Main Page | Report Page

 

  Politics Forum Index » Socialism Politics (Trotsky) Forum » Australia: How to fight imperialism in a junior...

Author Message
jh...
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:20 am
 
OK, now I get it, QE2 is the latest bankers' acronym for
"quantititative easing." Don't know where the 2 came from.

Actually I'm glad Vangelis brought that up, a more interesting subject
than Dusty. And a particularly dumb posting by Vangelis. If the
Spartacists haven't launched a full-blooded verbal assault on Obama's
beggar-thy-neighbor protectionist economic nationalism over this, it
is only because it only came up this last week or so, the paper comes
out every two weeks, and they can't cover everything. (Though I do
wish they had more coverage of Greece...) Attacking US economic
protectionist nationalism is one of WV's favorite themes.

And not just the Sparts. *Literally* everybody has been attacking the
US over this, it went over like a lead balloon at the economic summit
that just blew up in Obama's face.

This is very significant. I've talked a lot here about how the US is
trying to line up an imperialist alliance vs. China, to reestablish US
world leadership just as the great US alliance vs. the Soviet Union
during the Cold War did, and 9-11 did briefly, till Bush Jr. pissed
that away over Iraq.

What this means is that this is not working! The economic stresses
created by the Great Recession are preventing this. German, Russian
and other imperialist rivals of the US are now actually *siding with
China* vs. the US!

A very bad thing for US imperialism, and a pretty damn good thing,
actually, for the workers of the world. No doubt the Chinese
Stalinists will *not* use this for revolutionary purposes, as
revolutionary Soviet diplomats like Rakovsky did during the 1920s, but
instead to cement collaboration with the European bourgeoisie on
dubious economic projects like Chinese investment in Greece,
furthering capitalist restoration. But that's only what can be
expected from Stalinists.

-jh-

On Nov 13, 10:50 am, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 13, 1:27 am, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:

...
Funny though how the US isn't attacked for being nationalist for QE2.
All else
are naitonalists yet never the gangsters that run that country.

vngelis-

The US government aren't nationalists, and nobody attacks' em for
that? Huh? What are you smoking now? And what's QE2? An ocean liner?

-jh-- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

 
jh...
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:29 pm
 
On Nov 13, 1:29 pm, srd <srdiam... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 13, 10:50 am, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

....
Indeed he doesn't. If anybody he supports the IG. This month anyway.

Yeah, but I have trouble working up any enthusiasm. (Which accounts
for the likelihood of the last sentence.) And there's the whole "death
of communism" thing, which seems sort of right. Related to which, I
think I've located the main reason for disbelieving the thesis: the
election of a black President in this period. While Obama, of course,
represents no political change, his election does mark a significant
social change. Most wouldn't have predicted its likelihood years ago,
not before a woman gets elected, that seeming the natural progression.
The rejection of racism by a majority of the population reflects a
deep change in social attitudes, a change which can only be described
as leftward. How do you square the thesis that this is a thoroughly
reactionary period?


Here you are committing the mistake the SL majority accused the SL
minority of last year.

The election of Barack Obama did *not* mark a significant social
change. If anything, it has resulted in increased white racism in
American society, as Obama takes the blame for the Great Recession.
Even Obama knows that, that is why he is so careful never to do
*anything* that could be interpreted as beneficial to the black
population, who are the worst victims of Obama's policies.

Hell he couldn't even complain when his buddy Gates was humiliated by
a white cop! He had to invite said cop to have a beer with him and
Gates in the White House!

Obama was elected because of the Iraq War, the economic disaster, and
the massive revulsion vs. Bush Jr. The American electorate really was
thinking "anybody but Bush," even a black man.

I suspect there were quite a few overt white racists who voted for
Obama out of sheer disgust.


-jh-

Quote:

But most of what is in that article should be uncontroversial to
anyone who thinks of himself as a Trotskyist. Something you are not.

He just needs arguments and if they are found in a cupboard

somewhere they will be
uploaded.

D and V both copy the other's worst traits. Here Dusty replicates the
classical V hypocrisy (or psychotic projection). DV has no compunction
about uploading near-nazis, which that being their manner of fascism,
they really have no real reason to avoid.

srd- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

 
dusty...
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:22 pm
 
Oops!

Goldman Sachs...the Puppeteer-in-Chief...and not just of Obama Banana!
His "oratory" becomes more wooden by the day!
 
dusty...
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:28 pm
 
On Nov 15, 7:18 am, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:

Quote:
Didn't wan to make it sound worse than it is.
Now fancy that, never taken part in any social struggle whilst in a
career
but assumes he has an ability to pontificate on ...social struggles.
vngelis

It reminds me of the criticism that used to be directed by Protestants
at the Catholic Clergy re their pontifications on...sex.

