The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMichael Hudson Archive
U.S. Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Today’s world is at war on many fronts. The rules of international law and order put in place toward the end of World War II are being broken by U.S. foreign policy escalating its confrontation with countries that refrain from giving its companies control of their economic surpluses. Countries that do not give the United States control of their oil and financial sectors or privatize their key sectors are being isolated by the United States imposing trade sanctions and unilateral tariffs giving special advantages to U.S. producers in violation of free trade agreements with European, Asian and other countries.

This global fracture has an increasingly military cast. U.S. officials justify tariffs and import quotas illegal under WTO rules on “national security” grounds, claiming that the United States can do whatever it wants as the world’s “exceptional” nation. U.S. officials explain that this means that their nation is not obliged to adhere to international agreements or even to its own treaties and promises. This allegedly sovereign right to ignore on its international agreements was made explicit after Bill Clinton and his Secretary of State Madeline Albright broke the promise by President George Bush and Secretary of State James Baker that NATO would not expand eastward after 1991. (“You didn’t get it in writing,” was the U.S. response to the verbal agreements that were made.)

Likewise, the Trump administration repudiated the multilateral Iranian nuclear agreement signed by the Obama administration, and is escalating warfare with its proxy armies in the Near East. U.S. politicians are waging a New Cold War against Russia, China, Iran, and oil-exporting countries that the United States is seeking to isolate if cannot control their governments, central bank and foreign diplomacy.

The international framework that originally seemed equitable was pro-U.S. from the outset. In 1945 this was seen as a natural result of the fact that the U.S. economy was the least war-damaged and held by far most of the world’s monetary gold. Still, the postwar trade and financial framework was ostensibly set up on fair and equitable international principles. Other countries were expected to recover and grow, creating diplomatic, financial and trade parity with each other.

But the past decade has seen U.S. diplomacy become one-sided in turning the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, SWIFT bank-clearing system and world trade into an asymmetrically exploitative system. This unilateral U.S.-centered array of institutions is coming to be widely seen not only as unfair, but as blocking the progress of other countries whose growth and prosperity is seen by U.S. foreign policy as a threat to unilateral U.S. hegemony. What began as an ostensibly international order to promote peaceful prosperity has turned increasingly into an extension of U.S. nationalism, predatory rent-extraction and a more dangerous military confrontation.

Deterioration of international diplomacy into a more nakedly explicit pro-U.S. financial, trade and military aggression was implicit in the way in which economic diplomacy was shaped when the United Nations, IMF and World Bank were shaped mainly by U.S. economic strategists. Their economic belligerence is driving countries to withdraw from the global financial and trade order that has been turned into a New Cold War vehicle to impose unilateral U.S. hegemony. Nationalistic reactions are consolidating into new economic and political alliances from Europe to Asia.

We are still mired in the Oil War that escalated in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq, which quickly spread to Libya and Syria. American foreign policy has long been based largely on control of oil. This has led the United States to oppose the Paris accords to stem global warming. Its aim is to give U.S. officials the power to impose energy sanctions forcing other countries to “freeze in the dark” if they do not follow U.S. leadership.

To expand its oil monopoly, America is pressuring Europe to oppose the Nordstream II gas pipeline from Russia, claiming that this would make Germany and other countries dependent on Russia instead of on U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG). Likewise, American oil diplomacy has imposed unilateral sanctions against Iranian oil exports, until such time as a regime change opens up that country’s oil reserves to U.S., French, British and other allied oil majors.

U.S. control of dollarized money and credit is critical to this hegemony. As Congressman Brad Sherman of Los Angeles told a House Financial Services Committee hearing on May 9, 2019: “An awful lot of our international power comes from the fact that the U.S. dollar is the standard unit of international finance and transactions. Clearing through the New York Fed is critical for major oil and other transactions. It is the announced purpose of the supporters of cryptocurrency to take that power away from us, to put us in a position where the most significant sanctions we have against Iran, for example, would become irrelevant.”[1]Billy Bambrough, “Bitcoin Threatens To ‘Take Power’ From The U.S. Federal Reserve,” Forbes, May 15, 2019. https://www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/05/...b6405.

The U.S. aim is to keep the dollar as the transactions currency for world trade, savings, central bank reserves and international lending. This monopoly status enables the U.S. Treasury and State Department to disrupt the financial payments system and trade for countries with which the United States is at economic or outright military war.

ORDER IT NOW

Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly responded by describing how “the degeneration of the universalist globalization model [is] turning into a parody, a caricature of itself, where common international rules are replaced with the laws… of one country.”[2]Vladimir Putin, keynote address to the Economic Forum, June 5-6 2019. Putin went on to warn of “a policy of completely unlimited economic egoism and a forced breakdown.” This fragmenting of the global economic space “is the road to endless conflict, trade wars and maybe not just trade wars. Figuratively, this is the road to the ultimate fight of all against all.” That is the trajectory on which this deterioration of formerly open international trade and finance is now moving. It has been building up for a decade. On June 5, 2009, then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev cited this same disruptive U.S. dynamic at work in the wake of the U.S. junk mortgage and bank fraud crisis.

Those whose job it was to forecast events … were not ready for the depth of the crisis and turned out to be too rigid, unwieldy and slow in their response. The international financial organisations – and I think we need to state this up front and not try to hide it – were not up to their responsibilities, as has been said quite unambiguously at a number of major international events such as the two recent G20 summits of the world’s largest economies.

Furthermore, we have had confirmation that our pre-crisis analysis of global economic trends and the global economic system were correct. The artificially maintained uni-polar system and preservation of monopolies in key global economic sectors are root causes of the crisis. One big centre of consumption, financed by a growing deficit, and thus growing debts, one formerly strong reserve currency, and one dominant system of assessing assets and risks – these are all factors that led to an overall drop in the quality of regulation and the economic justification of assessments made, including assessments of macroeconomic policy. As a result, there was no avoiding a global crisis.[3]Address to St Petersburg International Economic Forum’s Plenary Session, St Petersburg, Kremlin.ru, June 5, 2009, from Johnson’s Russia List, June 8, 2009, #8,

That crisis is what is now causing today’s break in global trade and payments.

Warfare on many fronts, with Dollarization being the main arena

Dissolution of the Soviet Union 1991 did not bring the disarmament that was widely expected. U.S. leadership celebrated the Soviet demise as signaling the end of foreign opposition to U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism and even as the End of History. NATO expanded to encircle Russia and sponsored “color revolutions” from Georgia to Ukraine, while carving up former Yugoslavia into small statelets. American diplomacy created a foreign legion of Wahabi fundamentalists from Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, Syria and Libya in support of Saudi Arabian extremism and Israeli expansionism.

The United States is waging war for control of oil against Venezuela, where a military coup failed a few years ago, as did the 2018-19 stunt to recognize an unelected pro-American puppet regime. The Honduran coup under President Obama was more successful in overthrowing an elected president advocating land reform, continuing the tradition dating back to 1954 when the CIA overthrew Guatemala’s Arbenz regime.

U.S. officials bear a special hatred for countries that they have injured, ranging from Guatemala in 1954 to Iran, whose regime it overthrew to install the Shah as military dictator. Claiming to promote “democracy,” U.S. diplomacy has redefined the word to mean pro-American, and opposing land reform, national ownership of raw materials and public subsidy of foreign agriculture or industry as an “undemocratic” attack on “free markets,” meaning markets controlled by U.S. financial interests and absentee owners of land, natural resources and banks.

A major byproduct of warfare has always been refugees, and today’s wave fleeing ISIS, Al Qaeda and other U.S.-backed Near Eastern proxies is flooding Europe. A similar wave is fleeing the dictatorial regimes backed by the United States from Honduras, Ecuador, Colombia and neighboring countries. The refugee crisis has become a major factor leading to the resurgence of nationalist parties throughout Europe and for the white nationalism of Donald Trump in the United States.

Dollarization as the vehicle for U.S. nationalism

The Dollar Standard – U.S. Treasury debt to foreigners held by the world’s central banks – has replaced the gold-exchange standard for the world’s central bank reserves to settle payments imbalances among themselves. This has enabled the United States to uniquely run balance-of-payments deficits for nearly seventy years, despite the fact that these Treasury IOUs have little visible likelihood of being repaid except under arrangements where U.S. rent-seeking and outright financial tribute from other enables it to liquidate its official foreign debt.

