This year has seen a flurry of government "intervention" in the global economy as a result of the cascading "crises" that have struck the u.s. and the world from every direction. While I would love to go into a discussion of what these "crises" really are and why they actually benefit certain people (Exxon Mobil recently recorded the highest profits EVER recorded). Unfortunately I am still compiling my data and sharpening my arguments. So, alas, we'll have to settle with a small aspect of the issue: the recent request from the White House for more funds for the occupation of Iraq.
Why take a look at this? Because nestled within this "Iraq Supplemental" bill are some very interesting allocations of funds. One is a $770 million earmark for food aid for countries sinking into mass starvation as a result of the current explosion of food prices. The other is an appropriation of $1.4 billion for "Plan Mexico" or the "Mérida Initiative," which is supposed to set up a "regional security cooperative initiative" between the u.s. and mexican repressive military forces.
Although earmarking $1.4 billion in a bill supposedly about Iraq seems shady to me, it could be argued that they are both military expenditures. We will return to this point. But what about food aid? Why is that part of a war bill?
We can begin to understand the connection between war and food aid policy when we look at the social rebellion that so-called "food shortages" are causing. Under capitalism "need" only exists when there is money behind it. Economists call this "effective demand". Other ideologues call it "dollar democracy" (one 'votes' with one's income....if one has an income).
Despite all of this, sometimes people get angry and desperate enough to vote with their fists. People have nasty habit of thinking they have a right to eat and live. At least people in Haiti and many other places think so...Such rebellious attitudes can topple governments and threaten the rules of private property. They encourage the idea that people should take what they need from an unjust system and those who are hoarding food to make profits.
What I'm trying to emphasize is the use of food "aid" as a tool of social control. Once we grasp this we can see how these policies link up with the general policies of "low intensity, perpetual warfare," where the point of militarism, strictly conceived, is only one aspect of a broad and brutal form of social control (rather than the obliteration of an enemy). Food aid is a carrot, the military is the stick. The occupation of Iraq is one piece in the puzzle that includes "Plan Mexico's", the military arm of NAFTA, the record oil profits of Exxon, etc.
Amilcar Cabral, leader of the national liberation movement in Guinea-Bissau during the 70's dealt with a similar tactic being used by the colonial Portuguese government. While the government was drenching rebellious villages in napalm, they simultaneously were providing services and goods for those who cooperated with them. The Portuguese, like the French and u.s. in Vietnam, set up "strategic hamlets," where peasants could live and receive aid. Of course, these hamlets were isolated from the rebellious villages and kept under strict (though benevolent) control. The people of Guinea-Bissau called this "the policy of smiling and bloodshed". An appropriate name.
Meanwhile NAFTA's inclusion of Mexico in the "first world" doesn't seem to be going over too well with the vast majority of the Mexican people. And so, there is a need for better planes, helicopters, and criminal "justice" funding in order to help the Mexican people understand that resistance will not be tolerated. "Plan Mexico" is one and the same with the continuation of "Operation Iraqi Freedom".
Today the u.s. government is a conspirator in a global policy of guns and grain which amounts to about the same as "smiling and bloodshed": death. The fact that the "aid" is part of a military appropriation bill which seeks funding for the further strengthening of the Mexican military and the occupation forces in Iraq should tell us something about what's going on. At moments like these it is essential to remind ourselves that the State is nowhere near exhausted as an institutional bulwark of capital(ism). In moments of "crisis" when food prices and profits sky-rocket, the State makes possible the continued accumulation of capital by means of crisis.
Like addicted gamblers, the rulers of the world couldn't be more excited about the current economic crises. But they are also worried that someone might find out they've stacked the deck and things might get ugly. So, they hedge their bed with a few million dollars of grains and a few billion dollars of guns.
Keep your eyes on the connections comrades!
Why take a look at this? Because nestled within this "Iraq Supplemental" bill are some very interesting allocations of funds. One is a $770 million earmark for food aid for countries sinking into mass starvation as a result of the current explosion of food prices. The other is an appropriation of $1.4 billion for "Plan Mexico" or the "Mérida Initiative," which is supposed to set up a "regional security cooperative initiative" between the u.s. and mexican repressive military forces.
