• Categories

  • The Golden Rule

    “That which is hateful to you do not do to another ... the rest (of the Torah) is all commentary, now go study.”

    - Rabbi Hillel

  • Subscribe

  • Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Remember to click "manage" to set your preferences, such as daily and the time of delivery. Thanks!

  • Note

    The huge blue banner ads on the videos are placed there by Wordpress.com, not Dandelion Salad.
  • Lists of posts and videos


    List of all posts

    List of all videos

    Feedburner listing the last 25 posts

    Blogroll

    Open Forum for Dandelion Salad
    (Discussion, comments, whatever you'd like to write about.)

    Don’t Enlist, But Don’t Just Take My Word For It by Lo
    Please pass this on to anyone you know who may be considering enlisting as a soldier (mercenary).

  • Don’t forget to check out more videos on Dandelion Salad’s Lockerz

  • Amendment I

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
  • Disclaimer:

    The views and/or opinions posted on all the blog posts and in the comment sections are of their respective authors, not necessarily those of Dandelion Salad.

    All content has been used with permission from the copyright owners, who reserve all rights, and that for uses outside of fair use (an excerpt), permission must be obtained from the respective copyright owner.

  • Dandelion Salad on Facebook

  • Occupy Everywhere!

    Occupy Wall Street on Dandelion Salad
  • Food

    Food On Dandelion Salad
  • Activism – Protests – Boycotts

    Activism Protests Boycotts

    "But remember, this power of the people on top depends on the obedience of the people below. When people stop obeying, they have no power." -- Howard Zinn

  • Global Warming

    Drought
  • Socialism

    Socialism on Dandelion Salad
  • Meet the new boss the same as the old boss

    Obama = Bush
  • US Deaths in Afghanistan: Obama vs Bush. Click here to learn more.
  • Obama’s Wars

    President Obama: Stop the Wars!

    Afghanistan

    Iraq

    Somalia

    Uganda

    Yemen

    Economic Warfare: Sanctions-Embargos

    Cuba

    Iran

    North Korea

  • RSS Press TV

  • RSS Public Citizen

  • RSS Citizens for a Legitimate Government

  • RSS williambowles.info

  • RSS Permaculture Research Institute

  • RSS My Utmost for His Highest

    • Our Careful Unbelief May 23, 2013
      . . . do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on —Matthew 6:25Jesus summed up commonsense carefulness in the life of a disciple as unbelief. If we have received the Spirit of God, He will squeeze right …
  • RSS The Greanville Post

  • RSS War Is A Crime

Ron Paul on CNN 04.28.08 (video)

Dandelion Salad

mmortal03

Ron Paul talking about his new book, the Republicrats, the national debt, the Federal Reserve, non-intervention, John McCain, subsidization, inflation, the free market economy, and his overwhelming support at the recent Nevada Republican convention

from www.youtube.com posted with vodpod

.

h/t: x Timothy Michael x ~ L.O.™. ~

US intelligence on Syrian reactor: justifying last year’s crime to prepare for new ones

Dandelion Salad

By Peter Symonds
http://www.wsws.org
28 April 2008

More than seven months after Israeli warplanes destroyed a building in Syria’s eastern desert, the Bush administration has released intelligence purporting to prove that Damascus was building a nuclear reactor at the site, with the assistance of North Korea, as part of plans to build an atomic bomb.

The CIA intelligence briefing last Thursday raised more questions than it answered, and fuelled considerable speculation about its timing and purpose. In all the commentary, however, the most obvious point is deliberately obscured. The US is belatedly justifying an unprovoked and illegal act of aggression by Israel, undoubtedly sanctioned at the time by Washington, that had the potential to spark a new war in the Middle East.

A White House statement hypocritically warned that Syria’s covert construction of the reactor was “a dangerous and potentially destabilising development for the region and the world”, carried out in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). It is an open secret, however, that Israel, with Washington’s tacit approval, has covertly manufactured a substantial arsenal of nuclear weapons, refused to sign the NPT and blocked International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections of its facilities.

…continued

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Pepe Escobar: What did Israel bomb in Syria? (video)

Evolving US Military Agenda: Black Hole in Bush’s Brain

Evidence-based Bombing By Scott Ritter

US ship confronts boats in Gulf + Iranian Boats shot at by U.S. Navy (video)

An Act Of War – Interview: Seymour Hersh

McCain: I will follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell + McCain’s Serious Foreign Policy

Dandelion Salad

joeboo4refill

Senator John McCain comments on Osama bin Laden during a rally in Tampa, FL on January 28th, 2008.

from www.youtube.com posted with vodpod

.

h/t: ICH

***

John McCain’s Serious Foreign Policy

By Glenn Greenwald
ICH

04/
26/08 “Salon

John McCain was on a conference call with right-wing bloggers yesterday and boasted:

I think that people should understand that I will be Hamas’s worst nightmare.

What possible reason would a U.S. President have for turning himself and our country into a “nightmare” for Hamas, let alone its “worst nightmare”? Hamas is a single-issue Palestinian group, focused exclusively on its “territorial dispute” with Israel (and, in light of its victory in the U.S.-demanded election, is also now preoccupied with governing the Palestinian Authority). Is there anyone who thinks that Hamas has tried to, will try to, or ever could attack the U.S.? Hamas is an enemy of Israel, not the U.S. Is that a distinction we even recognize any more?

…continued

***

John McCain’s Bid For American Jewish Votes

By Glenn Greenwald
ICH
04/28/08 “Salon

John McCain was in South Florida yesterday bidding for Jewish votes by explicitly articulating the right-wing, fear-mongering strategy to secure this vital voting bloc: namely, exploiting the devotion which many American Jewish voters have to Israel by scaring them into believing that Barack Obama will jeopardize Israel’s security while only McCain will protect that country (by copying the Bush/Cheney approach to Israel’s enemies):

When asked about the Jewish vote in South Florida, a bloc that typically votes Democratic, McCain said he wanted the votes of all Americans. “There are many Jewish Americans who are committed to the state of Israel and its existence and realize it is under incredible threat — the Iranians, Hamas, Hezbollah, all of the other threats that they face including the president of Iran, who Sen. Obama wants to sit down and negotiate with face to face, who is dedicated to the extinction of the state of Israel,” McCain said.

…continued

***

McCain’s Bizarre Undiscovered Foreign Policy Ideas

http://www.motherjones.com

04/28/08

McCain’s troubling foreign policy vision on Iraq/Afghanistan/the war on terror is well-known. But he’s just as recklessly hawkish when it comes to the rest of the world. For example, he wants to create a League of Democracies that will replace the United Nations. Here’s the always insightful Fareed Zakaria:

The approach lacks any strategic framework…. How would the League of Democracies fight terrorism while excluding countries like Jordan, Morocco, Egypt and Singapore? What would be the gain to the average American to lessen our influence with Saudi Arabia, the central banker of oil, in a world in which we are still crucially dependent on that energy source?

