Unfortunately, under Capitalism, pride in workmanship is diminished as the extra care and time is an extra cost that apparently adds nothing to the bottom line.

The blight that affects computing today is that of "good enough". It is within our power to make Windows operate without the BSOD, but it is good enough that Windows works most of the time.

The pride of workmanship in computing is going. The user interface of choice is now a web page! Yes, it is good enough! But can we do better! With a shit facade like that, why would anyone spend effort making the code in the back end a source of pride?

The community aspect of the Celtics win is due to Archbishop Desmond Tutu:

As Tutu explained, “A person with Ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and good, for he or she has a proper self-assurance that comes from knowing that he or she belongs in a greater whole and is diminished when others are humiliated or diminished…”

Emphasis Mine

Yet in our workplaces, we have competition between individuals for jobs, promotions, projects, and pay rises. We are only evaluated on individual performance. We are replaceable components in the industrial machine.

There is no community interest - only the interest of the Capitalist. The workplace is an artificial community created to serve Capitalism.

How can we have pride in what that does not belong to us?

Read more!

NDA Photographs

For those who are not on the GreenLeft Weekly e-group, links to photographs taken from the NDA are below:

• 1st anniversary protest against NT intervention by Peter Boyle
• Hobart protest pics by Rose Matthews
• SBS News slideshow & news video of protests
• Photos from Sydney rally against the NT intervention by Alex Bainbridge

Read more!

End the racist NT intervention now!

Saturday June 21 National Day of Action Against the Racist Intervention into Northern Territory Indigenous Communities. The Sydney rally is at

Sydney: 11am, The Block, Redfern
contact Monique Wiseman 0415410558 or Paddy Gibson 0415800586

View Larger Map

Sam Watson says End the racist NT intervention now!

“You don’t deal with issues of alcoholism and drug addiction with police. It’s a health issue, not a law and order issue. You need properly funded drug and alcohol services in Aboriginal communities, not more police and bureaucrats”.

The Socialist Alliance spokesperson concluded by pointing out that a properly funded program of positive discrimination for Indigenous people in education and training and a real Indigenous job creation campaign could have started to solve the problems of Aboriginal communities’ hopelessness years ago.

As Malcolm X once said, "You cannot have Capitalism without racism."

Read more!

Status Quo-oh

Jim Kunstler examines the current Status Quo-oh as the perfect storm of climate change, financial instability, and peak oil combine to make life interesting for the planet.

The real tragedy of industrial agriculture is the subsitution of energy for knowledge.

Behind that magic is an agribusiness model of farming cranked up on the steroids of cheap oil and cheap natural-gas-based fertilizer. Both of these "inputs" have recently entered the realm of the non-cheap. Oil-and-gas-based farming had already reached a crisis stage before the flood of Iowa. Diesel fuel is a dollar-a-gallon higher than gasoline. Natural gas prices have doubled over the past year, sending fertilizer prices way up. American farmers are poorly positioned to reform their practices. All that cheap fossil fuel masks a tremendous decay of skill in husbandry. The farming of the decades ahead will be a lot more complicated than just buying x-amount of "inputs" (on credit) to be dumped on a sterile soil growth medium and spread around with giant diesel-powered machines.

Emphasis Mine

The farmer has become another worker drone that follows a set of instructions. Ten thousand years of agricultural knowledge wiped out over the span of three generations.

Capitalism requires more and more of the workforce to become members of the proletariat in order to drive wages down and profits up. Standardised ways of working reduce training time and the bargaining power of workers. If they could give a set of instructions to monkeys, Capitalists would have no compunction about doing it as they would only have to pay peanuts.

In my own profession of computing, we complain about the skill levels of the new people but they do a good enough job for the Capitalists at a cheap price. So what if a computer system crashes and kills people? Tort Law Reform caps the liabilities anyway.

Preventable deaths are just another business cost. Profit is the only thing that matters.

How will anyone react to this looming crisis?