The United States is the only nation that can run sustained balance-of-payments deficits without having to sell off its assets or raise interest rates to borrow foreign money. No other national economy in the world can could afford foreign military expenditures on any major scale without losing its exchange value. Without the Treasury-bill standard, the United States would be in this same position along with other nations. That is why Russia, China and other powers that U.S. strategists deem to be strategic rivals and enemies are looking to restore gold’s role as the preferred asset to settle payments imbalances.

The U.S. response is to impose regime change on countries that prefer gold or other foreign currencies to dollars for their exchange reserves. A case in point is the overthrow of Libya’s Omar Kaddafi after he sought to base his nation’s international reserves on gold. His liquidation stands as a military warning to other countries.

Thanks to the fact that payments-surplus economies invest their dollar inflows in U.S. Treasury bonds, the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit finances its domestic budget deficit. This foreign central-bank recycling of U.S. overseas military spending into purchases of U.S. Treasury securities gives the United States a free ride, financing its budget – also mainly military in character – so that it can taxing its own citizens.

Trump is forcing other countries to create an alternative to the Dollar Standard

The fact that Donald Trump’s economic policies are proving ineffective in restoring American manufacturing is creating rising nationalist pressure to exploit foreigners by arbitrary tariffs without regard for international law, and to impose trade sanctions and diplomatic meddling to disrupt regimes that pursue policies that U.S. diplomats do not like.

ORDER IT NOW

There is a parallel here with Rome in the late 1st century BC. It stripped its provinces to pay for its military deficit, the grain dole and land redistribution at the expense of Italian cities and Asia Minor. This created foreign opposition to drive Rome out. The U.S. economy is similar to Rome’s: extractive rather than productive, based mainly on land rents and money-interest. As the domestic market is impoverished, U.S. politicians are seeking to take from abroad what no longer is being produced at home.

What is so ironic – and so self-defeating of America’s free global ride – is that Trump’s simplistic aim of lowering the dollar’s exchange rate to make U.S. exports more price-competitive. He imagines commodity trade to be the entire balance of payments, as if there were no military spending, not to mention lending and investment. To lower the dollar’s exchange rate, he is demanding that China’s central bank and those of other countries stop supporting the dollar by recycling the dollars they receive for their exports into holdings of U.S. Treasury securities.

This tunnel vision leaves out of account the fact that the trade balance is not simply a matter of comparative international price levels. The United States has dissipated its supply of spare manufacturing capacity and local suppliers of parts and materials, while much of its industrial engineering and skilled manufacturing labor has retired. An immense shortfall must be filled by new capital investment, education and public infrastructure, whose charges are far above those of other economics.

Trump’s infrastructure ideology is a Public-Private Partnership characterized by high-cost financialization demanding high monopoly rents to cover its interest charges, stock dividends and management fees. This neoliberal policy raises the cost of living for the U.S. labor force, making it uncompetitive. The United States is unable to produce more at any price right now, because its has spent the past half-century dismantling its infrastructure, closing down its part suppliers and outsourcing its industrial technology.

The United States has privatized and financialized infrastructure and basic needs such as public health and medical care, education and transportation that other countries have kept in their public domain to make their economies more cost-efficient by providing essential services at subsidized prices or freely. The United States also has led the practice of debt pyramiding, from housing to corporate finance. This financial engineering and wealth creation by inflating debt-financed real estate and stock market bubbles has made the United States a high-cost economy that cannot compete successfully with well-managed mixed economies.

Unable to recover dominance in manufacturing, the United States is concentrating on rent-extracting sectors that it hopes monopolize, headed by information technology and military production. On the industrial front, it threatens to disrupt China and other mixed economies by imposing trade and financial sanctions.

The great gamble is whether these other countries will defend themselves by joining in alliances enabling them to bypass the U.S. economy. American strategists imagine their country to be the world’s essential economy, without whose market other countries must suffer depression. The Trump Administration thinks that There Is No Alternative (TINA) for other countries except for their own financial systems to rely on U.S. dollar credit.

To protect themselves from U.S. sanctions, countries would have to avoid using the dollar, and hence U.S. banks. This would require creation of a non-dollarized financial system for use among themselves, including their own alternative to the SWIFT bank clearing system. Table 1 lists some possible related defenses against U.S. nationalistic diplomacy.

As noted above, what also is ironic in President Trump’s accusation of China and other countries of artificially manipulating their exchange rate against the dollar (by recycling their trade and payments surpluses into Treasury securities to hold down their currency’s dollar valuation) involves dismantling the Treasury-bill standard. The main way that foreign economies have stabilized their exchange rate since 1971 has indeed been to recycle their dollar inflows into U.S. Treasury securities. Letting their currency’s value rise would threaten their export competitiveness against their rivals, although not necessarily benefit the United States.

Ending this practice leaves countries with the main way to protect their currencies from rising against the dollar is to reduce dollar inflows by blocking U.S. lending to domestic borrowers. They may levy floating tariffs proportioned to the dollar’s declining value. The U.S. has a long history since the 1920s of raising its tariffs against currencies that are depreciating: the American Selling Price (ASP) system. Other countries can impose their own floating tariffs against U.S. goods.

Trade dependency as an aim of the World Bank, IMF and US AID

The world today faces a problem much like what it faced on the eve of World War II. Like Germany then, the United States now poses the main threat of war, and equally destructive neoliberal economic regimes imposing austerity, economic shrinkage and depopulation. U.S. diplomats are threatening to destroy regimes and entire economies that seek to remain independent of this system, by trade and financial sanctions backed by direct military force.

ORDER IT NOW

Dedollarization will require creation of multilateral alternatives to U.S. “front” institutions such as the World Bank, IMF and other agencies in which the United States holds veto power to block any alternative policies deemed not to let it “win.” U.S. trade policy through the World Bank and U.S. foreign aid agencies aims at promoting dependency on U.S. food exports and other key commodities, while hiring U.S. engineering firms to build up export infrastructure to subsidize U.S. and other natural-resource investors.[4]https://www.rt.com/business/464013-china-russia-cryp...hrone/ . Already in the late 1950s the Forgash Plan proposed a World Bank for Economic Acceleration. Designed by Terence McCarthy and sponsored by Florida Senator Morris Forgash, the bank would have been a more truly development-oriented institution to guide foreign development to create balanced economies self-sufficient in food and other essentials. The proposal was opposed by U.S. interests on the ground that countries pursuing land reform tended to be anti-American. More to the point, they would have avoided trade and financial dependency on U.S. suppliers and banks, and hence on U.S. trade and financial sanctions to prevent them from following policies at odds with U.S. diplomatic demands. The financing is mainly in dollars, providing risk-free bonds to U.S. and other financial institutions. The resulting commercial and financial “interdependency” has led to a situation in which a sudden interruption of supply would disrupt foreign economies by causing a breakdown in their chain of payments and production. The effect is to lock client countries into dependency on the U.S. economy and its diplomacy, euphemized as “promoting growth and development.”

U.S. neoliberal policy via the IMF imposes austerity and opposes debt writedowns. Its economic model pretends that debtor countries can pay any volume of dollar debt simply by reducing wages to squeeze more income out of the labor force to pay foreign creditors. This ignores the fact that solving the domestic “budget problem” by taxing local revenue still faces the “transfer problem” of converting it into dollars or other hard currencies in which most international debt is denominated. The result is that the IMF’s “stabilization” programs actually destabilize and impoverish countries forced into following its advice.

IMF loans support pro-U.S. regimes such as Ukraine, and subsidize capital flight by supporting local currencies long enough to enable U.S. client oligarchies to flee their currencies at a pre-devaluation exchange rate for the dollar. When the local currency finally is allowed to collapse, debtor countries are advised to impose anti-labor austerity. This globalizes the class war of capital against labor while keeping debtor countries on a short U.S. financial leash.

U.S. diplomacy is capped by trade sanctions to disrupt economies that break away from U.S. aims. Sanctions are a form of economic sabotage, as lethal as outright military warfare in establishing U.S. control over foreign economies. The threat is to impoverish civilian populations, in the belief that this will lead them to replace their governments with pro-American regimes promising to restore prosperity by selling off their domestic infrastructure to U.S. and other multinational investors.

