Even the first governments redistributed wealth: in Mesopotamia and Egypt, the people who worked the land were not the ones who accumulated the surplus wealth produced (wealth above subsistence). The governments--and the priests--extracted the wealth for their own enjoyment. As a rationale for doing so, they "protected" society and maintained order.
It still works that way. In the US, approximately half of all discretionary funds are spent on "security," and much of the proceeds go to a small elite, who run or own large corporations especially created to profit from the business of "security." Their friends in the financial sector arrange to siphon off perhaps half of the rest of the surplus wealth created. How do they do it: by buying off the powers-that-be.
My conservative Venezuelan uncle used to explain that American oil-men preferred to work with the dictatorship (of which my family had been a prosperous part), because they didn't have to buy off as many people as they do in a "democracy."
True democracy hasn't been possible since societies emerged from hunting and gathering. With agriculture, with empires, with armies, with currency, some people always find ways to steal everyone else's surplus wealth: in hunting and gathering societies there was no surplus, or it was small enough to be given away. That's why the indigenous Americans of the Northwest, practiced the potlatch: surplus riches were distributed at potlatch parties, so no one would become obscenely wealthy.
In the US today, some people are obscenely wealthy, like Mitt Romney. What we need is something like the potlatch, so that surplus wealth can benefit everyone, not just a tiny few.
When the Roman Empire held sway, there was a highly compensated bureaucracy, but an even wealthier Senatorial class--as well as impoverished plebeians and slaves, the latter doing most of the work. Julius Caesar was heavily in debt until he conquered Gaul; then he became the wealthiest Roman of all.
Long before the western Roman Empire fell in 476, men with swords and armor carried off most of the wealth. The Huns, highly successful for a time in pillaging both Empires; paid no taxes to Attila, but then their king only led them to the spoil; they shared it with him, of course, and his share was mind-boggling.
Now, we have a tax and financial system that ingeniously insures that a tiny percentage of the population carries off most of the surplus wealth. The elites work hard to siphon off government's rewards and society's spoils: like buying off Pennsylvania's government so that they could gain eminent domain over fracking sites: the people are powerless to stop them. Money to the Defense complex and most other government "services" are also huge sources of profit--for a few.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year: you have been so generous to the 1%: it is better to give than to receive.
Showing posts with label Venezuela. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Venezuela. Show all posts
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Columbus and a Deracinated Carib
Some of my present-day relatives, unknown to me, must mourn the coming of that man, whose name changed over time. He was never known to himself as Christopher Columbus.
Colon stumbled on the Americas. He didn't discover them, since whole societies had been there for thousands of years. The people Colon mistakenly landed amongst were not particularly happy that he did so; he kidnapped, enslaved and killed them. Essentially, Colon, and almost every European following him, until a few enlightened souls in the 19th and 20th centuries, saw the indigenous peoples as sub-humans to be subjugated, enslaved, or eradicated.
Unbeknownst to Colon and to most of his successors until very late, the diseases Europeans brought with them unknowingly were the most effective destroyers of the healthy indigenous peoples. Late, in the 19th century, smallpox-smeared blankets were distributed to the Plains Indians to accomplish one of the most horrendous acts of "ethnic cleansing" ever attempted, perhaps the first biological warfare.
Before Colon, indigenous Americans were about as numerous as people in Europe, according to recent archaeology, yet soon after him, Europeans saw the Americas as nearly empty continents ripe for the picking. The Europeans' diseases preceded them, probably because refugees fleeing each plague spread it everywhere, from the Europeans' common cold, to the flu to small pox to malaria. No one understood diseases, then, not Europeans, not First Americans.
Siphilis, America's contribution to global diseases, didn't kill off whole European populations, but did precipitate mass craziness, like the Inquisition.
Spanish Conquistadores in Florida, shortly after Colon, strung up murdered Indians' bodies, and fed them to their dogs. Even now in the US indigenous transsexuals need protection from whites.
None of my indigenous heritage has been acknowledged by my Venezuelan family, but all you had to do was look at my mother and uncle to see it: straight, coarse black hair, not-white skin (except when sheltered always from the sun, as my grandmother apparently did), high cheekbones and small stature. My grandmother's family couldn't afford to admit its heritage: they were prominent landowners, business people and, reputedly, owners of a pearl fishery off the small island where my mother was born. The Coello's, island people, were probably half-Carib for generations, until my grandfather, a "100% Spanish" Andino, married my grandmother.
