1. How the West created the conditions of its downfall ?
The end of Western hegemony was predicated by the class-war mindset of Western big capital holders, and their institutional servants, who could not fathom that the social-wellness of the nineteen-fifties and sixties was foundational to the Western economic boom of the time.
While resisting state intervention during the economic crisis of the nineteen-thirties they had indoctrinated themselves to the idea that the state should not intervene in the working of society. So they could not accept the workers’ rising incomes of the nineteen-fifties and sixties.
They thought indeed that increasing wages were eating up their profits and causing their tendency to decrease in the nineteen-sixties. But the reality was far different. The workers share of national productivity had indeed not increased at all and so the share of capital had remained constant all along percentage wise.
This misconception, about increasing wages, reinforced the ideological apriorism of capital holders, and their servants, against state policies of solidarity. And with hindsight we come to understand that this misconception preordained the present undoing of the West. It was indeed the root cause that incited them to devise their grand strategy to go South.
Thinking that the decreasing tendency of their profits in the nineteen-sixties was due to rising wages, and furthermore thinking that the political landscape was stacked against them, they came up with a straightforward response. They would employ workers in what were still called 3rd world countries at the time who would cost them cents on the dollars they paid to Western workers..
The professional literature of the nineteen-seventieths shows without a shred of a doubt that Western big capital holders, and their servants, thought that, going global, would be like shooting one arrow and satisfying multiple objectives of theirs :
1. Internally :
1.1. Reducing the cost of the work factor
1.2. Taming the working class and, by the same token, rendering their own class predominant in their societies
1.3. Offering cheaper prices would help them beat the local activities — of independent farmers — of craftsmen — of technicians-technologists which, they thought, would expand their own field of investment
2. Externally :
2.1. The South, they thought, would not only help to reduce their wages and other costs that would help them beat local activities back home but it would also gradually open new markets in the South which, with hindsight, proved to be right on the mark
2.2. A presence in the South would also help them to capture the material and energy resources of 3rd world countries
2.3. And “the rules based order” set up by their servants would help them to capture the assets earned by the economic actors in 3rd world countries
1.1. Western Strategies of extraction
Only recently have citizens started to awake to the outrageousness of the remedies of Western big capital holders and their institutional servants. Their strategy was no less than a class-war against Western workers and the countries of the South and this war is ongoing to this very day. In what follows I show the present state of application of these strategic remedies.
1.1.1. Manipulation of the value of the world reserve currency
The strategy was to transfer the assets of the South into the hands of Western big capital holders.
In a first move the interest on borrowed money is fixed at very low rates. This encourages a flood of new borrowing, by the economic actors in the countries of the South, from Western financial institutions. In a second move interests are pushed higher which causes difficulties for Southern companies and state institutions to pay the charges on their debts.
The coup de grace comes when the value of the dollar increases and Southern countries are faced with a stratospheric increase in the value, of principal and interests, expressed in their local currencies. Many companies and state institutions are then no longer capable to pay the charges on their debts. So called “emerging countries”, the new denomination replacing the denomination “3rd world countries” that was in use earlier, are presently entering such a new round of this strategy. We are presently witnessing the effects of this strategy in Sri Lanka.
By playing with interest levels and the value of the dollar, the West has repeatedly been able to force Southern countries to sell their assets to them at a loss. And the fact is that each time, one after the other, these countries find themselves in financial difficulty. Their difficulty is the opportunity for large holders of Western capital and their companies to buy the struggling assets of the South on the cheap. And today they have the nerve to want to hide their misdeeds by accusing China of having trapped these countries into debt.
But these Western tricks have been used so many times by now that the countries of the South know all too well what awaits them and to protect themselves they are flocking around the fast enlarging BRICS, China, India, Russia, and the other big countries of the South.
But what happens very soon, at the peak of the confrontation between the South and the North, to save bankrupt Southern countries from the clutches of Western financial institutions ?
