Showing posts with label banksters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label banksters. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

The Neoliberal Neocon Lovechild


There I was on Sunday skimming the latest from the New York Times when my eyes alighted upon the headline Poland Steels for Battle, Seeing Echoes of Cold War in Ukraine Crisis accompanied by, what else, a picture of camouflaged women crawling on what appeared to be a soccer field. Curiosity about what my hitherto believed to be apathetic hosts were up to naturally drew me in. Now, living in Poland has accustomed me to western exaggeration about my adopted country along with the natives inability to think rationally any time the word Russia is mentioned. History has scarred the land and imagination every bit as badly as religion and in fact created what the Times once called the Smolensk Religion which propagates the belief that the Russians assassinated Polish President Kaczyński along with 96 others on their way to mark the anniversary of the Katyń massacre. Anyway, the article had me chortling at its transparent cheerleading for war, just another Times propaganda piece pushing for armed conflict a la Iraq 2003, when my snickering was stifled by the sobering reality of this passage:
On Tuesday, Prime Minister Ewa Kopacz changed the law on who can be called up for service in case of “military maneuvers.” Previously, the armed forces could summon only current and former reservists, those with actual military training. Now, if necessary, they can call on almost any man in the country.
Wait. What? We've got a female prime minister? Ok, I knew that, but I didn't know she could call me up tomorrow to go running around the forest with a bunch of wannabe Rambos. Clearly the Anne Applebaums, Tom Friedmans and whoever the Polish version of a pro-war journalist is have pushed us too far, frogmarching us into another conflict. I've been reticent to comment on the situation in Ukraine for many reasons. First and foremost is how difficult it seems to get any reliable information, regardless of where you are. While back in Canada last summer I was treated to a constant Ukrainian-voter friendly barrage of tough talking politicians pandering to the public's bloodlust and the resultant steady stream of questions from friends and relatives concerned about my safety. Strangely, proximity to the happenings doesn't seem to help and in fact may hinder the truth from surfacing. While there's not a Russian or 'western' source I trust, the situation here in Poland is even worse. Despite Poles geographical contiguity to the festivities, there's nary a soul I've spoken to over the past year here with any idea of what's going on beyond the knee-jerk Putin is bad reaction. That's not to say that I've got it all sussed out, but let's just say I've reserved judgement on putting the good guy/bad guy labels anywhere.

Wait, check that, I do have a clue where to start at least, and as is so often the case, the clue comes from a headline from last week that's just a little bit off:

Ukraine to receive $17.5bn from IMF to save economy

Um, yeah, right. Here, let me try:

Ukraine to receive $17.5bn from IMF to enslave economy

There, fixed it. Just three letters short of the truth, a lot better than normal at least. It's amazing that even complex stories can be simplified if you just follow the money. If the press just spent a fraction of the time focusing on who stands to gain and lose financially as they do speculating about just how demonic/autistic/autocratic/narcissistic Vladimir Putin is, they'd begin to fulfil their role as a check on power. Of course if they did that they might also have to remind their flock why things kicked off in Kiev almost 16 months ago which might lead to uncomfortable questions taking shape in people's minds, so best to nip that in the bud.
"The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting"
- Milan Kundera The Book of Laughter and Forgetting
November 21, 2013, then Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych's cabinet announced they wouldn't be signing an EU association agreement the following week in Lithuania. That's about the last fact that we know; pretty much everything else, from the reasons for the decision to the repercussions of it, are subject to debate. That being the case, wouldn't it seem natural to want to know something about the agreement? Yet, little was said beyond that not signing represented a move away from Europe towards Russia; true to a point, but misleading in more ways than one. Most obviously, the agreement didn't mean EU ascension, but instead a vague future possibility and came with a number of strings attached ranging from the release of Julia Tymoshenko to a slew of austerity demands such as budget cuts and a 40% increase in natural gas bills. It also tied Ukraine to accepting, wait for it, an IMF loan worth $17 billion that didn't look quite as alluring to Yanukovych, probably both personally and for the nation, as a $15 billion gift from Russia that came with a 33% discount on natural gas. Yes, we in the west spend billions bailing out banks and then lending money to indebted countries to keep up their interest payments to those same banks, but can't lend a hand to start a real democracy. Just as debt peonage works to enslave students entering adulthood so it does for nations in that it manufactures consent by engendering conformity and enforcing compliance.

(Un)fortunately, one of the first moves of the newly installed government following the unconstitutional coup last February was the signing of the once rejected deal allowing us a closer look at what else was inside the loan agreement. Despite decades of debacles, and dozens of disasters, the IMF prescription for reform demanded in exchange for loans remains the dreaded structural adjustment program. A few highlights of the neoliberal nightmare visited upon Ukraine: raising excise and property taxes, reducing social income support expenditures for retirees and public employees, freezing minimum wage, and cutting public-sector wages; increasing natural gas and heating tariffs for consumers by 56 percent and 40 percent in 2014, respectively, and by 20 to 40 percent annually from 2015 to 2017 while cutting gas subsidies over two years. At the same time, as gas prices increase sharply, gas subsidies to end users will be completely ended over the next two year at a time when Russia was ceasing gas supplies as a result of a payment dispute; oh, and implementing a floating exchange rate for its national currency, the hryvnia, making it increasingly difficult to serve their dollar-denominated loans.

(Un)surprisingly, everything has gone according to script. A world of pain for the poor and elderly has paid for a bonanza for the oligarchs and western puppeteers. The currency has tanked (the hryvnia lost half its value in February alone), inflation has reached 272% while the economy has sharply contracted (down 15.2% year on year) at a time when war expenses are further draining the coffers. Less than a year on from the original loan, a new one was needed and approved last Wednesday but even IMF official admit it's not for Ukraine but the banks, as the bulk of the money is heading out the door to foreign lenders fast: $5 billion likely by the end of this week and another $5 billion in coming months. The Ukrainian oligarch-controlled banks will also syphon off about $4 billion so they can keep financing the war in the east. Even more contumelious, the IMF's own statutes prohibit lending to countries that don't have the ability to repay as that would be, you know, evil. One can only admire the audacity to pull of such a stunt, especially with Greece fresh in our minds, seems evil really is as evil does, again and again and again. Worse, they're also prohibited from giving money to nations at war. Makes sense, seems you wouldn't want to be remembered by history as having financed a government unleashing Nazi storm troopers on a European population, right? Nevertheless, once again the economic hitmen have done there job:

"The substitution of the unconscious action of crowds for the conscious activity of individuals is one of the principal characteristics of the present age."
- Gustave Le Bon The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind
While everyone was arguing about who was responsible for the sniper fire in Kiev that turned Maiden into a masacre, who shot down Flight MH17, whether or not Russia was justified in annexing Crimea and who killed Nemtsov, Ukraine gave up its sovereignty. We can debate how much of a role US Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria 'Fuck the EU' Nuland (neocon wife of neocon Robert Kagan) and her $5 billion played in fomenting the Maiden protests enabling her to put her man Yats (Arseniy Yatsenyuk) in the prime minister's office, or how much money George "give Ukraine $50 billion so I can have some" Soros and Pierre Omidyar pumped into USAID to help bring about regime change. Or, instead we could just notice how quickly the vice-president of the United States' son, Hunter Biden, was named to the board of Ukraine's largest private gas producer, Burisma Holdings, following the inauguration of the chocolate king, Petro Poroshenko, as Ukraine's president (weren't we supposed to disempower the oligarchs?). As long as there's shale gas to be fracked, you know the people's water table will be poisoned to profit American corporate interests.

We could spend our time arguing about how much of a role neo-nazis had in last year's coup, or better yet framing the openly white supremacist Ukrainian Azov battalion's use of the Wolfsangel symbol on their banner as "romantic" as the Washington Post does. That might explain away the Odessa massacre in which dozens of anti-Kiev protesters were burnt alive in a building set on fire by nationalists or clubbed to death when they jumped from windows. We could even wonder why former US presidential candidate and current senator John McCain met and stood alongside an openly pro-Nazi politician in December 2013. It's easier though to simply evaluate how well the new government has cleaned up the corruption that plagued the pro-Russian regime. President Poroshenko appointed former ING Bank Ukraine deputy head Valeriya Gontareva the National Bank (NBU) chief last June. As a respected member of the banking community, it was said she would inspire the confidence of the private sector and work closely with the IMF. Yet, according to charges brought against her in December, by August she was robbing the state by manipulating the currency. Ihor Bilous, another banker given the post of chief of the State Fiscal Service by the new government dove headlong into money laundering, bribery and corruption schemes from the get go. None if this makes for as good TV as corrupt presidential palaces though. Pity about all that Ukrainian gold.