Columbus didn't just "discover" America. He set in motion the destruction of a whole hemisphere's cultures and societies, and the reduction of its original inhabitants to genetic remnants; I am one small, deracinated part. He also launched Europe onto the world's stage, and the US extended European dominance with its huge new resources in the hastily emptied hemisphere.
But that is past. Despite Republican posturing, Pax Americana will be more fleeting than Pax Romanum; American resources are stretched thin. The American Empire cannot maintain itself militarily, but Republicans would try: until the last penny of the not-rich has been poured down war's rat-hole--and billionaires escape.
Colon stumbled on the Americas. He didn't discover them, since whole societies had been there for thousands of years. The people Colon mistakenly landed amongst were not particularly happy that he did so; he kidnapped, enslaved and killed them. Essentially, Colon, and almost every European following him, until a few enlightened souls in the 19th and 20th centuries, saw the indigenous peoples as sub-humans to be subjugated, enslaved, or eradicated.
Unbeknownst to Colon and to most of his successors until very late, the diseases Europeans brought with them unknowingly were the most effective destroyers of the healthy indigenous peoples. Late, in the 19th century, smallpox-smeared blankets were distributed to the Plains Indians to accomplish one of the most horrendous acts of "ethnic cleansing" ever attempted, perhaps the first biological warfare.
Before Colon, indigenous Americans were about as numerous as people in Europe, according to recent archaeology, yet soon after him, Europeans saw the Americas as nearly empty continents ripe for the picking. The Europeans' diseases preceded them, probably because refugees fleeing each plague spread it everywhere, from the Europeans' common cold, to the flu to small pox to malaria. No one understood diseases, then, not Europeans, not First Americans.
Siphilis, America's contribution to global diseases, didn't kill off whole European populations, but did precipitate mass craziness, like the Inquisition.
Spanish Conquistadores in Florida, shortly after Colon, strung up murdered Indians' bodies, and fed them to their dogs. Even now in the US indigenous transsexuals need protection from whites.
None of my indigenous heritage has been acknowledged by my Venezuelan family, but all you had to do was look at my mother and uncle to see it: straight, coarse black hair, not-white skin (except when sheltered always from the sun, as my grandmother apparently did), high cheekbones and small stature. My grandmother's family couldn't afford to admit its heritage: they were prominent landowners, business people and, reputedly, owners of a pearl fishery off the small island where my mother was born. The Coello's, island people, were probably half-Carib for generations, until my grandfather, a "100% Spanish" Andino, married my grandmother.
Columbus didn't just "discover" America. He set in motion the destruction of a whole hemisphere's cultures and societies, and the reduction of its original inhabitants to genetic remnants; I am one small, deracinated part. He also launched Europe onto the world's stage, and the US extended European dominance with its huge new resources in the hastily emptied hemisphere.
But that is past. Despite Republican posturing, Pax Americana will be more fleeting than Pax Romanum; American resources are stretched thin. The American Empire cannot maintain itself militarily, but Republicans would try: until the last penny of the not-rich has been poured down war's rat-hole--and billionaires escape.
Labels:
American empire,
Carib,
Colon,
Columbus,
pearl fishery,
Republicans,
Roman Empire,
Spanish,
Venezuela
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
My Personal History Collides with Egypt
When Mubarak's supporters attacked Egyptian protesters with sticks and knives, I felt an unwelcome kinship. Most of the pro-government demonstrators are probably goons from the security services; my mother's family was high up in similar institutions in Venezuela when Juan Vicente Gomez was military dictator (1908 to 1935). When Gomez died in 1935 (of natural causes), my Great Uncle Velasco, Governor of Caracas, delayed news of Gomez's death by 24 hours. He needed time to load a gunboat with all his valuables, so he could flee to Costa Rica.
My grandfather was not so foresighted. When he was Gomez's governor in Estado Falcon, he invested in land; when Gomez died, he lost it all.
