Project Syndicate has an article by Stiglitz on
America’s New Age of Empire
Following the United States' illegal intervention in Venezuela,
if it is illegal, why has Trump not been prosecuted? The answer is that his action was legal according to the only law which counts- viz. American law.
there is a palpable sense of uncertainty and foreboding, particularly among America's traditional allies.
Sir Keir fears being kidnapped? Don't be silly!
But it should already be obvious that things will not end well, either for the US or the rest of the world.
This is not obvious at all. Maduro didn't trust his own Army which is why his security detail was Cuban. The question is whether Delcy Rodriguez can hold on to power. Still, a big donor to Donald, the head of a 'vulture' fund, will probably triple his profit on the forced sale of the Venezuelan oil company's refineries and other assets in the US. That's ten billion dollars right there. Chevron too will make a lot of money. But Exxon's reluctance to return to Venezuela is justified. The Orinoco Basin may become even more ungovernable.
NEW YORK – US President Donald Trump has drawn a wave of criticism for his actions in Venezuela, violations of international law, disdain for longstanding norms, and threats against other countries – not least allies like Denmark and Canada. Around the world, there is a palpable sense of uncertainty and foreboding. But it should already be obvious that things will not end well, neither for the United States nor the rest of the world.
This isn't obvious. I personally don't think Iran will witness a revolution, but we have to agree that Obama was wrong to try to appease a corrupt, maniacal, regime. Iran's people are now experiencing the joys that Hamas or Hezbollah, with Iranian support, inflicted on the people of Gaza or Lebanon.
None of this comes as a surprise to many on the left.
What didn't come as a surprise to the rest of us is that Stiglitz was wrong about Chavez. Is there anything he has been right about?
We still remember US President Dwight Eisenhower’s valedictory warning about the industrial-military complex that had emerged from World War II.
Kennedy won the election by gassing on about an imaginary 'missile gap' with the Soviet Union.
It was inevitable that a country whose military spending matched that of the rest of the world combined would eventually use its arms to try to dominate others.
Stiglitz was in his twenties when the US intervened massively in Vietnam. It has been doing 'domination' for a very long time now.
To be sure, military interventions became increasingly unpopular following the American misadventures in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.
The mistake is to keep boots on the ground rather than do hit and run or shoot and scoot.
But Trump has never shown much concern for the will of the American people.
That's why he was never elected President.
Since he entered politics (and no doubt earlier), he has considered himself above the law, boasting that he could shoot someone on New York’s Fifth Avenue without losing a vote.
Because he didn't just understand what Americans wanted (e.g. protection from low-wage competition/immigrants) he actually gave it to them.
The January 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol – whose anniversary we have just “celebrated” – showed that he was right. The 2024 election reinforced Trump’s hold on the Republican Party, ensuring that it will do nothing to hold him accountable.
Unless they lose the mid-terms. In that case, Trump turns into a lame deck facing impeachment hearing and Congressional inquiries into Epstein etc. It may be that Trump fears he won't be able to turn Consumer Confidence around by November and so is offering his core supporters foreign policy victories of a type which they may believe will enrich the country going forward. Sadly, Robber Baron tactics seldom make sustainable profits. That is why such Barons disappeared from Europe a long time ago.
The capture of Venezuela’s dictator, Nicolás Maduro, was brazenly illegal and unconstitutional.
If so, why has no Court case not been brought against him? The plain fact is, if snatching Maduro was illegal, so was Obama snatching Osama. At that time, the US argued that it could violate territorial sovereignty if 'the host government is "unwilling or unable" to suppress a transnational threat emanating from its soil.
As a military intervention, it required congressional notification, if not approval.
This only becomes an issue if Trump loses control of Congress. Everything depends on the mid-terms.
And even if one stipulates that this was a case of “law enforcement,” international law still requires that such actions be pursued through extradition. One country cannot violate another’s sovereignty or snatch foreign nationals – let alone heads of state – from their home countries. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and others have been indicted for war crimes, but no one has proposed deploying soldiers to seize them wherever they happen to be.