Little did they know! But after all, the "practice" was, sadly, biased
towards perversion!

How that applies to Diamond, I don't know...yet.
 
Vngelis...
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:52 pm
 
On Nov 13, 7:20 pm, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
OK, now I get it, QE2 is the latest bankers' acronym for
"quantititative easing." Don't know where the 2 came from.

Actually I'm glad Vangelis brought that up, a more interesting subject
than Dusty. And a particularly dumb posting by Vangelis. If the
Spartacists haven't launched a full-blooded verbal assault on Obama's
beggar-thy-neighbor protectionist economic nationalism over this, it
is only because it only came up this last week or so, the paper comes
out every two weeks, and they can't cover everything. (Though I do
wish they had more coverage of Greece...) Attacking US economic
protectionist nationalism is one of WV's favorite themes.

And not just the Sparts. *Literally* everybody has been attacking the
US over this, it went over like a lead balloon at the economic summit
that just blew up in Obama's face.

This is very significant. I've talked a lot here about how the US is
trying to line up an imperialist alliance vs. China, to reestablish US
world leadership just as the great US alliance vs. the Soviet Union
during the Cold War did, and 9-11 did briefly, till Bush Jr. pissed
that away over Iraq.

What this means is that this is not working! The economic stresses
created by the Great Recession are preventing this. German, Russian
and other imperialist rivals of the US are now actually *siding with
China* vs. the US!

A very bad thing for US imperialism, and a pretty damn good thing,
actually, for the workers of the world. No doubt the Chinese
Stalinists will *not* use this for revolutionary purposes, as
revolutionary Soviet diplomats like Rakovsky did during the 1920s, but
instead to cement collaboration with the European bourgeoisie on
dubious economic projects like Chinese investment in Greece,
furthering capitalist restoration. But that's only what can be
expected from Stalinists.

-jh-


Someone is top dog. One cant blame all 'nationalism' Van Rompuy style
and
have an anti-imperialist mask. The nationalism of the USA and the
nationalism of China aren't the same thing. For the US banksters to
survive the world has to be broken and to starve. Hence protectionism
against the US is progressive, not reactionary.

vngelis
 
jh...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 9:25 am
 
On Nov 15, 1:52 am, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 13, 7:20 pm, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:





OK, now I get it, QE2 is the latest bankers' acronym for
"quantititative easing." Don't know where the 2 came from.

Actually I'm glad Vangelis brought that up, a more interesting subject
than Dusty. And a particularly dumb posting by Vangelis. If the
Spartacists haven't launched a full-blooded verbal assault on Obama's
beggar-thy-neighbor protectionist economic nationalism over this, it
is only because it only came up this last week or so, the paper comes
out every two weeks, and they can't cover everything. (Though I do
wish they had more coverage of Greece...) Attacking US economic
protectionist nationalism is one of WV's favorite themes.

And not just the Sparts. *Literally* everybody has been attacking the
US over this, it went over like a lead balloon at the economic summit
that just blew up in Obama's face.

This is very significant. I've talked a lot here about how the US is
trying to line up an imperialist alliance vs. China, to reestablish US
world leadership just as the great US alliance vs. the Soviet Union
during the Cold War did, and 9-11 did briefly, till Bush Jr. pissed
that away over Iraq.

What this means is that this is not working! The economic stresses
created by the Great Recession are preventing this. German, Russian
and other imperialist rivals of the US are now actually *siding with
China* vs. the US!

A very bad thing for US imperialism, and a pretty damn good thing,
actually, for the workers of the world. No doubt the Chinese
Stalinists will *not* use this for revolutionary purposes, as
revolutionary Soviet diplomats like Rakovsky did during the 1920s, but
instead to cement collaboration with the European bourgeoisie on
dubious economic projects like Chinese investment in Greece,
furthering capitalist restoration. But that's only what can be
expected from Stalinists.

-jh-

Someone is top dog. One cant blame all 'nationalism' Van Rompuy style
and
have an anti-imperialist mask. The nationalism of the USA and the
nationalism of China aren't the same thing. For the US banksters to
survive the world has to be broken and to starve. Hence protectionism
against the US is progressive, not reactionary.

vngelis

Who is Van Rompuy?

The above is sleazy deliberate confusionism. Of course national pride
in China, where you had a revolution and now have a Stalinist-
bureaucratically deformed workers state, is not the same thing as US
imperialist nationalism. The Chinese have a revolution vs. capitalism
and imperialism to be proud about. Although given the powerful
capitalist restorationist forces in China, it *can* slide over into
Chinese bourgeois nationalism.