Perhaps more ominous is the discontent on the trucking scene. Truckers are going broke in droves, unable to carry on their business while getting paid $2000 for loads that cost them $3000 to deliver. In Europe last week, enraged truckers paralyzed the food distribution networks of Spain and Portugal. The passivity of US truckers so far has been a striking feature of the general zombification of American life. They might continue to just crawl off one-by-one and die. But it's also possible that, at some point, they'll mount a Night-of-the-Living-Dead offensive and take their vengeance out on "the system" that has brought them to ruin. America has only about a three-day supply of food in any of its supermarkets.

Emphasis Mine

It has been a similar situation in Australia. The last real rumble about fuel prices was back in 2005 when Trucker Blockades were mooted and Trucker Blockades - One Day On, they folded.

The demoralisation of the proletariat is so complete that people could well lay down and die.

The problem with revenge against the system is that there is no obvious target. There are rumours of secret societies running things.

At least with the French Revolution, there were the obvious symbols of Feudalism to be destroyed: the Bastille; the Monarchy; the Church; and the Aristocracy. What are the equivalents for Capitalism? The Stock Exchange? Maybe, but so what? It is just a building.

The Capitalist system is a way of thinking about social relations between people. It is expressed in laws, customs, and expectations. These cannot be changed by force only by patient reasoning.

Unfortunately, patience requires time and time is running out.

Read more!

Tomgram: John Feffer, Are We All North Koreans Now?

In the latest Tomgram: John Feffer, Are We All North Koreans Now? John Feffer argues that the recurring crises in North Korea are not just problems with Communism but with industrial agriculture.

In the 1990s, North Korea was the world's canary. The famine that killed as much as 10% of the North Korean population in those years was, it turns out, a harbinger of the crisis that now grips the globe -- though few saw it that way at the time.

That small Northeast Asian land, one of the last putatively communist countries on the planet, faced the same three converging factors as we do now -- escalating energy prices, a reduction in food supplies, and impending environmental catastrophe. At the time, of course, all the knowing analysts and pundits dismissed what was happening in that country as the inevitable breakdown of an archaic economic system presided over by a crackpot dictator.

They were wrong. The collapse of North Korean agriculture in the 1990s was not the result of backwardness. In fact, North Korea boasted one of the most mechanized agricultures in Asia. Despite claims of self-sufficiency, the North Koreans were actually heavily dependent on cheap fuel imports. (Does that already ring a bell?) In their case, the heavily subsidized energy came from Russia and China, and it helped keep North Korea's battalion of tractors operating. It also meant that North Korea was able to go through fertilizer, a petroleum product, at one of the world's highest rates. When the Soviets and Chinese stopped subsidizing those energy imports in the late 1980s and international energy rates became the norm for them, too, the North Koreans had a rude awakening.

Emphasis Mine

We all literally eat oil. Oil for fertilizer. Oil for tractors. Oil for trucks to take the produce to the factories. No oil, no food!

The article also points out that we are running out of arable land and water as well. And global warming is exacerbating the problem.

The core problem is seen to be:

The quest for perfect markets usually conceals a global shell game in which wealth is redistributed from the many to the few. To even the playing field that markets constantly tilt in favor of the powerful, and to direct funds toward environmental sustainability, governments need to intervene in the economy.

Yet another liberal is wishing upon the star of a benevolent government! The state exists to sustain the power of the ruling class. That power can be sustained either by force or by bribery.

The interest of the rulers is to stay in charge in order to increase their wealth. If people have to starve in order for the rulers to profit, so be it. No money, no food! This is the marketplace speaking. No soppy sentimentality there!

Feffer's solution is:

Certainly organic farming will play a role here. Although Green Revolution guru Norman Borlaug has dismissed organic agriculture as incapable of feeding the world, an important new study published by Cambridge University Press shows that organic systems in developing countries can produce 80% more than conventional farms.

Integrated farming systems that rely on sustainable energy -- solar, wind, tidal -- will also be critical. No-till agriculture can cut down on energy use and soil erosion.

While properly wary of snake-oil salesmen, neither can we afford to be Luddites. New technologies will play a role as well, as long as they reduce fertilizer and pesticide use, don't shackle debt-ridden farmers to major seed companies, and meet strict consumer safety requirements.