US Warfare on Many FrontsDedollarization defense
Military warfare (the Near East, Asia)
NATO and bilateral treaty (Saudi, ISIS, Al Qaida). color revolutions and proxy wars.
Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and pressure for Europe to withdraw from NATO unless the U.S. alleviates its New Cold War threats.
Dollarization is monetary warfare. The US Treasury-bill standard finances the mainly military U.S. balance-of-payments deficit. SWIFT threatens to isolate Iran and Russia
Dedollarization will refrain from foreign central banks financing U.S. overseas military spending by keeping their savings in dollars.
Creation of alternative payments clearing system.
The IMF finances US client regimes and seeks to isolate those not following US policy.An alternative global financial organization, such as Europe’s INSTEX to circumvent US anti-Iran sanctions, and Russo-China alternative to SWIFT.
Creditor policy forcing austerity on debtor economies, forcing them to privatize and sell off their public domain to pay debts.An international court empowered to write down debts to the ability to pay, based on the original principles that were to guide the BIS in 1931.
The World Bank finances trade dependency on US food exports and opposes national food self-sufficiency.An alternative development organization based on food self-sufficiency. Annulment of World Bank and IMF debt as “odious debt.”
Unilateral US trade war based on levy of US protectionist tariffs, quotas and sanctions,Countervailing sanctions, and creation of an alternative to the WTO or a strengthened organization free of US control.
Cyber War, spycraft via US internet platforms, and Stuxnet sabotage.Work with Huawei and other alternatives to US internet options.
Class War: austerity program for laborMMT, taxation of rentier income and capital gains.
Neoliberal monetarist doctrine of privatization and creditor-oriented rulesPromotion of a mixed economy with public infrastructure as a factor of production.
US patent policy seeks monopoly rents.Non-recognition of predatory monopoly patents.
Investment controlDeprivatization and buyoutsof US assets abroad.
International law and diplomacyThe U.S. as the world’s “exceptional nation,” not subject to international laws or even to its own treaty agreements.
Veto power in any organization it joins. The basic principle that the U.S. is not subject to any foreign say over its laws and policies.
Global Problems caused by US PolicyResponse to U.S. Disruptive Policy
U.S. refuses to join international agreements to reduce carbon emissions, Global Warming and Extreme Weather.
U.S. diplomacy is based on control of oil to make other countries dependent on U.S. energy dominance.
Trade and tax sanctions against U.S. exporters and banks. Taxes on U.S. tax avoidance by the oil industry’s “flags of convenience” (convenient for tax avoidance).
Taxation or isolation of U.S. exports based on high-carbon production.
Attempt to monopolize new G5 Internet technology, Sanctioning of Huawei, insistence on US priority in high-tech.Rejection of patents on basic IT, medicine and other basic human needs.
Patent laws in pharmaceuticals, etc.Taxation of monopoly rents.

There are alternatives, on many fronts

Militarily, today’s leading alternative to NATO expansionism is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), along with Europe following France’s example under Charles de Gaulle and withdrawing. After all, there is no real threat of military invasion today in Europe. No nation can occupy another without an enormous military draft and such heavy personnel losses that domestic protests would unseat the government waging such a war. The U.S. anti-war movement in the 1960s signaled the end of the military draft, not only in the United States but in nearly all democratic countries. (Israel, Switzerland, Brazil and North Korea are exceptions.)

The enormous spending on armaments for a kind of war unlikely to be fought is not really military, but simply to provide profits to the military industrial complex. The arms are not really to be used. They are simply to be bought, and ultimately scrapped. The danger, of course, is that these not-for-use arms actually might be used, if only to create a need for new profitable production.

Likewise, foreign holdings of dollars are not really to be spent on purchases of U.S. exports or investments. They are like fine-wine collectibles, for saving rather than for drinking. The alternative to such dollarized holdings is to create a mutual use of national currencies, and a domestic bank-clearing payments system as an alternative to SWIFT. Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela already are said to be developing a crypto-currency payments to circumvent U.S. sanctions and hence financial control.

In the World Trade Organization, the United States has tried to claim that any industry receiving public infrastructure or credit subsidy deserves tariff retaliation in order to force privatization. In response to WTO rulings that U.S. tariffs are illegally imposed, the United States “has blocked all new appointments to the seven-member appellate body in protest, leaving it in danger of collapse because it may not have enough judges to allow it to hear new cases.”[5]Don Weinland, “WTO rules against US in tariff dispute with China,” Financial Times, July 17, 2019. In the U.S. view, only privatized trade financed by private rather than public banks is “fair” trade.

An alternative to the WTO (or removal of its veto privilege given to the U.S. bloc) is needed to cope with U.S. neoliberal ideology and, most recently, the U.S. travesty claiming “national security” exemption to free-trade treaties, impose tariffs on steel, aluminum, and on European countries that circumvent sanctions on Iran or threaten to buy oil from Russia via the Nordstream II pipeline instead of high-cost liquified “freedom gas” from the United States.

In the realm of development lending, China’s bank along with its Belt and Road initiative is an incipient alternative to the World Bank, whose main role has been to promote foreign dependency on U.S. suppliers. The IMF for its part now functions as an extension of the U.S. Department of Defense to subsidize client regimes such as Ukraine while financially isolating countries not subservient to U.S. diplomacy.

To save debt-strapped economies suffering Greek-style austerity, the world needs to replace neoliberal economic theory with an analytic logic for debt writedowns based on the ability to pay. The guiding principle of the needed development-oriented logic of international law should be that no nation should be obliged to pay foreign creditors by having to sell of the public domain and rent-extraction rights to foreign creditors. The defining character of nationhood should be the fiscal right to tax natural resource rents and financial returns, and to create its own monetary system.

The United States refuses to join the International Criminal Court. To be effective, it needs enforcement power for its judgments and penalties, capped by the ability to bring charges of war crimes in the tradition of the Nuremberg tribunal. U.S. to such a court, combined with its military buildup now threatening World War III, suggests a new alignment of countries akin to the Non-Aligned Nations movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Non-aligned in this case means freedom from U.S. diplomatic control or threats.

ORDER IT NOW

Such institutions require a more realistic economic theory and philosophy of operations to replace the neoliberal logic for anti-government privatization, anti-labor austerity, and opposition to domestic budget deficits and debt writedowns. Today’s neoliberal doctrine counts financial late fees and rising housing prices as adding to “real output” (GDP), but deems public investment as deadweight spending, not a contribution to output. The aim of such logic is to convince governments to pay their foreign creditors by selling off their public infrastructure and other assets in the public domain.

Just as the “capacity to pay” principle was the foundation stone of the Bank for International Settlements in 1931, a similar basis is needed to measure today’s ability to pay debts and hence to write down bad loans that have been made without a corresponding ability of debtors to pay. Without such an institution and body of analysis, the IMF’s neoliberal principle of imposing economic depression and falling living standards to pay U.S. and other foreign creditors will impose global poverty.

The above proposals provide an alternative to the U.S. “exceptionalist” refusal to join any international organization that has a say over its affairs. Other countries must be willing to turn the tables and isolate U.S. banks, U.S. exporters, and to avoid using U.S. dollars and routing payments via U.S. banks. To protect their ability to create a countervailing power requires an international court and its sponsoring organization.

Summary

The first existential objective is to avoid the current threat of war by winding down U.S. military interference in foreign countries and removing U.S. military bases as relics of neocolonialism. Their danger to world peace and prosperity threatens a reversion to the pre-World War II colonialism, ruling by client elites along lines similar to the 2014 Ukrainian coup by neo-Nazi groups sponsored by the U.S. State Department and National Endowment for Democracy. Such control recalls the dictators that U.S. diplomacy established throughout Latin America in the 1950s. Today’s ethnic terrorism by U.S.-sponsored Wahabi-Saudi Islam recalls the behavior of Nazi Germany in the 1940s.

Global warming is the second major existentialist threat. Blocking attempts to reverse it is a bedrock of American foreign policy, because it is based on control of oil. So the military, refugee and global warming threats are interconnected.

The U.S. military poses the greatest immediate danger. Today’s warfare is fundamentally changed from what it used to be. Prior to the 1970s, nations conquering others had to invade and occupy them with armies recruited by a military draft. But no democracy in today’s world can revive such a draft without triggering widespread refusal to fight, voting the government out of power. The only way the United States – or other countries – can fight other nations is to bomb them. And as noted above, economic sanctions have as destructive an effect on civilian populations in countries deemed to be U.S. adversaries as overt warfare. The United States can sponsor political coups (as in Honduras and Pinochet’s Chile), but cannot occupy. It is unwilling to rebuild, to say nothing of taking responsibility for the waves of refugees that our bombing and sanctions are causing from Latin America to the Near East.

U.S. ideologues view their nation’s coercive military expansion and political subversion and neoliberal economic policy of privatization and financialization as an irreversible victory signaling the End of History. To the rest of the world it is a threat to human survival.

