tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7343733660444187772024-02-21T08:45:19.892-06:00La disidenciafcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.comBlogger141125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-74744906354738090692011-06-23T18:50:00.005-05:002011-06-23T19:09:12.849-05:00Habitantes de la Hermana República de Cravia manifiestan su respaldo a Encinas<span style="font-weight:bold;">- Llevan a cabo consulta<br />- Decisión unánime: apoyo a Encinas<br />- Temen devastación de bosques</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXZK28dAG8GvcfBBpVy9i_ATuuKWO6u-wOxNfuulWrvXLyIWeL1JwoukG2mnmNIDaRRhh9DY9JWAxHWGgHYz4WlyXbDyNxIcCo-Q_0_EOvaC6LuTZicQNeY2FU7h7NjEUgEh6IDCnSLps/s1600/sendero-bosque.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXZK28dAG8GvcfBBpVy9i_ATuuKWO6u-wOxNfuulWrvXLyIWeL1JwoukG2mnmNIDaRRhh9DY9JWAxHWGgHYz4WlyXbDyNxIcCo-Q_0_EOvaC6LuTZicQNeY2FU7h7NjEUgEh6IDCnSLps/s400/sendero-bosque.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5621571243876177954" /></a><br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">El Vaso, Cravia, 23 de junio de 2011<br /></span><br />Después de llevar a cabo una consulta horizontal, previa discusión extensa y profunda en los comités de cada una de las provincias confederadas que constituyen la H. República de Cravia, los habitantes de este bello paraje acordaron, por consenso, manifestar su apoyo al candidato de la coalición "Unidos Podemos Más", Alejandro Encinas, en la contienda por la gubernatura del Estado de México. Los "ciudadanos plenos" --un "ciudadano pleno", a diferencia de un ciudadano común y corriente, característico de los, así llamados, regímenes democráticos-liberales, tiene una incidencia directa real sobre la totalidad de las decisiones de gobierno que se toman en su entidad política (en los Altos de Chiapas, lo llaman "Buen Gobierno")-- de Cravia expresaron que su intención no es manifestar algún tipo de injerencia sobre los procesos políticos del vecino gobierno local de la República Mexicana. Sin embargo, ante la impotencia frente a la devastación de los bosques circundantes al territorio que comprende está pequeña pero espectacular república, provocada por la tala inmoderada y los desarrollos turísticos e inmobiliarios mal planeados, han acordado hacer público su rechazo a los intereses particulares de un miembro destacado del Grupo Atlacomulco: Arturo Montiel. Las trapacerías, fraudes y desfalcos cometidos por Arturo Montiel son bien conocidas por todos. Lo mismo, el encubrimiento que su delfín "Quique Gaviotón" ha hecho de estos crímenes. La devastación generada por los negocios inmobiliarios de Montiel ha continuado, sin freno, bajo el gobierno del Lic. Gaviotón. Los habitantes de Cravia manifiestan que, en el interés de sendos gobiernos, urge detener a esta camarilla de delincuentes, por el bien de los bosques y quienes los habitan. Ésta y otras razones los han empujado a manifestar su apoyo a Alejandro Encinas.fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-16556218218414607052011-04-22T12:25:00.001-05:002011-04-22T12:31:23.892-05:00Pocas son las empresas que más desechos vierten a los ríosEmiten empresas alta polución<br />Ciba <br />Los contaminantes que arroja Ciba al Río Santiago representan casi la quinta parte de los registrados en caudales de todo México.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhL6ldkoKKIKu07hD1-s9UManNixxsDxJLqQTtnk3Ag-4fu8yo0juk9J9IMw693lRWMZvts7BmaHigRBEYZ_n61ZBJP0sMG8ejGv30h2JynVNr_Tvgx1uwVYC9ahbTcU8b2EzM8ayvdZ7g/s1600/pecesmuertos-350x262.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 350px; height: 262px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhL6ldkoKKIKu07hD1-s9UManNixxsDxJLqQTtnk3Ag-4fu8yo0juk9J9IMw693lRWMZvts7BmaHigRBEYZ_n61ZBJP0sMG8ejGv30h2JynVNr_Tvgx1uwVYC9ahbTcU8b2EzM8ayvdZ7g/s400/pecesmuertos-350x262.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5598461764050355138" /></a><br />Foto: Archivo Editorial<br /><br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Revela un informe volumen de tóxicos que arrojan fábricas al aire, agua y suelo<br /><br />Andrés Martínez<br /><br />Guadalajara, México (22 abril 2011).- En Jalisco operan tres de las empresas que más contaminan el agua, suelo y aire en México.<br /><br />Así lo revela el reporte "Emisiones y Transferencia de Contaminantes en América del Norte", elaborado por la Comisión para Cooperación Ambiental (CCA) y recientemente difundido.<br /><br />El documento científico tiene como objetivo que los Gobiernos de Norteamérica tomen decisiones con sustento técnico para abatir la contaminación.<br /><br />Ciba Especialidades Químicas de México, ubicada en Atotonilquillo, justo sobre la ribera del Río Santiago, es la segunda planta industrial entre las 10 de todo el País que más poluciona el agua, descargando cada año 77 mil 652 kilogramos de contaminantes.<br /><br />Aunque por su magnitud se ubica por debajo de la planta de la Comisión Federal de Electricidad localizada en Topolobampo, Sinaloa, que descarga al año 114 toneladas, los contaminantes emitidos por la empresa de derivados químicos al agua representan el 17.55 por ciento del total reportado en el Registro de Emisiones y Transferencia de Contaminantes de México.<br /><br />De acuerdo con el último análisis de laboratorio de la Comisión Estatal del Agua, en ese punto del Río Santiago los fósforos totales superan en más de 24 veces los límites máximos permitidos por la normatividad ambiental.<br /><br />Los sulfuros se superan 200 veces, el aluminio es 10 veces más del permitido y el mercurio -un elemento cancerígeno- también rebasa las concentraciones máximas.<br /><br />Según el reporte de la CCA, Yamaver, una fábrica localizada en El Salto que se dedica a la inyección de plásticos para la industria electrónica y automotriz, es la tercera entre las 10 que más emisiones al suelo registra en todo México, con 5 mil 142 kilogramos de contaminantes al año.<br /><br />Encabezada por Hylsa en San Nicolás de los Garza, Nuevo León, con descargas que superan las 27 toneladas, la plantas industriales que integran la lista de las 10 empresas más contaminantes del suelo son responsables del 97 por ciento de las emisiones de su tipo en todo el País.<br /><br />"Las plantas mexicanas de los sectores de fabricación de productos metálicos y otras actividades manufactureras registraron el 75 por ciento del total de las emisiones al suelo, incluidos metales como cromo, plomo, níquel y mercurio, con sus respectivos compuestos, además de cianuros y asbestos", advierte el reporte de la CCA.<br /><br />Por emitir cada año más de 54 toneladas de contaminantes a la atmósfera, la empresa Polyrey -ubicada en la Zona Industrial de Guadalajara, que trabaja con derivados del petróleo para la fabricación de espumas-, es la octava planta entre las 10 del País que más poluciona el aire, detalla el documento.<br /><br />"La magnitud o volumen de las emisiones no es el único factor a considerar, ya que algunas sustancias pueden ser sumamente tóxicas incluso cuando se liberan en muy pequeñas cantidades", puntualiza la CCA.fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-26382300253926561342011-02-15T12:14:00.004-06:002011-02-15T12:22:20.922-06:00Ya cayó, ya cayó...<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKMhyphenhyphenHlJWYTBWeRYhxvg_y4wCh1MDbO5xHFBXuIKqs1-D7yHQ2n9wEr2GRyV0JdPZlRZPlGskai80LMzGQp2-AV-obc1HaAh5GgGL7ZQKSp9WhUbDVKjcSXsKCv4wgJNSPT6_-X6CenHE/s1600/thumbnail.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 160px; height: 106px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKMhyphenhyphenHlJWYTBWeRYhxvg_y4wCh1MDbO5xHFBXuIKqs1-D7yHQ2n9wEr2GRyV0JdPZlRZPlGskai80LMzGQp2-AV-obc1HaAh5GgGL7ZQKSp9WhUbDVKjcSXsKCv4wgJNSPT6_-X6CenHE/s400/thumbnail.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5573983319995951266" /></a><br /><em>Weekend Edition<br />February 11 - 13, 2011<br />The Mummification of Pharaoh on Display</em><br /><strong>Egypt's Judgment Day</strong><br /><em>By ESAM AL-AMIN</em><br /><br /><br /><br /><em>“L’Etat, C’est moi.” (I am the state.)</em><br />King Louis XIV of France <br /> <br /><em>Leave means Get out <br />Don’t you comprehend?<br />O Suleiman O Suleiman <br />You too must leave<br />Sitting in sitting in <br /> Till the regime is gone<br />Revolution revolution until victory<br />Revolution in all Egypt’s streets </em><br />Chants by two million Egyptians, Liberation Square, Feb. 10, 2011<br /><br />Thursday, February 10, was slated to be a day of preparation for the following day’s activities in Egypt. Friday was dubbed “Defiance Day,” in reference to the test of wills between the people and the beleaguered president. Despite seventeen days of massive demonstrations across the country, Hosni Mubarak remained defiant, still stubbornly refusing to submit to the will of the people, who were coming out by the millions to demand his ouster.<br /><br />A day earlier, the leaders of the revolution called for a major escalation with another round of massive protests scheduled for Friday. Not only did they ask the people to come to Tahrir Square by the millions, but they also planned to march on state symbols around the country. <br /><br />By midnight, the buildings of the Council of Ministers, the People’s Assembly (lower chamber of parliament), the Consultative Assembly (upper chamber), and the Interior Ministry were totally surrounded by thousands of people. Prime Minister Ahmad Shafiq could not reach his office that day and had to relocate to the Ministry of Civilian Aviation.<br /><br />The youth of the revolution also issued a passionate appeal to the labor movement and unions as well as to all professional syndicates to join the revolution in full force and ignore the regime-appointed union leaders, who were calling for calm as part of the propaganda machine to undermine the people’s demands.<br /><br />Strikes and protests by Egyptian labor are neither novel nor surprising. According to Egypt’s Center of Economic and Labor Studies, there were 478 labor protests in 2009 alone, in which 126,000 workers were laid off, tragically resulting in 58 suicides. It was no surprise that this fervent pro-democracy call ignited a spark throughout Egypt.<br /><br />Tens of thousands of workers across Egypt responded to this appeal and flocked to the streets. As a strike by thousands of workers in the state defense industries was declared in Cairo, these workers managed to block the streets leading to the factories where no one crossed the picket lines. <br /><br />Other state-owned factories and government agencies throughout Cairo have declared strikes and took to the streets as well. For example, government employees at the Ministry of Environment, the medical Heart Institute, and sanitation workers were on strike. Similarly, public transport workers went on strike while holding a protest calling for Mubarak’s ouster. Postal workers organized their protests in shifts.<br /><br />In the cities of Asyut and Sohag in Upper Egypt, thousands of workers in the pharmaceutical factories, state electrical power and gas service companies, as well as university employees declared a strike and marched across their respective towns.<br />Furthermore, in the Nile delta cities of Kafr el-Sheikh, el-Mahalla al-Kobra, Dumyat, and Damanhour, major industries such as textile, food processing, and furniture, have completely halted all production. The strikes then spread along the canal and coastal towns of Suez, Ismailiyyah and Port Said. Approximately 6,000 workers at five government companies managed by the Suez Canal Authority continue to be on strike, threatening to spread widely, impacting the passage of international shipping through the canal.<br /><br />Furthermore, according to the Ministry of Tourism, over 160,000 tourists left Egypt in the last ten days, resulting in a total loss of at least $1.5 billion in tourism-related revenue to the economy. The Abu Dhabi-based paper The National reported that the country’s industrial output has dropped eighty per cent. The daily economic loss is estimated to be between $300 million and $400 million.<br /> <br />Rahma Refaat, a lawyer and programs coordinator for the non-governmental Center for Trade Unions and Workers Services (CTUWS) told The National, “Most of those on strike say that they have discovered that the resources of our country have been stolen by the regime.” <br /><br />She then cited several strikes as a response to the general call by the pro-democracy leadership of the revolution. She listed 6,000 workers at the Spinning and Weaving Company in the industrial city of Helwan, outside Cairo, 2,000 workers from the Sigma pharmaceutical company in Qesna, while about 5,000 unemployed youths stormed a government building in Aswan demanding the ouster of the governor. “Every hour we hear about a new strike.” She continued. <br /><br />In an interview with Al-Jazeera, Kamal Abbass, executive director of CTUWS promised that if Mubarak was not out by Monday, all workers across Egypt would be on strike, a move that would paralyze the whole country.<br /><br />Similarly, professional syndicates heeded the call and showed up to the protests in full force. On Wednesday evening, hundreds of judges dressed in their black robes and green sashes joined with other demonstrators in Tahrir Square. <br />According to Al-Jazeera over twelve thousand lawyers dressed in their black robes marched on Thursday to Abdeen, one of Mubarak’s presidential palaces in central Cairo, demanding that he resign.<br /><br />The same day thousands of medical doctors and pharmacists marched in their white coats to Tahrir Square, joining the demonstrators calling for Mubarak’s departure. Meanwhile, thousands of journalists chased their government-appointed union president from his office, and marched to downtown Cairo declaring their support, to the delight of the protesters.<br /><br />Likewise, actors, writers, directors, singers and musicians were not far behind. For the first time in recent history hundreds of artists joined while chanting with the public in an unprecedented display of support and solidarity. <br /><br />In addition, many Muslim and Coptic leaders such as the former Mufti of Egypt, Muhammad Nasr Farid and Father Fawzi Khalil, showed up at Tahrir Square calling for unity and declaring their support to the Revolution of the Youth as one called it. <br />In one of the most emotional moments of the day, three army officers, two majors and a captain, showed up in uniform declaring their total support for the goals of the revolution. Maj. Ahmad Ali Shoman declared on live television that he handed his pistol over to his commanding officer earlier in order to join the nonviolent and peaceful struggle against the regime. <br /><br />He called on President Hosni Mubarak, Vice President Omar Suleiman, Prime Minister Ahmad Shafiq, and Defense Minster Field Marshall Muhammad Hussein Tantawi to resign. He then called on the Army and its Chief of Staff Sami Anan to take over and depose the president on behalf of the people.<br /><br /><strong>The King is checkmated but still wants to play</strong><br />By early afternoon, over one million people swelled into Tahrir Square. The leaders of the revolution declared that over ten million people across Egypt would be expected to demonstrate the following day after Friday congregational prayers if their demands were not met.<br /><br />Subsequently, thousands left Tahrir Square that afternoon and surrounded the government-run television and radio building, which has been running anti-revolution propaganda since the first day of the protests. Immediately, government authorities evacuated the building while the army protected it from being stormed by the people, who camped out around it.<br /><br />By late afternoon, an unexpected declaration by the army was read on state television. It was dubbed Communiqué One, a name reminiscent of the 1950s and 1960s army coups. It was read in the name of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), which consists of the Minister of Defense, the Joints Chief of Staff, Chiefs of the four military branches, as well as the Commanders of the different weapon systems.<br /><br />As president, Mubarak is the commander-in-chief of this council. But he was conspicuously absent, which led many people to believe his departure was imminent. The declaration by the spokesperson, Gen. Ismail Etman, gave credence to this conclusion when he declared that the SCAF was “in total support of the legitimate demands of the people.” He further stated that SCAF would be meeting in continuous session in order to decide on what “course of action it should take to secure the demands and gains of the people.”<br /><br />Shortly thereafter, state television declared that Mubarak would address his people at 11 PM. This declaration fueled speculation that Mubarak was about to step down and resign. This expectation was also bolstered when CIA director Leon Panetta, testifying that afternoon before the House Intelligence Committee, stated that he believed Mubarak would indeed step down that evening. When President Barack Obama delivered a midday address in northern Michigan, he hinted that the Egyptian people would soon accomplish their demand as they were “witnessing history unfold.”<br /><br />Nevertheless, the embattled Egyptian president’s third address since the inception of the revolution on Jan. 25 was true to form. The delusional president gave a pathetic address in which he reiterated all his earlier “concessions” (not running for a sixth presidential term in September and offering some constitutional reforms.) <br /><br />He further claimed that the call for him to step down was a “foreign dictation” in a clear reference to Washington. With a straight face he declared that he had never given in to foreign demands and pressure and was not about to do so in this instance, totally ignoring his thirty-year history of providing services to the U.S. as a regional client state.<br /><br />After pledging that he would remain president until September, he then offered to transfer some of his powers to Vice President Suleiman in order to defuse the crisis. It was a pitiful performance by a person completely oblivious to reality. Incredibly, he once more succeeded in insulting millions of Egyptians by accusing them, in effect, of being part of a conspiracy to depose him and destabilize Egypt.<br /><br />Shortly thereafter, his Vice President followed Mubarak on television, arrogantly beseeching his countrymen and women to stop the protests and go home. Once more he showed fierce loyalty to Mubarak and thanked him. Perhaps as someone who has served him for eighteen years as the head of the intelligence service, it was to be expected.<br /><br />He stated that now, as acting president, he has taken over the duties of the president, and was ready to lead in the path of reform. However, in his address, he totally ignored the demands and the will of the people who have withdrawn the legitimacy from Mubarak and his regime.<br /><br /><strong>Likely scenarios: people united will never be defeated</strong><br />Upon hearing Mubarak and Suleiman back-to-back, the Egyptian people were enraged. Millions who had been in the streets for hours, were now joined by the hundreds of thousands flocking to the streets, displaying their anger, and vowing to stay in the streets until the ouster of the regime. They chanted incessantly, “The people demand the fall of the regime.” <br /><br />Further, they felt disappointed that their hopes of Mubarak’s stepping down, which were generated earlier by the army’s declaration and by the statements of the American officials, were dashed. What added insult to injury was Mubarak’s contention that the revolution was a foreign conspiracy directed at Egypt to destabilize it, ironically contradicting another statement he gave when he stated that he respected the protesters’ demands.<br /><br />At every stage in this crisis, Mubarak has proven that he has always been two steps behind the people. Had he given this address two weeks ago, perhaps he would have found more sympathy. But with every speech he has succeeded in enraging and alienating the Egyptian people, in effect uniting them against him because of his arrogance and gross miscalculations.<br /><br />According to the New York Times, Mubarak has been emboldened by the international support he has received from the leaders of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman, and the U.A.E. All these leaders have leaned heavily on the Obama administration, pleading Mubarak’s case and urging the administration not to abandon its close ally. <br /><br />On January 29, Saudi Ambassador Adel Al-Jubair spent twelve straight hours on the telephone rallying congressional and diplomatic support to influence the administration to back Mubarak, at least until his term expires in September.<br /><br />To some extent certain international actors, such as the United States, by virtue of having considerable leverage over the regime, may actually play a limited role in deciding the success or failure of Egypt’s revolution. But judging from the fast-paced events, there are currently three major domestic players in this high stakes game that might ultimately dictate its outcome: the Egyptian people, who are sustaining the revolution with its almost universal support; the embattled regime, including its stubborn president and vice president; and finally, the army. <br />To the dismay of their friends in Washington, Mubarak and Suleiman have played their risky move badly. In essence, Mubarak tied the fate of Suleiman (the favored American and Israeli candidate to keep Egypt in the orbit of the West) to his own. In their addresses, both have decided to challenge the Egyptian people, hoping to either divide or exhaust them. <br /><br />Nonetheless, the people are determined to carry on with their revolution, calling for a massive day of demonstrations and strikes on Friday. Every segment of society has pledged to participate. The joke in Egypt is that the only person who would stay home on that day is Mubarak. <br /><br />They also vowed not only to demonstrate and stay in Tahrir Square but also to march to several presidential palaces and other government buildings. The pro-democracy organizers insist on escalating their campaign until every corner in Egypt is part of the action and the country is at a stand still. <br /><br />The crucial question is this: How much is the third side of this triangle, namely the army, willing to tolerate the country’s polarization? How would it determine the outcome of this tense confrontation?<br /><br />On Friday morning, SCAF issued its second Communiqué, basically endorsing the Mubarak/Suleiman roadmap.<br /><br />Here are the facts known so far.<br /><br />The army has pledged to protect the people and their revolution. It declared flatly that it would not shoot at the demonstrators. On the other hand, the army leadership has also shown not only incredible loyalty and deference to Mubarak and his dying regime, but also endorsement of its limited reform program, without the critical support for the ouster of Mubarak or his regime. In short, Suleiman would govern under the protection of the army. Thirdly, the army leadership has expressed grave concerns about the situation, vowing to continuously monitor it, and to intervene at crucial moments, but most likely on the side of the regime. <br /><br />In his speech Suleiman claimed to have the backing of the army. He confidently warned the people and asked them to go home. The army in its subsequent communiqué confirmed that. Meanwhile, the people rejected his call and vowed to protest by the millions. For their part, the protesters continue to chant that the people and the army are one, expressing an unwavering confidence in that institution. <br />Observers present different scenarios. One possibility is the direct interference of the army if the situation either turns violent or violence is somehow interjected by other actors despite the non-violent and peaceful posture of the revolution and its leaders.<br /><br /> In this case the army would crack down hard on the people, declaring martial law, and then imposing political leaders as occurred in Algeria in 1992. This could only take place if the regime was able to instigate massive violence on the part of the opposition to justify the army’s violence. As the Algerian model demonstrates, this is a very risky and costly scenario. In this case, the people have to split and the regime must receive unqualified Western backing. An unlikely outcome on both counts.<br />Another scenario is for Mubarak to leave the country soon under a medical pretext, so that Suleiman could claim that the main demand of the opposition has been fulfilled and thus people should go home while he manages the political dialogue and supervises the process of constitutional reforms.<br /><br />However, the majority of the people would most likely reject this stand, arguing that whatever presidential authority Mubarak has transferred to Suleiman, he could always retrieve whenever he wishes. More importantly, the pro-democracy revolutionaries have demanded the downfall of the regime, not just the ouster of Mubarak. In their eyes, Mubarak and Suleiman have become indistinguishable. In that case, the army would be forced to intervene. <br /><br />If the people are not split and stay firm on their demands, including the ouster of the entire regime, the dissolution of both chambers of parliament, the formation of a national unity government, the lifting of the emergency law, and the establishment of a new constitution based on democratic principles, judicial independence, and safeguarding civil rights and freedoms, then it’s unlikely that the army would crack down on the demonstrators. <br /><br />In this hopeful scenario, the army would calibrate its position, stand with the people, and change its indirect support of Mubarak and Suleiman. In this case, the revolution would have spectacularly succeeded in achieving all of its goals. Clearly, its impact on the region would be enormous. <br /><br />Already, several countries have been influenced by the events in Tunisia and Egypt. But the successful outcome of Egypt’s revolution would unleash its great potential and serve as the model to neighboring countries. Undoubtedly, this would seriously upset several pro-Western despots in the region, many of whom have already been trying to stem the Egyptian tsunami coming their way.<br /><br />Algeria, for instance, declared this week that it would lift its state of emergency that has been in effect since 1992. Still the opposition group “Free Youth Movement in Algeria,” called for massive demonstrations against the regime on Saturday, Feb. 12. Many other opposition groups have also vowed to join.<br />Yemen’s President, Ali Abdullah Saleh, declared in a recent address that neither he nor his son would be candidates in the next presidential elections, scheduled for 2013. Nevertheless, opposition groups have insisted on calling for huge protests on <br />Friday to pressure the regime to open up the political system.<br /><br />In Jordan, King Abdullah II sacked his Prime Minister in an effort to quell massive protests against the government persisting since mid-January. He has also started a dialogue with the opposition in the hopes of deflecting any revolutionary change. <br /><br />According to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, many political observers, including CIA experts, believe that the Saudi regime has all the characteristics of a society suffering from social instability and economic inequality. They consider it a ripe candidate for serious protests and political turmoil.<br />After eighteen days of massive popular protests and widespread mobilization, it is clear that Egypt’s revolution has been embraced by all of its people. Judgment day is upon the regime and its defenders. Mubarak and his regime have failed. Soon, the army may either usher a new bright dawn for Egypt’s future or a new abyss that would lead to more instability and chaos. <br /><br />As John F. Kennedy once said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”<br /><br /><em>Esam Al-Amin can be reached at alamin1919@gmail.com</em>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-80702948512199631572011-02-11T13:08:00.002-06:002011-02-11T13:33:56.691-06:00Detalles sobre la trayectoria de los jòvenes lìderes de la protesta en Egipto<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitr_L-so1F48d8w_RANdWyUD4Z-1znx6QlEnSfOkYL0AopIxXSRdVhrar6Vmp3Hcw1fLYBHtAau_8DigPBSYvAR4TZoI0R9jNBXBQGR1WKbU8Yh71PVQ0w7ybNJ6mnAIF_jrxZf1h0YEY/s1600/thumbnail.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 200px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitr_L-so1F48d8w_RANdWyUD4Z-1znx6QlEnSfOkYL0AopIxXSRdVhrar6Vmp3Hcw1fLYBHtAau_8DigPBSYvAR4TZoI0R9jNBXBQGR1WKbU8Yh71PVQ0w7ybNJ6mnAIF_jrxZf1h0YEY/s400/thumbnail.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5572517127519929378" /></a><br /><em>February 9, 2011<br /><br />From Stalemate to Checkmate</em><br /><strong>Meet Egypt's Future Leaders</strong><em>By ESAM AL-AMIN</em><br /><br /><br /><br />O Youth, today is your day so shout <br />No more slumber or deep sleep<br />This is your time and your place <br />Bestow on us your talents and efforts<br />We want Egypt’s youth to hold fast <br />As they resist the aggressor and outsider<br /><br />Egyptian Poet Ibrahim Nagi (1898-1953)<br /><br />On June 6, 2010, soft-spoken businessman Khaled Said, 28, had his dinner before retreating to his room and embarking on his daily routine of surfing the Internet, blogging, and chatting with his friends on different social websites. Several days earlier, he had posted a seven-minute online video of Alexandria police officers dividing up confiscated drugs among themselves.<br /><br />When his Internet service suddenly was disrupted that evening, he left his middle class apartment in the coastal city of Alexandria and headed to his neighborhood Internet café. As he resumed blogging, two plain-clothes secret police officers demanded that he be searched. When he inquired as to why or on whose authority, they scoffed at him while blurting out: emergency law. He refused to be touched and demanded to see a uniformed officer or be taken to a police station. <br /><br />According to eyewitnesses, within minutes they dragged him to a nearby vacant building and began to severely beat up his tiny body, eventually smashing his head on a marble tabletop. His body was subsequently dumped in the street to be retrieved later by an ambulance that declared him dead. According to his mother, Leila Marzouq, his body was totally bruised, teeth broken, and skull fractured.<br /><br />Immediately, the Interior Ministry started the cover-up campaign. The official report claimed that Said was a drug dealer who tried to escape arrest. They claimed that when he was busted he died by asphyxia as he tried to swallow the narcotics. The authorities backed up this incredible account with two medical reports from the state’s medical examiner. The government print and TV media recycled the official version by painting the reclusive and shy blogger as a reckless drug addict and dealer.<br /><br />However, when graphic images of Said’s body began to circulate online, other political bloggers and human rights activists were enraged and the nascent youth movement to rescind the 29-year old emergency law started to transform itself from online group discussions to popular protests in the streets of Alexandria, which were predictably met with more police repression and brutality.<br /><br />Since he became president in 1981, Hosni Mubarak has been utilizing the emergency law as a club to beat down political activity and civil liberties, as well as a means to sanction abuse and torture. According to human rights groups including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Egyptian human rights groups, no less than 30,000 Egyptians have been imprisoned under the law, which allows the police to arrest people without charge, permits the government to ban political organizations, and makes it illegal for more than five people to gather without a permit from the government. <br /><br />Even the U.S. government confirmed the regime’s atrocious record when the 2009 State Department Human Rights Report submitted to Congress in March 2010 stated, “Police, security personnel, and prison guards often tortured and abused prisoners and detainees, sometimes in cases of detentions under the Emergency Law, which authorizes incommunicado detention indefinitely.”<br /><br />Said’s case is hardly unique. A recent report published by the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights documented 46 torture cases and 17 cases of death by government secret police between June 2008 and February 2009.<br /><br />Since his murder the case of Khaled Said has become the cause célèbre for Egypt’s youth. Hundreds of thousands of young people across Egypt have watched related online videos, songs, raps, sketches, or participated in group chat room discussions. A simple Google search of his name yields millions of results, almost all anti-government.<br /><br />One of the groups that embraced this cause was the April 6 Youth Movement. It started as an Egyptian Facebook group founded by Human Resources specialist Isra’a Abdel Fattah, 29, and civil engineer Ahmed Maher, 30, in spring 2008 to support the April 6 workers strike in el-Mahalla el-Kobra, an industrial town along the Nile Delta. <br /><br />On their Facebook page, they encouraged thousands to protest and join the labor strike. Within weeks, over 100,000 members joined the group, who were predominantly young, educated, and politically inexperienced or inactive. Moreover, by making extensive use of online networking tools, they urged their members to demonstrate their support for the workers by wearing black, staying at home, or boycotting products on the day of the strike. <br /><br />As the secret police cracked down on the April 6 labor strikers, both Abdel Fattah and Maher were arrested, tortured (in the case of Maher, threatened with rape), and detained for a few weeks. Both came out of the prison experience more committed to the cause of freedom and democracy, as well as more determined than ever to carry on with their program of political reforms.<br /><br />Asma’a Mahfouz, 26, a petite Business Administration graduate, is another prominent figure in the April 6 Youth Movement. By her account she did not have any political training or ideology before joining the group in March 2008. With her two colleagues she immediately helped set up the Facebook page urging Egyptians to support and join the strikes. <br /><br />More significantly, Mahfouz played a critical role in the mobilization efforts for the current popular revolution. She posted passionate daily online videos imploring her countrymen and women to participate in the protests. In a recent interview, she elucidated her role when she stated, “I was printing and distributing leaflets in popular areas, and calling for citizens to participate. In those areas, I also talked to young people about their rights, and the need for their participation.” <br /><br />She continued, “At the time when many people were setting themselves on fire, I went into Tahrir Square with several members of the movement, and we tried a spontaneous demonstration to protest against the recurrence of these incidents. However, the security forces prevented us and removed us from the Square. This prompted me to film a video clip, featuring my voice and image, calling for a protest.”<br /><br />“I said that on the 25th of January, I would be an Egyptian girl defending her dignity and her rights. I broadcasted the video on the Internet, via Facebook, and was surprised by its unprecedented distribution over websites and mobile phones. Subsequently, I made four further videos prior to the date of the protest,” she added.<br /><br />If Maher is the movement’s national coordinator, Muhammad Adel, 22, a college junior majoring in computer science, is its technology wizard and media coordinator. Online he jokingly calls himself “The dead Dean,” in a reference to his young age and what could be in store for him from the secret police.<br /><br />In November 2008, he was arrested at the age of twenty, detained and placed in solitary confinement for over 100 days because of his political activities on the Internet. He was denied any means of communications with his family during the whole period. His interrogators pleaded with him to stop blogging so he could be freed. He refused to give them any commitment until he was freed in March 2009.<br /><br />According to the “April 6 Youth” movement’s platform, its main concerns include promoting political reforms and democratic governance through a strategy of non-violence; constitutional reforms in the areas of civil rights, political freedoms, and judicial independence; and economically addressing poverty, unemployment, social justice and fighting corruption. Their focus is primarily the youth and students. Their means of communications, education and mobilization relies on the extensive use of technology and the Internet.<br /><br />Wael Ghoneim, 30, a brilliant communications engineer, has been working for several years in Dubai, U.A.E, as Google marketing director for the Middle East and North Africa. As a consequence of the murder of Khaled Said by Mubarak’s regime, he was enraged and created the popular Facebook page “We are all Khaled Said.” A few days before the current uprising he left Dubai to Cairo so he could be part of the historical events.<br /><br />As the administrator of the popular webpage, Ghoneim was instrumental in the online mobilization efforts of the Jan. 25 uprising. So on the evening of Jan. 27, four plain-clothes secret police officers kidnapped him during the protest, an event that was captured on tape. For the next twelve days the government refused to acknowledge that he was arrested until the newly appointed Prime Minister announced his release on Feb. 7 as a gesture to the demonstrators because of his popularity and prominence in the youth movement.<br /><br />Upon his release, Ghoneim said that he was kept blindfolded and in isolation the entire time he was in detention as he was interrogated about his role in the uprising. After his release he gave an emotional TV interview calling the three hundred people that have lost their lives during the popular revolution the real heroes of Egypt.<br /><br />Furthermore, one of the most articulate voices of Egypt’s revolution is thirty-seven year old Nawwara Nagm. Since her graduation as an English literature major, she has been a well-known political activist as well as a severe critic of Mubarak’s regime working as a journalist and blogger for opposition newspapers. In 1995 she was first arrested and sent to prison at the age of twenty-two because she protested the inclusion of Israel in Cairo’s annual Book Fair. <br /><br />Both of her parents are also well known in Egyptian society. Her father, Ahmad Fuad Nagm, 81, is perhaps the most popular poet in Egypt today. He has been in and out of prison during most of the past five decades (during the reigns of Nasser, Sadat, and Mubarak) because of his political and satirical poems that directly attack not only the regime but also its head. Her mother is Safinaz Kazem who broke many barriers as a female journalist. Educated in the U.S. in the 1960’s, she became one of the most respected literary and film critics and political analysts publishing in major Egyptian newspapers and magazines.<br /><br />Since the uprising began on Jan. 25, Nawwara has been an eloquent spokesperson expressing the steadfast political demands of the organizers and protesters, and in the process mobilizing the support of millions of Egyptians and Arabs who are constantly following the revolution on Al-Jazeera and other satellite networks.<br /><br />On Sunday Feb. 6, the youth groups that spearheaded Egypt’s revolution formed a coalition called the “Unified Leadership of the Youth of the Rage Revolution.” It consisted of five groups with a grassroots base and are considered the backbone of the organized activities of the revolution. <br /><br />The coalition includes two representatives from each of the April 6 Youth Movement, the Justice and Freedom Group, the Popular Campaign to Support El-Baradei, the Democratic Front Party, and the popular Muslim Brotherhood Movement. In addition four independent members were also added to the leadership for a total of fourteen members. Maher, the coordinator of the April 6 movement, and Ghoneim, an independent, were elected to the leadership. All members are from the youth in their late 20s or early 30s.<br /><br />Ahmed Naguib, 33, a key protest organizer, has explained how the leadership was formed. He said, “There are people from the April 6 and Khaled Said movement,” referring to groups that worked non-stop to set off the uprising. Speaking of some opposition parties that want to hijack the revolution or negotiate on its behalf, he said, “They talk a lot about what the youth has done, but they continue on the same path as the government, marginalizing young people - except for the Muslim Brotherhood and El-Baradei group."<br /><br />Coalition spokesperson is attorney Ziad Al-Olaimai, 32, from the Popular Campaign to Support El-Baradei. He read a statement on behalf of the coalition at a news conference that laid out their seven demands, namely: the resignation of Mubarak, the immediate lifting of emergency law, release of all political prisoners, the dissolution of both upper and lower chambers of parliament, the formation of a national unity government to manage the transitional period, investigation by the judiciary of the abuses of the security forces during the revolution, and the protection of the protesters by the military.