Velasco was known for a particular form of torture, so it's likely that his appointees' main job was regime security. My mother's father, and almost all his brothers, worked for Velasco. My uncles were probably counterparts to the Cairenes deploying the police goons in mufti, today--not the men wielding sticks and knives, or riding horses and camels into Tahrir Square, but the ones who sent them.
My sympathies go out to the anti-government protesters, who defended themselves with stones.
Deploying the pro-government goons would be something Gomez might have done, but Gomez was always careful to tightly control his military. It was not a conscript army. In Egypt it is, dividing the army into elite officers and civilian soldiers.
The chaos and violence precipitated by Mubarak's followers is probably a tactic for bringing the army over to the President's side. The officers revere order, and order is now being visibly disrupted--by the President's men.
There have been extraordinary stories in both Tunisia and Cairo of the demonstrators/protesters policing themselves; there were even TV scenes of young men cleaning up the trash in Tahrir Square. Other stories told of young men protecting neighborhoods from looting, and of the elaborate but self-deputized efforts of the protesters to screen newcomers, preventing them from bringing weapons into Tahrir Square.
And then on Wednesday, the army let in the pro-Mubarak demonstrators with knives, clubs, and even a few guns.
Either the army still feels constrained when faced by security forces, or it prefers a passive role: letting the protesters protest, and letting the counter-protesters into the square--until it tries to separate them with armored cars. Maybe the army sees itself as Egypt's arbitrator.
The people recruited for the pro-Mubarak demonstrations are like the people who worked for my mother's family. Now, in Venezuela, my cousins are united in their disgust for Chavez.
But it was the people who won for Chavez in Venezuela, after he was toppled in a coup. The Egyptian people can win, too; I hope they have better luck in leaders.
Their triumph will mark another important step in the decline of the American Empire.
My grandfather was not so foresighted. When he was Gomez's governor in Estado Falcon, he invested in land; when Gomez died, he lost it all.
Velasco was known for a particular form of torture, so it's likely that his appointees' main job was regime security. My mother's father, and almost all his brothers, worked for Velasco. My uncles were probably counterparts to the Cairenes deploying the police goons in mufti, today--not the men wielding sticks and knives, or riding horses and camels into Tahrir Square, but the ones who sent them.
My sympathies go out to the anti-government protesters, who defended themselves with stones.
Deploying the pro-government goons would be something Gomez might have done, but Gomez was always careful to tightly control his military. It was not a conscript army. In Egypt it is, dividing the army into elite officers and civilian soldiers.
The chaos and violence precipitated by Mubarak's followers is probably a tactic for bringing the army over to the President's side. The officers revere order, and order is now being visibly disrupted--by the President's men.
There have been extraordinary stories in both Tunisia and Cairo of the demonstrators/protesters policing themselves; there were even TV scenes of young men cleaning up the trash in Tahrir Square. Other stories told of young men protecting neighborhoods from looting, and of the elaborate but self-deputized efforts of the protesters to screen newcomers, preventing them from bringing weapons into Tahrir Square.
And then on Wednesday, the army let in the pro-Mubarak demonstrators with knives, clubs, and even a few guns.
Either the army still feels constrained when faced by security forces, or it prefers a passive role: letting the protesters protest, and letting the counter-protesters into the square--until it tries to separate them with armored cars. Maybe the army sees itself as Egypt's arbitrator.
The people recruited for the pro-Mubarak demonstrations are like the people who worked for my mother's family. Now, in Venezuela, my cousins are united in their disgust for Chavez.
But it was the people who won for Chavez in Venezuela, after he was toppled in a coup. The Egyptian people can win, too; I hope they have better luck in leaders.
Their triumph will mark another important step in the decline of the American Empire.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Elections and Anger
"Quick, I want a list of all the incumbents, so I can vote against them!" the voter told me, at the election "in-take" table in our rural-ex-urban Town Hall.
I said I couldn't help him; it's against election law for an election inspector to politic. The Republican inspector sitting next to me remarked, "If he doesn't know who the incumbents are, maybe he should have paid attention for the last couple years; probably, all he did was complain."
The voter, a youngish middle-aged man, was angry and frustrated, but he epitomized, for me, the mood of the electorate, not just locally, but nationally.
