============================================================================ A GUIDEBOOK: HOW THE WORLD WORKS AND HOW WE CAN CHANGE IT (C) 2000, Richard K. Moore http://cyberjournal.org Chapter 1: How does the world work today, and where is it headed? a. Globalization and the West: a covert coup d'etat b. Globalization and the third world: empire by another name c. Kultur-kampf: enforcing the New World Order d. Economic globalization: Robber Barons writ large e. Decoding propaganda: matrix vs. reality f. Capitalism's growth imperative and societal engineering g. Elite rule and the Dark Millennium ---------------------------------------------------- 1.b. Globalization and the third world: empire by another name "Recommendation P-B23 (July, 1941) stated that worldwide financial institutions were necessary for the purpose of 'stabilizing currencies and facilitating programs of capital investment for constructive undertakings in backward and underdeveloped regions.' During the last half of 1941 and in the first months of 1942, the Council developed this idea for the integration of the world.... Isaiah Bowman first suggested a way to solve the problem of maintaining effective control over weaker territories while avoiding overt imperial conquest. At a Council meeting in May 1942, he stated that the United States had to exercise the strength needed to assure 'security,' and at the same time 'avoid conventional forms of imperialism.' The way to do this, he argued, was to make the exercise of that power international in character through a United Nations body." - Laurence Shoup & William Minter, in Holly Sklar's "Trilateralism," writing about strategic recommendations developed during World War II by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). At the end of World War II, a grand new project of world management was launched. The United Nations was formed and the Bretton Woods Institutions (IMF and World Bank) were set up for the purpose of stabilizing currencies and providing investment capital. European empires were gradually dismantled, and dozens of newly independent nations were formed out of the old colonies. The establishment of the UN led to hope that world peace would be achieved. The new independent nations were generally seen as evidence of the spread of democracy, and the beginning of a better life for all. The third world became known as the 'underdeveloped world', and 'development' was generally embraced as the obvious path to a better future. But what is 'development'? When Western nations industrialized in the 1800s, those were examples of development that led to strong national economies, effective national infrastructures, and productive industrial capacities. It was development aimed at nation building. When a transnational corporation buys land in Central America and raises cattle there to make hamburgers, that is also 'development.' But instead of nation building in Central America, this development extracts large profits from local resources while creating very little local wealth or long term benefit to the local economy. Furthermore, it displaces farmers and forces them into poverty, and it destroys old-growth rain forests. In addition, repressive local regimes are required to enable the extraction of maximum profit from the capital investment without interference from labor unrest or environmental regulations. The word 'development', when used rhetorically by government officials and the media, implies 'advancement' and 'betterment' - such as was experienced when the U.S. or Japan industrialized. But in reality, when a corporation talks about undertaking a 'development project', this means only that the company is going to invest some money, build something, and then extract more profit than was invested. When it comes down to it, the thing actually being developed is the corporation's cash - it is being developed from a huge stash into a still bigger stash. There is a big difference between nation building and corporate wealth accumulation - but both are called 'development'. The distinction may seem like a minor detail of semantics, but the confusion enables officials to say one thing and mean the opposite. The third world remains 'underdeveloped' - after fifty years of intensive 'development' - because 'underdeveloped' refers to the strength of the local economy and infrastructure, while 'intensive development' refers to the number of corporate projects that have been undertaken. In fact 'development', as it is practiced, is precisely what prevents the kind of 'development' that is promised by official mythology - and was hoped for in the optimism following World War II. That is why many third world nations today are demanding a 'right to development' - and why many of us in the West would have a hard time understanding what they are talking about. America was once on the other side of this coin. Before the American Revolution, Britain prohibited manufacturing in the colonies, forcing the locals to trade their raw resources to Britain for finished goods - an exchange that worked disproportionately to Britain's benefit. To a large extent the Revolution was a struggle for the 'right to development', and as soon as independence was achieved, intensive nation-building development began. The actual experience of the third world in the postwar era has been one of economic exploitation, environmental destruction, civil suppression, and continued underdevelopment. The economic relationship between the West and the third world remained substantially unchanged as colonial empires were dismantled. New means of control were introduced, such as replacing garrisoned imperial troops with local client regimes, and employing occasional intervention instead of ongoing colonial administration. What looked like democratization and the end of imperialism was in practice a modernized, more efficient form of imperialism. From available planning documents, such as the one quoted above from "Trilateralism," it becomes clear that this postwar version of imperialism was no accident but was rather the result of an intentional design. The planners _intended to exploit and they _intended to deceive. While avoiding the _appearance of "conventional forms of imperialism", they sought nonetheless to exercise "effective _control over weaker territories". While publicly proclaiming an era of international cooperation, they all the time intended the UN and the Bretton Woods institutions to serve as a framework for systematic global exploitation - by means of "programs of capital investment for constructive undertakings". 'Constructive undertakings', like 'development', seems to imply 'advancement' or 'progress', but all it really means is achieving profitable returns from corporate investments. From a third-world perspective, globalization amounts to an acceleration of this postwar imperialist program. Free-trade treaties and IMF demands tighten the economic screws on the third world, squeezing out increased profits by more rapidly depleting local resources and impoverishing local people. One might wonder how the West expects to compel the third world to submit to this program of rape and plunder by international capital. ---------------------------------------------------- Recommended reading. Michel Chossudovsky, "The Globalization Of Poverty - Impacts of IMF and World Bank Reforms", The Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia, 1997. This detailed study by an economics insider shows the consequences of "reforms" in various parts of the world, revealing a clear pattern of callous neo-colonialism and genocide. Definitely red-pill material Frances Moore Lappé, Joseph Collins, Peter Rosset, "World Hunger, Twelve Myths", Grove Press, New York, 1986. Another red pill. Debunks Malthusian thinking, among other things. Here's a sample: "During the past twenty-five years food production has outstripped population growth by 16 Percent. India - which for many of us symbolizes over-population and poverty--is one of the top third-world food exporters. If a mere 5.6 percent of India's food production were re-allocated, hunger would be wiped out in India." William Greider, "One World Ready or Not, the Manic Logic of Global Capitalism", Simon & Schuster, New York, 1997. A tour by a superb journalist showing how the global economy operates in various parts of the world. "Third World Resurgence", a magazine published monthly by the Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia, http://www.twnside.org.sg. This magazine deserves widespread circulation. It covers a wide range of global issues, presents a strong and sensible third-world perspective, and is a very good source of real-world news. Martin Kohr is managing editor and a frequent contributor. "The New Internationalist", a magazine published monthly by New Internationalist Publications, Ltd, Oxford, UK, http://www.newint.org. Another good source of real news and commentary, with a global perspective. ============================================================================