All we need are some kind-heart Capitalists! Hah! These do not last long enough in the face of their ruthless competitors to do permanent good.

This is just one crisis in which private property (capital) confronts public good (food and water).

Read more!

Superheroes

Seth Godin describes some important attitudes of Superheroes.

He offers some basic thoughts about how to handle the paradox. This is especially important for members of Communist Parties.

Superheroes don't have a look, but they definitely have an attitude. They're restless and impatient, but, here's the cool paradox, they're also calm and patient. Patient because they realize that change takes a while. Patient because they understand that if it's worth doing, it's worth getting through the Dip. Impatient and restless, though, because they refuse to accept the status quo. Most of the time, of course, these can't co-exist. Most of the time, the impatient flit. They don't stick it out. Acumen just celebrated their seventh anniversary and this is the year traction is really kicking in.

Emphasis Mine

Far too often, we have party comrades who want to man the barricades from day one instead of the slow grind of building the Party through agitation, propaganda, recruitment, and education. This takes a lot of patience but requires the fuel of impatience to keep going.

It has been 160 years since the publication of The Communist Manifesto, and we only have national Communist governments in Vietnam, Laos, Korea (part), Cuba, Nepal and Venezuela. Communist governments exist at the provincial and municipal level in India and Italy. And there is Communist management of workplaces in Argentina and Spain. China is in a long transition from Communism to Capitalism.

As Capitalism enters yet another crisis, there may be some upsurge in interest in Communism although Fascism has been the preferred option for advanced ecoonomies in dire peril.

Read more!

Tent City, USA

Mike Shedlock uncovers the hidden shame of Tent City, USA.

Here is the cost of converting a social good (housing) into a commodity.

The Capitalist illusion of providing social goods through production of commodities has been exposed as a fraud. Here these people are thrown into a refugee camp as the property rights of the banks are enforced.

Commodities are only produced for people that can afford them. If one cannot afford the cost of food, water, or housing, then one does not eat, drink or find shelter.

The people here would defend the right of property owners when they had houses to live in. But now, they have been sacrificed to preserve the Capitalist system of property rights.

The right of property trumps human rights to food, water, and shelter. So much for the right to life!

Read more!

Cut fuel price, say voters

Cut fuel price, say voters. This is an idiotic idea that raises problems for me in that how can I defend democracy when such attitudes are self-defeating?

If we had a direct democracy, then the fuel excise tax would be reduced to zero and people would go using their cars as usual. And the peak oilers would be pissing into the wind.

And it does not help when:

Last week in Japan, Mr Rudd put pressure on oil-producing nations to lift production and accused them of distorting the market by refusing to do so.

The Finance Minister, Lindsay Tanner, criticised petrol subsidies and caps on prices in Asian countries, saying they distorted the market and delayed the development of new technology.

...

The Opposition agreed fuel subsidies were unsustainable but said Australia had no right to lecture neighbours.

The government is once again misleading people into believing that things can go as normal. The price signals from the market can be ignored.

The cut in excise tax amounts to a subsidy because the tax is supposed to align the price of Australian produced oil with the world market. The idea was that when the Australian oil ran out, there would be no shock to the economy when we brought oil from overseas, and the depletion was slowed down because of the cost.

Yet, the government is right to say that the price signals is supposed to foster the development of new technologies. But only for other people, not us. And the opposition is right to say that subsidies are wrong. Again for other people, not us.

Ross Gittins is right when he says that our leaders are Too gutless to give us the bad oil:

I think I've stumbled on a new law of politics: the harder life becomes in this capitalist economy, the more our supposed leaders soft-soap us. The harsher it gets, the harder they try to persuade us we're living in a Sunday school where no one plays for keeps.

Take the carry-on about petrol prices. Neither side of politics is prepared to speak the obvious truth about them.

...

The trouble with all this soft-soaping is that it encourages the ignorant notion it's the government's job to solve all our problems. It hurts - fix it!

