Wednesday, May 24, 2017

'I spit on you again': Russian billionaire renews tirade against Putin rival

Arsenal shareholder Alisher Usmanov publishes second angry video attacking anti-corruption campaigner Alexei Navalny, whom he is suing for libel


The Russian billionaire and Arsenal shareholder Alisher Usmanov has launched an embittered online attack on the anti-corruption campaigner and Vladimir Putin critic Alexei Navalny.
Usmanov, who is currently trying to take full control of Arsenal, last week released an angry, personal video tirade, ending with the words: “I spit on you, Alexei Navalny.” On Wednesday he released a second video entitled “I spit on you again”. 
Usmanov has promised to take Navalny to court over the bribery allegations, which he denies, and has also begun an online offensive against the opposition politician.
Ins his latest video, Usmanov casts doubt on Navalny’s claims that the current Russian government is repressive. “You call out from every street corner that you are being persecuted, that the government is ruthless. Ruthless? You spent a whole day in jail. One night, as far as I know. You spent one night in jail, and I spent six years in jail, for nothing.” 
The Kremlin is wary of Navalny’s ability to harness street anger and is unlikely to allow him on to the ballot next year. When travelling around the country to launch his presidential campaign, he has been insulted and assaulted by people he believes are sent by the authorities.

The Guardian Usmanov 


Wayne Madsen: Trump Backs Sunni Radical Islam over Moderate Shi’ism

I had high hopes for Trump, but I knew I was being naïve. But I weren't the only one, Michael Hudson and Max Keiser had high hopes too, lots of people did. We were betting on the unknown as we knew the other lot were rotten.

As terrorists bomb Britain again, the biggest source of Terrorism is ignored in the MSM: Saudi Wahhabism. How can the public be so easily duped, and how can Western governments be so brazen?


President Donald Trump signaled to the nations of the Middle East and Muslim world that he strongly backs radical Sunni Islam, mostly embodied by Saudi Arabia’s brand of Wahhabism, over the emerging moderate Shi’ism on display in Iran. Trump’s first visit to another country as president was Saudi Arabia. Trump was also the only president to make Saudi Arabia his first stop after taking office. The decision to honor Saudi Arabia with such U.S. presidential protocol was a calculated one. 
Trump’s first official act after he landed in Riyadh was to ink a $300 billion arms package with Saudi Arabia. The United States agreed to supply the Saudis with the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-ballistic missile system, maritime littoral combat ships for close-in shore combat, and so-called «precision-guided munitions» responsible for so many civilian «collateral damage» deaths in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Pakistan. 
Considering the Wahhabist kingdom’s past and current support for the very same radical jihadists who are committing acts of terrorism in Syria, Yemen, and other nations, it is hypocritical that Trump claimed the U.S. and Saudi Arabia are «jointly» battling against terrorism.. 
Ironically, as Trump was praising Saudi Arabia’s «efforts» against jihadist terrorism, Iran overwhelmingly re-elected moderate President Hassan Rouhani. Rouhani ran on a platform of bestowing more freedoms on the Iranian people and opening the country to the rest of the world. A day after Trump’s anti-Iran speech in Riyadh, reformists won all 21 seats in Tehran’s municipal election. Across the board, Iranians, particularly women and minority religious groups, enjoy many more rights than do the Saudi Arabs.  
Trump Backs Sunni Radicals 



Matthew Jamison: Tory Lead Tumblng

This is from Strategic Cultures which my Malwarebytes says is unsafe. I think it's political and the site is okay, but I won't give a link, just this extract. I go to the site using my phone. Stephen Lendman fears that the election will be rigged whatever the polls say. Mathew Jamison is a senior parliamentary at the House of Commons.


Yet their opinion poll lead rather than holding up or growing ahead of Election Day set for Thursday June 8th is actually declining as the campaign wears on. With so much of the mainstream press in Britain backing Theresa May's Tory Party and the overwhelmingly hostile campaign of nearly all the newspapers and members of his own Parliamentary Party, Mr. Corbyn, had been pronounced by many in the London media and indeed within his party in the House of Commons as a dead man walking with no hope of slashing the Tory lead let alone consistently week on week bring it down by 3-4%. Now the Tories once mighty lead has fallen by nearly 10 % in the space of three weeks or so. At this rate come election day it may even be tied between Labour and the Conservatives or a few points separating them. 
How has this happened. Well, it would appear that while most of Mr. Corbyn's Parliamentary Party were plotting his downfall with various journalists he and the Labour Leadership have been developing rich policy work across a range of public policy areas in need of drastic reform. Since the formal launch of the campaign all we have had from Theresa May and her Conservatives is one vacuous slogan: «Strong and Stable leadership.» Nothing on the NHS and the funding crisis it and schools in Britain are facing. Nothing on plans to update and improve Britain's appalling infrastructure; nothing to help bring down the cost of living holding shark landlords and extortionate rents to account. Nothing on the job creation of the future. Basically on all the important domestic policies which affect people's lives, Theresa May and the Conservative Party have said and presented nothing. 
Meanwhile, the Labour Party have been rolling out what appear to be well thought out; costed and popular policies with key constituencies across the UK. Many people have started to say that Jeremy Corbyn's message on the home front or his foreign policy views make a great deal of sense and he is not the Stalinist madman that the likes of the Daily Mail and the Sun have made him out to be while Mrs. May's vacuous, meaningless slogan «strong and stable leadership» is starting to wear very thin with little policy meat on the bones to back it up and what there is such as the «dementia tax» are thoroughly nasty, horrible policies. Mrs. May; her inadequate team and the party she leads may find come polling day they squandered one of the largest opinion poll leads in the shortest space of time imaginable. 



Robert Parry: New Cracks in Russia-gate ‘Assessment’

When this finally all falls apart I'm going to have a field day at the Guardian, as I've said before. Now doubt the MSM will have some way of trying to worm out of it, but the Real News sites will have them by the short and curleys. This is a pretty damping report by Robert Parry. What really gets me is how RT is accused of messing in US politics and affairs because it runs reports on fracking and Occupy, and also because it presents third party candidates more, when in fact, a large part of the electorate vote independent.

On Tuesday, former CIA Director John Brennan told the House Intelligence Committee that only four of the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies took part in the assessment, relying on analysts from the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, under the oversight of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.  
However, the restricted nature of the Jan. 6 report – limiting it to analysts from CIA, NSA and FBI – blocked the kind of expertise that the State Department, the Defense Department, the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies might have provided. In other words, the Jan. 6 report has the look of pre-cooked intelligence. 
Yet, as any intelligence expert will tell you, if you “hand-pick” the analysts, you are really hand-picking the conclusion. For instance, if the analysts were known to be hard-liners on Russia or supporters of Hillary Clinton, they could be expected to deliver the one-sided report that they did. 
                                                           ********** 
There were other biases reflected in the ICA, such as a bizarre appendix that excoriated RT, the Russian television network, for supposedly undermining Americans’ confidence in their democratic process. 
This seven-page appendix, dating from 2012, accused RT of portraying “the US electoral process as undemocratic” and offered such “proof” as RT’s staging of a debate among third-party presidential candidates who had been excluded from the Republican-Democratic debates between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. 
“RT broadcast, hosted and advertised third-party candidate debates,” the report said, as if allowing political figures in the United States who were not part of the two-party system to express their views, was somehow anti-democratic, when you might think that letting Americans hear alternatives was the essence of democracy. 
New Cracks in Russia-gate ‘Assessment’


Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Zero Hedge — Here Are The 66 Programs That Trump's Budget Eliminates

President Trump's fiscal 2018 budget proposal would completely eliminate 66 federal programs, for a savings of $26.7 billion. [emphasis added]
Got that? 26.7 billion in savings!

Just what a sovereign currency issuer needs, right? (snark)

Zero Hedge
Here Are The 66 Programs That Trump's Budget Eliminates
Tyler Durden

Robert Waldmann — $ 2.1 trillion here $ 2.1 trillion there and soon you’re talking real money

They are into deep Voodoo. 
Also known as "ledgerdemain."