Hypothesizing about why Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk would tell a German TV station that it was in fact the Soviet Union that invaded Germany in 1941 won't get us anywhere. Questioning Poland's deputy foreign minister, Grzegorz Schetyna's grasp on reality after crediting Ukrainians for liberating Auschwitz thus forgetting they only made up a part of the multinational Red Army history credits with the feat seems petty really. Poking the Russian bear is a spectator sport in these parts every bit as much as popular as ignoring the geopolitical reality that Frontline Ukraine author Richard Sakwa rightly calls a "fateful geographical paradox: that NATO exists to manage the risks created by its existence". Whether or not Bush the Elder promised Gorbachev that NATO wouldn't expand eastward following the dissolution of the USSR is irrelevant.

Actions speak louder than words and watching NATO swallow up 12 Eastern European countries in three rounds of enlargement would make any Russian leader nervous. Though portrayed as Putin's lapdog, Yanukovych extorted $45 billion from Russia to lease the Black Sea fleet bas in April 2010 causing Putin to exclaim "I would be willing to eat Yanukovych and his prime minister for that sort of money". Putin didn't even deign to meet him when he fled the Maiden protesters for Russia. It is in fact the Russian speaking public who voted for Yanukovych in 2010 in the contested east that Putin claims need protection, and many sources allege are the target of ethnic cleansing in order to guarantee a pro-western candidate wins the eventual next election in Ukraine. For those will to look beyond the tabloids and memes, much of the speculation surrounding Putin's 10-day public disappearing act concerned the powerful voices in the Kremlin who would like to see Russia take an active military role in Ukraine. Perhaps they're more sensitive to the sting of humiliation the west has heaped on the nation over the last 25 years, from the "shock therapy" pillaging of the economy to missile shields and NATO's promise of eventual membership to Ukraine in 2008. Yeah exactly what Russia fears about Ukraine's western pivot. Given the prospect of nuclear war, the old adage better the devil you know than the devil you don't seems more relevant than ever.

Stop me if you've heard this one, an American, a Lithuanian and a Georgian walk into a bar... No, it might sound like the set up for a joke, but it wouldn't be so funny if it were your country that had fast-tracked citizenship for the three in a bizarre ceremony making it legal to name them your Finance, Economy and Health ministers respectively just a few minutes later. The American, Natalie Jaresko, is a former US State Department official and investment banker with no experience with the convoluted Ukraine budget. Aivaras Abromavičius also unsurprisingly comes via the banking world with no previous experience while at least Aleksander Kvatashvili served in the same post in Tblisi, but unfortunately doesn't speak Ukrainian forcing meetings to be held in Russian, embarrassing given the first thing the new government did was to target the language by repealing the minority languages law. If this didn't give anyone pause, maybe when Abromavičius immediately named former Estonian Jaanika Merilo as his advisor on foreign investments did. No? Well, how about knowing the first thing she did in her new post was to tweet the pics you see above to the right?

At least Abromavičius was forthright about his country being bankrupt, declaring about the budget "[t]o expect that we are going to produce real as opposed to declarative incentive programs is unrealistic." Translation: the new Ukrainian budget is nothing but a piece of paper with the numbers wanted from the IMF in order to qualify for the loan. Again, Greece anyone? Seems to me that it's a bit counterproductive to incentivize corruption while claiming that the regime change was necessary to root it out. Oh, by law dual citizenship is not permitted for Ukrainian government officials, except when it is for, say the aforementioned trio or the oligarch governor of the Dnepropetrovsk region, Ihor Kolomoyskyi, who has three. Suppose that's what make him such a great banker, or more likely it's the fact that his bank, PrivatBank, that will be the biggest beneficiary of the IMF loan so he can continue to fund his private army fighting in eastern Ukraine. Throw in a few former warlords turned MPs such as Yuri Beryoza, Andrei Levus, assault rifle wielding Igor Mosiychuk (here he is shooting at Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov's picture) and Dmytro Yarosh, who admitted to fondling a real hand grenade in his pocket while inside the Rada, and you might question if pulling Ukraine out of the Russian orbit has sure brought sunshine to the land.

Still no? Well, tell you what. We can ignore everything else except one word in one subsection of a single article in that EU agreement. Here's Article 404 (c);
promoting modern and sustainable agricultural production, respectful of the environment and of animal welfare, including extension of the use of organic production methods and the use of biotechnologies, inter alia through the implementation of best practices in those fields;
Yeah, I made it easy for you. Oh, c'mon, you can't think this whole mess was concocted just to plunder an economy that's soon to be half the size of the state of Indiana. Sure, a long term, low level war in eastern Ukraine is a bonanza for the military contractors' bottom lines on sales not just to the combatants but also the rest of the west who need to prepare for the sure to be coming Russian invasion, but it sure is hell isn't worth risking a nuclear confrontation. The wealth of Ukraine is in that rich black soil ideal for growing grains which has made it the world's third-largest exporter of cotton and the fifth-largest exporter of wheat, and according to a 2013 USDA forecast it is forecast to jump to the second biggest exporter in the world after the US having shipped over 30 million tonnes of grain out of the country last year.

Still, you might ask what's so nefarious about the word 'biotechnologies', after all, Ukraine, as the rest of the Europe, prohibits genetically modified crops. Selling the lie that GMO is the only answer to food security to a Rada full of parliamentarians inclined to listen to corporate interests shouldn't prove any more difficult than it was to convince them to open up selling land to foreign agribusinesses. Yes, that's right, as part of previous structural adjustment programs agreed to in exchange for debt, since 2002 over 1.6 million hectares of land have been snatched up by multinational companies since 2002. This includes over 405,000 hectares to a company listed in Luxembourg, 444,800 hectares to Cyprus-registered investors, 120,000 hectares to a French corporation, and 250,000 hectares to a Russian company. A now disputed deal brokered between China and Yanukovych prior to the political crisis granted Beijing control over some three million hectares of prime farmland in the east, an area about the size of Belgium or about five percent of Ukraine’s arable land. Something tells me something will overturn the deal and they'll be a willing American buyer waiting in the wings. I wonder who would be interested?

Though Monsanto's $140 million Ukrainian investment in 2013 was ostensibly for conventional seeds only, later that year six large Ukrainian agriculture associations happened to be pushing draft amendments for "creating, testing, transportation and use of GMOs" and the president of the Ukrainian Grain Association, Volodymyr Klymenko stated that "[w]e...have signed two letters to change the law on biosecurity, in which we proposed the legalization of the use of GM seeds". Strangely, both amendments mirrored the wording in the EU Association Agreement. Still not convinced a change is coming? Well, take a gander at this recent investor report regarding our old friend Monsanto which includes "The IMF and World Bank included a clause in their loan package to Ukraine to force the country to use GMOs as part of its loan package" as part of its recommendation to be long in Monsanto stocks. Oh, and I suppose that it was just a coincidence that Ukraine's US ambassador Olexander Motysk met with Brett D. Beggemann, Monsanto's President and COO on March 4th.
"There are only two peoples now. Russia is still barbarous, but it is great. The other young nation is America. The future is there between these two great worlds. Someday they will collide, and then we will see struggles of which the past can give no idea."
- Alexis de Tocqueville
While the neocons' rockets, missiles and bombs get all the headlines, it's the tender ministrations of the neoliberals that deserve the regime change accolades and therefore blame for the deformed offspring of the confluence of the two in Ukraine. Warmongers from Australia to Canada have taken the opportunity to portray themselves as tough guys, witness Prime Ministers Abbott and Harper's shirtfronting and confronting antics at last November's APEC meeting. In another reality they'd be called Abbott and Costello, playing both the court jesters and jousters to divert the public's attention from the goings on behind the curtain. The weapon of choice in this war is economic as round after round of sanctions against Russia prove. Yet, even here the true intent is murky as they serve the dual purpose of strangling both the Russian and European economies. For these latter 28 states, faced with the cost of breaking ties with an important trading partner, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) suddenly looks more appealing despite its decidedly anti-democratic nature. Meanwhile, the Russians have redoubled their push to implement and expand the Eurasian Economic Union in places like Egypt and even India.

So while the western and Russian propaganda machines have been working overtime to produce visceral fear to shut down our critical thinking, ironically usually involving casting the other as modern day Nazis. Putin's Crimea gambit to protect ethnic Russians is compared to that of Hitler's justification for annexing the Sudentland while the New York Times hides the fact that a few Ukrainian battalions, er, actually are on a crusade against what they see as the Semite-led Untermenschen. Yeah, that's right, I did it, I compared apples to oranges, but unless enough people wake up to the reality of what's happening 1,500 km to my east, the neoliberals could accidentally lead the neocons into a war that I'll have to take part in. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail to save my tail, either by imagining a Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse or remembering how many times we've been hoodwinked into war, but what of the Ukrainians caught in a geoeconopolitical tug of war? Strangely, banging the war drum so fervently last week, this time for war on Iran, the neocons themselves may have offered a ray of hope for Ukraine as they reminded the world that no deal is ever etched in stone.