<br /><br />Muhammad Abbas, 26, is another leader of the coalition representing the youth of the Muslim Brotherhood movement (MB). After initial hesitation at the beginning of the uprising, the MB has brought since Jan. 28 tens of thousands of its supporters to join and help organize the efforts in Tahrir Square as well as in other demonstrations across the country. <br /><br />On Feb. 2, government goons were beating up, throwing Molotov cocktails, and shooting at the demonstrators. Some of the female demonstrators under siege called Muslim Brotherhood leaders Mohammad El-Biltagi and Esam El-Erian pleading for help. Both leaders rushed to Tahrir Square after midnight leading over five thousand MB members to break the siege.<br /><br />Dr. Sally Tooma Moore, 32, a Christian Copt and an independent member of the coalition’s leadership, is an Egyptian-British medical doctor. Under gunfire, she helped save hundreds of lives using a makeshift hospital in a Cairo mosque during the violent attacks of the security forces and the outlaws sponsored by the ruling party.<br /><br />In a recent interview she demonstrated the unity of all Egyptians, Muslims and Copts when she said, “It's totally beyond description how the mosque has been transformed into a working hospital. It is a mosque but there are no religious divisions.” Her answer to a question by Al-Jazeera about the regime’s assertion regarding the lack of stability in the country was, “What is stability without freedom?”<br /><br /><strong>Revolution and counter-revolution: A test of two wills</strong><br /><br />Since the inception of the popular revolution on Jan. 25, the regime’s reaction has gone through many typical stages. The first phase was the customary use of security crackdown and utilization of police brutality, which yielded over three hundred people killed and five thousand injured. <br /><br />A list of the people killed by the regime since Jan. 25 was published on the opposition’s magazine website, Al-Dustoor. It shows that over seventy per cent of those killed were under the age of 32, including children as young as ten, with female casualties constituting about ten percent of the total.<br /><br />During this stage, the regime cut off all Internet, mobile phone, and instant messaging services in a frantic attempt to disrupt communications and information exchange between the organizers of the revolution. But the genie was already out of the bottle.<br /><br />When that failed miserably, and in a desperate attempt to end the uprising, the regime created a state of chaos by withdrawing the police and security forces from the streets including from neighborhood police stations, while releasing thousands of criminals from prisons around the country hoping to spread terror and fear as a substitute to stability and order as the beleaguered president warned in his first address. <br /><br />The formation of popular committees to protect the neighborhoods coupled with the arrest of the thugs roaming the streets was able to defeat this deplorable scheme. The thugs that were arrested by these committees were handed over to army units deployed throughout the country.<br /><br />The next stage was a tactical retreat by the government, occurring as the embattled president tried to deflect the popular call for his immediate resignation. Four days after the commencement of the uprising and the subsequent crackdown, he gave an address dismissing his cabinet; mainly sacking his Interior minister as well as other corrupt businessmen who were doubling as ministers of major industrial sectors of the economy. <br /><br />He appointed his old Air Force colleague, Gen. Ahmad Shafiq, as the new Prime Minister while still incredibly retaining eighteen ministers in the cabinet. He also appointed his long-serving intelligence chief, Gen. Omar Suleiman, as his first ever Vice President so he could be the face of the regime in leading a “dialogue” with the opposition to enact “political reforms.” But these acts were considered too little too late by the revolutionaries, and were rejected outright. In their eyes, he had lost his legitimacy when the first protester was shot dead on Jan. 25.<br /><br />Within days, the regime offered many sacrificial lambs in the hope that public anger would subside. The ruling party that Mubarak has headed for decades, the National Democratic Party (NDP), was overhauled. All senior leaders, including his son Gamal, were purged. Many corrupt businessmen, who were considered influential party members just before the revolution, were now under investigation by the state prosecutor and prohibited from travel. A few were put under house arrest. Still the angry public was not satisfied, continuing to call on Mubarak to leave.<br /><br />Moreover, throughout the popular protests the regime used all means to taint the main organizers of the revolution. First, they claimed that the protesters were members of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood. This claim while parroted by American Islamophobes and right-wing media, was never taken seriously in Egypt. It was clear to all that the main organizers did not belong to any political party or ideology. In fact, the MB did not join the protests until the Day of Rage on Friday, Jan. 28. <br /><br />Then the state media repeated the claims that the organizers were agents of foreign powers, financed and manipulated by a foreign hidden agenda. The accusers could not make up their mind. They accused them of working for Iran, Qatar, Hezbollah, Hamas, the U.S. and Israel. <br /><br />In one instance, state media falsely claimed to have obtained seven Wikileaks documents that showed a conspiracy between Qatar (read Al-Jazeera), the U.S. and Israel to de-stabilize Egypt. Why the U.S. and Israel would undermine a staunch ally like Mubarak was never addressed.<br /><br />Najat Abdul-Rahman, a journalist in a state-owned magazine called 24 Hours, admitted to her boss that she was pressured by the regime to call a pro-government TV station and falsely claim to be one of the organizers of the protests. She then claimed on air that she and other fellow organizers were trained in the U.S. and Qatar by the Israeli Mossad to spread chaos in Egypt. Although she tried to change her appearance and mask her voice while on camera, her colleagues at the magazine were able to identify her and reveal her identity. She has been suspended without pay pending an investigation.<br /><br />The regime then turned its fury against the media. It stripped the broadcasting license of Al-Jazeera and withdrew the accreditation of all its correspondents. It also started arresting, harassing, and beating up foreign journalists including CNN’s Anderson Cooper, ABC’s Christiane Amanpour, and CBS’s Katie Couric. This prompted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to declare, “This is a violation of international norms that guarantee freedom of the press. And it is unacceptable under any circumstances.” Egyptian journalist Ahmad Mahmoud was killed after being shot point blank while taking a photograph. <br /><br />With intense international pressure mounting, Mubarak gave a second address in which he promised not to seek re-election for a sixth six-year term this September, but nonetheless he refused to bow out and resign. Throughout the crisis, he tried to portray a false image of being confidant and in charge. But clearly the ego of this dictator was bruised as he was denounced daily by millions of his people.<br /><br />By the end of the first week, it was clear that the stubborn president would not listen to anyone. He was able to at least secure the neutrality of the army, which was not prepared to turn against the people. But it was still loyal to its long-serving commander-in-chief, and would not depose him.<br /><br />Meanwhile, Vice President Suleiman moved quickly to contain the political fallout of the revolution, and invited the opposition parties for a dialogue including the regime’s nemesis, the MB. Although all opposition groups initially echoed the street demand of Mubarak’s ouster, some groups, which had very little public following, gladly joined Suleiman hoping to have a seat at the table and to get some attention.<br /><br />But everyone knew that without the participation of the youth movement or the MB, any dialogue with the regime would be meaningless. While the youth steadfastly maintained their position of “no dialogue unless Mubarak is out,” the MB fell into the trap of the regime and participated, along with many other opposition groups, in a dialogue with Suleiman. <br /><br />It was a classic trap. More than forty opposition members entered a room where a huge portrait of Mubarak hung on the wall, a slap across the face of millions of Egyptians who were chanting for his ouster in the past ten days. It was clear that Suleiman was in charge of the meeting as he chaired the session and dictated the agenda. The groups were guests in his house. Not a great start.<br /><br />At any rate, the regime did not give an inch. Suleiman even refused to entertain discussing the idea of Mubarak’s ouster. He simply reiterated all the “concessions” given by Mubarak in his earlier speeches including cosmetic changes to the constitution, and pledging that Mubarak would not run in the next presidential elections. <br /><br />It is not clear why the MB participated, but most observers believe that the group sought legitimacy after being outlawed since 1954. It is ironic that the group would seek legitimacy from a regime that has just been de-legitimized by its people.<br /><br />Upon the end of the meeting, the regime immediately issued a communiqué that thanked Mubarak, and reiterated the regime’s perspective and interpretation of events. It claimed inaccurately that all participants agreed on the road map towards finding a solution to the “crisis,” which was based on limited reforms to the constitution and elections, while maintaining all state institutions and characters including the fraudulent parliament. It did not promise the immediate lifting of the emergency law. Ironically, a day after the dialogue Suleiman declared on national TV that “Egypt is not ready for democracy.” So much for a reform agenda.<br /><br />The MB leaders who attended the meeting held a press conference afterwards that not only contradicted Suleiman’s assertions, but also previous statements given by other MB leaders such as Abdul Monem Abu-el-Futooh, who maintained the original stand of no negotiations until Mubarak’s ouster. It seems that for a perceived short-term gain, the MB was looking weak and confused. A day later the MB rejected Suleiman’s characterization of the talks and renewed its demand for Mubarak’s ouster.<br /><br />Meanwhile, the Youth leadership in Tahrir Square immediately rejected Suleiman’s offer and proclamations. They declared that they were neither party to any agreement nor willing to consider any proposals until Mubarak is removed. For the previous twelve days they have been able to mobilize over ten million Egyptians in the streets, why should they compromise on their first demand? They asked rhetorically. The will of the people shall be respected, and must defeat the stubbornness of Mubarak and his regime, they declared. After fifteen days the crowds have been sharply on the rise all over the country. Daily they number in the millions from all walks of life. <br /><br /><strong>Checkmate: Revolution legitimacy trumps an archaic constitution</strong><br /><br />For a day, the declared results of the so-called dialogue by the regime created breathing space for the feeble regime to recover. On Monday Feb. 7, the U.S. and its European allies, which for days had been hinting and pushing for Mubarak’s resignation, suddenly changed their stand and accepted for Mubarak to stay until September in order to allow for “a constitutional transfer of power.” <br /><br />On Feb. 8, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowly stated, “if President Mubarak stepped down today, under the existing constitution, … there would have to be an election within 60 days. A question that that would pose is whether Egypt today is prepared to have a competitive, open election.”<br /><br />In effect, supporters of the revolution feared that its momentum might slow down, a stalemate may come to pass. <br /><br />Since the uprising began, Mubarak has been hiding behind the new face of the regime, Gen. Suleiman. The U.S, Israel and other Western countries strongly prefer him over any other candidates to maintain the status quo and “stability,” in order to keep the current balance of power in the region, which is hugely in favor of Israel.<br /><br />Newly released Wikileaks documents reveal that Suleiman has been a long-standing favorite by the U.S. and Israel to succeed Mubarak for many years. The London Daily Telegraph recently published leaked cables from American embassies in Cairo and Tel Aviv showing the close cooperation between the Egyptian Vice President and the U.S. and Israeli governments.<br /><br />The newspaper described that “One cable in August 2008, stated that “Hacham was full of praise for Suleiman, and noted that a ‘hot line’ set up between the MOD and Egyptian General Intelligence Service is now in daily use,” in reference to David Hacham, a senior adviser from the Israeli Ministry of Defense. <br /><br />In another cable, Tel Aviv diplomats added: “We defer to Embassy Cairo for analysis of Egyptian succession scenarios, but there is no question that Israel is most comfortable with the prospect of Omar Suleiman.” Moreover, the paper stated that “the files suggest that Mr. Suleiman wanted Hamas isolated, and thought Gaza should go hungry but not starve.” <br /><br />Regardless, the organizers of the revolution declared that they have no trust in the regime. They asked rhetorically how could they trust a Vice President whose loyalty is to a discredited and illegitimate president. Thus they firmly rejected not only Suleiman and his parameters for a way forward, but also the premise that any real change would come from adhering to a constitution that has been shredded many time by an illegitimate regime. They advocated a position that called for the legitimacy of the revolution over any outdated constitutional legitimacy. <br /><br />The youth leaders maintain that all institutions of state power, except the army, which on the surface declared its neutrality, have lost their legitimacy in lieu of the will of the people to support the revolution. They insisted that the people have already spoken and called for Mubarak’s ouster, the dissolution of parliament, the replacement of the government, and the formation of constitutional experts to re-write a new constitution. Therefore, all efforts by the regime to re-constitute itself through promised reforms to maintain its grip on power are illegitimate and rejected. This is a popular revolution not a protest, they maintained. <br /><br />As the government attempts to weather the storm and deal with Tahrir Square as a Hyde Park phenomenon, a place where people vent their frustrations, the leadership of the revolution has devised new tactics to force the regime to accept their demands.<br /><br />They have called for massive demonstrations not only in public squares but also called for similar protests around strategic governmental buildings. For example, on Feb. 8 in addition to a million demonstrators in Tahrir Square, hundreds of thousands held huge demonstrations around the Prime Minster’s building, preventing him from reaching his office. They also blocked the parliament, preventing any member from going in or out. They vowed that soon the presidential palace would be surrounded.<br /><br />The protesters were also joined this week with professional syndicates and labor unions. Hundreds of judges stood in Tahrir Square on Tuesday wearing their judicial robes in support of the revolution. Similarly, hundreds of journalists chased away the pro-government head of their union declaring the union independent and free. Likewise, hundreds of university professors from colleges across Egypt showed up at Tahrir Square declaring their full support for the goals of the revolution.<br /><br />Next week schools and universities will be back from the Spring break. The organizers plan to call on hundreds of thousands of students to participate in the demonstrations that could paralyze the whole education system. Meanwhile, they have also reached out to labor unions calling for massive strikes across the nation, especially in state factories and public industries. When this is fully implemented, Egypt’s export business could come to a screeching halt. <br /><br />Slowly but surely selected major industries such as transportation, oil, or navigation through the Suez Canal could also be severely hindered. Sports activities have already ceased. The film industry has stopped all productions. There is no end to what activities the revolutionaries could advocate or call for. The initiatives are in their hands. They believe that they have the legitimacy and the support of the people.<br /><br />In short, the revolution has adapted to the maneuvering of the regime and has adopted a comprehensive program of activities that are creative and extensive. Time is no longer on the regime’s side. With the passing of each week more Egyptians are joining the revolution. A culture of freedom and empowerment is on the rise.<br /><br />Meanwhile, the international community could speed up the inevitable, which is the collapse of the corrupt and repressive regime. Last week the Guardian and several financial publications including the Wall Street Journal and MSNBC, showed that Mubarak’s family might be worth between $40 to $70 Billion. Most of this wealth is believed to be in the U.S, the U.K, Switzerland, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. In short, Western governments have access to ill-gotten money that belong to the Egyptian people. They can start investigations to determine the legality of these assets.<br /><br />Similarly, they can encourage Mr. Mubarak to go to Germany for his annual (extended) medical check-up, after which he could render his resignation. The people of Egypt would not forget who stood with them during their revolution, who stood against them, and who was on the sideline.<br /><br />When Mahfouz, the revolution’s video blogger was asked what her expectations are now after the massive demonstrations, she answered, “All Egyptians, not only the protestors, have broken through the fear barrier. I expect only one outcome - protests will continue until Mubarak steps down from power.”<br /><br />Mubarak and his Western backers better take notice. Checkmate. <br /><br /><em>Esam Al-Amin can be reached at alamin1919@gmail.com</em>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-74578205866010668522011-02-04T12:39:00.001-06:002011-02-04T12:44:26.742-06:00La contra en Egipto<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCFUg-hrcXAhyzCA9izHoZpakX92ShzEJA-nIlYiYxIbi1irZZeqb5IBExRl6kchE-CnPvR7Ha29Ju4-uw28htnYzY9kAukvUkUjgnbwIWXIhOrGV8ozdf-JL6w-FHVpjyMM0Z03VBWck/s1600/egypt-protests.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 285px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCFUg-hrcXAhyzCA9izHoZpakX92ShzEJA-nIlYiYxIbi1irZZeqb5IBExRl6kchE-CnPvR7Ha29Ju4-uw28htnYzY9kAukvUkUjgnbwIWXIhOrGV8ozdf-JL6w-FHVpjyMM0Z03VBWck/s400/egypt-protests.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5569907129826342162" /></a><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Weekend Edition<br />February 4 - 6, 2011<br />From Counter-Attack to Departure Day</span><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Mubarak's Last Gasps</span><br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><br />By ESAM AL-AMIN<br /></span><br /><br /><br /> There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen.”<br /><br /> --V. I. Lenin (1870-1924)<br /><br /> “Victory is accomplished through the perseverance of the last hour.”<br /><br /> --Prophet Muhammad (570-632 AD)<br /><br />According to the CIA's declassified documents and records, senior CIA operative, Kermit Roosevelt, paid $100,000 to mobsters in Tehran, in early August 1953, to hire the most feared thugs to stage pro-Shah riots.<br /><br />Other CIA-paid men were brought weeks later, on August 19, into Tehran in buses and trucks to take over the streets, topple the democratically elected Iranian government, and restore Shah Reza Pahlavi to his thrown. It took the people of Iran 26 years, enormous sacrifices, and a popular revolution to overthrow the imposed, corrupt and repressive rule of the Shah.<br /><br />This lesson was not lost on the minds of a small clique of officials who were meeting in desperation in the afternoon of Monday, Jan. 31, 2011, in Cairo. According to several sources including former intelligence officer Col. Omar Afifi, one of these officials was the new Interior minister, Police Gen. Mahmoud Wagdy, who as the former head of the prison system, is also a torture expert. He asked Hosni Mubarak, the embattled president to give him a week to take care of the demonstrators who have been occupying major squares around the country for about a week.<br /><br />Not only he had to rapidly reconstitute his security forces, which were dispersed and dejected in the aftermath of the massive demonstrations engulfing the country, but he also had to come up with a quick plan to prevent the total collapse of the regime.<br /><br />The meeting included many security officials including Brig. Gen. Ismail Al-Shaer, Cairo’s security chief, as well as other security officers. In addition, leaders of the National Democratic Party (NDP)- the ruling party- including its Secretary General and head of the Consultative Assembly (upper house of Parliament), Safwat El-Sherif, as well as Parliament Speaker, Fathi Sorour, were briefed and given their assignments. Similarly, the retained Minister of Information, Anas Al-Feky, was fully apprised of the plan.<br /><br />By the end of the meeting each was given certain tasks to regain the initiative from the street; to end or neutralize the revolution; and to defuse the most serious crisis the regime has ever faced in an effort to ease the tremendous domestic and international pressures being exerted on their president.<br /><br />They knew that eyes around the world would be focused on the massive demonstrations called for by the youth leading the popular revolution while promising million-strong marches on Tuesday, Feb. 1. True to their promise the pro-democracy groups drew a remarkable eight million people (ten percent of the population) throughout Egypt on that day.<br /><br />People from every age, class, and walk of life assembled and marched in every province and city by the hundreds of thousands: two million in Tahrir Square in Cairo, one million in Martyrs Square in Alexandria, 750 thousand in downtown Mansoura, and a quarter million in Suez, just to name a few. It was an impressive show of strength. This time, they demanded not only the immediate removal of Mubarak but also the ouster of the whole regime.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />An evil plan devised</span><br /><br />As the fierce determination of the Egyptian people to remove their autocratic president became apparent, governments around the world began pressuring Mubarak to step down and be replaced by his newly appointed Vice President, the former head of intelligence, Gen. Omar Suleiman. President Barak Obama, for example, dispatched over the last weekend former U.S. Ambassador, Frank Wisner, a close friend to Mubarak to deliver such warning.<br /><br />Wisner indeed delivered a firm but subtle message to Mubarak that he ought to announce that neither he nor his son would be presidential candidates later this year. He also urged him to transfer his powers to Suleiman. Western governments have been alarmed by the deterioration of the situation in Egypt and were trying to give their preferred candidate, Gen. Suleiman, the upper hand before events favor another candidate that might be less amenable to Israel and the West, and therefore shift the strategic balance of powers in the region.<br /><br />On Saturday Jan. 29, The National Security Council advised the president to ask Mubarak in no uncertain terms to immediately step down. However, Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, whom the president consulted, strenuously objected and pleaded for time to allow Mubarak to stay in power at least until he finishes his term in September.<br /><br />Openly criticizing Obama, former Israeli Defense minister, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, a longtime friend of Mubarak, said, “I don't think the Americans understand yet the disaster they have pushed the Middle East into.” The Israeli lobby and Saudi Ambassador Adel Al-Jubeir went overdrive and intensified their lobbying efforts in Congress in order to exert immense pressure on the administration. Reluctantly, the U.S. president relented.<br /><br />Meanwhile, the last touches of a crude plan to abort the protests and attack the demonstrators were being finalized in the Interior Ministry. In the mean time, the leaders of the NPD met with the committee of forty, which is a committee of corrupt oligarchs and tycoons, who have taken over major sections of Egypt’s economy in the last decade and are close associates to Jamal Mubarak, the president’s son. The committee included Ahmad Ezz, Ibrahim Kamel, Mohamad Abu el-Enein, Magdy Ashour and others.<br /><br />Each businessman pledged to recruit as many people from their businesses and industries as well as mobsters and hoodlums known as Baltagies – people who are paid to fight and cause chaos and terror. Abu el-Enein and Kamel pledged to finance the whole operation.Meanwhile,the Interior Minister reconstituted some of the most notorious officers of his secret police to join the counter-revolutionary demonstrators slated for Wednesday, with a specific plan of attack the pro-democracy protesters.<br /><br />About a dozen security officers, who were to supervise the plan in the field, also recruited former dangerous ex-prisoners who escaped the prison last Saturday, promising them money and presidential pardons against their convictions. This plan was to be executed in Cairo, Alexandria, Suez, Port Said, Damanhour, Asyout, among other cities across Egypt.<br /><br />By Tuesday evening, Mubarak gave a speech in response to the massive demonstrations of the day. He pledged not to seek a sixth term, while attacking the demonstrators and accusing them of being infiltrated, in an indirect reference to the Muslim Brotherhood. Nevertheless, he pledged to complete his term and that he would not leave under pressure.<br /><br />Although he pledged not to run, he was silent about whether or not his son would be a candidate. He ended his 10 minute address by giving his nation a grave warning that the situation was extremely dangerous, and that the country would face either “stability or chaos,” presenting himself as the embodiment of the former. Leaders of the pro-democracy demonstrators immediately rejected his characterization and insisted that he leave power.<br /><br />Although Sen. John Kerry, the Chairman of the Senate Relations Committee, called publicly on President Mubarak two days earlier to disavow any plans for his son to seek the presidency, the Egyptian president ignored his call. However, a former senior intelligence aide, Mahmoud Ali Sabra, who used to present daily briefs to Mubarak for 18 years (1984-2002), said publicly on Al-Jazeera that Mubarak has indeed been grooming his son to become president since at least 1997. Although Jamal had no official title in the government, Sabra stated that Mubarak asked him to present these daily intelligence reports to no one in the government except to him and his son.<br /><br />Sabra also described how Mubarak was disturbed after the first stage of the 2000 Parliamentary elections, when the Muslim Brotherhood won a majority of seats. He then ordered his Interior Minister to manipulate the elections in the subsequent stages and forge the results in order to put NDP on top.<br /><br />Shortly after the besieged president’s address to his nation around midnight on Tuesday, the baltagieswere unleashed on the pro-democracy demonstrators in Alexandria and Port Said beating and clubbing them in a rehearsal for what was to come the following day at Tahrir Square.<br /><br />Tahrir or Liberation Square has been the center of action in Cairo throughout the protests. It’s the largest square in the country located in downtown Cairo where millions of demonstrators have been gathering since Jan. 25. Eight separate entrances lead to it including the ones from the American Embassy and the famous Egyptian museum.<br /><br />Around 2 PM on Wednesday Feb. 2, the execution of the plan of attack ensued in earnest. Over three thousand baltagies attacked from two entrances with thousands of rocks and stones thrown at the tens of thousands of peaceful demonstrators gathered in the square, while most attackers had shields to defend themselves against the returning rocks. While a few were armed with guns, all baltagies were armed with clubs, machetes, razors, knives or other sharp objects.<br /><br />After about an hour of throwing stones, the second stage of the attacks proceeded as dozens of horses and camels came charging at the demonstrators in a scene reminiscent of the battles of the middle ages. The pro-democracy people fought back by their bare hands, knocking them from their rides and throwing their bodies at them. They subsequently apprehended over three hundred and fifty baltagies, turning them over to nearby army units.<br /><br />They confiscated their IDs which showed that most assailants were either NDP members or from the secret police. Others confessed that they were ex-cons who were paid $10 to beat up the demonstrators. The camel and horse riders confessed to have been paid $70 each.<br /><br />The third stage of the attack came about three hours later when dozens of assailants climbed the roofs in nearby buildings and threw hundreds of Molotov cocktails at the pro-democracy protesters below, who immediately rushed to extinguish the fires. They eventually had to put out two fires at the Egyptian museum as well. By midnight the thugs started using tear gas and live bullets from a bridge above the protesters killing five people and injuring over three dozens, ten seriously.<br /><br />Interestingly, one hour before the planned assault the army announced to the demonstrators on national TV that the government “got the message” and then implored the protesters to end the demonstrations and “go home.” But when the protesters begged the army units to interfere during the brutal attacks that persisted for 16 hours, the army declared that it was neutral and partially withdrew from some entrances despite its promise to protect the peaceful and unarmed demonstrators.<br /><br />By morning, the Tahrir Square resembled a battleground with at least 10 persons killed and over 2,500 injured people, 900 of which required transport to nearby hospitals as admitted by the Health ministry. Most of the injured suffered face and head wounds including concussions, burns and cuts because of the use of rocks, iron bars, shanks, razors, and Molotov cocktails. Al-Jazeera TV and many other TV networks around the world were broadcasting these assaults live to the bewilderment of billions of people worldwide.<br /><br />Before the attacks started that afternoon, the Minister of Information had also executed his part of the plan. He called on all ministry employees to demonstrate on behalf of Mubarak in an upscale neighborhood in Cairo. He then asked the Egyptian state TV to broadcast live- for the first time in nine days of continuous demonstrations- the ensuing confrontation between the protesters and the government-sponsored thugs, in order to show the Egyptian people what chaos would bring to the country as Mubarak had warned them in his address just the previous night.<br /><br />The battle plan was for the baltagies to block seven entrances of the Tahrir Square, leaving only the American Embassy entrance open for the thugs to push back the demonstrators in order for them to come so close to the Embassy that its guards surrounding it would have to shoot at them and thus instigate a confrontation with the Americans.<br /><br />But the heroic steadfastness of the demonstrators lead by the youth was phenomenal as they not only withstood their ground but also chased them away every time they were pushed. By the next morning the assault fizzled and the whole world condemned the Mubarak regime for such wickedness, cruelty, and total disregard of human life.<br /><br />“The events in Tahrir Square and elsewhere strongly suggest government involvement in violence against peaceful protesters,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of the Human Rights Watch. “The U.S. and other allies should make clear that further abuse will come at a very high price.”<br /><br />By that afternoon every major Western country has called for Mubarak to step down including the U.S, the European Union, the U.K, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Norway and many others. In Washington, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs called the violence by the pro-Mubarak crowd “outrageous and deplorable” and warned that it should stop immediately.<br /><br />On the other hand, by daybreak, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians joined their fellow pro-democracy activists in order to show support and solidarity. The leaders of the protests have already called for massive demonstrations on Friday across Egypt after congregational prayers, calling the event “Departure Day,” in a reference to the day they hoped to force Mubarak to resign or leave the country.<br /><br />In an attempt to contain the damage about what happened in Tahrir Square on Wednesday, Prime Minister Ahmad Shafiq offered his apology to the people. He also denied his government’s involvement, calling for a prompt investigation and swift punishment for those who were responsible. Moreover, Vice President Suleiman appeared on state TV offering an olive branch to the opposition, declaring that all of their demands would be accepted by the government, while ignoring the main demand of Mubarak’s ouster. He then pleaded for time to implement political reforms.<br /><br />He also appealed to the nation to allow President Mubarak to complete his term until the upcoming presidential elections in September. For the first time, the regime then vowed that the president’s son would not be a candidate. He further called for dialogue with all opposition parties.<br /><br />Ahmad Maher, 29, the national coordinator of the “April 6 Youth” movement, the primary group that called for and organized the uprising, immediately rejected the offer by Suleiman, calling it a trick to abort the revolution. He insisted on the main demand of removing Mubarak from power before any negotiations could take place.<br /><br />All other opposition groups, including the popular Muslim Brotherhood, followed suit. Friday’s “Departure Day” is promising to be a decisive day where the pro-democracy demonstrators vowed to continue the protests until Mubarak is ousted.<br /><br />Meanwhile, the regime in a last-ditch effort to limit the effect of the demonstrations have asked all foreign journalists to leave the country before D-Day (Departure Day), and dismantled all cameras from Tahrir Square. There is not a single network in Cairo today that can broadcast the event live. Clearly, this last ploy was designed to intimidate the demonstrators who insisted that they would not cowed.<span style="font-weight:bold;"><br /><br />Likely scenarios: remember Marcos?</span><br /><br />The Obama administration is evidently very frustrated with Mubarak because of his stubbornness and obliviousness to reality. President Obama bluntly declared on Tuesday, “It is my belief that an orderly transition must be meaningful, it must be peaceful and it must begin now.”<br /><br />Since the crisis began ten days ago, the U.S, which has been supporting and subsidizing the Egyptian regime for three decades, expected that its beleaguered ally would listen to its advice, limit the damage, pack up and leave. But his performance and ruthless behavior have endangered its other allies in the region, and caused long-term damage to its strategic interests, namely, Israel, stability, oil, and military bases.<br /><br />Egypt was one of the most important countries and allies to the U.S. in the region. It was a cornerstone in its strategic equation. If Egypt were to be lost to a more independent leader, the strategic balance of power in the region would radically shift against America’s interest or its allies.<br /><br />In turn this change might cause a major re-assessment of the long-term American strategy in the region, especially in regard to policies related to Israel and counter-terrorism. Thus, Vice President Suleiman is considered by the U.S. and other Western allies, as the best person who could fulfill this role of maintaining the status quo. Thus, the more Mubarak maneuvered to stay in power, the less likely this prospect would be realized.<br /><br />Ambassador Wisner, who has been in Egypt since Saturday, was asked to deliver to Mubarak an ultimatum from Obama. It would be similar to the one given to Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines in 1989 by then President George H. W. Bush. Mubarak would be told that he should resign and transfer his presidential powers to his vice president.<br /><br />If he refuses, the army would then remove him anyway, while Western governments would go after the billions in American and European assets that he and his sons have hoarded over the years. He would also be told that he would face a certain indictment by the International Criminal Court on War Crimes against his people. Surely, Mubarak would be expected to choose the first option and leave either to Germany under a medical pretext, or join his two sons in London.<br /><br />As Omar Suleiman is promoted to become the new President of Egypt, this appointment will be hailed by Western governments and media as a great victory by the pro-democracy forces and as the expression of the will of the Egyptian people. Political and economic reforms will then be promised to the people, in an effort that allows great leeway in internal reforms but keep foreign policy intact.<br /><br />However, this move will undoubtedly divide the country. The leaders of the revolution, namely the youth, who have led the demonstrations for the past two weeks and sacrificed blood for it, would continue to press for total and clean break from the previous regime. They will also be supported by popular and grass-roots movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood.<br /><br />On the other hand, other opposition movements, which have little or no popular support bur were largely created by the Mubarak regime as a décor to portray a democratic image, will accept Suleiman and embrace the new arrangements in order to have a seat at the table and get a piece of the pie. The Egyptian public will likely be split as well.<br /><br />With the monopoly of the government over the state media and other means of government information control, the new regime may bet on getting a slack from the public while it consolidates its power.<br /><br />Alternatively, the youth movement, which started its march towards freedom and democracy using social media and independent means of communications, while spearheading the most robust and forceful democracy movement in the whole region, may actually have the last word.<br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><br />Esam Al-Amin can be reached at alamin1919@gmail.com</span>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-68138393071200533262011-02-04T11:42:00.003-06:002011-02-04T11:47:04.774-06:00El Tatic de Chiapas: Samuel Ruíz<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXETR9m4pu_qEZA5T7LWHkn-epQCX6AE6n1de0ao_BrKNbFKZgFbnI5ERYKDHMSMODpsxYhyphenhyphenmEof1RtxlcLniVQySSQynJphABwG1r9flJThQf8r3Nafjl095mjzPjxLIiAQz_1-FT8P0/s1600/Samuel_Ruiz_obispo.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXETR9m4pu_qEZA5T7LWHkn-epQCX6AE6n1de0ao_BrKNbFKZgFbnI5ERYKDHMSMODpsxYhyphenhyphenmEof1RtxlcLniVQySSQynJphABwG1r9flJThQf8r3Nafjl095mjzPjxLIiAQz_1-FT8P0/s400/Samuel_Ruiz_obispo.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5569892342047122450" /></a><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">El Tatic de Chiapas</span><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">por Miguel León Portilla</span><br /><br /><br />Comenzaré recordando algunos de los atributos naturales y culturales de Chiapas, donde el tatic Samuel Ruiz laboró incansable durante cerca de 40 años. Chiapas, con algo más de 74 mil kilómetros cuadrados –aproximadamente la extensión de Austria– y cerca de 250 kilómetros de costas en el Pacífico, posee una geografía variada y abundante en recursos: tierras altas, mesetas, bosques, selvas y planicies costeras, grandes ríos como el Grijalva, Mezcalapa, Usumacinta, Santo Domingo y también no pocos lagos, como los de Montebello. Chiapas y Tabasco son los estados más lluviosos de México. Entre sus recursos sobresalen la madera de sus bosques, las plantaciones de cacao, café y maíz. En sus pastizales prolifera el ganado.