Amos's River of Justice

Category: Economics Commentary

  • The Siege of the Tax Havens

    The following information is from a new documentary, The Spider’s Web: Britain’s Second Empire. We are under siege. It’s the siege of the tax havens.

    As the British Empire’s 300-year reign was coming to an end, the British elites saw their wealth evaporating as countries began to declare their independence. Bankers, lawyers and accountants responded by setting up a financial spider’s web to capture the world’s capital. This led to a restoration of revenue for the elite. This is Britain’s second empire.

    Beginning in the 1960s there was an unintended consequence of this spider’s web. Great Britain and its partner in crime, the United States were de-industrialized (financialized). However, the developing countries suffer from this system more than wealthy countries. Today, Africa is wrongly said to be a net debtor. Africa’s foreign debt is $177 billion, but the wealth that has been moved offshore is $944 billion. Africa is actually a net creditor. Britain’s second empire starves developing nations of their wealth and tax revenues.

    With each new revelation about offshore tax havens, politicians announce a crackdown on corruption, but they have no intention of following through. Today the offshore market is the world’s dominant financial market and it has penetrated the state’s apparatus to the point where politicians are its spokespersons. They are either lobbying congress or parliament to protect their racket, or they’re thinking of new ways to deny social programs to the public.

    This video recommends five steps for addressing this problem:

    1. Stop public councils from issuing pubic contracts to companies operating out of tax havens.
    2. Create public registers of beneficial owners of companies, trusts, and foundations.
    3. Introduce full transparency of deals and secret agreements between companies and governments.
    4. Introduce public country-by-country reporting by multinational companies.
    5. Introduce automatic information exchange between al countries.

  • The Economy of the 1 Percent

    We saw in the 2016 election that the global political establishment has no intention of changing its direction.  Therefore I propose that we get our talking points straight and settle in for the long haul.  In the last article I said something to the effect that it won’t do any good to break up the banks until we solve the problem of the dollar being the reserve currency.  The problem with this claim is that it implies we have no control over monetary policy. It would then follow that we can’t do anything about the banks. But of course I don’t believe that.  Breaking up the banks is a solid proposal and a worthwhile goal for the short term.  But we also have to talk about the underlying cause of the money problem. We need to talk about the economy of the 1 percent.

    One View of the Problem: Beth A. Simmons

    I’ve been studying a book cited in the last article, Who Adjusts?: domestic sources of foreign economic policy during the interwar years, by Beth A. Simmons. This book has a number of implications for workers’ rights.  For example, the author argues that the gold standard couldn’t be maintained in countries that allow worker organization and universal suffrage. Universal suffrage turns a government into a financial pariah in the view of the markets.  Market reactions then hamstring the finances of the government. This is due to the expectation that it won’t be willing to impose harsh measures to correct its deficits.  

    The Markets v Workers’ Rights

    Simmons’s argument suggests the possibility that the markets leave no room for workers’ rights. It will take some time to examine the accounting details behind this assertion but the fact that she glosses over important realities in order to make her point tells me there is an argument to be made.  In the next article I will describe the workings of the prewar and interwar gold standard as she describes them in her book.  In this article I want to deal with the social assumptions that underly her main thesis.  

    She is not necessarily arguing for a return to he Gold Standard

    She is not necessarily arguing for a return to the gold standard. She views the gold standard as a normative benchmark for appropriate foreign economic policy and goes on to explain the conditions associated with the decision to devalue and protect.

    The issue of abiding by the rules is the focal point of her study.  Simmons seems to admire what she interprets as prewar indifference to the majority of the population.  She views the first world war as a calamity for the classical gold standard of the prewar years and traces the collapse of the interwar gold exchange standard to worker organization and representation after the industrial revolution, and to World War I.  She argues that without universal suffrage prewar governments could do whatever they deemed necessary without repercussions.  