The American promise is that the victory of neoliberalism is the End of History, offering prosperity to the entire world. But beneath the rhetoric of free choice and free markets is the reality of corruption, subversion, coercion, debt peonage and neofeudalism. The reality is the creation and subsidy of polarized economies bifurcated between a privileged rentier class and its clients, their debtors and renters. America is to be permitted to monopolize trade in oil and food grains, and high-technology rent-yielding monopolies, living off its dependent customers. Unlike medieval serfdom, people subject to this End of History scenario can choose to live wherever they want. But wherever they live, they must take on a lifetime of debt to obtain access to a home of their own, and rely on U.S.-sponsored control of their basic needs, money and credit by adhering to U.S. financial planning of their economies. This dystopian scenario confirms Rosa Luxemburg’s recognition that the ultimate choice facing nations in today’s world is between socialism and barbarism.

Keynote Paper delivered at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy, July 21, 2019.

Notes

[1] Billy Bambrough, “Bitcoin Threatens To ‘Take Power’ From The U.S. Federal Reserve,” Forbes, May 15, 2019. https://www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/05/15/a-u-s-congressman-is-so-scared-of-bitcoin-and-crypto-he-wants-it-banned/#36b2700b6405.

[2] Vladimir Putin, keynote address to the Economic Forum, June 5-6 2019. Putin went on to warn of “a policy of completely unlimited economic egoism and a forced breakdown.” This fragmenting of the global economic space “is the road to endless conflict, trade wars and maybe not just trade wars. Figuratively, this is the road to the ultimate fight of all against all.”

[3] Address to St Petersburg International Economic Forum’s Plenary Session, St Petersburg, Kremlin.ru, June 5, 2009, from Johnson’s Russia List, June 8, 2009, #8,

[4] https://www.rt.com/business/464013-china-russia-cryptocurrency-dollar-dethrone/ . Already in the late 1950s the Forgash Plan proposed a World Bank for Economic Acceleration. Designed by Terence McCarthy and sponsored by Florida Senator Morris Forgash, the bank would have been a more truly development-oriented institution to guide foreign development to create balanced economies self-sufficient in food and other essentials. The proposal was opposed by U.S. interests on the ground that countries pursuing land reform tended to be anti-American. More to the point, they would have avoided trade and financial dependency on U.S. suppliers and banks, and hence on U.S. trade and financial sanctions to prevent them from following policies at odds with U.S. diplomatic demands.

[5] Don Weinland, “WTO rules against US in tariff dispute with China,” Financial Times, July 17, 2019.

 
Hide 63 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Sean says:

    Interesting as always. but a little too moralistic because rights only exist under a system that can enforce a claim of right. America has a technological lead and the will to use it unilaterally. As to US bonds having replaced gold , the US may not be running a deficit indefinitely. Artificial intelligence and the UBI it will pay for will make a lot of these considerations obsolete. Uncertain when, but it is coming.

    • Replies: @MarkU
    , @Fran Macadam
  2. Overall a decent analysis. However the references such as

    The world today faces a problem much like what it faced on the eve of World War II. Like Germany then, the United States now poses the main threat of war,

    or

    by the ability to bring charges of war crimes in the tradition of the Nuremberg tribunal.

    are so off base that they detract from your credibility.

    Germany would never have been a threat if it weren’t for the UK wanting to protect its economic territory. The German attempts at settling disputes peacefully, and proposals for arms reductions were all rejected by the UK and France. Settlement offers on the Danzig question were undermined by the UK, even though the offer was what the previous Polish dictator Pidsulski had wanted.

    As for Nuremberg, it was a military trial, and it was unprecedented in history. There is no Nuremberg “tradition”.

    It is ironic that the role of the International Bank of Settlements in creating the conditions for WWII is not touched on. Much like Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution of today, Germany in the 1930s had been able to develop trade with other countries by trading commodity for commodity, by-passing the BIS, and in effect, demonstrating its uselessness.
    All wars are economic wars.

    Winston Churchill told Lord Robert Boothby:

    Germany’s most unforgivable crime before the Second World War was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.

    The bankers are always to blame. The bankers own the Fed, and the Fed owns the US. The WTO, GATT, and every other “trade deal” is solely for the benefit of finance capital. The old trade rules required an internal market before exporting manufactured goods. Given the US and Canada use one electrical system and all of Asia another. there is no internal market for virtually all electronic goods shipped here. The Japanese cars sent to North America prior to them building here, were never available in Japan. Even today, there are vehicles sent here that are too big for Japanese streets.
    The US economy has been in controlled demolition since 1972.

    • Replies: @m___
    , @EdNels
  3. MarkU says:
    @Sean

    America has a technological lead and the will to use it unilaterally.

    America once had a technological lead but not any more, the continual degradation of US education, especially in the scientific and technical fields has seen to that. According to the following article, 29% of 18-29 year old in America believe the earth is or could be flat, hardly what one would expect of a nation destined to innovate anything.

    http://www.unz.com/anepigone/flatism-is-racist/

  4. Yee says:

    “It is the announced purpose of the supporters of cryptocurrency to take that power away from us, to put us in a position where the most significant sanctions we have against Iran, for example, would become irrelevant.”

    Cryptocurrency would be a even more powerful “new dollar”, a true global currency, much better than the mere “reserve currency status”.

    If it could make it into circulation medium worldwide, it would strip other nations of their monetary sovereinty. This might not be a problem for those private owned central banks, but certainly for those that aren’t.

    I don’t know who exactly is behind this scheme, but wouldn’t be surprised at all if it was the same one who own private central banks.

    • Replies: @Alfred
    , @Boysie Dent
  5. This foreign central-bank recycling of U.S. overseas military spending into purchases of U.S. Treasury securities ….

    He needs to re-think this: This is nonsense.

    The United States refuses to join the International Criminal Court. To be effective, it needs enforcement power for its judgments and penalties, capped by the ability to bring charges of war crimes in the tradition of the Nuremberg tribunal.

    By the standards of the original Nuremburg Tribunal, the myriad sanctions intended to foster regime change in various places are Crimes Against Humanity; no way would the US want the ICC to have that power.

    The first existential objective is to avoid the current threat of war by winding down U.S. military interference in foreign countries and removing U.S. military bases as relics of neocolonialism.

    So which vested interest in D.C. is going to initiate that?

    Global warming is the second major existentialist threat.

    Care to cite authoritative references for that? Climate Science in its present form is junk science. I don’t advocate excess waste and pollution, but I also don’t advocate deindustrialisation of the Western world to the financial benefit of the rest of the world. The Paris Accord was rubbish, and the US was correct to pull out of it.

    • Replies: @james charles
    , @Miggle
    , @renfro
  6. m___ says:
    @Curmudgeon

    Indeed, a dishonest bend, multiple times referred at (Germany). Still minor as compared to his earlier piece here on unz, M. Hudson is more explicit.

    As for solutions into the China alternative, essentially the same ultimate mindset.

  7. olde reb says:

    Michael Hudson, an erudite shill for Wall Street—as detailed in 1700 words emailed to you a few minutes ago.

    Again, in this current article, Hudson omits ANY AND ALL references to international bankers or to Wall Street’s control or influence in foreign affairs. He deliberately diverts all nefarious actions to the US government—not to Wall Street.

    • Replies: @MarkU
    , @Jacques Sheete
  8. The bottom column of US Warfare on Many Fronts has the examples reversed.

  9. @Sean

    Whistling past the graveyard.

    • Replies: @Moi
  10. It’s really too bad Michael believes the climate change hoax. Most who do believe it are more like religious cultists than they are serious scholars.

    So that must be the reason that Hudson suddenly has decided that the only reason the US pulled out of the Paris Accords has to be to control oil somewhere.

    I guess Trump clearly stating that the US is actually ahead of the goals of the Accords anyway is a lie? I don’t know. Those who are cult members like Hudson can read the “real” motives in everything that people like Trump say.

    Being a religious fanatic as Michael Hudson has come to be, I guess all the people that have pointed out that both India and China get to pretty much skate on the Accords and that both countries but especially China are the world’s worst polluters (of the air, of the ocean, you name it, they are polluting it) and that the Accords were clearly shaped so that US and Europe would be the ones to pay lots of money while neither China nor India would have to, I guess none of that made any difference in the US withdrawing from the Accords? Michael seems to know just know that it is all just about oil, and that’s all.

    It’s amazing and sad at how seemingly smart people can have such huge blind spots.