<br /><br />Posee petróleo, gas natural, azufre, en tanto que sus aguas a lo largo de sus litorales, sus lagos y ríos son ricas en pesca. Un moderno y muy grande sistema de presas –Malpaso, La Angostura, Nezahualcóyotl y Chicoasen– hace que hoy Chiapas sea el primer productor de energía eléctrica en el país. Y debe notarse de entrada que esto poco aprovecha a la mayoría de cerca de millón y medio de indígenas que carecen de electricidad y de agua potable.<br /><br />Recordemos que desde hace muchos siglos, Chiapas fue escenario de un gran desarrollo cultural. Habitada principalmente por grupos mayenses –choles, lacandones, tzotziles, tzeltales, tojolabales, canjobales, mames y otros– así como por zoques y gente de origen nahua-pipil, fue tierra donde, desde el periodo preclásico anterior a la era cristiana, hasta la Conquista, floreció esplendente el universo cultural maya. Testigos de ello son las estelas de Izapa y Chiapa de Corzo, y de siglos posteriores los extraordinarios asentamientos de Yaxchilán, Toniná, Chilón, Bonampak y Palenque, entre otros.<br /><br />Pero en esta tierra de tantas maravillas, en el siglo XVI incursionaron Pedro de Alvarado, Luis Marín y Diego Mazariegos, a los cuales los pueblos originarios se opusieron a tal grado que los conocidos como "indios chiapas", tras heroica resistencia, prefirieron despeñarse en el cañón del Sumidero antes que someterse a los conquistadores.<br /><br />En 1545 llegó a Chiapas como obispo fray Bartolomé de las Casas. Contempló ahí cómo en ese paraíso de luz y calor, subsistían los indios sojuzgados y sometidos en las encomiendas. Las Casas actuó con vehemencia, defendió a los indios, se enfrentó a los encomenderos, denunció ante el emperador Carlos V el drama que ahí se vivía. Pero no obstante que luchó por ellos hasta su propia muerte, en 1566, la explotación y la consiguiente miseria perduraron.<br /><br />Cerca de cuatro siglos después otro obispo, Samuel Ruiz García llegó también a Chiapas y pudo percatarse de que, no obstante que México había alcanzado su independencia y no obstante la reforma liberal y la Revolución de 1910, la situación de los indios poco o nada había cambiado. Para él, que había estudiado en Roma y tenía muy buena preparación teológica y en general académica, fue un choque lo que contemplaba. Le llevó tiempo enterarse cabalmente de lo que ocurría. Tristes símbolos de ello eran los indios que, al encontrarse en la calle con los ladinos y los coletos, bajaban de la banqueta para que éstos pasaran muy cómodos y también ver en los caminos a mujeres indígenas encorvadas con pesadas cargas a la espalda.<br /><br />Conocí a don Samuel y con él hablé en algunas ocasiones y también en otras muchas oí hablar acerca de él. Unos, como el antropólogo de origen maya Alfonso Villa Rojas, que había trabajado en el Centro Indigenista de San Cristóbal de las Casas, me dijo varias veces que nunca se había imaginado que un obispo fuera como don Samuel. Me decía: "fíjese, pienso que se parece a fray Bartolomé de Las Casas". Por mi parte, añadiré que, al verlo, me pareció hombre alejado de cualquier arrogancia, inteligente y bondadoso. Al padre Las Casas lo aborrecieron los encomenderos y al tatic también lo detestaron los finqueros, los ricos y muchos políticos que no querían que les "agitaran las aguas".<br /><br />Pienso que don Samuel, al que los tzotziles y otros llamaban ya tatic, padre, hizo suyos dos principios claves que normaron su actuar. Uno fue que había que liberar a los indios de las injusticias acumuladas por siglos y exigir respeto a sus derechos. Y por cierto que tiempo después sus demandas coincidieron en gran parte con lo que fueron reclamos de los zapatistas en las discusiones que llevaron a los acuerdos de San Andrés Larráinzar. El tatic, como lo había hecho cuatro siglos antes fray Bartolomé, alzó muchas veces su voz, haciendo denuncias, aunque con ello perturbara a no pocos potentados, políticos, clérigos y al Vaticano mismo.<br /><br />El otro principio clave, expuesto con claridad por él mismo, consistió en reconocer que, si como obispo, tenía que entregarse a la evangelización de los indios, debía emprenderla no ya imponiendo ni menos atentando contra la cultura indígena. Así habían actuado muchos frailes desde el siglo XVI. Don Samuel se propuso entonces, y en ello tuvo seguidores, adaptar el cristianismo a la cultura indígena, y no al revés, destruyéndola e imponiendo lo que le era ajeno. Desde luego que esto, en tanto que aceptado y reconocido por algunos religiosos, como sus amigos el dominico Miguel Concha y el jesuita Eugenio Maurer, perturbó a otros, desde curas y obispos hasta llegar al nuncio del Papa y a la curia Vaticana.<br /><br />El tatic participó en todas las sesiones del Concilio Vaticano II, allá por 1962, convocado por Juan XXIII. En él, entre otros asuntos, se discutió ampliamente sobre las formas de evangelización de los pueblos de culturas distintas de la occidental. El principio del respeto y lo que se llamó "la inculturación" del cristianismo en los usos, costumbres y visión del mundo de los pueblos originarios de América Latina, África y Asia, comenzó entonces a abrirse camino; don Samuel ahondó en ello y, así como defendía los derechos de los indios, adoptó una nueva forma de actuar. Antes que cualquier otra cosa buscó y logró la participación en la acción evangelizadora de hombres y mujeres descendientes de los pueblos originarios: instauró la formación de diáconos indígenas; propició el empleo en las iglesias de las lenguas nativas, no sólo en los oficios religiosos sino también en traducciones de la Biblia. Sin ambages reconoció el valor de muchos de los símbolos indígenas ancestrales. Él mismo conoció y habló tzotzil, tzeltal y tojolabal.<br /><br />Todo esto –la lucha por los derechos indígenas y la nueva forma de presentarles el cristianismo– molestó a muchos. Y cuando el primero de enero de 1994 ocurrió el alzamiento zapatista, el tatic, lejos de permanecer pasivo, se aprestó con valentía para encontrarle solución. Ante todo actuó para impedir el derramamiento de sangre. En tal empeño formó parte del grupo mediador entre los zapatistas y el gobierno federal, al lado de hombres como Pablo González Casanova, Gonzalo Ituarte, Juan Bañuelos y Concepción Calvillo viuda de Nava. Su participación, siempre atenta a las demandas indígenas –autonomía, restitución de territorios ancestrales, representación en las cámaras, respeto y apoyo al uso de sus lenguas...– no sólo influyó sino que fue decisiva.<br /><br />Además de denuncias y exigencias en pro de los indios, dio apoyo y protección a los refugiados nativos de Guatemala que huían de la persecución gubernamental de ese país. También levantó la voz cuando ocurrió la matanza en Acteal. Todo esto incrementó el disgusto y rencor de sus adversarios. El ya mencionado Miguel Concha recuerda que don Samuel recibió amenazas de muerte en varias ocasiones, al grado tal que incluso autoridades que lejos estaban de simpatizar con él, como el gobernador de Chiapas Patrocinio González Garrido, ordenaron su protección.<br /><br />Hoy, al evocar la muerte del tatic, acaecida el 24 de enero de este año, podemos afirmar que, con su pensamiento y acción, ha dejado profunda huella no sólo en Chiapas sino en México entero, en América Latina y en otros lugares del mundo. Al difundirse la noticia de su fallecimiento las reacciones de inmediato se dejaron sentir. No sólo sus hijos tzotziles, tzeltales y los demás nativos chiapanecos, sino también incontables académicos –principalmente antropólogos, sociólogos y periodistas– y aún políticos de casi todas los partidos, incluso de aquellos que en ocasiones lo difamaron acusándolo de cómplice en el levantamiento zapatista, en fin, la sociedad civil, han lamentado públicamente su muerte. Numerosos artículos y esquelas en diversos medios de comunicación dan testimonio de ello.<br /><br />Y si esto es en verdad elocuente, hay algo más que debe ponerse de relieve. El tatic, como lo había hecho fray Bartolomé de Las Casas, ha dejado un legado perdurable. Ambos, como defensores de los indios, actuaron sin reposo y diseñaron formas de proceder para lograr la defensa de sus derechos. Y también como cristianos verdaderos, expresaron público rechazo a las imposiciones y abrieron caminos para "inculturar" su mensaje en el ser de los pueblos originarios. Si Chiapas posee grandes atributos naturales y culturales, su riqueza incluye también, y de modo muy especial, la presencia y acción de hombres como Bartolomé de Las Casas y Samuel Ruiz. La memoria de sus personas, ideas y actuación es ya parte de la historia de Chiapas y también de México, América Latina y otros muchos ámbitos de cultura.<br /><br />Quiero concluir esta mínima recordación del tatic aplicándole las palabras con que los antiguos sabios nahuas describían al tlamcazqui Quetzalcóatl, el sacerdote cuyo título evocaba a dicha deidad, conservadas en el Códice florentino entre los textos que reunió fray Bernardino de Sahagún:<br /><br />Aún cuando fuera pobre,/ aún cuando su madre y su padre/ fueran los pobres de los pobres,/ no se veía su linaje,/ sólo se atendía a su género de vida,/ a la pureza de su corazón,/ a su corazón bueno y humano,/ a su corazón firme./ Se decía que tenía a Dios en su corazón,/ que era sabio en las cosas de Dios.<br /><br />Creyente como fue el tatic, podemos afirmar que fue él un yolteotl, tuvo a Dios en su corazón, fue bueno y humano.fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-13862229193724249272011-02-02T14:20:00.002-06:002011-02-04T11:50:14.885-06:00Crónica de la revolución en Egipto<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiarA-ArL3p3loGQahu16nJl1UO4jdid6mJZbLTbGdmibca6nDDTU72OZervj7KoJf9KL0mQ-FL3BtwVNX591JO7Tdjuu8dHtChYRFA0jjIX-Jn1BPCge4hyphenhyphennO1plskmDutVZtuN8geoGQ/s1600/egypt_Tahrir-Protests.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiarA-ArL3p3loGQahu16nJl1UO4jdid6mJZbLTbGdmibca6nDDTU72OZervj7KoJf9KL0mQ-FL3BtwVNX591JO7Tdjuu8dHtChYRFA0jjIX-Jn1BPCge4hyphenhyphennO1plskmDutVZtuN8geoGQ/s400/egypt_Tahrir-Protests.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5569893156566596466" /></a><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">February 1, 2011<br />People Power in Action<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The Making of Egypt's Revolution</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">By ESAM AL-AMIN</span><br /><br /> Freedom lies behind a door, closed shut<br /> It can only be knocked down with a bleeding fist<br /><br /> -- Egyptian Poet-Laureate Ahmad Shawqi (1869-1932)<br /><br /><br /><br />On April 21, 2008, an assistant high school principal placed an advertisement in Al-Ahram, the largest daily newspaper in Egypt, pleading disparately with President Hosni Mubarak and his wife to intervene and release her daughter from prison.<br /><br />It turned out that her 27 year-old daughter, Israa’ Abd el-Fattah, was arrested 10 days earlier because of her role in placing a page on Facebook encouraging Egyptians to support a strike in the industrial city of al-Mahalla that had taken place on April 6.<br /><br />In her spare time, she and two of her colleagues created the Facebook page. Within days of posting it, over 70,000 people supported their call. After the security forces cracked down against the huge riots in al-Mahalla on April 6, Abd el-Fattah was arrested.<br /><br />What was odd about this arrest was that although thousands of people have been arrested over the past three decades, it was the first time that a warrant was issued against a female under the notorious emergency laws imposed in the country since 1981. To get out of prison she had to apologize and express regret for her actions. But the experience made her more determined than ever to be politically active.<br /><br />On that day, the “April 6 Youth” movement was created. For the next two and a half years it maintained its presence and created one of the most popular political forums on several social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Flickr.<br /><br />When the president of Tunisia, Zein al-Abideen Ben Ali, was deposed on January 14, following a four week popular uprising, the April 6 movement, like millions of youth across the Arab World, was inspired, energized, and called for action.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Changing of the Guard: the Youth leads</span><br /><br />Looking at the calendar, Israa’ and her colleagues picked the next Egyptian holiday, which was ironically “Police Day” falling on Tuesday, January 25. Within a few days they called on all social media sites for massive protests and an uprising against the Mubarak regime.<br /><br />They called for marches to start from all major squares, mosques and churches in Cairo and Alexandria while asking others to help plan in other Egyptian cities. They insisted that the protests would be peaceful and that no one should bring weapons of any type.<br /><br />They had four demands: that the government develops programs to address poverty and unemployment; that it would end the state of emergency and uphold judicial independence; the resignation of the interior minister whose ministry was notorious for torture and abuse of human rights; and for political reforms including the limitation of presidential terms to two, the dissolution of the parliament, and for new elections to be held after the massive elections fraud of last November.<br /><br />Within a few days, over ninety thousand youth signed up and charted a comprehensive protest throughout Egypt. Initially, neither the government nor the opposition took them seriously. Even former IAEA director Dr. Mohammad Elbaradei, who has been criticizing the regime for over a year, was abroad due to his frequent speaking engagements.<br /><br />In a show of force, the government assembled over two hundred thousand of its security forces surrounding the protesters throughout the country. On the other hand, hundreds of thousands of protesters marched representing broad cross sections of society, men and women, young and old, educated and illiterate, and declared that their demonstrations were peaceful but that they were determined to press their demands.<br /><br />When they could not control the crowds the police beat back the protesters using water canons, tear gas and rubber bullets. By the end of the day there were over a dozen casualties and hundreds of injuries. This not only outraged the demonstrators, but also ignited the whole country.<br /><br />Most of the protesters refused to go home and escalated the confrontation declaring an open demonstration in Liberation Square in downtown Cairo and throughout the country. The government continued its crackdown calling for curfews in Cairo, Alexandria, and Suez from 6 PM to 6 AM.<br /><br />The curfews for the following days kept getting longer until the government called for a general curfew from 3 PM to 8 AM. But each time the people simply ignored it and increased their demands, calling for total regime change and the ouster of Mubarak.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />An Uprising turns into a Revolution</span><br /><br />By Thursday, the organizers called for “A Day of Rage” after Friday’s congregational prayers. The next round of protests included participation by all opposition groups, the largest of which was the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Immediately hundreds of their leaders were rounded up and detained. As millions of people across Egypt took to the street, all 350,000 security forces and police were mobilized, advancing on the protesters and turning Egyptian streets and neighborhoods into battlegrounds. By the end of the day dozens more were killed and thousands injured.<br /><br />Afterwards, security forces evacuated from all the cities. Chaos and confusion ensued. Police stations and buildings belonging to the ruling party were torched. The secret police opened all police stations and prisons releasing all criminals in a scorched-earth attempt to spread fear and chaos. The regime hoped to regain the upper hand by proving its worth to the people as their source of security.<br /><br />After a four-day absence, at midnight on Friday, the 82-year old Egyptian president addressed his nation of 85 million by blaming his government, describing it as “inept,” and promising to appoint a new cabinet. By the following day he appointed two generals, his chief of intelligence, Gen. Omar Suleiman as his first ever vice president and Gen. Ahmad Shafiq as prime minister.<br /><br />People immediately dismissed the superficial gestures and demanded an end to Mubarak’s 30-year rule. By Monday the new cabinet was sworn in, retaining 18 of the previous ministers, including those occupying the important posts of defense, foreign, communications, justice, and oil.<br /><br />The only major change was the sacking of the interior minister, appointing another general in his place. Not a single opposition party was consulted, let alone appointed. The first order of business of the new government was to reconstitute the security forces and restore order.<br /><br />Although by Friday the authorities had completely cut mobile phone and Internet services, the genie was already out of the bottle. When asked by the French news service AFP, Abd el-Fattah, who has been camping with her colleagues since Tuesday in Liberation Square, said, after the government disrupted the internet, "We've already announced the meeting places. So we've done it, we no longer need means of communication."<br /><br />She continued, “We want the regime to go. We've been asking for reforms for 30 years and the regime has never answered or paid attention to our demands.” She then added, "It won't just be tomorrow, but the day after and the day after that as well. We won't stop, we won't go home.”<br /><br />Amidst the chant “the People demand the fall of the regime,” Abd el-Fattah talked to Al-Jazeera TV, which has been covering the unfolding events non-stop since it began four days earlier, and called for all opposition parties to form a transitional government. But by Saturday the regime interrupted all satellite channels including Al-Jazeera. Egyptians were now totally cut off from all means of information and communications.<br /><br />By Sunday afternoon a provisional parliament, made up of the major opposition parties including the MB, the liberal Wafd, and the April 6 and Kefaya movements, met at Liberation Square and appointed a 10-member committee, headed by Dr. Elbaradei. Their mandate was to negotiate with the regime the departure of the embattled president. The April 6 youth was disappointed since they had hoped for a formation of a transitional government rather than a committee that would initiate negotiations with the despised regime.<br /><br />Meanwhile, in the absence of the police and security forces, the president sent the army to restore order and intimidate the protesters. Tanks and armed vehicles were occupying major squares, thoroughfares, and public buildings. The following day F-16s and military helicopters were roaming the skies in a show of force. But the protesters immediately embraced the army, hugging them, chanting for them, and asking them to be on their side.<br /><br />The head of the army declared that the military would not attack or intimidate the people but would only protect the country and maintain order. A few officers even joined the demonstrators in denouncing the regime. Overall, however, the army seems to have kept its loyalty to the regime despite the popular call to oust the president.<br /><br />Meanwhile, people formed popular committees to protect their properties and neighborhoods. Hundreds of looters caught by the people were found to be either deserted police officers or common criminals released by the police. All were turned to the army for detention.<br /><br />Despite the massive demonstrations, the total paralysis of the country, and the increasingly hardened will of the Egyptian people, President Mubarak remained arrogant, stubborn, and unmoved by his people’s rage towards his regime. He also was emboldened as he received support from other authoritarians such as the King of Saudi Arabia, and the leaders of Libya and the Palestinian Authority.<br /><br />Furthermore, a former Israeli defense minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, considered one of the closest Israeli politicians to Mubarak, told the Jerusalem Post after speaking to Mubarak, “I have no doubt that the situation in Egypt is under control.” He then added, “Our relations with Egypt are strategic and intimate.”<br /><br />As the events unfolded the regime seemed confounded and shaken. Initially, the official news agencies in Egypt blamed some members of the ruling party and low-ranking officials. For instance the party demanded and received the resignation of Ahmad Ezz, the right-hand man of Jamal Mubarak, the president’s son and undeclared heir apparent.<br /><br />Ezz was a corrupt billionaire businessman who quickly rose through the party ranks and oversaw the latest fraudulent parliamentary elections where the party won 97 per cent of the seats. Just a few weeks ago, he was praised by ruling party officials for orchestrating the overwhelming victory despite more than 1500 judicial orders that overturned much of the election results, but were ignored by the government. Ezz and his family immediately left the country in his private jet.<br /><br />Likewise, both of Mubarak’s sons and their families left to London in their private jets. The head of the Cairo International Airport also announced that 19 private jets owned by the richest families in the country left to Dubai on Saturday. One of these corrupt billionaires was Hussein Salem, a former intelligence officer and a close confidant of the president. Dubai airport officials declared that they seized over $300 million in cash from him.<br /><br />Salem was the head of a private energy company that teamed up with an Israeli conglomerate to secure a long-term contract to sell natural gas to Israel. In June 2008 Les Afriques reported that Egypt was subsidizing Israel with hundreds of millions of dollars every year in energy purchase. By January 2010, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz exposed the secret and reported that Israel was in fact receiving natural gas from Egypt at a 70 per cent discount. The scandal was swept aside by the former Egyptian prime minister who refused to divulge to the parliament the terms of the contract. Subsequently when the government was sued, a judge ruled against it and invalidated the contract, which the government totally ignored.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Looking the other way: Human Rights but not for all</span><br /><br />The Mubarak regime had one of the worst human rights records in the world. In June 2010, Human Rights Watch reported that “the Egyptian Government continued to suppress political dissent … dispersing demonstrations; harassing rights activists; and detaining journalists, bloggers, and Muslim Brotherhood members.”<br /><br />Even the U.S. State Department 2008 Human Rights Report to Congress stated that “The (Egyptian) government's respect for human rights remained poor, and serious abuses continued in many areas.” It continued, “The government limited citizens' right to change their government and continued a state of emergency that has been in place almost continuously since 1967. Security forces used unwarranted lethal force and tortured and abused prisoners and detainees, in most cases with impunity.” <br /><br />It concluded, “Security forces arbitrarily arrested and detained individuals, in some cases for political purposes, and kept them in prolonged pretrial detention. The executive branch placed limits on and pressured the judiciary. The government's respect for freedoms of press, association, and religion declined during the year, and the government continued to restrict other civil liberties, particularly freedom of speech, including Internet freedom, and freedom of assembly, including restrictions on nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Government corruption and lack of transparency persisted.”<br /><br />But despite this massive indictment of the Egyptian regime by the U.S. government, the U.S. continued to support the Mubarak regime, providing it with almost $2 billion annually, the second largest foreign aid recipient after Israel. According to the Congressional Research Report submitted to Congress in September 2009, the U.S. had subsidized the Egyptian regime with over $64 billion since it signed the peace treaty with Israel in 1979, including $40 billion in military hardware and security gear.<br /><br />It also rewarded the regime with $7 billion debt relief in April 1991 for its support of the Gulf war earlier that year. Furthermore, it intervened with the Paris club to forgive half of Egypt’s $20 billion debt to Western governments. In short, the U.S. and other Western governments favored establishing a strategic relationship with Mubarak, because of the peace treaty with Israel, overlooking the nature of the regime’s corruption and repression.<br /><br />After 9/11, the Mubarak regime played a major role in aiding and abetting the U.S. counterterrorism policy on rendition and torture. In 2005, the BBC reported that both the United States and the United Kingdom sent terrorist suspects to Egypt for detention. In that report, Egypt's prime minister acknowledged that since 2001, the U.S. had transferred some 60-70 detainees to Egypt as part of the "war on terror.” According to journalist Jane Mayer’s investigative book “The Dark Side,” the new Vice President, Suleiman, was the coordinator of the CIA’s extraordinary rendition program during the Bush era. [See Stephen Soldz’s account of Suleiman’s role on CounterPunch, January 31.]<br /><br />Despite George Bush’s grandiose rhetoric on democracy and freedom, Bush welcomed Mubarak, calling him a “good friend” and explaining that he looked forward to “his wise counsel,” when the Egyptian president visited Bush in his Crawford ranch in April 2004. With Mubarak standing next to him Bush said, “Our nations have a relationship that is strong and warm. Egypt is a strategic partner of the United States.” He then thanked Mubarak’s efforts on rendition and torture when he said, “I'm grateful for President Mubarak's support in the global war against terror.”<br /><br />In fact, the Bush administration subsequently received Jamal Mubarak at the highest levels of government in an attempt to groom him to succeed his father. In May 2006, the Washington Post reported that, “It was unusual for a private foreign citizen with no official portfolio to receive so much high-level attention.” The younger Mubarak met with Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, during his “private visit” to the U.S. While he was at the White House the former President stopped by to “welcome him.”<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The sacred equation: Egyptian Dictatorship equals Secure Israel</span><br /><br />The strategic relationship between Egypt and the U.S. was bipartisan. When President Barak Obama was asked by the BBC during his celebrated visit to Egypt in June 2009, whether he regarded President Mubarak as an authoritarian ruler, Obama answered with an emphatic “No.” Then he spelled out the strategic value of Mubarak when he said, “He has been a stalwart ally in many respects to the United States. He has sustained peace with Israel which is a very difficult thing to do in that region.”<br /><br />This perceived security for Israel was key in the West’s continued support of the Egyptian regime. When Vice President Joe Biden was asked to comment about the turmoil in Egypt by Jim Lehrer of PBS, he shamelessly declared on January 27, that Mubarak was not a dictator. Presenting the Israeli viewpoint, Biden said, “Look, Mubarak has been an ally of ours in a number of things and he's been very responsible on-- relative to geopolitical interests in the region: Middle East peace efforts, the actions Egypt has taken relative to normalizing the relationship with Israel. I would not refer to him as a dictator.”<br /><br />On the same day, while Egypt’s security forces were killing, beating and gassing the Egyptian people by the thousands, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton offered this flimsy reaction: "Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people."<br /><br />Likewise, when White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked whether the White House believed the Egyptian government was stable, he replied without hesitation: “Yes.” When he was next asked whether the U.S. still supports Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, he reiterated that Egypt remains “a strong ally.” <br /><br />Not a single U.S. government official or member of Congress condemned the Egyptian government for killing and attacking its own citizens. When Neda Agha-Sultan was killed in Tehran in June 2009, many Western governments immediately issued world-wide condemnations blaming the Iranian government. But not so for the hundreds of Egyptians gunned down by their own government in broad daylight. Regretting the loss of life without denouncing the culprits is a disguised attempt to cover for the crimes and protect the perpetrators.<br /><br />As the Egyptian people showed determination and resilience while the embattled regime intensified its brutality, the administration tried to backtrack. President Obama offered a stark warning to Mubarak when he said on Friday evening, "Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away." Without condemning the regime he then urged Egyptian authorities to refrain from violence against their citizens," Obama stressed that governments "must maintain power through consent, not coercion," and that "Ultimately the future of Egypt will be determined by the Egyptian people.” Human rights advocates were encouraged and relieved by these statements.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Take a stand: Either with the people or with the regime</span><br /><br />The following day the President convened his National Security Council and spoke to several world leaders. He gave a statement imploring Mubarak to open the political process and engage the opposition. Britain, France, Germany, and the European Union also called for political openness as well as restraint against the demonstrators.<br /><br />In an interview with CNN on Sunday January 30, Secretary Clinton, sensing the weakness of the Egyptian regime, gave implicit support to the guarded approach in handling the popular revolution when she said “What we're trying to do is to help clear the air so that those who remain in power, starting with President Mubarak, with his new vice president, with the new prime minister, will begin a process of reaching out, of creating a dialogue that will bring in peaceful activists and representatives of civil society to, you know, plan a way forward that will meet the legitimate grievances of the Egyptian people.”<br /><br />Yet all these mixed statements were not lost on the millions of protesters. In denouncing these ambivalent stands they chanted “No to Mubarak, No to Suleiman… No to the agents of al-Amrikan (the Americans).” Dr. Elbaradei declared that the moment of truth has arrived, “The U.S. has to side either with the people or the regime. They could not be with both.” But on Monday January 31, Press Secretary Gibbs said that the administration would not take sides in the confrontation between the regime and the people.<br /><br />This hypocritical stand was in a stark contrast to the position Obama took two days earlier, or that of successive U.S. administrations with regard to the color revolutions in the past 20 years as in the Ukraine and Georgia in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, or the demonstrations by the opposition groups in Iran in the aftermath of its elections in June 2009.<br /><br />So what happened over the weekend for the administration’s turnabout?<br /><br />The answer to this double standard seems to be the influence of Israel and its supporters in Congress, where the new Republican Speaker John Boehner and other Republican leaders supported the administration’s ambivalent policy of not abandoning the Egyptian dictator.<br /><br />In Israel, a real hysteria has engulfed the political establishment. On January 31, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told a news conference in Jerusalem that he was concerned about the fate of Israel's peace treaty with Egypt should President Mubarak be forced out of power and replaced by someone more hostile toward Israel. He asked for support of the Egyptian regime lest an antagonistic regime emerges in its place.<br /><br />The same day Haaretz reported that Israel called on the United States and a number of European countries over the weekend to curb their criticism of President Hosni Mubarak to preserve stability in the region.<br /><br />It was reported on the Cairo streets that when a speech writer of President Mubarak rushed into his office and said “Mr. President; this is your farewell speech to the nation.” Mubarak remarked, “Why? Are the people leaving the country?”<br /><br />This Egyptian joke captures the essence of the stalemate in the streets. Mubarak insists on staying in power regardless of any consequence, counting on his security apparatus, the army, and the implicit backing of the West. Meanwhile, the popular committee headed by Dr. Elbaradaei is not recognized by the regime, let alone to engage with it in meaningful negotiations.<br /><br />Meanwhile, the decisive moment seems to have arrived. The protesters called for a million-man march in Liberation Square in Cairo and for a similar one in Alexandria on Tuesday February 1. Upon hearing this move, the military sent an important signal to the people. Gen. Ismail Othman, the military spokesman declared on national TV that the army recognizes the legitimate demands of the people and would not shoot at them. With this declaration the army gave an unmistakable sign for the president to yield. The government immediately went overdrive blocking all entrances to Liberation Square and stopped all public transportations to Cairo and Alexandria including trains coming from the delta and upper Egypt.<br /><br />Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people have flocked to Liberation Square. Politicians and party leaders, Imams and priests, judges and lawyers, former military officers and veterans, labor and farmers, professionals and the unemployed, taxi drivers and garbage collectors, young and old, women and men, families with their children, as well as prominent actors, artists, poets, movie directors, journalists, and authors have declared their support and participation in this massive march. Egypt had never seen such unanimity in its modern history.<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Trickery and treachery are the practices of fools</span><br /><br />On Monday January 31, the new vice president Suleiman addressed the nation saying that he was asked by Mubarak to open a dialogue with all opposition groups and to ask the judiciary to overturn the disputed elections results of last November. It was a tactical retreat by the regime in order to waste time and exhaust the protesters.<br /><br />However, the protest leaders instantly rejected this disingenuous offer and insisted on their main demand of the total removal of Mubarak and for regime change.<br /><br />It seems that the embattled president would have to make a choice soon. He will either submit to the demands of the popular revolution and leave power or employ his exhausted security forces to battle his people, transforming Liberation Square to Tiananmen Square.<br /><br />On the other hand, the challenge to the Egyptian people is whether they will stop their impressive revolution when the West and its local hirelings give up Mubarak in order to save his regime. The leaders of this revolution and civil society groups that have joined have so far insisted on regime change, not change of characters.<br /><br />A few weeks after 9/11, the neo-cons persuaded Bush that after Afghanistan, the U.S. should pursue regime change in Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria and its allies in Lebanon, and to give Israel a green light to eliminate the Palestinian resistance in the Occupied territories.<br /><br />After almost a decade, the U.S. is struggling in Afghanistan and has enormously enhanced Iran’s strategic regional posture by handing Iraq to its allies. Moreover, its ally in Lebanon was toppled while Hezbollah’s candidate is forming the new government. The Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his negotiating team have completely lost their credibility in the eyes of the Palestinian people after the recent publications of the Palestine Papers. The West has lost its ally in Tunisia, and is about to lose another in Egypt. Meanwhile its allies in Algeria, Yemen and Jordan are hanging on by their fingernails.<br /><br />What a reversal of fortunes!<br /><br />For most of the past sixty years, the U.S. has perceived the Middle East, and the Muslim world at large, from the dual prisms of Israel and oil. It has provided Israel with massive military aid, economic assistance, political cover and diplomatic shelter that not only denied the Palestinians their legitimate rights, but also prolonged their suffering and misery. <br /><br />Furthermore, in securing its short-term interests of oil and military bases, successive U.S. administrations have favored dictatorships and repressive regimes in the name of stability at the expense of the right of self-determination to the people of the area.<br /><br />Thirty-two years ago the U.S. lost Iran and has ever since been in a contentious relationship with it for its refusal to admit its role in maintaining the regime of the Shah. It is doubtful whether the U.S. government has learned that lesson and whether it would be willing now to clearly and completely side with the people or respect their will to be free and independent.<br /><br />In his farewell address of 1796, George Washington warned his countrymen and women against the “passionate attachment” to a foreign country and advised them that “against the insidious wiles of foreign influence . . . the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Esam Al-Amin can be reached at alamin1919@gmail.com</span>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-50923018694568628702010-07-02T19:58:00.000-05:002010-07-02T20:00:03.111-05:00Cómo organizar un sindicato agrario horizontal exitoso<span style="font-style:italic;">June 30, 2010<br /><br />A Message From Below<br /><br />Going Horizontal at the US Social Forum<br /><br />By BILLY WHARTON</span><br /><br />If one political concept dominated the proceedings of the US Social Forum, it was horizontalism. Organizers mentioned it in relation to media access, workshops panelists offered it as an alternative to top-down NGOs and political parties and participants already engaged in politics employed it as a measurement of their own groups’ internal functioning. To some, horizontalism represented more of an abstract democratic sense informed by anarchist sentiments. For others, it meant thinking through power relations that operate inside the new structures they sought to set up – frequently things like cooperatives, community supported agriculture or community gardens. Kandace Vallejo an organizer with the Student Farmworker Alliance (SFA) offered a more concrete definition.<br /><br />Vallejo spoke as part of the panel I helped to organize for the Socialist Party USA at the Social Forum. SFA is an ally organization to the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW), an organization that represents farm workers throughout the state of Florida. Vallejo spoke about CIW’s remarkable string of victories at a moment when nearly all of organized labor seems to be in deep retreat. Multinational food giants such as Taco Bell, McDonalds and WholeFoods have all yielded to the demands of this organization.<br /><br />Vallejo presented these successful campaigns as a part of a larger process of trial and error. At first, workers in the region did what workers everywhere do – prepare to fight their bosses. This meant organizing against the growers. However, CIW soon realized that multinational food corporations held growers hostage by their demands for cheap produce. In response, the focus shifted to these companies and, in the process, the CIW needed to call on external ally organizations to assist the organizing. High-profile campaigns ensued as picket lines were thrown up in front of Taco Bell and other food chain stores throughout the country.<br /><br />How could the CIW maintain this broad network of allies and still keep the focus on the workplace struggles? The driving force behind these campaigns, Vallejo related, are the workers themselves. The initial organizing was quite challenging since workers came from radically different historical traditions in Haiti, Central America and Mexico. Eventually, after struggling together, the workers devised a three-prong system for organizing – popular education, the identification and development of leaders and mass mobilizations.<br /><br />Vallejo described the manner in which popular education played a critical role in mobilizing both the workers and the surrounding community. By employing graphic art and a low power radio station, CIW is able to reach a beyond the worksite and enter into the everyday lives of people in the region. Organizers employ the notion of “accompaniment” to express their desire to march with the community not over its head or not in an attempt to force changes that they see as desirable, but the community does not.