    The Influence of Universal Suffrage

    One reason the international monetary system was stable during the nineteenth century was because of the excellent fit it enjoyed with prevailing domestic political institutions and practices.  From 1870 to 1913 the gold standard was managed from the top down.  External balance could be maintained with costs going to domestic economic activity.  Lack of resistance may be attributed to exclusionary politics and laissez-faire political philosophies that did not recognize state responsibility for the economic well-being of its citizens.  Political systems that could ignore economic and social pain; Political philosophies that could shun responsibility for misery.(page 22)

    She does acknowledge that workers would not have organized if not for the Industrial Revolution, which forced them to move to the cities and work in factories, but she treats the plight of the workers as an obstacle that can and should be overcome in the interests of a balanced budget.  She completely ignores the logic of worker organization as a direct result of the Industrial Revolution.  

    The book’s unspoken assumption, that workers rights are the only real obstacle to balanced budgets, led me to see the Great War as a war against workers. That led me to the following video. Click “Watch Online” in the right-hand column and choose Part 3.  

    Plutocracy

    Source: Who Adjusts?: domestic sources of economic policy during the interwar years  Beth A. Simmons, Princeton University Press, 1994

  • Economic Inequality is Public Enemy Number 1

    I entitled a previous article The Big Bang Swindle. I temporarily forgot something important about scientific theories: they are informed by philosophical ideas. All scientists work within the context of their own cultural understanding. A Spirkin explains the connection between philosophy, religion and science when he says that philosophy has always informed science, directly or indirectly, through ‘the whole system of culture’. So it doesn’t make sense to call the Big Bang theory ‘a swindle’. 

    However I am still concerned with the current direction of physics. I mentioned previously that Albert Einstein objected to Quantum physics, but it was his work that made the atom bomb possible. It seems strange to me that we don’t seem willing or able to discuss the beliefs and values that led to its development and to the bombing of Japan.

    Economic Inequality is Public Enemy Number1
    Philosophy and Science

    Science isn’t the problem. I would argue that the problem today is an economic system that allows a small number of people to set policy and control science. It destroys caution, it drowns out wisdom, and it uses science and politics as weapons.

    Given enough time we can solve any problem. If extreme inequality threatens to rob us of time it must go. Economic inequality is public enemy number 1.

     

    [1] A. Spirkin Philosophy and Science Marxists.org. Available Here 

  • Standing Rock and the Addictions of Dominant Capital

    The question that keeps coming up in regard to our country’s oil policy is why? Why would policy makers want to remain dependent on oil when they know it’s contributing to climate change? Why would they risk destroying the water and the land when there are alternative sources of energy? And why the expensive militarization of the police against peaceful demonstrators? I think of it as an addiction. We were all witness to the specter of Standing Rock and the addictions of dominant capital.

    According to Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler, 1 oil has become inseparable from the power structures of dominant capital. It is part of the process of ‘differential accumulation’ by which dominant capital controls everyone and everything else. What’s even more ominous is that it has formed an uneasy alliance with the arms trade.

    The Power Aspect of Capital is a Social Dimension

    Nitzan and Bichler disagree with the neoclassicists who say that capital is nothing more than material wealth. For them the power aspect of capital is a social dimension independent from tangible wealth. They redefine accumulation as a broader tension between productivity and power.

    “In this sense, large-scale business enterprise is driven by the same principal force which animated all previous power civilizations – namely the quest to control nature and people.”

    Accumulation is not enough for Dominant Capital

    But it’s worse than that. Simple accumulation will not do the job. Real power is in differential accumulation, which is the rate of return relative to the average. In order to accumulate more than everyone else, dominant capital implements strategic sabotage against non-dominant capital. Various methods are used for this purpose. These are not corporate strategies, but social regimes. They may look different from the outside, for example when comparing the period in the United States when there was a thriving middle class to our time of the disappearing middle class, but they’re all based on the ‘needs’ of a narrow group. I’ll include a brief summary of the regimes because I think it’s important in light of the efforts by the Trump administration and others throughout U.S. history to blame the economy on migrants and minorities.