    Sad mostly. I would have walked out of his speech way before he got to the conclusions. And I’ve watched a lot of his speeches and talks on YouTube. This one is a rambling wrong turn.

    Michael, you just drove into a cul de sac. Turn around, do it while you still have some of your reputation in tact. Thanks.

    • Replies: @Bork
    , @james charles
  11. Anonymous[247] • Disclaimer says:

    We are still mired in the Oil War that escalated in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq, which quickly spread to Libya and Syria. American foreign policy has long been based largely on control of oil.

    American foreign policy is based on the Jewish control of the US so these wars were never about oil, pipelines, democracy or incubator babies. I wish Michael Hudson would stop spreading this “oil control” nonsense.

  12. MarkU says:
    @olde reb

    You have touched on a common problem, how wide can an essay be? and do they really want to go there?

    A lot of people writing in the public domain have had to make some judgement calls about what they are prepared to say on certain subjects, 9/11 being the most spectacular example. Do they put themselves outside the scope of mainstream debate and lose their livelihood and any possibility of influencing the public at large? or are they prepared to reluctantly prop up a false narrative in order to effect ‘change from within’? I could list a large number of writers who have chosen the latter option, are they all ‘gatekeepers’ or shills? (consciously I mean) I doubt it, though some of them definitely are.

    So please have some mercy on Michael Hudson who was presenting a Paper at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy and could hardly be expected to launch into a discussion on who really runs the US, could he?

    • Agree: Iris, Jacques Sheete
    • Disagree: SolontoCroesus
  13. Castellio says:
    @MarkU

    MarkU…. what is this, a reasonable and appropriate response to the fact that we live in a samizdat culture?

  14. I’m an isolationist.

    I would prefer the USA had stayed out of WWI and WWII to say nothing of not playing “World Police”, but I do realize that the US has maintained freedom of the seas for over 70 years and I am not stupid enough to think the world will be a peaceful place when we stop playing World Police. Apparently some people are that stupid.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @renfro
    , @bluedog
  15. @Anonymous

    Agree.

    But what would one expect when Hudson bases his analysis on this flawed historical assessment:

    The international framework that originally seemed equitable was pro-U.S. from the outset. In 1945 this was seen as a natural result of the fact that the U.S. economy was the least war-damaged and held by far most of the world’s monetary gold.

    Not a “natural result” but the intention, the raison d’être for waging the war to destroy Germany and much of the rest of W. Europe, and to fracture the British empire.

    Still, the postwar trade and financial framework was ostensibly set up on fair and equitable international principles. Other countries were expected to recover and grow, creating diplomatic, financial and trade parity with each other.

    Zionists and Communists — Henry Morgenthau, Jr., his sidekick, Harry Dexter White, who spied for Moscow while both were in command of US Treasury, and Dean Acheson, Felix Frankfurter’s acolyte — ran the show at Bretton Woods , to the dismay of John Maynard Keynes, who could only gasp as the pound sterling was replaced by the dollar as the world’s currency.

    But the past decade has seen U.S. diplomacy become one-sided in turning the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, SWIFT bank-clearing system and world trade into an asymmetrically exploitative system. This unilateral U.S.-centered array of institutions is coming to be widely seen not only as unfair, but as blocking the progress of other countries whose growth and prosperity is seen by U.S. foreign policy as a threat to unilateral U.S. hegemony.

    Didn’t “become one-sided;” rather, the mask came off.

    Since Joshua conquered Jericho that’s the way Jews have operated: steal in quietly, set spies in place, employ prostitutes to sell out their home country (can you say Hillary?), aggregate power, suborn and subvert, then “march around the city . . .” at first quietly, then, on the seventh day, “Shout!” — destroy the city, slay the people, take their treasure, and curse any attempt to reclaim the city:

    Now the gates of Jericho were securely barred because of the Israelites. No one went out and no one came in.

    Jericho at least made the effort to maintain its borders against invaders.
    Joshua 6
    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Joshua+6&version=NIV

    Then the Lord said to Joshua, “See, I have delivered Jericho into your hands, along with its king and its fighting men

    .

    [Read what the newly appointed head of NSA, Ann Neuberger had to say about her motivation as the granddaughter of Holocaust™ survivors whose own relatives were “killed by Nazis in the gas chambers,” and her Orthodox upbringing:
    “Her professional achievements have come not in spite of her faith. They’ve come because of it.” https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/07/12/421816261/at-the-nsa-a-rising-stars-commitment-to-faith-and-public-service ]

    Back to Joshua and the model campaign for the zionist takeover of USA:

    March around the city once with all the armed men. Do this for six days. Have seven priests carry trumpets of rams’ horns [the first spin machines] in front of the ark. On the seventh day, march around the city seven times, with the priests blowing the trumpets. When you hear them sound a long blast on the trumpets, have the whole army give a loud shout; then the wall of the city will collapse and the army will go up, everyone straight in. The seventh time around, when the priests sounded the trumpet blast, Joshua commanded the army, “Shout! For the Lord has given you the city!”

    The city and all that is in it are to be devoted[a] to the Lord. Only Rahab the prostitute and all who are with her in her house shall be spared, because she hid the spies we sent. But keep away from the devoted things, so that you will not bring about your own destruction by taking any of them. Otherwise you will make the camp of Israel liable to destruction and bring trouble on it. All the silver and gold and the articles of bronze and iron are sacred to the Lord and must go into his treasury.”

    When the trumpets sounded, the army shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the men gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so everyone charged straight in, and they took the city. They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

    Joshua said to the two men who had spied out the land, “Go into the prostitute’s house and bring her out and all who belong to her, in accordance with your oath to her.” 23 So the young men who had done the spying went in and brought out Rahab, her father and mother, her brothers and sisters and all who belonged to her. They brought out her entire family and put them in a place outside the camp of Israel.

    Then they burned the whole city and everything in it, but they put the silver and gold and the articles of bronze and iron into the treasury of the Lord’s house.

    At that time Joshua pronounced this solemn oath: “Cursed before the Lord is the one who undertakes to rebuild this city, Jericho the United States of America:

    “At the cost of his firstborn son
    he will lay its foundations;
    at the cost of his youngest
    he will set up its gates.”

    At the instigation of zionists and egged on by greed, European-American Christians destroyed their European Christian forebears.

    What makes any American think he will not share the same fate, at the hands of the zionists?

    • Replies: @Jacques Sheete
  16. @MarkU

    The price of pusillanimity is your virtu, ergo your nation.

    See #15.

  17. Alfred says:
    @Yee

    The fact that cryptocurrencies are allowed to exist at all is proof that it is a deliberate scam supported by those behind the dollar.

    Cryptocurrencies have been useful in helping capital escape from China to the West – a part of the ongoing economic war. However, should the Iranians use it in a big way to sell their oil, it would be considered no longer so useful.

    There is an economic war going on. History books never mention who it was who financed wars. The flow of capital is always edited out of the story. You cannot sent a horse, let alone a tank, from Paris to Moscow without a considerable amount of finance.

    Pulling the plug on cryptocurrencies is incredibly easy. People are just so gullible.

  18. @The Alarmist

    “For climate change, there are many scientific organizations that study the climate. These alphabet soup of organizations include NASA, NOAA, JMA, WMO, NSIDC, IPCC, UK Met Office, and others. Click on the names for links to their climate-related sites. There are also climate research organizations associated with universities. These are all legitimate scientific sources.

    If you have to dismiss all of these scientific organizations to reach your opinion, then you are by definition denying the science. If you have to believe that all of these organizations, and all of the climate scientists around the world, and all of the hundred thousand published research papers, and physics, are all somehow part of a global, multigenerational conspiracy to defraud the people, then you are, again, a denier by definition. 

    So if you deny all the above scientific organizations there are a lot of un-scientific web sites out there that pretend to be science. Many of these are run by lobbyists (e.g.., Climate Depot, run by a libertarian political lobbyist, CFACT), or supported by lobbyists (e.g., JoannaNova, WUWT, both of whom have received funding and otherwise substantial support by lobbying organizations like the Heartland Institute), or are actually paid by lobbyists to write Op-Eds and other blog posts that intentionally misrepresent the science.”
    https://thedakepage.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/how-to-assess-climate-change.html

    • Replies: @Bork
  19. @SolontoCroesus

    The international framework that originally seemed equitable was pro-U.S. from the outset. In 1945 this was seen as a natural result of the fact that the U.S. economy was the least war-damaged and held by far most of the world’s monetary gold.

    Not a “natural result” but the intention, the raison d’être for waging the war to destroy Germany and much of the rest of W. Europe, and to fracture the British empire.