People don't get on with facing up to their problems because they imagine it just a matter of waiting for governments to act. And then the pollies wonder why the punters increasingly regard them as liars and cheats. Why their cynical behaviour breeds cynicism.

Despite the politicians' obfuscation, the plain truth is obvious: one way or another, petrol prices have got nowhere to go but up.

This would lead to believe that we need strong leaders to force us to act in our best interests when we obviously don't know what they are. This leads towards a form of Totalitarianism as we surrender more and more of our decisions to those who know better.

For democrats, this leaves us in a quandry. How can we defend Democracy when people want to do stupid things?

We can hide behind the idea that the people are ignorant and easily led. I find the opposite case to be true. People believe that they can survive the coming crisis. The real nutters believe Jesus will rescue them in the nick of time.

On an individual basis, they all believe that they can survive. They just haven't considered what 20 million other people doing the same things would actually entail. There is not enough arable farmland for 20 million people to set up their own little enclaves. We could accomodate 10 million as we did back in the 1930's.

Yet, I believe that direct Democracy is the best way forward because it would force us to take responsibility for own decisions. At present, we can blame others for bad decisions because we do not have to make them. As long as we do not accept responsility for our actions, we cannot grow as adults. We are just children pretending to be adults.

Read more!

Heyda Fawda

Heyda Fawda is an Egyptian movie about a police officer (Hatem) stalking a school teacher (Nour) who is chasing an Assistant District Attorney (Sherif) who is sleeping with a drug addict (Shiela) who wears mini-skirts. The movie has English sub-titles but the graffiti and posters are not translated.

This was my first Egyptian and Arabic movie. So this post is made out of pure ignorance.

There are so many threads running through this movie. The main thread is the decline and fall of Hatem through his obsession with Nour. But this is against a motif of opening with police suppression of a demonstration and closing with the arrival of riot at another demonstration.

I think the best clue to this movie is the translation of the title as 'Le Chaos'. There is chaos in Egypt which the Emergency Law tries to address. The movie lays out four (4) distinct attempts to control this chaos:

1. Hatem uses force and corruption to regulate the chaos;
2. Sherif uses the merciful application of the law to restore confidence in the system;
3. The headmistress uses education to control the chaos;
4. Sheila uses drugs, sex, love, parties to block out the chaos.

Hatem uses force to convince people that order must be followed even at the expense of the law. In this, he is encouraged by his superiors. Hatem uses the chaos to enrich himself through corruption by cutting through the red tape. In Hatem, the system is defending itself against attack.

Sherif uses mercy to temper the law and so win people across to the system. He interprets the law in order to dispense justice. In Sherif, the system is paternalistic and benevolent.

The headmistress and school inspector strive to raise the education level of the students so that they are better equipped to handle the chaos. Nour tries to teach English to a class but she does not how even though she has the right qualifications. She tells the school inspector that she is a qualified idiot who was taught by other qualified idiots.

Shiela justs gets high, parties like mad, and makes passionate love to Sherif. She uses her wealth and position to hide from the chaos. She is above it while the other characters are caught up the raging currents.

Hatem descent into hell takes him through the impotence of power. He cannot make Nour love him. He can only rape her. He goes from a man who can inflict pain on others to someone cowering in an elevator while the world erupts around him. He is so self-absorbed that he does not see beauty in young love or a famous painting.

Sherif fails when he tries to use the legal system to prosecute Hatem for rape. Sherif sees his own impotence in the face of police perjury and obstruction.

Once all the legal avenues have failed, Nour's mother and the headmistress take their allegations to the street. There the people rise up and invade the police station. Eventually Hatem is sacrificed to save the system.

Read more!

Seven Billion Experts—Waiting to Be Heard!

Tom Peters rails against the Central Planners in favour of Seven Billion Experts—Waiting to Be Heard! He argues that the Development policies have failed.

Peters also has a link to a set of PowerPoint slides about this. These are worth viewing in order to see Peter's argument elaborated on.

The underlying assumption is that the development aid has failed. While this is true for the developing countries, development aid has worked wonders for the developed world by increasing the rate of exploitation.