So, Trump has done what no previous POTUS could. That's a feather in his cap. Sadly, this isn't true. There was once a guy called Saddam Hussein who lived in a country called Iraq. The US invaded and occupied it and then hunted down Saddam and his henchmen.
Even more brazen are Trump’s subsequent remarks. He claims that his administration will “run” Venezuela and take its oil, implying that the country will not be permitted to sell to the highest bidder. Given these designs, it would appear that a new era of imperialism is upon us.
Only if you believe Imperialism can make a profit. It can't. That's why it ended.
Might makes right, and nothing else matters. Moral questions – such as whether killing dozens of alleged drug smugglers without any pretense of due process – and the rule of law have been shunted aside, with barely a whimper from Republicans who once proudly touted American “values.”
America values winning. Trump is a winner. Let's see what happens if the Republicans lose the mid-terms by a wide margin. Thankfully, stories of corruption & incompetence in Democratic States- e.g. the Somali 'childcare' scandal which has ended Walz's political career- may save the bacon of the GOP.
Many commentators have already addressed the implications for global peace and stability.
They have addressed it by screaming hysterically and soiling their pants.
If the US claims the Western Hemisphere as its sphere of influence (the “Donroe Doctrine”) and bars China from accessing Venezuelan oil, why shouldn’t China claim East Asia and bar the US from accessing Taiwanese chips?
Because it has to conquer Taiwan first. The US just showed that they have the monopoly on global force projection. Even the newest Chinese aircraft carriers are only about 80 percent the size of the biggest American carriers. Moreover, the Yanks have turned combined operations into a fine art. The Chinese simply don't have the experience of doing any such thing.
Doing so would not require it to “run” Taiwan, only to control its policies, particularly those allowing exports to the US.
The only way to control Taiwan is to occupy it and jail lots of people. But, this may kill off the golden goose. The smart guys who make silicon chips will have emigrated to the US by the time you get hold of the place.
It is worth remembering that the great imperial power of the 19th century, the United Kingdom, did not fare well in the 20th.
It fared very well. In both world wars, the Royal Navy was able to prevent Germany from getting vital raw materials. Indeed, during the Great War, many Germans starved to death. The reason the Brits got rid of the Empire was because they could make more money without incurring much cost out of the British Commonwealth and 'Sterling Zone'.
If most other countries cooperate in the face of this new American imperialism – as they should –
why don't they? The answer is that they have problems with each other.
the long-term prospects for the US could be even worse.
Long-term prospects depend on productivity and technological innovation.
After all, the UK at least tried to export salutary governing principles to its colonies,
e.g. killing coolies who objected to foreign rule
introducing some modicum of the rule of law and other “good” institutions.
The US has the same intention. But so does the Ayatollah. Good institutions kill women who don't wear hijab. Women who don't wear hijab are violating God's law- which is above international law. As for the homosexuals, don't get me started, mate.
By contrast, Trumpian imperialism, lacking any coherent ideology, is openly unprincipled – an expression solely of greed and the will to power.
Which is why it is more acceptable than Biden's sententious shite. Trump is transactional- just like China.
It will attract the most avaricious and mendacious reprobates that American society can churn up.
America was created by such reprobates. The First Nations were slaughtered or driven off their ancestral land.
Such characters do not create wealth.
America is very poor. This is its punishment for robbing the indigenous people of their land.
They direct their energy to rent-seeking:
If you own the underlying resource, your economic rent rises by raising its productivity. You can't get any rent for a pile of stinky shit.
plundering others through the exercise of market power,
plundering does not involve buying or selling. It involves beating and robbing.
deception,
e.g. making treaties with the indigenous people and then breaking them once you have the upper hand.
or outright exploitation.
Slavery? Does Stiglitz really not know the history of his own country?
Countries dominated by rent-seekers may produce a few wealthy individuals, but they do not end up prosperous.
Which is why the vast majority of Americans are starving.