There was also the older voter, who was clearly confused by the new voting system (New York recently installed optical scanners and paper ballots to finally comply with the HAVA federal election law; most people wanted their lever machines back). The old man couldn't believe he actually had to blacken ovals by each candidate, and after requesting bipartisan assistance, said he'd wanted to vote for Cuomo, but now he was so frustrated he'd just vote the straight Republican line; anything else was too complicated.
The scanner did break down, repeatedly, and, after several hours wait, was replaced by another from County headquarters. At least, the "emergency" ballots voted in the interim, were easily retrieved and scanned once the new scanner was up and running. Paper ballots are a sturdy paper record.
Our incumbent Democratic Congressman was voted out; the operative mood was simply 'throw the bums out,' even though the 'tea party' gubernatorial candidate, Paladino, was soundly rejected. My Republican colleague pronounced him "crazy."
Republicans swept to control the House of Representatives, but despite tea party rants, there was no clear mandate, not only because Democrats retained the Senate, but because what voters were reflecting was the inchoate anger and frustration of my angry voter, who had no idea what he wanted, except: throw the bums out.
How can the US govern itself as a democracy, when voters have no idea what they want? Voters chose rejection, not direction.
But then Democrats, after campaigning in 2006-08 for Change, were not capable of delivering sufficient positive change, nor, especially, of undoing the economic damage wrought by Republicans and Bush. So, now we get Republicans, aiming to restore the previous, unregulated economy, even though it led to the economic collapse that caused voter anger. There even might be enough spine-challenged Democrats in the Senate to go along.
Will the US experience long-term stagnation, like Japan? Likely--unless Obama, or a rival presidential candidate, promotes war as a solution. The Washington Post has suggested Iran! Let's add Somalia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Bolivia and Yemen: WWIII. The US could lose its empire through bankruptcy and defeat, just like Japan and Rome.
Then, American elites could move to China, Brazil, or?
I said I couldn't help him; it's against election law for an election inspector to politic. The Republican inspector sitting next to me remarked, "If he doesn't know who the incumbents are, maybe he should have paid attention for the last couple years; probably, all he did was complain."
The voter, a youngish middle-aged man, was angry and frustrated, but he epitomized, for me, the mood of the electorate, not just locally, but nationally.
There was also the older voter, who was clearly confused by the new voting system (New York recently installed optical scanners and paper ballots to finally comply with the HAVA federal election law; most people wanted their lever machines back). The old man couldn't believe he actually had to blacken ovals by each candidate, and after requesting bipartisan assistance, said he'd wanted to vote for Cuomo, but now he was so frustrated he'd just vote the straight Republican line; anything else was too complicated.
The scanner did break down, repeatedly, and, after several hours wait, was replaced by another from County headquarters. At least, the "emergency" ballots voted in the interim, were easily retrieved and scanned once the new scanner was up and running. Paper ballots are a sturdy paper record.
Our incumbent Democratic Congressman was voted out; the operative mood was simply 'throw the bums out,' even though the 'tea party' gubernatorial candidate, Paladino, was soundly rejected. My Republican colleague pronounced him "crazy."
Republicans swept to control the House of Representatives, but despite tea party rants, there was no clear mandate, not only because Democrats retained the Senate, but because what voters were reflecting was the inchoate anger and frustration of my angry voter, who had no idea what he wanted, except: throw the bums out.
How can the US govern itself as a democracy, when voters have no idea what they want? Voters chose rejection, not direction.
But then Democrats, after campaigning in 2006-08 for Change, were not capable of delivering sufficient positive change, nor, especially, of undoing the economic damage wrought by Republicans and Bush. So, now we get Republicans, aiming to restore the previous, unregulated economy, even though it led to the economic collapse that caused voter anger. There even might be enough spine-challenged Democrats in the Senate to go along.
Will the US experience long-term stagnation, like Japan? Likely--unless Obama, or a rival presidential candidate, promotes war as a solution. The Washington Post has suggested Iran! Let's add Somalia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Bolivia and Yemen: WWIII. The US could lose its empire through bankruptcy and defeat, just like Japan and Rome.
Then, American elites could move to China, Brazil, or?
Labels:
American empire,
elections 2010,
Iran,
tea party,
Venezuela,
Washington Post
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Coup in Ecuador, in US?