Will the South have the stamina to unanimously declare the obligations it contracted, for its loans from the institutions of the North, as being void ?
The fact is that the centuries of Western economic extraction, that have inflicted so much misery on the South, should be sufficient ground to justify a unanimous declaration that all debts, of Southern countries toward Western countries, are “Odious Debts” (1) indeed !
Such a unanimous decision could then be upheld by the law, and the collective defense, of a new set of international institutions in charge of servicing the interests of the 158 member countries of the Global South that represent some 87% of the world population and growing.
And only after the 35 countries, of the Global North, recognize the extinction of Southern obligations should they eventually be allowed to apply for participation in the new multi-polar order that is being managed by this new set of international institutions.
This would be the logical path for the Global South to avoid the cheap harvesting of assets, from many of its 158 member countries like Sri Lanka, by large Western capital holders and their corporations. But the immensity of the undertaking, I fear, would be such that these countries would not have the audacity to make the leap in time, into the multipolar world of tomorrow, to counter the rush from the North, not only to implement its harvest of assets from the South, but above all to disseminate its new paradigm which is "the totalitarianism at work in the transformation of nature into capital".
I really hope that I’m wrong here but the world is presently engaged in a sprint between the partisans of two visions and the one who passes the finish line first will decide the fate of the world for the foreseeable future. On one side is the Global North whose progressivist vision is to transform nature into capital while on the other side is the conservative vision of the Global South which is to strengthen national sovereignty. My fear is that the outcome of this sprint could sound the death knell of the idea of a multipolar world.
1.1.2. Monetary policy
The monetary powers of the Fed have consistently been abused by its issuance of grants and no interest loans that were offered to Western big capital holders and the financial institutions that they own. But over the last 3 years this kind of abuse resulted in an increase of the total US money in circulation by some 55 % which naturally immediately unleashed a bout of hyper-inflation that extinguishes, at least momentarily, the monetary power of the FED to further expand the mass of money in circulation. This reality applies, not only to the USA, but to the whole North.
The EU and Japan are indeed in the same boat. Hyper-inflation annihilates the possibility to continue practicing the kind of monetary policies that Northern countries have applied over the last 40 years. We have entered a new monetary cycle that calls for a contraction of the mass of money in circulation. But we better remember the fact that hyper-inflation has always been used by the powers that be to melt away the debts of state and corporations. Those who pay for hyper-inflation are the savers who observe that the buying power of their savings is constantly decreasing and are forced to join the ranks of the ‘have-not’ who live in misery.
But the fact is that most of this new fiat money has been converted into debt. It is therefore impossible to know how long this cycle of contraction will last, before the currency in circulation stabilizes with the economic realities. Western governments will indeed continue to resist the liquidation of their largest debtors because they are also the largest holders of capital who own the bulk of their countries' assets. And they will thus have little patience with the notion of "debt jubilees" which are a kind of debt cancellation that frees citizens from the state implementation of their obligations to pay the charges on their debts.
Hyper-inflation becomes thus a justification to help the biggest corporations while keeping a tight lid on the citizens who have financial difficulties. The most probable is therefore that Western countries will be stuck, with it for a few years, until the weight of debt has decreased sufficiently to become manageable for the biggest corporations and the States.
1.1.3. Sucking the citizens’ wealth to force them in a new era of bondage
The national annual productivity gains of Western countries were relatively equitably shared until a tiny minority started to suck these gains at its own advantage sometime around nineteen-eighty. This led to a greater share of national income going to the top earners while the large majority were seeing their income reduced to a lower share of the total income which de-facto reduced their buying power from year to year.
The bottom 90% saw its share of the national income plateau at 65 % in 1980 from where it went in free fall to reach 49.6 % in 2012 against 50.4 % for the richest 10 % which was already one percent higher than what they took home in 1929 ! And since 2012 the increase, in the levels of inequality, has further accelerated !