<br /><br />However, the internal workings of the CIW express the clearest ethic of horizontalism. Vallejo spoke about the yearly assemblies of CIW members in which major decisions about campaigns and the election of representatives take place. Further, elected leaders are held to a similar position as that of workers themselves as no salary exceeds three times the average worker and staff must spend ¼ of the season working in the fields. Such measures are meant to prevent the formation of elitism amongst officials and are a far cry from the way a typical trade union operates. CIW members work side-by-side with their representatives thereby placing real limits on vertical hierarchies within the worker's movement. This type of organization also allows the campaigns to flow from the bottom up as ally organizations express solidarity with real organizing conducted by the farm workers themselves.<br /><br />The next test for the CIW and its allies will come as they continue a campaign that targets the Trader Joe’s chain. Once again a corporation that markets a sense of sustainability to its consumers has proved to be resistant when farm workers come knocking. And so, again, the CIW will roll out its networks of allies in order to employ mass mobilization as a tactic to lessen exploitation and defend the base level organizing underway in Florida.<br /><br />The CIW was not the only organization advertising its horizontal structures. Many other workshops offered the argument that transforming a society based on hierarchy would require a grassroots democratic response. Such a response aims at simultaneously challenging the non-profit and NGO sector and the political party formations that rest on vanguardist or hierarchical assumptions.<br /><br />So, as the latest version of the US Social Forum draws to a close, a message from below is beginning to materialize – the self-organization, self-reliance and self-determination that horizontalism allows will be a fundamental part of any attempt at social transformation in the US. Exploitative vertical institutions such as multinational corporations beware.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Billy Wharton is a writer and activist whose articles have appeared in the Washington Post, the NYC Indypendent, Spectrezine and the Monthly Review Zine. He can be reached at whartonbilly@gmail.com</span>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-30103897560712826952010-07-02T19:53:00.000-05:002010-07-02T19:54:37.695-05:00El fin del primer mundo: el desmantelamiento del Estado de bienestar<span style="font-style:italic;">Weekend Edition<br />June 25 - 27, 2010<br /><br />EU Today, US Tomorrow<br /><br />Europe's Fiscal Dystopia: the "New Austerity" Road<br /><br />By MICHAEL HUDSON</span><br /><br />Europe is committing fiscal suicide – and will have little trouble finding allies at this weekend’s G-20 meetings in Toronto. Despite the deepening Great Recession threatening to bring on outright depression, European Central Bank (ECB) president Jean-Claude Trichet and prime ministers from Britain’s David Cameron to Greece’s George Papandreou (president of the Socialist International) and Canada’s host, Conservative Premier Stephen Harper, are calling for cutbacks in public spending.<br /><br />The United States is playing an ambiguous role. The Obama Administration is all for slashing Social Security and pensions, euphemized as “balancing the budget.” Wall Street is demanding “realistic” write-downs of state and local pensions in keeping with the “ability to pay” (that is, to pay without taxing real estate, finance or the upper income brackets). These local pensions have been left unfunded so that communities can cut real estate taxes, enabling site-rental values to be pledged to the banks of interest. Without a debt write-down (by mortgage bankers or bondholders), there is no way that any mathematical model can come up with a means of paying these pensions. To enable workers to live “freely” after their working days are over would require either (1) that bondholders not be paid (“unthinkable”) or (2) that property taxes be raised, forcing even more homes into negative equity and leading to even more walkaways and bank losses on their junk mortgages. Given the fact that the banks are writing national economic policy these days, it doesn’t look good for people expecting a leisure society to materialize any time soon.<br /><br />The problem for U.S. officials is that Europe’s sudden passion for slashing public pensions and other social spending will shrink European economies, slowing U.S. export growth. U.S. officials are urging Europe not to wage its fiscal war against labor quite yet. Best to coordinate with the United States after a modicum of recovery.<br /><br />Saturday and Sunday will see the six-month mark in a carefully orchestrated financial war against the “real” economy. The buildup began here in the United States. On February 18, President Obama stacked his White House Deficit Commission (formally the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform) with the same brand of neoliberal ideologues who comprised the notorious 1982 Greenspan Commission on Social Security “reform.”<br /><br />The pro-financial, anti-labor and anti-government restructurings since 1980 have given the word “reform” a bad name. The commission is headed by former Republican Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson (who explained derisively that Social Security is for the “lesser people”) and Clinton neoliberal ErskineBowles, who led the fight for the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Also on the committee are bluedog Democrat Max Baucus of Montana (the pro-Wall Street Finance Committee chairman). The result is an Obama anti-change dream: bipartisan advocacy for balanced budgets, which means in practice to stop running budget deficits – the deficits that Keynes explained were necessary to fuel economic recovery by providing liquidity and purchasing power.<br /><br />A balanced budget in an economic downturn means shrinkage for the private sector. Coming as the Western economies move into a debt deflation, the policy means shrinking markets for goods and services – all to support banking claims on the “real” economy.<br /><br />The exercise in managing public perceptions to imagine that all this is a good thing was escalated in April with the manufactured Greek crisis. Newspapers throughout the world breathlessly discovered that Greece was not taxing the wealthy classes. They joined in a chorus to demand that workers be taxed more to make up for the tax shift off wealth. It was their version of the Obama Plan (that is, old-time Rubinomics).<br /><br />On June 3, the World Bank reiterated the New Austerity doctrine, as if it were a new discovery: The way to prosperity is via austerity. “Rich counties can help developing economies grow faster by rapidly cutting government spending or raising taxes.” The New Fiscal Conservatism aims to corral all countries to scale back social spending in order to “stabilize” economies by a balanced budget. This is to be achieved by impoverishing labor, slashing wages, reducing social spending and rolling back the clock to the good old class war as it flourished before the Progressive Era.<br /><br />The rationale is the discredited “crowding out” theory:<br /><br />Budget deficits mean more borrowing, which bids up interest rates. Lower interest rates are supposed to help countries – or would, if borrowing was for productive capital formation. But this is not how financial markets operate in today’s world. Lower interest rates simply make it cheaper and easier for corporate raiders or speculators to capitalize a given flow of earnings at a higher multiple, loading the economy down with even more debt!<br /><br />Alan Greenspan parroted the World Bank announcement almost word for word in a June 18 Wall Street Journal op-ed. Running deficits is supposed to increase interest rates. It looks like the stage is being set for a big interest-rate jump – and corresponding stock and bond market crash as the “suckers’ rally” comes to an abrupt end in months to come.<br /><br />The idea is to create an artificial financial crisis, to come in and “save” it by imposing on Europe and North America a “Greek-style” cutbacks in social security and pensions. For the United States, state and local pensions in particular are to be cut back by “emergency” measures to “free” government budgets.<br /><br />All this is an inversion of the social philosophy that most voters hold. This is the political problem inherent in the neoliberal worldview. It is diametrically opposed to the original liberalism of Adam Smith and his successors. The idea of a free market in the 19th century was one free from predatory rentier financial and property claims. Today, an Ayn-Rand-style “free market” is a market free for predators. The world is being treated to a travesty of liberalism and free markets.<br /><br />This shows the usual ignorance of how interest rates are really set – a blind spot which is a precondition for being approved for the post of central banker these days. Ignored is the fact that central banks determine interest rates by creating credit. Under the ECB rules, central banks cannot do this. Yet that is precisely what central banks were created to do. European governments are obliged to borrow from commercial banks.<br /><br />This financial stranglehold threatens either to break up Europe or to plunge it into the same kind of poverty that the EU is imposing on the Baltics. Latvia is the prime example. Despite a plunge of over 20 per cent in its GDP, its central bankers are running a budget surplus, in the hope of lowering wage rates. Public-sector wages have been driven down by over 30 per cent, and the government expresses the hope for yet further cuts – spreading to the private sector. Spending on hospitals, ambulance care and schooling has been drastically cut back.<br /><br />What is missing from this argument? The cost of labor can be lowered by a classical restoration of progressive taxes and a tax shift back onto property – land and rentier income. Instead, the cost of living is to be raised, by shifting the tax burden further onto labor and off real estate and finance. The idea is for the economic surplus to be pledged for debt service.<br /><br />In England, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard has described a “euro mutiny” against regressive fiscal policy. But it is more than that. Beyond merely shrinking the economy, the neoliberal aim is to change the shape of the trajectory along which Western civilization has been moving for the past two centuries. It is nothing less than to roll back Social Security and pensions for labor, health care, education and other public spending, to dismantle the social welfare state, the Progressive Era and even classical liberalism.<br /><br />So we are witnessing a policy long in the planning, now being unleashed in a full-court press. The rentier interests, the vested interests that a century of Progressive Era, New Deal and kindred reforms sought to subordinate to the economy at large, are fighting back. And they are in control, with their own representatives in power – ironically, as Social Democrats and Labor party leaders, from President Obama here to President Papandreou in Greece and President Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero in Spain.<br /><br />Having bided their time for the past few years the global predatory class is now making its move to “free” economies from the social philosophy long thought to have been irreversibly built into the economic system: Social Security and old-age pensions so that labor didn’t have to be paid higher wages to save for its own retirement; public education and health care to raise labor productivity; basic infrastructure spending to lower the costs of doing business; anti-monopoly price regulation to prevent prices from rising above the necessary costs of production; and central banking to stabilize economies by monetizing government deficits rather than forcing the economy to rely on commercial bank credit under conditions where property and income are collateralized to pay the interest-bearing debts, culminating in forfeitures as the logical culmination of the Miracle of Compound Interest.<br /><br />This is the Junk Economics that financial lobbyists are trying to sell to voters: “Prosperity requires austerity.” “An independent central bank is the hallmark of democracy.” “Governments are just like families: they have to balance the budget.” “It is all the result of aging populations, not debt overload.” These are the oxymorons to which the world will be treated during the coming week in Toronto.<br /><br />It is the rhetoric of fiscal and financial class war. The problem is that there is not enough economic surplus available to pay the financial sector on its bad loans while also paying pensions and social security. Something has to give. The commission is to provide a cover story for a revived Rubinomics, this time aimed not at the former Soviet Union but here at home. Its aim is to scale back Social Security while reviving George Bush’s aborted privatization plan to send FICA paycheck withholding into the stock market – that is, into the hands of money managers to stick into an array of junk financial packages designed to skim off labor’s savings.<br /><br />So Obama is hypocritical in warning Europe not to go too far too fast to shrink its economy and squeeze out a rising army of the unemployed. His idea at home is to do the same thing. The strategy is to panic voters about the federal debt – panic them enough to oppose spending on the social programs designed to help them. The fiscal crisis is being blamed on demographic mathematics of an aging population – not on the exponentially soaring debt overhead, junk loans and massive financial fraud that the government is bailing out.<br /><br />What really is causing the financial and fiscal squeeze, of course, is the fact that that government funding is now needed to compensate the financial sector for what promises to be year after year of losses as loans go bad in economies that are all loaned up and sinking into negative equity.<br /><br />When politicians let the financial sector run the show, their natural preference is to turn the economy into a grab bag. And they usually come out ahead. That’s what the words “foreclosure,” “forfeiture” and “liquidate” mean – along with “sound money,” “business confidence” and the usual consequences, “debt deflation” and “debt peonage.”<br /><br />Somebody must take a loss on the economy’s bad loans – and bankers want the economy to take the loss, to “save the financial system.” From the financial sector’s vantage point, the economy is to be managed to preserve bank liquidity, rather than the financial system run to serve the economy. Government social spending (on everything apart from bank bailouts and financial subsidies), disposable personal income are to be cut back to keep the debt overhead from being written down. Corporate cash flow is to be used to pay creditors, not employ more labor and make long-term capital investment.<br /><br />The economy is to be sacrificed to subsidize the fantasy that debts can be paid, if only banks can be “made whole” to begin lending again – that is, to resume loading the economy down with even more debt, causing yet more intrusive debt deflation.<br /><br />This is not the familiar old 19th-century class war of industrial employers against labor, although that is part of what is happening. It is above all a war of the financial sector against the “real” economy: industry as well as labor.<br /><br />The underlying reality is indeed that pensions cannot be paid – at least, not paid out of financial gains. For the past fifty years the Western economies have indulged the fantasy of paying retirees out of purely financial gains (M-M’ as Marxists would put it), not out of an expanding economy (M-C-M’, employing labor to produce more output). The myth was that finance would take the form of productive loans to increase capital formation and hiring. The reality is that finance takes the form of debt – and gambling. Its gains were therefore made from the economy at large. They were extractive, not productive. Wealth at the rentier top of the economic pyramid shrank the base below. So something has to give. The question is, what form will the “give” take? And who will do the giving – and be the recipients?<br /><br />The Greek government has been unwilling to tax the rich. So labor must make up the fiscal gap, by permitting its socialist government to cut back pensions, health care, education and other social spending – all to bail out the financial sector from an exponential growth that is impossible to realize in practice. The economy is being sacrificed to an impossible dream. Yet instead of blaming the problem on the exponential growth in bank claims that cannot be paid, bank lobbyists – and the G-20 politicians dependent on their campaign funding – are promoting the myth that the problem is demographic: an aging population expecting Social Security and employer pensions. Instead of paying these, governments are being told to use their taxing and credit-creating power to bail out the financial sector’s claims for payment.<br /><br />Latvia has been held out as the poster child for what the EU is recommending for Greece and the other southern EU countries in trouble: Slashing public spending on education and health has reduced public-sector wages by 30 per cent, and they are still falling. Property prices have fallen by 70 percent – and homeowners and their extended family of co-signers are liable for the negative equity, plunging them into a life of debt peonage if they do not take the hint and emigrate.<br /><br />The bizarre pretense for government budget cutbacks in the face of a post-bubble economic downturn is that the supposed aim is to rebuild “confidence.” It is as if fiscal self-destruction can instill confidence rather than prompting investors to flee the euro. The logic seems to be the familiar old class war, rolling back the clock to the hard-line tax philosophy of a bygone era – rolling back Social Security and public pensions, rolling back public spending on education and other basic needs, and above all, increasing unemployment to drive down wage levels. This was made explicit by Latvia’s central bank – which EU central bankers hold up as a “model” of economic shrinkage for other countries to follow.<br /><br />It is a self-destructive logic. Exacerbating the economic downturn will reduce tax revenues, making budget deficits even worse in a declining spiral. Latvia’s experience shows that the response to economic shrinkage is emigration of skilled labor and capital flight. Europe’s policy of planned economic shrinkage in fact controverts the prime assumption of political and economic textbooks: the axiom that voters act in their self-interest, and that economies choose to grow, not to destroy themselves. Today, European democracies – and even the Social Democratic, Socialist and labour Parties – are running for office on a fiscal and financial policy platform that opposes the interests of most voters, and even industry.<br /><br />The explanation, of course, is that today’s economic planning is not being done by elected representatives. Planning authority has been relinquished to the hands of “independent” central banks, which in turn act as the lobbyists for commercial banks selling their product – debt. From the central bank’s vantage point, the “economic problem” is how to keep commercial banks and other financial institutions solvent in a post-bubble economy. How can they get paid for debts that are beyond the ability of many people to pay, in an environment of rising defaults?<br /><br />The answer is that creditors can get paid only at the economy’s expense. The remaining economic surplus must go to them, not to capital investment, employment or social spending.<br /><br />This is the problem with the financial view. It is short-term – and predatory. Given a choice between operating the banks to promote the economy, or running the economy to benefit the banks, bankers always will choose the latter alternative. And so will the politicians they support.<br /><br />Governments need huge sums to bail out the banks from their bad loans. But they cannot borrow more, because of the debt squeeze. So the bad-debt loss must be passed onto labor and industry. The cover story is that government bailouts will permit the banks to start lending again, to reflate the Bubble Economy’s Ponzi-borrowing. But there is already too much negative equity and there is no leeway left to restart the bubble. Economies are all “loaned up.” Real estate rents, corporate cash flow and public taxing power cannot support further borrowing – no matter how wealth the government gives to banks. Asset prices have plunged into negative equity territory. Debt deflation is shrinking markets, corporate profits and cash flow. The Miracle of Compound Interest dynamic has culminated in defaults, reflecting the inability of debtors to sustain the exponential rise in carrying charges that “financial solvency” requires.<br /><br />If the financial sector can be rescued only by cutting back social spending on Social Security, health care and education, bolstered by more privatization sell-offs, is it worth the price? To sacrifice the economy in this way would violate most peoples’ social values of equity and fairness rooted deep in Enlightenment philosophy.<br /><br />That is the political problem: How can bankers persuade voters to approve this under a democratic system? It is necessary to orchestrate and manage their perceptions. Their poverty must be portrayed as desirable – as a step toward future prosperity.<br /><br />A half-century of failed IMF austerity plans imposed on hapless Third World debtors should have dispelled forever the idea that the way to prosperity is via austerity. The ground has been paved for this attitude by a generation of purging the academic curriculum of knowledge that there ever was an alternative economic philosophy to that sponsored by the rentier Counter-Enlightenment. Classical value and price theory reflected John Locke’s labor theory of property: A person’s wealth should be what he or she creates with their own labor and enterprise, not by insider dealing or special privilege.<br /><br />This is why I say that Europe is dying. If its trajectory is not changed, the EU must succumb to a financial coup d’êtat rolling back the past three centuries of Enlightenment social philosophy. The question is whether a break-up is now the only way to recover its social democratic ideals from the banks that have taken over its central planning organs.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Michael Hudson is a former Wall Street economist and now a Distinguished Research Professor at University of Missouri, Kansas City (UMKC), and president of the Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends (ISLET). He is the author of many books, including Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (new ed., Pluto Press, 2002) and Trade, Development and Foreign Debt: A History of Theories of Polarization v. Convergence in the World Economy. He can be reached via his website, mh@michael-hudson.com<br /></span>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-69129322549877617692010-07-02T19:47:00.004-05:002010-07-02T19:52:47.180-05:00Un mundo sin dinero: una alternativa viable anárquica<span style="font-style:italic;">Weekend Edition<br />June 25 - 27, 2010<br /><br />Local Exhange Trading Systems<br /><br />What If the Greeks Did This?<br /><br />By TROND ANDRESEN</span><br /><br />Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for the reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally”<br /><br />-- John Maynard Keynes<br /><br />This is an attempt to think outside the box, because any sorts of thinking inside the box on Greece and countries in similar situations hasn't led to anything and will not either. But if the reader knows about some unconventional proposal that I may have overlooked, point me to it!<br />Here follows my proposal - comments are welcome:<br /><br />An alliance of large grass roots organisation (typically: unions) sets up a cooperative bank-like operation ("BLO"). Probably it should formally be an association requiring membership to participate (more on this below). This BLO issues "value points" (an arbitrarily chosen term, from now on abbreviated "VP's" -- it could be called "units", "work units", "credits", "coupons", whatever -- but should for legal reasons not be called "money" or "Drachmas"). Technically, the BLO is just a national office with computer capacity and a few employees. There are no branches. A member gets a VP "account" with the BLO. To use the account the member needs a mobile phone subscription. When opening an account, (s)he is automatically offered credit up to a standard amount of VP's from the BLO. Such a "start loan" has the purpose of enabling the person to start transacting with others. It is primarily meant as a medium of exchange, and not as a store of value. It is interest-free, but there is a very small membership fee per account, which is only to cover the expenses of the BLO office and computer/network costs. This fee must be paid in Euros/regular money. The VP loan has limited duration, a few months. When the loan expires, the borrower has the right to an automatically renewed loan, but the maximum amount allowed may have been adjusted somewhat up or down in relation to the last loan received. More on this below.<br /><br />Technological progress makes this possible<br /><br />What is to be proposed here is a national and extremely efficient version of a LETS (Local Exchange Trading System), or a local currency system. These are basically barter schemes but strongly improved by using a local medium of exchange. Members gain points by supplying goods or services to other members. Such points gained are in the next round used to buy goods or services from other participants. The big advantage is that this enables economic activities locally which would else not have taken place due to lack of a regular medium of exchange (i.e. money). A LETS system has traditionally been managed by some trusted person(s) keeping tally of everyones' points account on a computer. This is done when reports of exchanges are received. Such a system is only manageable when it is confined to some local community. Another factor limiting the geographical and population scope of such schemes is that participants need to know which other agents (persons, firms) are also in the scheme, and what sort of services or goods they offer.<br /><br />A local currency system does a similar job as a LETS scheme. In that case one may have circulating paper currency resembling regular money, something that eliminates the need for account updates with each transaction, but which may be legally difficult to uphold due to the state's monopoly on money issuance.<br /><br />A LETS-like scheme must do the following:<br /><br />* account for transactions (or run a local monetary system)<br /><br />* give participants an easy and fast way to find other agents in the system and what they offer (or demand).<br /><br />Today, with most people having mobile phones, and also access to the Internet (whether at home, work or elsewhere), both challenges may be elegantly and cheaply met, and "the local community" may be expanded to encompass a country. Reporting of transactions is done via mobile phone/SMS and automatically received and accounted for on a server. And a web site data base (possibly on the same server), updated by participants and having a Google-like search system, will enable participants to advertise themselves or to easily find sellers and and buyers anywhere of the relevant goods or services.<br /><br />Gradual increase in transactions<br /><br />Mobile phone transactions with other BLO members may be implemented through one of the technically proven schemes already in operation in some developing countries. There are no physical/paper VP's in circulation. People and firms offering goods and services will gradually - as the scheme gets more popular - decide to accept a certain share of VP's as payment, while the rest must still be in Euros. Such a share is decided freely and individually by the seller, and may also be adjusted at any time with circumstances. The same holds for wages: employers and employees may as the scheme gets widely accepted, agree on a certain share of wages being paid in VP's, a share that may be re-negotiated as things develop.<br /><br />Pure fiat money<br /><br />The VP's are pure fiat money. They do not have any property giving it an intrinsic value like money issued by a central bank, which has indisputable value by being the sole currency that may be used to pay taxes (as per the "modern money" or "Chartalist" view). People or firms will therefore accept VP's in payment only if they believe that a sufficient amount of other people/firms will accept them. This outcome is probable however, since today's only alternative for the Greeks (and other nations in a similar situation) of too low and further shrinking income in Euros over many years, is much worse.<br /><br />Building confidence<br /><br />Such a scheme has dynamics which may be unstable both ways: confidence building more confidence, or decreasing confidence leading to hyperinflation and collapse. One should ensure a basic and initial level of confidence by the BLO being launched and run by (a) large, national and well established organisation(s). Second, and most important, by controlling the amount of VP's in circulation, based on observing the average acceptance of VP's as a share of payment together with Euros, it should be possible to uphold the needed amount of confidence in the system. The amount in circulation may be limited by renewing loans with a lower amount when earlier loans expire. Then the borrower will have to accept a reduction of the amount in his/hers account. To avoid runaway inflation in VP's, one should probably start the process by issuing a restricted amount (see below), and then letting the aggregate amount grow (or in between shrink) based on the observed impact. Note that the existence of VP's only as electronic entities on a computer (no physical "currency"), combined with the fact that the initial issued loan has not in any way been "earned" by the account holder, allows the scheme to freely regulate the amount of VP's in circulation upwards or even downwards, by adjusting all accounts with the same amount. This is a new and potent macroeconomic control instrument that is not available in a regular monetary system.<br /><br />Why is membership necessary?<br /><br />As already mentioned, the BLO should be organised as an association requiring membership. Then the VP's are not a state-controlled medium of exchange like Euros, but a device for members to exchange goods and labour between them. Hopefully this will make it difficult for the state to ban such a system, something it will possibly or even probably want to do.<br /><br />There is a further good argument for membership requirement: One should avoid giving the well-to-do a free lunch in the form of an automatic BLO loan, on top of the ample buying power they possess in Euros. They should as a rule only be allowed to open an account, but not have access to an automatically given and renewed VP loan. The BLO should be targeted towards the less well-off in society. This may be achieved by having two grades of membership. Level 1 is open to all (including firms): you get an account but no initial loan. Level 2 (call it "core" membership) additionally qualifies for the loan. Core membership should only be given to people already belonging to one or more of the organisations behind the BLO (unions and similar popular organisations, for instance farmers'), and to the unemployed. And it should be automatically given, to give the scheme a flying start.<br /><br />One could modify the rules somewhat by allowing level 2 membership for persons that do not initially qualify, but who are recommended by a core member. But it is probably wise to start the process carefully by only giving automatic loans to core members, and later relax the rules in a controlled manner, based on how things develop. Account holders that default on their loans above some defined level of transgression may be excluded as members of the system, and their accounts discontinued.<br /><br />Credit above the automatic amount?<br /><br />In an initial period, the system should be simple and only have the purpose of enabling transactions between agents that lack a medium of exchange. If the scheme exhibits strong growth and widening acceptance, the possibility of extending larger VP loans to applicants may be considered. But this would demand a dramatic increase in the staff and organisation complexity of the BLO because loan applicants have to be vetted and collateral has to be posted.<br /><br />Political resistance<br /><br />On may expect that such a scheme will be opposed by the state and derided by the economic establishment, including most media pundits. But criticism in itself is not a fundamental obstacle. A bigger danger is whether the scheme may be banned based on the country's laws, like the Austrian state did in 1933 against the succesful local currency in the town of Wörgl. Hopefully, organising the scheme as an association with transactions only being available to members and no money-like paper VP's in circulation, will prevent such an outcome.<br /><br />Another and perhaps more surprising source of resistance may be the leadership in some of the mass organisations whose members would benefit from such a scheme. Many such leaders are anchored in a marxist/communist/left socialist tradition. The proposal may easily be seen by some of these as a "petty bourgeouis" invention of the "green" "alternative" type, only giving the masses "illusions" and "leading them astray in the struggle against capitalism and for socialism".<br /><br />Better than the only and bleak alternative<br /><br />By the proposed scheme it should be possible to activate a large underused potential that Greece (and other Eurozone countries) has, unemployed or underemployed people. It will also primarily stimulate domestic production, since VP's may not be used to pay for imports. Enabling unemployed or underemployed people to work for each other and (increasingly) to exchange goods and services with the rest of society, will - with immediate effects - ameliorate the dramatic and persistent decrease in living standards for most people, which is the bleak and only future (lasting many years) that the powers that be and most pundits are able to come up with.<br /><br />(Note however: possibly the best solution would have been to revert to a national currency combined with partial foreign currency debt forgiveness, as argued by some dissident voices. But this seems to be politically totally out of the question for those in power. Therefore the above "VP" proposal.)<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Trond Andressen is a lecturer in the Department of Engineering Cybernetics at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim. He can be reached at: trond.andresen@itk.ntnu.no.</span>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-13726368310688521422010-07-02T19:44:00.001-05:002010-07-02T19:46:56.130-05:00Posible desarrollo catastrófico de la fuga de petróleo en el Golfo de México<span style="font-style:italic;">Editors' note for first-time visitors: What follows is a comment from a The Oil Drum reader. To read what The Oil Drum staff members are saying about the Deepwater Horizon Spill, please visit the front page. (Were the US government and BP more forthcoming with information and details, the situation would not be giving rise to so much speculation about what is actually going on in the Gulf. This should be run more like Mission Control at NASA than an exclusive country club function--it is a public matter--transparency, now!)</span><br /><br />OK let's get real about the GOM oil flow. There doesn't really seem to be much info on TOD that furthers more complete understanding of what's really happening in the GOM.<br />As you have probably seen and maybe feel yourselves, there are several things that do not appear to make sense regarding the actions of attack against the well. Don't feel bad, there is much that doesn't make sense even to professionals unless you take into account some important variables that we are not being told about. There seems to me to be a reluctance to face what cannot be termed anything less than grim circumstances in my opinion. There certainly is a reluctance to inform us regular people and all we have really gotten is a few dots here and there...<br /><br />First of all...set aside all your thoughts of plugging the well and stopping it from blowing out oil using any method from the top down. Plugs, big valves to just shut it off, pinching the pipe closed, installing a new bop or lmrp, shooting any epoxy in it, top kills with mud etc etc etc....forget that, it won't be happening..it's done and over. In fact actually opening up the well at the subsea source and allowing it to gush more is not only exactly what has happened, it was probably necessary, or so they think anyway.<br /><br />So you have to ask WHY? Why make it worse?...there really can only be one answer and that answer does not bode well for all of us. It's really an inescapable conclusion at this point, unless you want to believe that every Oil and Gas professional involved suddenly just forgot everything they know or woke up one morning and drank a few big cups of stupid and got assigned to directing the response to this catastrophe. Nothing makes sense unless you take this into account, but after you do...you will see the "sense" behind what has happened and what is happening. That conclusion is this:<br /><br />The well bore structure is compromised "Down hole".<br /><br />That is something which is a "Worst nightmare" conclusion to reach. While many have been saying this for some time as with any complex disaster of this proportion many have "said" a lot of things with no real sound reasons or evidence for jumping to such conclusions, well this time it appears that they may have jumped into the right place...<br /><br />TOP KILL - FAILS:<br />This was probably our best and only chance to kill this well from the top down. This "kill mud" is a tried and true method of killing wells and usually has a very good chance of success. The depth of this well presented some logistical challenges, but it really should not of presented any functional obstructions. The pumping capacity was there and it would have worked, should have worked, but it didn't.<br /><br />It didn't work, but it did create evidence of what is really happening. First of all the method used in this particular top kill made no sense, did not follow the standard operating procedure used to kill many other wells and in fact for the most part was completely contrary to the procedure which would have given it any real chance of working.<br /><br />When a well is "Killed" using this method heavy drill fluid "Mud" is pumped at high volume and pressure into a leaking well. The leaks are "behind" the point of access where the mud is fired in, in this case the "choke and Kill lines" which are at the very bottom of the BOP (Blow Out Preventer) The heavy fluid gathers in the "behind" portion of the leaking well assembly, while some will leak out, it very quickly overtakes the flow of oil and only the heavier mud will leak out. Once that "solid" flow of mud is established at the leak "behind" the well, the mud pumps increase pressure and begin to overtake the pressure of the oil deposit. The mud is established in a solid column that is driven downward by the now stronger pumps. The heavy mud will create a solid column that is so heavy that the oil deposit can no longer push it up, shut off the pumps...the well is killed...it can no longer flow.<br /><br />Usually this will happen fairly quickly, in fact for it to work at all...it must happen quickly. There is no "trickle some mud in" because that is not how a top kill works. The flowing oil will just flush out the trickle and a solid column will never be established. Yet what we were told was "It will take days to know whether it<br />worked"...."Top kill might take 48 hours to complete"...the only way it could take days is if BP intended to do some "test fires" to test integrity of the entire system. The actual "kill" can only take hours by nature because it must happen fairly rapidly. It also increases strain on the "behind" portion and in this instance we all know that what remained was fragile at best.<br /><br />Early that afternoon we saw a massive flow burst out of the riser "plume" area. This was the first test fire of high pressure mud injection. Later on same day we saw a greatly increased flow out of the kink leaks, this was mostly mud at that time as the kill mud is tanish color due to the high amount of Barite which is added to it to weight it and Barite is a white powder.<br /><br />We later learned the pumping was shut down at midnight, we weren't told about that until almost 16 hours later, but by then...I'm sure BP had learned the worst. The mud they were pumping in was not only leaking out the "behind" leaks...it was leaking out of someplace forward...and since they were not even near being able to pump mud into the deposit itself, because the well would be dead long before...and the oil was still coming up, there could only be one conclusion...the wells casings were ruptured and it was leaking "down hole"<br /><br />They tried the "Junk shot"...the "bridging materials" which also failed and likely made things worse in regards to the ruptured well casings.