One case in point is coffee. For years, the World Bank recommended that developing countries invest in coffee. So much development occurred that the price of coffee collapsed. And the developed countries benefited from cheap coffee.

So instead of growing food to support themselves, these developing countries now have loans to pay off with a cash crop that does not bring in enough cash.

Now these countries go off to the IMF to sort out their loans. And out comes the cookie-cutter of the Structural Adjustment Program in which the subsidies that make life somewhat bearable are removed and the economy is to be opened up for foreign investment which proceeds to gut the local firms. And now, these countries have a seething mass of angry people. So the governments then need weapons to stay in power. More debt! And more sales to developed countries. What a racket!

Anyway enough jumping on Tom Peters.

The theme of his slides is interesting for Communists especially in our United Front work. The important thing is not to control these organisations but to get people involved. For once people see that they can change little things through their own efforts, they might begin to open up to changing larger things in their life. And they can become more confident about analyzing the structure of society.

We Communists need to become accustomed to "Trying and succeeding on the 37th attempt". The churn of Party membership is mainly due to this continual failing as well as the search for the perfect Party Program.

In all, I think we should view the slides at least in order to refocus ourselves.

Read more!

Countdown to $200 oil meets Anglo Disease

Jerome a Paris descibes what happens when the Countdown to $200 oil meets Anglo Disease. He sees the current economic problems as an aberration.

One of the more interesting things about this Friday's economic news was the very obvious connection between the unemployment number and oil prices. What links the two is debt, the defining feature of what I have called the Anglo Disease, ie the highly unequal economy whereby the rich and the financial sector (almost the same thing these days) capture most of the income but hide it by providing cheap debt to the middle classes so that they can continue to spend.

Emphasis Mine

He expands this point further:

in today's economy, the cannibalistic sector is not oil&gas, but finance. Bankers, through debt, have the ability to convert future cash-flows into immediate profits. Such immediate returns attract more capital, talent and resources (which cannot go to other sectors) and impose an iron discipline on the rest of the economy: those that provide the debt want to ensure that the future cash-flows will indeed materialize, and move in to ensure a relentless focus, in the underlying activities, on profitability at the expense of all other criteria. The immediate contribution of the financial world to measured GDP and growth makes it a popular industry, thus reinforcing its influence - and spreading out its way of thinking, focused on monetary gains and financial "efficiency." So not only the rest of the economy gets squeezed for any extra drop of profitability, but the language of financial analysts becomes the dominant one of not only economic discourse but also political discourse;

Emphasis Mine

This is how Capitalism is supposed to work. Investments flow to the sectors of the economy that that show the highest rates of return. There is no other criteria for a Capitalist investment choice.

What then is supposed to happen is that the rate of return on these new investments is supposed to revert to the mean once sufficient investment has been made. Unfortunately, the inertia of investment decisions means that over-investment occurs and large losses are experienced.

In order to justify this new regime of investment allocation, the spiritual producers are called upon to cast their spells, and wave their wands. The punditocarcy exists only to serve. To Serve Man up to the insatiable demands of Capital!

The author then goes onto explain that:

in a nutshell, the debt bubble hid the class warfare waged by the rich against everybody else, conveniently trapping those that could not or would not live within their means in the system, by making their livelihood increasingly dependent on not rocking the boat.

So close! Class warfare is reemerging in the consciousness of people.

So far, the article is mainly a litany of complaints. And his solution is:

So there you have it: wage stagnation (Anglo Disease) and oil production stagnation (the fundamental driver of the Countdown diaries) combining in a perfect storm. But hey, the financiers are still sitting pretty, and will say that more "reform" and "deregulation" and tax cuts are needed.

Maybe it's time to stop listening to what is highly self-interested drivel, and take back what they grabbed: it's not theirs. And maybe it's time to actually worry about using lots less oil (and gas and coal).

And, wonderfully, a programme to invest in housing and vehicle energy efficiency, renewable energy, and infrastructure, paid for by massive tax hikes on the rich, will help solve the current recession and the oil crisis.