Will Obama say 'No!' to Ecuador's generals? A coup is unfolding at this moment. In April last year, Obama said "I am absolutely opposed and condemn any efforts at violent overthrows of democratically elected governments," in the hemisphere. That was at an OAS meeting. However, in June last year, his State Department didn't condemn the coup in Honduras, so it went forward. The ousted elected President could not return, and the subsequent election was carefully controlled by the pro-business coup leaders.
Is this how big business will get rid of the surge of social democracy in Latin America? One coup at a time. My family in Venezuela would be happy at the prospect, but even there, Chavez has significantly reduced inequality; he's still popular.
Simultaneously, corporations are trying to buy US elections: funding groups like Rove's Crossroads, pumping millions into the tea party, or like the Koch brothers, directly funding tea party insurgents and radical conservative Republicans.
There is a common theme to these corporate-friendly actions: corporations and their owners want to eliminate regulations. They want to be able to pollute, without having to pay costs they impose on society. They want to gamble with free taxpayer money; they want to terrorize illegal aliens--and employees, more generally--so workers are desperate enough to work for near-subsistence wages. They also want to be free to ship jobs and processes overseas without having to pay the costs of their leaving. They even want to continue tax subsidies for doing so!
In places like Ecuador and Honduras, they want governments they can buy, not ones that try to serve their peoples' interests. As my Venezuelan uncle enjoyed pointing out: it's much more difficult to buy off a democratic government--the executive, the legislators, the judges--than a dictatorship, where you deal with one guy, or a small group.
Corporate interests, or pro-corporate conservatives have already gained electoral power in Britain, Canada, Germany and France. African and Asian countries are venues for conflict, over resources, not religion. China and India are major players, while Japan stagnates.
What also seems to be emerging is a bent toward authoritarianism. You see it in Russia and China. Developing countries emulate China. It isn't the "Communism" that's imitated: it's the authoritarian politics and the hybrid command/market economics China invented.
You see the same authoritarian leanings even in the US, even with Obama; he's continued Bush's Security State, and has barely held the military at bay on Afghanistan.
What will happen if the radical conservatives win? More severe economic crises yet, and even greater immiseration of most of the people: it makes them docile workers. Dictators would, too.
The few would be on their way to achieving the kind of dominance held by Roman Senators just before Rome's fall in 476.
Is this how big business will get rid of the surge of social democracy in Latin America? One coup at a time. My family in Venezuela would be happy at the prospect, but even there, Chavez has significantly reduced inequality; he's still popular.
Simultaneously, corporations are trying to buy US elections: funding groups like Rove's Crossroads, pumping millions into the tea party, or like the Koch brothers, directly funding tea party insurgents and radical conservative Republicans.
There is a common theme to these corporate-friendly actions: corporations and their owners want to eliminate regulations. They want to be able to pollute, without having to pay costs they impose on society. They want to gamble with free taxpayer money; they want to terrorize illegal aliens--and employees, more generally--so workers are desperate enough to work for near-subsistence wages. They also want to be free to ship jobs and processes overseas without having to pay the costs of their leaving. They even want to continue tax subsidies for doing so!
In places like Ecuador and Honduras, they want governments they can buy, not ones that try to serve their peoples' interests. As my Venezuelan uncle enjoyed pointing out: it's much more difficult to buy off a democratic government--the executive, the legislators, the judges--than a dictatorship, where you deal with one guy, or a small group.
Corporate interests, or pro-corporate conservatives have already gained electoral power in Britain, Canada, Germany and France. African and Asian countries are venues for conflict, over resources, not religion. China and India are major players, while Japan stagnates.
What also seems to be emerging is a bent toward authoritarianism. You see it in Russia and China. Developing countries emulate China. It isn't the "Communism" that's imitated: it's the authoritarian politics and the hybrid command/market economics China invented.
You see the same authoritarian leanings even in the US, even with Obama; he's continued Bush's Security State, and has barely held the military at bay on Afghanistan.
What will happen if the radical conservatives win? More severe economic crises yet, and even greater immiseration of most of the people: it makes them docile workers. Dictators would, too.
The few would be on their way to achieving the kind of dominance held by Roman Senators just before Rome's fall in 476.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)