Thursday, May 2, 2013

Thatcher's Poland

My mistake was not waiting to light my cigarette until after I'd passed the pawn shop. The lombard, as they call them here, opened only a few months ago but it's quickly become a favorite hangout for young and old alike. Bizarrely, you're just as likely to see a group of old fogies as a gang of kids ogling the phones in the window, dreaming of the day when they can afford to light up the screens with the slide of a fingertip to signal to the those around them they are worthy while sending and receiving signals from around the world.

As I hit the corner of the main drag, I suddenly remembered I needed cash. Lucky every other building is now a bank while the majority of those in between are oft-time ironically named cheque cashing joints like Happy Credit, mortgage brokers and aptly named kantors (foreign exchange) such as Joker Kantor, so cash was flowing free and easy. Well, apparently not for buddy who was on me like a fly on shit as I waited for the bank machine.

- "Daj mi papierosa" (Give me a cigarette) Came the predictable plea.
- "Jest moj ostatni" (It's my last) I tried to parry.
- "Give me cigarette"
Fuck. Something about my amazing (!?) accent had given me away making me both a prey and a mark.
- "Cigarette!" He barked.
My smoke was now the focus of both our attentions as I raised it to my lips and dropped it to my side. A couple of quick drags and I hand him the butt but he still doesn't budge.
- "One, two beer. How much?" Guess he's thirsty, too. After all it's almost noon.
- "I dunno, depends which" I answer, giving him a shoulder slap to his right shoulder while dodging to my right and slide into the bank machine as the previous customer walks out.

Cash in hand, smoke accoster nowhere in sight, I continued my walk towards first the train and then my work station beyond. As the flow of traffic peppered with the odd late model Porsche and communist era Polski Fiat 126p whizzed by I pass the Golden Arches just in time to see a herd of diabetic fat kids stream out the door, miraculously avoiding the two drunks splayed on the pavement leaning against each other for support as they dream of their next drink. Next up is the wheelchair beggar at his post just past the rail yard and in front of the trade center on the corner where I turn toward the university. Fortunately I'm shielded from his view as I pass by a gaggle of home decor/gardening/fashion enthusiasts clutching their conference bags filled with soon-to-be landfill waste and don't have to respond to his plea for the zloty (cash) he'd need to survive the next 24 hours.

Turning onto the bridge I walked past the newly completed portion of the train station, already covered in grime thanks to the pollution along with the road work and construction of the monstrous mall and even more ginormous parking garage that will be attached to the new Poznan train terminal. Wired gates control traffic at the end the bridge where the roadworks are most intense. Cars jockey for position from all sides as I emerged onto the zebra crossing with my usual contempt for motorized traffic. My second confrontation of the day comes when a car creeps up to my knee and we lock eyes, I point to the crossing and he starts yelling through his windscreen. Flipping him the bird I've already had two opportunities to fight and I haven't been out of the flat for 20 minutes.

That's when I found out Margaret Thatcher had died. I didn't have to wait to read about it in the obituaries or the newspaper, the words accompanied the beep that lit up my cellphone (fortunately I'm still holding onto my decade old Nokia brick and haven't yet needed to join the gawkers in front of the lombard).

"Ding dong, the witch is dead!"

Having come from a British friend that's all that was needed to convey the news. The fraction of a second it took for the impulse to smile to travel from my brain was long enough to allow the guilt for having such a feeling to arrest the curl of my lips before they'd even crinkled. I had to stop and look around. Here I was in Poland about to walk into university to teach a group of students whose parents most likely believe the Iron Lady was at least in part to thank for causing Communist USSR to crumble. The knowledge was more likely than not passed to their offspring subconsciously, like the information transmission of DNA, the kids probably don't even know what they, well, know. The terms Thatcher's Britain and Thatcher's child took no time to enter the lexicon and then the OED, and now standing on the corner with a Beyonce for H&M billboard to my left commanding women to buy her swimsuit or suffer social ostracism, if one's different, one's bound to be lonely, and a Szybcy i Wsciekli 6 (Fast & the Furious 6) billboard to my right reminding me of Thatcher's possibly apocryphal quote "[a] man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a bus can count himself as a failure", I couldn't help wonder how much this was Thatcher's Poland.

"Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past"
- Orwell, 1984

Upon noticing a book carried by one of my first Polish private students with Ronald Reagan on the cover, I was informed that Saint Ronnie along with John Paul II and Margaret Thatcher were his heroes: the holy trinity of freedom, a triptych of Maggie, Ronnie and JP2 on the mantelpiece of every good home. It's one of those things everyone here just knows just as I knew at that moment that Thatcher's passing wasn't going to go quietly; an information war every bit as deadly as the shooting kind she loved so much was already under way to remake her legacy, reframe the perspective and retard the rest of us.

Had she been a man, Margaret Thatcher could easily have been called Iron Balls as she had conviction in her beliefs if she had anything. Instead, thanks to her power to make most shrink around her, she was ironically given the nickname she came to love by the system she loathed. Accusing her of trying to revive the cold war, the Soviet Army newspaper Krasnaja Zvezda (Red Star) dubbed the then leader of the opposition železnaja dama (the Iron Lady) in January of 1976.

Seems as with everything else about Lady Thatcher, measuring the impact of her role in the fall of the Soviet Union is too subjective to measure, a hagiographic effort at best. Sure, after meeting Mikhail Gorbachev in 1984 she declared "We can do business together" and shortly thereafter the official party policy of glasnost was adopted in the USSR. However a near identical phrase "I think they can do business together" had been uttered in February of the same year by the American Senate Majority Leader Howard H Baker Jr. in reference to Reagan's potential meeting with the then Soviet leader Konstantin Chernenko.

Her bold assertions that there was no alternative nor any such thing as society, delivered in a tone both boring and boring, made her seem so decisive and divisive but when examined in context become wishy-washy and banal. Should we celebrate the life or death of a lady who may have had a hand in bringing about a Brave New World order by bringing down the (iron) curtain on our 1984 future? How does one shed a tear for a woman who had no qualms about ordering the death of hundreds of 'Argies' sailing away from a fight, not only allowed the US to station nuclear tipped cruise missiles on British soil to up the Cold War ante but also to use British bases for bombing raids on Libya, and above all, taught us to be selfish and that the pain of others isn't our problem?

But did she help save the Poles and the rest from communism? Unanswerable and doubtful but Poland's neoliberal lackey foreign minister Radek Sikorski eulogized her as a "fearless champion of liberty". We can guess how the Argentinians feel about how she saved the Malvinas. Barack Obama trotted out the obligatory praise saying she was "one of the great champions of freedom and liberty". Why don't we ask a Chilean if she helped or hurt their struggle against her buddy Pinochet by thanking him for "bringing democracy to Chile" by murdering the people's elected representative. I'm sure the tens of thousands murdered, hundreds of thousands tortured and million plus forced to flee Chile under his dictatorship would disagree.

The Economist magazine, bringing the tru to Minitru and where 2+2=5, eulogized "[t]he essence of Thatcherism was to oppose the status quo and bet on freedom", thus doing their part to ensure her support of the South African apartheid regime is lost down the memory hole. Not only did she once refer to Nelson Mandela's ANC as a "typical terrorist organization" while her spokesman said it was "cloud-cuckoo land for anyone to believe" they could run the country, she somehow worked the doublethink trick of projecting opposition to the racist regime while befriending then Premier P.W. Botha. She celebrated her friendship with Indonesia's General Suharto calling hime "one of our very best and most valuable friends" for having killed 500,000 suspected Communists in Indonesia before moving on to invade East Timor in 1975 to massacre around 250,000 men, women and children on the island. Her government helped arm Saddam Hussein, lent a hand to Pol Pot and hailed General Mohammed Zia ul-Haq's work in Pakistan that laid the groundwork for the Islamic radicalization of a whole generation.

Perhaps the greatest paradox of the woman was just that, she was a woman. In 1970, a week after becoming Secretary of State for Education and Science, she was asked if she would she like to become the first woman Prime Minister. "No," she answered emphatically, "there will not be a woman Prime Minister in my lifetime—the male population is too prejudiced." Of the movement and activists which possibly did more to change the 20th century than any other and opened the door to 10 Downing to her, she reportedly told an adviser, "[t]he feminists hate me, don’t they? And I don’t blame them. For I hate feminism. It is poison." In 1982 she said "The battle for women's rights has largely been won" which explains why she never felt the need to speak out against domestic violence, rape, sexual abuse or harassment or how women earned about 60 cents to the dollar of men's wages. She gave the appearance of smashing the glass ceiling while in fact pulling up the ladder, famously promoting only a single woman to a cabinet position preferring instead to surround herself with vegetables. Is it sexist of me to wonder how a mother of two could also become Maggie Thatcher the milk-snatcher by taking away kids' milk? Despite her portrayal as a greengrocer's daughter who had to fight to the top, she seems to have been a daddy's girl who married well which allowed her the luxury to study and hire a nanny.