Protectionism is a separate issue altogether, and of course a workers'
state needs to protect itself against the capitalist market. And the
same with Third World countries vs. their imperialist masters. Though
now, in the current state of capitalist decay, it seems like it's the
capitalists want protection vs. China! Which your David Irving-loving
buddy enthusiastically supports in the case of Australia, and you of
course in the case of Greece.

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states.
Going totally against all traditions of socialism and Marxism, but
what do you care?

-jh-
 
srd...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 9:52 am
 
On Nov 15, 11:25 am, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:
And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states.

In my book, this is the main point.

V, how do you defend counterposing program for the U.S. to the program
in workers states and oppressed countries, when in fact you favor THE
SAME program for the U.S.

Answer that, sleazebag.

srd


Quote:
Going totally against all traditions of socialism and Marxism, but
what do you care?

 
Vngelis...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:24 pm
 
On Nov 15, 7:25 pm, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

Who is Van Rompuy?

Watch this you might learn something but then again might not as the
case may be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY
Quote:

The above is sleazy deliberate confusionism. Of course national pride
in China, where you had a revolution and now have a Stalinist-
bureaucratically deformed workers state, is not the same thing as US
imperialist nationalism. The Chinese have a revolution vs. capitalism
and imperialism to be proud about. Although given the powerful
capitalist restorationist forces in China, it *can* slide over into
Chinese bourgeois nationalism.

Protectionism is a separate issue altogether, and of course a workers'
state needs to protect itself against the capitalist market. And the
same with Third World countries vs. their imperialist masters. Though
now, in the current state of capitalist decay, it seems like it's the
capitalists want protection vs. China! Which your David Irving-loving
buddy enthusiastically supports in the case of Australia, and you of
course in the case of Greece.

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states.
Going totally against all traditions of socialism and Marxism, but
what do you care?

-jh-

You are globalist anti-protectionist Obama style...
vngelis
 
srd...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:11 pm
 
On Nov 15, 2:24 pm, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 15, 7:25 pm, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:



Who is Van Rompuy?

Watch this you might learn something but then again might not as the
case may behttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY







The above is sleazy deliberate confusionism. Of course national pride
in China, where you had a revolution and now have a Stalinist-
bureaucratically deformed workers state, is not the same thing as US
imperialist nationalism. The Chinese have a revolution vs. capitalism
and imperialism to be proud about. Although given the powerful
capitalist restorationist forces in China, it *can* slide over into
Chinese bourgeois nationalism.

Protectionism is a separate issue altogether, and of course a workers'
state needs to protect itself against the capitalist market. And the
same with Third World countries vs. their imperialist masters. Though
now, in the current state of capitalist decay, it seems like it's the
capitalists want protection vs. China! Which your David Irving-loving
buddy enthusiastically supports in the case of Australia, and you of
course in the case of Greece.

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states.
Going totally against all traditions of socialism and Marxism, but
what do you care?

-jh-

You are globalist anti-protectionist Obama style...
vngelis

Look, cur, that isn't responsive.

srd
 
Vngelis...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:21 pm
 
On Nov 15, 7:52 pm, srd <srdiam... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 15, 11:25 am, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states.

In my book, this is the main point.

V, how do you defend counterposing program for the U.S. to the program
in workers states and oppressed countries, when in fact you favor THE
SAME program for the U.S.

Answer that, sleazebag.

srd
I was against the bailout I thought the banks should go to the wall.

You were for it indirectly by stating that there was no crash.
You are also for mass immigration into the USA to destroy workers
conditions.


Workers in the USA should try to control imports and exports both of
labour and capital.
That is my line always has been. Yours has been the exact opposite
recently, on apst.
In private you are Republican neo-con pure and simple.

What you have said regarding 9/11 and your support for Bush's wars
clearly shows that.
Practice determines politics not politics practice... in your case.
Others have a brain and they may use it.
vngelis
 
dusty...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:29 pm
 
On Nov 16, 10:11 am, srd <srdiam... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 15, 2:24 pm, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:





On Nov 15, 7:25 pm, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Who is Van Rompuy?

Watch this you might learn something but then again might not as the
case may behttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY

The above is sleazy deliberate confusionism. Of course national pride
in China, where you had a revolution and now have a Stalinist-
bureaucratically deformed workers state, is not the same thing as US
imperialist nationalism. The Chinese have a revolution vs. capitalism
and imperialism to be proud about. Although given the powerful
capitalist restorationist forces in China, it *can* slide over into
Chinese bourgeois nationalism.