<br /><br />"Despite successfully pumping a total of over 30,000 barrels of heavy mud, in three attempts at rates of up to<br />80 barrels a minute, and deploying a wide range of different bridging materials, the operation did not overcome the flow from the well."<br />http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7062487<br /><br />80 Barrels per minute is over 200,000 gallons per hour, over 115,000 barrels per day...did we seen an increase over and above what was already leaking out of 115k bpd?....we did not...it would have been a massive increase in order of multiples and this did not happen.<br /><br />"The whole purpose is to get the kill mud down,” said Wells. “We'll have 50,000 barrels of mud on hand to kill this well. It's far more than necessary, but we always like to have backup."<br /><br />Try finding THAT quote around...it's been scrubbed...here's a cached copy of a quote...<br />http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:WDj-HORTmIoJ:www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/deepwaterhorizon/7006870.html+%E2%809CThe+whole+purpose+is+to+get+the+kill+mud+down,%E2%80%9D+said+Wells.+%E2%80%9CWe'll+have+50,000+barrels+of+mud+on+hand+to+kill+this+well.+It's+far+more+than+necessary,+but+we+always+like+to+have+backup.%E2%80%9D&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us<br /><br />"The "top kill" effort, launched Wednesday afternoon by industry and government engineers, had pumped enough drilling fluid to block oil and gas spewing from the well, Allen said. The pressure from the well was very low, he said, but persisting."<br /><br />"Allen said one ship that was pumping fluid into the well had run out of the fluid, or "mud," and that a second ship was on the way. He said he was encouraged by the progress."<br />http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20100527/ARTICLES/100529348<br /><br />Later we found out that Allen had no idea what was really going on and had been "Unavailable all day"<br />http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/05/27/interview_with_coas...<br /><br />So what we had was BP running out of 50,000 barrels of mud in a very short period of time. An amount far and above what they deemed necessary to kill the well. Shutting down pumping 16 hours before telling anyone, including the president. We were never really given a clear reason why "Top Kill" failed, just that it couldn't overcome the well.<br /><br />There is only one article anywhere that says anything else about it at this time of writing...and it's a relatively obscure article from the wall street journal "online" citing an unnamed source.<br /><br />"WASHINGTON—BP PLC has concluded that its "top-kill" attempt last week to seal its broken well in the Gulf of<br />Mexico may have failed due to a malfunctioning disk inside the well about 1,000 feet below the ocean floor.<br /><br />The disk, part of the subsea safety infrastructure, may have ruptured during the surge of oil and gas up the well on April 20 that led to the explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon rig, BP officials said. The rig sank two days later, triggering a leak that has since become the worst in U.S. history.<br /><br />The broken disk may have prevented the heavy drilling mud injected into the well last week from getting far enough down the well to overcome the pressure from the escaping oil and gas, people familiar with BP's findings said. They said much of the drilling mud may also have escaped from the well into the rock formation outside the wellbore.<br /><br />As a result, BP wasn't able to get sufficient pressure to keep the oil and gas at bay. If they had been able to build up sufficient pressure, the company had hoped to pump in cement and seal off the well. The effort was deemed a failure on Saturday.<br /><br />BP started the top-kill effort Wednesday afternoon, shooting heavy drilling fluids into the broken valve known as a blowout preventer. The mud was driven by a 30,000 horsepower pump installed on a ship at the surface. But it was clear from the start that a lot of the "kill mud" was leaking out instead of going down into the well."<br />http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870487560457528013357716426...<br /><br />There are some inconsistencies with this article.<br />There are no "Disks" or "Subsea safety structure" 1,000 feet below the sea floor, all that is there is well bore. There is nothing that can allow the mud or oil to "escape" into the rock formation outside the well bore except the well, because it is the only thing there.<br /><br />All the actions and few tid bits of information all lead to one inescapable conclusion. The well pipes below the sea floor are broken and leaking. Now you have some real data of how BP's actions are evidence of that, as well as some murky statement from "BP officials" confirming the same.<br /><br />I took some time to go into a bit of detail concerning the failure of Top Kill because this was a significant event. To those of us outside the real inside loop, yet still fairly knowledgeable, it was a major confirmation of what many feared. That the system below the sea floor has serious failures of varying magnitude in the complicated chain, and it is breaking down and it will continue to.<br /><br />What does this mean?<br /><br />It means they will never cap the gusher after the wellhead. They cannot...the more they try and restrict the oil gushing out the bop?...the more it will transfer to the leaks below. Just like a leaky garden hose with a nozzle on it. When you open up the nozzle?...it doesn't leak so bad, you close the nozzle?...it leaks real bad,<br />same dynamics. It is why they sawed the riser off...or tried to anyway...but they clipped it off, to relieve pressure on the leaks "down hole". I'm sure there was a bit of panic time after they crimp/pinched off the large riser pipe and the Diamond wire saw got stuck and failed...because that crimp diverted pressure and flow to the rupture down below.<br /><br />Contrary to what most of us would think as logical to stop the oil mess, actually opening up the gushing well and making it gush more became direction BP took after confirming that there was a leak. In fact if you note their actions, that should become clear. They have shifted from stopping or restricting the gusher to opening it up and catching it. This only makes sense if they want to relieve pressure at the leak hidden down below the seabed.....and that sort of leak is one of the most dangerous and potentially damaging kind of leak there could be. It is also inaccessible which compounds our problems. There is no way to stop that leak from above, all they can do is relieve the pressure on it and the only way to do that right now is to open up the nozzle above and gush more oil into the gulf and hopefully catch it, which they have done, they just neglected to tell us why, gee thanks.<br /><br />A down hole leak is dangerous and damaging for several reasons.<br />There will be erosion throughout the entire beat up, beat on and beat down remainder of the "system" including that inaccessible leak. The same erosion I spoke about in the first post is still present and has never stopped, cannot be stopped, is impossible to stop and will always be present in and acting on anything that is left which has crude oil "Product" rushing through it. There are abrasives still present, swirling flow will create hot spots of wear and this erosion is relentless and will always be present until eventually it wears away enough material to break it's way out. It will slowly eat the bop away especially at the now pinched off riser head and it will flow more and more. Perhaps BP can outrun or keep up with that out flow with various suckage methods for a period of time, but eventually the well will win that race, just how long that race will be?...no one really knows....However now?...there are other problems that a down hole leak will and must produce that will compound this already bad situation.<br /><br />This down hole leak will undermine the foundation of the seabed in and around the well area. It also weakens the only thing holding up the massive Blow Out Preventer's immense bulk of 450 tons. In fact?...we are beginning to the results of the well's total integrity beginning to fail due to the undermining being caused by the leaking well bore.<br /><br />The first layer of the sea floor in the gulf is mostly lose material of sand and silt. It doesn't hold up anything and isn't meant to, what holds the entire subsea system of the Bop in place is the well itself. The very large steel connectors of the initial well head "spud" stabbed in to the sea floor. The Bop literally sits on top of the pipe and never touches the sea bed, it wouldn't do anything in way of support if it did. After several tens of feet the seabed does begin to support the well connection laterally (side to side) you couldn't put a 450 ton piece of machinery on top of a 100' tall pipe "in the air" and subject it to the side loads caused by the ocean currents and expect it not to bend over...unless that pipe was very much larger than the machine itself, which you all can see it is not. The well's piping in comparison is actually very much smaller than the Blow Out Preventer and strong as it may be, it relies on some support from the seabed to function and not literally fall over...and it is now showing signs of doing just that....falling over.<br /><br />If you have been watching the live feed cams you may have noticed that some of the ROVs are using an inclinometer...and inclinometer is an instrument that measures "Incline" or tilt. The BOP is not supposed to be tilting...and after the riser clip off operation it has begun to...<br /><br />This is not the only problem that occurs due to erosion of the outer area of the well casings. The way a well casing assembly functions it that it is an assembly of different sized "tubes" that decrease in size as they go down. These tubes have a connection to each other that is not unlike a click or snap together locking action. After a certain length is assembled they are cemented around the ouside to the earth that the more rough drill hole is bored through in the well making process. A very well put together and simply explained process of "How to drill a deep water oil well" is available here:<br />http://www.treesfullofmoney.com/?p=1610<br /><br />The well bore casings rely on the support that is created by the cementing phase of well construction. Just like if you have many hands holding a pipe up you could put some weight on the top and the many hands could hold the pipe and the weight on top easily...but if there were no hands gripping and holding the pipe?...all the weight must be held up by the pipe alone. The series of connections between the sections of casings are not designed to hold up the immense weight of the BOP without all the "hands" that the cementing provides and they will eventually buckle and fail when stressed beyond their design limits.<br /><br />These are clear and present dangers to the battered subsea safety structure (bop and lmrp) which is the only loose cork on this well we have left. The immediate (first 1,000 feet) of well structure that remains is now also undoubtedly compromised. However.....as bad as that is?...it is far from the only possible problems with this very problematic well. There were ongoing troubles with the entire process during the drilling of this well. There were also many comprises made by BP IMO which may have resulted in an overall weakened structure of the entire well system all the way to the bottom plug which is over 12,000 feet deep. Problems with the cementing procedure which was done by Haliburton and was deemed as “was against our best practices.” by a Haliburton employee on April 1st weeks before the well blew out. There is much more and I won't go into detail right now concerning the lower end of the well and the troubles encountered during the whole creation of this well and earlier "Well control" situations that were revieled in various internal BP e-mails. I will add several links to those documents and quotes from them below and for now, address the issues concerning the upper portion of the well and the region of the sea floor.<br /><br />What is likely to happen now?<br /><br />Well...none of what is likely to happen is good, in fact...it's about as bad as it gets. I am convinced the erosion and compromising of the entire system is accelerating and attacking more key structural areas of the well, the blow out preventer and surrounding strata holding it all up and together. This is evidenced by the tilt of the blow out preventer and the erosion which has exposed the well head connection. What eventually will happen is that the blow out preventer will literally tip over if they do not run supports to it as the currents push on it. I suspect they will run those supports as cables tied to anchors very soon, if they don't, they are inviting disaster that much sooner.<br /><br />Eventually even that will be futile as the well casings cannot support the weight of the massive system above with out the cement bond to the earth and that bond is being eroded away. When enough is eroded away the casings will buckle and the BOP will collapse the well. If and when you begin to see oil and gas coming up around the well area from under the BOP? or the area around the well head connection and casing sinking more and more rapidly? ...it won't be too long after that the entire system fails. BP must be aware of this, they are mapping the sea floor sonically and that is not a mere exercise. Our Gov't must be well aware too, they just are not telling us.<br /><br />All of these things lead to only one place, a fully wide open well bore directly to the oil deposit...after that, it goes into the realm of "the worst things you can think of" The well may come completely apart as the inner liners fail. There is still a very long drill string in the well, that could literally come flying out...as I said...all the worst things you can think of are a possibility, but the very least damaging outcome as bad as it is, is that we are stuck with a wide open gusher blowing out 150,000 barrels a day of raw oil or more. There isn't any "cap dome" or any other suck fixer device on earth that exists or could be built that will stop it from gushing out and doing more and more damage to the gulf. While at the same time also doing more damage to the well, making the chance of halting it with a kill from the bottom up less and less likely to work, which as it stands now?....is the only real chance we have left to stop it all.<br /><br />It's a race now...a race to drill the relief wells and take our last chance at killing this monster before the whole weakened, wore out, blown out, leaking and failing system gives up it's last gasp in a horrific crescendo.<br /><br />We are not even 2 months into it, barely half way by even optimistic estimates. The damage done by the leaked oil now is virtually immeasurable already and it will not get better, it can only get worse. No matter how much they can collect, there will still be thousands and thousands of gallons leaking out every minute, every hour of every day. We have 2 months left before the relief wells are even near in position and set up to take a kill shot and that is being optimistic as I said.<br /><br />Over the next 2 months the mechanical situation also cannot improve, it can only get worse, getting better is an impossibility. While they may make some gains on collecting the leaked oil, the structural situation cannot heal itself. It will continue to erode and flow out more oil and eventually the inevitable collapse which cannot be stopped will happen. It is only a simple matter of who can "get there first"...us or the well.<br /><br />We can only hope the race against that eventuality is one we can win, but my assessment I am sad to say is that we will not.<br /><br />The system will collapse or fail substantially before we reach the finish line ahead of the well and the worst is yet to come.<br /><br />Sorry to bring you that news, I know it is grim, but that is the way I see it....I sincerely hope I am wrong.<br /><br />We need to prepare for the possibility of this blow out sending more oil into the gulf per week then what we already have now, because that is what a collapse of the system will cause. All the collection efforts that have captured oil will be erased in short order. The magnitude of this disaster will increase exponentially by the time we can do anything to halt it and our odds of actually even being able to halt it will go down.<br /><br />The magnitude and impact of this disaster will eclipse anything we have known in our life times if the worst or even near worst happens...<br /><br />We are seeing the puny forces of man vs the awesome forces of nature.<br />We are going to need some luck and a lot of effort to win...<br />and if nature decides we ought to lose, we will....<br /><br />Reference materials:<br /><br />On April 1, a job log written by a Halliburton employee, Marvin Volek, warns that BP’s use of cement “was<br />against our best practices.”<br /><br />An April 18 internal Halliburton memorandum indicates that Halliburton again warned BP about its practices,<br />this time saying that a “severe” gas flow problem would occur if the casings were not centered more carefully.<br /><br />Around that same time, a BP document shows, company officials chose a type of casing with a greater risk of<br />collapsing.<br />http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/06/us/06rig.html?pagewanted=1&sq=at_issue...<br /><br />Mark Hafle, the BP drilling engineer who wrote plans for well casings and cement seals on the Deepwater<br />Horizon's well, testified that the well had lost thousands of barrels of mud at the bottom. But he said models<br />run onshore showed alterations to the cement program would resolve the issues, and when asked if a cement<br />failure allowed the well to "flow" gas and oil, he wouldn't capitulate.<br /><br />Hafle said he made several changes to casing designs in the last few days before the well blew, including the<br />addition of the two casing liners that weren't part of the original well design because of problems where the<br />earthen sides of the well were "ballooning." He also worked with Halliburton engineers to design a plan for<br />sealing the well casings with cement.<br />http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/05/hearings_bp_ce...<br /><br />graphic of fail<br />http://media.nola.com/news_impact/other/oil-cause-050710.pdf<br />Casing joint<br />http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/files/OGL00001.gif<br />Casing<br />http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/files/OGL00003.gif<br /><br />Kill may take until Christmas<br />http://preview.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-02/bp-gulf-of-mexico-oil-leak-...<br /><br />BP Used Riskier Method to Seal Well Before Blast<br />http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/us/27rig.html<br /><br />BP memo test results<br />http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20100512/Internal.BP.Email.Reg...<br /><br />Investigation results<br /><br />The information from BP identifies several new warning signs of problems. According to BP there were three flow<br />indicators from the well before the explosion.<br />http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100525/Memo.BP.Internal.Inve...<br /><br />BP, what we know<br />http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100512/BP-What.We.Know.pdf<br /><br />What could have happened<br /><br />1. Before or during the cement job, an influx of hydrocarbon enters the wellbore.<br />2. Influx is circulated during cement job to wellhead and BOP.<br />3. 9-7/8” casing hanger packoff set and positively tested to 6500 psi.<br />4. After 16.5 hours waiting on cement, a negative test performed on wellbore below BOP.<br />(~ 1400 psi differential pressure on 9-7/8” casing hanger packoff and ~ 2350 psi on<br />double valve float collar)<br />5. Packoff leaks allowing hydrocarbon to enter wellbore below BOP. 1400 psi shut in<br />pressure observed on drill pipe (no flow or pressure observed on kill line)<br />6. Hydrocarbon below BOP is unknowingly circulated to surface while finishing displacing<br />the riser.<br />7. As hydrocarbon rises to surface, gas break out of solution further reduces hydrostatic<br />pressure in well. Well begin to flow, BOPs and Emergency Disconnect System (EDS)<br />activated but failed.<br />8. Packoff continues to leak allowing further influx from bottom.<br />Confidential<br />http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100512/BP-What.Could.Have.Ha...<br /><br />T/A daily log 4-20<br />http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100512/TRO-Daily.Drilling.Re...<br /><br />Cement plug 12,150 ft SCMT logging tool<br />SCMT (Slim Cement Mapping Tool)<br />Schlumberger Partial CBL done.<br />http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100530/BP-HZN-CEC018441.pdf<br /><br />Schlum CBL tools<br />http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/production/product_sheets/well_integrit...<br /><br />Major concerns, well control, bop test.<br />http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100530/BP-HZN-CEC018375.pdf<br /><br />Energy & commerce links to docs.<br />http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=articl...<br /><br />well head on sea floor<br />http://nca-group.com/bilder//Trolla/A.%20GVI%20of%20Trolla%20prior%20to%20WHP002%20(2).jpg<br /><br />Well head on deck of ship<br />http://nca-group.com/bilder//Trolla/DSC_0189.JPG<br /><br />BP's youtube propoganda page, a lot of rarely seen vids here....FWIW<br />http://www.youtube.com/user/DeepwaterHorizonJIC<br />http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1097505/pg1<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">I used to cover the energy business (oil, gas and alternative) here in Texas, and the few experts in the oil field -- including geologists, chemists, etc. -- able or willing to even speak of this BP event told me early on that it is likely the entire reserve will bleed out. Unfortunately none of them could say with any certainty just how much oil is in the reserve in question because, for one thing, the oil industry and secrecy have always been synonymous. According to BP data from about five years ago, there are four separate reservoirs containing a total of 2.5 billion barrels (barrels not gallons). One of the reservoirs has 1.5 billion barrels. I saw an earlier post here quoting an Anadarko Petroleum report which set the total amount at 2.3 billion barrels. One New York Times article put it at 2 billion barrels.<br /><br />If the BP data correctly or honestly identified four separate reservoirs then a bleed-out might gush less than 2 to 2.5 billion barrels unless the walls -- as it were -- fracture or partially collapse. I am hearing the same dark rumors which suggest fracturing and a complete bleed-out are already underway. Rumors also suggest a massive collapse of the Gulf floor itself is in the making. They are just rumors but it is time for geologists or related experts to end their deafening silence and speak to these possibilities.<br /><br />All oilmen lie about everything. The stories one hears about the extent to which they will protect themselves are all understatements. BP employees are already taking The Fifth before grand juries, and attorneys are laying a path for company executives to make a run for it.</span><br /><br />Fuente: <br />http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6593/648967fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-31507302879174652512010-05-07T16:36:00.002-05:002010-05-07T16:37:08.985-05:00Dos formas diferentes de enfrentar la crisis: Venezuela y Grecia<em>Weekend Edition<br />May 7 - 9, 2010<br /><br />Compare and Contrast <br /><strong>Venezuela and Greece </strong>By MARK WEISBROT </em><br />With Venezuela’s economy having contracted last year (as did the vast majority of economies in the Western Hemisphere), the economy suffering from electricity shortages, and the value of domestic currency having recently fallen sharply in the parallel market, stories of Venezuela’s economic ruin are again making headlines.<br /><br />The Washington Post, in a news article that reads more like an editorial, reports that Venezuela is “gripped by an economic crisis,” and that “years of state interventions in the economy are taking a brutal toll on private business.”<br /><br />There is one important fact that is almost never mentioned in news articles about Venezuela, because it does not fit in with the narrative of a country that has spent wildly throughout the boom years, and will soon, like Greece, face its day of reckoning. That is the government’s debt level: currently about 20 percent of GDP. In other words, even as it was tripling real social spending per person, increasing access to health care and education, and loaning or giving billions of dollars to other Latin American countries, Venezuela was reducing its debt burden during the oil price run-up. Venezuela’s public debt fell from 47.5 percent of GDP in 2003 to 13.8 percent in 2008. In 2009, as the economy shrank, public debt picked up to 19.9 percent of GDP. Even if we include the debt of the state oil company, PDVSA, Venezuela’s public debt is 26 percent of GDP. The foreign part of this debt is less than half of the total.<br /><br />Compare this to Greece, where public debt is 115 percent of GDP and currently projected to rise to 149 percent in 2013. (The European Union average is about 79 percent.)<br /><br />Given the Venezuelan government’s very low public and foreign debt, the idea the country is facing an “economic crisis” is simply wrong. With oil at about $80 a barrel, Venezuela is running a sizeable current account surplus, and has a healthy level of reserves. Furthermore, the government can borrow internationally as necessary – last month China agreed to loan Venezuela $20 billion in an advance payment for future oil deliveries.<br /><br />Nonetheless, the country still faces significant economic challenges, some of which have been worsened by mistaken macroeconomic policy choices. The economy shrank by 3.3 percent last year. The international press has trouble understanding this, but the problem was that the government’s fiscal policy was too conservative – cutting spending as the economy slipped into recession. This was a mistake, but hopefully the government will reverse this quickly with its planned expansion of public investment this year, including $6 billion for electricity generation.<br /><br />The government’s biggest long-term economic mistake has been the maintenance of a fixed, overvalued exchange rate. Although the government devalued the currency in January, from 2.15 to 4.3 to the dollar for most official foreign exchange transactions, the currency is still overvalued. The parallel or black market rate is at more than seven to the dollar.<br /><br />An overvalued currency – by making imports artificially cheap and the country’s exports more expensive - hurts Venezuela’s non-oil tradable goods’ sectors and prevents the economy from diversifying away from oil. Worse still, the country’s high inflation rate (28 percent over the last year, and averaging 21 percent annually over the last seven years) makes the currency more overvalued in real terms each year. (The press has misunderstood this problem, too – the inflation itself is too high, but the main damage it does to the economy is not from the price increases themselves but from causing an increasing overvaluation of the real exchange rate.)<br /><br />But Venezuela is not in the situation of Greece – or even Portugal, Ireland, or Spain. Or Latvia or Estonia. The first four countries are stuck with an overvalued currency – for them, the euro – and implementing pro-cyclical fiscal policies (e.g. deficit reduction) that are deepening their recessions and/or slowing their recovery. They do not have any control over monetary policy, which rests with the European Central Bank. The latter two countries are in a similar situation for as long as they keep their currencies pegged to the euro, and have lost output 6 to 8 times that of Venezuela over the last two years.<br /><br />By contrast, Venezuela controls its own foreign exchange, monetary and fiscal policies. It can use expansionary fiscal and monetary policy to stimulate the economy, and also exchange rate policy – by letting the currency float. A managed, or “dirty” float – in which the government does not set a target exchange rate but intervenes when necessary to preserve exchange rate stability – would suit the Venezuelan economy much better than the current fixed rate. The government could manage the exchange rate at a competitive level, and not have to waste so many dollars, as it does currently, trying to narrow the gap between the parallel and the official rate. Although there were (as usual, exaggerated) predictions that inflation would skyrocket with the most recent devaluation, it did not – possibly because most foreign exchange transactions take place through the parallel market anyway.<br /><br />Venezuela is well situated to resolve its current macroeconomic problems and pursue a robust economic expansion, as it had from 2003-2008. The country is not facing a crisis, but rather a policy choice.<br /><br /><em>Mark Weisbrot is an economist and co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. He is co-author, with Dean Baker, of Social Security: the Phony Crisis.<br /><br />This article was originally published in The Guardian. </em>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-39570325843209938022010-04-05T13:24:00.000-05:002010-04-05T13:25:38.777-05:00La guerra contra las drogas: un punto de vista diferente<em>March 22, 2010<br /><br />Why the Death Toll in Juarez Will Continue to Rise <br /><strong>Obama's Bloody War in Mexico</strong> <br />By MIKE WHITNEY </em><br /><br />Last Saturday, a US consulate employee and his pregnant wife were gunned down in their SUV in Ciudad Juarez while their seven month old baby watched from the backseat. Just minutes later, another consulate employee was killed at point-blank range in the northern part of the city. Both shootouts took place in broad daylight and were executed with precision, clearly the work of professionals. <br /><br />The only thing that stands out about these incidents, is that two of the victims were American citizens. Otherwise, it's just "business as usual" in the murder capital of the western hemisphere. Juarez has been rocked by a wave of gangland-style killings for the last two years. The statistics are mind-boggling. 50 people were killed last weekend alone (four of the victims were beheaded) and there have been more than 500 homicides since the beginning of 2010. All told, more than 19,000 people have been killed since Mexican President Felipe Calderon took office in 2006. Juarez is presently the most dangerous place in the world, worse has Baghdad or Kabul. <br /><br />* * * <br /><br />The violence in Juarez is not accidental. It's the result of a deeply-flawed US/Mexico policy. The Merida Initiative, which was signed in 2007 by President George W. Bush and Calderon, has led to the militarization of law enforcement which has intensified the battle between the state and the drug cartels. Plan Mexico--as Merida is also called--has increased the incidents of gang-related crime and murder by many orders of magnitude. The military is uniquely unsuited for tasks that should be handled by criminal investigators or the police. That's why the death toll keeps rising. The bottom line, is that the troubles in Juarez have more to do with Plan Mexico than they do with drug-trafficking. This is "policy-driven" carnage and the United States is largely to blame. <br /><br />Shortly after he took office in 2006, Calderon began using the military to battle Mexico's powerful narco-mafia. Since then, there's been a steady escalation in troop deployments and violence across the country. The Calderon strategy has been universally condemned except (of course) by US think-tank ideologues who applaud the bloodletting as proof of its success. Laura Carlsen, the director of the Americas Policy Program in Mexico City, was recently interviewed about Plan Mexico and asked whether the policy has changed under Barack Obama. Here's what she said:<br /><br />“The Obama administration has supported Plan Mexico and even requested, and received from Congress, additional funds beyond what the Bush administration requested. In the three years since Calderon launched the war on drugs in Mexico with the support of the US government drug related violence has shot up to over 15,000 executions and formal reports of violations of human rights have increased sixfold.....Washington recognizes serious problems with the drug war model and yet continues to claim, absurdly, that the rise in violence in Mexico is a good sign--it means that the cartels are feeling the heat.. <br /><br />“Plan Mexico... grew out of the extension of NAFTA into security areas, known as the Security and Prosperity Partnership.... It was designed in Washington as a way to "push out the borders" of the US security perimeter, that is, that Mexico would take on US security priorities including policing its southern border and allowing US companies and agents into Mexico's intelligence and security operations." <br /><br />NAFTA transformed Juarez into a manufacturing hub where assembly plants and electronics companies turned out all types of goods that were shipped to the United States tariff-free. In the last few years, however, corporations have exited Mexico en masse seeking cheaper labor costs in China. According to the Wall Street Journal: "Since 2005, 10,600 businesses—roughly 40 per cent of Juárez's businesses—have closed their doors, according to the country's group representing local chambers of commerce." Free trade has left Juarez in ruins which has only added to the current troubles. <br /><br />Laura Carlsen again: <br /><br />"The Bush administration used the counterterrorism paradigm to extend US presence in strategic areas. In Mexico, the idea was to open up lucrative defense and intelligence contracts while aiding the rightwing government, which still faced serious questions of legitimacy due to unresolved accusations of fraud in the 2006 elections."<br /><br />Carlsen confirms that Plan Mexico is not so much about the fictitious war on drugs as it is about creating a business-friendly authoritarian regime that will crush any threat to state/corporate power. By throwing his support behind the current policy, Obama is merely picking up where his predecessor G.W. Bush left off. <br /><br />Calderon has largely complied with whatever directives he's gotten from Washington. In practical terms, he's assumed the mantle of "provincial governor" charged with carrying out US security operations south of the border; a regular Mexican Karzai. And he has performed reasonably well too, which is to say that he's turned the country to a free-fire zone where anything-goes as long as the billions in US aid continues to roll in. A recent survey shows that more than half of the population now believes that Calderon has made the country more dangerous. In an interview with Democracy Now, author Charles Bowden describes what life is really like for the people who live in Juarez and have to adjust to the daily violence: <br /><br />"This is in a city where people live in cardboard boxes sometimes. Ten thousand businesses have given up and closed in the last year. Thirty to sixty thousand people from Juárez, mainly the rich, have moved across the river to El Paso for safety, including the mayor of Juárez, who likes to bunk in El Paso. And the publisher of the newspaper there lives in El Paso. Somewhere between 100,000 and 400,000 people simply left the city. A lot of the problem is economic, not simply violence. At least 100,000 jobs in the border factories have vanished during this recession because of the competition from Asia. There’s 500 to 900 gangs there, estimates vary. <br /><br />So what you have is about 10,000 federal troops and federal police agents all marauding. You have a city where no one goes out at night; where small businesses all pay extortion; where 20,000 cars were officially stolen last year; where 2,600-plus people were officially murdered last year; where nobody keeps track of the people who have been kidnapped and never come back; where nobody counts the people buried in secret burying grounds, and they, in an unseemly way, claw out of the earth from time to time. You’ve got a disaster. And you have a million people, too poor to leave, imprisoned in it. That’s the city." <br /><br />The war in Juarez isn't about narcotics; it's about a foreign policy that supports proxy-armies to impose order through police-state repression and militarization. The media keep reiterating the same tedious refrain about the ongoing "drug war", but it's all baloney. The so-called war on drugs--like the war on terror--is merely the public relations mask which conceals the political agenda. Regional hegemony is the ostensible goal, and extreme violence is the cornerstone upon which the entire policy rests. Here's a clip from an article in the Independent which sums up the futility of the drug war and its corrosive effect on government institutions: <br /><br />"The outlawing and criminalizing of drugs and consequent surge in prices has produced a bonanza for producers everywhere, from Kabul to Bogota, but, at the Mexican border, where an estimated $39,000m in narcotics enter the rich US market every year, a veritable tsunami of cash has been created. The narcotraficantes, or drug dealers, can buy the murder of many, and the loyalty of nearly everyone. They can acquire whatever weapons they need from the free market in firearms north of the border and bring them into Mexico with appropriate payment to any official who holds his hand out. <br /><br />“And drug-related bribery is gnawing deep into US institutions, as Calderon has long alleged. Thomas Frost of the US Dept of Homeland Security says that last year the department accused 839 of its own agents of corruption.... the FBI ... dug up more than 400 public corruption cases that resulted in well over 100 arrests and more than 130 state and federal prosecutions...<br /><br />The narcos have penetrated the US embassy in Mexico City (as they had previously the one in Colombia's capital, Bogota), their funds allowing them to siphon out a stream of intelligence about future operations against the narcos." ("The US-Mexico border: where the drugs war has soaked the ground blood red", Hugh O'Shaughnessy The Independent) <br /><br />The real reason US powerbrokers want to militarize Mexico is to counter the leftist social movements which have sprouted up everywhere in Latin America. The administration wants to get a foot in the door so they can roll back the advances that have been made in health care, civil liberties, education, wealth redistribution and land reform. The US wants to quash the burgeoning unions, the indigenous communities, and pro-democracy groups which have taken root and replaced the kleptocratic regimes which were propped up by Washington. The Merida Initiative is an attempt to return to the dark days of oligarchy and torture, of death squads and "dirty wars". Clearly, Uncle Sam will not be easily deterred; it will take determined resistance from grassroots organizations and engaged citizens. <br /><br />As for the faux "drug war" here's an extended excerpt from an article written by CounterPunch co-editors Cockburn & St Clair back in June, 1998, stemming from their book Whiteout:<br /><br />"Amid the United Nations’ special session in New York on drugs, hundreds of prominent people from around the world signed on to the view that the drug war has been a disaster and “the time has come for a truly open and honest dialogue about future global drug control policies.<br /><br />“The statements to which the signatories put their names are mostly unimpeachable common sense: ‘Drug war politics impede public health efforts to stem the spread of HIV, hepatitis and other infectious diseases. Human rights are violated, environmental assaults perpetrated and prisons inundated with hundreds of thousands of drug law violators.’ <br /><br />“All true, and every phrase repeated, proved and doubly proved year after year. So why does the drug war grind on, decade after decade, immune to reason, often grotesque in its hypocrisy?...<br /><br />“The answer is plain enough, particularly if one takes a look at the history of drug wars over the past 150 years. These drug wars are either enterprises that expand the drug trade or pretexts for social and political repression. In either case, the aim of halting the production, shipment and consumption of drugs is not on the agenda. <br /><br />“Domestically, the ‘drug war’ has always been a pretext for social control, going back to the racist application of drug laws against Chinese laborers in the recession of the 1870s when these workers were viewed as competition for the dwindling number of jobs available. ....