$ 2.1 trillion here $ 2.1 trillion there and soon you’re talking real money
Robert Waldmann

Zero Hedge — Yuan Tumbles As Moody's Downgrades China To A1, Warns On Worsening Debt Outlook



Zero Hedge
Yuan Tumbles As Moody's Downgrades China To A1, Warns On Worsening Debt Outlook
Tyler Durden

Dirk Ehnts— Maastricht Summer School: Modern Monetary Theory and European Macroeconomics


Bravo, Dirk.

econoblog 101
Maastricht Summer School: Modern Monetary Theory and European Macroeconomics
Dirk Ehnts | Lecturer at Bard College Berlin

Jimmy Dore: Corporate News Tool Gets Shut Down By Progressive




This is good. Sarah Champion of The British Labour Party takes on the biased corporate media. I thought she was so articulate that she should go for the Labour Party leadership one day.

I am running for president in 2020. Please support my campaign.

Friends...



I am running for President of the United States in 2020 and I need your help. I am an MMT trained economist. The United States is a currency issuing nation and as such, we have no limits on the amount of money we can invest in ourselves and our citizenry. My presidency will spend to invest in infrastructure, health care for all, basic science and research, care for the elderly, alternative energy, protection of our environment, education and much more. Furthermore, I will work to rein in Wall St and curb speculation. Banks are agents of the government and should lend in the public purpose. We will end foreign wars and stop the Deep State and their desire for world domination and the wanton killing of millions for the profits of a few. We will normalize relations with Russia. America has no limits. We have no constraints. We can have equality for all and I will provide it. We are most certainly NOT "out of money." That is ludicrous. And the bankers and financiers who dominate our politics, they will be gone under my administration. I promise you. I know how to do it. I can do it in 90 days. Give me a chance.
Please go here to fund. Thank you.

Mike Norman

Bill Mitchell — There is more to the Job Guarantee literature than a few blog posts

I have noticed a new phenomenon – a sort of new myopia – has emerged as the blogoshphere has expanded. The knowledge set that people think they are empowering themselves with becomes rather constricted – sometimes to a selection of blogs they may have read, sometimes even to the last blog they read on a topic. So we get a range of views and prognostications emerging – held out as expert commentary in many cases – upon the basis of perhaps just a few blogs having been read. As a long-term blogger, I also see this syndrome in the comments section of blogs. Someone new turns up it seems having read the latest offering from someone and launches into an array of criticisms which have been previously addressed but the commentator hasn’t bothered to read. 
The point is that research is a lengthy process and opinions should only be formed with conviction when one is convinced they have read all the major offerings in the area of interest and considered the evidence base. 
Which brings me to the real point. 
Before I wrote blogs I had generated 25 or so years of academic research material – in journal articles, books, book chapters, commissioned reports – hundreds of items of work. That is standard fare for an active researcher chasing competitive grants. That is where one’s contribution to ‘knowledge’ (as far as it is) is to be found. I only started writing blogs as a way of promoting Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) to a broader audience that would never read my academic work. I think that has been a successful strategy. But it has also created this ‘new myopia’. 
People think that the knowledge set available lies exclusively in blogs. It doesn’t. My blogs cut corners in writing style, referencing, and leave things unsaid that a more formal treatment would cover. The aim of the blog is accessibility and to provide an introduction to ideas which will encourage readers to delve further and arm themselves with deeper knowledge so as to promote informedprogressive activism. A case in point is recent deliberations about one of my pet topics – the Job Guarantee.

A week or so ago (May 16, 2017), the Washington-based Centre for American Progress published an Op Ed – Toward a Marshall Plan for America.... [paragraphing introduced for readability in this format.
Bill Mitchell – billy blog
There is more to the Job Guarantee literature than a few blog posts
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia

Shaping the Future: Moscow and Beijing’s Multipolar World Order

Paul Craig Roberts said that many of the elite should go on trail for treason. They stripped our countries advances in manufacturing sent it abroad. Now the West had lost that advance which would have provided a good standard of living for people in Western cultures.

Michael Hudson said how academics and economists in the 50's asked how were we going to spend our extra leisure time in the new technological age? I remember how my 40 hour week was reduced to 38 hours and they said this was just the beginning. Then later it got reversed, and some rival companies went to a 42 hourly week.


Beijing has been the world’s economic engine for over two decades and shows no signs of slowing down, at least not too much. Moscow, contrary to western media propaganda, has returned to play a role not only on a regional scale but as a global power. Both of these paths of military and economic growth for China and Russia have set things on a collision course with the United States, the current global superpower that tends to dominate international relations with economic, political and military bullying thanks to a complicit media and corrupt politicians. 
In the case of Beijing, the process of globalization has immensely enhanced the country, allowing the Asian giant to become the world’s factory, enabling Western countries to outsource to low-cost labor. In this process of economic growth, Beijing has over the years gone from being a simple paradise for low-cost outsourcing for private companies to being a global leader in investment and long-term projects. The dividends of years of wealth accumulation at the expense of Western nations has allowed Beijing to be more than just a strategic partner for other nations. China drives the process of globalization, as recently pointed out by Xi Jinping in Davos in a historic speech. China’s transition from a harmless partner of the West to regional power with enormous foreign economic investments place the country on a collision course with Washington. Inevitably, Beijing will become the Asian hegemon, something US policymakers have always guaranteed will not be tolerated.
Shaping the Future: Moscow and Beijing’s Multipolar World Order



Robert Greenstein — Trump Budget Proposes Path to a New Gilded Age

President Trump’s new budget should lay to rest any belief that he’s looking out for the millions of people the economy has left behind. He proposes steep cuts in basic health, nutrition, and other important assistance for tens of millions of struggling, low- and modest-income Americans, even as he calls for extremely large tax cuts for the nation’s wealthiest people and profitable corporations.
This disturbing budget would turn the United States into a coarser nation, making life harder for most of those struggling to get by but more luxurious for those at the very top. Most Americans do not seek a new Gilded Age. And the budget is sharply at odds with what the President told voters he would do during his campaign. With this budget, the President betrays many voters who placed their trust in him.
In fact, this stands as the most radical, Robin-Hood-in-reverse budget that any modern President has ever proposed. Consider the combined effects of the health, tax, and spending policies that he’s outlined:
Ultimate supply side: drastic cuts in social welfare to fund enormous tax cuts for the wealthy on the assumption that this will stimulate domestic investment and create "millions of US jobs."

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Greenstein: Trump Budget Proposes Path to a New Gilded Age
Robert Greenstein | President CBPP

Monday, May 22, 2017

Andrew Lainton — Why an Economic Equilibrium is not Like a Physical Equilibrium


Conservative v. dissipative systems, and information transfer.

Decisions, Decisions, Decisions
Why an Economic Equilibrium is not Like a Physical Equilibrium
Andrew Lainton

Beowulf — Health is the War of The State

The first step of any political reform, I’ve always believed, is to figure out how to achieve the desired goal with the minimum number of changes to the existing legal structure. [Beowulf if a lawyer.] As I’ve written before, Obama’s healthcare plan should have simply been a universal plan similar to Medicare (if not Medicare itself) that covered every American from the day they were born instead of when they turned 65. It would have been faster, cheaper, more universal (as in 100%) and more popular. It was a mistake Obama didn’t take that route and unlike Bill Clinton, he didn’t have an excuse for it....
Beowulf tells how to get there with Pete Stark's Americare and why the Democrats Medicare for All bill (HR 676) is a non-starter the way it is written.

As a lawyer, Beowulf thinks of policy in terms of the actual bills that would need to be passed into law. This involves getting from here (status quo) to there (desired objective), along with what it would take politically to do so. This is something that economists and a lot of public policy people miss.