Protectionism is a separate issue altogether, and of course a workers'
state needs to protect itself against the capitalist market. And the
same with Third World countries vs. their imperialist masters. Though
now, in the current state of capitalist decay, it seems like it's the
capitalists want protection vs. China! Which your David Irving-loving
buddy enthusiastically supports in the case of Australia, and you of
course in the case of Greece.

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states..
Going totally against all traditions of socialism and Marxism, but
what do you care?

-jh-

You are globalist anti-protectionist Obama style...
vngelis

Look, cur, that isn't responsive.

srd

What do you mean?

I've just looked at it. Nigel Farage does a superb job in dealing with
Van Rompuy who indeed does look like something the cat dragged in and
he does come from the divided freeway that today calls itself
"Belgium" and Van Rompuy does and has stated as you have also, that he
wants the destruction of all nation states and rule by a Global
Imperialist World Government, a front for the Banks and their
Transnational Corporations. And he is a Bilderburg Dog and it's from
that shadowy outfit that this total non-entity derives his
"authority".
 
dusty...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 3:51 pm
 
On Nov 16, 11:29 am, dusty <trackdu... at (no spam) yahoo.com.au> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 16, 10:11 am, srd <srdiam... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:





On Nov 15, 2:24 pm, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 15, 7:25 pm, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Who is Van Rompuy?

Watch this you might learn something but then again might not as the
case may behttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY

The above is sleazy deliberate confusionism. Of course national pride
in China, where you had a revolution and now have a Stalinist-
bureaucratically deformed workers state, is not the same thing as US
imperialist nationalism. The Chinese have a revolution vs. capitalism
and imperialism to be proud about. Although given the powerful
capitalist restorationist forces in China, it *can* slide over into
Chinese bourgeois nationalism.

Protectionism is a separate issue altogether, and of course a workers'
state needs to protect itself against the capitalist market. And the
same with Third World countries vs. their imperialist masters. Though
now, in the current state of capitalist decay, it seems like it's the
capitalists want protection vs. China! Which your David Irving-loving
buddy enthusiastically supports in the case of Australia, and you of
course in the case of Greece.

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states.
Going totally against all traditions of socialism and Marxism, but
what do you care?

-jh-

You are globalist anti-protectionist Obama style...
vngelis

Look, cur, that isn't responsive.

srd

What do you mean?

I've just looked at it. Nigel Farage does a superb job in dealing with
Van Rompuy who indeed does look like something the cat dragged in and
he does come from the divided freeway that today calls itself
"Belgium" and Van Rompuy does and has stated as you have also, that he
wants the destruction of all nation states and rule by a Global
Imperialist World Government, a front for the Banks and their
Transnational Corporations. And he is a Bilderburg Dog and it's from
that shadowy outfit that this total non-entity derives his
"authority".

The unremitting change in the structure of World economic activity has
been from smaller, nation-state based firms to Transnational (Global)
Corporations. It is this which makes old positions about opposition to
protectionism obsolete in all nations. The "Left" holds onto their old
position of opposing protectionism and so becomes a servile tool of
the Banks and Transnational Corporations in their agendas of nation
state obliteration and the ultimate goal of Imperialist World
Government.

Earlier realities and developments:

Google’s cache of http://www.scribd.com/doc/20489701/The-Role-of-Transnational-Corporations-in-a-Global-Market.

"The rapidity with which the MNCs are growing is indicated by the fact
that while according to the World Investment Report 1997 there were
about 45,000 MNCs with some 280,000 affiliates, according to the World
Investment Report 2001 there were over 63,000 of them with about
822,000 affiliates. Only less than 12 per cent of these affiliates
were in the developed countries. China was host to about 3.64 lakh of
the affiliates (i.e., more than 44 percent of the total) compared to
more than 1400 in India The MNCs account for a significant share of
the world’s industrial investment, production, employment and trade.
The Prowess of MNCs International production by transnational.
Corporations (TNCs), now numbering some 63,000 parent firms with
around 800,000 foreign affiliates and a plethora of inter firm
arrangements, spans virtually all countries and economic activities,
rendering it a formidable force in today’s world economy. The worlds
top 100 (non-financial) TNCs based almost exclusively in developed
countries. Are the principal drivers of international production. The
$2 trillion in assets of their foreign affiliates accounted for about
one eighth of the total assets of all foreign affiliates worldwide in
1998. the foreign affiliates of the top 100 TNCs employ over 6 million
persons, and their foreign sales are of the order of $2 trillion."