<br /><br />“President Nixon was helpfully explicit in his private remarks. H.R. Haldeman recorded in his diary a briefing by the president in 1969, prior to launching of the war on drugs: ‘Nixon emphasized that you have to face the fact the whole problem is really the blacks. The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to.’<br /><br />“So what was ‘the system’ duly devised? The 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, with its 29 new minimum mandatory sentences, and the 100-to-1 sentencing ratio between possession of crack and powder cocaine, became a system for locking up a disproportionate number of black people. <br /><br />“So to call for a ‘truly open and honest dialogue’ about drug policy, as all those distinguished signatories in the advertisement requested, is about as realistic as asking the U.S. government to nationalize the oil industry. Essentially, the drug war is a war on the poor and the dangerous classes, here and elsewhere. How many governments are going to give up on that?”<br /><br />Obama knows that the war on drugs is a sham, but that won't stop him from committing billions more to Plan Mexico. In fact, it's already a done deal. What the administration wants is a "hemispheric security policy" which creates a hospitable environment for resource extraction and corporate exploitation. And, they don't care how many people get killed in the process. That's why the death toll in Juarez will to continue to rise. <br /><br /><em>Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com</em>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-78857656475500706452010-02-19T13:41:00.007-06:002010-02-19T13:55:27.588-06:00Impunidad a cuatro años de la tragedia de Pasta de Conchos<span style="font-style:italic;">México SA<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Cuarto aniversario de la tragedia de Pasta de Conchos<br /></span><br />Campea la plena impunidad<br />Carlos Fernández-Vega</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBjmPRA_Z5zY84oU6aiekQWIySAvhybz6RdCCIUqBXDByjx1WnEFbWGU2oJUJZhUBmpCU9zwfd0qcC1aUn7xuQHdGUFwlHjheeuqSMQDMuTCRPC5EpxBs5pX-ENgsIempnrHCg8dRXFzA/s1600-h/mineros.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 267px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBjmPRA_Z5zY84oU6aiekQWIySAvhybz6RdCCIUqBXDByjx1WnEFbWGU2oJUJZhUBmpCU9zwfd0qcC1aUn7xuQHdGUFwlHjheeuqSMQDMuTCRPC5EpxBs5pX-ENgsIempnrHCg8dRXFzA/s400/mineros.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5440044081471004754" /></a><br /><br />Hoy se cumple el cuarto aniversario de la tragedia en la mina Pasta de Conchos, en San Juan de Sabinas, Coahuila, concesionada a Germán Larrea, uno de los multimillonarios Forbes, el mismo que hoy pretende sepultar, también, a los mineros de Cananea. Cuatro largos años han transcurrido, periodo que involucra a dos catastróficos gobiernos panistas, a igual número de inquilinos de Los Pinos (uno peor que el otro, lo que ya es decir), de secretarios del (des) Trabajo y de cabezas visibles en la Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos, así como un gobernador, y la justicia, junto con los cuerpos de los trabajadores que perdieron la vida en aquel "accidente", se mantiene bajo los escombros. Fue una tragedia igual de evitable que la ocurrida en junio pasado en la guardería ABC de Hermosillo, y en ambos casos los responsables permanecen impunes.<br /><br />Ocurrió a escasos nueve meses de que Vicente Fox abandonara la comodidad de Los Pinos, sólo para que uno peor, Felipe Calderón, ocupara la misma silla. De despedida, el primero de los nefastos personajes prometió todo e incumplió todo; de llegada, el segundo procedió exactamente igual, y así se ha mantenido; a estas alturas ningún responsable está preso, ni le han cancelado las concesiones mineras, mientras los deudos de los trabajadores fallecidos en Pasta de Conchos infructuosamente intentan desenterrar a la justicia que las supuestas autoridades y su protegido del consorcio minero les siguen negando.<br /><br />Lo dicho y prometido por Fox y su secretario del Trabajo, el hoy diputado panista Francisco Xavier Salazar Sáenz, quedó en el aire; lo dicho y prometido por Calderón también, y lo propio ha hecho el gobernador de Coahuila, Humberto Moreira, quien no se ha quedado atrás en eso de ofrece e incumplir. Por ello, para el ejercicio de la memoria colectiva van los siguientes discursos, todos en torno al primer aniversario de Pasta de Conchos.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpy1l7CLPm8csOyqc8YhcL2PGkmkaylQaO191Qh76ZwQVaAkobThXu6zK0NeBJG1t9CgsgowjR2OkVQTCy3z-_s250goNf0hwDydSX94M6kI2UdGRwJmX-e1zhcduMc9FDketz3X5BpwQ/s1600-h/germ%C3%A1n+Larrea.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 337px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpy1l7CLPm8csOyqc8YhcL2PGkmkaylQaO191Qh76ZwQVaAkobThXu6zK0NeBJG1t9CgsgowjR2OkVQTCy3z-_s250goNf0hwDydSX94M6kI2UdGRwJmX-e1zhcduMc9FDketz3X5BpwQ/s400/germ%C3%A1n+Larrea.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5440045162472761058" /></a><br />Germán Larrea, propietario de Industrial Minera México (uno de los individuos más acaudalados de México)<br /><br />A) El secretario calderonista del (des) Trabajo, Javier Lozano Alarcón, declaró: “Industrial Minera México (de Germán Larrea y su Grupo México) tuvo la mayor parte de la responsabilidad en el accidente de Pasta de Conchos, porque estaba obligada por ley a cumplir con condiciones de seguridad… no voy a solapar a ningún servidor público que pudiera estar involucrado, ni taparé a ningún personaje por más importante que sea” (La Jornada, Patricia Muñoz). Es de suponer que si el pianista tuvo los elementos para sostener públicamente que el citado consorcio empresarial fue el de "la mayor parte de la responsabilidad", el paso inmediato no era armar un show mediático, sino presentar la denuncia legal correspondiente en contra de los empresarios y ex funcionarios públicos involucrados. También dijo que "a la Secretaría del Trabajo no le corresponde señalar culpables (aunque lo hizo), sino que será la Secretaría de la Función Pública la que determine si hubo o no responsabilidad de servidores públicos, así como las procuradurías General de la República y estatal (la de Coahuila) las que verán la situación tanto de la empresa como de los funcionarios. Mientras, la Secretaría de Economía tiene que ver el dictamen que emita el Sistema Geológico Mexicano y lo referente a la concesión del yacimiento". Ninguna de las instituciones citadas por Lozano movió un dedo.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuLdA_JSkVubh_WIa6B7RNa5x5PhC8VjQ-ikWCqcuwbD6ctYX6Kl4171AfX4wMUwPhwX6mwx-__N37QjsRuzrYsg4M6RM_NfOht_Sec-ApVoFMy0oJhJCTNAoydQ2s1Ch59Gh4swCg7LI/s1600-h/javier+lozano.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 370px; height: 270px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuLdA_JSkVubh_WIa6B7RNa5x5PhC8VjQ-ikWCqcuwbD6ctYX6Kl4171AfX4wMUwPhwX6mwx-__N37QjsRuzrYsg4M6RM_NfOht_Sec-ApVoFMy0oJhJCTNAoydQ2s1Ch59Gh4swCg7LI/s400/javier+lozano.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5440044211347728978" /></a><br />Javier Lozano, Secretario de Trabajo y Previsión Social<br /><br />B) El director general del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Juan Molinar Horcasitas (hoy despacha cómodamente en la SCT), denunció que para efectos de registro en el IMSS, Industrial Minera México no sólo subcontrató a sus trabajadores sino que a los mineros de Pasta de Conchos los dio de alta con salarios menores a los realmente cubiertos para pagar menos cuotas, en detrimento de las finanzas de la institución, con lo que se configura el fraude contra el Estado. Lo anterior, reconocido ante los integrantes de la comisión legislativa "para dar seguimiento" a las investigaciones por la explosión en Pasta de Conchos. Sin embargo, el instituto no presentó ninguna denuncia legal en contra del consorcio privado propiedad de Germán Larrea y su práctica fraudulenta.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYxS7G1_s155zgEleB2Pk0Z5mHO735W6JBPlo_2tPDFvgvahjayBHAZ10-T1JHgqoIlxS0BY3UcqaOg6mk8VvJYCSLPBTWj54j5JDAizgZ2Pip7qmAyEifirRe27YVa1G8t2qfRgae0hE/s1600-h/juan+molinar+horcasitas.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 305px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYxS7G1_s155zgEleB2Pk0Z5mHO735W6JBPlo_2tPDFvgvahjayBHAZ10-T1JHgqoIlxS0BY3UcqaOg6mk8VvJYCSLPBTWj54j5JDAizgZ2Pip7qmAyEifirRe27YVa1G8t2qfRgae0hE/s400/juan+molinar+horcasitas.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5440044431025419906" /></a><br />Juan Molinar Horcasitas, Director del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social<br /><br />C) El gobernador de Coahuila, Humberto Moreira, denunció que "desde la Presidencia de la República Vicente Fox Quesada me pidió procesar y enviar a prisión a inocentes por la tragedia en la mina Pasta de Conchos. Desde la dirigencia del Partido Acción Nacional me presionan para que no encarcele a los verdaderos responsables de la muerte de 65 trabajadores; hubo otras atrocidades, como cuando Vicente Fox, en mi cara, en Los Pinos, me pidió que hiciera cosas que no tienen moral: que inventara delitos a otras personas, que distrajéramos la atención. Soy víctima de una serie de presiones de gente del gobierno o del PAN para que no encarcelemos al ex delegado de la Secretaría de Trabajo en Coahuila, Pedro Camarillo Adame. No voy a mover un dedo para que libren el pellejo quienes están involucrados en el asesinato, en la muerte, de coahuilenses. Son responsables, hay gente que es responsable y que trabajó en la administración pasada y va a tener que ser encarcelada; lo sostengo en la cara del ex presidente Vicente Fox, le digo eso, y también las llamadas que le hice en tono suplicante para que pudiera acudir al estado. Le digo también cómo le pedí, le insistí que pudiera asignar más inspectores y no me hizo ningún caso. Yo se lo digo en su cara al ex presidente". Nada hizo.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHYgohpOtfrcck44gwiCpcnPEzU-mDb5H50wwZjQ9FmQ7czzBDpkUqQR_qqJRZfNPO_91sMSDwC508zIFzcGZZWM2GaFmGVJs3QpDip3c1iHX27Hq5v3tfIqT2-q_j6ufqLM1voRUuk4I/s1600-h/humberto+moreira.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 370px; height: 270px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHYgohpOtfrcck44gwiCpcnPEzU-mDb5H50wwZjQ9FmQ7czzBDpkUqQR_qqJRZfNPO_91sMSDwC508zIFzcGZZWM2GaFmGVJs3QpDip3c1iHX27Hq5v3tfIqT2-q_j6ufqLM1voRUuk4I/s400/humberto+moreira.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5440044633176664322" /></a><br />Humberto Moreira, Gobernador de Coahuila<br /><br />D) El 17 de enero de 2007 Felipe Calderón "mantuvo una entrevista informal" con Maribel Rico Montelongo, familiar de uno de los 65 mineros fallecidos en Pasta de Conchos. De acuerdo con la crónica del momento, el inquilino de Los Pinos aseguró que "la mina no será cerrada; además, se hará todo lo posible para que los cuerpos sean rescatados y tengan cristiana sepultura" (La Vanguardia de Saltillo). Dos semanas después Industrial Minera México despidió a 250 trabajadores para "cerrar transitoriamente" la mina (sin que ello implique la pérdida de la concesión federal), y la "cristiana sepultura" se mantiene en lista de espera.<br /><br />Así de sencillo. Cuatro años después de la tragedia, todo sigue igual: plena impunidad.<br /><br />Las rebanadas del pastel<br /><br />También hay noticias amables (Lolita dixit): en plena crisis, con desempleo creciente, salarios miserables y demás gracias del sistema, los mexicanos hicieron la hombrada: pagaron tantos intereses y comisiones de usura que en 2009 la banca trasnacional que opera en el país obtuvo utilidades netas por 62 mil 58 millones de pesos, 11 por ciento más que en 2008. De ese monto, Bancomer, Banamex y Santander concentraron 71 por ciento (44 mil 200 millones) del total.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">cfvmexico_sa@hotmail.com - mexicosa@infinitum.com.mx</span>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-9447021182846224072010-02-11T18:23:00.004-06:002010-02-11T18:42:51.745-06:00capitalismo pa principiantes...<em>January 26, 2010<br /><br />Which Economy is Obama Talking About? <br /><strong>Myths of Recovery </strong><br />By MICHAEL HUDSON</em><br /><br />The State of the Union address is in danger of purveying the usual euphemisms. I expect Obama to brag that he has overseen a recovery. But can there be any such thing as a jobless recovery? What has recovered are stock market averages and Wall Street bonuses, not disposable personal income or discretionary spending after paying debt service.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjk9EJPiWAgupsZkSyaQ2DAbW9VzXpaIeYzMMo6OlzIhbqZUJYPFe2awGQVrBcqL9EXeDgsHGL8p8mVPqfP1Nfu3e2K7vl7wQGOVmofHH8yHHiVHm8M0OZiR7aDQUCrZda-Lmm8ixRu2_8/s1600-h/obama.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjk9EJPiWAgupsZkSyaQ2DAbW9VzXpaIeYzMMo6OlzIhbqZUJYPFe2awGQVrBcqL9EXeDgsHGL8p8mVPqfP1Nfu3e2K7vl7wQGOVmofHH8yHHiVHm8M0OZiR7aDQUCrZda-Lmm8ixRu2_8/s400/obama.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5437150765046082722" /></a><br /><em>Barack H. Obama, Presidente de Estados Unidos de América</em><br /><br />There is a dream that what can be “recovered” is something so idyllic as to be mythical: a Bubble Economy enabling people to make money without actually working, by borrowing and riding the tide of asset-price inflation to make capital gains. Corporate Democrat Harold Ford Jr. writes nostalgically that Bill Clinton’s eight years in office created 22 million jobs, “balanced the budget and left his successor with a surplus. This can be done again,” if only Obama moves further to the right (which Ford calls the center, meaning the Bayhs and Republicans).<br /><br />It can’t be done again. Pres. Clinton’s administration balanced the budget by “welfare reform” to cut back public spending. This would be lethal today. Meanwhile, his explosion of bank credit and the dot.com boom (rising stock prices and bonuses without any earnings) fueled the early stages of the Greenspan bubble. It was a debt-leveraged illusion. Instead of the government running budget deficits to expand domestic demand, Clinton left it to banks to extend interest-bearing credit-debt pollution that we are still struggling to clean up. <br /><br />The danger is that when Obama speaks of “stabilizing the economy,” he means trying to sustain the rise in compound interest and debt. This mathematical financial dynamic is autonomous from the “real” industrial economy, overwhelming it economically. That is what makes the present economic road to debt peonage so self-defeating. <br /><br />Debts that can’t be paid, won’t be. So defaults are rising. The question that Obama should be addressing is how to deal with the excess of debt above the ability to pay – and of negative equity for the one-quarter of U.S. real estate that has a higher mortgage debt than the market price is worth. If the hope is still to “borrow our way out of debt” by getting the banks to start lending again, then listeners on Wednesday will know that Obama’s second year in office will be worse for the economy than his first.<br /><br />How realistic is it to expect the speech to make clear that “we can’t go home again”? Obama promised change. “We simply cannot return to business as usual,” he said on Jan. 21, introducing the “Volcker plan.” But how can there be meaningful structural change if the plan is to return to an idealized dynamic that enriched Wall Street but not the rest of the economy?<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzorviuKPBno57G4fsc__mm869Q1VPt7jgesmHCdsIX0SAZ6Lm5Eo9mtKn30Vd7D-koqCgGCcjSa8Hjk63nIc2T-MiI9EvyS0XVPzuersv6x1AuqgLnd9MhbUN-kPZZ5mMYi1KQAFgv_8/s1600-h/volcker.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 384px; height: 323px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzorviuKPBno57G4fsc__mm869Q1VPt7jgesmHCdsIX0SAZ6Lm5Eo9mtKn30Vd7D-koqCgGCcjSa8Hjk63nIc2T-MiI9EvyS0XVPzuersv6x1AuqgLnd9MhbUN-kPZZ5mMYi1KQAFgv_8/s400/volcker.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5437149591361312514" /></a><br /><em>Paul Volker, Director del Consejo Presidencial para la Reconstrucción Económica</em><br /><br /><strong>The word “recession” implies that economic trends will return to normal almost naturally.</strong><br /><br />Any dream of “recovery” in today’s debt-leveraged economy is a false hope. Yet high financial circles expect Obama to insist that the economy cannot recover without first reimbursing and enriching Wall Street. To re-inflate asset prices, Obama’s team looks to Japan’s post-1990 model. A compliant Federal Reserve is to flood the credit markets to lower interest rates to revive bank lending –- interest-bearing debt borrowed to buy real estate already in place (and stocks and bonds already issued), enabling banks to work out of their negative equity position by inflating asset prices relative to wages.<br /><br />The promise is that re-inflating prices will help the “real” economy. But what will “recover” is the rising trend of consumer and homeowner debt responsible for stifling the economy with debt deflation in the first place. This end-result of the Clinton-Bush bubble economy is still being applauded as a model for recovery.<br /><br />We are not really emerging from a “recession.” The word means literally a falling below a trend line. The economy cannot “recover” its past exponential growth, because it was not really normal. GDP is rising mainly for the FIRE sector – finance, insurance and real estate – not the “real economy.” Financial and corporate managers are paying themselves more for their success in paying their employees less. <br /><br />This is the antithesis of recovery for Main Street. That is what makes the FIRE sector so self-destructive, and what has ended America’s great post-1945 upswing.<br /><br /><strong>There are two economies – and the extractive FIRE sector dominates the “real” economy</strong><br /><br />When listening to the State of the Union speech, one should ask just which economy Obama means when he talks about recovery. Most wage earners and taxpayers will think of the “real” economy of production and consumption. But Obama believes that this “Economy #1” is dependent on that of Wall Street. His major campaign contributors and “wealth creators” in the FIRE sector – Economy #2, wrapped around the “real” Economy #1.<br /><br />Economy #2 is the “balance sheet” economy of property and debt. The wealthiest 10 per cent lend out their savings to become debts owed by the bottom 90 per cent. A rising share of gains are made in extractive ways, by charging rent and interest, by financial speculation (“capital gains”), and by shifting taxes off itself onto the “real” Economy #1.<br /><br />John Edwards talked about “the two economies,” but never explained what he meant operationally. Back in the 1960s when Michael Harrington wrote The Other America, the term meant affluent vs. poor America. For 19th-century novelists such as Charles Dickens and Benjamin Disraeli, it referred to property owners vs. renters. Today, it is finance vs. debtors. Any discussion of economic polarization betweens rich and poor must focus on the deepening indebtedness of most families, companies, real estate, cities and states to an emerging financial oligarchy.<br /><br />Financial oligarchy is antithetical to democracy. That is what the political fight in Washington is all about today. The Corporate Democrats are trying to get democratically elected to bring about oligarchy. I hope that this is a political oxymoron, but I worry about how many people buy into the idea that “wealth creation” requires debt creation. While wealth gushes upward through the Wall Street financial siphon, trickle-down economic ideology fuels a Bubble Economy via debt-leveraged asset-price inflation.<br /><br />The role of public spending – and hence budget deficits – no longer means taxing citizens to spend on improving their well-being within Economy #1. Since the 2008 financial meltdown the enormous rise in national debt has resulted from the reimbursing of Wall Street for its bad gambles on derivatives, collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps that had little to do with the “real” economy. They could have been wiped out without bringing down the economy. That was an idle threat. A.I.G.’s swap insurance department could have collapsed (it was largely in London anyway) while keeping its normal insurance activities unscathed. But the government paid off the financial sector’s bad speculative debts by taking them onto the public balance sheet.<br /><br />The economy is best viewed as the FIRE sector wrapped around the production and consumption core, extracting financial and rent charges that are not technologically or economically necessary costs. <br /><br />Say’s Law of markets, taught to every economics student, states that workers and their employers use their wages and profits to buy what they produce (consumer goods and capital goods). Profits are earned by employing labor to produce goods and services to sell at a markup. (M – C – M’ to the initiated.)<br /><br />The financial and property sector is wrapped around this core, siphoning off revenue from this circular flow. This FIRE sector is extractive. Its revenue takes the form of what classical economists called “economic rent,” a broad category that includes interest, monopoly super-profits (price gouging) and land rent, as well as “capital” gains. (These are mainly land-price gains and stock-market gains, not gains from industrial capital as such.) Economic rent and capital gains are income without a corresponding necessary cost of production (M – M’ to the initiated). <br /><br />Banks have lent increasingly to buy up these rentier rights to extract interest, and less and less to promote industrial capital formation. Wealth creation” FIRE-style consists most easily of privatizing the public domain and erecting tollbooths to charge access fees for basic necessities such as health insurance, land sites, home ownership, the communication spectrum (cable and phone rights), patent medicine, water and electricity, and other public utilities, including the use of convenient money (credit cards), or the credit needed to get by. This kind of wealth is not what Adam Smith described in The Wealth of Nations. It is a form of overhead, not a means of production. The revenue it extracts is a zero-sum economic activity, meaning that one party’s gain (that of Wall Street usually) is another’s loss.<br /><br /><strong>Debt deflation resulting from a distorted “financialized” economy</strong><br /><br />The problem that Obama faces is one that he cannot voice politically without offending his political constituency. The Bubble Economy has left families, companies, real estate and government so heavily indebted that they must use current income to pay banks and bondholders. The U.S. economy is in a debt deflation. The debt service they pay is not available for spending on goods and services. This is why sales are falling, shops are closing down and employment continues to be cut back.<br /><br />Banks evidently do not believe that the debt problem can be solved. That is why they have taken the $13 trillion in bailout money and run – paying it out in bonuses, or buying other banks and foreign affiliates. They see the domestic economy as being all loaned up. The game is over. Why would they make yet more loans against real estate already in negative equity, with mortgage debt in excess of the market price that can be recovered? Banks are not writing more “equity lines of credit” against homes or making second mortgages in today’s market, so consumers cannot use rising mortgage debt to fuel their spending.<br /><br />Banks also are cutting back their credit card limits. They are “earning their way out of debt,” making up for the bad gambles they have taken with depositor funds, by raising interest rates, penalties and fees, by borrowing low-interest credit from the Federal Reserve and investing it abroad – preferably in currencies rising against the dollar. This is what Japan did in the “carry trade.” It kept the yen’s exchange rate down, and it is lowering the dollar’s exchange rate today. This threatens to raise prices for imports, on which domestic consumer prices are based. So easy credit for Wall Street means a cost squeeze for consumers.<br /><br />The President needs a better set of advisors. But Wall Street has obtained veto power over just who they should be. Control over the President’s ear time has been part of the financial sector’s takeover of government. Wall Street has threatened that the stock market will plunge if oligarch-friendly Fed Chairman Bernanke is not reappointed. Obama insists on keeping him on board, in the belief that what’s good for Wall Street is good for the economy at large.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAH7abHaKl-MORw89GdXjy5tyv1IPJakNTK73mB1RSe0C17PIdZ4LPcvX3v3nc3wKjleZbgAZCTDPH0R3x3fEnoZ7vmEsOrc1ry6ZCk83CWpVYkKNS3RzbSRWhDsOlm2V__cVEFHRZ5kc/s1600-h/bernanke.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 375px; height: 375px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAH7abHaKl-MORw89GdXjy5tyv1IPJakNTK73mB1RSe0C17PIdZ4LPcvX3v3nc3wKjleZbgAZCTDPH0R3x3fEnoZ7vmEsOrc1ry6ZCk83CWpVYkKNS3RzbSRWhDsOlm2V__cVEFHRZ5kc/s400/bernanke.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5437150306475595314" /></a><br /><em>Ben Bernanke, Gobernador de la Reserva Federal</em><br /><br />But what’s good for the banks is a larger market for their credit – more debt for the families and companies that are their customers, higher fees and penalties, no truth-in-lending laws, harsher bankruptcy terms, and further deregulation and bailouts. <br /><br />This is the program that Bernanke has advised Washington to follow. Wall Street hopes that he will be kept on board. Bernanke’s advice has helped bolster that of Tim Geithner at Treasury and Larry Summers as chief advisor to convince Pres. Obama that “recovery” requires more credit.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqiikgLsLccy9ZzcsHxN9H4AR4VDbZgiqlPRIiXFT_JyWEEN2I5B_YVLve9xIBY_zncJVYh1hiNiYa3hliHOXywtjoX2qVtG6Bb0WrUN2x_5rZoj3pTTqESBfmX2DRUegkay3CCbQg0ew/s1600-h/geithner.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 365px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqiikgLsLccy9ZzcsHxN9H4AR4VDbZgiqlPRIiXFT_JyWEEN2I5B_YVLve9xIBY_zncJVYh1hiNiYa3hliHOXywtjoX2qVtG6Bb0WrUN2x_5rZoj3pTTqESBfmX2DRUegkay3CCbQg0ew/s400/geithner.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5437150498684213730" /></a><br /><em>Timothy Geithner, Secretario del Tesoro</em><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMM5iMMphiCkYVNMkVApc_GA-qJlrFyLvZdxUBc1m4MDGDYN3DCHlwXI7gaAQFPz9XILMjrYhj60YNLTZTssY88Cno7ZxzGQaFVaJxpw0NNhwpwSnKQnElfhwJOzaufxbwzgilR7v6nqg/s1600-h/summers.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 329px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMM5iMMphiCkYVNMkVApc_GA-qJlrFyLvZdxUBc1m4MDGDYN3DCHlwXI7gaAQFPz9XILMjrYhj60YNLTZTssY88Cno7ZxzGQaFVaJxpw0NNhwpwSnKQnElfhwJOzaufxbwzgilR7v6nqg/s400/summers.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5437150640530229922" /></a><br /><em>Larry Summers, Director del Consejo Nacional de Economía</em><br /><br />Going down this road will make the debt overhead heavier, raising the cost of living and doing business. So we must beware of the President using the term “recovery” in his State of the Union speech to mean a recovery of debt and giving more money to Wall Street Jobs cannot revive without consumers having more to spend. And consumer demand (a hateful, jargon word, because only Wall Street and the Pentagon’s military-industrial complex really make demands) cannot be revived without reducing the debt burden. Bankers are refusing to write down mortgages and other debts to reflect the ability to pay. That act of economic realism would mean taking a loss on their bad debts. So they have asked the government to lend new buyers enough credit to re-inflate housing prices. This is the aim of the housing subsidy to new homebuyers. It leaves more revenue to be capitalized into higher mortgage loans to support prices for real estate fallen into negative equity.<br /><br />The pretense is that this is subsidizing the middle class, but homebuyers are only the intermediaries for government credit (debt to be paid off by taxpayers) to mortgage bankers. Nearly 90 per cent of new home mortgages are being funded or guaranteed by the FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – all providing a concealed subsidy to Wall Street.<br /><br />Obama’s most dangerous belief is in the myth that the economy needs the financial sector to lead its recovery by providing credit. Every economy needs a means of payment, which is why Wall Street has been able to threaten to wreck the economy if the government does not give in to its demands. But the monetary function should not be confused with predatory lending and casino gambling, not to mention Wall Street’s use of bailout funds on lobbying efforts to spread its gospel.<br /><br /><strong>Deficit reduction</strong><br /><br />It seems absurd for politicians to worry that running a deficit from health care or Social Security can cause serious economic problems, after having given away $13 trillion to Wall Street and a blank check to the Pentagon. The “stimulus package” was only about 5 per cent of this amount. But Obama has announced that he intends on Tuesday to close the barn door by proposing a bipartisan Senate Budget Commission to recommend how to limit future deficits – now that Congress is unwilling to give away any more money to Wall Street. <br /><br />Republican approval would set the stage for Wednesday’s State of the Union message promising to press for “fiscal responsibility,” as if a lower deficit will help recovery. I suspect that Republicans will have little interest in joining. They see the aim as being to co-opt their criticism of Democratic spending plans. But in view of the rising and well-subsidized efforts of Harold Ford and his fellow Corporate Democrats, the actual “bipartisan” aim seems to be to provide political cover for cutting spending on labor and on social services. Obama already has sent up trial balloons about needing to address the Social Security and Medicare deficits, as if they should not be financed out of the general budget by taxpayers including the higher brackets (presently exempted from FICA paycheck withholding).<br /><br />Traditionally, running deficits is supposed to help pull economies out of recession. But today, spending money on public services is deemed “bad,” because it may be “inflationary” – that is, threatening to raise wages. Talk of cutting deficits thus is class-war talk – on behalf of the FIRE sector.<br /><br />The economy needs deficit spending to avoid unemployment and poverty, to increase social spending to deal with the present economic shrinkage, and to maintain their capital infrastructure. The federal government also needs to increase revenue sharing with states forced to slash their budgets in response to falling tax revenue and rising unemployment insurance.<br /><br />But the deficits that the Bush-Obama administration have run are nothing like the familiar old Keynesian-style deficits to help the economy recover. Running up public debt to pay Wall Street in the hope that much of this credit will be lent out to inflate asset prices is deemed good. This belief will form the context for Wednesday’s State of the Union speech. So we are brought back to the idea of economic recovery and just what is to be recovered.<br /><br />Financial lobbyists are hoping to get the government to fill the gap in domestic demand below full-employment levels by providing bank credit. When governments spend money to help increase economic activity, this does not help the banks sell more interest bearing debt. Wall Street’s golden age occurred under Bill Clinton, whose budget surplus was more than offset by an explosion of commercial bank lending.<br /><br />The pro-financial mass media reiterate that deficits are inflationary and bankrupt economies. The reality is that Keynesian-style deficits raise wage levels relative to the price of property (the cost of obtaining housing, and of buying stocks and bonds to yield a retirement income). The aim of running a “Wall Street deficit” is just the reverse: It is to re-inflate property prices relative to wages. <br /><br />A generation of financial “ideological engineering” has told people to welcome asset-price inflation (the Bubble Economy). People became accustomed to imagine that they were getting richer when the price of their homes rose. The problem is that real estate is worth what banks will lend – and mortgage loans are a form of debt, which needs to be repaid. <br /><br /><em>Michael Hudson is a former Wall Street economist. A Distinguished Research Professor at University of Missouri, Kansas City (UMKC), he is the author of many books, including Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (new ed., Pluto Press, 2002) and Trade, Development and Foreign Debt: A History of Theories of Polarization v. Convergence in the World Economy. He can be reached via his website, mh@michael-hudson.com </em><br /><br /><em>En: http://www.counterpunch.com/hudson01262010.html</em>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-77587713661181255752009-11-17T23:14:00.003-06:002009-11-17T23:19:22.197-06:00¡¡49 millones de desnutridos en Estados Unidos!! ... al tiempo empresas de comida rápida reportan ganancias récord<span style="font-style:italic;">La mitad de los menores de edad dependerán alguna vez de la asistencia federal para comer</span><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">En 2008 unos 49 millones de estadunidenses no tuvieron acceso a alimentos suficientes: informe</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Es dos veces más probable que comunidades negras e hispanas reporten hambre en sus hogares</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">por David Brooks<br />Corresponsal</span><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Periódico La Jornada<br />Martes 17 de noviembre de 2009, p. 20</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-n6bVdiEoSBw2LfYH30F_HfTJIaq3gI3-op83R84r8rK8-a5ihDjTQJHnJCBWP2Vbz79vSLoQMkr7uxmhzCRJI8UeVIKI8nIqNR1T03PNzmfpsfaAgdY0oUQfwbMjXztJUQOlRC8-d84/s1600/11-20-End-of-Hunger-in-US.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 315px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-n6bVdiEoSBw2LfYH30F_HfTJIaq3gI3-op83R84r8rK8-a5ihDjTQJHnJCBWP2Vbz79vSLoQMkr7uxmhzCRJI8UeVIKI8nIqNR1T03PNzmfpsfaAgdY0oUQfwbMjXztJUQOlRC8-d84/s400/11-20-End-of-Hunger-in-US.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5405308824611276322" /></a><br /><br />Nueva York, 16 de noviembre. Más estadunidenses padecen hambre hoy día que en cualquier momento desde que se empezaron a llevar estadísticas de manera oficial, según un informe del gobierno de Estados Unidos difundido hoy.<br /><br />Por otro lado, la mitad de los menores de edad estadunidenses tendrán en algún momento que depender de asistencia federal para comer antes de llegar a adultos.<br /><br />Al inaugurarse este lunes en Roma la Cumbre Mundial sobre la Seguridad Alimentaria, el hambre en el país más rico del mundo no es parte del programa, ya que casi todo está enfocado en la asistencia de los países avanzados a los más pobres. Por supuesto, el hambre aquí se manifiesta de manera mucho menos severa que en los países pobres, y se llama más bien "inseguridad alimentaria", pero el hecho de que hay niños que no tienen suficiente que comer dentro del país más rico revela algo sobre por qué hay hambre en el planeta.<br /><br />El número de estadunidenses que padecieron lo que se llama técnicamente "inseguridad alimentaria", o sea, que no tuvieron acceso seguro a suficientes alimentos en todo momento durante el año, se disparó a 49 millones en 2008, la cifra más grande desde 1995, cuando el gobierno empezó a llevar registros anuales, según un informe anual del Departamento de Agricultura de Estados Unidos.<br /><br />El informe reveló que 14.6 por ciento de los hogares estadunidenses –17 millones– sufrieron de "inseguridad alimentaria" durante algún momento en 2008. Eso es un incremento de 3.5 por ciento, o 4 millones de hogares, comparado con 2007. Además, un tercio de estos hogares –6.7 millones– sufrían un nivel "muy bajo de seguridad alimentaria".<br /><br />Según el informe, unos 17 millones de niños vivían en hogares donde a veces no había suficiente alimento, un incremento de casi 5 millones con relación al año anterior, y un número que representa más de uno de cada cinco menores de edad. A la vez, el número de niños que a veces padecían hambre aumentó en un año en casi 400 mil para llegar a un total de un millón 100 mil en 2008.<br /><br />De hecho, en otra investigación elaborada por los sociólogos Mark Rank y Thomas Hirschl y publicada en la revista de medicina pediátrica Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine a principios de mes, se reveló que casi la mita de todos los niños estadunidenses –y 90 por ciento de los afroestadunidenses– dependerían del principal programa de asistencia alimentaria del gobierno federal (food stamps) en algún momento de su niñez. Los investigadores alertaron que estas cifras provienen de una evaluación de 30 años de datos oficiales, pero que la recesión económica actual podría incrementarlas.<br /><br />De acuerdo con cifras oficiales, aproximadamente 28.4 millones de estadunidenses dependían del programa federal de food stamps para alimentarse en un mes promedio durante 2008.<br /><br />El informe del Departamento de Agricultura revela también que más de una de cada tres madres solteras reportaron dificultades para obtener suficiente alimento, y más de una de cada siete informaron que alguien en su hogar padecía hambre. Además, el reporte detectó que es dos veces más probable que los afroestadunidenses y los hispanos reporten que se carece de alimentos en sus hogares.<br /><br />El informe del Departamento de Agricultura se puede consultar en: www.ers.usda.gov/features/householdfoodsecurity/<br /><br />El presidente Barack Obama prometió en su campaña electoral que se dedicaría a erradicar el hambre entre los niños en este país para 2015, objetivo que ningún otro presidente se había atrevido a declarar. Pero con la actual crisis económica, las cosas podrían más bien empeorar durante su cuatrienio en la Casa Blanca.<br /><br />La principal organización de asistencia caritativa alimentaria en Estados Unidos, Feeding America, la cual provee de alimentos a más de 25 millones de estadunidenses cada año, afirmó este lunes que los nuevos datos oficiales confirman sus propias investigaciones, que registraron un "incremento dramático en solicitudes de asistencia alimentaría de emergencia" por todo el país. Los depósitos de alimento manejados por la organización registraron un incremento de casi 30 por ciento este año. "Es trágico que tanta gente en este país de abundancia no tenga acceso a suficientes montos de alimento nutritivo", declaró hoy Vicki Escarra, presidenta de Feeding America, al agregar que las cifras oficiales actuales se refieren a 2008 y que desde entonces la situación económica ha empeorado.<br /><br />Mientras tanto, en Roma, la FAO inauguró la cumbre mundial sobre la seguridad alimentaria, donde se repitió que el hambre afecta a uno de cada seis seres humanos, o sea, a mil millones. De seguro no muchos de los asistentes pensaban que entre los afectados por esta crisis se encuentran millones de estadunidenses.<br /><br />A la vez, el sector empresarial de "servicios de alimento" (el cual comprende la comida rápida) fue el número uno entre 51 ramas industriales que incrementó sus ganancias durante 2008, según las listas anuales de las principales empresas de la revista Fortune, con un impresionante repunte de 43 por ciento. El sector de "producción de alimentos" (el cual incluye las principales agroindustrias) fue el número 9 de las 52 ramas en el incremento de sus ingresos en 2008.fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-363241187187049142009-11-17T22:58:00.002-06:002009-11-17T23:01:59.186-06:00¿Victoria del movimiento magisterial guerrerense?<span style="font-style:italic;">Piden al gobierno estatal cumplir acuerdos pactados en congreso</span><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Maestros de Guerrero exigen que renuncie el titular de Educación<br /><br />por Misael Habana de los Santos<br />Corresponsal</span><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Periódico La Jornada<br />Martes 17 de noviembre de 2009, p. 27</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-qQgwsGn3p50nu-XrTWHHasX-A3ihDLy04s9ifTIx6n0UjQX6I4NbtUVYxQNHT5VoXXAe-sS49Jp17Tgp8QPfcPkCUg4eyR-hVtwU8_rUxq87Jb3RW0o-4oyIw71Ub1OiIJoOQOPLmEU/s1600/protesta+magisterial,+acapulco.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-qQgwsGn3p50nu-XrTWHHasX-A3ihDLy04s9ifTIx6n0UjQX6I4NbtUVYxQNHT5VoXXAe-sS49Jp17Tgp8QPfcPkCUg4eyR-hVtwU8_rUxq87Jb3RW0o-4oyIw71Ub1OiIJoOQOPLmEU/s400/protesta+magisterial,+acapulco.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5405304048530980322" /></a><br /><br />Acapulco, Gro., 16 de noviembre. Profesores afiliados a la Coordinadora Estatal de Trabajadores de la Educación en Guerrero (CETEG) se plantaron la mañana de este lunes en un carril de la avenida Costera Miguel Alemán, frente al club de golf de Acapulco.<br /><br />Una comisión de mentores provenientes de las ocho regiones de la entidad, con aval de diputados locales, se reunieron en un hotel y presentaron a la base una minuta de 15 puntos que se discutió hasta casi las 20 horas.<br /><br />La CETEG advirtió que, independientemente de los logros de su movilización, insistirá en que renuncie el titular de la Secretaría de Educación en Guerrero (SEG), José Luis González de la Vega, "porque no le interesan los problemas educativos de Guerrero".