Apologists rose to Thatcher's defense to claim her actions were a product of the times, the ends justified the means and of course, war is peace. Her sales pitch to a roomful of Saudis, "I'll have one of those!" while stroking a gleaming missile, to seal the $80 billion Al Yamamah arms deal wasn't meant for public consumption as 'batting for Britain' really involved billions in black money to bribe Saudi princes and add to the bottom line of BAE. Poles have learned Thatcher's buddy system well, er, well, the politicians at least, lining up to sacrifice lives and zloty to the alter of American military hegemony. Polish may have recently become England's second language but Polish politicians speak Anglo-Saxon ass-kissing as good as any lapdog. Most Poles are oblivious to the fact they ranked number four on the 'coalition of the willing' casualty countdown and just last month saw their 39th soldier killed in Afghanistan, while four more stand trial for war crimes committed there. Meanwhile the billions to be spent on a useless missile shield that the majority of the people don't want will piss off the Russians and definitely won't end up in the pockets of the locals.

"Non-stop distractions of the most fascinating nature...are deliberately used as instruments of policy, for the purpose of preventing people from paying too much attention to the realities of the social and political situation."
- Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

Thanks to doublethink, the lady wasn't for turning and probably believed in what she was doing but the real trick was to convince not just the people but her own party of the myth that Thatcherism was good for 'ordinary' people and would emancipate the working classes. Attila the Hen found an ally in Rupert Murdoch; she helped him consolidate his media power while he helped her spread the gospel and get reelected twice. The two protestant 'outsiders' who attended Oxford railed against the establishment which they became a part of by helping each other; he by having his tabloid the Sun shift its traditional support for Labour to Thatcher's Tories with a front page editorial arguing Thatcher’s election would be better for the working classes, she by allowing his acquisition of The Times and Sunday Times to avoid scrutiny by the competition authorities thanks to a deal struck during lunch at Chequers. While Thatcherism was tearing the heart out of the industrial heartland and looting the commons to hand it over to a tiny elite of 'wealth creators' who would free up the market and rain wealth on the land, Murdoch helped make sure there would be astonishingly little protest or consciousness by blaming the poor, promoting war and of course giving the people want they really wanted, more football.

The strength of ignorance is both easily built and desperately needed here in Poland. Caught so often on the wrong side of history and geography, convincing the Poles that there is no alternative to the current course has been an easy sell. Football, vodka and the Catholic Church allow the people to imagine they'll get to a better place as long as they keep their head down and work hard. Sure, they have the right complain and the array of choices seems as diverse as anywhere but the media landscape ensures the discourse never strays far off course. German companies like Axel Springer AG spew IngSoc, er, tabloid trash and EU propaganda with their version of the Sun, Fakt, alongside Dziennik and Newsweek Polska, American movies continually revise the past while TV portrays seemingly  possible present from the west or a poor simulation thereof and Radio Maryja spews xenophobic hate cloaked in the hope of redemption. The closest Poland comes to Murdoch is Adam Michnik, editor of the ofttimes leading national daily Gazeta Wyborca who somehow managed the trick of undergoing a conversion from a fearless dissident into a hack propagandist heralding the evils of Islamofascism and convincing women to go shopping on cobblestone streets wearing high heels (er, a forced reference to his paper's women's magazine Wysokie Obcasy - High Heels)

Maggie may or may not have been instrumental in delivering Poland and Eastern Europe from the Soviet Union but it was her amazing electoral success along with that of fellow cold war warrior Rotten Ronnie on the other side of the pond that sped the demise of democracy as we knew it. Yes, the unions they broke had too much influence on Labour and Democrat policy and no, it wasn't her or Raygun's fault those parties ran into the arms of Big Finance but there you are. Poland et al had the misfortune of gaining freedom just as the end of history arrived and democracy became nothing but a choice between  more or less measures of neocon and neoliberal, a lesser of two evil song and dance, a recipe repeated around the world from Ottawa to Warsaw. When asked about her greatest achievement, Thatcher simply replied, "New Labour" and Tony Blair. In Poland the answer would be the ruling Platforma Obywatelska (Civic Platform) and the likes of Oxford educated, husband of Washington Post hack Anne Applebaum, current foreign minister Radek Sikorski (not only did he write this drivel after Thather's death he called for a statue to be erected here in her honour, maybe right next to Reagan's in Warsaw!). Politics have become subordinate to markets and labour to capital, society now serves the economy instead of the other way around.

"All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind."
- Adam Smith, An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations

It's this last point which is probably the most important connection between Thatcher and life here in Poland, freedom is slavery. Sparked by the Powell Memo in 1971 and lent an aura of intellectual legitimacy by the Chicago Boys, a new economic ideology was propagated through institutional sponsorship: America has the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute and the American Enterprise Institute while the UK's versions include the Adam Smith Institute, the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Centre for Policy Studies founded in 1974 by Thatcher's mentor, Keith Joseph. Despite their benign sounding names, these are radical think tanks with almost nothing to do with the likes of Adam Smith who understood something about Moral Sentiments and the dangers of private monopolies and everything to do with Hayek, Friedman and Rand and their belief in extreme individualism or social Darwinism. Nigel Lawsen, Thatcher's Chancellor of the Exchequer from '83 to '89 summarized their economic philosophy, "Economic planning was both impossible and unnecessary. . . . The price mechanism . . . was a much more efficient means of transmitting consumer wants and needs than the vast bureaucracies of Whitehall and the nationalized industries." Selfishness along with ostentation of power and status was in. Culture was ruled over by money, and the idea that those who win by making more of it do so because they are better was not just permitted but ordained.

Profit and capitalism were good while planning, government and taxes were bad. Conveniently this all worked together as in order to lower taxes, public spending had to be lowered which scaled back government by reducing public services, privatizing whatever was possible and deregulating the rest. Inconveniently most voters viewed the government as subsidizing essential public services, ensuring economic security and helping families in need. The trick therefore was to create a backlash against government waste, resentment against public subsidies to those who were less hard working than themselves and place the blame for inflation on greedy unions. Notice the success as the issue of benefit fraud, which costs the UK about £1.2 billion yearly is a far more emotive topic than tax avoidance, which costs about £70 billion a year. Voters also needed to be convinced that what was taken from the state was being given to them thus enhancing individual economic freedom and unshackling the wealth creators, allowing the wealth to trickle down on everyone. The only valid idealism was to destroy the state by, as Lawson continued, "elevating private actions above public direction and dismissing ‘social justice’ as both vague and arbitrary." Finding bad reasons for what one believes for other bad reasons - that's philosophy.

Thatcher was swept into power on a perfect storm of global inflation emanating from the US pushing up world prices, IMF imposed austerity in exchange for loans to support the value of sterling after Britain's 1976 foreign exchange crisis which made it impossible to finance the modernization of public industries as it would increase the PSBR (Public Sector Borrowing Requirement), and finally, well, strikes and weather, otherwise known as Britain's Winter of Discontent. Yes, a public sector strike during an unusually cold winter ground the country to a halt, literally, as roads went unsalted, hospital patients were denied treatment and garbage piled up in the streets. Labour, who had tied themselves to those striking unions, found themselves with their hands also tied behind their back. Thatcher picked and chose her battles with labour wisely and pursued a step-by-step program of trade union reform before ultimately crushing them in the '84-'85 coal miners' strike. There was indeed no alternative to the monetarist Thatcherism which created an employers' market by imposing chronic under-employment and shifting enterprise out of the unionized public sector to newly privatized, non-unionized enterprises; Marks and Spencer had triumphed over Marx and Engels.

Ironically, or perhaps just calculatingly mercenary, while destroying unions and solidarity at home she was lionized by Solidarność (Solidarity) in Poland, actually being mobbed by dockworkers in Gdynia when she visited in 1988. If you've gotten this far in reading it hopefully means you realize I understand there was a difference between unions in the UK and Poland, after all, in Poland the military used to shoot striking miners dead. Given the trade unions' role in the democratization of Poland it is curious that Poland today has among the lowest unionization rates in Europe as from 1982 until 2005 membership fell from 80% to below 14% (only  2.4% for employees under the age of 25). There are myriad of factors at play here, from the many mistakes made by the unions themselves, a massive shift of the workforce from traditional industries and sectors such as mining and steel, and the privatization of many formerly public, union dominated industries, but it was the pernicious effects of Thatcherism on human psychology that seem the greatest factors. The transformation of the full-employment ideals of post-WWII society to an economic system based on chronic un- and underemployment has made many afraid of forming or joining a union along with the societal appeal to the narrowest self-interest of individuals having gained the upper hand over the feeling of brotherhood and the desire to work for the collective good.