After all that, the only suggestion is to take the rich. A reformist approach! As if the rich would stand aside for the rabble to despoil their ill-gotten gains!

This is a start. The acknowledgement of class warfare is a significant step forward. But it is only one step out of a journey.

Read more!

"Who’s Afraid of Friedrich Hayek?"

Mark Thoma points to an article that asks "Who’s Afraid of Friedrich Hayek?" without any comment.

The original article is by Jesse Larner who asks Who’s Afraid of Friedrich Hayek? The Obvious Truths and Mystical Fallacies of a Hero of the Right. I think her main conclusion is:

In titling his individualist manifesto The Road To Serfdom, Hayek clearly was equating collectivism with a tendency to slavery. ...

She starts with:

Hayek was a surprise, in several ways. He’s nowhere near as extreme as his ideological descendants. He admits that there are a few rare economic circumstances in which market forces cannot deliver the optimum result, and that when these occur, the state may legitimately intervene. He recognizes such a thing as the social interest and will even endorse some limited redistributionalism—he goes so far as to suggest that the state ensure a minimum standard of living, an idea that surely embarrasses the good folks at Cato. Politically, Hayek is not the cynic I had braced for. Plainly, transparently—and in stark contrast to many modern conservative intellectuals—he is a man concerned with human freedom. One of the unexpected things in Road [to Serfdom] is that he writes with passion against class privilege.

Emphasis Mine

Hayek can propose these things because he is a conservative. And a conservative defends rights and opposes privileges. The arguments within conservatism are mainly about the differentiation between the two.

A conservative could propose that the worker's right to a minimum standard of living trumps the right to enjoy the profits accuring from property because the former reflects a greater good - the right to life.

Unfortunately, conservatives get waylaid into defending the rights and privileges of the ruling class (capitalists, feudal lords, slave owners) over all others. They would come to believe that the current ordering of society (capitalist, feudal, slavery) is the best available and has to defended against the chaos that would result in changing the system.

Larner goes on further to explain why she thinks Hayek is so passionate in his belief that socialism will always lead to totalitarianism because planning reflects the needs and outlook of the planners:

A complex economy is something no person or institution can understand. But it can generate a sustainable order, with a rational allocation of resources, as individuals respond to their own circumstances and make choices as consumers and entrepreneurs, signaling the subjective value that they place on goods and capital stock through the price mechanism: One of Hayek’s most original contributions to economic theory is the insight that economic systems are based primarily on information rather than resources. To plan an outcome and to direct economic inputs and outputs toward this outcome is to stifle the emergence of a spontaneous, democratic response to the needs of the individuals who make up the community—a response that will necessarily have winners and losers, but that will not privilege the vision or depend on the limited information of a governing elite, and that will encourage further experimentation. The responsibility of a government that fosters individual freedom is to set up transparent and impartial rules so that the legal reaction to personal choices can be predicted for all, regardless of social station; to tolerate no privileged access to the law; to provide security; and to protect contracts and private property, so long as doing so does not conflict with the very small set of social assumptions on which there truly is broad consensus (arguably, Hayek’s suggestion that government should be responsible for a minimum standard of living would have fit into this consensus when Road was published.)

Emphasis Mine

Larner is writing this when the price signals from the real estate market caused a huge bubble in property prices, another bubble in stock prices, another bubble in oil and other commodity prices, and a bubble in food prices. And she still believes in the efficient pricing through the market?

And as for the efficient allocation of resources, toll roads are still being built in Sydney while the rail network is near collapse.

Larner overlooks one way of planning: democracy. We all vote on different plans and the one with the most votes is implemented.

I think Larner is of the reformist left in that she would soften the edges of capitalism through the spontaneous emergence of worker collectives that compete within a capitalist economy.

In that, I think she is naive to think that the ruling class would sit idly by while its power is whittled away. No ruling class has ever gone quietly into the dust bin of history.

Make no mistake, a worker collective directly challenges the capitalisr right to rule the economy. For once people see that they can make better decisions that the capitalists, then the people would question the need for a separate class of property holders and their privileges.

Read more!