…continued

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

McCain visits New Orleans: I would have nuked Katrina first (satire)

McCain Sound Bytes the MSM Ignored (videos)

UN rapporteur talks about the global food crisis (vid)

Dandelion Salad

AlJazeeraEnglish

The United Nations is expected to reveal a so-called battle plan to tackle the growing global food crisis.

The meeting in Switzerland on Monday comes after a warning from the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food.

Jean Ziegler says biofuels are a crime against humanity. Al Jazeera asked him to give us his personal view on exactly what’s wrong with the system right now.

from www.youtube.com posted with vodpod

.

see

FOOD CRISIS: The greatest demonstration of the historical failure of the capitalist model

Global Famine: The Lords of Capital Decree Mass Death by Starvation

The World Food Crisis By John Nichols

Fueling Food Shortages by Ralph Nader + Harry Chapin: Cats In The Cradle

Bill Moyers Journal: Hunger in America + Exposé Farm Subsidies + Soup Kitchen

Global Famine? Blame the Fed By Mike Whitney

Pentagon TV Scandal: Media Fails To Ask Hard Questions

Dandelion Salad

Veracifier

More at http://www.theuptake.org
You’d think news that the Pentagon secretly infiltrated TV news shows with propaganda about the Iraq invasion packaged as fact would be a huge story. It was in the New York Times which broke the story. But on TV, particularly the networks that were duped by the Pentagon, coverage of the story was short-lived.

Matt Thompson of FreePress.net reports the hard questions in this scandal haven’t been answered, because they haven’t been asked.

from www.youtube.com posted with vodpod

.

see

Tomgram: Petraeus, Falling Upwards By Tom Engelhardt

The neoconning of a nation: Vice-President, shilling troupe of retired generals, deliver fantastic tales for their cause

PBS: TV Generals Pentagon Propagandist & It’s Illegal!

Max and the Marginalized: Whose Face Can You Save

NYT on the Pentagon’s Puppets (video)

Pentagon pundits jeopardize America’s Free Press (Action Alert; vid)

Pentagon Propaganda & Antiwar Analysts

Major revelation: US media deceitfully disseminates government propaganda

Reverend Wright Delivers the Knockout Punch By Mike Whitney

Dandelion Salad

By Mike Whitney
04/28/08 “ICH”

“Yes, there have been death threats on both myself and on Pastor Moss. And bomb threats at the church.” Reverend Jeremiah Wright on the media’s incitement; “Bill Moyers Journal” PBS

Reverend Jeremiah Wright appeared on PBS Bill Moyers Journal on Friday night and delivered a knockout punch to the bully-boys in the corporate media. It was an impressive performance that left the political assassins over at FOX News choking on their sausage-rolls. Wright showed that he is neither a fanatic nor an “America hater”; just an extremely well-read and principled man with an unshakable commitment to justice. Wright has also paid his dues; he’s an ex-Marine who served in Vietnam when most of his critics were either hiding behind their student deferments or languishing in the “Champagne Unit” of the Texas National Guard. He’s earned the right to say whatever he chooses.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright:

“And the United States of America government, when it came to treating her citizens of Indian descent fairly, she failed. She put them on reservations. When it came to treating her citizens of Japanese descent fairly, she failed. She put them in internment prison camps. When it came to treating citizens of African descent fairly, America failed. She put them in chains. The government put them on slave quarters, put them on auction blocks, put them in cotton fields, put them in inferior schools, put them in substandard housing, put them in scientific experiments, put them in the lowest paying jobs, put them outside the equal protection of the law, kept them out of their racist bastions of higher education and locked them into position of hopelessness and helplessness. The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law, and then wants us to sing God bless America? No, no, no. Not God bless America; God damn America!

No one disputes Wright’s summary of US history. His comments have simply been taken out of context to beat up on Barack Obama; everyone knows that. Just like everyone knows that the media has been retooled to destroy political enemies, which means anyone who poses a challenge to America’s unelected corporate oligarchy. That’s why it is so frustrating to hear people say, “The media is not doing its job.”

That’s just plain wrong; the media IS doing its job. It’s cheerleading the country to war, it is diverting attention from the main political and economic issues of the day, and it is destroying its political enemies. That’s what it’s paid to do. Its foolish to think the media should perform differently because of the PR nonsense about a “free press”. The media gets its marching orders from its corporate managers; that’s who issues the paychecks on Fridays. It’s their agenda that counts, not ours. The political assassination of Barack Obama just happens to be on the top of their list this week. That’s why the media is zeroing in on Rev. Wright; he is the sacrificial lamb.

What the media is trying to do by singling out Wright is to make it look like blacks are outside of the mainstream and hostile to white American society. It’s all pretty straightforward. They’re trying to create the impression that blacks conceal a deep sense of grievance which expresses itself in rage. This generates feelings of fear among whites which, of course, is all part of the strategy. The message is simple; “blacks are angry, blacks are dangerous” and, oh by the way, Obama is black.

Is it fair to say that that is essentially a racist message?

What’s so clever about the attack on Wright is that it was set up in a way to make it look like the Reverend—a man whose entire career has been devoted to social justice—is a racist. That took a bit of maneuvering. In fact, the media, and their friends at the right-wing think tanks, had to dig through 15 years of Wright’s sermons to find just the right snippets they needed to destroy Obama. Now that’s determination! The attacks on Wright bear all the earmarks of a well-engineered Karl Rove-type operation. Nothing has been left to chance. All the mud-slinging and poisonous innuendo has been arranged with the greatest attention to detail and with real professionalism. These guys are pros. They know what it takes to ruin people and they are good at it.

They decided the best way to go-after Obama was by using his “blackness” against him. It took considerable skill to invoke the “race card” without being discovered. The tables were turned in a way that made it look like Wright and his parishioners were the racists and whites were merely blameless bystanders. That’s the real genius of the Wright smear-campaign.

For more than 5 months Obama had been able to run on a campaign on issues and experience, but the attacks on Wright have changed all of that. Now the public sees Obama as a black man; at least that’s the intention. Race has become one of the dominant issues on the campaign-trail and Obama routinely fends off charges that blacks foster a hidden resentment towards whites because of the way they have been mistreated. Obama is no longer just a man running for office; now he’s a black man. That’s how swift-boating works. Like they say in the Godfather; “It’s not personal; it’s just business”. The business of personal destruction.

Fortunately, Bill Moyers, one of the giants of journalism, decided to give Wright a chance to acquit himself before the public. Wright took the opportunity and made the most of it.