Thatcherism also slowly shifted the balance of power from labour to capital through tax and monetary policy, privatization and deregulation. She managed to destroy more than 2 million jobs in two years, an astonishing figure considering unemployment only breached 1 million in 1978 before reaching 3.5 million by 1983. Her monetarism lowered everyone's taxes a bit and 'simplified' the fiscal system by regressively shifting taxes away from wealth onto consumers via sales taxes, excise taxes and the value-added tax. With public institutions being starved by austerity, privatization was the only way to modernize. "Popular capitalism", spreading ownership as widely as possible, would serve the double purpose of making it difficult to re-nationalize in the future plus giving the public skin in the game, giving workers a stake in preserving the value of the shares they held in these enterprises. The discipline of the market would make British industry more competitive but its effect along with deregulation of the financial industry, the 'Right to Buy' scheme of 1980 and the 'Big Bang' of 1986 simply handed over complete control of the British economy to the square mile in the heart of London, the City.

Privatization, which started tentatively in her first term with British Aerospace and Cable & Wireless, had reached fever pitch by her second reelection: Jaguar, British Telecom, Britoil, British Gas, British Steel, British Petroleum, Rolls Royce, British Airways. Her fourth term (well, John Major's first) saw British Rail hit the auction block. By the time the Conservatives were voted out of office in 1997 by one of the largest margins in history it had become clear to the public that there were some side-effects to the medicine they were being forced to take. Prices hadn't declined along with productivity gains in some areas while they had jumped for essential services like water whose systems were breaking down or shifted against residential consumers in favor of large industrial users in the case of electricity. Services had been cut back, privatized companies were engaging in monopoly practices and to add insult to injury economic inequality had widened with the shrinkage in the industrial labor force and stagnating real wages while profits soared for the privatized companies and the City fleeced the government for underwriting fees and began gambling in earnest thanks to the newfound market freedom. Thatchers reply? "Let us glory in our inequality."

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H.L. Mencken, A Little Book in C Major

Pity the Poles for having gained their freedom at the height of Thatcherism, imagine how different the future would look had it been in, say, 1968? As it was, having been tried and tested by Thatcher's buddy Pinochet in Chile, the Chicago Boys idea of "Shock Therapy" came to Poland in the person of Leszek Balcerowicz in 1989 under the guidance of Harvard's Jeffery Sachs backed by the muscle of the IMF. Doubtless, drastic measures were called for to make the huge transition that was complicated by the fact Poland was an economic basket case, with debt of $40 billion and inflation running at 600%. Also doubtless, the Balcerowicz plan was a success when compared to the results achieved in some other Eastern bloc nations. Forgotten though is the doublethink trick achieved of forcing a now 'free' democratic nation to trade off part of the debts incurred by a totalitarian regime it had never voted for in return for selling off state assets at discount prices for the benefit of foreigners and those highly place communists who were quick enough to convert to the new religion. Who cares if it was completely undemocratic, Balcerowicz termed it "extraordinary politics" while Michnik warned that the common people or "rank and file...irrational hotheads [were] incapable of recognizing the limits and realities of the real world". Those in position to do so stripped all the assets they could, a $1 billion stabilization loan (aren't numbers from the olden days quaint?) was arranged, large blocks of shares of privatized assets were placed in the hands of banks and Poland was absorbed into the global slavery debt trap.

The only goal of the IMF/Sachs/Balcerowicz policies was to ensure payments continued to flow west on the $40 billion in illegitimate foreign hard currency debt (what would be called odious debt today). Much of that debt had been incurred in 1979 when rates in London and New York increased 300% under the policies of, you guessed it, Margaret Thatcher and US Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. By the end of '91, Polish unemployment had reached 2 million, industrial production was 66% of the '89 level at the end of '92 and as 1993 closed 2.8 million were unemployed and 50% of families with 3 or more children were living below the poverty line. Little wonder that elections held in September of 1993 saw the the pro-IMF government of Hanna Suchocka replaced by a raft of coalition parties with direct ties to the communist regime. Predictably, as inequality elsewhere surpasses levels unseen since the roaring '20s, the new grand bourgeoisie that has emerged here has combined old bureaucrats, new managers and a burgeoning entrepreneurial class; a situation reminiscent of Poland in the 1920s. Perhaps the best symbols of what Poland got in return for the misery, organized crime, and debt-based slavery brought by the 'reforms' are Galeria Mokotów (Mokotów Mall) in Warsaw and Stary Browar (Old Brewery). The former, a shopping center built in place of a demolished semiconductor factory, cuz, you know, who needs those in a modern economy when you can create another black hole to suck wealth out of the local economy, and the latter a mall built on bribery (Polish link) and murder involving the richest man in Poland.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and the poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
- Anatole France, Le Lys Rouge (The Red Lilly)

Ah yes, the riches and glory promised to Poland are coming but as in the rest of the world more and more disproportionately to those at the top of the income scale. It would take a figure  stronger than Thatcher to convince Poles they are on the wrong course though as they are pumped through the indoctrination centers that are the education system. They emerge believing they have free will and as unquestioning of the free-market god as their forefathers were in the Catholic one unaware that one believes things because one has been conditioned to believe them; soma is simply Christianity without tears. The trains are slow, late and chaotic not because they're being sold off piecemeal on EU orders which is creating the disarray, but because it's not fully privatized like the UK's, who cares about their disastrous experience. The long waits at NFZ have nothing to do with it being underfunded, the public health care system isn't a blessing but a curse as promoting preventative medicine instead of the Americanized version of health for profit resulting in worse health outcomes and higher costs must be better as it's the path the Cameron government is choosing as they privatize the NHS by stealth. Oh, and don't worry Polish kids, it's only a matter of time until the course laid in leads to a completely privatized American-style college system of trillion dollar debt slavery before you've even entered the workforce. Just ask any 20-year-old Brit what it's like

Would the UK and Poland be much different if Thatcher had never been? Maybe not seeing as even the EU, the institution that most separates Maggie and Poland, has become nothing more than a glorified debt collector/pusher a fact not lost on most Poles as they become more disenchanted with the concept as their democracy ages just as Thatcher did. Even the Iron Lady, as she mentions in her autobiography, was caught off guard at how much she came to rely on the financial manipulators, how little she was able to control them and the scale of those bankers' greed; she convinced us to sell the family silver for the benefit of the rentiers who perceived the Thatchers and Friedmans as pawns, well-meaning promoters wrapping austerity economics in populist garb. Unfortunately, the deleterious social effects of the inequality caused by growing GDP through financialization of the economy, empowering those banks and other corporations to pursue profit without paying the price for wrongdoing and turning people into consumer zombies takes years to measure and decades to be felt. Trillions in wealth will continue to by siphoned out of the productive economy while we are forced to run faster and faster just to keep up and are convinced that our phone has somehow made us smarter. Yet while there is always time to get off the tracks before the train hits there's not much chance of heeding the warning the more we come to rely on those who profit from us being run over.

Friday, August 24, 2012

The Hazardous Morals of Bankers

Warning: You must forgive the writer for the exceptional length of this piece as a combination of rust that accumulated over months away from writing, a little too much time on his hands and what is feared to be the initial stages of ambiguphobia all contributed to the problem. 
- ed.

US federal debt will be more than $16 trillion by the time you read this. Student loan debt in the land of the free surpassed both credit card debt and the $trillion mark earlier this year. Greece teeters on the brink of bankruptcy while the other PIIGS wait their turn in the slaughterhouse. Three cities in California declared bankruptcy within a month this summer while nations have given up their sovereignty in order to avoid the same fate. Tens of millions have been thrown out of their homes in the past four years while even the Catholic Church battles to remain solvent. All of this was kicked off with the collapse of Lehmann Brothers four years ago triggering a crisis which forced governments and central banks around the world to pour trillions of dollars of bailouts into the financial system in order to stave off financial collapse and the threatened panic, chaos and disaster sure to follow. So, why are we here four years later staring over the US fiscal cliff, waiting for the eurozone to collapse and watching local sheriffs play the muscle for the mafioso banks repossessing all our neighbours possessions? The same reason the crisis seems perpetual. Debt and it's collector, moral hazard.