    Social Regimes: Breadth and Depth Regimes

    There are two main regimes: breadth and depth. In a breadth regime a firm augments the size of its organization by having more employees. In a depth regime it increases its elemental power, which means getting more profit per employee. Breadth is relatively more stable and easier to maintain, while depth involves social antagonism and is more likely to spin out of control.

    Each Regime can be subdivided into Internal and External Subroutes

    Each regime can be subdivided into ‘internal’ and ‘external’ sub-routes. The following is a reproduction of a chart on page 49.

      Regimes of Differential Accumulation

    Breadth
    External: Green-field; Internal: Mergers & Acquisitions
    Depth
    External: Stagflation; Internal: Cost Cutting

    Green-field investment is building new capacity and hiring new employees faster than the average in order to increase market share. This is considered ‘external’ because it involves hiring additional employees from outside the firm. Excessive green-field growth has certain disadvantages. It creates surpluses, downward pressure on prices, and a decrease in profit per employee.

    Mergers and Acquisitions is Internal

    Mergers and acquisitions is the most potent form of differential accumulation. However it is limited by the availability of takeover targets and by social, political and technological barriers. M&A is considered ‘internal’ because it redistributes control over existing capacity and employment.

    Cost Cutting is Internal

    Cost cutting is internal because it redistributes income shares within a given price. Firms constantly practice cost cutting but it usually only helps them to meet the average rate rather than beat it, because of the difficulty of monopolizing new technology and controlling input prices.

    Stagflation is an Alternative Regime to Mergers and Acquisitions.

    Stagflation is an alternative regime to mergers and acquisitions. It is inflation practiced not by a single firm but by dominant capital, increasing its profit margin relative to non-dominant capital. Dominant capital can benefit from inflationary prices if it works in concert, while single sellers cannot. The result is a distribution of income to the bigger firms.

    What Does This Have to do With Standing Rock?

    Ok so what does all this have to do with the pipeline conflicts in the United States? It’s shocking to see these things here because we don’t realize that for dominant capital there is no difference between the Middle East and North America. The Middle East conflicts were not outside of the system. They were part of the system.

    “Interestingly, when we look at the history of the region from this particular perspective, the lines separating state from capital, foreign policy from corporate strategy, and territorial conquest from differential profit, no longer seem very solid. Many conventional wisdoms are put on their head. State policies, ostensibly aimed at advancing the national interest, often appear to undermine it; company officers and government officials, moving through a perpetually revolving door, sometimes simultaneously cater to several masters; arms races are fuelled for the sake of ‘stability’; and peace is avoided for being ‘too expensive’.”

    The Weapondollar-Petrodollar Coalition

    About 65 years ago the oil companies lost some of their control in the Middle East due to nationalism and industry competition. In the 1970s they formed a Weapondollar-Petrodollar Coalition with large U.S. and European-based manufacturing companies that were struggling with global competition. The strategy of the manufacturing part of this coalition was to turn to military contracts and arms exports. The strategy of Big Oil was to demand a strong state capable of protecting the dominant firms. Weapons, which used to be given as aid and controlled by the government’s foreign policy, became privatized and commercialized while oil became politicized.

    War and Capitalism Are Compatible: John Hobson

    It had already been observed by the late nineteenth century that war and capitalism were compatible. Their connection with wealth and income inequality was also known. The authors cite John Hobson’s ‘Imperialism’ (1902), on this point.

    Capitalism in the leading countries was moving from atomistic competition to concentration and monopoly, and tended to redistribute income from wages to profits, creating a problem of oversavings and underconsumption. This profit would normally have gone to green-field investment, but since people had less to spend there was less need for investment. That left imperialist expansion as the only outlet for excess savings.

    This doesn’t make much sense in the big picture since imperialism is a net loss to society. The explanation is that it made perfect sense to those who led the charge–a narrow coalition of arms producers, trading houses, the military and imperial apparatus, and the financiers. The financiers led the coalition in the late nineteenth century, enlisting key politicians and the possessing classes on the threat of redistribution at home, and they counted on the newspapers to provide the necessary atmosphere of nationalism and racism.