The following graph illustrates the cycle of social wellness that was generated in the wake of the 2nd World War and how it plateaued from 1973 to 2008 when it started its descent into the historical records of social inequality that we observe today.
Graph 01 : US Income growth from 1917 to 2012
The Western cycle of social wellness got interrupted when President Nixon, on 1971-08-15, announced to to his fellow US citizens that he had signed an order for his administration to implement a new economic policy addressing the following (3) :
- “The first order was for the gold window to be closed. Foreign governments could no longer exchange their dollars for gold; in effect, the international monetary system turned into a fiat one”.
- “The second order was for a 90-day freeze on wages and prices to check inflation”.
With hindsight we observe that this restructuring was hugely consequential. It initiated a turning point that privileged big capital holders, who form the largest contingent among the 1%, in the distribution of the nation’s gains of productivity. But it came at the detriment of the working class whose 3 months wage-freeze, ordered by Nixon, somehow got stuck in the minds as illustrated in graph 01 and 02. The consequence is visible in graph 03.
Graph 02 : by the Economic Policy Institute (4)
This last graph is highly significant. It shows indeed without any possible doubt that Western societies engaged in social redistribution of their national incomes in favor of the 1%. Graph 2 indicates that the progression of wages got disconnected from the progression of productivity. Something like that could only have occurred as the result of a voluntary choice by political decision-makers anticipating the wage-shock provoked by the coming delocalizations that would start to shake social relations a decade later.
1.2. The revolution of Late-Modernity that nobody talks about
The hugely consequential monetary restructuring of 1971 had a determinant effect on the US monetary capacity to force its ways on other nations. But, with hindsight, it appears that this was merely the introductory episode of the bigger story of ‘the permanent revolution’ of capitalism along Late-Modernity that was pre-ordained by the ideological prejudices of Western big capital holders and their servants against working people.
The transfer of labor in Western countries, from the agricultural sector to satisfy the demands of the industrial sector, was almost completed between the 1950s and 1960s. This was also when Western big capital holders observed that their returns on invested capital started to decrease year after year. Faced with this conundrum we have seen how their ideological prejudices guided them on a path of escape through cost reduction by de-localizing their activities in what at the time were called 3rd world countries.
Starting from this idea, of escaping their workers’ higher wages, their think-tanks theorized a pretty radical strategic response that would impulse a double headed strategy of globalizing the reach of Western big capital holders by revolutionizing the paradigm of Modernity :
1.2.1. The expansion of the domain of Western investments to the whole world
The fall of their returns on investments got countered by expanding the field of Western investments, from their Western countries of origins, to the whole world. Wages in 3rd world countries were a fraction their cost in Western countries. And while these countries offered an escape to the high cost of Western wages they also offered the advantage of an absence of financial obligations for any kinds of solidarity efforts that Western societies had legislated like social redistribution, environmental protection, education and so on.
The strategy to manufacture in China, for example, reduced production costs by a sizable margin and Western consumer prices decreased substantially which eased the social acceptance of the stagnation of wages that had set in during the nineteen-eighties in Western countries. This appeased the social relations within Western countries and this also paradoxically facilitated the accelerated transfer of Western factories to the East. But by 2008, with the great recession, the expressions of malcontent started to grow louder and louder and Donald Trump adroitly exploited these to get elected in 2016.
While Western consumers benefited from falling prices Western manufacturers who had established factories in China were the great winners. Their margins exploded and returns on invested capital were hefty. But then President Trump threw a grenade in the edifice of globalization. As a result China decided to privilege its internal circulation which means that the country took the decision to become technologically self-sufficient while boosting its trade and investments in its “first ring road of economic partnership” and so ASEAN became its most important trade partner in the year 2020.