You have to choose between trusting to the natural stability of gold and the natural stability of the honesty and intelligence of the members of the Government. And, with due respect for these gentlemen, I advise you, as long as the Capitalist system lasts, to vote for gold.”
 - George Bernard Shaw

Like all good yarns, that of debt goes way back in time, before money, before barter, beginning with the Sumerians in Mesopotamia over 5000 years ago in fact, but we don't need to go back that far. No, forty-one years is enough for our purposes, when Richard Nixon ended the post war Bretton Woods International Monetary system by suspending the convertibility of the dollar into gold (then $35 to the ounce, today around $1600) on August 15th, 1971, effectively creating the current floating currency regimes: fiat money. No longer would the US dollar be convertible to gold; no longer would money creation and thus finance be constrained. Not only was the US fighting a war in Vietnam that had to be paid for but they were battling "international money speculators" as Tricky Dick dubbed them. Heck watch for yourself:



So it was that the casino known as the financialization of capital was built, in order to protect the average worker "because they [financial speculators] thrive on crisis, they help to create them". By no means was this the first time the world had used virtual money with nothing guaranteeing its value but our faith. According to David Graeber, there have been two such previous periods in the history of money and debt: The Age of the First Agrarian Empires (3500–800 BCE) and The Middle Ages (600 CE — 1500 CE). The key difference with today was that both those eras saw strong institutions and traditions which placed controls on the potentially catastrophic social consequences of debt from Mosaic jubilees (debt forgiveness every 50 years) to Christian and Muslim prohibitions on usury. Fast forward in time to go backward as the current era has seen protection turned on its head creating the first effective planetary debt enforcement system, operating through the IMF, World Bank, governments, corporations and other financial institutions. In the past we protected debtors; today we protect the interest(s) of creditors. Spot the doublethink involved here as the danger posed by financial speculators led to a policy which in turn empowered the threat leading to it's perpetuation becoming a necessity to maintain the status quo. The battle against the money speculators has been fought just like the war on terror.

Nixon's move had predictable results, a series of crises as wave after wave of speculation, manipulation and deregulation smashed against the economy. Predictably, with no physical limit to fiscal and monetary expansion, government debts ballooned leading to inflation which needed 22% interest rates to tame causing economic malaise that necessitated tax cuts (mostly for corporations and the rich) and deregulation to get the economy going again. The balance of power between rentiers and workers was shifted by slashing capital gains and opening investment loopholes so that in less than a generation the very group we had been warned about had been handed the keys to the Porsche and proceeded to drive us all over the edge. The process seemed almost planned, conspiratorial, but it was our own hubris that allowed it.

"There are compelling reasons for paying attention to this potential for catastrophe as, every debt crisis in history since Solon of Athens has ended in inflation, bankruptcy or war, and there is no cause to believe we’ve solved this one, even if it has been postponed." - Susan George; Fate Worse Than Debt, p. 196

The Cliff's Notes to the crisis reads like a tragedy. Steady erosion of the competitive advantage enjoyed by the US after WWII and the west as a whole to the east leads to policies which ensured wage stagnation for those working in industries losing employment and skyrocketing renumeration for the CEO's outsourcing those jobs and the financial industry which facilitates it. This creates a feedback loop in which those at the top enjoy more influence on legislation thanks to their enhanced financial position. Those at the bottom, seeing themselves falling further behind turn to debt in order to maintain the illusion of keeping up with the Joneses. Check out this interactive chart to see the machine in action. Meanwhile, the flood of money to the top leads to fewer and fewer available investment alternatives necessitating looser regulation on credit to lend to less and less credit worthy clients through the creation of creative, near magical, financial instruments. All the while, the growing inequality brought about by transferring wealth to the top slowly strangles the consumer driven economy (about 70%) as those who would spend have less while those who invest, at home or abroad, have more. A little more doublethink courtesy of trickle-down economics.

On the government side, though Reagan talked a fiscally conservative game, he walked a public spending splurge as debt tripled under his watch. Bush the elder didn't do much better and though Clinton managed to run a couple of surpluses late in his second term, Dubya and Congress managed to pass two successive $trillion plus tax cuts while fighting two separate $trillion plus wars along with passing a $trillion plus prescription drug plan. The Anglo-Saxon affinity saw the UK walking in near lockstep; just replace Reagan with Thatcher and Clinton with Blair at the head of the parade through the Corporation of the City of London instead of Wall Street. The financial sectors share of domestic US profits skyrocketed from below 16% to 41% making bankers more important than ever. The partial repeal of Glass Steagall, allowing banks to gamble grandma's pension with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act which ensured that the credit default swaps and collateralised debt obligations at the heart of the 2007/8 crisis wouldn't be regulated were the finishing touches as the banksters had merged with government and rigged the economy for explosion.

The story that unfolded in continental Europe was somewhat different but had the same result. Overnight, countries such as Ireland, Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy were expected to transform into Germany. Shockingly, it didn't happen and without their own currencies to debase in order to regain competitiveness, the peripheral, low-capital investment economies were crippled while German producers were given a boost. Not only did prices go up - in Spain a loaf of bread doubled in four years - but salaries stayed about the same, rising 14% in the ten years from the introduction of the euro January 1st, 2002 to the end of 2011. Throw in the additional enticement of suddenly being deemed nearly as credit worthy as their northern partners and you've got yourself the perfect debt bomb recipe. The explosion of Benzes, Beemers and Audis on the streets of Madrid and Dublin created a surplus that found its way back to German banks who had to lend this money to someone and were happy to find eurozone approved customers from Porto to Thessaloniki to buy more German cars or real estate developers to build beach resorts to take vacations in. Each country took their own path to purgatory, in Spain and Ireland it was more private bank debt while in Greece and Portugal it was more public (and Italy, well, they've always had too much debt).

As we know, our story doesn't end well, in fact, there doesn't seem to be an end as it's starting to feel like the neverending story. The total cost is incalculable  in dollars, euros or pounds, but it's the human cost that should remind us that economies are meant to serve people and not the other way around. When the crisis hit, we were told we had to bailout the banks or the world would end, so we did. Ever since it became clear that Greece wasn't going to be able to maintain its debt, the troika always manages to get the money to Athens on time. When the Irish banks couldn't keep afloat, their government threw them a lifeline and guaranteed their debt. Spanish banks were going under so once again the troika (IMF/ECB/European Commission) saved the day. Trillions of paper dollars, pounds and euros all to ensure the debt obligations continue to be paid, trillions the people will have to pay back. For what? The sums will never be paid off, everything has been done to keep interest payments flowing to the banks and to give them enough time to get their capital out. The price of paying off failed bankster bets is not only the sweat of our brows but becomes ever more demanding, framed in the Orwellian language of fiscal austerity/consolidation, structural adjustment/reform, labour flexibility, competitiveness, and growth.

In the 70's and 80's the IMF/World Bank became despised figures in the developing world. As global capital sought higher returns than could be found in the developed west, their sites settled on the poorer resource-rich nations of the south and east where they found dictators, anti-commie generals and corrupt legislators willing to sign over their people's futures in exchange for ready cash to build vanity projects, fund coups, suppress insurrections or simply pad their Swiss bank accounts. When the people of their nations found they couldn't pay, the men in black would arrive, preaching the 'free market' mantra of globalization, structural adjustment programs, which always had the effect of worsening life for the people while benefiting the foreign corporations. Eventually, the anti-globalization movement and debt cancellation voices became loud enough and democracy returned to many places and debt was in some cases even forgiven. The first part of the story is now playing itself out in the 'developed' world except this time the countries aren't even getting a hydroelectric dam, bombs or a statue in return. Debt is granted only to maintain existing debt in exchange for lowering spending on those things that help the people, shredding the social safety net, firing workers, lowering tariffs and taxes and eliminating workers rights in a duplicitous attempt to make the economy more competitive in order to grow and pay off the increased debt load. Unfortunately it has never worked, isn't working and never will. The only winner, for awhile at least, are the banks to whom the interest keeps flowing.

Ironically, many accept this punishment as atonement, self-flagellation to purify the soul. Debts are contracts that must be paid off, more than an obligation, as the threat of moral hazard would not only destroy our financial system but lead to anarchy (gasp!). Yet bank bailouts are a perfect example of moral hazard as the banksters have now learned that they will not pay the costs of their losses; their gains remain privatized while their losses are socialized. Morality should be the last thing they want to talk about as their lascivious behaviour has been highlighted this summer with a series of scandals that illustrate they have no intention of ever doing the right thing whenever there's a whiff of profit to be had. If they don't get caught, great, if they do, well, there will be newspaper headlines, an investigation and finally, at worst, a fine to pay, usually a fraction of what the illegal behaviour gained. Somehow, even though both Mitt Romney and the US Supreme Court have defined corporations as people, not only are the big banks Too Big To Fail, they've become Too Big To Jail (TBTF/J).

