SUPPORT OUR
SPONSORS

Organic Valley

Dr. Bronner's
Magic Soaps

Botani Organic

Aloha Bay

Eden Foods

Ode Magazine

Mountain
Rose Herbs

The Green Guide

911-Globalization & War

From Agribusiness Examiner #127
Oct. 3, 2001
by Al Krebs <avkrebs@earthlink.net>

Ties Fast Track Legislation to"US Response to Terrorism"
Protestors "No Friends of the Poor" by Robert Zoellick

U.S. Flaunts"Affluence and Power"
World Reacts in "Varying Degrees" by R.C. Longworth

Accessory Before the Fact by Sam Smith

Ties Fast Track Legislation
to"US Response to Terrorism"
Protestors "No Friends of the Poor"

ROBERT ZOELLICK;

" . . . This President and this Administration will fight for open markets
and free trade. We will not be intimidated by those who have taken to the
streets to blame trade --- and America --- for the world's ills. The global
trading system has demonstrated --- from Seoul to Santiago --- that it is a
pathway out of poverty and despair. As President Bush stated in July in a
speech at the World Bank, the protesters against globalization, largely
upper middle class and affluent young people, are `no friends of poor.' Or
as former President Zedillo of Mexico said, the protesters `seem strangely
determined to save the developing world from development.' The plural of
anecdote is not fact . . . ."

--- Robert B. Zoellick U.S. Trade Representative, "American Trade
Leadership: What is at Stake," The Institute for International Economics,
Washington, D.C., September 24, 2001

U.S. Flaunts "Affluence and Power"
World Reacts in "Varying Degrees"

R.C. LONGWORTH, CHICAGO TRIBUNE: . . . Nothing --- no complaint against
corporations or capitalism --- justifies the slaughter of innocent civilians
at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. But the West and especially the
United States have to understand the alienation that the American-led rush
toward globalization has caused in these left-behind regions of the world.
"In a globalized world with instant communications, it is impossible to have
excessive opulence alongside grinding poverty without something, sometime,
somewhere, exploding," said William Van Dusen Wishard, a former official in
the Commerce Department and president of WorldTrends Research. "We
Americans have flaunted our affluence and power in the
face of the world, and the world has reacted in varying degrees, terrorism
being only the most extreme form of reaction."

The globalization gospel insists that a rising tide lifts all boats and that
the global economy is increasing incomes and improving lives everywhere it
goes. This is not true even in more favored areas, as farmers and factory
workers from the Midwest to Southeast Asia can attest. In large areas of the
world, global communications have excited expectations and overturned
centuries of traditions, but the global economy has not arrived to fulfill
those expectations or to replace those traditions with something of value.

Africa is an example, of course, but the Middle East is Exhibit A. "The
Middle East is really pathetic in its relative lack of participation in the
global economy," said Marvin Zonis, a professor at the University of
Chicago's Graduate School of Business and an expert on the region.

The global economy is powered by trade and investment, but, apart from the
oil and gas industry, there is virtually no Western investment in or trade
with Middle Eastern economies, Zonis said. Foreign investment in the region
was about $6.5 billion in 1998, according to UN statistics. Of this, $4.8
billion went to Saudi Arabia alone; the other countries, with more than 400
million people, got $1.7 billion. This is less than
the amount that went to Hungary, with 10 million people, one-third as much
as what went to Thailand (60 million people), one-twelfth as much as what
went to Sweden (8 million people).

"If any region has got the worst of the global economy but none of the best,
it is the Middle East. `People see the disruption in their own lives," said
William Reno, a political science professor at Northwestern University.
"They recognize that markets can be a very destructive force. In the United
States, which is the center of this economy, jobs are destroyed, businesses
are destroyed, there is destruction. But our economy offers opportunities,
too, for new jobs and businesses and training. In marginal parts of the
world, all they get is the destruction." . . . .

Accessory Before the Fact

SAM SMITH, PROGRESSIVE REVIEW UNDERNEWS: Among those
who escaped injury in the recent disasters was an American establishment
responsible for the costliest military defeat against a foreign adversary ever
to occur on home soil.