More recent (2009):

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Transnational+corporations+and+marketing+ethics+in+global+market+in...-a0216488581



"FIFTY YEARS AGO ONLY A FEW HUNDRED TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS
EXISTED. TODAY THEY ARE SOME 65,000 OF THEM WITH ABOUT 850,000 FOREIGN
AFFILIATES ACROSS THE GLOBE. Sometimes called multinational
organizations, they operate "across national boundaries in a context
of nation states" and are engaged in almost every economic activity,
most notably in agriculture food stuff, fishing, forestry,
pharmaceuticals, mining, manufacturing, energy, tourism, transport,
financial and other services. Mostly based in western economies, TNCs
now occupy a powerful position in the global economy, accounting for
around two-thirds of international trade. While most are comparatively
small, some are huge. In 1999, fifty one of the world's one hundred
largest economies were corporations, 49 were government (Madeley;
2003). These transnational corporations have become most powerful
economic and political entities in the world today. For example, the
combined revenues of just General Motors and Ford the two largest
automobile corporations in the world exceed the combined Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) for all of sub-Saharan Africa. The combined
sales of Mitsubishi, Mitsui, ITOCHU, Sumitomo, Marubeni, and Nissho
Iwai, Japan's top six Sogo Sosha or trading companies, are nearly
equivalent to the combined GDP of all of South America. Overall, fifty-
one of the largest one hundred economies of the world are
corporations. THE REVENUE OF THE TOP 500 CORPORATIONS IN THE US EQUAL
ABOUT SIXTY PERCENT OF THE COUNTRY'S GDP. TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS
HOLD NINETY PERCENT OF ALL TECHNOLOGY AND PRODUCT PATENT WORLDWIDE AND
ARE INVOLVED IN SEVENTY PERCENT OF WORLD TRADE. WHILE GLOBAL IN REACH,
THESE CORPORATIONS' HOME BASES ARE CONCENTRATED IN THE NORTHERN
INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES. MORE THAN HALF COME FROM JUST FIVE NATIONS:
FRANCE, GERMANY, THE NETHERLANDS, JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES. BUT
DESPITE THEIR GROWING NUMBERS POWER IS CONCENTRATED AT THE TOP I.E.
THE THREE HUNDRED LARGEST CORPORATIONS ACCOUNT FOR ONE-QUARTER OF THE
WORLD'S PRODUCTIVE ASSETS. THE UNITED NATIONS HAS DESCRIBED THESE
CORPORATIONS AS "THE PRODUCTIVE CORE OF THE GLOBALIZING WORLD
ECONOMY". THEIR 250,000 FOREIGN AFFILIATES ACCOUNTS FOR MOST OF THE
WORLD'S INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE, INTERNATIONAL
FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS AND ULTIMATELY THE POWER OF CONTROL. IN TERMS
OF ENERGY, THEY MINE, REFINE AND DISTRIBUTE MOST OF THE WORLD'S OIL,
GASOLINE, DIESEL AND JET FUEL AS WELL AS BUILD MOST OF THE WORLD'S
MINERALS FROM THE GROUND. THEY MANUFACTURE AND SELL MOST OF THE
WORLD'S AUTOMOBILES, AIRPLANES, COMMUNICATION SATELLITES, COMPUTERS,
HOME ELECTRONICS, CHEMICAL, MEDICINES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS. THEY
HARVEST MUCH OF THE WORLD'S WOOD AND MAKE MOST OF ITS PAPER. THEY GROW
MANY OF THE WORLD'S MAJOR AGRICULTURAL CROPS, WHILE PROCESSING AND
DISTRIBUTING MUCH OF ITS FOOD. TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS ARE MORE
CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR OWN PROJECT THAN WITH THE WELFARE OF A HOST
COUNTRY.Corporate efficiency is good for profits but it can drive
small scale companies in developing countries out of business. TNC
have been powerful enough to lead industrialization in some countries,
but there is evidence that such TNC led industrialization in several
Asian countries has been achieved at a severe cost to agriculture and
rural development. It is significance that the presence of TNCs in
poor countries has widespread internal inequalities. Almost all the
studies that have done on the effects of FDI have concluded that it
has led to an uneven income distribution in developing countries. TNCs
produce goods and services for those who have purchasing power; they
cannot meet the basic needs of people who do not have the money to
express their needs in the market place. The corporations apply their
knowledge to make comparatively luxury goods and services. The nature
of their products and knowledge may create biases against the poor,
very few of whom are its direct customers, employees or source of
supply."
 
jh...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:23 pm
 
On Nov 15, 3:21 pm, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 15, 7:52 pm, srd <srdiam... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:> On Nov 15, 11:25 am, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states..

In my book, this is the main point.