    I kid you not, but I was ready to jump severly on exactly those sentences as well with the same response as you did, but then re-read it and noticed that he wrote “seemed” and “was pro-US from the outset” and Hudson is correct about that.

    As usual, I agree with the rest of your comment and would emphasize your last sentence.

  20. @olde reb

    He deliberately diverts all nefarious actions to the US government—not to Wall Street.

    Well, if the US government is not owned by the Wall Street mafiosi, then I don’t know my own name. If anyone else doesn’t realize it they don’t know my name either.

    • Agree: MEFOBILLS
  21. But the past decade has seen U.S. diplomacy become one-sided in turning the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, SWIFT bank-clearing system and world trade into an asymmetrically exploitative system.

    Arrrrggh…

    It was designed that way!

    Hey S2C… I take it all back; you are correct in #15. My apologies.

  22. Moi says:
    @Fran Macadam

    He’s just pleasuring himself because he’s having a wet dream. It’s over!

  23. The US military under zionist control does not exist to defend America, it exists to act as a mercenary force of the zionist/US to protect and extend the zionist tentacles into every part of the globe and this is done by force of arms in the majority of cases.

    The US under zionist control has become a terrorist nation with it’s creations of AL CIADA and ISIS with the help of Israel and Britain and via these terrorists acting as a mercenary army as an extension of the existing military have destroyed the middle east and the Balkans and the Ukraine and now have their sights set on Iran.

    There is no instance of a nation benefiting from prolonged war – Sun Tzu

  24. Miggle says:
    @The Alarmist

    Global warming is the second major existentialist threat.

    Care to cite authoritative references for that? Climate Science in its present form is junk science. I don’t advocate excess waste and pollution, but I also don’t advocate deindustrialisation of the Western world to the financial benefit of the rest of the world. The Paris Accord was rubbish, and the US was correct to pull out of it.

    Pull your head out of the sand, Larmist. There are now many ships sailing through the North-West Passage and from the Pacific Ocean to Europe via the Arctic Sea off Siberia. How come? And there are unprecedented heat waves in the USA, and Europe has gone tropical, really tropical this summer. A huge, super-huge slab of Antarctic ice is about to fall into the water. very likely leading to Manhattan going under water forever. You may be able to live bearably for the rest of your life but your grandchildren will die very, very young after lives of misery.

    If we could get past this silly denial there might be hope. Michael Hudson says deprivatize, so let’s start with public transport. A bus every five minutes along all main roads — impossible when it is not a public service but is greed-driven preying on the public — and most people would stop driving their cars to work, leading to a huge reduction in the movement of fossil carbon into the biosphere as dioxide. Your grandchildren might then have cause for hope.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @The Alarmist
  25. MEFOBILLS says:
    @MarkU

    A lot of people writing in the public domain have had to make some judgement calls about what they are prepared to say on certain subjects,

    MarkU, have touched on an important point here.

    Curmudgeon earlier discusses how Michael uses tropes about Nazi Germany. (see entry 2 above)

    Michael also dances around the Jewish problem.

    None of these problems we identify with Michael detracts from his economic analysis. In my opinion, he has smartly chosen a wide lane, where he will get traction. By not touching the third rail he avoids being destroyed. He is still attacking finance plutocracy by exposing their methods.

    Would our Jewish finance elite be able to extract rents and usury on the world, when countries are sovereign, with their own money power?

    To save debt-strapped economies suffering Greek-style austerity, the world needs to replace neoliberal economic theory with an analytic logic for debt writedowns based on the ability to pay. The guiding principle of the needed development-oriented logic of international law should be that no nation should be obliged to pay foreign creditors by having to sell of the public domain and rent-extraction rights to foreign creditors. The defining character of nationhood should be the fiscal right to tax natural resource rents and financial returns, and to create its own monetary system.

    Michael is sticking his knife into our rent seeking friends, only it is obliquely done.

    Others, like Curmudgeon will step into the breach and go straight for the heart. Hudson doesn’t need to go there to be effective in his own right.

    The “tribes” business plan is to take rents and usury, and to own the money power. One world government with one world money is an end goal. Without these inputs of energy and nutrients from others, the “weed” would wither and possibly die.

    The parasite operates with inputs of energy from its various hosts. The U.S. has been parasitised, and is being used as a golem.

    Those of us who object to becoming a host are called racists, bigots, anti-semites, etc. We may be doxxed and attacked.

    • Agree: Jacques Sheete
  26. In Virgil’s poem, The Aeneid, the hero founds Rome, a civilization that is prophesied will be an “Empire without end”. Every empire before and since has seen itself as having no end, rather being the “End of History”. The US felt this after “winning” the Cold War: events since have proven them wrong. But we are in the nuclear age, when WMD will be used as last resort (the fall-back position of Deterrence doctrine).
    How do we “avoid the current threat of war by winding down U.S. military interference in foreign countries and removing U.S. military bases as relics of neo-colonialism” without triggering nuclear Holocaust?
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

  27. EdNels says:
    @Curmudgeon

    You covered a lot of territory about WW2 and Germany’s crimes to be blamed for, and the Banksters who own it all, like some of the real reasons for things are kind of strange, like the cars that don’t fit on Japanese streets that they export, (why does that happen…?).

    The US economy has been in controlled demolition since 1972.

    So for example, why did the corps send all the manufacturing oversees…? etc. etc.

    One answer might be, that America is a huge thing as a ”soveriegn” country”. The most Yuge ever, unprecendented power and all that etc., but the ”Americans” (the population) that is enjoying being residents and beneficiaries and legacy of all this, whether or not they are sufficiently Thankful or not for their good fortune, are no doubt… No Doubt , that they could be seen to be a extremely costly burden to maintain, inso far as they have a very high living standard expectation… historically unprecedented, but, that is… could be an attractive target to some. To some who are in the business as it were of Extracting… leave it at that: Extraction.
    One way of taking the goods away from the presumed owners who are self deemed exceptional, and not much inclined to willingly give it all up for any reasons, much less for the good of the planet or posterity, or to share it with the GaZillions of worlds anthill of poor peoples…. etc. will be to walk the county (as a Sovereign entity as it were… keeping that myth alive some little time longer, ) walk it and all to the point where it all can be just… pushed over the edge, easy, no fuss, some quick thing, and that will be that.

    To put that better, The population that are the Americans, are a burden and must be separated from the item that is in question: the Country, the people need to be reduced to pauperhood, so the country can move ahead streamlined, powerful in control by the owners, they don’t need no stinkin Democracy or high ” living standards” or health care, school lunches an allthat!

  28. Bork says:
    @restless94110

    It’s really too bad Michael believes the climate change hoax. Most who do believe it are more like religious cultists than they are serious scholars.

    Hardly surprising. Like the vast majority of western academics Hudson is totally clueless outside his chosen speciality.

    • Replies: @lysias
  29. Bork says:
    @james charles

    “For climate change, there are many scientific organizations that study the climate. These alphabet soup of organizations include NASA, NOAA, JMA, WMO, NSIDC, IPCC, UK Met Office, and others.

    There is no question that the climate changes slowly. The question is if humans have anything to do with it and the answer is soundly “very little if anything”. Do you know that there is climate change on other planets in the solar system? The central factor is the sun which while a very stable star compared to average stars is not totally stable. The sun varies minutely in power output and solar wind, and it is the solar wind or the lack of it that causes climate change. The denser the gas output by the sun the lesser is the cosmic radiation (atomic nuclei moving very fast) hitting the upper atmosphere, and that means less cloud formation, and less cloud formation means that the earth has a lower albedo and absorbs more energy from the sun. The polar caps have been totally melted before so whats happening today is that the earth is slowly recovering from the last miniature ice age which ended 200 years ago. The climate change scam could be another topic for the “American Pravda” series since it is used to plunder the economies of the western world by introducing artificial commodities such as “emissions permits” which can be speculated against.

    • Replies: @james charles
  30. lysias says:
    @Bork

    As a Classics Ph.D., I am very impressed by Hudson’s knowledge and understanding of ancient history. This is no limited thinker.

  31. @Anonymous

    You are correct about the dubious claims concerning America’s so-called ‘wars for oil’. Too bad Hudson doesn’t have the cajones to recognize this.

    Contrary to claims by the Zionist-dominated Left in America, Washington did not invade and annihilate Iraq for oil. The same is true of anti-Zionist Libya. These regimes were taken out because World Jewry wanted them gone.