Cheng Yawen, professor at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs of Shanghai International Studies University, argues that (6) :
It is evident by now that President Trumps’ Geo-political approach forced China to readjust its strategy at the expanse of Western countries and, as a consequence, the country will soon enough become self-sufficient technologically. It educates more STEM graduates than the US and Europe combined and it has the financial means to invest in the creation of universities and to finance generous budgets for scientific research and development. It was thus only a question of time before China would surpass the West technologically. The only success of President Trump was to force China to accelerate the realization of that outcome !"… in the future China will have to promote a new global system, a "three-ring" international system that will guarantee China's national security and development: the first ring is China's neighboring East Asia, Central Asia and the Middle East, with which China has formed a close industrial division of labor and through which it obtains a stable energy supply and a reliable security barrier. The second ring is the developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, with which China exchanges raw materials and industrial goods and assists their development; the third ring extends to the traditional industrialized countries, mainly in Europe and the United States."
Globalization also offered the prospect to Western corporations to gain access to new markets. But that was a prospect that would only materialize years later with the firming of China’s development. Market access became a prime consideration only when Chinese consumption exploded in the years 2000. Today China has the largest consumer market on earth. Every year it sells nearly 2 times the number of cars sold in the USA and by 2015 US car manufacturers had become dependent on China for their survival.
So the strategy of Western big capital holders to de-localize, and more particularly to invest in China, was a wise move when seen through the lens of “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital” and the gamble to “transform debt into capital” was rewarded with a big pay-off. But there can be no doubt that the distribution, of the benefits of this strategy, was skewed, from the start, against the populations of Western countries. And this is what derailed the process...
This brings us back to our original observation that the whole strategy of Western big capital holders got initiated by their ideological prejudice against unionized working people. And it was by exploiting the anger of the working people that Donald Trump freed the social genie out of its bottle which now shakes Western countries out of their torpor. But amidst this social hurricane Western elites find nothing better than to scapegoat China in order to deflect the rightful anger of Western people against themselves.
A political maelstrom erupted as a consequence and the whole edifice of globalization is now in doubt which threatens Western big capital holders with the loss of their income streams from the Global South which to them is something that is entirely unacceptable and will eventually force them to recapture the control of a Western political decision-making process that has erred too far in adventurism.
This just shows how the bitch of ideological prejudice boomerangs.
Amidst this political maelstrom, Western elites seem to have concluded that a conflict with China, around Taiwan, was their best bet to regain full ownership over Western political institutions while simultaneously destabilizing China and forcing an exit of the Communist Party (7).
If this strategy were to be successful, one day, it would procure the US, Japan and Korea, the opportunity to help their Taiwanese allies to take ownership of the most industrialized regions inside China while the remainder would be broken into pieces and attached to Western compliant forces :
- The South-West, Qinghai, and Gansu would be annexed by Tibet under its exiled Kashag (8)
- Inner Mongolia would be attached to Outer Mongolia
- Xinjiang would be taken over by the East Turkistan Government in exile (9)
- The 3 Northern provinces could then be annexed by Korea after North-Korea’s forceful take-over by the South. The following map (10) gives an idea of what would be wrought on China if the US succeeded to implement its strategy.
The Geo-political mayhem that would ensue after such a break-up of China would have troubling social ramifications not only for the citizens of China but for the citizens of Russia, of India, and of the whole Global South whose countries would indisputably lose their sovereignty and their citizens would be made captives of Western economics and culture for another round of decades or centuries !
But the perspective of a break-up of China is evidently completely unacceptable for the CPC and this explains why it reacts so forcefully against US provocations. The talk in Beijing, in the wake of the news of Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, is indeed about blockading the island's air and maritime space while threatening all incoming traffic, that is not approved by Beijing, with kinetic destruction !
The financial engineers soon concluded that the idea of spreading the reach, of Western big capital holders, to the whole world was not going to be satisfied by the paradigm of Modernity in its original form of “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital”. The expansion of the field of Western investments to the whole world would necessitate incredibly large capital investments that their returns on invested capital could not satisfy at least not within the time range they were planning on.