V, how do you defend counterposing program for the U.S. to the program
in workers states and oppressed countries, when in fact you favor THE
SAME program for the U.S.

Answer that, sleazebag.

srd

I was against the bailout I thought the banks should go to the wall.
You were for it indirectly by stating that there was no crash.
You are also for mass immigration into the USA to destroy workers
conditions.

Workers in the USA should try to control imports and exports both of
labour and capital...

A truly absurd demand. Export of capital is what imperialism is all
about. This is a call for ... workers control over imperialism?

If taken seriously, this would be social-imperialism of the purest
type. How do you enforce that "workers control over capital export"?
Workers control of Blackwater and the other private security companies
guarding Halliburton installations in Iraq? Hmmm, there might be some
old Meanyite AFL/CIA diehards in the labor bureaucracy who would go
for that...

It's not serious though, it's just a sonorous pseudo-Marxist way to
get away with supporting imperialist protectionism vs. China and Third
World countries. Including US imperialist. And let's not forget
British, as Vangelis is after all a Brit, when you get right down to
it.

-jh-
 
dusty...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:54 pm
 
On Nov 16, 1:23 pm, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 15, 3:21 pm, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:





On Nov 15, 7:52 pm, srd <srdiam... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:> On Nov 15, 11:25 am, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states.

In my book, this is the main point.

V, how do you defend counterposing program for the U.S. to the program
in workers states and oppressed countries, when in fact you favor THE
SAME program for the U.S.

Answer that, sleazebag.

srd

I was against the bailout I thought the banks should go to the wall.
You were for it indirectly by stating that there was no crash.
You are also for mass immigration into the USA to destroy workers
conditions.

Workers in the USA should try to control imports and exports both of
labour and capital...

A truly absurd demand. Export of capital is what imperialism is all
about. This is a call for ... workers control over imperialism?
-jh-

These words reflect a cross between the powerlessness of the petty
bourgeois and the mendacious cynicism of a Jewish Globalist.

Hey Larry, did it occur to you that "WAR is also what imperialism is
all
about?
 
dusty...
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:34 pm
 
On Nov 16, 12:51 pm, dusty <trackdu... at (no spam) yahoo.com.au> wrote:
Quote:
On Nov 16, 11:29 am, dusty <trackdu... at (no spam) yahoo.com.au> wrote:





On Nov 16, 10:11 am, srd <srdiam... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 15, 2:24 pm, Vngelis <meberr... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 15, 7:25 pm, jh <jhsherl... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

Who is Van Rompuy?

Watch this you might learn something but then again might not as the
case may behttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY

The above is sleazy deliberate confusionism. Of course national pride
in China, where you had a revolution and now have a Stalinist-
bureaucratically deformed workers state, is not the same thing as US
imperialist nationalism. The Chinese have a revolution vs. capitalism
and imperialism to be proud about. Although given the powerful
capitalist restorationist forces in China, it *can* slide over into
Chinese bourgeois nationalism.

Protectionism is a separate issue altogether, and of course a workers'
state needs to protect itself against the capitalist market. And the
same with Third World countries vs. their imperialist masters. Though
now, in the current state of capitalist decay, it seems like it's the
capitalists want protection vs. China! Which your David Irving-loving
buddy enthusiastically supports in the case of Australia, and you of
course in the case of Greece.

And you are being deceitful here, fact is you support protectionism in
the US too, as well as in all other capitalist and imperialist states.
Going totally against all traditions of socialism and Marxism, but
what do you care?

-jh-

You are globalist anti-protectionist Obama style...
vngelis

Look, cur, that isn't responsive.

srd

What do you mean?

I've just looked at it. Nigel Farage does a superb job in dealing with
Van Rompuy who indeed does look like something the cat dragged in and
he does come from the divided freeway that today calls itself
"Belgium" and Van Rompuy does and has stated as you have also, that he
wants the destruction of all nation states and rule by a Global
Imperialist World Government, a front for the Banks and their
Transnational Corporations. And he is a Bilderburg Dog and it's from
that shadowy outfit that this total non-entity derives his
"authority".

The unremitting change in the structure of World economic activity has
been from smaller, nation-state based firms to Transnational (Global)
Corporations. It is this which makes old positions about opposition to
protectionism obsolete in all nations. The "Left" holds onto their old
position of opposing protectionism and so becomes a servile tool of
the Banks and Transnational Corporations in their agendas of nation
state obliteration and the ultimate goal of Imperialist World
Government.

Earlier realities and developments:

Google’s cache ofhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/20489701/The-Role-of-Transnational-Corporat....