Rev. Wright:

“God is the giver of life. Let me tell you what that means. That means we have no right to take a life whether as a gang-banger living the thug life, or as a President lying about leading a nation into war. We have no right to take a life! Whether through the immorality of a slave trade, or the immorality of refusing HIV/AIDS money to countries or agencies who do not tow your political line! We have no right to take a life!”

Wright showed that the doctrine he preaches, Black Liberation Theology, is neither discriminatory nor racist as the media has suggested. Rather, it integrates the teachings of Jesus Christ with the real-time struggle for social justice and equality. Compassion is not possible if one does not have a grasp of one’s own culture and identity. That’s why Wright tries to reconnect his congregation to their roots, so they can be proud of who they are and have more productive lives.

Rev. Wright:

“You know, you come into the average church on a Sunday morning and you think you’ve stepped from the real world into a fantasy world. And what do I mean by that?” He said pick up the church bulletin. You leave a world, Vietnam, or today you leave a world, Iraq, over 4,000 dead, American boys and girls, 100,000, 200,000 depending on which count, Iraqi dead. Afghanistan, Darfur, rapes in the Congo, Katrina, Lower Ninth Ward, that’s the world you leave. And you come in; you pick up your church bulletin. It says, there is a ladies tea on second Sunday. He said, “How come the faith preached in our churches does not relate to the world in which our church members leave at the benediction?”

This is the essence of Black Liberation Theology; how to make sense of the world we live in so the word of Christ can be applied in practice. Wright thinks that faith should be a transforming experience that changes behavior and shapes lives, not just a few hours of prayer every week at Sunday services. Does that make it “a race-based theology? (as Moyers asks)

Rev. Wright:

“No, it is not. It is embracing Christianity without giving up Africanity. …We’re not givin’ up who we are as black people to become somebody else…No mas. Nada mas. We’re gonna be ourselves. We’re gonna be our culture. We’re gonna be our history. And we’re gonna embrace it and not say one is superior to the other. Because we are different. And different does not mean deficient. We talk about God of diversity? God has diverse culture and we’re proud of who we are and that’s not a race-based theology.”

Wright has also been skewered in the media for suggesting there may be a connection between American foreign policy and the attacks of 9-11. The media considers any analysis that doesn’t square with Bush’s crackpot “they hate our freedoms” theory to be either anti-American or outright heresy. In his most famous sermon, Wright elaborates on the “blowback” theme as well as the so-called war on terror:

“We took this country by terror away from the Sioux, the Apache, the Arawak, the Comanche, the Arapaho, the Navajo. Terrorism! We took Africans from their country to build our way of ease and kept them enslaved and living in fear. Terrorism! We bombed Grenada and killed innocent civilians, babies, non-military personnel. We bombed the black civilian community of Panama with stealth bombers and killed unarmed teenagers and toddlers, pregnant mothers and hard-working fathers. We bombed Gadafi’s home and killed his child. “Blessed are they who bash your children’s head against a rock!” We bombed Iraq. We killed unarmed civilians trying to make a living. We bombed a plant in Sudan to payback for the attack on our embassy. Killed hundreds of hard-working people; mothers and fathers who left home to go that day, not knowing that they would never get back home. We bombed Hiroshima! We bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye! Kids playing in the playground, mothers picking up children after school, civilians – not soldiers – people just trying to make it day by day. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and Black South Africans, and now we are indignant? Because the stuff we have done overseas has now been brought back into our own front yards! America’s chickens are coming home to roost! Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred and terrorism begets terrorism.”

America has blood on its hands. America, as Martin Luther King said, “is the greatest perpetrator of violence in the world today.” So what else is new?

What’s new, is the media is using every soapbox in the country to preach uber-nationalism and vilify America’s critics as unpatriotic. Their “Love it or leave it” gibberish is being used to tar a presidential candidate who hasn’t sufficiently prostrated himself before his corporate overlords to make them feel that he can be trusted to carry out their directives. That is what’s really happening. Obama is just unpredictable enough to make the parasite class nervous that he might do something crazy, like serve the public interest. That would be a real disaster. It’d be better to install the appalling Ms. Clinton than take a chance on the “populist” Obama. That’s why the wrath of the media has descended on Obama like a Texas hailstorm; they’re afraid he doesn’t understand who really runs things in America.

Wright means nothing to the media or to the men behind the curtain. If he didn’t provide an avenue for denigrating Obama, he’d be treated with the same indifference as the thousands of other blacks who were herded at gunpoint into the Superdome during Hurricane Katrina. It’s Obama’s scalp they want; that’s the real prize. This is a turf war; the big-wigs are defending their fiefdom from interlopers. They’re even rolling out the heavy artillery expecting a full-blown conflagration. The election season is shaping up to be a real donnybrook. Better buckle up. Obama has entered the crosshairs of America’s criminal oligarchy and things are bound to get nasty.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Rev Jeremiah Wright Without The Right-Wing Propaganda (vid)

Bill Moyers Journal: Reverend Jeremiah Wright

Mosaic News – 4/25/08: World News from the Middle East

Dandelion Salad

Warning

.

This video may contain images depicting the reality and horror of war/violence and should only be viewed by a mature audience.

linktv

For more: http://linktv.org/originalseries
“Israel Rejects Hamas’ Offer,” Al Jazeera English, Qatar
“2 Israelis Killed Near Tulkarem,” IBA TV, Israel
“Hamas Changing Tactics,” Al Arabiya TV, UAE
“Hamas Predicts an End to the Siege,” Al Aqsa, Gaza
“Lebanese Prisoners in Syrian Jails,” New TV, Lebanon
“760 Thousand Iraqi Students Out of Schools,” Dubai TV, UAE
“Iranians Lose Confidence in Parliamentary Elections,” Al Jazeera TV, Qatar
“MIR: The Taming of the Assad (lion),” Link TV, USA
Produced for Link TV by Jamal Dajani.

from www.youtube.com posted with vodpod

.

see

FOOD CRISIS: The greatest demonstration of the historical failure of the capitalist model

Syrian ambassador rejects US nuclear charges + The Taming of the Assad (lion) (vids)

FOOD CRISIS: The greatest demonstration of the historical failure of the capitalist model

Dandelion Salad

By Ian Angus
www.socialistvoice.ca
April 28, 2008

“If the government cannot lower the cost of living it simply has to leave. If the police and UN troops want to shoot at us, that’s OK, because in the end, if we are not killed by bullets, we’ll die of hunger.” — A demonstrator in Port-au-Prince, Haiti

In Haiti, where most people get 22% fewer calories than the minimum needed for good health, some are staving off their hunger pangs by eating “mud biscuits” made by mixing clay and water with a bit of vegetable oil and salt.[1]

Meanwhile, in Canada, the federal government is currently paying $225 for each pig killed in a mass cull of breeding swine, as part of a plan to reduce hog production. Hog farmers, squeezed by low hog prices and high feed costs, have responded so enthusiastically that the kill will likely use up all the allocated funds before the program ends in September.