Counting on surpluses realized on investments would imply that the whole process of globalization would be extremely long indeed. That is when it was suggested to use debt as the engine of capital formation. This subterfuge shifted the paradigm of Modernity, from “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital”, into “the gamble that is at work in the transformation of debt into capital” :
1.2.2.1. Financialization of capital formation :
A revolution took place, in the first part of the nineteen-seventies, that nobody talks about. But the transformation of the process of capital formation, by discarding “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital” and replacing it with the financialization of capital formation through debt, was nothing short of a revolution that would not only change the formation of capital but would also revolutionize the formation of daily culture in ways that would devastate Western societies as we’ll see later.
Lets remember for now that the classical formation of equity capital, by investing surpluses, shifted to financialization. But passing from, the transformation of existing money into capital, to the transformation of debt into capital was a stupendous feat to say the least. It was a de-facto recognition that debt is money. Let’s remember that Early-Modernity had started with the prohibition of the monetization of debt while Late-Modernity started with the societal commendation of debt monetization and of the central role it was to play in the formation of capital !
This commendation was enacted with the lightness of a feather and got barely noticed by economists. The reason for this is straightforward enough. The failure of classical economists to detect the emergence of the paradigm of Modernity, that resides in “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital”, challenged the detection of a shift in its nature. The fact is that you can’t perceive the transformation of something whose existence you are not aware of !
The failure to observe that shift has been hiding the reason for the occurrence of the fundamental changes in the culture of capitalism that were coming and so the historical shift from High-Modernity to Late-Modernity never figured in economic nor history textbooks. But what is even more difficult to believe for me is that 50 years later this fact has still not been recognized !
In short the shift from High-Modernity to Late-Modernity gave us the following :
I postulate here that, at the peak of the total corruption of Western societies, financiers had wanted to speculate on the “the transformation of nature into capital” (11). This was the moment when Modernity was entering its agony and soon it will assist at the birth of After-Modernity. What I mean by this is that it was a gamble too far…
1.2.2. the gamble of transforming debt in capital
The financial engineers soon concluded that the idea of spreading the reach, of Western big capital holders, to the whole world was not going to be satisfied by the paradigm of Modernity in its original form of “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital”. The expansion of the field of Western investments to the whole world would necessitate incredibly large capital investments that their returns on invested capital could not satisfy at least not within the time range they were planning on.
Counting on surpluses realized on investments would imply that the whole process of globalization would be extremely long indeed. That is when it was suggested to use debt as the engine of capital formation. This subterfuge shifted the paradigm of Modernity, from “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital”, into “the gamble that is at work in the transformation of debt into capital” :
1.2.2.1. Financialization of capital formation :
A revolution took place, in the first part of the nineteen-seventies, that nobody talks about. But the transformation of the process of capital formation, by discarding “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital” and replacing it with the financialization of capital formation through debt, was nothing short of a revolution that would not only change the formation of capital but would also revolutionize the formation of daily culture in ways that would devastate Western societies as we’ll see later.
Lets remember for now that the classical formation of equity capital, by investing surpluses, shifted to financialization. But passing from, the transformation of existing money into capital, to the transformation of debt into capital was a stupendous feat to say the least. It was a de-facto recognition that debt is money. Let’s remember that Early-Modernity had started with the prohibition of the monetization of debt while Late-Modernity started with the societal commendation of debt monetization and of the central role it was to play in the formation of capital !
This commendation was enacted with the lightness of a feather and got barely noticed by economists. The reason for this is straightforward enough. The failure of classical economists to detect the emergence of the paradigm of Modernity, that resides in “the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital”, challenged the detection of a shift in its nature. The fact is that you can’t perceive the transformation of something whose existence you are not aware of !
The failure to observe that shift has been hiding the reason for the occurrence of the fundamental changes in the culture of capitalism that were coming and so the historical shift from High-Modernity to Late-Modernity never figured in economic nor history textbooks. But what is even more difficult to believe for me is that 50 years later this fact has still not been recognized !