    Rudulf Hilferding on How The Bourgeoisie Stopped Being Peace-loving

    Marxist writers were influenced by Hobson although most of them rejected his belief that capitalism could be reformed. According to Rudulf Hilferding (1910) Finance Capital, an amalgamate of industry and finance controlled by the big banks, is a natural outcome of the monopoly stage of capitalism.

    “The demand for an expansionary policy revolutionizes the whole world view of the bourgeoisie, which ceases to be peace-loving and humanitarian. The old free traders believed in free trade not only as the best economic policy but also as the beginning of an era of peace. Finance capital abandoned this belief long ago. It has no faith in the harmony of capitalist interests, and knows well that competition is becoming increasingly a political power struggle. The ideal of peace has lost its luster, and in place of the idea of humanity there emerges the glorification of the greatness of and power of the state…The ideal now is to secure for one’s own nation the domination of the world, an aspiration which is as unbounded as the capitalist lust for profit from which it springs…Since the subjection of foreign nations takes place by force – that is, in a perfectly natural way – it appears to the ruling nation that this domination is due to some special natural qualities, in short the garb of natural science, a justification for finance capital’s lust for power, which is thus shown to have the specificity and necessity of a natural phenomenon. An oligarchic ideal of domination has replaced the democratic ideal of equality.” (Hilferding 1910: 335) As cited by Nitzan and Bichler. (205)

    Summary

    Nitzan and Bichler occasionally use Marxist analyses, but they are critical of it when it falls short of explaining a given problem. What do they think about the possibility of salvaging capitalism? On page 65 they state:

    “In summary, there is a long but crucial link leading from capitalism, to differential accumulation, to amalgamation, to capital mobility (Proposition 5). From this perspective, the present process of globalization is inherent in capitalist development and therefore not easily reversible without altering capitalism or moving away from it altogether. Moreover, contrary to popular perception, the underlying force here is not greater efficiency, but the control of efficiency, and the purpose is not aggregate but differential gain. Over time, particularly since the 1980s, foreign investment has come to rely less on green-field and more on cross-border mergers and acquisitions, as firms increasingly break through their national ‘envelope’. The big winners are the large ‘distributional coalitions’ of dominant capital. For society as a whole the picture is less cheerful, as the emphasis progressively shifts from green-field to amalgamation, causing growth to recede and stagnation to creep in (Proposition 3).” (For the list of 8 propositions, see pages 51-2.)

  • The Occult IMF

    Christine Lagarde’s strange occult speech given on January 15, 2014 inspired this article.  In this speech, she purposely called attention to numerology and then gave a series of misleading instructions on how to use it. This was during the time she was Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Because of the role the IMF plays today in our politics and economics, and because Legarde went to such trouble to call attention to numerology, it’s clear that the IMF is ‘The occult IMF’.

    Comparing Numerology in Orpheus the Fisher

    I’m using Robert Eisler’s book Orpheus the Fisher 2 to examine Lagarde’s references to numerology.  On page 267 Eisler begins a section entitled Number Symbolism in Aberkios’ Epitaph. This section is in the chapter entitled The ‘Fish’ caught by the ‘Virgin’ in the Mystic Epitaph of Bishop Aberkios.

    Who Was Aberkios?

    Eisler tells us that Aberkios was probably bishop Avirkios Markellos of Hieropolis in Phrygia Salutaris. According to the Church History of Eusebius, Aberkios lived towards the close of the 2nd century A.D. His epitaph incudes a number of words that are used in an unusual metaphorical sense. In other words, he uses a Christian mystery-language. He focuses on the various mystic epithets given to the ‘fish’ (p. 251). In these epethets we can distinguish between the reference to the Leviathan and the reference to ‘the suffering Messiah himself. Eisler says he intended the latter meaning.