Monetary Realism
Health is the War of The State
Beowulf

David Graeber: Debt: the Myth of Barter

Adam Smith got it wrong about primitive society where he said that people bartered, says David Graeber. What they had was a kind of mental debt system. You'd help someone one day, or give them something, but you expected the favour returned on another day if you needed it.


In the second chapter David Graeber explodes a foundational myth of economics. In textbooks all around the world the history of economics is summarized thusly: first came barter, then money, only later were credit and debt invented. The problem with this presentation is that “barter” economies pretty much never existed. We don’t find them either in anthropological study of any human cultures around the world, nor in historical records anywhere. In fact, the very first records of any kind are of credits and debits in Mesopotamian tablets. 
But the story of barter is so ingrained in us we probably find the fact that it didn’t really happen dumbfounding. I mean, of course people barter. Don’t they? If I have wheat and you have ham and I want ham but I don’t have any money I just trade you my wheat for your ham, right? 
Graeber shows how the idea of barter was created in exactly this way: as a thought experiment by economists trying to explain their discipline. But the myth of barter was never really compared against actual human societies. It was was simply assumed that barter must be what people do when they don’t have money and all sorts of imaginary scenarios were concocted, without reference to historical records, to explain the invention of money and gradually increasing complexity of this new thing they called “the economy”. 
Economists imagine that complications arising from barter are what gave the impetus for creating money. For example they describe something called the double coincidence of needs: you and I both have to need what the other has for a direct trade to work. But the truth is much simpler. Barter doesn’t work in a small village or tribal setting because it presumes antagonism between the people involved in the exchange. If we live in a village where we see each other on a daily basis though, we can’t afford this kind of antagonism. I can’t seek my own gain at your loss because we are in a long-term relationship. Instead we will come up with a way of accounting for debts. When you need wheat I will give it to you with the understanding that when I need ham you will return the favour. 
Here is what I think the take-away from this mistaken historiography should be: the foundational myth of economics establishes the entire system on the basis of antagonistic transactions of self-interest when in truth the story of debt is a story about human relationships. Debt was originally the answer to the question of how you and I can meet each others’ needs and remain friends.


The Myth of Barter

Sunday, May 21, 2017

Bill Mitchell — Humans are intrinsically anti neo-liberal

Over the course of my academic career and even outside of that I have often been regaled with the claim (as if it is science) that capitalism is the ‘natural’ system for humans because our nature biases us to competitiveness and selfishness. 
So Marx’s famous epithet in his Critique of the Gotha program (1875) – “from each according to their ability to each according to their need” – was dismissed as being against our natural tendencies – a denial of basic human nature. 
It then followed that planned economies and economies where governments intervened strongly to ensure equitable distribution of opportunities and outcomes, was in some way contrived and would surely fail because our human nature would find ways to thwart such interference. 
This has been a compelling and dominant narrative over the last several decades as neo-liberal think tanks, biased media outlets, and politicians from both sides of politics (homogenised into a common economic mantra) reinforced it continuously in print, spoken word and policy. 
We shifted from living in societies where collective will and equity was deemed important organising principles to living in economies where every outcome was in the hands of the individual – including mass unemployment – and the concept of systemic failure that could be ameliorated by state intervention was rejected. State intervention was cast as the devil. 
It is no surprise that economic outcomes for a rising proportion of the population deteriorated as we shifted from society to economy – from collectivism to individualism. 
It turns out that the research into human nature, motivation, decision-making etc largely rejects the ‘competitive selfish individual’ narrative. We are intrinsically cooperative and care about equity. Our basic propensities appear to be collective and cooperative. Funny about that. [paragraphing added for ease of reading on this blog format]
Bill Mitchell – billy blog
Humans are intrinsically anti neo-liberal
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia

Jianghong Li and Wen-Jui Han — Our 24/7 economy and the wealth of nations


Inventing new ways of  killing ourselves and impairing our children.

Asia Times
Our 24/7 economy and the wealth of nations
Jianghong Li, Senior Research Fellow, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.and Wen-Jui Han, Director of NYU-ECNU Institute for Social Development and Affiliate Professor, NYU Shanghai

James Petras — President Emmanuel Macron: Reversing Five Decades of Working-Class Power


Not difficult to see where this is headed.

James Petras Website
President Emmanuel Macron: Reversing Five Decades of Working-Class Power
James Petras | Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University in Binghamton, New York and adjunct professor at Saint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia

Brad Voracek — Doughnut Economics – Grab a pencil, draw a doughnut!

Many of us know we need to rethink economics, but Kate Raworth actually did it.|Envisioning the economy as a doughnut, two boundaries become clear. If we fall into the doughnut’s middle hole, human needs fail to be met. If we drop off of the outer edge, life is unsustainable.
You should always be weary of people who seek to get the “first lick” on a young impressionable brain. Paul Samuelson knew that by writing a successful economics textbook, he could influence how students frame the economy, and thus the world. From the 50’s to the 70’s, his textbook was the most widely used in introductory economics courses.
Today, that role has been given to Gregory Mankiw’s “Macroeconomics” (see the Open Syllabus Project). Both view the economy in the same narrow way, with the same simple pictures that don’t seem useful today. Raworth’s Doughnut Economics breaches the pattern and envisions a new economics, for a new generation with clearly defined challenges and scant tools to solve them....

See also

Evonomics
Seven Ways to Transform 21st-Century Economics — and Economists
Kate Raworth | senior visiting research associate at Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute and a senior associate of the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership

The Next System
A New Cooperative Economy
By Guy Dauncey

Neil Wilson — The Job Guarantee: What Will People Do?

If you’ve come here looking for a list, I’m afraid you’re going to be disappointed. The Job Guarantee isn’t a list of things to do, because, unsurprisingly, the people who designed it weren’t fans of central planning.
Instead we’ll go through the Job Guarantee in detail and explain that it is a process, not a destination. We’ll explain what it does and why it is there — using a slightly different viewpoint from normal....
The Job Guarantee is a mechanism for creating jobs of social value. It is a dynamic system that enables and supports the creation of jobs that provide public service to others and that others consider to be of public service.
Nobody has any idea what jobs the Job Guarantee will create or not create because that is left to the Social Entrepreneurs to decide based upon the forces they respond to.
In this view of a JG, the currency issuing government doesn't create the jobs directly by employing people, but rather indirectly by providing the  supporting institutional structure and funding for job creation by social value entrepreneurs operating on the basis of creating social value through innovation instead of market value like the private sector.

Modern Money Matters
The Job Guarantee: What Will People Do?
Neil Wilson

Phil Price — An obvious (?) fact about constrained systems.


In economics the constraints are restrictive assumptions introduced for tractability and simplification.

The post makes the point that when one constraint is relaxed in a precise way in that can be measured with respect to the system, the response of the system is knowable. This is how economic models are used.

However, if all the constraints imposed by the restrictive assumptions of economic models are removed, as they are in the real world, the behavior of the actual system becomes unknowable from the model, a point that Keynes noticed and pointed out.

This is a reason it is difficult to develop models that work as representational models where human motivation and behavior is involved. Such models are infected with uncertainty. As a financial speculator, Keynes was well aware of this as a person that had written a book on probability theory.

As Richard Feyman said, "Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings!"

Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science
An obvious (?) fact about constrained systems.
Phil Price

Brett Arends — Opinion: Greece’s Varoufakis reveals the worst kept secret in Europe in his tell-all book

Forget all the claims and protestations about “families of nations” and a “new Europe” and “the European project.” The European Union, and especially the eurozone, is a German empire.

The new capital of Europe is not Brussels — let alone Strasbourg, the home of the European Parliament — but Berlin. The ultimate power of the EU is not the president of the European Commission, but the chancellor of Germany.…
And Germany is a pretty much a vassal of the US.
In other words, the Greeks had to be punished in order to terrify the rest of the continent. 
If you can think of any historical parallels for this German behavior in Europe, go right ahead.
Just German leaders being German leaders.
On the positive side, it surely means the euro is the deutsche mark in drag, and a harder currency than outsiders credit. Achtung, baby.
This is the point of the EZ in the eyes of Germany. The euro is the DM in disguise and Germany gets a discount on its currency.