"The rapidity with which the MNCs are growing is indicated by the fact
that while according to the World Investment Report 1997 there were
about 45,000 MNCs with some 280,000 affiliates, according to the World
Investment Report 2001 there were over 63,000 of them with about
822,000 affiliates. Only less than 12 per cent of these affiliates
were in the developed countries. China was host to about 3.64 lakh of
the affiliates (i.e., more than 44 percent of the total) compared to
more than 1400 in India The MNCs account for a significant share of
the world’s industrial investment, production, employment and trade.
The Prowess of MNCs International production by transnational.
Corporations (TNCs), now numbering some 63,000 parent firms with
around 800,000 foreign affiliates and a plethora of inter firm
arrangements, spans virtually all countries and economic activities,
rendering it a formidable force in today’s world economy. The worlds
top 100 (non-financial) TNCs based almost exclusively in developed
countries. Are the principal drivers of international production. The
$2 trillion in assets of their foreign affiliates accounted for about
one eighth of the total assets of all foreign affiliates worldwide in
1998. the foreign affiliates of the top 100 TNCs employ over 6 million
persons, and their foreign sales are of the order of $2 trillion."

More recent (2009):

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Transnational+corporations+and+marketin...

"FIFTY YEARS AGO ONLY A FEW HUNDRED TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS
EXISTED. TODAY THEY ARE SOME 65,000 OF THEM WITH ABOUT 850,000 FOREIGN
AFFILIATES ACROSS THE GLOBE. Sometimes called multinational
organizations, they operate "across national boundaries in a context
of nation states" and are engaged in almost every economic activity,
most notably in agriculture food stuff, fishing, forestry,
pharmaceuticals, mining, manufacturing, energy, tourism, transport,
financial and other services. Mostly based in western economies, TNCs
now occupy a powerful position in the global economy, accounting for
around two-thirds of international trade. While most are comparatively
small, some are huge. In 1999, fifty one of the world's one hundred
largest economies were corporations, 49 were government (Madeley;
2003). These transnational corporations have become most powerful
economic and political entities in the world today. For example, the
combined revenues of just General Motors and Ford the two largest
automobile corporations in the world exceed the combined Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) for all of sub-Saharan Africa. The combined
sales of Mitsubishi, Mitsui, ITOCHU, Sumitomo, Marubeni, and Nissho
Iwai, Japan's top six Sogo Sosha or trading companies, are nearly
equivalent to the combined GDP of all of South America. Overall, fifty-
one of the largest one hundred economies of the world are
corporations. THE REVENUE OF THE TOP 500 CORPORATIONS IN THE US EQUAL
ABOUT SIXTY PERCENT OF THE COUNTRY'S GDP. TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS
HOLD NINETY PERCENT OF ALL TECHNOLOGY AND PRODUCT PATENT WORLDWIDE AND
ARE INVOLVED IN SEVENTY PERCENT OF WORLD TRADE. WHILE GLOBAL IN REACH,
THESE CORPORATIONS' HOME BASES ARE CONCENTRATED IN THE NORTHERN
INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES. MORE THAN HALF COME FROM JUST FIVE NATIONS:
FRANCE, GERMANY, THE NETHERLANDS, JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES. BUT
DESPITE THEIR GROWING NUMBERS POWER IS CONCENTRATED AT THE TOP I.E.
THE THREE HUNDRED LARGEST CORPORATIONS ACCOUNT FOR ONE-QUARTER OF THE
WORLD'S PRODUCTIVE ASSETS. THE UNITED NATIONS HAS DESCRIBED THESE
CORPORATIONS AS "THE PRODUCTIVE CORE OF THE GLOBALIZING WORLD
ECONOMY". THEIR 250,000 FOREIGN AFFILIATES ACCOUNTS FOR MOST OF THE
WORLD'S INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE, INTERNATIONAL
FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS AND ULTIMATELY THE POWER OF CONTROL. IN TERMS
OF ENERGY, THEY MINE, REFINE AND DISTRIBUTE MOST OF THE WORLD'S OIL,
GASOLINE, DIESEL AND JET FUEL AS WELL AS BUILD MOST OF THE WORLD'S
MINERALS FROM THE GROUND. THEY MANUFACTURE AND SELL MOST OF THE
WORLD'S AUTOMOBILES, AIRPLANES, COMMUNICATION SATELLITES, COMPUTERS,
HOME ELECTRONICS, CHEMICAL, MEDICINES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS. THEY
HARVEST MUCH OF THE WORLD'S WOOD AND MAKE MOST OF ITS PAPER. THEY GROW
MANY OF THE WORLD'S MAJOR AGRICULTURAL CROPS, WHILE PROCESSING AND
DISTRIBUTING MUCH OF ITS FOOD. TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS ARE MORE
CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR OWN PROJECT THAN WITH THE WELFARE OF A HOST
COUNTRY.Corporate efficiency is good for profits but it can drive
small scale companies in developing countries out of business. TNC
have been powerful enough to lead industrialization in some countries,
but there is evidence that such TNC led industrialization in several
Asian countries has been achieved at a severe cost to agriculture and
rural development. It is significance that the presence of TNCs in
poor countries has widespread internal inequalities. Almost all the
studies that have done on the effects of FDI have concluded that it
has led to an uneven income distribution in developing countries. TNCs
produce goods and services for those who have purchasing power; they
cannot meet the basic needs of people who do not have the money to
express their needs in the market place. The corporations apply their
knowledge to make comparatively luxury goods and services. The nature
of their products and knowledge may create biases against the poor,
very few of whom are its direct customers, employees or source of
supply."