Some of the slaughtered hogs may be given to local Food Banks, but most will be destroyed or made into pet food. None will go to Haiti.

This is the brutal world of capitalist agriculture — a world where some people destroy food because prices are too low, and others literally eat dirt because food prices are too high.

Record prices for staple foods

We are in the midst of an unprecedented worldwide food price inflation that has driven prices to their highest levels in decades. The increases affect most kinds of food, but in particular the most important staples — wheat, corn, and rice.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization says that between March 2007 and March 2008 prices of cereals increased 88%, oils and fats 106%, and dairy 48%. The FAO food price index as a whole rose 57% in one year — and most of the increase occurred in the past few months.

Another source, the World Bank, says that that in the 36 months ending February 2008, global wheat prices rose 181% and overall global food prices increased by 83%. The Bank expects most food prices to remain well above 2004 levels until at least 2015.

The most popular grade of Thailand rice sold for $198 a tonne five years ago and $323 a tonne a year ago. On April 24, the price hit $1,000.

Increases are even greater on local markets — in Haiti, the market price of a 50 kilo bag of rice doubled in one week at the end of March.

These increases are catastrophic for the 2.6 billion people around the world who live on less than US$2 a day and spend 60% to 80% of their incomes on food. Hundreds of millions cannot afford to eat.

This month, the hungry fought back.

Taking to the streets

In Haiti, on April 3, demonstrators in the southern city of Les Cayes built barricades, stopped trucks carrying rice and distributed the food, and tried to burn a United Nations compound. The protests quickly spread to the capital, Port-au-Prince, where thousands marched on the presidential palace, chanting “We are hungry!” Many called for the withdrawal of UN troops and the return of Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the exiled president whose government was overthrown by foreign powers in 2004.

President René Préval, who initially said nothing could be done, has announced a 16% cut in the wholesale price of rice. This is at best a stop-gap measure, since the reduction is for one month only, and retailers are not obligated to cut their prices.

The actions in Haiti paralleled similar protests by hungry people in more than twenty other countries.

  • In Burkino Faso, a two-day general strike by unions and shopkeepers demanded “significant and effective” reductions in the price of rice and other staple foods.
  • In Bangladesh, over 20,000 workers from textile factories in Fatullah went on strike to demand lower prices and higher wages. They hurled bricks and stones at police, who fired tear gas into the crowd.
  • The Egyptian government sent thousands of troops into the Mahalla textile complex in the Nile Delta, to prevent a general strike demanding higher wages, an independent union, and lower prices. Two people were killed and over 600 have been jailed.
  • In Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire, police used tear gas against women who had set up barricades, burned tires and closed major roads. Thousands marched to the President’s home, chanting “We are hungry,” and “Life is too expensive, you are killing us.”
  • In Pakistan and Thailand, armed soldiers have been deployed to prevent the poor from seizing food from fields and warehouses.

Similar protests have taken place in Cambodia, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Honduras, Indonesia, Madagascar, Mauritania, Niger, Peru, Philippines, Senegal, Thailand, Uzbekistan, and Zambia. On April 2, the president of the World Bank told a meeting in Washington that there are 33 countries where price hikes could cause social unrest.

A Senior Editor of Time magazine warned:

“The idea of the starving masses driven by their desperation to take to the streets and overthrow the ancien regime has seemed impossibly quaint since capitalism triumphed so decisively in the Cold War…. And yet, the headlines of the past month suggest that skyrocketing food prices are threatening the stability of a growing number of governments around the world. …. when circumstances render it impossible to feed their hungry children, normally passive citizens can very quickly become militants with nothing to lose.”[2]

What’s Driving Food Inflation?

Since the 1970s, food production has become increasingly globalized and concentrated. A handful of countries dominate the global trade in staple foods. 80% of wheat exports come from six exporters, as does 85% of rice. Three countries produce 70% of exported corn. This leaves the world’s poorest countries, the ones that must import food to survive, at the mercy of economic trends and policies in those few exporting companies. When the global food trade system stops delivering, it’s the poor who pay the price.

For several years, the global trade in staple foods has been heading towards a crisis. Four related trends have slowed production growth and pushed prices up.

The End of the Green Revolution: In the 1960s and 1970s, in an effort to counter peasant discontent in south and southeast Asia, the U.S. poured money and technical support into agricultural development in India and other countries. The “green revolution” — new seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, agricultural techniques and infrastructure — led to spectacular increases in food production, particularly rice. Yield per hectare continued expanding until the 1990s.

Today, it’s not fashionable for governments to help poor people grow food for other poor people, because “the market” is supposed to take care of all problems. The Economist reports that “spending on farming as a share of total public spending in developing countries fell by half between 1980 and 2004.”[3] Subsidies and R&D money have dried up, and production growth has stalled.

As a result, in seven of the past eight years the world consumed more grain than it produced, which means that rice was being removed from the inventories that governments and dealers normally hold as insurance against bad harvests. World grain stocks are now at their lowest point ever, leaving very little cushion for bad times.

Climate Change: Scientists say that climate change could cut food production in parts of the world by 50% in the next 12 years. But that isn’t just a matter for the future:

  • Australia is normally the world’s second-largest exporter of grain, but a savage multi-year drought has reduced the wheat crop by 60% and rice production has been completely wiped out.
  • In Bangladesh in November, one of the strongest cyclones in decades wiped out a million tonnes of rice and severely damaged the wheat crop, making the huge country even more dependent on imported food.

Other examples abound. It’s clear that the global climate crisis is already here, and it is affecting food.

Agrofuels: It is now official policy in the U.S., Canada and Europe to convert food into fuel. U.S. vehicles burn enough corn to cover the entire import needs of the poorest 82 countries.[4]

Ethanol and biodiesel are very heavily subsidized, which means, inevitably, that crops like corn (maize) are being diverted out of the food chain and into gas tanks, and that new agricultural investment worldwide is being directed towards palm, soy, canola and other oil-producing plants. This increases the prices of agrofuel crops directly, and indirectly boosts the price of other grains by encouraging growers to switch to agrofuel.

As Canadian hog producers have found, it also drives up the cost of producing meat, since corn is the main ingredient in North American animal feed.

Oil Prices: The price of food is linked to the price of oil because food can be made into a substitute for oil. But rising oil prices also affect the cost of producing food. Fertilizer and pesticides are made from petroleum and natural gas. Gas and diesel fuel are used in planting, harvesting and shipping.[5]

It’s been estimated that 80% of the costs of growing corn are fossil fuel costs — so it is no accident that food prices rise when oil prices rise.