    However, Eisler councils against insisting on the meaning, as ‘these expressions are intentionally mysterious.’ Instead, he believes we can guess the principle meaning of the document without knowing what dogma the poet had in mind. But even under these limitations, there is another surprise in store.

    Eisler thinks Aberkios Invited Christians to ‘Count the Number’

    Eisler thinks it can “be proved  that where Aberkios invites him ‘who understands this’ to pray for his soul, he means, even as the author of Rev. 13:18, also him ‘who has understanding to count the number,’ not only him who knows how to explain the mystery-words.” And  if we want to study this meaning, we should use the system found on inscribed tablets of the Dodonean oracle-priests and familiar to readers of Homer.

    Numeral Mysticism in Early Christian Literature

    Whatever had been known previously of numeral mysticism in Early Christian literature–e.g. the famous 666 in Revelations, the 888 for the name of Jesus (ΙΗΣΟΥΣ) in Marcus, the 801 = Omega-Alpha for the Dove (ΠΕΡΙΣΤΕΡΑ) of the Hoy Spirit, etc. –was al based, as well as the Pagan parallels of ‘Mithras’ (ΜΕΙΘΡΑΣ) or ‘Abraxas’ (ΑΒΡΑΞΑΣ) = 365, etc., on the so-called Milesian or common Greek system of expressing numbers by the letters of the alphabet, namely, A = 1, B = 2, Γ = 3 …Stigma = 6 …I = 10, IA = 11, …K = 20 …Koppa = 90, P = 100, etc.

    Yet Carl Robert had shown years ago that there existed another system of number-writing, anterior to this decimal mode, found e.g. on inscribed tablets of the Dodonean oracle-priests, etc., which is quite familiar to every reader of Homer as the twenty-four cantos of the Iliad and the Odyssey are simply numbered with the twenty-four sequent letters of the Greek alphabet

    These twenty-four sequent letters of the Greek alphabet are Α = 1, Β = 2, Γ = 3, . . . Κ = 10, Λ = 11, . . . Φ = 21, Χ = 22, Ψ = 23, Ω = 24—, without the supplementary signs Stigma, Koppa and Sampi used in the other series. Eisler tested the hypothesis of Wolfgang Schultz in his own book, Weltenmantel und Himmelszelt,[efn-note]On. ii. 70, pp. 164-166 (Hercher).[/efn-note] and he identifies it as the system used by the Orphic and Pythagorean mystics to conceal their innermost mystery-secrets.

    On the one hand, Eisler calls this method of deriving meanings from numbers ‘ridiculous futility’, but he thought it provided enough information for anyone ‘who had understanding to count the number’. This was important because they could prove to an adept of Pythagorean lore that the ‘name’ of Jesus, ‘into which’ the Christians were baptised, could be ‘put on’ even as a heavenly ‘garment’, instead of the ‘old man’ (Col. 3:9).

    “Putting on the Heavenly Garment” is Pagan, Not Jewish

    This concept comes from the Pagan mysteries. It was alien to the old Jewish cult-system. However, Paul used this simile himself. (Eisler assumes he was under the influence of Hermeticism.) But the concept was also used in John 21, and possibly his source in Mark.

    Eisler concludes that it is worthwhile to study this system ‘if it is in keeping with other features of the narrative, for example the precise numbers full of symbolic bearing that are given for the cubits over which Peter has to swim from the boat to the Lord Jesus, and the multitude of ‘great fishes’ caught in the Apostle’s net. Eisler lists many other examples, but to include them all in this article would be getting off the subject.

    The Magic Number 7 in Lagarde’s Occult IMF Speech

    At the beginning of Lagarde’s occult IMF speech she mentions the ‘magic number 7’, saying that it’s ‘in all sorts of themes and religions’. She also explains that the numbers should be compressed. However, if she was serious about counting the number, she should have explained which system she was using. Her method made no sense.

    My Calculations Find the Magic Number 7 In Events She Mentions but Doesn’t Calculate

    Beginning with the date of Lagarde’s speech, both January 15 and 2014 equal 7: 01 + 1 + 5 = 7 and 2 + 1 + 4 = 7. In other words, the entire date equals 14, not just the last two digits of the year as she claimed.