In short the shift from High-Modernity to Late-Modernity gave us the following :
-
Ultra rationalization of rationalism in finance :
A technocratic managerial class displaced entrepreneurs and engineers and boards of directors got filled with lawyers and financiers who displaced capital holders. And all this was done in the name of “financial rationalization”. The biggest capital holders were hiding behind the secrecy rules of investment funds that are thus not required to make public the names of those whose funds they manage. Lawyers and financiers represent financial funds. The financiers invent the financial shenanigans and the lawyers are in charge of the polishing of those shenanigans in words that are within the spirit of the law and if this task is impossible they task the financiers to modify their shenanigans so that they fit within the meaning of their polishing. - The age of financial shenanigans :
Boards of directors are concerned primarily by returns on investments which are the first preoccupation of the big capital holders they represent. These must pay the charges on the debts they contracted to finance their share in the investment fund and the priority of the fund is thus to guarantee that these clients receive the necessary returns, on their participation in the fund, to pay their charges. And so the generation of profits shifted gradually from the production of goods and services to the generation of financial shenanigans : — worker lay-offs — wage contraction — share buy-back — asset inflation — speculation on raw materials — speculation on currencies — de-localization of production — management of production chains — and so on and on …
- They were put in charge of taming “the gamble that is at work in the transformation of debt into capital” so that capital holders are able to pay the charges on the debts they contracted to finance their participation in the financial fund or directly in the capital of the enterprise.
- They were put in charge of maximizing the leverage of all the assets of the enterprise, in which the fund had invested, so as to maximize its cash collection from its debt position.
- And finally they were put in charge of the gamble to conciliate these two positions while leaving hefty remunerations for the fund itself.
I postulate here that, at the peak of the total corruption of Western societies, financiers had wanted to speculate on the “the transformation of nature into capital” (11). This was the moment when Modernity was entering its agony and soon it will assist at the birth of After-Modernity. What I mean by this is that it was a gamble too far…
1.2.2.2. Full ownership of Western state institutions by big capital holders :
By ownership I mean not a very public contractual title on the institutions of state but a hidden arrangement, forced upon politicians and bureaucrats by financial might, that remains invisible to the citizens and has thus a greater chance to successfully avoid public resistance to its guidance of the path to be followed by societies and their citizens :
- The risks of the expansion of the field of Western investments to the whole world has squarely been squeezed in the written obligations of Western public institutions, and the International institutions under their control, which means that, in case the biggest Western capital holders can’t satisfy their obligations those will be covered by the public pursue
- On the so called merit of the services that the biggest Western capital holders render, to their nations, state institutions close their eyes on their infringements of the national rules of the game
- Western countries, and the International institutions under their control, are also in charge of bullying the countries of the Global South to acquiesce to the demands of Western capital holders. And in case their demands are not satisfied Western countries never hesitate to unleash the madness of kinetic wars…
Neo-liberalism preached the termination of all systems of solidarity and the focus of public institutions on their traditional functions of force like policing and warfare, the collection of taxes and information, the manipulation of the minds through propagandizing of the ideology of big capital holders and lastly the cancellation of all independent voices. Such Neo-liberal precepts are now firmly in application all over the West as demonstrated by the vicious repression of all recent social demonstrations of malcontent by Western citizens…
So it is only logical that it would not only be the countries of the South that suddenly start to jump overboard the ship of Modernity. After having been impoverished over the last decades the large majority of Western citizens are fast reaching a tipping point when their patience is suddenly starting to explode which will force a reconfiguration of daily life and the decision-making processes of their societies.
1.2.3. Postmodernism liquidated all grand narratives
The revolution of Late-Modernity expanded the reach of Western big capital holders to the whole world. To finance the huge capital injections involved it had been determined that the paradigm of Modernity which is "the reason that is at work in the transformation of money into capital" would need to shift to "the gamble that is at work in the transforming of debt into capital.
But the rationalization, implied by the financialization of capital, would inevitably revolutionize daily culture and the expectation was that this would unleash strong social resistance movements that could potentially force Western state institutions to resist the revolution planned by big capital holders.