The conclusion? The European project that manifested in the EU and the EZ only works if Germany leaves. But the point of the European project was to put a harness on Germany.

MarketWatch
Opinion: Greece’s Varoufakis reveals the worst kept secret in Europe in his tell-all book
Brett Arends


Asad Zaman — The Human Development Revolution

The Human Development approach of Mahbubul Haq was carried further by Amartya Sen, who defined development as the freedom to develop human capabilities. This notion, closely aligned with Eastern thought, was so alien to orthodox economists that they rejected it. Consequently, a new human-centred field of development studies emerged, which combined many streams of dissent from orthodoxy.
Freedom to develop human capabilities and human-centeredness are fundamental tenets of the Western liberal tradition that began in ancient Greece, as well as the philosophical raison d'être of the tradition.

This is the thrust of Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, for example, the analysis of which concludes that happiness (Gk: εὐδαιμονία eudaimonia) is a byproduct of the pursuit of excellence (ἀρετή arete). Eudaimonia literally means "good spirit." "Spirit" here is not some mystification but rather point to the non-material aspect of human being that makes a person a rational animal capable of theoretical and practical wisdom. Human are characterized by their having a rational principle (λόγον ἔχον).

Thus, humans can experience both happiness (eudaimonia), which is of the rational principle, and also pleasure (Gk: hedone), which is of the animal nature.

Happiness as "utility" is a Benthamite version of hedonism that views happiness as material pleasure , which Aristotle argued against as insufficient. J. S. Mill was aware of this distinction of Aristotle when he wrote with reference to Bentham:
It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinions, it is because they only know their side of the question. — Utilitarianism: Chapter 2: What Utilitarianism Is (Part 1)
For Aristotle, happiness is a byproduct of living a good life in a good society, where a person progressively develops one's potential as both a human being and as an individual. All persons have the same potential as humans, that is, human excellence as a "spiritual" aspect, and all humans, being embodied and living in historical social circumstances, have a unique personality and individual potential both constitutionally (nature) and contingently (nurture). Human life is about living one's full individual potential socially and according to Aristotle, this can only be achieved by aiming for excellence as a human person.

Subsequently, Christian thinkers developed this in a theological context, and after the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, and the rise of capitalism, this was expressed naturalistically in Western liberalism, of which there are various strains, such as J. S. Mill in England and Wilhelm von Humboldt in Germany.

Unfortunately, economists adopted and adapted Jeremy Bentham's version, likely because it is a natural fit with homo economicus and it lends itself to mathematical tractability in terms of utility functions.

To deal with this, Zaman explains how Mahbub ul Haq developed the Human Development Index (HDI), which measures a variety of factors as indicators, as a better way to measure development than GDP, which measures development only in terms of wealth accumulation on a per capita basis.
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and per capita income indicators, which are used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. A country scores higher HDI when the lifespan is higher, the education level is higher, and the GDP per capita is higher. The HDI was developed by the Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq,[1] often framed in terms of whether people are able to "be" and "do" desirable things in their life, and was published by the United Nations Development Programme. — Wikipedia
Real-World Economics Review Blog
The Human Development Revolution
Asad Zaman | Vice Chancellor, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics and former Director
General, International Institute of Islamic Economics, International Islamic University Islamabad

Professor Cohen Says Assault on Trump is 'National Security Threat', 'Beyond Belief'




Steven Cohen, Professor of Russian studies at Princeton and NYU (an obvious Russian spy) was besides himself tonight, in sheer disbelief over the with hunt of gigantic nothing-burgers that are being used to assault the Presidency of Donald Trump.
He declared, "today, I would say (the greatest threat to national security) is this assault on President Trump. Let's be clear what he's being accused of is treason. This has never happened in America, that we had a Russian agent in the White House. Cohen believes Flynn did nothing wrong by talking to the Russian ambassador, describing it as 'his job' to do so. 
He then illuminated the indelible fact that there is a 4th branch of government, the intelligence community, who have been meddling in American foreign affairs, obstructing the other 3 branches of government. 
"In 2016, President Obama worked out a deal with Russian President Putin for military cooperation in Syria. He said he was gonna share intelligence with Russia, just like Trump and the Russians were supposed to do the other day. Our department of defense said it wouldn't share intelligence. And a few days later, they killed Syrian soldiers, violating the agreement, and that was the end of that. So, we can ask, who is making our foreign policy in Washington today?" 
Professor Cohen added, "you and I have to ask a subversive question, are there really three branches of government, or is there a 4th branch of government? These intel services. What we know, as a fact, is that Obama tried, not very hard but he tried for a military alliance with Putin, in Syria, against terrorism and it was sabotaged by the department of defense and its allies in the intelligence services."

Simon Black: I never knew how screwed up global banking was until I started my own bank

Despite massive profits banks use ages old technology leading to massive security risks. All the money goes to bankers bonuses.


After so many run-ins with the bitter incompetence and bureaucratic indignity of the banking system, I decided once and for all that I would start my own bank.
The deeper I went, the more overwhelming my discoveries of how shockingly inept, obsolete, and out of touch the industry is. 
It’s one thing to read about it in the headlines. It’s quite another to experience it first hand as an insider. 
Here’s a great example: you know how it seems commonplace these days to hear about banks getting hacked? Well, there’s a very good reason for that. 
Every bank runs on something called “core banking software”, which is sort of a central financial database that keeps track of all accounts and transactions.
Core banking software is the most critical component of any bank’s technological infrastructure. 
Yet ironically, the software that many of the most established banks use was originally written in either Fortran or COBOL, both 60-year old programming languages that date back to the late 1950s. 
SWIFT is a worldwide banking network that links allows financial institutions to send and receive messages about wire transfers and payments.
SWIFT is absolutely critical to global banking and handles billions of transactions and messages each year. 
So you can imagine my surprise when I found out that SWIFT runs on Windows Vista an obsolete operating system that Microsoft no longer supports. 
When my bank received its SWIFT code, we were told that we had to have a computer running Vista in the office in order to connect to SWIFT. 
It was such an absurd exercise to find an obsolete computer running an obsolete operating system to connect to the supposedly most advanced and important international payment network in the world.

The Screwd Up Banking Sector

ANOTHER BBC GUEST REFUSES TO GO ALONG WITH THE PROPAGANDA!

Old news now but great to watch. Peter Ford, former British ambassador to Syria, wrecks the BBC's attempt to push western propaganda. Peter Ford completely destroys the Western narrative about the recent chemical attack in Syria.

Blogger can't find the video but this link works.

Peter Ford Wrecks Western Propaganda

Paul Street: How Russia Became Our Adversary Again

The Soviet Union is now long gone and Russia has become a free market capitalist state, so why is it the Western enemy No 1? Below is a quote from Mike Whitney.