    If we use the Greek letters for January, we get the same result. January in Greek is Ιανουȧριος, or 9 + 1 + 13 + 15 + 20 + 1 + 17 + 9 + 15 + 18 = 118. Compressing 118 gives 1 + 1 + 8 = 10. So again that’s: 1 + 0 + 1 + 5 = 7.

    The 100th Anniversary of World War I

    Next she tells us that 2014 will mark the 100th anniversary of World War I. The date of the beginning of World War I, June 28, 1914, doesn’t give us a 7 in the same way that January 15, 2014 does. Perhaps it’s not relevant. However the number 28 is important as the fulfillment of the number 7: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 = 28.

    The 70th Anniversary of the Bretton Woods Conference

    Then she says 2014 is also the ‘70th anniversary of the Bretton Woods conference which gave birth to the IMF’. The 70 compresses to 7.  International Monetary Fund compresses to 7.

    The 25th Anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall

    Next she says, it’s the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. 2 + 5 = 7.

    The Berlin Wall fell November 9, 1989. November in Greek is Νοεμβριος. This is 13 + 15 + 5 + 12 + 2 + 17 + 9 + 15 + 18 = 106, which compresses to 7.

    1989 is 1 + 9 + 8 + 9 = 27. (Compressed this is 9, however the number 27 may be important in itself.)  November 9, 1989 is 106 + 9 + 27 = 142. 1 + 4 + 2 = 7.

    The 7th Anniversary of ‘Financial Jitters’

    Next, she tells us that 2014 marks the 7th anniversary of the ‘financial jitters that turned into the greatest global catastrophe since the Great Depression’. The 7th anniversary comment looks to be the main relevance of this date as well.

    It’s not hard to guess why she chose January 15 for an occult speech in the year 2014, but what do the correspondences mean? Is she hinting that her cabal had a hand in those events? Unfortunately this system can be used to ‘prove’ just about anything, so it’s anyone’s guess.

    Lagarde Emphasizes ‘Weakness’

    However there several things in this speech we can talk about without feeling ridiculous. I’ll deal in this post with one interpretation of Lagarde’s emphasis on weakness. She described the previous 7 years as ‘weak and fragile’.

    By coincidence, I was researching the relationship between the theories of Joachim of Fiore & secularism and found an article about Gianni Vattimo that seems relevant.  3Gianni Vattimo, (1936–) Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: a peer-reviewed academic resource.[/efn-note] I realize the connection of Vattimo with the IMF is random but it’s amazing how well it fits.

    Gianni Vattimo

    Vattimo is an Italian philosopher and cultural commentator, who is currently a Member of the European Parliament and a gay rights activist. He is influenced by Joachim of Fiore, but also by the works of Nietzsche, Heidegger, Gadamer and Kuhn. His ideas have influence across disciplines such as feminism, theology, sexuality studies, and globalization.

    Vattimo is “well known for his philosophical style of ‘weak thought’ (pensiero debole). ‘Weak thought’ is an attempt to understand and re-configure traces from the history of thought in ways that accord with postmodern conditions. In doing so, the aim of ‘weak thought’ is to create an ethic of ‘weakness’…” But what does this entail?

    The Ethic of Weakness is Vattimo’s Versions of  the Decline of the West Theme

    Vattimo, an ‘End of History’ type of philosopher, believes there is no longer a coherent narrative which is accepted in the West. In his view this process is a positive thing–it was initiated by Jesus Christ who  came to expose society’s propensity for sacrificial religion.

    Vattimo posits that history has lost its unilinear character in three principle ways: theoretically, demographically, and through mass communication. To explain the theoretical process he uses Walter Benjamin, who argues that unilinear history is a product of class conflict. Vattimo thinks demographic effects in modern Europe, in particular mass migration, have acted to undermine the notion of Europe’s unilinear history. This process is aided by mass communication which facilitates the rebellion of previously ruled peoples. In his view, the chaotic aspect of mass communication will lead to ‘emancipation’.