    Zio-Washington whacked Saddam’s Iraq so it would become what it is: a weak, chaotic, dysfunctional shadow of its former self. Iraq’s destruction was just what the supremacists in Greater Israel wanted. Their long term-plan is for the Jewish state to dominate the entire region. Zionists are already most of the way there.

    It’s also worth keeping in mind that, after the war on Saddam Hussein regime, most of the oil drilling contracts in Iraq actually ended up going to Chinese and Russian operators. This is further proof that Zionized Washington never intended to “steal” Iraq’s oil, as was claimed by the Zionist shill, Noam Chomsky, and many others.

    Sad fact: the US taxpayer wasted trillions of dollars on a colossal war crime. Only Israel benefitted.

    Interestingly, mass killings that serve world Jewry are seldom treated as serious crimes. Jewry invariably gets an pas, as the survivors in Palestine, Germany, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq and Iran understand.

    Jewish moral privilege also helps explains why the bloody Bolsheviks were never prosecuted, pursued, or even shamed like the defeated and punished Nazis are still. Jews get to do what Jews need to do. Others are expected to play by the rules.

    Major western powers have been infiltrated by cypto-Israelis and our ‘leaders’ have been bought and compromised. The Zionist domination of virtually all elite US news and entertainment media also helps facilitate this process.

    This entrenched Zionist power configuration throughout the West explains why the anti-Zionist regimes in Damascus and Tehran are also being targeted ruthlessly. The Zionist mafia wants additional ‘regime change’. They’re not done yet.

    Co-conspirators inside the US State dept., Treasury, the Federal Reserve, the World Bank as well as Congress and the White House are all working together to make life unbearable in Iran and Syria. Lebanon is also being targeted. Only condition in the occupied Gaza and the West Bank are worse. But even there the screws are being tightened.

    Sadly, ‘superpower America’ has become a rogue Zionist colony.

    • Replies: @lysias
    , @MEFOBILLS
  32. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    When Hudson speaks you listen , you better pay attention and think about what he said .

    Thank you Unz and Hudson .

  33. renfro says:
    @another fred

    I am not stupid enough to think the world will be a peaceful place when we stop playing World Police. Apparently some people are that stupid.

    Yea you are stupid.
    Evidently too stupid to notice that the US has been the ‘instigator ‘ of wars for several decades…..and where not the instigator it has been the ‘enabler’ of various warring groups……and in addition it has been the ‘disruptor’ and coup stirring supporter on various countries.

  34. lysias says:
    @mark green

    Both Saddam’s Iraq and Gaddafi’s Libya were instituting systems whereby their oil could be bought without any use of dollars. They were attacked in part to defend the petrodollar system.

    • Agree: mark green
  35. carlos45 says:

    Just a thought, massive and populous countries like China & Russia could just divide their nations into small economic zones and trade among themselves as if they were trading with the global market, they could have each zone specializing in something like raw materials for example.

    Even without Russian commodities like oil & gas China could probably source them from somewhere on its territory.

    Together though Russia & China with a 1.5 billion population are economically immune as they both have something the other needs & are neighbours.

  36. renfro says:
    @The Alarmist

    I don’t advocate excess waste and pollution, but I also don’t advocate deindustrialisation of the Western world to the financial benefit of the rest of the world.

    Earth worms of the world unite to deny climate threat!……continue with the only things earthworm do in life ; eat, shit and screw themselves……and viva! the financial benefits.

  37. MEFOBILLS says:
    @mark green

    You are correct about the dubious claims concerning America’s so-called ‘wars for oil’. Too bad Hudson doesn’t have the cajones to recognize this.

    Hudson’s book “Super Imperialism” discusses the TBill economy, which originated as a function of war – the Vietnam war in this case.

    He does have cajones, and was the first to recognize the mechanism.

    The line of causality goes like this:
    1) Vietnam war is funded with deficit spending. 2) Excess dollars spent on war in Indochina are recycled to the U.S. from European Central Banks. France in particular, recycles dollars. 3) Recycled dollars buy gold. 4) Nixon goes off of the gold standard as France (and others) are draining U.S. of its gold stores. 5) Nixon dares France and others to buy American goods instead of gold. 6) France, England and others instead buy TBills when gold becomes no longer available.

    The Tbill economy is born

    7) 1973 Kissinger (((CFR agent))) goes to Saudi and signs Kissinger-Saudi agreement. This agreement makes sure that Saudi Oil is priced in dollars. Cartels are allowed. Saudi’s get front line military gear. Saudi coup is sanctioned Saudis get fifth fleet protection.

    All petrodollars are to be recycled into dollar zones, and Saudi cannot have a bourse.

    America’s so called war for oil is to keep the TBill/Petrodollar/Dollar as reserve/Private Bank Money system alive.

    This is finance oligarchy using America as its golem. America’s money is not U.S. dollars, but instead is Federal Reserve Notes, which in turn is an international corporate money trust.

    This international trust benefits from TBill/Petrodollar system … and in turn bribes, hypnotizes, and gets compromat on Congress Critters.

  38. bluedog says:
    @another fred

    Well it would be the biggest player removed if the U.S. was removed from the worlds so called super power category, for the only thing they have contributed to is for the benefits of the U.S, banking and corporate sector,and no the world may not be a more peaceful place, but I’m sure that the removal of U.S. intelligence agencies,IMF and the World Bank would be a great stride in making the world a better place with far less poverty, killing and destruction.!!!

  39. Sam J. says:

    I agree with most of Hudson’s remarks but some of his ideas will hurt everyone.

    Get rid of patents would be a huge mistake. Patents only last for a short time compared to history. I agree that there s some abuse there and the last big change in patent laws favored large companies but you shouldn’t throw out the baby with the bath water. Getting rid of patents is one of those lefty ideas that are selfish. They want “whatever” right now. Forget that knowing how things are done can help the future. This is the same problem with some environmental actions. A mine can be messy for a while but in hundreds of years it’s nothing and nature can clear it up.

    I also, as an American, don’t want to be punished because a bunch of psychopathic Jews have taken over my country. Why don’t we take (((their))) money. I suspect that they will try to blame “America” and the Jews will get off free with their loot after hollowing out the country.

  40. @Bork

    “Greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes. This time around humans are the cause, mainly by our CO2 emissions.”
    https://skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm

    • Replies: @Bork
  41. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Miggle

    A huge, super-huge slab of Antarctic ice is about to fall into the water. very likely leading to Manhattan going under water forever.

    You say that like it’s a bad thing.

    • LOL: The Alarmist
    • Replies: @Miggle
  42. Bacevich says: • Website

    Michael Hudson, America is not free and sovereign. America, Europe, Australia, they are colonies of the Jewish Empire.

    Mongol empire lasted 130 years before they retreated back to the steppes.

    Let’s see how long the Jewish Empire lasts.

    • Replies: @Iris
  43. Deterioration of international diplomacy into a more nakedly explicit pro-U.S. financial, trade and military aggression was implicit in the way in which economic diplomacy was shaped when the United Nations, IMF and World Bank were shaped mainly by U.S. economic strategists.

    I forgot where I read it or what early Cold War document was being quoted, but there was an explicit recognition immediately after WW II that the US consumed most of the world’s resources and that it was the job of US foreign policy to make sure that continued indefinitely. It may have been something George Kennan wrote. At any rate, these institutions were always explicitly, though perhaps mostly covertly, designed to maintain US hegemony at least over the “free world.”

  44. Bork says:
    @james charles

    Why dont you try explain the present ongoing global warming on the other planets in the solar system with theories about increased CO2 levels on Earth? Your stance is just religion masquerading as science. There is a huge ongoing desinformation operation aimed at normalizing the CO2 emissions trade and that site you quoted is just a part of it. You really aint smart enough to post on UNZ if you cant see how this scam is played.

    Here, have some:

    https://www.unz.com/article/fifty-years-of-apocalyptic-global-warming-predictions-and-why-people-believe-them/

    and watch all of this:

    [MORE]

    https://hooktube.com/watch?v=M_yqIj38UmY

    This video is a presentation of good, real actual science. Notice that this team was not from the english speaking world. You cant do this type of science in the west because it is too politically sensitive.

    • Replies: @james charles
  45. Anonymous[851] • Disclaimer says:
    @james charles

    What a childish response. You really are too stupid to post here.

    Global CO2 market control is a “solution” in search of a “problem”. These people are largely ignoring all the other, real, environmental destruction while breathlessly screeching about a natural gas that’s essential for the planet’s ecosystem.