What has Russia done to deserve all the negative press and unsupported claims of criminal meddling?…Just look at a map. For the last 16 years, the US has been rampaging across North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. Washington intends to control critical oil and natural gas reserves in the ME, establish military bases across Central Asia, and remain the dominant player in an area of that is set to become the most populous and prosperous region of the world…" 
“But one country has upset that plan, blocked that plan, derailed that plan. Russia. Russia has stopped Washington’s murderous marauding and genocidal depredations in Ukraine and Syria, which is why the US foreign policy establishment is so pissed-off.  US elites aren’t used to obstacles.” 
“For the last quarter of a century – since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union – the world had been Washington’s oyster. If the president of the United States wanted to invade a country in the Middle East, kill a million people, and leave the place in a smoldering pile of rubble, then who could stop him? …Nobody.  Because Washington owns this fu**ing planet and everyone else is just a visitor…Capisce?.” 
“But now all that’s changed. Now evil Putin has thrown up a roadblock to US hegemony in Syria and Ukraine. Now Washington’s land-bridge to Central Asia has been split in two, and its plan to control vital pipeline corridors from Qatar to the EU is no longer viable. Russia has stopped Washington dead-in-its tracks and Washington is furious.” 
“The anti-Russia hysteria in the western media is equal to the pain the US foreign policy establishment is currently experiencing. And the reason the foreign policy establishment is in so much pain, is because they are not getting their way.  It’s that simple. Their global strategy is in a shamble because Russia will not let them topple the Syrian government, install their own puppet regime, redraw the map of the Middle East, run roughshod over international law, and tighten their grip on another battered war-torn part of the world.” 
“So now… Putin must be demonized and derided. The American people must be taught to hate Russia and all-things Russian…Russia must be blamed for anything and everything under the sun…”


How Russia Became Our Adversary Again

Saturday, May 20, 2017

Travers Child — Reconstruction and conflict: Losing hearts and minds

The pervasive ‘hearts and minds’ theory guiding counterinsurgency doctrine contends that military-led reconstruction reduces violence in post-conflict settings.| Using rare data from Afghanistan, this column questions the theoretical and empirical basis of that perspective. Military-led projects in the health sector are found to successfully alleviate violence, whereas those in the education sector actually provoke conflict. The destabilising effects of education projects are strongest in conservative areas, where public opinion polls suggest education projects breed antipathy towards international forces.
Imposing liberal values creates conflict in traditional areas. Another paradox of liberalism.

Vox.eu
Reconstruction and conflict: Losing hearts and minds
Travers Child | PhD candidate in Economics, Tinbergen Institute and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

David Beer — The power of money: how the rich took hold of our monetary systems to make themselves richer


On Ann Pettifor’s The Production of Money: How to Break the Power of Bankers
Open Democracy
The power of money: how the rich took hold of our monetary systems to make themselves richer
David Beer | Reader in Sociology at the University of York

Zaphod Trumplebrox And The Deep State

Douglas Adams nailed it [The Hitch-hikers Guide to the Galaxy (Pan Books, 1979)]:
Irrussianality
Paul Robinson | Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa

Is there a new capitalism? [techo-capitalism]


Capitalism in the digital age. Same old capitalism or a new type of capitalism?

Understanding Society
Is there a new capitalism?
Daniel Little | Chancellor of the University of Michigan-Dearborn, Professor of Philosophy at UM-Dearborn and Professor of Sociology at UM-Ann Arbor

Beryl Chang and Fabrizio Ghisellini — Behavioural economics: What we know and how it could be mainstreamed

Behavioural economics has identified phenomena that standard models could not explain. But its critics warn that it is becoming little more than a ‘pile of quirks’. This column argues that the future development of behavioural economics should focus on a streamlining process that will clarify core issues, fill conceptual gaps, and create tractable models. Behavioural models will only become a coherent alternative to homo economicus if this process occurs.
Vox.eu
Behavioural economics: What we know and how it could be mainstreamed
Beryl Chang and Fabrizio Ghisellini

Robin Ramsey: Well, How Did We Get Here?

I found this free PDF copy of Robin Ramsey's brilliant book explaining how bankers took over and ruined the British economy. It's quite a sad read, when you think of the kind of society we could have had, one that both Conservative and Labour supporters would have loved. A place where businesses would thrive and there would have been plenty of well paid jobs. This is the story the public never gets told.

http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster60/lob60-062.pdf

Excerpt:


Where Are We Exactly? The banks have ripped us off, screwed the economy, and taken billions in the taxpayers’ name. They are not lending to the productive sector of the economy, they are still paying themselves huge bonuses, and there is barely a flicker of political protest. None of the three major parties are even thinking of doing anything serious to restrain or reform them. (And the same is true in the United States: the Obama administration’s plans for the financial sector will not inhibit the global gambling.1) It’s not that the banks are too big to fail, to quote the title of one of the books about the events of 2007/8: they have already failed. Rather, they are perceived in this country to be too big to tackle. (In America they have simply bought the politicians.) 
This essay tries to explain how we got here. By which I don’t mean the recent events leading up to the crash of 2008 – these are have been discussed in dozens of books. Instead I want to set out the older and specifically British back story, both economic and political. The crash of 2008 did not appear out of the blue. Yes, some of the key factors, notably the use of computers in the global gambling, are relatively recent. But many of the building blocks were in place long before the Internet enabled the global casino we now live in. 
The story in outline is simple: we got here because we removed  the controls placed on the financial sector. For sixty years the British banks struggled to escape the constraints imposed on them by the rest of society. And as they overcame each obstacle they proceeded to create and lend money on an ever larger scale. They lent money against property for the most part and left British industry to look after itself as best it could. The bankers in charge did this to make themselves rich. That’s all there is to it. What follows is a very short account of how this happened. And almost no economics knowledge is required to understand it. 
                                                                      *********
Although he never explicitly said this, Heath wanted to convert Britain into a European-style social democracy, similar to that sought by the Labour government he had succeeded. ‘Heath had been very impressed, when visiting Germany, by Willy Brandt’s regular round-table consultations with the unions and the German system of co-partnership; his mind began moving towards establishing a similar relationship in Britain by which the unions should be given an acknowledged role in the running of the economy.’ 24 
   Heath also wanted the British bankers to become more like their German counterparts, taking direct stakes in British manufacturing.

John Pilger — Getting Assange: the Untold Story


John Pilger relates the story of the concerted drive to get Assange because freedom and democracy. (snark)

How liberalism becomes authoritarian when "liberals" attempt to save liberalism by killing it.

Counterpunch

Ken Moak — Western critics should not be so skeptical of Belt and Road

Western critics continue to pour cold water on China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), an ambitious and well-planned architecture connecting the massive Eurasian landmass through a system of roads, railways and ports. They complain that it lacks transparency, erodes trade standards set up by the West, is financially too huge for China to handle, is self-serving, and is a deceptive vehicle for China to dominate the world, just to name a few.
The reality is that the West has to destroy this initiative or face watching its dominance fake into oblivion. This could involve war if that is the last resort of a dying empire. This is obvious to anyone with a passing interest in geopolitics, geostrategy and history.

The window for the West to preserve its domination is closing. These are parlous times.

Asia Times
Western critics should not be so skeptical of Belt and Road
Ken Moak

David Goldman — Constitutional crisis in Washington? More like attempted coup

This is NOT a Constitutional crisis, contrary to press hype, but an attempted coup, as a senior Republican statesman told a private briefing this week.
Asia Times
Constitutional crisis in Washington? More like attempted coup
David Goldman

Diane Coyle — They don’t make economists like they used to


About William Baumol, who recently passed away.

The Enlightened Economist
They don’t make economists like they used to
Diane Coyle | freelance economist and a former advisor to the UK Treasury. She is a member of the UK Competition Commission and is acting Chairman of the BBC Trust, the governing body of the British Broadcasting Corporation

Canadians copying Americans?


Well not in this case; no QE from the Canada central bank... as long as this remains the policy, they will continue to avoid a large scale crisis.





The Great Unravellng: Nafeez Ahamd

Some people see a world in crisis as a business opportunity.


The New York-based Jewish magazine Forward ran a lengthy piece examining my story forecasting a potential scenario of a major financial crash in or shortly after 2018 (the one that was picked up by the New York Observer). The article is authored by Andrew Eil, a  coordinator of climate assistance programs for the US Department of State from 2010 to 2014. He now runs his own consultancy and his clients include the World Bank, the UN Environment Programme, Bloomberg LLP, among others. 
The piece is worth reading for the profound insight it provides into the way some sectors of the establishment tend to view the prospect of a global convergence of systemic crises. Eil's basic argument is that, it doesn't matter if the entire world experiences a series of cascading synchronous failures because of a major convergence of oil, food and financial crises driven by fundamental systemic and structural processes. It doesn't matter because Israel, he thinks, will be largely insulated from the worst impacts of these crises, and therefore will potentially even benefit from the resulting chaos. 
While the Middle East and other parts of the world become weaker, Eil suggests that if my worst-case scenario indeed transpires (and I hasten to add that it is only one potential scenario - there are others, and here's another I've outlined), Israel will be left standing. Eil points out some compelling facts that highlight how Israel could be relatively insulated from the worst impacts of a global crisis scenario. Unfortunately, his argument also highlights the sort of myopic, frankly, self-serving elitist thinking very much associated with the very paradigm that has made the global system so vulnerable to crisis:
The Great Unravelling

The Rise of New Labour: Robin Ramsey

Jonathon Freedland in the Guardian says that the present Labour Party manifesto is really good so why is the electorate going for Tory austerity instead? He says it's because Labour has lost credibility to run the economy because the Conservatives, along with the media, have successfully blamed New Labour for the mess after 2008, when, in fact, all the money had been spent on the bankers. But, say's Jonathon Freedland, Labour had also mismanage the economy in the past and so voters are wary.