CNN didn't tell you that, but aside from the internecine Civil War, the
largest number of American deaths in battle on our mainland prior to the
recent assaults occurred during the Revolutionary War --- about 4,500.
Actual battle deaths --- not all on the mainland or even in our colonies ---
during the War of 1912 were 2,300; the Mexican War, 1,700; the Spanish
American War, 400; and at Pearl Harbor 2,400. In September, over 6,000
Americans were lost when the biggest and best funded military in world
history was defeated by a handful of guerillas armed mainly with knives.

In normal circumstances there would be talk of courts martial (as there was
in the case of Pearl Harbor) and impeachment (as there was during the
Vietnam War). Instead we have been conned into waving the flag on behalf of
an establishment that has shamefully failed the country through a
combination of arrogance, greed, stupidity, unpreparedness, carelessness,
and corruption.

Consider, for example, the fact that we are now getting lessons on
patriotism from politicians and journalists who spent the past decade
tossing American sovereignty down the drain in the name of "free trade."
Consider that our military, alienating the restless in scores of country,
turned out to be a cause of our troubles rather than of their elimination.

Consider an intelligence establishment that help train the guerillas who
have now turned on us. Consider the politicians who undermined our safety to
please the oil and defense industries or who endangered our lives in order
to support Israel and gain the campaign rewards that followed. Consider a
foreign policy intelligentsia that could not tell the difference between
realpolitik and realstupid.

This is not cause for unity, flag-waving and loyalty to the latest political
puppet of a decadent elite that has led us into such a crisis. It is cause
for shock and anger, for citizen inquiries and investigations into the
questions the think tanks, Congress and the media refuse to ask, and for a
Solidarity-type movement in which Americans who love their land, the freedom
they once possessed, and the decency to which they aspire come together not
just to bring peace in a war-mad moment but to cause a transformation in how
power is exercised.

I was asked the other day what I would do if I were president. I declined
the hypothesis because, I said, the only way that would happen would be if
the Green Party had come to power, which would mean that America would
have already have been acting in a far different manner than it is today and thus
the attacks would have been far less like even to have occurred. I might
have added that it was a little late to be seeking the advice of those who
have repeatedly sought a different course and who, in return, have been
scorned, kept off the ballot, not invited to debates, and blacked out of the
media.

Further, the American establishment, despite its shameful and disastrous
failure, refuses even now to listen to other than itself. Check this out by
counting how many minutes on mainstream TV or inches in your paper are
devoted to non-military, non-violent solutions to our problem.

Of course, the establishment would have you believe that the guerillas
sprung from the global forest like the Big Bad Wolf going after Little Red
Riding Hood. It relies heavily on the American faith that bad things have
only two sources: accident or someone else's evil. The idea, such as was
imbedded for centuries in maritime law, that a collision often involves
divided fault, is alien to us save in a few instances such as when an abused
spouse shoots her husband. Yet we must now face our proportional
responsibility not only in the name of honesty but in the name of survival.
Nations can not well endure on such a diet of denial as ours.

The question of what one should do at this moment is clouded by another
truth: there may actually be no adequate defense against that which we fear.
To believe that we will be safe if we only ban, search, and spy on enough
things, and jail enough people on enough specious grounds, is a path towards
madness. Like the individual suffering from agoraphobia, we will become
prisoners in our own rooms.

The possibility of no available defense is frightening until one realizes
that we live happily with it every day in other contexts. For example, no
husband and wife adequately protects themselves from being murdered by each
other or by their children. Yet, most do not sleep in bulletproof vests nor
pat the kids down each time they walk in the house. That's because we have
found other ways of assuring the safety in these relationships based on
means beyond those used by the military and police. Similarly, despite the
often heated nature of labor negotiations, I have never heard of a mediator
going into the conference room fully armed.

To define the possible solutions to this crisis as only those of war and
security is to admit defeat, for it is on this level that we are most
vulnerable. Yet these appear to be virtually the sole tools our
establishment understands. Thus not only has it brought unprecedented shame
and danger to this land, it proposes with unbridled hubris to compound its
errors by more of the same.

The rest of us, whether out of moral sense or pragmatic grasp, must no
longer enable such madness but tell those who have failed and betrayed us
that they may not, must not, damage further our lives, our fortunes, and
our sacred honor.