Although earmarking $1.4 billion in a bill supposedly about Iraq seems shady to me, it could be argued that they are both military expenditures. We will return to this point. But what about food aid? Why is that part of a war bill?
We can begin to understand the connection between war and food aid policy when we look at the social rebellion that so-called "food shortages" are causing. Under capitalism "need" only exists when there is money behind it. Economists call this "effective demand". Other ideologues call it "dollar democracy" (one 'votes' with one's income....if one has an income).
Despite all of this, sometimes people get angry and desperate enough to vote with their fists. People have nasty habit of thinking they have a right to eat and live. At least people in Haiti and many other places think so...Such rebellious attitudes can topple governments and threaten the rules of private property. They encourage the idea that people should take what they need from an unjust system and those who are hoarding food to make profits.
Bush, expressing concern as rocketing world food prices intensified unrest in poor countries, promised...that the United States would take the lead as hunger takes hold of a greater swathe of the developing world.One solution would be to force an increase of income (notice that NO major pundit is suggesting that the solution to current economic crises is increased income for the poor and lower segments of the working class). But this would cut into profits. Instead, capitalists and their governments use "aid" (in Bangladesh corporations are providing food for their poorest workers--to keep them working--rather than paying them better). Rather than increase real wages, they choose instead to "provide" a little food. Of course, along with this "aid" comes stipulations. For example, of the $770 million, $395 million is marked for food, while the other $375 million is to be put in the hands of the US Agency for International Development, so they can continue their neo-liberal "structural adjustment" as a requirement for aid. (Anyone who has ever been to a government office for welfare knows this game very well). Failing to follow the rules can mean starving--a useful club to hold in a period when the largest rice producing countries are talking about forming a "rice cartel" to control prices like OPEC does oil and when workers get that itch to do "unwise" things together.
What I'm trying to emphasize is the use of food "aid" as a tool of social control. Once we grasp this we can see how these policies link up with the general policies of "low intensity, perpetual warfare," where the point of militarism, strictly conceived, is only one aspect of a broad and brutal form of social control (rather than the obliteration of an enemy). Food aid is a carrot, the military is the stick. The occupation of Iraq is one piece in the puzzle that includes "Plan Mexico's", the military arm of NAFTA, the record oil profits of Exxon, etc.
Amilcar Cabral, leader of the national liberation movement in Guinea-Bissau during the 70's dealt with a similar tactic being used by the colonial Portuguese government. While the government was drenching rebellious villages in napalm, they simultaneously were providing services and goods for those who cooperated with them. The Portuguese, like the French and u.s. in Vietnam, set up "strategic hamlets," where peasants could live and receive aid. Of course, these hamlets were isolated from the rebellious villages and kept under strict (though benevolent) control. The people of Guinea-Bissau called this "the policy of smiling and bloodshed". An appropriate name.
Meanwhile NAFTA's inclusion of Mexico in the "first world" doesn't seem to be going over too well with the vast majority of the Mexican people. And so, there is a need for better planes, helicopters, and criminal "justice" funding in order to help the Mexican people understand that resistance will not be tolerated. "Plan Mexico" is one and the same with the continuation of "Operation Iraqi Freedom".
Today the u.s. government is a conspirator in a global policy of guns and grain which amounts to about the same as "smiling and bloodshed": death. The fact that the "aid" is part of a military appropriation bill which seeks funding for the further strengthening of the Mexican military and the occupation forces in Iraq should tell us something about what's going on. At moments like these it is essential to remind ourselves that the State is nowhere near exhausted as an institutional bulwark of capital(ism). In moments of "crisis" when food prices and profits sky-rocket, the State makes possible the continued accumulation of capital by means of crisis.
Like addicted gamblers, the rulers of the world couldn't be more excited about the current economic crises. But they are also worried that someone might find out they've stacked the deck and things might get ugly. So, they hedge their bed with a few million dollars of grains and a few billion dollars of guns.
Keep your eyes on the connections comrades!
No comments:
Post a Comment