***

By the end of 2007, reduced investment in the third world, rising oil prices, and climate change meant that production growth was slowing and prices were rising. Good harvests and strong export growth might have staved off a crisis — but that isn’t what happened. The trigger was rice, the staple food of three billion people.

Early this year, India announced that it was suspending most rice exports in order to rebuild its reserves. A few weeks later, Vietnam, whose rice crop was hit by a major insect infestation during the harvest, announced a four-month suspension of exports to ensure that enough would be available for its domestic market.

India and Vietnam together normally account for 30% of all rice exports, so their announcements were enough to push the already tight global rice market over the edge. Rice buyers immediately started buying up available stocks, hoarding whatever rice they could get in the expectation of future price increases, and bidding up the price for future crops. Prices soared. By mid-April, news reports described “panic buying” of rice futures on the Chicago Board of Trade, and there were rice shortages even on supermarket shelves in Canada and the U.S.

Why the rebellion?

There have been food price spikes before. Indeed, if we take inflation into account, global prices for staple foods were higher in the 1970s than they are today. So why has this inflationary explosion provoked mass protests around the world?

The answer is that since the 1970s the richest countries in the world, aided by the international agencies they control, have systematically undermined the poorest countries’ ability to feed their populations and protect themselves in a crisis like this.

Haiti is a powerful and appalling example.

Rice has been grown in Haiti for centuries, and until twenty years ago Haitian farmers produced about 170,000 tonnes of rice a year, enough to cover 95% of domestic consumption. Rice farmers received no government subsidies, but, as in every other rice-producing country at the time, their access to local markets was protected by import tariffs.

In 1995, as a condition of providing a desperately needed loan, the International Monetary Fund required Haiti to cut its tariff on imported rice from 35% to 3%, the lowest in the Caribbean. The result was a massive influx of U.S. rice that sold for half the price of Haitian-grown rice. Thousands of rice farmers lost their lands and livelihoods, and today three-quarters of the rice eaten in Haiti comes from the U.S.[6]

U.S. rice didn’t take over the Haitian market because it tastes better, or because U.S. rice growers are more efficient. It won out because rice exports are heavily subsidized by the U.S. government. In 2003, U.S. rice growers received $1.7 billion in government subsidies, an average of $232 per hectare of rice grown.[7] That money, most of which went to a handful of very large landowners and agribusiness corporations, allowed U.S. exporters to sell rice at 30% to 50% below their real production costs.

In short, Haiti was forced to abandon government protection of domestic agriculture — and the U.S. then used its government protection schemes to take over the market.

There have been many variations on this theme, with rich countries of the north imposing “liberalization” policies on poor and debt-ridden southern countries and then taking advantage of that liberalization to capture the market. Government subsidies account for 30% of farm revenue in the world’s 30 richest countries, a total of US$280 billion a year,[8] an unbeatable advantage in a “free” market where the rich write the rules.

The global food trade game is rigged, and the poor have been left with reduced crops and no protections.

In addition, for several decades the World Bank and International Monetary Fund have refused to advance loans to poor countries unless they agree to “Structural Adjustment Programs” (SAP) that require the loan recipients to devalue their currencies, cut taxes, privatize utilities, and reduce or eliminate support programs for farmers.

All this was done with the promise that the market would produce economic growth and prosperity — instead, poverty increased and support for agriculture was eliminated.

“The investment in improved agricultural input packages and extension support tapered and eventually disappeared in most rural areas of Africa under SAP. Concern for boosting smallholders’ productivity was abandoned. Not only were governments rolled back, foreign aid to agriculture dwindled. World Bank funding for agriculture itself declined markedly from 32% of total lending in 1976-8 to 11.7% in 1997-9.”[9]

During previous waves of food price inflation, the poor often had at least some access to food they grew themselves, or to food that was grown locally and available at locally set prices. Today, in many countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America, that’s just not possible. Global markets now determine local prices — and often the only food available must be imported from far away.

* * *

Food is not just another commodity — it is absolutely essential for human survival. The very least that humanity should expect from any government or social system is that it try to prevent starvation — and above all that it not promote policies that deny food to hungry people.

That’s why Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez was absolutely correct on April 24, to describe the food crisis as “the greatest demonstration of the historical failure of the capitalist model.”

What needs to be done to end this crisis, and to ensure that doesn’t happen again?
Part Two of this article will examine those questions.

Footnotes

[1] Kevin Pina. “Mud Cookie Economics in Haiti.” Haiti Action Network, Feb. 10, 2008. http://www.haitiaction.net/News/HIP/2_10_8/2_10_8.html

[2] Tony Karon. “How Hunger Could Topple Regimes.” Time, April 11, 2008. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1730107,00.html

[3] “The New Face of Hunger.” The Economist, April 19, 2008.

[4] Mark Lynas. “How the Rich Starved the World.” New Statesman, April 17, 2008. http://www.newstatesman.com/200804170025

[5] Dale Allen Pfeiffer. Eating Fossil Fuels. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island BC, 2006. p. 1

[6] Oxfam International Briefing Paper, April 2005. “Kicking Down the Door.” http://www.oxfam.org/en/files/bp72_rice.pdf

[7] Ibid.

[8] OECD Background Note: Agricultural Policy and Trade Reform. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/52/23/36896656.pdf

[9] Kjell Havnevik, Deborah Bryceson, Lars-Erik Birgegård, Prosper Matondi & Atakilte Beyene. “African Agriculture and the World Bank: Development or Impoverishment?” Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal, http://www.links.org.au/node/328

h/t: SocialistUS & BlueGreenEarth / ESEI

Socialist Voice is a forum for discussion of today’s struggles of the workers and oppressed from the standpoint of revolutionary Marxism. Readers are encouraged to distribute Socialist Voice as widely as possible.

see

Global Famine: The Lords of Capital Decree Mass Death by Starvation

The World Food Crisis By John Nichols

Bill Moyers Journal: Hunger in America + Exposé Farm Subsidies + Soup Kitchen

Global Famine? Blame the Fed By Mike Whitney

Fueling Food Shortages by Ralph Nader + Harry Chapin: Cats In The Cradle

High prices & less land keep Haiti hungry (vid) + The Black Hole of Debt

Is Impeachment Possible? by David Swanson (vids)

davidcnswanson

David Swanson speaks on impeaching Dick Cheney.
April 24th, 2008 Town Hall meeting, Grand Lake Theater, Oakland, CA.
David shares his inspiration, insights, humor, latest news, and initiatives for impeachment of Cheney.
How you can get involved in and what you can do to promote and achieve impeachment.

