qualities of great insight, honesty and brilliant writing, often against
policies of their governments. Both are skillful and popular enough to
write for important mass journals, also often with contrary views. Their
styles are different; Krugman - well, he's an economist, Fisk from the
land of Shakespeare. Here, both address shock, in ways different and
the same, in humanity's most restive period since WWII. Warm yourself,
this coldest day of the year.
Ed
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/25/opinion/25krugman.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212
Shock Doctrine, U.S.A.
Paul Krugman
NY Times Op-Ed: February 25, 2011
Here's a thought: maybe Madison, Wis., isn't Cairo after all. Maybe it's
Baghdad - specifically, Baghdad in 2003, when the Bush administration put
Iraq under the rule of officials chosen for loyalty and political
reliability rather than experience and competence.
As many readers may recall, the results were spectacular - in a bad way.
Instead of focusing on the urgent problems of a shattered economy and
society, which would soon descend into a murderous civil war, those Bush
appointees were obsessed with imposing a conservative ideological vision.
Indeed, with looters still prowling the streets of Baghdad, L. Paul Bremer,
the American viceroy, told a Washington Post reporter that one of his top
priorities was to "corporatize and privatize state-owned enterprises" - Mr.
Bremer's words, not the reporter's - and to "wean people from the idea the
state supports everything."
The story of the privatization-obsessed Coalition Provisional Authority was
the centerpiece of Naomi Klein's best-selling book "The Shock Doctrine,"
which argued that it was part of a broader pattern. From Chile in the 1970s
onward, she suggested, right-wing ideologues have exploited crises to push
through an agenda that has nothing to do with resolving those crises, and
everything to do with imposing their vision of a harsher, more unequal, less
democratic society.
Which brings us to Wisconsin 2011, where the shock doctrine is on full
display.
In recent weeks, Madison has been the scene of large demonstrations against
the governor's budget bill, which would deny collective-bargaining rights to
public-sector workers. Gov. Scott Walker claims that he needs to pass his
bill to deal with the state's fiscal problems. But his attack on unions has
nothing to do with the budget. In fact, those unions have already indicated
their willingness to make substantial financial concessions - an offer the
governor has rejected.
What's happening in Wisconsin is, instead, a power grab - an attempt to
exploit the fiscal crisis to destroy the last major counterweight to the
political power of corporations and the wealthy. And the power grab goes
beyond union-busting. The bill in question is 144 pages long, and there are
some extraordinary things hidden deep inside.
For example, the bill includes language that would allow officials appointed
by the governor to make sweeping cuts in health coverage for low-income
families without having to go through the normal legislative process.
And then there's this: "Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1),
the department may sell any state-owned heating, cooling, and power plant or
may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with
or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department
determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss.
196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service
commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for
the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is considered to be in
the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a
project under s. 196.49 (3) (b)."
What's that about? The state of Wisconsin owns a number of plants supplying
heating, cooling, and electricity to state-run facilities (like the
University of Wisconsin). The language in the budget bill would, in effect,
let the governor privatize any or all of these facilities at whim. Not only
that, he could sell them, without taking bids, to anyone he chooses. And
note that any such sale would, by definition, be "considered to be in the
public interest."
If this sounds to you like a perfect setup for cronyism and profiteering -
remember those missing billions in Iraq? - you're not alone. Indeed, there
are enough suspicious minds out there that Koch Industries, owned by the
billionaire brothers who are playing such a large role in Mr. Walker's
anti-union push, felt compelled to issue a denial that it's interested in
purchasing any of those power plants. Are you reassured?
The good news from Wisconsin is that the upsurge of public outrage - aided
by the maneuvering of Democrats in the State Senate, who absented themselves
to deny Republicans a quorum - has slowed the bum's rush. If Mr. Walker's
plan was to push his bill through before anyone had a chance to realize his
true goals, that plan has been foiled. And events in Wisconsin may have
given pause to other Republican governors, who seem to be backing off
similar moves.
But don't expect either Mr. Walker or the rest of his party to change those
goals. Union-busting and privatization remain G.O.P. priorities, and the
party will continue its efforts to smuggle those priorities through in the
name of balanced budgets.
***
The destiny of this pageant lies in the Kingdom of Oil
Robert Fisk:
Independent/UK: Saturday, 26 February 2011
The Middle East earthquake of the past five weeks has been the most
tumultuous, shattering, mind-numbing experience in the history of the region
since the fall of the Ottoman empire. For once, "shock and awe" was the
right description.
The docile, supine, unregenerative, cringing Arabs of Orientalism have
transformed themselves into fighters for the freedom, liberty and dignity
which we Westerners have always assumed it was our unique role to play in
the world. One after another, our satraps are falling, and the people we
paid them to control are making their own history - our right to meddle in
their affairs (which we will, of course, continue to exercise) has been
diminished for ever.
The tectonic plates continue to shift, with tragic, brave - even blackly
humorous - results. Countless are the Arab potentates who always claimed
they wanted democracy in the Middle East. King Bashar of Syria is to improve
public servants' pay. King Bouteflika of Algeria has suddenly abandoned the
country's state of emergency. King Hamad of Bahrain has opened the doors of
his prisons. King Bashir of Sudan will not stand for president again. King
Abdullah of Jordan is studying the idea of a constitutional monarchy. And
al-Qa'ida are, well, rather silent.