Robin Ramsey describes in one of his books -which are not available now - how Ted Heath wanted to reindustrialise Britain to be more like Germany, but this didn't suite the banking sector, so behind the scenes they engineered economic crisis's to undermine the economy, it worked, and Heath's Conservative Party lost the election. They also ensured that Labour under Wilson and Callaghan were unsuccessful too. So the reason for the lack of success of both Heath's Conservative Party and the Labour Party back in the 1970's was not so much failure of policy, but the City of London engineering economic recessions, a run on the pound, and exchange rate crisis's.

Jonathon Freedland mentions none of this probably because the Guardian is not a radical paper at all; and even though some of its journalists may have a slight left bias, they remain entirely acceptable to the ruling elite. Good reporters like, Jonathon Cook and Nafeez Ahmad, got ousted out, and many others never got the job in the first place. This is the same for all the media. I'm not saying that Ramsey, Cook, and Nafeez, don't have their own bias, we all do, but at least we should be able to read different points of view.

Ramsey's books don't seem to be in print anymore, but here's a PDF of a speech he made about the rise of New Labour.

Excerpt:


A group within the labour movement had concluded that the key structural conflict in Britain wasn’t between the classes, the Marxist view, but between the interests of the domestic and overseas sections of the economy; which in shorthand boiled down to on the one hand the City and on the other manufacturing.  People wrote essays with titles such as: the City versus industry. This group included Neil Kinnock, as his 1986 book, Making Our Way, shows; and Bryan Gould, who also thought like this, was appointed by Kinnock to chair the committee on economic policy.  Gould’s committee duly produced a detailed analysis of why the bankers had too much power and how to reduce it.
But the Gould committee report was rejected by Neil Kinnock as soon as it appeared.  Gould tells us that just before the report was due to be published a group of Labour MPs came to see him to try and get it stopped or modified. One of them was the then rising star of the back-benches, Tony Blair. This was 1988. 
We still don’t know for sure why the Gould report was dumped: none of those principally involved have explained it. My guess would be simply that the group around Kinnock wanted to get elected more than they cared about the state of the British economy or the fate of its citizens; and having lost two general elections, decided that the bankers were too powerful to challenge.  By this time – 1988/9 –  the City had been largely sold off to American banks in the so-called ‘big bang’ of 1986 and was well on its way to being an extension of Wall Street; and thus to be anti-City of London increasingly meant being perceived as anti-American. 


For whatever reason the policy review document on the economy was abandoned, and Labour began the long process of making itself acceptable to the City of London – even though the City then was only about 4% of the British economy. 
Shadow Chancellor John Smith led what became derisively known as the prawn cocktail offensive, as he toured the City of London’s dining rooms in the years before the 1992 election, promising them that they would get no trouble from a
Labour government.
 
In some of these dining rooms John Smith was already known: at this point he was on the steering committee of the Bilderberg group, some of whose regular attenders are bankers. 
But this ass-kissing was to no avail: Labour lost again in 1992. Neil Kinnock resigned and John Smith won the leadership election, defeating Bryan Gould, the leader of the anti-banker tendency within the parliamentary Labour Party. My branch of the Labour Party was one of the few which voted for Gould. Gould’s loss to Smith was the end of the anti-banker tendency in the Labour movement. 
Under John Smith, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown became shadow front bench spokesmen and were widely seen as the coming men. When John Smith died in 1994, Blair took over and NuLab began to form. 
The central fact remains: the party of Clement Attlee, Harold Wilson, Barbara Castle and Jack Jones, largely funded by the trade unions, chose as leader someone [Tony Blair], as well as being Mrs Thatcher in all but name, is the godfather to one of Rupert Murdoch’s children, never saw a powerful arse he couldn’t kiss, and, most striking of all, hated the Labour Party and everything it stood for.
http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster63/lob63-new-labour.pdf 

Friday, May 19, 2017

Alex Pfeiffer — As Leaks Pile Up It’s Evident Trump Is Under Attack From His Own Staff


Or else the place is bugged.

The Daily Caller
As Leaks Pile Up It’s Evident Trump Is Under Attack From His Own Staff
Alex Pfeiffer

Rush Limbaugh on Russia Probes — ‘We Are Watching a Silent Coup Here to Oust a Duly Elected President’

I think it has a purposeful, studied effort and outcome, which is a coup. We are watching a silent coup here to oust a duly elected president, and this coup is being mounted by career government people who can traffic anonymously and who are protected by people in the media and within the Democrat Party. Stop and think of it, folks. A year. How many…? 
Hasn’t the Washington Post at one time admitted that they have over 30 anonymous sources for all of this? That’s just one newspaper, 30 anonymous sources there.
How many anonymous people are talking New York Times? How much overlap? How many sources are talking to both places? All these deep state career government people, ex-Obama people that are civilians now? We don’t know. But it is a lot of people, and there isn’t any evidence....

This is what the folks on the right are reading. The political divide grows exponentially.
 

Thomas E. Patterson — News Coverage of Donald Trump’s First 100 Days

Trump has repeatedly claimed that his treatment by the media is unprecedented in its hostility.
This study suggests that, at least when it comes to recent history, he’s right.
Harvard Kennedy School Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy
News Coverage of Donald Trump’s First 100 Days
Thomas E. Patterson | Bradlee Professor of Government and the Press

Download PDF of the study

Asia Unhedged — Synchronized global expansion still alive and well


Now if the US can just refrain from blowing it up.

Asia Times
Synchronized global expansion still alive and well
Asia Unhedged

Also

A Chinese view or US politics.

Global Times: America’s energy ‘burns away’ in political strife

Stephanie Kelton — Announcing the First International Conference on Modern Monetary Theory


Economics for a New Progressive Era
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY
SEPTEMBER 21–24, 2017

New Economic Perspectives

“The Connection Between Finance and Politics Has Been Under-Researched for Years” — Guy Rolnik interviews Luigi Zingales


Amazing that they are just getting to this.

ProMarket — The blog of the Stigler Center at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business
“The Connection Between Finance and Politics Has Been Under-Researched for Years”
Guy Rolnik interviews Luigi Zingales

Bernie Sanders Supporters Are Suing the DNC for Fraud — Arron Mate interviews Elizabeth Lee


Lost in the furor about Russiagate.
A group of democratic voters have filed a class action lawsuit accusing the DNC of fraud for failing to be neutral. The DNC wants the case dismissed. In the most recent court hearing, it's legal team argued party leaders have no legal obligation to remain neutral.
"All's fair in politics and war."

TRRN
Bernie Sanders Supporters Are Suing the DNC for Fraud
Arron Mate interviews Elizabeth Lee

Amanda Crowell — Mediated Reality is No Match for Personal Experience

In The Psychological State of the Union, Amanda Crowell offers observations on the impact of our personal psychology on our political reality....
Immediate experience versus mediated "reality."

Maciej Cegłowski — Notes From An Emergency


Weekend reading. On tech feudalism as a key challenge of the digital era that is emerging. How to deal with it before it deals with us.

Idle Words
Notes From An Emergency
Maciej Cegłowski
ht Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism

Moon of Alabama — U.S. Attacks Syrian Government Forces - It Now Has To Make Its Choice


Mission creep again.