"Though the principles of the banking trade may appear somewhat abstruse, the practice is capable of being reduced to strict rules. To depart upon any occasion from these rules, in consequence of some flattering speculation of extraordinary gain, is almost always extremely dangerous, and frequently fatal to the banking company which attempts it." Adam Smith; The Wealth of Nations, Book V, Chapter I, Part III, p.820

This summer has put the lie to Adam's words once and for all. Most recently it was Britain's Standard Chartered, who NY state regulators accused of hiding $250 billion of transactions with Iran despite sanctions. A person would be charged with terrorism and sent to Guantanamo, a bank simply pays a $340 million fine; it's up to the families of those killed in terrorist attacks facilitated by StanChar to sue the bank. The reaction of the British government was particularly instructive; when a British bank is threatened with the loss of its New York banking license, officials, from the mayor of London to the Bank of England governor to the Chancellor of the Exchequer rush to its defense. This, from the same country that would and has done everything in its power to get Julian Assange extradited to the US for torture and possible execution and done nothing to prevent its own citizen, Gary MacKinnon, who suffers from Asperger's syndrome, from being extradited to the US for exposing weaknesses in the defense department's computer security systems.

Just a few week before that came the revelations of the LIBOR rigging scandal. A story that is 'too complicated' to understand by the public was therefore ignored by the media. Besides, there was that whole Batman shooting and then the Olympics to worry about. Denver theater body counts and jingoistic medal counts are far more interesting than a bunch of bankers sending each other emails, right? Well, no, not really when mass shootings seem to have become monthly occurrences in the US (surprise! another one today), the Olympic medal count can be predicted based on population, per capita GDP, past performance, and host status while the bankster collusion earned them hundreds of billions (trillions?) in profits while costing the public an impossible to figure, er, figure. Wait, sounds a bit like the Olympics. Anyway, as usual it's not all that complicated.

LIBOR stands for the London Inter Bank Offered Rates and it's used in the setting of most other kinds of interest in the world, from credit cards, student loans and mortgages to the cost of government bonds. Seeing as we live in a 'free market', up until the scandal we all assumed this rate was set by the 'laws' of supply and demand but, as usual, our naivety cost us and profited them. Instead, the most important rate in the world is determined every morning by representatives of the 18 largest western banks who report on what they expect to pay to borrow funds from each other (Inter Bank) in the future. Under LIBOR rules, the four highest and four lowest estimates are eliminated, and the average of the rest becomes the official rate. Well, shockingly, banksters used this opportunity to artificially set rates everyday a bit higher or lower in order to profit from the positions they held in their portfolios. Barclays had their boss Bob Diamond resign and was fined £290 million by British authorities, who were involved in the racket, while seven banks including Barclays have been subpoenaed in the States. A few Italian families get together and we call them the mafia and charge them with racketeering but when banks do it we call it cooperation. It will take years of litigation to sort it all out but you can be assured, a few banks will have to pay a fraction of the profits earned in the scam.

Speaking of the mafia, seeing as interest rates aren't spicy enough to make headlines, the other summer scandal involved just that, Mexican drug lords who line headless bodies on highways. Once again the contrast between the justice meted out to the flesh and blood people and the corporate people is illuminating. A real person gets caught selling dime bags on the street corner trying to raise money to go to college, we go to jail for life; they get caught laundering the money from the profits earned on those bags, they say they're sorry and get a slap on the wrist. Europe's largest bank, HSBC, not only transported billions of dollars of cash in armoured vehicles, cleared suspicious travellers' cheques worth billions, and allowed Mexican drug lords to buy planes with money laundered through Cayman Islands accounts, they also moved money from Iran, Syria and other countries on US sanctions lists, helped a Saudi bank linked to al-Qaida shift money to the US and even cleared $290 million in "obviously suspicious travelers cheques" that benefitted Russians "who claimed to be in the used car business." Lucky we only have to worry about Iranian-American used car salesmen hiring Mexican drug lords to assassinate the Saudi ambassador or this might sound like a conspiracy theory. Yep, all this was part of a report by a US senate committee which revealed HSBC failed to monitor $60 trillion in wire transfer and account activity, had a backlog of 17,000 unreviewed account alerts regarding potentially suspicious activity, and failed to conduct anti-money laundering due diligence before opening accounts for HSBC affiliates.

Each time new revelations come to light, bank executives line up to testify in front of an important sounding committee and explain how they are "horrified" by what has happened, that they couldn't have foreseen events, that measures have been put in place, that it was bad luck or a black swan or a rogue trader. Then it happens again. Just this spring, the last remaining 'good banker', Jamie Dimon had his bank JP Morgan victimized by one of those rogues as "the London whale" lost a bet on a position that could cost his bank $9 billion. Just the kind of gamble we were promised these banks would no longer make in exchange for bailing them out just four years ago. Just the kind that lost UBS $2 billion last September, Societe Generale $6 billion in January 2008, or Barings Bank $1.3 billion in 1995. Our always vigilant press is always sure to name them rogues, despite being the norm, performing unauthorized trades and justice is swiftly served on these lone scoundrels while pensioners and savers pay the price and the banks continue to promote the culture of short term profits in which psychopaths thrive, to inflate their quarterly earnings. Had enough yet? There's always the fattening of the PIIGS, the Magnetar trade, the Sentinel fraud, any of these, or ...

If these were people, as corporations such as banks have supposedly become, we'd execute, jail or banish them from our communities so how do you explain the social pressure to repay criminal enterprises that are slowly sucking the life from our economic system? In order to succeed in society, few would disagree that a university or college education is a prerequisite. Such a degree costs tens of thousands of dollars or pounds obliging many to take out student loans which become payable upon completion of their studies. In America, if you decide to head to Vegas and max out your credit card on hookers, blow and roulette only to find yourself unable to pay, one option is to declare bankruptcy, ruining your chances to obtain credit but clearing the debt off the books just as the hangover clears after a good, greasy breakfast. If you find yourself without a job (or only part-time or unpaid internship) once you finish school and unable to pay back a student loan, you don't have the bankruptcy option, it can't be cleared and will be with you until death or its paid. Heaven forbid if you're among the 25% of Americans without health coverage and you or a family member fall ill, the cost of which forces many into a debt spiral. This is nothing if not slavery. Even if you're a good client and you pay your debts, or the debts of your nation through your taxes, you are forced to work in order to earn the income. What else is forced labour but slavery?

Funny that we (or at least the Sumerians) had this all figured out 5000 years ago. Even then they recognized the need to protect those forced into debt from unforeseeable circumstances or the avaricious. Interest rates also seem to have first appeared in Sumer where most transactions were conducted on credit. Years with bad harvests resulted in peasants hopelessly indebted to the rich, forced to surrender their farms and, ultimately, family members, in debt bondage. Inevitably this would lead to a social crisis in which the masses were enslaved to the few. It soon became traditional for each new ruler to wipe the slate clean, cancel all debts, and declare a general amnesty or 'freedom', so that all bonded labourers could return to their families. Significantly, the first word for 'freedom' known in any human language, the Sumerian amarga, literally means 'return to mother' while in Sanskrit, Hebrew and Aramaic, debt, guilt, and sin are actually the same word. Julius Caesar became the hero of the Plebs, and was ultimately killed by the nobles, for introducing debt forgiveness schemes after he took power from the corrupt patrician oligarchy. Solon laid the foundation for Athenian democracy by "shaking off the burdens" of enslaving debt. Biblical prophets instituted a similar custom, the Jubilee, whereby after seven years all debts were similarly cancelled, the direct ancestor of the New Testament notion of ‘redemption’. Through some historical error, we inherited the institutions of lending at interest without the original checks and balances.

Instead, we live in a world where banks are bailed out while people are sold out. In which lenders making up details on credit applications became such a common practice it became known as liar loans but debtors get sent to jail for 30 years for lying on the same forms. It was after all many of those liar loans that were slapped together, sliced, diced and bundled into the CDO's that helped cause the crisis, but no one needs to be jailed for that. It's only those uncivilized countries that obviously need a good bombing where bankers are actually punished for fraud. Tax evasion is only for the rich and corporation kind of people not the 99%. It's jail for you or me if you screw the IRS but if you're HSBC or Credit Suisse, you just cut a deal in which you hand over email and telephone records of your staff to the US Department of Justice. Stealing from your clients is frowned upon unless your MF Global, an investment company run by the former governor of New Jersey Jon Corzine, then of course it's okay. It's usually fraud if I sell you something that I know is going to blow up, but if you're Goldman Sachs, where your clients are referred to as muppets, well, it's fine to sell your clients investment products that your bank is offloading as fast as possible on the open market because you know they're about to explode, even when there's emails to prove it.

It doesn't seem like banks have morals and they definitely don't learn their lesson from the punishments they receive. Bank of America’s securities unit has agreed four times since 2005 not to violate a major antifraud statute, and another four times not to violate a separate law. Merrill Lynch, which Bank of America acquired in 2008, has separately agreed not to violate the same two statutes seven times since 1999. They're just doing cost-benefit analysis, where their benefits are our costs as when Morgan Stanley entered into a complex swap agreement with the New York electricity provider KeySpan in 2006 that gave it a stake in the profits of a competitor enabling the two companies to push up the price of electricity. Price fixing is illegal, so Morgan Stanley had to pay a fine of $4.8 million for enabling it, but they got to keep the $21.6 million they made for handling the swap and didn't have to admit any wrongdoing. The cost to New Yorkers in higher utility bills? $300 million. Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase came out smelling like roses converting human shit into billions of dollars in profits by financing a new sewer treatment plant for the people of Jefferson County. The people didn't come out smelling so pretty though as the financing cost forced them into the biggest municipality bankruptcy in US history. The same thinking probably went into Wells Fargo's alleged decision to fire an employee three days before his daughter was scheduled for surgery in order to avoid paying the bill. No cash, no cure for cancer as the hospital cancelled the surgery and the child was left to die.