<br /><br />Por la mañana, unos 5 mil profesores y alumnos de la Escuela Normal de Ayotzinapa marcharon desde la SEG, en el puerto, y se plantaron frente a las oficinas del Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales de los Trabajadores del Estado a las 11 de la mañana, para exigir el cumplimiento de la minuta firmada en noviembre de 2007, después de que la CETEG bloqueó durante 15 días la principal avenida de Acapulco.<br /><br />En ese documento, la administración que encabeza el gobernador Zeferino Torreblanca Galindo se comprometió a efectuar el Congreso Estatal de Educación, Cultura y Deporte, realizado en junio de 2008 en Acapulco.<br /><br />En ese acto se determinó plantear una alternativa a la Alianza por la Calidad de la Educación, crear la Subsecretaría de Educación Indígena y el Instituto Pedagógico de Investigación y Evaluación Educativa, así como recategorizar a profesores indígenas y eliminar exámenes estandarizados.<br />Foto<br />Maestros de todas las regiones de Guerrero afiliados a la CETEG marcharon ayer por la costera Miguel Alemán, en Acapulco, para demandar al gobierno estatal que cumpla acuerdos relacionados con la Alianza por la Calidad en la EducaciónFoto Pedro Pardo<br /><br />La minuta elaborada el lunes propone 15 puntos, entre ellos dar continuidad a los acuerdos del Congreso Estatal de Educación, 14 millones de pesos para ofrecer préstamos por conducto del plan de previsión social, y basificación de profesores de nivel escolar y de educación indígena en la Montaña de Guerrero. Asimismo, se pide revisar el programa magisterial de jubilaciones y una reunión con autoridades judiciales para analizar las órdenes de aprehensión contra miembros de la CETEG.<br /><br />Hasta las ocho de la noche, maestros de toda la entidad analizaban la propuesta acordada en la reunión con el subsecretario de educación básica del estado, Luis Alberto Sánchez, y el asesor técnico Jorge Sotomayor Landeta, a la que acudieron como garantes el diputado estatal perredista Napoleón Astudillo –principal empresario de la educación privada en Guerrero– y el priísta Francisco Torres Miranda.<br /><br />El fin de semana, en el Congreso local, trabajaron en las mesas de trabajo los diputados locales Héctor Vicario Castrejón, del Partido Revolucionario Institucional, y Florentino Cruz Ramírez, del Partido de la Revolución Democrática.<br /><br />El líder y vocero de la CETEG, Jorge García Hernández, resaltó los logros de la protesta. Dijo que "existe un magisterio movilizado, que está convencido de que sólo a través de la movilización y la negociación podemos arrancarle al gobierno lo que nos corresponde".fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-85691045662419071342009-11-17T16:02:00.002-06:002009-11-17T16:03:28.272-06:00sin comentarios...<strong>Paquetazo, presupuesto y campañas...</strong><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo87cfHefJ8Z8EG2pHK3GtjJJljpC1Zk1qEDKaa5Joh04PofTmScOGIzgb162ymVmAVrjMeXcJ4EPy_bPNQ5xd6Frtye4GVCQoeaaFSEUAC5LcalN_Zu1uksMvdID4ZA2SFDXRXGNHXhU/s1600/paquetazo,+presupuesto+y+campa%C3%B1as,+fisgon.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 250px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo87cfHefJ8Z8EG2pHK3GtjJJljpC1Zk1qEDKaa5Joh04PofTmScOGIzgb162ymVmAVrjMeXcJ4EPy_bPNQ5xd6Frtye4GVCQoeaaFSEUAC5LcalN_Zu1uksMvdID4ZA2SFDXRXGNHXhU/s400/paquetazo,+presupuesto+y+campa%C3%B1as,+fisgon.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5405196481794923298" /></a><br /><br /><strong>por el Fisgón</strong>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-29877696150564365802009-11-17T15:53:00.002-06:002009-11-17T15:55:45.782-06:00SME: después del paro cívico nacional<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJn0cYG3nCkYkXZyWWlB_kDKvpMRGon3az2jrk6UWTOfJCBzgEq5fpApUgKzQnHfwO5wLcy5Y2odI6s4PMOMBPzLqHY6T1thjehqeOfEaSBBtCnOzs8mzPqldrZjOnh3F_A_UOTQfxT6U/s1600/Marcha_SME_3.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 267px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJn0cYG3nCkYkXZyWWlB_kDKvpMRGon3az2jrk6UWTOfJCBzgEq5fpApUgKzQnHfwO5wLcy5Y2odI6s4PMOMBPzLqHY6T1thjehqeOfEaSBBtCnOzs8mzPqldrZjOnh3F_A_UOTQfxT6U/s400/Marcha_SME_3.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5405194531237985266" /></a><br /><br /><strong>por Luis Hernández Navarro</strong><br />Terminó el plazo que el gobierno federal dio para liquidar a los trabajadores de Luz y Fuerza del Centro (LFC) ofreciendo un bono extra. Aunque sigue la disputa por las cifras, los resultados no son buenos para la administración de Felipe Calderón: los empleados que aceptaron indemnizarse son poco más de la mitad de la plantilla. Apenas unos cuantos seguidores más de los que votaron por la planilla del disidente Alejandro Muñoz en los pasados comicios sindicales.<br /><br />El gobierno necesitaba que cerca de 90 por ciento de los electricistas dieran por terminada la relación laboral. No lo consiguió. No obstante las deudas y necesidades económicas de los trabajadores, cerca de la mitad siguen resistiendo. Los electricistas sortearon una feroz campaña en su contra en medios y se mantienen en pie de lucha. A pesar de que la administración de Calderón requisó los fondos sindicales y el gremio no contaba con un fondo de huelga para enfrentar un conflicto de esta magnitud, la movilización continúa. El conflicto subsiste.<br /><br />El servicio eléctrico no ha podido ser regularizado. Cortes de energía y apagones son hoy continuos y de mayor duración que en el pasado. Con frecuencia, los afectados se han visto obligados a ocupar la vía pública para que se restablezca el servicio. Tan constantes y extendidas son las fallas que ya ni se reportan en la prensa. Se han convertido en parte de la vida cotidiana en las zonas que abastecía LFC.<br /><br />La Comisión Federal de Electricidad no ha podido cobrar el servicio eléctrico, pues no cuenta con personal para la toma de lecturas de los medidores. Ahora, en una acción a toda luces ilegal, pretende que los usuarios paguen la luz con base en estimados de consumos anteriores. Muy probablemente se levantará una ola de inconformidad entre los usuarios.<br /><br />En el terreno jurídico, el gobierno federal sufrió un sonoro descalabro. El pasado 6 de noviembre, la juez Guillermina Coutiño Mata concedió la suspensión definitiva al Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas (SME) para que la Junta Federal de Conciliación y Arbitraje se abstenga de resolver sobre la terminación de la relación colectiva de trabajo entre LFC y el sindicato. Eso significa que, desde el punto de vista legal, sindicato y contrato colectivo de trabajo siguen existiendo. Alrededor del 25 de noviembre se espera que se emita la sentencia definitiva.<br /><br />A su vez, la administración de Calderón tuvo un respiro por la negativa de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación a aceptar una demanda de controversia constitucional interpuesta por la Asamblea Legislativa del Distrito Federal. Falta aún ver qué suerte corre la demanda promovida por el Congreso de Hidalgo y si la Cámara de Diputados presenta la suya. El punto se ha vuelto un asunto controvertido dentro de la bancada del Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) que ve en ello el terreno de una fructífera negociación con el gobierno. Los diputados de la Confederación Nacional Campesina apoyan que se promueva la demanda.<br />El pasado 11 de noviembre se efectuó un paro cívico nacional en apoyo de los electricistas. La acción fue una contundente demostración de fuerza y de capacidad de convocatoria, una de las más resonantes en muchos años. El funcionamiento de la ciudad de México se desquició, el tránsito vehicular a través de las principales carreteras que conectan a la capital con el resto del país se estranguló por momentos y los medios de comunicación debieron reportar las acciones de protesta.<br /><br />Curiosamente, como si respondiera a un guión dictado, la prensa destacó tres hechos: que en la protesta habían participado menos personas que en la marcha del 15 de octubre, que los trabajadores habían radicalizado sus acciones y que la dirigencia del SME había enarbolado un estandarte de la Virgen de Guadalupe. Cómo midieron el número de asistentes a una jornada de lucha que duró más de 12 horas y que abarcó 22 estados de la República es un misterio.<br /><br />La realidad fue mucho más compleja y rica. En estados como Michoacán y Oaxaca, por ejemplo, el magisterio suspendió clases en prácticamente todas las escuelas. En muchos de los municipios donde la generación eléctrica es la principal actividad económica, las movilizaciones paralizaron las actividades económicas. En la ciudad de México se efectuaron acciones simultáneas (desde asambleas hasta marchas) en multitud de colonias. Las universidades públicas del Distrito Federal no funcionaron; la participación estudiantil fue notable. Muchos de quienes protestaron no asistieron a la manifestación que fue al Zócalo porque ya lo habían hecho en sus centros habitacionales o de trabajo.<br /><br />El paro cívico nacional no articuló el descontento existente entre los no organizados; no provocó una explosión social. ¿Alguien supuso seriamente que algo así sucedería el 11 de noviembre? Participó, sí, la mayoría de los sectores populares organizados del centro y parte del sur del país en los que las izquierdas influyen. A pesar de que muchas de las fuerzas involucradas enarbolaron sus propias demandas (por ejemplo, los telefonistas) fue, en lo esencial, una movilización de apoyo a los electricistas.<br /><br />A cinco semanas de la declaración de guerra del gobierno federal contra el SME, la administración de Felipe Calderón no ha podido triunfar. Para avanzar en el terreno jurídico deberá hacer concesiones significativas al PRI en otros ámbitos. Un conflicto que creyó poder resolver en menos de un mes de plazo, y que necesitaba ganar con rapidez, persiste en la escena política nacional y amenaza con extenderse, radicalizarse y durar todavía más.fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-82484361276032367442009-11-09T22:27:00.002-06:002009-11-09T22:31:16.614-06:00Biografía de Raúl Prebisch<span style="font-style:italic;">November 5, 2009<br />The Story of Raul Prebisch, Implacable Foe for First World Power</span><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The Great Heretic</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">By VIJAY PRASHAD</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj16mgcaj3L_6HaIBFqYKugMTlkcqXIpyu4NtZy_sKFYlLD3ejf7_8GVyXAGUWCJkijidRrqeRlXUo-jplxVwaDd_glRTO9JXw2vlejCdKC4Lbnt58BigFfUuI42PcKksM21id3VFEIfrE/s1600-h/ra%C3%BAl+prebisch.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 288px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj16mgcaj3L_6HaIBFqYKugMTlkcqXIpyu4NtZy_sKFYlLD3ejf7_8GVyXAGUWCJkijidRrqeRlXUo-jplxVwaDd_glRTO9JXw2vlejCdKC4Lbnt58BigFfUuI42PcKksM21id3VFEIfrE/s400/ra%C3%BAl+prebisch.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5402327676562709650" /></a><br /><br />Raul Prebisch was not born in Buenos Aires. His father was a German immigrant who married into a declasse branch of a prominent Argentine family. Advantages did not come to him by the accident of birth. He had to make his own career, pushing against insuperable odds in a society given over to the bloodlines of the haute bourgeoisie. Coming to the capital from provincial Tucuman, Prebisch studied hard, avoiding all society for the library. He caught the eye of liberal intellectuals who hailed from among the privileged but were in search of talent among those who had few connections. They took him up and pushed him into their circles.<br /><br />Prebisch’s own difficult ascent up the ladder of Argentine society taught this young man an important lesson: that his country’s backwardness could be traced to the insularity of its elite. He had other ideas for his country, and himself. Influenced by the Italian intellectual Vilfredo Pareto, Prebisch withdrew from the partisan disputes that wracked inter-war Argentina and hoped instead for the emergence of a technocratic, modernizing elite to take charge of things.<br /><br />Prebisch was only 21 when he came to this view. It would not change for his entire career, taking him from being the pioneer banker of his native land to be the most revered United Nations’ economist as the first head of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). As he put it to his godson in 1934, “I am not a politician, Marucho. I am a technocrat and believe in technocracy, and technicians are politically neutral.” The remarkable thing is that Prebisch never had any advanced degrees. He liked to be called “Dr Prebisch”, but his enemies taunted him with lesser titles (“Prebisch the public accountant”). He was not born into privilege, and without the traditional authority of descent or degrees he rose to Olympian heights.<br /><br />Finally, two decades after his death, Edgar Dosman has given us a biography worthy of this man, the “great heretic” of international political economy. Prebisch went to Buenos Aires in 1914. He burrowed in his lodgings, taking his books with him everywhere, reading everything he could lay his hands on. He enrolled in the Faculty of Economic Sciences, but nothing there impressed him. The scholarship was decidedly pro-British, which is to say it had taken the logic of David Ricardo’s theory of comparative advantage as dogma. Argentina, they felt, must remain a producer of agricultural goods and meat products because it is this that the country excels in producing. Sold to England, the unprocessed beef in particular brought Argentina its foreign exchange. England, in turn, sold Argentina manufactured goods. There was a deadened refusal to engage with reality and, so, to take things as they were.<br /><br />Prebisch found this incomprehensible. The Great War, which took England’s market off-line, forced Argentina to develop some industry. One result of this industrialization was that meat began to be processed in Argentina, and this itself quickly made up 17 per cent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). Prebisch sat in the seminar run by Alejandro Bunge, who used these facts to lodge a sustained critique of Ricardo’s theory. He gave Prebisch the tools to think about alternatives to laissez faire or at least to contemplate the conundrum of places like Argentina, stuck producing raw materials and buying finished products.<br /><br />Prebisch took Bunje’s insights and his own thirst for reality to his new job at the Argentine Rural Society, a lobby of the largest cattle ranchers who were basically Argentina’s oligarchy. The Argentine cattle barons wanted to know whether the British and United States meat-packers were manipulating them. This gave Prebisch the perfect opportunity to study the data on trade and to open him up to a lifelong fascination with good statistical data as the basis for analysis and policy. For the next several years, Prebisch would work on the problem of the beef trade, first for the cattle lobby and after they fired him, for the government. He displayed his independence when he refused to provide the ranchers the conclusion they wanted, but even they remained impressed with his research. It was this commitment to research and to the truth that kept Prebisch in the halls of power for a decade after he began to rub the oligarchy the wrong way.<br /><br />Taken into Argentina’s main bank to run its research wing, Prebisch brought together the best talent around. They had to sort out Argentina’s statistics, as well as produce the Revista Económica (Economic Journal). Their active work coincided with the Great Depression so that Prebisch and his team had to conceptualize the problems of the Argentine economy at a time of great planetary financial turbulence. Prebisch wrote explanatory essays in the journal, providing his readers with a map to navigate the crisis. The government saw his skills and brought him into the Finance Ministry. Here Prebisch proposed orthodox means to shield Argentina from the worst of the problems, although when Britain abandoned the gold standard in 1931, Prebisch convinced his government to introduce exchange controls and insulate Argentina from the wave of competitive devaluations that struck many countries.<br /><br />None of his good work protected Prebisch. His fate rested with the oligarchy and the military, and when it suited them he went into the political wilderness. Luckily for Prebisch, one of his exiles was in Geneva, where he was sent to help prepare the League of Nations. The advantage of this visit was that Prebisch not only got to interact with other innovators but he also found common company among a group of Swedish economists (such as Charles Rist and Gustav Cassel) who had been worried about the “terms of trade”. The prices of industrial and agricultural goods had widened over the years, they had found, with the “chief sufferers” being the agricultural-raw material producing countries. This insight would remain with Prebisch for his entire career, indeed becoming the foundation for the Prebisch-Singer thesis for which he is best known.<br /><br />It was also in Geneva that Prebisch came to understand, as Dosman puts it, that “the currency of international trade was power, and the ‘market’ concealed the power relationships that stratified the global system into a core of dominant subjects with a band of heterogeneous peripheral objects.” From 1921, Prebisch began to use the metaphor of core and periphery to describe the geography of international trade, with the core being Europe and the U.S. and the periphery being the rest of the planet (what Marx called the “peasant nations”).<br /><br />A brief stay in London, negotiating with the English over a new trade treaty, showed Prebisch real power: Montagu Norman, the Governor of the Bank of England, who answered neither to the political parties nor to the monarch. Prebisch wanted such a post in Argentina, one that would allow him to put his insights over monetary policy and international trade to work without the vacillation of electoral politics. He did get a sinecure at the Central Bank of Argentina after his plan (the Economy Recovery Plan of 1933) allowed his country to tread a middle ground between protectionism and “free trade”. As Dosman puts it, “Prebisch certainly cared less about textbooks than evolving a new balance between industry and agriculture in the uncharted waters of the Great Depression.”<br /><br />From his perch as the Director of the Central Bank, Prebisch spent the next decade developing a monetary policy for the periphery, which was largely based on pragmatism rather than on any established theory. For this he earned few friends and many enemies, notably among the permanent bureaucracy in the U.S. Prebisch’s ferocious nationalism prevented him from allowing Argentina’s economy to bend its knee before either London or Washington, and this bothered the latter so greatly that Prebisch was barred from attending the Bretton Woods conference to set up the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.<br /><br />He soldiered on, with new thinking on the merits and demerits of hacia adentro, or inward-directed growth. Enforced import substitution during the war years had resulted in the growth of an industrial sector, but this was low in productivity. Heavy industry had not taken root and the problem lay in how to move surplus capital into such productive investment. Prebisch saw a role for the Central Bank, drawing here from his reading of John Maynard Keynes. However, unrest in the political sphere threw him off. Before he could set his experiments in motion, Prebisch found himself without a job.<br /><br />Fortunately for Prebisch, he had married a remarkable companion, Adelita Moll de Prebisch. She sorted out their finances at these times of distress and produced the social conditions necessary for Prebisch to go into a period of contemplation. Dosman lays out in great detail Adelita’s domestic labour, the thankless task of refreshing Prebisch so that he could go on with his own intellectual and political work. In Adelita’s arms, Prebisch began work on his major reconstruction of Keynes’ work, to be called “Money and the Rhythms of Economic Activity”. Prebisch’s magnum opus would never be completed, but this work set the stage for him to think about the role of the business cycle in the periphery (which is different from the business cycle in the core) and to redouble his efforts on the matter of trade in international development.<br /><br />Prebisch had worked on the business cycle as early as 1921 (when he was only 20), coming to the conclusion 20 years later that “to resist subordination of the national economy to foreign movements and contingencies, we must strengthen our internal structure and achieve an autonomous functioning of our economy”. To create “inward development” (desarrollo hacia adentro), the country had to cease being a producer of low-value commodities. This of course raised the question of the terms of trade, of import substitution industrialization and of the reconfiguration of the world trade rules. All this did not preclude the matter of growth, for “one must bear in mind that the common denominator of social policy is the increase in production. Without this a stable increase in the level of income for the masses cannot be sustained.”<br /><br />Keynes, for Prebisch, was of great interest, but the Englishman did not break from the premises of neoclassical economics. This was why Keynes did not raise the question of why there was “always disequilibrium” in the periphery, why the business cycle worked in a lopsided way there. These brilliant insights appear in Prebisch’s book proposal. The book itself was not written. To compensate for it, and to make some money, Prebisch travelled across Latin America, advising central bankers and meeting with economists. This was a tonic for him, but it also kept him away from his intellectual work. Or, indeed, his lack of formal training in economics stifled him, and he fled his writing desk for these consultations in Mexico City, Bogata, Rio de Janeiro, Montevideo and elsewhere.<br /><br />In 1949, the United Nations created a series of economic commissions, one for Europe (ECE), one for Asia (ECAFE) and one for Latin America (ECLA). The search for a leader of ECLA ended at Prebisch’s door. His journeys around Latin America had alerted the leading economists both to his intellectual talent and to his nationalist instincts. He was their man. Washington was unhappy with this choice (it had earlier prevented Prebisch from getting an IMF job). It could not get its way. He prevailed. ECLA took lodgings in Santiago, Chile. Prebisch cleverly selected a staff of brilliant economists whose own political affiliations ran the gamut from Christian Conservatives to Marxists (such as the Brazilians Celso Furtado and Fernando Henrique Cardoso).<br /><br />To set ECLA’s agenda, Prebisch decided to write a synthesis of the work he had already accomplished. In three days, he wrote The Economic Development of Latin America and its Principal Problems, a text later known as the ECLA Manifesto. This essay summarised his experiences in government and his critique of Keynes. Prebisch laid out the fundamental asymmetry of international development, with the industrial countries gaining as a result of the unequal terms of trade that benefited them as against the agricultural countries. To break this cycle Prebisch recommended industrialization, with caution by central banks to avoid inflation and any structural distortions in the economy. “One of the conspicuous deficiencies of general economic theory, from the point of view of the periphery,” Prebisch wrote, “is its false sense of universality.” When Prebisch delivered this address at ECLA’s Havana conference it was a sensation. From then on, as the Brazilian newspaper O Estado do Såo Paulo put it, Prebisch was “a living symbol of Latin American industrialisation”.<br /><br />The U.S. government tried its best to undermine ECLA, cutting its funding through pressure in the U.N. and by shifting its responsibilities to the U.S.-dominated Organisation of American States. But Prebisch was undaunted. He managed to hold onto his funds and set ECLA’s course to produce a viable Economic Survey of Latin American countries (which meant to collect data on each) to train economists from across the region, and to push a set of coherent policies that he had laid out in his 1949 address. Those ideas were extended in two more central ECLA documents, Theoretical and Practical Problems of Economic Growth (1951), which traced the mechanism by which Latin America might produce its own planning model, and International Cooperation for a Latin American Development Strategy (1951), which Dosman says is the “operational counterpoint to the Havana Manifesto”.<br /><br />In this latter document, Prebisch’s team laid out a cocktail of means for Latin America’s development, including “the creation of a regional development bank; the strengthening of economic planning to avoid turbulence; stability for commodity exports; technical cooperation and training; taxation and agrarian reform; financing for development with a minimum target of one billion dollars a year in development assistance to accelerate industrialization; and the holding of the long-promised Inter-American Economic Conference in 1956”. Each individual element was not itself overly controversial, but the package was unthinkable to Washington.<br />Thomas Mann, a senior U.S. official, put Washington’s view of things plainly: “Latin Americans like a buck in their pocket and a kick in their ass. They don’t like us. Their thought processes are different. You have to be firm with them.” One can imagine the kind of disdain that greeted Prebisch’s ECLA. Everything that could be done was done to thwart it.<br /><br />When John F. Kennedy came to the White House, he recognized that the U.S. government had made a hash of its Latin America policy. Vice-President Richard Nixon’s trip to Latin America in 1958 had resulted in street riots. To revise the impression, Kennedy’s liberals went South to search for reasonable allies. They found Prebisch. He was charmed by the Kennedy moment and came to Washington to advise them as they created the Alliance for Progress (Prebisch drafted a part of the document). But, without a blink of an eye, the U.S. set into motion the attack on Cuba (at the Bay of Pigs) and it began once more to favour military dictatorships. All this bode ill for ECLA and for Prebisch. He began to look for different work.<br /><br />In 1962, Prebisch went to Cairo as U.N. Secretary-General U Thant’s representative at a Conference on the Problems of Economic Development. This conference was part of the Bandung and Non-Aligned Movement dynamic from which Prebisch had until now been absent. He was thrilled to be among the representatives from 36 non-aligned states, most of whom had ideas similar to those developed at ECLA. They saw things on the global scale, particularly the way in which the core countries had barricaded themselves into the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) since 1947, pretending that this body was international when it was in fact the representative of the core. When these countries pushed the U.N. to create the UNCTAD, Prebisch was their choice for Secretary-General. He accepted, with the mandate to make UNCTAD “a global version of ECLA in its diagnosis of structural inequality and global transformation, the need for planning and proposed remedies”.<br /><br />Prebisch was helped along by some superb people, including Sidney Dell and R. Krishnamurti, whom Dosman rightly calls “infinitely discreet” and a “master of U.N. institutional intricacies”. In 1963, as UNCTAD was being formed, Prebisch went on the assault against what he called “a conspiracy against the laws of the market” by the GATT countries. A “new order in the international economy” had to be created “so that the market functions properly not only for the big countries but the developing countries in their relations with the developed”. No shortcuts, no gimmicks, but a genuine reconstruction of the global political economy. This was an enormous agenda.<br /><br />UNCTAD’s role<br /><br />As UNCTAD laid out its agenda, it pressured the core to respond. GATT began to absorb many of UNCTAD’s positions, including that of “special and differentiated responsibilities”, a standard that enabled the periphery to demand partial treatment in negotiations (this is also the phrase that appears in the current climate change negotiations, as a way for the low carbon emitters to demand concessions for their own development agenda). Prebisch and U Thant wanted UNCTAD to operate as the principal arena for trade negotiations, but the core countries would not have that. They preferred GATT, which had already been set up to their advantage. “Nothing important can come from the South,” said Henry Kissinger in 1964, and he meant it.<br /><br />UNCTAD’s efforts led to the 1973 General Assembly call for the creation of a “new international economic order”, or NIEO, a proposal that would be countered by the core with vehemence (in 1974, the core would create the Library Group, a meeting of its foreign ministers to coordinate policy against the South; this association became the Group of 7, the G-7). Dosman does not go into the very significant role that UNCTAD played in and just after Prebisch’s tenure at its helm. For that, the interested reader might want to turn to the useful series, the United Nations Intellectual History Project, from which John and Richard Toye’s The UN and Global Political Economy: Trade, Finance and Development is a good introduction (as well, there is Karen Smith and Ian Taylor’s book on UNCTAD for the Routledge series on Global Institutions).<br /><br />UNCTAD was Prebisch’s last hurrah. It is also the perch from which he began to reconsider his ECLA work. This part of Prebisch’s life is least known. In 1957, Prebisch’s colleague Celso Furtado looked at the Mexican economy and concluded that import substitution in a semi-feudal context had led to growing inequality in the country. Its proximity to the U.S., and close interrelation of the two economies, as well as its import substitution had provided Mexico with high growth rates. However, the upper classes enjoyed the fruits of the growth and Furtado recommended a government regulatory policy to prevent this distortion. Prebisch would not allow this report to be published because it displeased the Mexican government. The censorship did not mean that the idea had not become clear, that import substitution without a commitment to equality would not solve the developmental challenges. What was needed, Prebisch wrote in his own book on Latin America (Change and Development: Latin America’s Great Task, 1971) was not simply a high growth rate, “but profound changes in the economic and social structure and in attitudes toward the development process”.<br /><br />How these changes would be brought about, Prebisch had little idea. He advocated land reforms but hastened to distance himself from the very regimes that would conduct these policies (such as his friend Salvador Allende’s short-lived government in Chile). In 1971, Prebisch told El Tiempo that he had no faith in the “masses” and indeed in politics because “the danger of social mobilisation in a capitalist society” is that “it destroys its leaders”. As a technocrat, Prebisch wanted the people to simply accept his Solomonic pronouncements. This was not to be.<br /><br />By 1976, Prebisch became a sharp critic of debt-led growth. He found commonality with the fulminations of Cuba’s Fidel Castro, who also spent these years trying to raise awareness about the toxicity of the oncoming debt crisis. But while Castro urged the countries of the periphery to go on a global debt strike, Prebisch wanted to prescribe his own kind of economic medicine. Here Prebisch’s journey resembles that of other UNCTAD-ECLA stalwarts, such as Brazil’s Fernando Henrique Cardoso and India’s Manmohan Singh. Prebisch worried about the “elephantiasis of the state”, the growth of public-sector spending to almost half of the GDP.<br /><br />“Thirty years of industrialization, accompanied by high rates of growth, have left 40 per cent of the population lagging behind. For them there has been no progress,” Prebisch wrote. “Inadequacies of state enterprises have not only contributed to leaving the masses behind but are also affecting the middle sectors of the social structure.” But he would not accept the sum total of the Washington Consensus. He did not have to govern a state. Prebisch had become a prophet. “Equitable distribution, vigorous economic growth and new institutional patterns in a genuinely participatory democracy: these are the major objectives.” This mantra remained with him until he slipped into the night in 1986.<br /><br />Dosman has written a tour de force: its title correctly points out that Dosman will give us the story not only of this remarkable man but of the equally tumultuous times that produced him and that he helped shape. As well, one should consider the intellectual legacy that Prebisch left behind as one that could profit those who want to make sense of the current financial crisis.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Vijay Prashad is the George and Martha Kellner Chair of South Asian History and Director of International Studies at Trinity College, Hartford, CT His new book is The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World, New York: The New Press, 2007. He can be reached at: vijay.prashad@trincoll.edu </span>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-17205138576097004012009-10-27T23:05:00.001-06:002009-10-27T23:07:46.749-06:00Mitos sobre la supesta legalidad tras el golpe de Estado hondureño<span style="font-style:italic;"> Counterpunch<br />October 27, 2009<br />New Reports Demolish Justifications for Ouster of Zelaya</span><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Honduran Coup Myths Dispelled<br /><br />By STEWART J. LAWRENCE</span><br /><br />Two new reports dealing with the June 28 military coup in Honduras have demolished the arguments of the current de facto government and its foreign apologists that the coup was consistent with the Honduran constitution and that most Hondurans welcomed the illegal ouster of the country’s democratically elected president, Mel Zelaya. <br /><br />In a recent commentary published on the Forbes Magazine web site, two veteran human rights lawyers, Juan Mendez and Viviana Krsticevic, take to task the authors of a recent analysis prepared for the US Congress that suggested that the Honduran constitution allowed the Honduran Congress to remove Zelaya from office. In fact, the Honduran Congress has no formal impeachment power and the vote to remove Zelaya was merely a legislative decree that was of dubious legality, the authors note. In 2003, the Honduran Supreme Court had struck down the efforts of the Honduran legislature to assert its independent authority – but according to the authors, that didn’t keep the legislature from invoking this same authority to try – wrongly - to justify legal action against Zelaya..<br /><br />The Honduran Supreme Court was also complicit in violating the Honduran Constitution, Mendez and Krsticevic note. Most notably, the Court ordered the armed forces to capture Zelaya and search the presidential residence, despite the fact that article 293 of the Constitution explicitly establishes that the national police, not the army, execute all legal decisions and resolutions, in accordance with the principle of civilian rule. There were also due process violations that occurred throughout the criminal proceedings against Zelaya. Zelaya was never read his rights, informed of the charges against him, or provided access to his lawyers while being detained, then forcibly expelled from the country.<br /><br />And then there is the matter of the expulsion itself, which as Mendez and Krsticevic note, has no grounding whatsoever in Honduran law. In theory, Zelaya should have been held for trial, or arrested and then released, pending trial. Amazingly, the Supreme Court cited the threat of a “flight risk” to justify an indefinite detention of Zelaya – as if Zelaya had any interest in leaving office, much less the country. <br /><br />The only “flight” that occurred, in fact, was the airplane trip that Zelaya took into exile courtesy of the armed forces. They rousted him at night in his pajamas and at the point of a bayonet, demanded that he leave – or else. Some “democracy.”<br /><br />The aftermath of the coup has also given rise to speculation, and charges, that whatever the legality of Zelaya’s ouster, most Hondurans were fed up with his rule, and were happy to see him go. Conservatives have noted that protests on Zelaya’s behalf have been fairly limited, while Zelaya’s supporters, and international human rights observers, have pointed to post-coup military repression, including extra-judicial killings, and other military abuses, as the primary reason for cautious popular protest. <br /><br />Now, a recent polling survey conducted by the highly respected polling firm Greenberg, Quinlan and Rosner thoroughly debunks the latest conservative propaganda. According to the poll, conducted just two weeks ago, 60% of Hondurans still oppose Zelaya’s ouster, and just 38% support it. 19% say Zelaya had performed “excellently” in office while 48% say his performance was “good” (a total of 67%).<br /><br />By contrast, by a margin of 2-1, Hondurans say they have a negative opinion of the coup plotter who supplanted Zelaya, Roberto Micheletti, the current de facto president.<br /><br />The survey also found that contrary to conservative propaganda, most Hondurans (by a 53% to 43% margin) support amending the country’s Constitution to allow the president to be re-elected – the very issue that became the pretext for Zelaya’s illegal ouster. Zelaya, of course, never actually tried to stand for re-election. He was accused of “high treason” and overthrown merely for suggesting that ordinary Hondurans be polled on the matter in a strictly non-binding referendum. <br /><br />Therefore, the pollsters at Greenberg, Rosner and Quinlan polling should probably consider themselves lucky. In the US, clients sometimes fire you when a poll brings them bad news. In Honduras, they throw you in jail, tear gas you – or worse.<br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><br />Stewart Lawrence is a recognized specialist in Latino and Latin American affairs, and author of numerous policy reports and publications. He can be reached at stewlaw2009@gmail.com</span>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-37445763992642353042009-10-26T12:23:00.001-06:002009-10-26T12:25:50.669-06:00Unificación monetaria en el bloque ALBA<em>Counterpunch: Weekend Edition<br />October 23-25, 2009</em><br /><br /><em><strong>An Interview with Economist Ethan Kaplan </em><br />Challenging the Dollar Dictatorship <br /><em>By NIKOLAS KOZLOFF </strong></em><br /><br />Last week, representatives of the Bolivarian Alternative of the Americas (known by its Spanish acronym ALBA) met in the Bolivian city of Cochabamba to discuss the future evolution of the trade bloc, designed to promote complementarity and reciprocity amongst left-leaning regimes in the region such as Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador. Since its inception in 2004, ALBA has carried out important exchanges of goods and services; for example Venezuela has exported subsidized oil to Cuba and receives Cuban medical assistance in return. However, some wonder whether ALBA is practical or can help to foster real economic development for the region’s poor. <br /><br />ALBA leaders however say it’s time to place such doubts aside. Last week in Cochabamba they declared their historic adoption of a common currency called the Unified System of Compensation of Reciprocal Payments or SUCRE in Spanish. Named after Antonio José de Sucre, a military general and hero of the wars of independence against Spain, the Sucre is to be gradually substituted for the U.S. dollar in terms of commercial exchange between ALBA member nations. <br /><br />According to the new Cochabamba agreement, ALBA countries will make deposits in their respective currencies to an ALBA bank headquartered in Caracas. The Sucre will act as a payment compensation mechanism and allow ALBA nations to reconcile accounts when they carry out commercial transactions in local currency. It’s a kind of barter exchange system: if Venezuela for example buys textiles from Bolivia and owes the Andean nation a certain quantity of money, then this will be compensated in kind with other imported goods such as asphalt. The difference in cost will be reconciled by central banks located within respective ALBA countries which handle the Sucre. Payment requests meanwhile will be processed electronically between ALBA members via an ALBA bank. <br /><br />Creation of the Sucre then will not lead to a new physical currency being issued. The Sucre will not have any intrinsic value but will have parity in relation to the U.S. dollar, the euro or Japanese yen. By early 2010, ALBA countries hope to start using the “virtual” currency, with future plans to convert it into a hard currency. Eventually, at some future yet undefined date, ALBA members hope to establish a unified regional currency which Bolivia has suggested could be named “Pacha” for the Quechua Indian word for Earth.<br /><br />Recently, I sat down with Ethan Kaplan, a visiting Professor at Columbia University’s Center for Global Thought and Department of Economics. Kaplan, a former economic advisor to the Venezuelan National Assembly, discussed the economic and political implications of the Sucre.