On Globalist creature Van Rompuy whom Holmes had forgotten about:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/bilderberg-appointee-van-rompuy-is-first-eu-president.html

Bilderberg Appointee Van Rompuy Is First EU President

Former Prime Minister of Belgium takes role just days after meeting
with secretive globalist cabal

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, November 20, 2009

UPDATE: EU president wants Copenhagen to give us “global management”
of planet

Despite widespread expectation that former British Prime Minister Tony
Blair would be announced as the first European Union President, the
former Prime Minister of Belgium, Herman Van Rompuy, was picked for
the role just days after he attended a Bilderberg Group dinner
meeting.

Reports suggest that there is “dismay” in some quarters over the
appointment because Van Rompuy has a “low international profile,” but
his fealty towards taking orders from his bosses at Bilderberg is
likely to have swayed the decision.

As we have exhaustively documented, Bilderberg has displayed its
kingmaker power on numerous occasions, contradicting claims that it
merely represents a “talking shop” for aging elitists.

Both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair attended Bilderberg meetings in the
early 90’s before becoming President and Prime Minister respectively.

In 2004 it was reported that John Edwards’ performance at the
Bilderberg conference in Italy was a key factor in his selection as
John Kerry’s number two. Bilderberg attendees even broke house rules
to applaud Edwards at the end of a speech he gave to the elitists
about American politics.

Pedro Santana Lopes and Jose Socrates attended the 2004 Bilderberg
meeting in Stresa, Italy before both going on to become Prime Minster
of Portugal.

Just days before the announcement was made, Van Rompuy attended a
dinner organized by the Bilderberg Group in Brussels, where he met
with top Bilderberg steering committee members and gave a speech about
implementing a raft of new taxes, including airline tax, fuel duty tax
and value added tax, all of which will form an EU tax that goes
straight to Brussels.

“The possibilities of financial levies at European level must be
seriously examined and for the first time the large countries in the
union are open to that,” said Van Rompuy, according to Dutch newspaper
De Tijd.

The report describes how Van Rompuy held discussions with Bilderberg
chairman Étienne Davignon, who earlier this year bragged to the EU
Observer about how the Euro single currency was a brainchild of the
Bilderberg Group. Van Rompuy also had a meeting with lifelong
Bilderberg member Henry Kissinger.

The foundations for the EU and ultimately the Euro single currency
were laid by the secretive Bilderberg Group in the mid-1950’s.
Bilderberg’s owned leaked documents prove that the agenda to create a
European common market and a single currency were formulated by
Bilderberg in 1955. One of the group’s principle founders was H.
Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a former Nazi SS officer.

But the ideological framework for the European Union goes back even
further, to the 1940’s when top Nazi economists and academics outlined
the plan for a single European economic community, an agenda that was
duly followed after the end of the second world war.

As we have highlighted in the past, Nazism and the EU have some very
disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined
and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.

The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and
industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power
and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of
the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union
system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of
totalitarianism.

This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular
social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power
grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which was
forced through in Ireland earlier this year despite the population
having already rejected it in a previous national referendum.

Just like Hitler repeatedly polled Germans of the 1930’s until he
could intimidate them into delivering the result he wanted, the
European Union has followed the same method. The ratification of the
Lisbon Treaty was what enabled the EU to create the post of a European
President in the first place, and there seems little doubt that Van
Rompuy will do everything in his power to accelerate the move towards
Bilderberg’s ultimate goal – a dictatorial European federal superstate
that completely swallows up what tattered shreds of sovereignty member
states have left.
 
 
Page 1 of 2    Goto page 1, 2  Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Apr 17, 2014 2:12 am