What of finances role of market maker and facilitating transactions for investors and consumers, surely we owe them something for that? Well, thanks to the deregulation of the agricultural commodity market in 2000 Goldman Sachs earned £600m from food speculation in 2009 alone. While the bank's profits were boosted, the numbers dependent on food banks and aid were exacerbated thanks in part to the banksters. No one disagrees that their gambling pushes up prices, the only question is how much relative to other factors such as biofuels, changing consumption patterns and drought. The poor are disproportionately affected by a rise in food prices as they spend a higher percentage of their income for the basics, just as they do for debt. If you use anything made of plastic, drive a car or heat your home, you should know oil speculation adds $23.39 to the price of a barrel (around a quarter) which translates to about an 83-cent-per-gallon of gas premium and costing an average American family $82/month. And people we're angry when Bank of America introduced a $5/month debit card fee!?! Seems these financial behemoths need the cash though as they need to keep up with their competitors in the new world of flash trading. By spending billions on faster cables they can shave microseconds off the latency, or trading execution time, thus allowing themselves to peek at the orders of other traders before they're made. Not only does this destroy the idea of investing, especially by us flesh and blooders, but it opens up the markets to one of the newest perils, the flash crash. Hooray, more risk!

Perusing the comments under any number of stories of payday loan companies charging four to 5000% interest, distraught families being tossed on the street or students in the streets protesting their debt enslavement, one can always be sure to find defenders of the faith of finance. These moralizers are quick to point out that no one forces people to sign on the dotted line but never take into account the asymmetry of information and power between the parties or the corrupting influence of living in a society built on sating our short term desires no matter the cost. The tired refrain of taxation and representation is trotted out to rationalize paying the debts of our governments but loses all meaning when put in the context of the options faced by voters today: Bad or Worse, Red or Blue, vote wrong and it's a redo, either/or results in another IOU as the need for money to get elected forces politicians to prostate themselves before the FIRE (finance, insurance and real estate, one for all and all for one thanks to deregulation). Insisting people today make rational economic decisions seems ludicrous while our educational system is being sold off to the lowest bidder and converted into a propaganda factory where standardized test scores are more important than critical thinking. Arguing we have a choice when the information we receive is nothing but a toxic mix of cognition clogging updates in our Twitooglebook universe alongside stories from a media controlled by six corporations (down from 50 in 1983) offering 2,000 channels with the same message while selling an illusion of choice barraging us with a constant stream of crisis reports, crisis summits and near-crisis averted but never connecting the dots.

"When national debts have once been accumulated to a certain degree, there is scarce, I believe, a single instance of their having been fairly and completely paid. The liberation of the public revenue, if it has ever been brought about at all, has always been brought about by bankruptcy; sometimes by an avowed one, but always by a real one, though frequently by a pretend payment." - Adam Smith; The Wealth of Nations, Book V, Chapter III, Part V, p. 481

To review. Forty years ago we entered a new era of fiat currency which untethered money and thus debt from any constraints in order to protect ourselves from "money speculators". The US in particular experienced a long economic boom for the wealthy with stagnation and even decline for the rest as taxes for the rich and corporations were cut, unions were gutted and jobs were outsourced. In the past 30 years, 96% of the growth of average incomes have gone to the richest 10% and in the past 10 years, the incomes of the other 90% have declined. In Europe, a new currency was introduced with supposed magical powers to turn the likes of Greece into Germany but only had the effect of causing them to diverge. On both sides of the Atlantic, the shortfall of the poor, the middle class and their governments was made up by increased borrowing. The "money speculators", whose ingenuity was unleashed by the deregulation that regulatory capture bought them, were more than happy to find more and more creative ways to eliminate risk and earn huge rewards. When the ponzi scheme faltered, we were told there was no alternative to saving the banks, transferring trillions from public hands to private with no consequences and next to no oversight. With nothing fixed and no lesson having been learned, the banks emerged bigger and more powerful than ever with the knowledge they can act with impunity while the public from Madrid to Manchester to Miami are forced to accept ever more stringent austerity measures in exchange for ever larger bailouts which continue right under our noses.

Oh, it continues. TARP was just the beginning of bank bailouts as the program has continued in stealth and shows no sign of being abandoned therefore changing the game is the new moral imperative and sustaining it a sin. Language is their most effective ruse, twisting meanings and changing expressions. Quantitative easing in the US and UK is nothing more than printing money electronically and using it to overpay banks for their financial assets or by lending to them on the cheap, minimizing their borrowing costs and lowering their reserve requirements in the hopes they will lend that money on to the real economy. Of course they don't, they just buy more bonds (gilts in the UK) to earn a risk free return (as long as the merry-go-round continues) and wait for the next round of easing (QE3 is rumored for a fall sailing). All this goes to pad the bottom line which they need to perpetually improve to keep increasing CEO salaries, keep the stock market happy and of course, give idiots like this something to babble about incoherently.



European sensibilities were a bit too sensitive for such blatant Zimbabwe/Weimar Republic-like behavior (at least until recently when they just up and gave Spanish banks €100 billion that the people will have to pay back), so the ECB basically did the same thing but called it LTRO, Long Term Refinancing Operation. Prohibited from giving money directly to countries, the ECB printing press is used to give money to banks ostensibly to buy bonds from countries having problems selling them (ie. Greece et al). More free money for the banks if the game continues as they can either put the cash into the riskier bonds at higher rates or play it safe and deposit it back at the ECB. Other Newspeak candidates include 'Growth friendly' policies, those which hand more power to foreign corporation and banks to continue their plunder while David Cameron's 'expansionary austerity' is more Orwellian than his Big Society and has driven the UK into a 'surprise' double-dip recession. Confused? Yep, you're meant to be, otherwise you'd wonder why they don't just give the money directly to the people instead of banks while artificially maintaining low interest rates in order to force the elderly to eat cat food or starve.

"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves" - Matthew 21:12

Just this past week US VP Joe Biden got in a little hot water for telling a half-truth:



People (well, right-wingnuts) went, well, nuts, as they tried to turn his words into an insensitive race play. The mistake he made though is that we're already in chains, slaves to greedy, immoral (amoral?), psychopathic bankers. It wouldn't be so bad if we at least we're being driven for a monumental purpose, I dunno, like building pyramids, the US capitol or White House instead of facilitating the worship of the Golden Calf. Up til now we've been complicit in their shakedown where debt is a sacred obligation only if it is owed by the poor and vulnerable to the rich and powerful who have used their gains to purchase political power or hidden them away in the Caymans. Yet debt is always negotiable or can even be written off when it's the other way around ensuring the wealth keeps flowing upwards. The growth in inequality seen before the crisis has been put on steroids since the bailout with more than 90% of the gains going exclusively to the richest 1% causing the middle class to slowly disappear and poverty to explode while Paul Ryan argues to cut their support. Regardless, much of the rabble will rally to the Romney/Ryan call to extend the Bush tax cuts and further cut taxes on the rich while making the rest pay for it. We used to ask "What's the Matter With Kansas?" but we need to ask "what's the matter with us?" today for doing nothing as the air raid sirens are sounding the next attack.



Alone, none of us can destroy the false idol of greed, there's no Moses amongst us, the only way is if enough people act together. Think and buy locally, plant a garden, ride your bike, vote for alternative parties and take your money out of the TBTF/J  banks (US, UK, Facebook) and put it in a credit union that puts profits back into communities are all simple ways to start. The more ambitious can talk to and teach others, join a protest, or even try to get out of the fiat economy altogether by investing in physical gold, silver or other metals. Of course if you're worried about all that extra weight in your pockets try using the alternative, electronic, secure Bitcoin currency. Finally, we have to shed the holier-than-thou shackles placed on us by those that would call people who walk away from underwater homes deadbeats, graduates unable to make their student loan payments slackers and governments tricked into a debt trap unable to meet their debt obligations lazy while bailed out banks behave beligerently, 'good' governments gut the promised social welfare state and corporations renege on obligations and commitments made to provide health care, pensions and other benefits to workers. The parasites may seem to have the power, they may have won the previous battles, but we, as flesh and blood people, have the real power, it's time to Strike Debt, stop paying what is no longer morally owed, a debt strike to stop the bankster shock doctrine takeover.