Pepe Escobar: What did Israel bomb in Syria? (video)

Dandelion Salad

TheRealNews

More at http://therealnews.com/c.ph…
Pepe Escobar: Real story behind September air strike has never been investigated

from www.youtube.com posted with vodpod

.

see

Evolving US Military Agenda: Black Hole in Bush’s Brain

Evidence-based Bombing By Scott Ritter

US ship confronts boats in Gulf + Iranian Boats shot at by U.S. Navy (video)

An Act Of War – Interview: Seymour Hersh

US rebuked Over Syria Nuclear Case + Syrian Nukes: the Phantom Menace

Syrian ambassador rejects US nuclear charges + The Taming of the Assad (lion) (vids)

Global Famine: The Lords of Capital Decree Mass Death by Starvation

Dandelion Salad

by Glen Ford
Global Research, April 28, 2008
Black Agenda Report

Having crushed the planet’s peasants and converted food into just another commodity for global manipulation, the Lord’s of Capital have unleashed upon humanity the threat – no, certainty – of mass starvation. The criminal mega-enterprise is centered in the United States, the former “breadbasket of the planet” whose massive conversion to biofuels has caused staple crop prices to skyrocket beyond the reach of hundreds of millions of the world’s poor. The death of millions translates into profits in the trillions for the Lords of Capital, killers on a mass scale whose only talents lie in “the production of overlapping calamities, each more lethal than the last.”

“No amount of emergency aid is sufficient to make up for the wild price rises that have already occurred.”

Fidel Castro called biofuels “genocide,” and he was right. And there can be no question as to the identity of the perpetrators of this global genocide: the Lords of Capital that formulate the foreign and domestic policy of the United States. That policy calls for 20 million acres of corn from states like Iowa to be converted from food to fuel. As should have been expected, such a massive diversion almost immediately pushed up the price of all other basic foodstuffs – a global disaster made quick and easy by the fact that, over the past several decades, planetary food production has been taken over by agribusiness – the speculative human parasites that control how food is bought and sold, and to whom, and for what purpose. These Lords of Capital are killers on a mass scale.

“Hot” money has totally distorted the “marketplace” for life-sustaining goods, causing millions of the desperately poor in scores of countries to take to the streets. “In less than a year,” writes the Guardian newspaper, in Britain, “the price of wheat has risen 130 per cent, soya by 87 per cent and rice by 74 per cent.”

These are nothing less than crimes against humanity, and cannot help but destroy the lives of millions who are already at the very edge of the precipice.

“The Lords of Capital have imposed a triage of death by starvation on the planet.”

The so-called “market” – which is actually a club of super-rich men who distort and destroy everything of value to humanity that they touch – will be the death of us all, and much quicker than through the effects of global warming, which is also greatly accelerated by the ghoulish, greedy rush to grow food for cars rather than people. In such a murderous environment -manipulated purely for the profits of the Lords of Capital – neither trees nor peasants stand a chance. The United Nations says it needs about half a billion dollars for the most critical cases of starvation, but no amount of emergency aid is sufficient to make up for the wild price rises that have already occurred – and which will put trillions in the pockets of the Lords of Capital.

Agribusiness wiped out small farmers in the U.S., and impoverished and pushed off the land untold millions of peasants, worldwide. Now the Lords of Capital have imposed a triage of death by starvation on the planet. The people who live on two dollars or less per day will have to die, and then, as prices rise, the three dollar people will follow.

The men who profit from such mass murder use terms like “structural adjustment” and “economic fundamentals” to attach a veneer of rationality to a chaotic system they have created on the fly for the sole purpose of mega-theft. In the end, the Lords of Capital have mastered only one art: the production of overlapping calamities, each more lethal than the last. Soon, if not already, the Haitian poor will have no cooking oil to mix with clay for their diet of dirt pies. The Lords of Capital will have turned them into dirt for another Haitian’s consumption and demise.

For Black Agenda Radio, I’m Glen Ford.

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Glen Ford, Black Agenda Report, 2008
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8828

see

More than 3 billion people condemned to premature death from hunger & thirst

The World Food Crisis By John Nichols

Fueling Food Shortages by Ralph Nader + Harry Chapin: Cats In The Cradle

Bill Moyers Journal: Hunger in America + Exposé Farm Subsidies + Soup Kitchen

Global Famine? Blame the Fed By Mike Whitney

Financial speculators reap profits from global hunger

Crisis in Food Prices Threatens Worldwide Starvation: Is it Genocide?

The World Food Crisis By John Nichols

Dandelion Salad

By John Nichols
This article appeared in the May 12, 2008 edition of The Nation.
April 24, 2008

The only surprising thing about the global food crisis to Jim Goodman is the notion that anyone finds it surprising. “So,” says the Wisconsin dairy farmer, “they finally figured out, after all these years of pushing globalization and genetically modified [GM] seeds, that instead of feeding the world we’ve created a food system that leaves more people hungry. If they’d listened to farmers instead of corporations, they would’ve known this was going to happen.” Goodman has traveled the world to speak, organize and rally with groups such as La Via Campesina, the global movement of peasant and farm organizations that has been warning for years that “solutions” promoted by agribusiness conglomerates were designed to maximize corporate profits, not help farmers or feed people. The food shortages, suddenly front-page news, are not new. Hundreds of millions of people were starving and malnourished last year; the only change is that as the scope of the crisis has grown, it has become more difficult to “manage” the hunger that a failed food system accepts rather than feeds.

…continued

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Exposed: the great GM crops myth

Fueling Food Shortages by Ralph Nader + Harry Chapin: Cats In The Cradle

William Clinton & Monsanto – a Team for Mutual Profit

Letter to Hillary about Monsanto connections (02.03.08)

Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear

Bill Moyers Journal: Hunger in America + Exposé Farm Subsidies + Soup Kitchen

Global Famine? Blame the Fed By Mike Whitney

Tomgram: Petraeus, Falling Upwards By Tom Engelhardt

Dandelion Salad

By Tom Engelhardt
TomDispatch
April 27, 2008

Selling the President’s General

The Petraeus Story

You simply can’t pile up enough adjectives when it comes to the general, who, at a relatively young age, was already a runner-up for Time Magazine’s Person of the Year in 2007. His record is stellar. His tactical sense extraordinary. His strategic ability, when it comes to mounting a campaign, beyond compare.

I’m speaking, of course, of General David Petraeus, the President’s surge commander in Iraq and, as of last week, the newly nominated head of U.S. Central Command (Centcom) for all of the Middle East and beyond — “King David” to those of his peers who haven’t exactly taken a shine to his reportedly “high self-regard.” And the campaign I have in mind has been his years’ long wooing and winning of the American media, in the process of which he sold himself as a true American hero, a Caesar of celebrity.