Who would have believed that the old man in the cave would suddenly have to
step outside, dazzled, blinded by the sunlight of freedom rather than the
Manichean darkness to which his eyes had become accustomed. Martyrs there
were aplenty across the Muslim world - but not an Islamist banner to be
seen. The young men and women bringing an end to their torment of dictators
were mostly Muslims, but the human spirit was greater than the desire for
death. They are Believers, yes - but they got there first, toppling Mubarak
while Bin Laden's henchmen still called for his overthrow on outdated
videotapes.
But now a warning. It's not over. We are experiencing today that warm,
slightly clammy feeling before the thunder and lightning break out.
Gaddafi's final horror movie has yet to end, albeit with that terrible mix
of farce and blood to which we are accustomed in the Middle East. And his
impending doom is, needless to say, throwing into ever-sharper perspective
the vile fawning of our own potentates. Berlusconi - who in many respects is
already a ghastly mockery of Gaddafi himself - and Sarkozy, and Lord Blair
of Isfahan are turning out to look even shabbier than we believed. Those
faith-based eyes blessed Gaddafi the murderer. I did write at the time that
Blair and Straw had forgotten the "whoops" factor, the reality that this
weird light bulb was absolutely bonkers and would undoubtedly perform some
other terrible act to shame our masters. And sure enough, every journalist
is now going to have to add "Mr Blair's office did not return our call" to
his laptop keyboard.
Everyone is now telling Egypt to follow the "Turkish model" - this seems to
involve a pleasant cocktail of democracy and carefully controlled Islam. But
if this is true, Egypt's army will keep an unwanted, undemocratic eye on its
people for decades to come. As lawyer Ali Ezzatyar has pointed out, "Egypt's
military leaders have spoken of threats to the "Egyptian way of life"... in
a not so subtle reference to threats from the Muslim Brotherhood. This can
be seen as a page taken from the Turkish playbook." The Turkish army turned
up as kingmakers four times in modern Turkish history. And who but the
Egyptian army, makers of Nasser, constructors of Sadat, got rid of the
ex-army general Mubarak when the game was up?
And democracy - the real, unfettered, flawed but brilliant version which we
in the West have so far lovingly (and rightly) cultivated for ourselves - is
not going, in the Arab world, to rest happy with Israel's pernicious
treatment of Palestinians and its land theft in the West Bank. Now no longer
the "only democracy in the Middle East", Israel argued desperately - in
company with Saudi Arabia, for heaven's sake - that it was necessary to
maintain Mubarak's tyranny. It pressed the Muslim Brotherhood button in
Washington and built up the usual Israeli lobby fear quotient to push Obama
and La Clinton off the rails yet again. Faced with pro-democracy protesters
in the lands of oppression, they duly went on backing the oppressors until
it was too late. I love "orderly transition". The "order" bit says it all.
Only Israeli journalist Gideon Levy got it right. "We should be saying
'Mabrouk Misr!'," he said. Congratulations, Egypt!
Yet in Bahrain, I had a depressing experience. King Hamad and Crown Prince
Salman have been bowing to their 70 per cent (80 per cent?) Shia population,
opening prison doors, promising constitutional reforms. So I asked a
government official in Manama if this was really possible. Why not have an
elected prime minister instead of a member of the Khalifa royal family? He
clucked his tongue. "Impossible," he said. "The GCC would never permit
this." For GCC - the Gulf Co-operation Council - read Saudi Arabia. And
here, I am afraid, our tale grows darker.
We pay too little attention to this autocratic band of robber princes; we
think they are archaic, illiterate in modern politics, wealthy (yes, "beyond
the dreams of Croesus", etc), and we laughed when King Abdullah offered to
make up any fall in bailouts from Washington to the Mubarak regime, and we
laugh now when the old king promises $36bn to his citizens to keep their
mouths shut. But this is no laughing matter. The Arab revolt which finally
threw the Ottomans out of the Arab world started in the deserts of Arabia,
its tribesmen trusting Lawrence and McMahon and the rest of our gang. And
from Arabia came Wahabism, the deep and inebriating potion - white foam on
the top of the black stuff - whose ghastly simplicity appealed to every
would-be Islamist and suicide bomber in the Sunni Muslim world. The Saudis
fostered Osama bin Laden and al-Qa'ida and the Taliban. Let us not even
mention that they provided most of the 9/11 bombers. And the Saudis will now
believe they are the only Muslims still in arms against the brightening
world. I have an unhappy suspicion that the destiny of this pageant of
Middle East history unfolding before us will be decided in the kingdom of
oil, holy places and corruption. Watch out.
But a lighter note. I've been hunting for the most memorable quotations from
the Arab revolution. We've had "Come back, Mr President, we were only
kidding" from an anti-Mubarak demonstrator. And we've had Saif el-Islam
el-Gaddafi's Goebbels-style speech: "Forget oil, forget gas - there will be
civil war." My very own favourite, selfish and personal quotation came when
my old friend Tom Friedman of The New York Times joined me for breakfast in
Cairo with his usual disarming smile. "Fisky," he said, "this Egyptian came
up to me in Tahrir Square yesterday, and asked me if I was Robert Fisk!" Now
that's what I call a revolution.
No comments:
Post a Comment