    Tellingly, none of them are proposing a global initiative to plant forests across the globe. Scientifically speaking, that’s a perfectly natural way to “fix” the “problem”.

    • Replies: @james charles
  46. Miggle says:
    @dfordoom

    You say that like it’s a bad thing.

    Haw, haw!

    Let me add for that nutcase denier with his head in the sand a report by “Tom Parfitt” on p.10 of the Murdoch newspaper The Alien aka The A’lian today (1 Aug).

    Greenland’s big ice melt forces sea levels higher
    A melt of Greenland’s ice sheet is pushing up sea levels as glaciers recede in Iceland and fires rage in Alaska and Siberia. Scientists have said that the melt levels are what they originally predicted for the middle or end of [this] century.
    […]

    That’s the beginning of quite a long report that is specific and cites well-qualified verbal sources.

    “The Greenland ice sheet has already lost more than 180 billion tonnes of water through melting alone in July,” Ruth Mottram […] said.
    […]
    Scientists would normally expect an average of 60 billion to 80 billion tonnes loss from the ice sheet over the same period[.]
    […]

  47. @Anonymous

    ” . . . breathlessly screeching about a natural gas that’s essential for the planet’s ecosystem. ”
    Science denier.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  48. Iris says:
    @Bacevich

    Wow, a Hasbara agent provocateur posting under Andrew Bacevich’s name and website?

    Your turpitude is fathomless.

  49. @james charles

    So I guess that Solar output is rigidly stable and the warming detected on Mars is from the electric motors on the rovers we have littered about that planet.

    Meanwhile, back on Earth, atmospheric temperatures remotely sensed from space and measured by balloons are relatively stable, while the ground station data shows the “alarming trend.” The one that is statistically insignificant and can be explained by a host of factors that are instead ignored by science deniers like yourself.

    I am The Alarmist … you’re just a poseur.

    • Replies: @james charles
  50. @Miggle

    So, you’ve described weather and a possible longer-term climactic trend. Now, connect the dots to show causation.

    • Replies: @Miggle
  51. @The Alarmist

    “For climate change, there are many scientific organizations that study the climate. These alphabet soup of organizations include NASA, NOAA, JMA, WMO, NSIDC, IPCC, UK Met Office, and others. Click on the names for links to their climate-related sites. There are also climate research organizations associated with universities. These are all legitimate scientific sources.

    If you have to dismiss all of these scientific organizations to reach your opinion, then you are by definition denying the science. If you have to believe that all of these organizations, and all of the climate scientists around the world, and all of the hundred thousand published research papers, and physics, are all somehow part of a global, multigenerational conspiracy to defraud the people, then you are, again, a denier by definition. 

    So if you deny all the above scientific organizations there are a lot of un-scientific web sites out there that pretend to be science. Many of these are run by lobbyists (e.g.., Climate Depot, run by a libertarian political lobbyist, CFACT), or supported by lobbyists (e.g., JoannaNova, WUWT, both of whom have received funding and otherwise substantial support by lobbying organizations like the Heartland Institute), or are actually paid by lobbyists to write Op-Eds and other blog posts that intentionally misrepresent the science.”
    https://thedakepage.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/how-to-assess-climate-change.html

    Science denier.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    , @Bork
  52. @restless94110

    “It’s really too bad Michael believes the climate change hoax. Most who do believe it are more like religious cultists than they are serious scholars. ”
    “For climate change, there are many scientific organizations that study the climate. These alphabet soup of organizations include NASA, NOAA, JMA, WMO, NSIDC, IPCC, UK Met Office, and others. Click on the names for links to their climate-related sites. There are also climate research organizations associated with universities. These are all legitimate scientific sources.

    If you have to dismiss all of these scientific organizations to reach your opinion, then you are by definition denying the science. If you have to believe that all of these organizations, and all of the climate scientists around the world, and all of the hundred thousand published research papers, and physics, are all somehow part of a global, multigenerational conspiracy to defraud the people, then you are, again, a denier by definition. 

    So if you deny all the above scientific organizations there are a lot of un-scientific web sites out there that pretend to be science. Many of these are run by lobbyists (e.g.., Climate Depot, run by a libertarian political lobbyist, CFACT), or supported by lobbyists (e.g., JoannaNova, WUWT, both of whom have received funding and otherwise substantial support by lobbying organizations like the Heartland Institute), or are actually paid by lobbyists to write Op-Eds and other blog posts that intentionally misrepresent the science.”
    https://thedakepage.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/how-to-assess-climate-change.html

  53. @james charles

    You are dealing in observations, many of which are problemmatic but still accepted by the “august” organisations you cite. None of those organisations has shown anything more than a degree of correlation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature variation, and to achieve the best fit they have been very selective in the time frame and observations chosen to portray the correlation.

    None have posited a serious hypothesis of causation between CO2 and atmospheric temperature variations, and the closest any have come to connecting the dots is to say it is “extremely likely” increases of atmospheric CO2 may be causing increases of global temperatures. That is not science, just casual observation.

    BTW, plants and other carbon-based life evolved in and are best supported at CO2 levels three to four times higher than current levels. It would be wiser to err to the side of supporting life rather than risking extinguishing carbon-based life, i.e. all life as we know it, at atmospheric CO2 levels below 150.

  54. Bork says:
    @james charles

    You have to understand that the organizations you put your trust in are troughly corrupt. Outside the english speaking world this climate alarmism have very little traction. Belief in antropogenic climate change is an American thing just like The Rapture or The Prosperity Gospel.

    https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.00165

    No experimental evidence for the significant anthropogenic climate change
    Jyrki Kauppinen, Pekka Malmi
    (Submitted on 29 Jun 2019)
    In this paper we will prove that GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 fail to calculate the influences of the low cloud cover changes on the global temperature. That is why those models give a very small natural temperature change leaving a very large change for the contribution of the green house gases in the observed temperature. This is the reason why IPCC has to use a very large sensitivity to compensate a too small natural component. Further they have to leave out the strong negative feedback due to the clouds in order to magnify the sensitivity. In addition, this paper proves that the changes in the low cloud cover fraction practically control the global temperature.

    • Replies: @james charles
  55. @Bork

    Conspiracy theorist climate denier.

    • Replies: @TimeSink
  56. @TimeSink

    Another science denier!

    • Replies: @TimeSink
  57. TimeSink says:
    @james charles

    Ok, read the article and then we’ll and see who is the science denier.

    • Replies: @james charles
  58. @TimeSink

    Science denier.
    “For climate change, there are many scientific organizations that study the climate. These alphabet soup of organizations include NASA, NOAA, JMA, WMO, NSIDC, IPCC, UK Met Office, and others. Click on the names for links to their climate-related sites. There are also climate research organizations associated with universities. These are all legitimate scientific sources.
    If you have to dismiss all of these scientific organizations to reach your opinion, then you are by definition denying the science. If you have to believe that all of these organizations, and all of the climate scientists around the world, and all of the hundred thousand published research papers, and physics, are all somehow part of a global, multigenerational conspiracy to defraud the people, then you are, again, a denier by definition.
    So if you deny all the above scientific organizations there are a lot of un-scientific web sites out there that pretend to be science. Many of these are run by lobbyists (e.g.., Climate Depot, run by a libertarian political lobbyist, CFACT), or supported by lobbyists (e.g., JoannaNova, WUWT, both of whom have received funding and otherwise substantial support by lobbying organizations like the Heartland Institute), or are actually paid by lobbyists to write Op-Eds and other blog posts that intentionally misrepresent the science.”
    https://thedakepage.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/how-to-assess-climate-change.html

  59. Miggle says:
    @The Alarmist

    So, you’ve described weather and a possible longer-term climactic trend. Now, connect the dots to show causation.

    What does causation have to do with it, nitwit? If humans are going to be extinct in 50 years because of incessant 60°C days at all latitudes, and no rivers, no fresh water anywhere except at privatized desalination plants with not much time left to maximize their profits, no-one will care about the cause. But if we recognize the fact, never mind the cause, if we recognize the fact, and fast, humanity might be saved.

    And “longer term”? I pointed out sudden, historic, critical changes, like suddenly we can steam through the North West Passage, when a decade ago that was highly exceptional, rarely possible. That’s not longer term: it’s now, and it’s urgent.

  60. Climate alarmism is a cover for peak oil. This is the true dirty secret. The Peak oil year was 2018. From now on – relentless decline of oil recovery, masked by climate emergency and wars. You understand it when you realize there is only one proposed solution of the problem – electrification.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Michael Hudson Comments via RSS