<br /><br />NK: ALBA leaders say creating the Sucre is necessary so as to defray the regional effects of the world economic crisis. By substituting their trade in dollars with the new alternative currency, ALBA members hope to protect themselves from future financial downturns. How well do you think this will work?<br /><br />EK: There’s a lot of evidence that currency unification leads to greater trade and hence there would probably be more intra-regional trade under the Sucre. The Sucre could make ALBA nations less subject to international financial crises outside of their group, but we need to remember that these countries have a lot of crises themselves. If ALBA nations make it harder for capital to leave their currency area, then they will have less to do with the broader international economy. A lot of recessions are induced by international financial crises, so if ALBA doesn’t have much to do with that international system and ALBA countries have a stable monetary system themselves, they could avoid some degree of financial crisis. However, I doubt that the Sucre will protect ALBA. Consider: ALBA is a small area economically. ALBA members will still trade heavily with the outside world. Obviously ALBA nations and the Sucre are not like the EU and the euro. Moreover, transmission of economic crises is more based upon trade in assets than trade in goods. My guess is that having a larger currency area shouldn’t dramatically change the demand for dollar-denominated, yen-denominated, or Euro-denominated assets. Capital controls would much more effectively accomplish that.<br /><br />To be honest I’m more optimistic about the Sucre as a means of fostering economic growth and achieving better prices as opposed to protecting ALBA nations from financial crises. Consider: right now, ALBA nations have low tariffs on U.S. goods like cars which can come into their countries relatively cheaply. So, ALBA countries are not going to start their own domestic car industry. In the 1960s Brazil experimented with this somewhat and had a well functioning car industry for a while. However, they later eliminated trading protections and the industry went belly up. Since ALBA represents a decent sized group of countries which would be fostering trade amongst themselves, there would be some scope for industrial diversification and ALBA nations might produce some things that they would normally get from the United States. By adopting a new currency, ALBA nations get slightly greater leverage to slap tariffs on U.S. goods so as to protect infant industries which the left wing group of countries seeks to encourage. <br /><br />NK: There’s a very pronounced political dimension to the Sucre: Hugo Chávez has remarked that the Sucre “will help us to overthrow the dictatorship of the dollar.” Yet, ALBA nations are rather insignificant economically at the global level. What are your thoughts?<br /><br />EK: I think that’s correct --- I don’t think the adoption of the Sucre or Pacha for that matter will have much of an economic impact on the United States. It probably will have a greater economic impact on ALBA nations by fostering import substitution and industry as opposed to pursuing a course of commodity exports. Here’s another benefit of a common currency: right now a lot of countries spend a lot of money buying dollar assets because they’re afraid of a speculative attack on their currency. One solution to this is to institute capital controls which the International Monetary Fund doesn’t particularly like. A successful currency union could make ALBA nations less subject to speculation and as a result these countries would be less concerned about their exchange rate relative to the U.S. dollar. As a result, ALBA nations would benefit as they wouldn’t have to invest so much in low-yield dollar assets. Still if speculators can force the bank of England to lose almost 100 billion pounds in one day back in 1992, my guess is that the Pacha will not be immune to speculative attack.<br /><br />NK: ALBA was originally set up to counter the FTAA or Free Trade Area of the Americas, the corporately –friendly free trade scheme sponsored by Bill Clinton and George Bush. Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez on the other hand says that the adoption of the Sucre constitutes a system of “fair trade” which will distance Latin American countries from “hegemonic capitalism,” “the neo-liberal dictatorship” and the “dictatorship of transnational companies.” The Sucre, Chávez adds, “will be much more than a currency.” According to him, the Sucre system will have four component parts: the Regional Monetary Council, the Sucre currency itself, the Central Clearing House, and a regional reserve and emergency fund. How significant a break does this represent with the go-go free trading past?<br /><br />EK: If the Sucre agreement winds up fostering closer economic integration along the lines of the EU and not NAFTA, then the new ALBA currency could wind up resulting in more fair trade as opposed to exploitative trade. Here’s another way the Sucre could represent a plus: normally multinationals go to Venezuela or Ecuador and set up their own companies which get all kinds of tax breaks and make profits off exports. Those profits are then repatriated to the United States. If there’s a common currency however, those profits would probably stay in the local region. So, a new currency might promote fair trade as well as fair investment.<br /><br />NK: On the face of it the idea of the Sucre is reminiscent of the euro, another regional currency which recently came into effect. Yet, the Sucre would seem to be more unique in that it has been promoted as a common ideological project amongst left-leaning nations. Is there any historic precedent for such an idea?<br /><br />EK: I’m not aware of any currency that’s been promoted on the basis of shared ideology, certainly not any left wing ideology…<br /><br />NK: What about the ruble?<br /><br />EK: That’s a good point. The Soviets exported the ruble to all of their satellite areas. But for the Soviets, the ruble on its own wasn’t such a decisive factor as there was already a centrally planned government which decided what the satellite countries would produce as well as what price they would trade at. In other words, given that the Soviet Union could already decide the relative prices of all goods, an exchange rate was relatively redundant. So, in terms of ALBA countries I think the benefits of a shared currency are higher because you have different governments as opposed to Moscow calling the shots. <br /><br />NK: Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa, himself an economist, hopes that the Sucre and the implementation of the new “virtual monetary system” could accelerate commerce between nations. Eventually, he hopes, such a system could be extended to all countries in Latin America and use of dollars would be reduced greatly. How likely is this to occur?<br /><br />EK: I think if the Sucre, or the Pacha as the case may be, were extended to all of Latin America this would reduce the use of the dollar and this would have an impact on the United States, particularly if Mexico joined the Sucre. Let’s face it though: Mexico is going to be reluctant to do that. To be honest, we don’t even know if the countries that have currently signed up for the Sucre will continue to stay on it. What would happen if a right wing government came to power in one of the ALBA nations? If one ALBA country on the Sucre has an economic downturn and wants to pursue a monetary policy that will help to reduce unemployment, this could lead to inflation in another ALBA nation, which in turn could spark political conflict. For the time being the ALBA nations have relatively similar political ideologies and they could set up some kind of political institution to govern the currency board. But, if one of the ALBA nations became right wing I don’t know what would happen. <br /><br />In addition to disagreements over monetary policy, there might also be conflicts over fiscal policy. One way for the government to get out of debt is by printing money to pay off the debt. This causes inflation. This is a very typical pattern in Latin America. So, if one ALBA country decides it wants to inflate its debt away and another country in the currency union doesn’t like that idea, then this could give rise to political conflict. A country finding itself in dire economic straits may need to create inflation because otherwise it would go bankrupt. Other countries within ALBA meanwhile won’t want one of their members to go bankrupt which could result in a potential currency attack on the entire region. Here’s the key point though: ALBA countries that are not experiencing economic pain may want to dictate how much debt their fellow member can hold as a percentage of GDP. If you want to join the EU, you must have a certain debt to GDP ratio. How will the ALBA nations bargain this out? These are vexing questions. Plus, if you really want to have an economic impact on the United States and the dollar you’d have to involve Brazil, Argentina and Mexico and it’s difficult to see that happening. <br /><br />NK: Speaking of which, Chávez has invited Argentina to join in the Sucre, and over the past few years Venezuela and Argentina have cultivated an unprecedented geopolitical alliance which is based on shared ideological affinities. Do you think that if Argentina joined that there could be a ripple effect and other countries might be encouraged to join? Some might say that if Brazil, the true economic juggernaut in the region, fails to join that such a currency might lack credibility. <br /><br />EK: Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, the current President of Argentina, is not super popular. She and her husband [former president Néstor Kirchner] had this idea of alternating power so they wouldn’t hit the wall on term limit restrictions. In light of recent parliamentary elections which resulted in electoral defeat for the Peronist party, it’s not clear whether the Kirchners can stay in power. If they don’t stay in power you can forget the idea of Argentina ever joining the Sucre. My guess is that even if they do, it’s an unlikely scenario for Argentina. <br /><br />NK: Some might say that from the very outset the Sucre won’t have much clout. Bolivia exports most of its goods to other Andean nations such as Peru and Colombia which do not participate in ALBA. Nicaragua meanwhile exports most of its products not to fellow ALBA nations but to other Central American nations, the United States and Europe where the dollar and euro are paramount in commercial transactions. What are your thoughts?<br /><br />EK: That’s true. But similarly a lot of countries in the EU don’t just trade amongst themselves but also with the UK, Switzerland and the United States. So, I don’t see that as being a huge barrier. In the case of Nicaragua it could be a little weird since the Central American nation doesn’t do that much business with other ALBA nations. So, there may not be a lot of benefits but conversely getting on the Sucre might imply little financial and political risk. <br /><br />However, once the currency goes from being “virtual” to real and ALBA nations ditch their own currencies for the Pacha these costs may go up as I explained earlier. The bottom line is that as long as ALBA countries are not trading amongst themselves that’s Ok: if it’s a virtual currency like the Sucre they still maintain their exchange rates with the other countries. Once they swap their currencies entirely however they’re forced to have the same exchange rate as other ALBA countries. Normally, if Nicaragua had a lot of inflation it would want to devalue relative to its other trading partners in Central America. But in the new milieu, Nicaragua wouldn’t be able to do that. This could really wind up hurting its exports.<br /><br />NK: What types of protections would you advise for the ALBA nations moving forward?<br /><br />EK: My concern would be defending the incipient currency from speculative attacks. There’s a very easy way to prevent this: you need to implement currency controls. In other words, don’t let people take money out of the currency except for trade-related actions and do not allow any speculation. There’s no way for ALBA to move ahead with a currency union without acting on currency controls. The International Monetary Fund won’t be too happy about that but I don’t think these left wing countries care about the IMF anyway.<br /><br />NK: The situation in Ecuador is positively ironic. Up until recently the Andean nation’s currency was called the Sucre, which it then ditched for the U.S. dollar. Now Ecuador is going back to another Sucre. How do you think life will change for Ecuador and Ecuadorans as the country moves to the Sucre as opposed to the dollar which had been embraced by the country’s economic elite?<br /><br />EK: First of all, let’s look at some of the costs of using the U.S. dollar. When the U.S. inflates currency and prints dollars to pay off debt, that’s a tax because prices go up and the value of money goes down. Who pays that inflation tax? In part it’s the Ecuadoran people who hold dollars. Who benefits? The U.S. government as it gets to pay off its debt. So, these financial crises devalue Ecuadoran money. <br /><br />But now the new Sucre monetary board, or eventually the Pacha board, could redistribute money between countries as opposed to having it filter back to the United States. Also, once Ecuador goes on the Pacha it’ll be easier for the Andean nation to adjust its exchange rate than it would under the dollar. As long as Ecuador sticks to the dollar, it’ll be beholden to whatever U.S. monetary policy happens to be. Once Ecuador’s in the ALBA currency union it has a voice and can have a much greater impact to shape its own finances. <br /><br />There are other political benefits to not being on the U.S. dollar. Take for example the case of Panama. When George H.W. Bush wanted to get rid of military strongman Manuel Noriega, he banned the export of U.S. dollars to Panama which caused a recession. That leverage is still there potentially with Ecuador. George W. Bush never entertained the possibility of putting the squeeze on Ecuador as he was distracted in other parts of the world. But, under other circumstances the United States might have exerted pressure. <br /><br />Despite all these problems, there are some benefits to having ties to the U.S. dollar. If you’re on the dollar this leads to stability in price levels which could be lost once Ecuador joins a new currency. <br /><br />NK: One key question will be whether private sector exporters in ALBA nations will have confidence in the new Sucre for it is they who dominate international trade. What are your thoughts?<br /><br />EK: If the private sector is forced to trade in the Sucre or not trade, then they’ll use it…<br /><br />NK: In all of these countries like Ecuador and Venezuela, it’s precisely the right opposed to leftist governments which is controlling the exports …<br /><br />EK: You could wind up with a strange situation in which the exporters are skittish about the new currency and either reduce exports or send their goods to non-ALBA countries like Colombia. In that case, the new currency union would not foster more intra-ALBA trade but the total opposite. If there’s greater state control over exports, as in the Venezuelan oil industry, this all becomes a moot question.<br /><br />NK: Professor Kaplan, thank you very much.<br /><br />EK: Thank you.<br /><br /><em>Ethan Kaplan is a visiting Professor at the Center for Global Thought and the Economics Department at Columbia University. <br /><br />Nikolas Kozloff is the author of Revolution! South America and the Rise of the New Left (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2008) Follow his blog at senorchichero.blogspot.com</em>fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-89310391692972473502009-10-19T09:59:00.004-05:002009-10-19T10:06:47.231-05:00Escandalosa evasión fiscal por parte de las 400 empresas más grandes de México¡¡Solamente pagan el 1.7% del ISR!!<br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><br />De los 400 grandes grupos que operan en el país, sólo 2% pagaron ISR, informa el SAT</span><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Busca Hacienda que más empresas cumplan con obligaciones fiscales</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Se pretende que suba hasta $70 mil millones recaudación por impuesto sobre la renta: Werner<br /><br />Los asalariados cargaron con el mayor peso, al aportar 49.9 por ciento de ese gravamen</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWUYUmtWN_gr64VB56E86H9F4PRK_BsggVcPyGmdORdsqsNHyBZXwDM_DGqe7ij5Jo3Xyyols-Rs03w27Jt1jzSiIFv0SIugz877qADhDPCNCPgykU9mNl-pcp6E4Ip-CiOwB1V09wBug/s1600-h/alejandro+werner.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 267px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWUYUmtWN_gr64VB56E86H9F4PRK_BsggVcPyGmdORdsqsNHyBZXwDM_DGqe7ij5Jo3Xyyols-Rs03w27Jt1jzSiIFv0SIugz877qADhDPCNCPgykU9mNl-pcp6E4Ip-CiOwB1V09wBug/s400/alejandro+werner.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5394326900307190610" /></a><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">El subsecretario de Hacienda, Alejandro WernerFoto Cristina Rodríguez</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">por Miriam Posada García y Juan Antonio Zúñiga (La Jornada, 16/oct/09)</span><br /> <br />Con la reforma de varios impuestos, como el especial sobre producción y servicios (IEPS) y sobre la renta (ISR), se busca que más empresas cumplan con sus obligaciones fiscales, señaló el subsecretario de Hacienda, Alejandro Werner, luego de que el Servicio de Administración Tributaria (SAT) informó a la Comisión de Hacienda de la Cámara de Diputados que de las 400 grandes empresas que operan en el país, sólo 2 por ciento pagó ISR, amparadas en el régimen de consolidación fiscal.<br /><br />Antes de su participación en la 51 Semana de la Radio y Televisión, Werner dijo que la estrategia de la Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público (SHCP) para promover que las grandes empresas amplíen su participación fiscal está delineada en el paquete económico enviado al Congreso, y consiste, entre otras medidas, en la reforma de los impuestos especiales y en el incremento al ISR.<br /><br />Detalló que sólo por concepto de ISR se pretende que las aportaciones empresariales asciendan a 70 mil millones de pesos, de los cuales 26 mil millones resultarán de las modificaciones al régimen de consolidación fiscal al que se acogen los empresarios.<br /><br />Se trata de "una reforma sobre el ISR donde se incluye el tema de la consolidación para generar un incremento en el pago efectivo, así como ampliar la carga efectiva de impuestos del sector empresarial, además de la propuesta de la nueva contribución al combate a la pobreza, dada la necesidad de recursos y la caída en la plataforma de producción de crudo".<br /><br />Tres décadas de financianiento del fisco federal<br /><br />La actual operatividad del régimen de consolidación fiscal no prevé una fecha determinada para el pago del impuesto sobre la renta (ISR) diferido, lo que representa un sacrificio para el erario, "ya que por casi tres décadas el fisco federal ha venido financiando a los contribuyentes de este régimen, obteniendo una recaudación mínima", afirmó el Servicio de Administración Tributaria.<br /><br />Al amparo de esta situación, señaló el organismo, "alrededor de <span style="font-weight:bold;">400 grupos empresariales</span>", que representan 3.3 por ciento de los "grandes contribuyentes activos", tuvieron en 2008 una carga fiscal del ISR de apenas 1.7 por ciento en promedio. <span style="font-weight:bold;">Pagaron sólo 85 mil millones de pesos por ingresos acumulados de 4 billones 960 mil millones, cantidad equivalente a 41 por ciento del producto interno bruto (PIB) de ese año.</span><br /><br />El Servicio de Administración Tributaria realizó un ejercicio sobre la baja carga fiscal pagada por ese conjunto de 400 grupos empresariales: "suponiendo que la carga fiscal de esos grupos fuera de 5 por ciento, en lugar de 1.7 por ciento, estaríamos hablando de ingresos por alrededor de 250 mil millones de pesos, en lugar de los 85 mil millones que actualmente pagan".<br /><br />Esto significa que cada punto porcentual que se ha dejado de aplicar en el cálculo del ISR a ese grupo de grandes contribuyentes, ha implicado un sacrificio fiscal de 55 mil millones de pesos: más de dos veces el monto de los recursos que se pretende destinar a la liquidación de los 43 mil 728 trabajadores sindicalizados de Luz y Fuerza del Centro.<br /><br />"En un esquema convencional de pago del impuesto sobre la renta, que es el seguido por los contribuyentes del régimen general, los grupos empresariales estarían obligados al pago de un ISR varias veces mayor al que actualmente pagan", precisó el SAT, y aclaró que "el monto exacto de la contribución adicional dependería en gran medida de la organización corporativa y del modelo de negocios que un grupo, que actualmente consolida, decidiera adoptar ante un esquema de régimen general".<br /><br />El origen del régimen de consolidación fiscal se remonta al 20 de junio de 1973 cuando apareció en el Diario Oficial de la Federación, y permaneció sin grandes cambios hasta 1999. Se le concibió como un sistema de incentivos para fortalecer la capacidad operativa y financiera de las empresas. En 1999 se acotó la consolidación de las utilidades y/o pérdidas fiscales de 100 hasta 60 por ciento de la participación accionaria que tuviera la sociedad controladora en forma directa en sus sociedades controladas.<br /><br />Pero los grandes contribuyentes encontraron desde hace décadas la manera de eludir gran parte de sus obligaciones fiscales con la sociedad.<br /><br />"Aunque existen situaciones precisas en la ley de la materia para el pago del impuesto diferido, el esquema actual no prevé una fecha determinada para el pago, lo que representa un sacrificio fiscal para el erario federal, ya que por casi tres décadas el fisco federal ha venido financiando a los contribuyentes de este régimen, obteniendo una recaudación mínima", manifestó el SAT.<br /><br />Según informes de la Secretaría de Hacienda, los trabajadores asalariados cargaron con el mayor peso de la recaudación tributaria durante la fase más aguda de la recesión económica del país, al aportar 49.9 por ciento de la recaudación del ISR en el primer semestre del año.<br /><br />Los causantes cautivos aportaron 139 mil 517.2 millones de pesos por la aplicación del ISR, en tanto las empresas contribuyeron con 96 mil 538 millones de pesos, que representaron 34.5 por ciento del total de los recursos obtenidos a través del principal impuesto de la estructura tributaria del gobierno federal.<br /><br />Aun si se considera la recaudación del impuesto empresarial a tasa única (IETU) obtenida de las empresas, la contribución de éstas fue menor a las aportaciones de los trabajadores asalariados a través del ISR.<br /><br />Liquidación de LFC<br /><br />El subsecretario Werner señaló que la liquidación de los trabajadores de Luz y Fuerza del Centro (LFC) está en marcha, y que el gobierno federal cuenta con recursos suficientes para realizar todos los pagos a los electricistas que decidan acogerse a la medida establecida por el gobierno federal.<br /><br />Indicó que la Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE) contará con los recursos necesarios para administrar y operar en LFC, los cuales provendrán de los ahorros generados por la extinción de la empresa, estimados en 18 mil millones de pesos, además del presupuesto considerado en el paquete económico.fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-67076567906143472382009-10-18T22:36:00.002-05:002009-10-18T22:39:53.952-05:00Consumo insostenible<span style="font-weight:bold;">De donde viene toda la leche, carne y huevo que comemos en las megaurbes<br />por Gerardo Villalva</span><br /><br />Un problema de hoy (donde ya no hay fecha y sólo es futuro)<br /><br />El matadero del capital, eficiencia es la máxima explotación posible. Vivimos en una granja industrial. ¿de que otra forma alimentar a tantos millones de seres?. Vivimos como cerdos, hacinados, unos sobre otros; a nuestra comida le mezclan pesticidas, antibióticos y hormonas, la industria nos vende veneno. ¿ qué es lo que todos nos tragamos ? ¿de donde provienen todos los huevos, la carne y la leche que consumimos?<br /><br />El capital aliena al ser humano de su producción, lo hace ajeno, lo hace consumidor, y sólo de esa forma somos capaces de aceptar comer tanto veneno y tanto sufrimiento, animal y humano, la comida industrial, la comida envenenada, enlatada, congelada…; nos han hecho capaces de comer mierda e incluso pedir más. ¿y como viven los seres que comemos ? ¿ como es la vida en una fábrica de animales ? parecida a la que empezamos a vivir en las megaurbes, ¿como se alimenta a una ciudad monstruo?<br /><br />Las pequeñas granjas y fincas familiares casi han desaparecido. Ahora son fábricas de animales los que surten al supermercado y a los mercados de la ciudad. Las fábricas de animales son lugares horribles e insalubres, y toda la carne, leche y huevos que consumimos provienen de esos lugares. En esas fábricas, a los animales se les encierra y se les aprieta hasta que ya no caben, son lugares cerrados con iluminación artificial, la mayoría nunca ven la luz del sol, tocan la tierra, o respiran aire fresco, muchos están tan apretados que ni siquiera pueden voltearse. Para que no se asesinen entre ellos, en estas fábricas se usan tácticas de mutilación sistemática, les cortan el pico a las aves, a las vacas les rompen los tobillos para poder llevarlas amontonadas al matadero. Los cerdos, los pollos, las reces, los pavos, son engordados con alimentos saturados de hormonas y antibióticos con el simple propósito de mantenerlos vivos hasta que engorden lo suficiente… y el terror no se acaba ahí.., millones de otros animales silvestres son despojados de sus ecosistemas cuando sus terrenos se convierten en pastos y campos para las fábricas de carne. El levante de ganado y el cultivo intensivo convierten la tierra en desiertos, lo cual representa una gran amenaza para la supervivencia de la misma vida en nuestro planeta. Se ha estimado que la contribución del ganado a la contaminación del agua supera más de diez veces a la de los humanos y más de tres a la de la industria (Philip Kapleau). Las fábricas de carne además de ser crueles no son sustentables para los ecosistemas.<br /><br />Toda la vida de los animales de las fábricas de carne es una agonía sin fin. El hacinamiento, las privaciones, el maltrato y las mutilaciones imperan en las fábricas de carne de hoy. El ganado vacuno se cría en pequeños corrales sin refugio de los elementos de la naturaleza, y los terneros recién nacidos son separados violentamente de sus madres y, alimentados con fórmulas químicas y puestos en jaulas que impiden el movimiento del animal. Igualmente, TODOS los animales sufren privaciones y maltratos abusando de ellos hasta sus límites biológicos en la incesante búsqueda de ganancias a corto plazo. Es importante repetir; son alimentados a la fuerza, manipulados médicamente, genéticamente, inseminados artificialmente, les cortan sus orejas, colas, picos y cuernos, se los marca con hierros calientes, son castrados y mutilados sin anestesia ni entrenamiento médico; son trasladados en condiciones horripilantes de transporte y movilización, en estas fábricas la agonía de los animales es prolongada hasta el último momento.<br /><br />Pero el peligro no se queda en la granja. La fábrica de carne es atendida por gente, mujeres y hombres, necesitados, hasta tal punto, dispuestos a meterse en esos lugares sucios en donde corren el riesgo de contraer graves enfermedades debido al abuso de antibióticos en la alimentación de los animales, esto puede crear variedades de gérmenes y virus resistentes a los tratamientos médicos; cada día nos acercamos más a una epidemia que no se podrá parar y los principales responsables son las fábricas de carne y los laboratorios médicos que fabrican cantidades industriales de antibióticos para las fábricas de carne, leche y huevos.<br /><br />Y no sólo los animales de la tierra están siendo torturados e intoxicados, los productos del mar muestran grandes cantidades de mercurio, pesticidas y otras toxinas provenientes de la actividad industrial humana. El atún aleta amarilla es uno de los más contaminados y el más popular de los enlatados, a pesar de que para atraparlo también atrapen a delfines, sus depredadores naturales y los regresen muertos al agua. Los barcos camaroneros asesinan con sus inmensas redes a miles de animales que no son camarones, y son regresados muertos al mar afectando definitivamente los ecosistemas marinos. Lo más terribles son las nuevas técnicas de pesca por barrido, en donde, literalmente, barren con una especie de arado inmenso grandes zonas, expoliando a todos los seres vivos del mar, y regresando muertos a los que no son comercializables. Debido a la contaminación y a la destrucción de los ecosistemas, los mares del norte cada día producen menos, lo que hace que barcos fábrica europeos y asiáticos invadan los mares de los países del sur, además cada día se pescan más especies ancestrales, los cuales han sobrevivido cientos de años, el pescado que se sirve en los restaurantes de la gente adinerada puede tener hasta 400 años y estar en grave peligro de extinción. Todos los seres del mar están en grave peligro; solamente por el creciente consumo de la sociedad china, los peces del mar pueden desaparecer en menos de medio siglo.<br /><br />El consumo de esta comida industrial, que nos ofertan los supermercados, es el gran peligro. Después de salir de la granja, la carne se congela, a veces durante años antes de su venta o su preparación industrial. Para conservarla le adhieren nitritos y nitratos, componentes que evitan la putrefacción de las carnes y los pescados, estas sustancias son altamente cancerígenas, esto sumado al riesgo de consumir hormonas, antibióticos, pesticidas y fertilizantes, que quedan en los tejidos de la comida industrial y pasan directamente a nuestro organismo, causando altos índices de cáncer, diabetes, hepatitis, alergias, inmunodeficiencia, alzheimer, mal de parkinson, problemas digestivos, problemas cardiacos, depresión, gastritis, esclerosis… y la lista de enfermedades es muy larga. ¿acaso no es buen negocio el de los laboratorios médicos?, al fin y al cabo el pez por la boca muere.<br /><br />Parece dantesco este infierno que viven nuestros compañeros de evolución de la vida, seres que como nosotros, tienen la capacidad de sufrir dolor, pues poseen un sistema nervioso muy parecido al nuestro, y muy diferente al de las plantas, granos y hongos, los animales de las fábricas y nosotros, también hemos sido sometidos a un sistema capitalista sin sentido, en donde la explotación máxima es la regla de oro. Y nosotros compramos y comemos toda la malvibra, y al parecer sufrimos también de hacinamiento en nuestras ciudades, en los multifamiliares, en nuestros transportes, en nuestras plazas; nos intoxican el cuerpo con comida hecha para alimentar el bolsillo de unos cuantos especuladores y envenenar lentamente los platos de la gente para crear enfermedades crónico degenerativas y luego vendernos medicinas de sus mismos laboratorios. Negocio redondo.<br /><br />Por todo esto, comer carne, pescado, huevos y leche industrial, es capitalista, además de ser un gran riesgo para la salud. Para producir un kilogramo de proteína animal son necesarios de 17 a 27 kilogramos de proteína vegetal. Millones de toneladas de granos y forrajes de los países pobres, son utilizados para alimentar las fábricas de animales, para producir carne para el que la pueda comprar: La mitad de la pesca mundial, el 91% del maíz, el 77% de la harina de Soya, el 64% de la cebada, el 68% de la avena y el 99% de las cosechas de sorgo se utilizan en alimentar ganado (Departamento de Agricultura de Estados Unidos). Si ser un explotador de la gente, de los animales, y del ecosistema, es capitalismo, comer productos animales industriales nos convierte en capitalistas, y explotadores de la tierra, de los animales y del hombre. Se calcula que 800 millones de personas en el mundo están sufriendo hambre y sed, mientras se alimenta a los animales con granos y legumbres suficientes para salvar esas vidas humanas. Esta hambruna se produce por el modo de vida y de consumo de los países ricos y de los consumidores adinerados; los países capitalistas industriales, usan la mayoría de la producción mundial de granos para alimentar ganado en sus fábricas de carne, y como estos países son muy poderosos han obligado a los países pobres a sembrar alimentos para mantener su estilo de vida, cuando estos pueblos pobres podrían cultivar alimentos para su propia gente.<br /><br />Nuestra cultura es muy fuerte, y cambiar de costumbres parece difícil pero no lo es. Tenemos que ser inteligentes, y encontrar soluciones alternas al mercado capitalista. El vegetarianismo es una postura política coherente contra las relaciones del capital en la alimentación, pero el campo también ha sido contaminado por la industria, así que la mejor alternativa no es sólo no comer carne industrial, sino estar informados de cómo se produce lo que consumimos y evitar el consumismo de productos industriales. Actualmente el 90 % de la soya mundial es transgénica y la controla Monsanto, una empresa perversa. Ellos son los creadores de la hormona que estimula la creación de leche en las vacas y también las mata, y del agente naranja, arma biológica usada durante la guerra de Vietnam y muchos otros inventos tóxicos. La soya y el maíz transgénico son hijos del capitalismo y la biotécnica corporativa, y en estudios en ratas, les ha causado cáncer y daños neuronales, en méxico, se comercializa a través de minsa, bimbo, maseca, gruma, cargill, misión, que nos venden el cereal más artificial del mundo, y que con sus poliniza al maíz autóctono con sus transgenes y lo contamina genéticamente, por eso esta tecnología es llamada terminator y ha contaminado el maíz oaxaqueño, poblano y mexiquense.<br /><br />En una sociedad industrial que confunde el trabajo con la productividad, la necesidad de producir siempre es un enemigo del deseo de crear. Explotados y alienados perdemos nuestra creatividad y nuestra humanidad; levantados por un aparatito a las 5 de la mañana, transportados como bultos al trabajo, al ruido de la maquinaria, sonidos y gestos sin sentido, manipulados a través de controles estadísticos y desinformaciones televisivas, y dispuestos al final del día a atravesar la violencia de la inseguridad, hasta que la fatiga nos tumba el fin de semana.<br /><br />De la adolescencia a la vejez, este ciclo de 24 horas se repite hasta la muerte. Repetición mecánica. Tiempo es dinero. Sumisión a los jefes, la vida se agrieta en cada dirección debajo de los soplos del trabajo forzado. Nunca antes una civilización ha producido tanto sufrimiento a la madre tierra y al ser humano, nunca antes ha habido una generación tan inmensa de seres que necesitemos recobrar la consciencia. No es tan tarde aún, hay mucho que aprender, necesitamos encontrar alternativas, para ser libres.<br /><br />La forma más fácil de voltear al enemigo, la forma más efectiva de sortear el peso de las cosas, es encontrar alternativas que rompan con la dominación y nos permitan ser autónomos. No nos preocupemos por las formas establecidas, argumentemos abiertamente, con la confianza y el conocimiento, sin imposiciones y sin represión. Convivir bajo las bases de jerarquías y roles impuestos es, por principio, inútil. Sólo los explotadores desean convivir bajo jerarquías de dominio, de acuerdo a las reglas del espectáculo. Recuerden; todas las jerarquías se alienan de la misma forma, pero algunas son menos despreciables que otras. Donde la comunicación es genuina y sincera, los malentendidos no son un crimen; pero si nos acosan, armados hasta los dientes, envenenando nuestro hogar, explotando a nuestra madre tierra y a nuestros hermanos los hombres y las mujeres, imponiendo la regla del más fuerte; no obtendrán nada de nosotros, más que una postura evasiva y un silencio formal que intente indicar que la discusión está cerrada.<br /><br /><br />vamos haciendo la nueva canción<br />de la derrota crear primavera<br />en estas noches de ojos sin sueño<br />es estos sueños de noches sin ojos<br />en que los buitres enormes abusan<br />de las parciales heridas del pueblo<br />vamos haciendo la nueva canción<br />de la derrota crear primaverafcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-734373366044418777.post-18381878464426566272009-10-14T09:23:00.004-05:002009-10-14T09:29:22.478-05:00La verdadera razón tras la quiebra de Luz y Fuerza del Centro<span style="font-weight:bold;">México SA<br /></span><span style="font-style:italic;"><span style="font-weight:bold;">por Carlos Fernández-Vega</span><br /><br />¿Por qué no pagan electricidad los que no pagan?<br /><br />¿Con cuánto se los subsidia?<br /><br />Los que esperan para aprovecharse<br /></span><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZ_U6uUIwRngIfxHHPlMrA1XD68alECopuoTfRMHKRNx7Vl5ZpK4Fi0naYxjUP4YEroKSXa6FRkUCxkj_6abBSLjrGjhShJFRyNp_Dk_2vnx5SMWpL4n_CIwQbxXhgEhLijye0Zu1KT-E/s1600-h/la+buena+noticia,+mag%C3%BA.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 223px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZ_U6uUIwRngIfxHHPlMrA1XD68alECopuoTfRMHKRNx7Vl5ZpK4Fi0naYxjUP4YEroKSXa6FRkUCxkj_6abBSLjrGjhShJFRyNp_Dk_2vnx5SMWpL4n_CIwQbxXhgEhLijye0Zu1KT-E/s400/la+buena+noticia,+mag%C3%BA.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5392462302026194306" /></a><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">La buena noticia <span style="font-weight:bold;">por Magú</span></span><br /><br />Por cortesía de Los Pinos y la generosa cuan desinteresada difusión de los medios electrónicos, los mexicanos han sido bombardeados con toneladas de "estadísticas, videos, denuncias, crónicas, saqueos" y demás detalles –todo con base en información oficial– sobre los "excesos, privilegios, pérdidas millonarias, robos" y conexos –entre tantas otras cosas– cometidos por el Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas, y las "causas" que, por lo mismo, "obligaron" al inquilino de Los Pinos a decretar la extinción de la empresa Luz y Fuerza del Centro.<br /><br />Ha sido tal la difusión, que hasta se conoce cómo los integrantes del SME lavaban sus calzones. Pero, eso sí, ni un solo pincelazo han soltado (Los Pinos y sus jilgueros electrónicos) sobre la otra cara de la moneda. Por ejemplo, que la Comisión Federal de Electricidad vendía el fluido eléctrico con grueso sobreprecio a Luz y Fuerza del Centro; que ésta, por decisión de la directiva y con el beneplácito de la Secretaría de Energía, revendía dicho fluido a un precio mucho menor y que a la gran empresa privada instalada en la zona de atención de LFC se le aplicaba una jugosa reducción de 70 por ciento en el precio y se le vendía (cuando lo pagaba) a 46 centavos el kilovatio-hora, mientras al consumidor doméstico le cargaban 1.50 pesos por la misma medida. El propio sindicato precisó de qué se trata: "70 por ciento del consumo de electricidad (en su zona de cobertura) corresponde a 46 mil grandes industriales, que pagan en promedio a 46 centavos el kilovatio-hora, mientras los usuarios domésticos lo pagan a 1.50 pesos, y todavía a fin del año ese recibo de luz de los industriales es deducible de impuestos".<br /><br />¿Cuánto suma un subsidio de tal naturaleza a la empresa privada? Si lo anterior no alcanzó para llevar directamente a la crisis financiera a la empresa hoy extinta por decreto, entonces lo que sigue puede que sí: por decisión de la misma directiva y el beneplácito de la Sener, Luz y Fuerza del Centro manejaba "cuentas especiales" para los grandes consorcios y dependencias públicas, comenzando por Los Pinos, las cuales no eran otra cosa que regalar el fluido eléctrico a empresas y dependencias selectas, o lo que es lo mismo, no cobrarles el servicio.<br /><br />El SME denunció lo siguiente: “estamos revisando uno por uno los servicios de cuentas especiales, y ¿qué creen lo que encontramos? La Torre Mayor de Reforma, directa (no paga por el fluido eléctrico; ni recibo se le envía); varios hoteles de la Zona Rosa y de Polanco, directos (lo mismo); el periódico Reforma, directo (igual); (lo que queda del diario) unomásuno, directo (en idéntica condición). La propia Presidencia de la República no paga luz; todas las dependencias federales no pagan la luz, tienen tomas clandestinas. Las repetidoras de Telmex tienen mediciones de ellos, tomas clandestinas, equipos de medición manipulados por ellos mismos, por los administradores de Luz y Fuerza, no por los trabajadores”. No vaya a ser la casualidad de que el duopolio de la televisión y el oligopolio de la radio también estén "directos" (La Jornada, Rosa Elvira Vargas y Enrique Méndez).<br /><br />¿Cuánto cuesta mantener en "directo" a esas empresas y a los cientos de edificios y casonas del sector público federal? Ayer lo mencionamos en este espacio: "el ex subsecretario de Electricidad, Nicéforo Guerrero (precisó que) si Luz y Fuerza del Centro cobrara lo que consumen las grandes empresas y comercios se resolvería su problema financiero, pues en cuentas especiales y concesiones a grandes empresarios se fugan anualmente casi 40 mil millones de pesos, el doble de lo que va a costar liquidar a los trabajadores activos".fcohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17972217389142990783noreply@blogger.com0