Moon of Alabama
U.S. Attacks Syrian Government Forces - It Now Has To Make Its Choice
b

It has the added "benefit" of sabotaging Us-Russian détente. Is the US military preempting the president, or is the president speaking with a forked tongue?

Fort Russ 
Lavrov on US At-Tanf airstrike: Illegitimate, illegal, and violation of sovereignty of Syria
Tom Winter

Intel Today — The Spies Who Fooled the World — Never Forget, Never Forgive

On the eve of the tenth anniversary of the Iraq War, Panorama reveals how key aspects of the secret intelligence used to justify the invasion were based on fabrication and lies.
And we are supposed to continue to believe the US and UK intelligence people? Forget it.

Philip Giraldi — Do High-Level Leaks Suggest a Conspiracy?


Duh. There may be no cabal, but there are networks of people with shared purpose. These cohorts are not necessarily linked directly but they have a common purpose and act in tandem.
Philip Giraldi | executive director of the Council for the National Interest and a former CIA officer.

Also

Donald Trump at a Lonely Crossroads
Alastair Crooke, former British diplomat and founder and director of the Conflicts Forum

The plan is to hogtie Trump, which is already largely accomplished, and remove him from office if possible, which is difficult given the high bar set by the US Constitution.

“He Is Free To Leave Whenever He Wants": Swedish Prosecutors Drop Rape Investigation Against Julian Assange


Instead of being quietly "sequestered" by the CIA, as some had speculated after his recent infamous spat with Mike Pompeo, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange may soon be a free man after spending the last half decade holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. 
Moments ago, Swedish prosecutors said they decided to discontinue their long-running probe into alleged rape targeting Chief Prosecutor Marianne Ny has today decided to discontinue the preliminary investigation regarding suspected rape concerning Julian Assange,” the prosecutor's office said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters. 
“Given that all options for moving the investigation forward are now exhausted, it appears that — in light of the views expressed by the supreme court on the proportionality of arresting someone in absentia — it is no longer proportional to maintain the decision to remand Julian Assange in his absence,” Ny wrote.WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. Assange denies the Swedish rape allegation and hasn’t been charged for it.

Julian Assange Freedom 

David Swanson: Gorbachev: It Was Worse Than This, and We Fixed It


On Friday in Moscow I and a group from the United States met with former president of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev. He said the current relationship between Washington and Moscow alarmed him. But, he said, it is possible to rebuild trust. “We had a situation that was worse, but we were able to rebuild trust. And people-to-people contacts helped to rebuild trust.” 
When Gorbachev and U.S. President Ronald Reagan first met, presidents of the two countries had not met for six years. Members of Reagan’s cabinet opposed the meeting. Gorbachev came out of the meeting saying of Reagan “He’s not a hawk, he’s a dinosaur.” Reagan came out denouncing Gorbachev as “a die-hard communist.” 
But they kept meeting. Eventually and inevitably Reagan asked what the Soviets would do if the U.S. were attacked by a meteor or aliens. Both men said their countries would help each other. However, Reagan was a fan of Star Wars, both the weapons boondoggle and the movie — which he may have kept distinct from each other in his mind. 
Gorbachev and Reagan accomplished a great deal of disarmament, not to mention Gorbachev’s accomplishing the nonviolent dissolution of an empire. But they could not get rid of all the nuclear weapons, and they could not take other serious steps in that direction, because Reagan was not willing, and the U.S. government was not willing.

David Swanson: Chorbachev

CrossTalk: Bullhorns on Hysteria




Is mass hysteria consuming western media and the American public? Still with no evidence the Trump collusion story with Russia appears to have a life of its own. Will it ever end? CrossTalking with David Swanson, Dmitry Babich, and Anatoly Karlin.

A good round up of events. I usually keep an eye out for propaganda but they say here that Russia is not the deeply religious, very conservative nation it is depicted to be. Now I had fallen for that. Also, the French hate it when the media says Macron won by a landslide when 60% of the vote was against him sayng no to neoliberalism.

Thursday, May 18, 2017

Maximus Thaler — Holding Hands is More Important Than You Think


Humans are social animals.
Dr. Coan is a neuroscientist who specializes in measuring social cognition. His work falls under the heading of Social Baseline Theory. The critical claim of social baseline theory is that humans are inherently social creatures. Just as fish gills indicate that fish are aquatic creatures, the human mind has a suite of adaptations which indicate that we are social creatures.
For the entirety of human evolution (some 6 million years) people have always relied on other people. Social aid has been a fixture in humanity’s evolutionary environment, and our brains should reflect this....
Evolution Institute
Holding Hands is More Important Than You Think
Maximus Thaler | PhD candidate at Binghamton University studying cultural evolution.

Xinhua— Alibaba revenue surges 60% in 4th fiscal quarter

China's e-commerce giant Alibaba said Thursday that its quarterly revenue jumped 60 percent year on year in the fourth fiscal quarter ending March
The group's revenue was about 38.6 billion yuan ($5.6 billion) in the quarter, beating market expectations, Alibaba said. This was Alibaba's highest quarterly revenue growth since a public initial offering.
The company said that the figure was mainly driven by robust revenue growth across all its segments, "in particular our China commerce retail revenue growth."
Revenue in the fiscal year surged 56 percent to about 158.3 billion yuan year on year, according to Alibaba.
China.org.cn
Alibaba revenue surges 60% in 4th fiscal quarter
Xinhua

Also
Chinese online gaming and social networking group Tencent Holdings Ltd is giving its once-dominant archrival Alibaba Group Holding Ltd a run for its money in the battle for market share in the nation's lucrative mobile payment sector.
WeChat, the all-in-one super app, which offers a platform for everything from money transfers to taxi hailing and buying coffee, has garnered 938 million monthly active users, according to Tencent's first-quarter financial report released on Wednesday, doubling and eroding the customer base of Alipay, which Alibaba launched in 2004 to facilitate payments on its Taobao e-commerce platform, and the country's top payment tool by market share.
The company reported profit of 14.4 billion yuan ($2.1 billion) in the first quarter of this year, a record high for Tencent's quarterly earnings. Revenue soared 54.8 percent to 49.6 billion yuan.…
Tencent gives Alibaba a run for its moneyChina Daily 

teleSUR — Ecuador’s Correa Leaves Office With 62 Percent Approval Rating

The survey, conducted between April 22 and 24, found that Correa’s approval rating never fell below 50 percent.

Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa is set to leave office on May 24 with a 62 percent approval rating, El Telegrafo reported on Thursday, citing new findings from a survey conducted by Public Opinion Ecuador.

The survey, conducted between April 22 and 24, found that Correa’s approval rating never fell below 50 percent. Approximately 2,270 people aged 16 and over were chosen randomly across the country for survey interviews.
Correa, who took office in 2007 representing the leftist Alianza Pais party, is considered to be one of Ecuador’s most popular presidents. In 2014, his approval rating peaked at 83 percent.
“It's an interestingly high rating after so much time,” Public Opinion Ecuador Director Santiago Perez told El Telegrafo....
teleSUR
Ecuador’s Correa Leaves Office With 62 Percent Approval Rating

Branko Milanovic — Is “neo-imperialism” the only path to development?

As is well-known (or should be well-known) Marxism has gradually developed two approaches to imperialism....
Global Inequality
Is “neo-imperialism” the only path to development?
Branko Milanovic | Visiting Presidential Professor at City University of New York Graduate Center and senior scholar at the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS), and formerly lead economist in the World Bank's research department and senior associate at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Robert Parry — When the Trump Coup-makers Cometh

So what did you think a U.S.-styled “soft coup” would look like? What we’re seeing regarding the intended removal of President Trump is not that much different from what has happened in dozens of other countries, whether Iran in 1953 or Ukraine in 2014 or Brazil in 2016. This one just has a few extra American touches.
Like other coups, there are often vague and unproven accusations leveled against the target and his or her entourage. Even though hard evidence is usually lacking, “process crimes,” such as making misstatements to prosecutors or obstructing justice, are developed as a substitute under the popular saying: “the cover-up is worse than the crime.” Whatever the case, a complicit media then trumpets alleged wrongdoing into grave and impeachable offenses....
As this American coup against Trump progresses, one commonality of coups around the world – whether “hard coups” of military tanks or “soft coups” of “constitutional” removals – is that the coup’s target is not some perfect human being. He or she has likely made political mistakes or cut some corners or had associates who lined their pockets.