    This view contrasts with that of Adorno, Horkheimer, and Orwell, who thought that a homogenization of society would result from mass communication. As a result of Vattimo’s reading of Nietzsche, he thinks mass communication will lead to an increase of interpretations rather than facts.

    The Contradictions and Hypocrisy in Vattimo’s Diagnosis of Late Modernity

    Vattimo’s philosophy is not free of contradictions and hypocrisy. In spite of his supposed acceptance of a variety of interpretations, he firmly believes that his diagnosis of the situation of late modernity makes the best possible sense of this interpretative plurality.

    In another example he accepts the wearing of a cross as part of the secular furniture of the West but he rejects the wearing of the chador, which he thinks is an example of strong thought.  Never mind that the chador could be worn out of choice in a ‘weak’ sense. (Vattimo is an atheist but he was educated as a Catholic.)

    Weak Thought is an Agenda

    Weak thought is Vattimo’s philosophical style but it’s also his agenda.  It has lead him to posit that the only plausible late-modern, Western philosophical outlook is ‘hermeneutical nihilism’.” According to Vattimo, one must weaken the traces of the tradition into which one is ‘thrown’, and this can be done by twisting the old traces of Being. (Hermeneutics is a branch of knowledge that deals with interpretation, especially of the Bible or literary texts.)

    “Determined in this manner, Vattimo’s philosophy of ‘weak thought’ involves a withdrawal from metaphysics by avoiding new foundations or complete assent to any position.”

    Conclusion

    Although this philosophy is all wrapped up in a new package, it’s not new at all.  In fact it’s been proven over and over again to be harmful.   Unfortunately our illustrious leaders have no objection to it.

    Lagarde’s speech was part of an abusive relationship. She is a powerful representative of a powerful institution who gives us false and misleading information and then allows us struggle to understand.

    The abuse continues today.  We’ve seen the destruction of Syria, blatant disrespect for the US electoral process, and the bulldozing of tribal burial grounds in North Dakota, all directly related to out-of-control corporate power.

    Philosophy is one thing. Imposing one’s philosophy on the physical world and then teasing people with this magical nonsense is another thing entirely. It should go without saying that this behavior is not acceptable.

  • Neoclassical Ideology

    Neoclassical ideology is capitalist mind control. It was created to support the aims of dominant capital.  Capitalist mind control is a smokescreen for the abuses of capitalist economics.

    Dominant Capital and Tax Money Financed Neoclassical Economics

    This development was financed by two sources, dominant capital and tax money. It is shored up by countless apologists and repairmen and implemented by state organs. And finally, the media sells it to the public.

    Most outsiders have trouble understanding it. This is because it’s deliberately made to look difficult. This is only one of the reasons the public doesn’t discuss it.  There is also the problem of treating the economy like a natural phenomenon subject to scientific study. It’s either above our heads, or it’s an inevitable phenomenon unaffected by humans, and therefore discussion is not necessary.  Laws of nature can be discovered but they can’t be changed. Capitalist mind control is one of its greatest powers.

    Denial of the Problem

    The most troubling thing about the current crisis of capitalism is the large number of people who deny that a problem exists. One example is Catholics who object to Pope Francis’s condemnation of the economy. We should question who they represent. This kind of objection is standard practice for those whose job it is to head off criticism about the economy.

    The phenomenon of murky, inexplicable economic manipulation is explained by Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler in The Global Political Economy of Israel, published in 2002 . 4

    What the Ruling class must hide

    The book deals mainly with Israel, but the critique of economic theory isn’t specific to Israel. The United States has a similar economic story. 5

    Between 1865 and 1920, in order for the U.S. to become the world’s leading industrial capitalist nation, dominant capitalists had to find a way to overcome two major factors: the demands of the working class; and competition among existing firms. They accomplished this through monopoly in manufacturing, and this produced a system of corporate capitalism.