The answer to that risk was to implement the strategy in stealth mode and to complement it with the termination of all grands narratives with the aim of focusing the attention of the citizenry, on bits and pieces of reality, which would distract it from a such broad narratives as the ones of globalization and the revolutionary change of the paradigm of Modernity.
To realize such a manipulation French critical theorists, who were already lecturing and writing about the end of grand narratives at the time, were called upon to lecture in US universities. Big capital then financed the marketing of their work, on the market for ideas, and those French intellectuals soon were the center of attention of the entire country. From this point on the path to societal atomization was straightforward. It was the logical outcome of the liquidation of grand narratives.
All this begs the question "who was in charge of the conception of such an intricate and far reaching strategy ?". I don't have a good answer to that question but one thing is for sure. US 3 letter agencies had quite remarkable intellectuals working for them in the sixties and seventies. I had already observed this earlier with the strategy of the State Department and the CIA to confront Western, and eastern public opinions, to Abstract Expressionism and the New York art school, in order to induce a cultural attraction to the West and beat the soviets.
What appeases my mind is that the strategy devised by these intellectuals, to use postmodernism against Western societies, was so successful in destroying the cohesion of their society that today they have lost the capacity to act as one entity. The USA particularly is no longer able to engage in any large societal projects like a war or the re-shoring of industrial productions.
To the Global South the societal demise of the US, and the West more generally, is a chance that absolutely can't be missed. Could those rare intellectuals, who were employed by US 3 letters agencies in the sixties and seventies, by all means have consciously planned the obsolescence of their country ?
Notes
1. "The concept of odious debt in public international law", United Nations Discussion Papers, N ° 185, 2007-07. by Prof. Robert Howse.
2. "A Visual History of Income Inequality in the US", Wall Street Wisdom, by Kirk Chisholm
3. "Nixon Ends Convertibility of U.S. Dollars to Gold and Announces Wage/Price Controls", Federal Reserve History, by Sandra Kollen Ghizoni, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. 2013-11-22.
4. "Why the Gap Between Worker Pay and Productivity Is So Problematic", The Atlantic. 2015-02-25, by Gillian B. White.
5. "World Inequality Report 2018", Written and coordinated by: Facundo Alvaredo, Lucas Chancel, Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, Gabriel Zucman
6. “Building the "New Three Rings": China's choice in the face of possible complete decoupling”, Culture Vertical. 2022-06-02, re-posted by RedChina, by Cheng Yawen.
7. "The Strategy of Denial. American Defense in an Age of Great Power Conflict", Yale University Press fall 2021, by Elbridge A. Colby
“Giving War a Chance”, Monthly Review 2022-05-01, by Laurence H. Shoup
"The U.S. Military and the Coming Great-Power Challenge", Foreign Affairs, by Andrew F. Krepinevich, Jr. 2021-11-17.
8. Tibet’s exile Kashag. The US was financing the Tibetan Kashag and the Dalai Lama who was at his head, since their flight out of Tibet in 1959, and has continued to finance their activities to this very day including spying and fomenting mayhem inside Tibet itself.
9. East Turkistan Government in exile. The same goes for the East Turkistan Government in exile than for the Tibetan Kashag. The mission of these two governments in exile is to take over the parts of China’s territory that they claim…
10. I grabbed this map from the official website of the East-Kurdistan Government of exile
11. "Nature as a Mode of Accumulation: Capitalism and the Financialization of the Earth", Monthly Review. March 2022 (Volume 73, Number 10) , by John Bellamy Foster
"The Defense of Nature: Resisting the Financializaton of the Earth", Monthly Review. March 2022 (Volume 73, Number 11) , by John Bellamy Foster. 2022-04–01
"The Capitalist Solution to 'Save' the Planet: Make it an Asset Class & Sell it", YouTube, by GPEnewsdocs.
No comments:
Post a Comment