But the difference between those misdeeds being treated as politics as usual or becoming the stuff of “scandal” has more to do with the interests of powerful interests – a domestic “deep state” or an outside “superpower” – than any evenhanded pursuit of justice....
Whether he knows it or not, Trump is now in very deep water and has no idea how to dog-paddle back to the shore....
Consortium News
When the Trump Coup-makers Cometh
Robert Parry

Recall this from Chuck Schumer in January:
“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” Schumer told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.
“So even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s being really dumb to do this.”
Now we are seeing this play out.

Still think the US is a democracy under the rule of law?

The Hill
Schumer: Trump 'really dumb' for attacking intelligence agencies
Mallory Shelbourne - 01/03/17


Steven Chovanec — Trump Escalates Syrian Proxy War


US neocons and deep state are back. Al Qaeda an ally.
Back in February, it was quietly reported that the CIA had discontinued its support program to rebels in Syria. A month later, a knowledgeable source from the region disclosed to me that the Trump administration and the Saudi defense minister, Prince Mohammed bin Salman, had agreed during their meetings in mid-March for the Gulf states to re-open supply channels to their rebel proxies.…
The parallel measures by the U.S. and Russia signify a race between the two major powers to capture as much territory as possible from the Islamic State before the other side is able to do so.
Under the guise of “defeating ISIS,” both powers are essentially carving out their own spheres of influence throughout the country, dividing it between U.S.- and Russian-backed regions, leading to an inevitable showdown between the two sides over the fate of the country and its territorial integrity.…
As the CIA reopens its rebel supply lines, it’s important to note that the entire opposition is dominated by al-Qaeda and other radical Islamists. While pro-regime-changers in the U.S. have repeatedly blame the rise of ISIS on the U.S. not sufficiently sponsoring the “moderate” rebels, in reality the program of supporting the moderates was the major factor that empowered the jihadists. The so-called “moderates” were never separate from the extremists, and often were only called “moderate” to justify U.S.-support.
Despite knowing its support was empowering extremists, the U.S. continued to do so, realizing that it was necessary in order for the goal of overthrowing the Syrian government to have any realistic chance of success. This created the situation today where the opposition is dominated by al-Qaeda and filled with sectarian extremists.

Today in Idlib, where the FSA is being supported by the CIA, al-Qaeda and its coalition completely dominate the rebel forces. Rebels routinely pass at least half of their U.S.-supplied weapons to Nusra while the U.S.-approved “moderates” only operate under license from al-Qaeda....
Steven Chovanec

Also

To support freedom and democracy, you see.

Independent
Donald Trump to announce $350bn arms deal with Saudi Arabia – one of the largest in history

Just what the snake pit needs.

Think Progress
Trump to unveil plans for an 'Arab NATO' in Saudi Arabia

John Whitehead: America's Reign of Terror: A Nation Reaps What It Sows

If it wasn't America it would be another county, I know. Japan has a reputation of being ruthless imperialists, so lucky they're kept under control. Every country's citizens needs to reign in its elite, who seem, collectively, to be pretty psychopathic.


Who designed the malware worm that is now wreaking havoc on tens of thousands of computers internationally by hackers demanding a king's ransom? The U.S. government 
Who is the biggest black market buyer and stockpiler of cyberweapons (weaponized malware that can be used to hack into computer systems, spy on citizens, and destabilize vast computer networks)? The U.S. government 
What country has one the deadliest arsenals of weapons of mass destruction? The U.S. government. 
Who is the largest weapons manufacturer and exporter in the world, such that they are literally arming the world? The U.S. government. 
Which is the only country to ever use a nuclear weapon in wartime? The United States. 
How did Saddam Hussein build Iraq's massive arsenal of tanks, planes, missiles, and chemical weapons during the 1980s? With help from the U.S. government. 
Who gave Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida "access to a fortune in covert funding and top-level combat weaponry"? The U.S. government. 
What country has a pattern and practice of entrapment that involves targeting vulnerable individuals, feeding them with the propaganda, know-how and weapons intended to turn them into terrorists, and then arresting them as part of an elaborately orchestrated counterterrorism sting? The U.S. government. 
Where did ISIS get many of their deadliest weapons, including assault rifles and tanks to anti-missile defenses? From the U.S. government. 
Which country has a history of secretly testing out dangerous weapons and technologies on its own citizens? The U.S. government. 
Are you getting the picture yet? 
The U.S. government isn't protecting us from terrorism. 
The U.S. government is creating the terror. It is, in fact, the source of the terror.
Just think about it for a minute: almost every tyranny being perpetrated against the citizenry--purportedly to keep us safe and the nation secure--has come about as a result of some threat manufactured in one way or another by our own government.
 
Unfortunately, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, "we the people" are the ones who keep reaping what the government sows. 
US Blowback 


If China Can Fund infrastructure with Its Own Credit, So Can We: Ellen Brown

China moves ahead while we remain in the doldrums because nothing can be done without the elite siphoning off resources. We should be investing in green energy for a safe and sustainable future, which would be highly profitable too.
A key difference between China and the US is that the Chinese government owns the majority of its banks. About 40% of the funding for its giant railway project comes from bonds issued by the Ministry of Railway, 10-20% comes from provincial and local governments, and the remaining 40-50% is provided by loans from federally-owned banks and financial institutions. Like private banks, state-owned banks simply create money as credit on their books. (More on this below.) The difference is that they return their profits to the government, making the loans interest-free; and the loans can be rolled over indefinitely. In effect, the Chinese government decides what work it wants done, draws on its own national credit card, pays Chinese workers to do it, and repays the loans with the proceeds. 
The US government could do that too, without raising taxes, slashing services, cutting pensions, or privatizing industries. How this could be done quickly and cheaply will be considered here, after a look at the funding proposals currently on the table and at why they are not satisfactory solutions to the nation’s growing infrastructure deficit. 
Countering the dogma that “private companies can always do it better and cheaper,” studies have found that on average, private contractors charge more than twice as much as the government would have paid federal workers for the same job. A 2011 report by the Brookings Institution found that “in practice [PPPs] have been dogged by contract design problems, waste, and unrealistic expectations.” In their 2015 report “Why Public-Private Partnerships Don’t Work,” Public Services International stated that “[E]xperience over the last 15 years shows that PPPs are an expensive and inefficient way of financing infrastructure and divert government spending away from other public services. They conceal public borrowing, while providing long-term state guarantees for profits to private companies.” They also divert public money away from the neediest infrastructure projects, which may not deliver sizable returns, in favor of those big-ticket items that will deliver hefty profits to investors. 
In a November 2014 editorial titled “How Two Billionaires Are Destroying High Speed Rail in America,” author Julie Doubleday observed that the US push against public mass transit has been led by a think tank called the Reason Foundation, which is funded by the Koch brothers. Their $44 billion fortune comes largely from Koch Industries, an oil and gas conglomerate with a vested interest in mass transit’s competitors, those single-rider vehicles using the roads that are heavily subsidized by the federal government. 
The federal government could set up a bank on a similar model. It has massive revenues, which it could leverage into credit for its own purposes. Since financing is typically about 50 percent of the cost of infrastructure, the government could cut infrastructure costs in half by borrowing from its own bank. Public-private partnerships are a good deal for investors but a bad deal for the public. The federal government can generate its own credit without private financial middlemen. That is how China does it, and we can too.

Ellen Brown, Public Banks, Infrastructure