    The process was driven by a ruling class with designs on power. Control of the financial system was the basic mechanism and the merger movement was the result. The process was managed by financial experts who commanded either capital itself or the avenues for gathering it.

    The Bankers’ Master Plan

    During the first years of the 20th century, ‘higher financial circles’ decided that the banking system should be the headquarters of an investment system based on cooperation among large firms. According to Thorstein Veblen, the essentials of the system were as follows: ‘The banking community took over the strategic regulation of the key industries, and…also the control of the industrial system at large.’ Key industries were controlled by the investment bankers who made up a sort of General Staff of financial strategy and who commanded the country’s credit resources.

    Their relation with insurance companies is one example.

    “In the years 1885 and 1905, the annual income of life insurance companies in the United States was $525 million and 2.9 billion, respectively. These funds were derived from premiums paid by holders of the insurance policies, and needed to be invested promptly so as to yield in income for the companies to pay for the deaths of their insured persons. Five firms owned two-thirds of the assets of all life insurance companies: Metropolitan, Prudential, Mutual, Equitable, and New York Life. The last three owned fully one-half the assets of all life insurance companies.

    In 1870 less than three percent of these assets were stocks and bonds; by 1900, that figure had risen to nearly 38 percent. Five years later, securities held by New York Life constituted 74 percent of its total assets; of Equitable 57 percent; and of Mutual, 54 percent. Which securities did the insurance companies buy? Primarily, those sold (i.e., underwritten) by six dominant New York investment banks, led by J.P. Morgan and Company. Such securities were issued by industrial corporations and others which had close relations with the dominant investment banks. According to Douglass North, ‘It was clearly a one-sided arrangement in which the great bulk of the advantages accrued to the investment banker rather than to the insurance company.’

    “Crucial to this entire arrangement was the requirement that the insurance companies control their own back yard. This was accomplished by deep company involvement in political and governmental affairs. ‘The three big insurance companies occupied key positions in financing the [New York State] Republican machine (and to some extent the Democratic one also) and guaranteed not only friendly legislators but cooperative [state] insurance departments as well.’ Between 1895 and 1905, a New York Life lobbyist was paid at least $1,312,197.18 to guard against passage of hostile legislation. The New York State Department of Insurance functioned as a subdivision of the industry…”

    The New York Department of Insurance Ruled Their Industry Like US Steel

    The New York Department of Insurance was a creature of the dominant capital machine. Its ‘regulations’ enabled the large companies to evade regulations when necessary, and to insure continuous dominance by the large companies. The Big Three insurance companies ruled their industry very much like US Steel, a Morgan firm.

    Neoclassical Ideology: the Organic Super-Government of Mankind

    Historians refer to the late 19th and early 20th centuries are frequently referred to as the age of Big Business. But according to W.E.B. Du Bois, this is misleading. It wasn’t so much about the size of the firms as it was about an ‘organic super-government of mankind in matters of work and wages. This super-government was directed with science and skill for the private profit of individuals.’

    “When Woodrow Wilson first ran for president in 1912, he declared that ‘the masters of the government of the United States are the combined capitalists and manufacturers of the United States.’ At the center of this process lay control of the principal political parties and the political machines, organized under the direction of party bosses. ‘Living to a great extent on the corporations, bossism burst into full bloom in the States where big capitalist interests were concentrated, where [railroad] companies were most numerous, such as New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania…’”

    The bosses didn’t run everything however. Often company officials sat in on important party committees and pulled the strings for them, equipped and kept up political organization for their own use, and ran them as they pleased.

    The Sherman Anti-Trust Act Was Ignored by Dominant Capital

    When the Sherman Anti-Trust Act was finally passed in 1890, an amendment was offered to assure it would not be applied against the unions. Senator Sherman led a successful fight against the amendment arguing it was not necessary. Within 5 years it was indeed used against the unions. The entire Anti-Trust Act was soon judged to be a charade because so much of it was ignored whenever it suited dominant capital.

error: Content is protected !!