As far as can be told, there’s never been a seat in his helicopter that couldn’t be filled by a friendly (or adoring) reporter. This, after all, is the man who, in the summer of 2004, as a mere three-star general being sent back to Baghdad to train the Iraqi army, made Newsweek’s cover under the caption, “Can This Man Save Iraq?” (The article’s subtitle — with the “yes” practically etched into it — read: “Mission Impossible? David Petraeus Is Tasked with Rebuilding Iraq’s Security Forces. An Up-close Look at the Only Real Exit Plan the United States Has — the Man Himself”).

And, oh yes, as for his actual generalship on the battlefield of Iraq… Well, the verdict may still officially be out, but the record, the tactics, and the strategic ability look like they will not stand the test of time. But by then, if all goes well, he’ll once again be out of town and someone else will take the blame, while he continues to fall upwards. David Petraeus is the President’s anointed general, Bush’s commander of commanders, and (not surprisingly) he exhibits certain traits much admired by the Bush administration in its better days.

Launching Brand Petraeus

Recently, in an almost 8,000 word report in the New York Times, David Barstow offered an unparalleled look inside a sophisticated Pentagon campaign, spearheaded by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, in which at least 75 retired generals and other high military officers, almost all closely tied to Pentagon contractors, were recruited as “surrogates.” They were to take Pentagon “talking points” (aka “themes and messages”) about the President’s War on Terror and war in Iraq into every part of the media — cable news, the television and radio networks, the major newspapers — as their own expert “opinions.” These “analysts” made “tens of thousands of media appearances” and also wrote copiously for op-ed pages (often with the aid of the Pentagon) as part of an unparalleled, five-plus year covert propaganda onslaught on the! American people that lasted from 2002 until, essentially, late last night. Think of it, like a pod of whales or a gaggle of geese, as the Pentagon’s equivalent of a surge of generals.

Click here to read more of this dispatch.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

The neoconning of a nation: Vice-President, shilling troupe of retired generals, deliver fantastic tales for their cause

PBS: TV Generals Pentagon Propagandist & It’s Illegal!

Max and the Marginalized: Whose Face Can You Save

NYT on the Pentagon’s Puppets (video)

Pentagon pundits jeopardize America’s Free Press (Action Alert; vid)

Pentagon Propaganda & Antiwar Analysts

Major revelation: US media deceitfully disseminates government propaganda

How can socialism become reality?

Dandelion Salad

Posted with permission by:
World Socialist Party (US)

www.wspus.org
April 26, 2008

From our website

P.M. writes: “I like the bulk of your ideals. By what means can they become reality?

FNB Replies: It’s our position that socialism can become reality when a majority of the population (primarily the working class) desires socialism and rejects capitalism.

I understand that sounds a rather simplistic answer. But the capitalist class cannot continue it’s rule – even through violence or bribery – when enough workers decide to break with the capitalists’ legitimacy and their system.

Our effort is to get enough workers to understand that socialism is a rejection of the fundamental structures of capitalism – the market, ownership, wages, production, etc. Not only understand but accept socialism as a positive change.

Workers are forced by their living conditions to question capitalism daily. Working people wish they didn’t have to work as hard and want more time with their families. They worry about the earth and the world their children will be inheriting.These days, they worry about keeping warm, keeping fed and keeping their house. They may even resent the pettiness of the ‘stuff’ that capitalism offers for our life’s efforts at work.

Because of these contradictions, socialists are given opportunities everyday to build a new consensus. The more socialists there are, the more ability we will have to take new and different actions to build the new system

But we also need to confront and destroy the capitalist class’ social legitimacy. The WSP believes that the capitalist’s legitimacy comes from their ‘democratic’ rule, thus we believe that the capitalist’s legitimacy can be totally be broken by taking a majority in Congress.

But “capturing” Congress is only a measure of acceptance of socialism and a coup de grace to capitalist rule. The real revolution in social relations will be made in our lives and by ourselves, not congress.

But right now, the movement is quite small and dispersed. So we focus on providing socialist analysis of the issues of the day. We hold meetings and work to break capitalist ideas when we’re involved in social movements (example).

As the movement grows, we’ll be able to be more inventive with our activity and in ways we cannot conceive of today. The WSP does not believe we – the WSP – can create blueprints or maps to the new society, that effort is one that must be left to all the people.

Thanks for writing.

You can now ask the WSP questions about our ideas and the case for socialism. We will attempt to answer all sincere questions. Send your questions to:

ask [at] wspus.org

Click on ASK! in the subject cloud ‘previous posts’ on our site.

Can the media be made democratic?

Dandelion Salad

Posted with permission by:
World Socialist Party (US)

by Steve Trott
http://www.wspus.org
April 23, 2008

(Socialist Standard – March 2008) Since the early twentieth century American journalists have been fascinated by the uneasy relationship between democracy and a media industry that has grown immensely powerful and profitable. The opinion that the democratic process has been undermined – epitomised by declining electoral turnout – by an industry more concerned with increasing corporate profits than the meaningful dissemination of information has repeatedly led to demands for media reform.

In the first part of the twentieth century the American writer and journalist Upton Sinclair drew attention to the corrosive influence of advertising that led newspapers to adapt content to suit powerful sponsors and encourage editorial self-censorship. Sinclair’s book The Brass Check (1919) was a scathing attack on a monopolistic press, in which he said that commercial journalism had become “a class institution serving the rich and spurning the poor,” with the task of “hoodwinking of the public and the plunder of labour”. Brought in some years after the publication of Sinclair’s book, the Federal Communication Act of 1934 was widely seen as the first real attempt to curb media monopoly and reinvigorate the supposedly democratic values embodied in the American Constitution through “public interest, convenience and necessity.” But these and later reforms failed to consider one possibility: What would happen if the government ever saw public information as secondary to free market economics? What would happen if the government actually joined forces with the media to communicate a common ideology that devalued “democracy”?

Media deregulation

According to Bill Moyers, one of America’s best known and respected post-war journalists, this is exactly what happened under the banner of media deregulation. Beginning with Ronald Reagan, deregulation sowed the seeds for a consolidation that eliminated much of the independent media and prompted editorial policy to downgrade the importance of news. But the crowning achievement in the demotion of meaningful news came later with the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which was passed with the support of both political parties. This legislation allowed communications conglomerates and advertisers to join forces to dismantle competition safeguards and devise “new ways of selling things to more people” across the full array of digital and conventional media. Within the media corporations the strategy eliminated remaining divisions between editorial and marketing functions to “create a hybrid known to the new-media hucksters as ‘branded entertainment.’” (Bill Moyers, Journalism and Democracy, Alternative Radio, 8 November 2003).

Moyers’ assessment of the American newspaper industry is equally gloomy. Here, according to a study by the Consumers Federation of America, two-thirds of today’s newspaper markets are monopolies. Not satisfied with this stranglehold, the major newspaper chains have combined with the trade group representing almost all of the broadcasting stations to lobby for further autonomy to extend cross-ownership of media, claiming that this will strengthen local journalism. Moyers notes that in typical fashion none of the organisations involved felt it necessary to report this news, remarking, “they rarely report on how they themselves are using their power to further their own interests and power as big business, including their influence over the political process”. He draws further evidence from the book, Leaving Readers Behind: The Age of Corporate Newspapering, which concludes that the “newspaper industry is in the middle of the most momentous change in its three hundred year history – a change that is diminishing the amount of real news available to the consumer”.

Looking back over American history, Moyers says that during the War of Independence freedom and freedom of communication were the “birth twins in the future United States”, but that today freedom of communication has become an obstacle to corporate profits and has been abandoned. He says that the media that once championed democracy now works hand in glove with government to intentionally undermine democratic values. He identifies certain developments that have ambushed democracy. These include censorship by omission, government refusal to disclose or debate in public, and the overarching power of media giants that “exalt commercial values at the expense of democratic values” to produce “a major shrinkage of the crucial information that thinking people can act upon”.

But according to Moyers perhaps the most repugnant development is the rise of a “quasi-official partisan press ideologically linked to an authoritarian administration that in turn is the ally and agent of the most powerful interests in the world”. This convergence, he says, “dominates the marketplace of political ideas” promoting the “religious, partisan and corporate right” to engage “sectarian, economic and political forces that aim to transform the egalitarian and democratic ideals embodied in our founding documents”. He goes on to provide examples where investigative newsgathering and scrutiny over government, police and the courts has been abandoned to cut costs, avoid institutional embarrassment and maintain this coalition of vested interests. In the absence of a strong opposition party to challenge this hegemony, the task of defending democracy, he says, falls to a reformed media.

The recurrent theme that runs throughout Moyers’ account of the American media is a yearning back to a romanticised “Golden Age”, when a free and independent press kept its subscribers fully informed with important news that enabled them to act. He points to the newspapers at the time of the American War of Independence and in particular to Tom Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense that helped mobilise opposition to the British. Moyers says that as a journalist Paine practised a principle in need of restoration: “an unwavering concentration to reach ordinary people with the message that they mattered and could stand up for themselves.” But was this really a “Golden Age” of democracy or was it, as Sinclair believed, just another instance of the press propagating a class interest under the guise of democracy? Put a different way, has a press free from political or commercial influence ever existed?

Romanticised past

For many, a belief in the abstract democratic ideal is closely linked to the myths surrounding the origin of the Constitution and the founding of America as a separate country. But far from being a revolutionary event that encouraged a genuine development of democratic values, the War of Independence was a strictly conservative affair. The colonial rebellion was not the work of enraged peasants but of landed gentlemen, who argued their case on the principles of the British constitution by demanding free assembly, trial by jury, and no taxation without representation. Despite pretensions of being “enlightened” – sweeping aside monarchy, aristocracy and the established church – the new republic was never designed to be anything other than an oligarchic state. The political institutions and Constitution mirrored instincts of conservatism and constructed an array of checks and balances motivated by paranoia, suspicion of central government power, and religion that laid the foundation for laissez faire economics.

The expulsion of the British eliminated the constraints of the feudal social order substituting in its place the abstract principles that “all men are created equal” and that power is derived from “the will of the people”. The desire to protect and then extend private property rights sanctified by religious superstition led to a type of liberty intended to allow the pursuit of individual aims and wealth unconstrained by government interference. To those who took up the reins of power, government was to be judged not by its ability to promote prosperity but by its capacity to leave people alone to pursue private ends. The principle that personal opportunity should be maximised also struck a chord with Puritanism that saw the acquisition of money as the just result of hard work and “the Lord’s blessing”.

This moderate civic liberty was deemed more important than any tendency towards democracy, and the architects of the Declaration of Independence – the land and property owners – were quick to construct a system of government based on the division of power that would guard against the “excesses of democracy”. They adopted a definition of “the people” which excluded women, non-landowners and slaves.

While it is undoubtedly true that writers like Tom Paine were influential in pushing the colonial revolt further than originally intended, it is also clear that the real beneficiaries of the break with Britain were the landowners and wealthy traders who were able to expand their own wealth without interference. Although Paine’s call to arms, based on abstractions and ideals, appealed to the ordinary person, the benefits accrued were material and went to the wealthy.

The “democracy” practised today in America is usually held up as the ultimate symbol of “liberty”. But from its outset this system was not envisaged as a condition in which individuals would be kept informed and use the knowledge acquired in the decision making process. On the contrary, this type of “democracy” was constructed as the institutional means to exclude the people from this arena by limiting involvement to the periodic election of someone, normally submissive to a political party, who would make decisions for them.

In capitalist society the media has always had a role to play in the promotion in this kind of vision. The production of a successful newspaper, for example, has always meant that journalistic integrity and editorial objectiveness have been subordinate to the institutional requirement of production for profit. From the moment that newspaper became a commodity and subject to advertising patronage and market forces, the genuine dissemination of information was always going to be the first casualty.

Prevailing ideas

So the media, in America as elsewhere, has a vested interest in driving out all but the most benign opinions and instilling a set of values and a code of behaviour that integrate people into class society. But this does not mean that the media are necessarily part of some conspiracy. While the media’s role is to circulate information presented in the context of society’s prevailing ideas, which have a strong influence over the way people think, this does not mean that the media originate these ideas. In general, the ideas presented by the media are rooted in the social milieu and are traceable, in the main, to the material conditions and the economic relations of society. The class that controls society’s economic structure shapes the institutions that arise in order to manage the economic conditions in its own interests and perpetuate its ascendancy over society. As well as its control over society’s coercive powers and the means by which the wage and salary earners live, this class also exercises persuasive powers, based on legal rights, traditions, customs and, as in America, historical myth that works its way into the consciousness of the working class. In a society divided by class, based on economic interests, the prevailing ideas are therefore a reflection of the needs and aspirations of the dominant class, which explains why many members of the working class often think and act in ways that are in contradiction to their real interests. The media therefore speaks not just for itself but for the whole of the capitalist class.

There are two reasons why Moyers’ belief that a reformed media can resurrect an abstract vision of “democracy” conjured up from a romanticised image of America’s past does not stand up to scrutiny. Firstly, the type of democracy he seems to want has never really existed, and secondly he fails to appreciate that capitalism and genuine democracy can never co-exist. Moyers does not criticise the economic system that compels the media to act in the way it does and does not see that in this system the media cannot operate in any other way – as if in a vacuum, uninfluenced by market forces. Media reform, which tinkers with the detail but leaves the underlying causes firmly entrenched, is, it could even be argued, actually dangerous because it reinforces the belief that capitalism can be made to work in the interests of the working class, when the opposite is patently the case.