Prosperity requires the rule of law.
America's law was 'if you are brown or black, Whitey is welcome to fuck you over.'
Without it, there is ever-present uncertainty.
There was the certainty, for black and brown people in the US, that Whitey would fuck them over.
Will the government seize my assets?
Will the Whites seize my ancestral land even if, by treaty, they promised not to do so?
Will officials demand a bribe to overlook some minor peccadillo?
Trump caught Stiglitz masturbating in public. He let him off after Stiglitz handed over a couple of bucks.
Will the economy be a level playing field,
which it may have been in the Stone Age.
or will those in power always give the upper hand to their cronies?
The US was founded on the principle that those in power would give the upper hand to people of their own race.
Lord Acton famously observed that, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Power replied 'Lord Acton is a fuckin' poofter. Most Catlicks are, you know.'
But Trump has shown that one does not need absolute power to engage in unprecedented corruption.
One does need to have SCOTUS on side as well as a majority (however slender) in Congress.
Once the system of checks and balances starts to fall apart – as indeed it has in the US – the powerful can operate with impunity.
Which is why the mid-terms are important. The Dems can't afford to be complacent about this. Maybe lurching to the Left will help them. Maybe not.
The costs will be borne by the rest of society, because corruption is always bad for the economy.
Stupidity is bad for the economy. Corruption can be 'enabling'- i.e. a way to get round stupid laws or regulations.
One hopes that we have reached “peak Trump,” that this dystopian era of kakistocracy will end with the 2026 and 2028 elections. But Europe, China, and the rest of the world cannot rely on hope alone. They should be devising contingency plans which recognize that the world does not need the US.
They should have started doing this in 2017. China, it must be said, has significantly raised its threat point while reducing its vulnerability. Europe has been playing tiddlywinks.
What does America offer that the world cannot do without?
Trump just showed us. America can do global force projection. Europe can't go it alone as the Suez Crisis showed. China may be able to match the US in ten years time.
It is possible to imagine a world without the Silicon Valley giants, because the basic technologies they offer are now widely available. Others would rush in, and they may well establish much stronger safeguards.
Coz that's what the Chinese are all about- right?
It is also possible to imagine a world without US universities and scientific leadership, because Trump has already done his utmost to ensure that these institutions struggle to remain among the world’s best.
They were doing it to themselves. Harvard now has a remedial math program. Apparently, there are undergraduates who can't do calculus or basic algebra- stuff the Chinese learn by the age of 16. It is said this is because of COVID. But China had a tighter lockdown.
And it is possible to imagine a world where others no longer depend on the US market.
That is already happening which is why TACO (Trump always chickens out) applies.
Trade brings benefits, but less so if an imperial power seeks to grab a disproportionate share for itself.
Sadly, 'Immiserizing growth' (increasing output of goods in inelastic demand leads to a fall in revenue (worse terms of trade)) has been around since before I was born. But non-Imperial countries with an advanced manufacturing/service sector gain even more because they don't have to spend on imperial force projection.
Filling the “demand gap” posed by the US's persistent trade deficits will be a lot easier for the rest of the world than the challenge facing the US of dealing with the supply side.
This would happen in any case.
A hegemon that abuses its power and bullies others must be left in its own corner.
Hegemons can't be made to go sit in a corner. The reason they are the hegemon is because they can fuck up anyone who tries to fuck with them.
Resisting this new imperialism is essential for everyone else’s peace and prosperity. While the rest of the world should hope for the best, it must plan for the worst;
Sir Keir should find some nice cellar to hide in. Otherwise Trump may snatch him from 10 Downing Street.
and in planning for the worst, there may be no alternative to economic and social ostracism – no recourse but a policy of containment.
Lets all stop talking to America. They will cry and cry. Stiglitz himself is constantly in tears because smart people refuse to talk to him. That is why he gave up his plan to conquer the world. If it worked on Stiglitz, it will work on Trump. The King should pretend he is invisible. He should say 'there's a bad smell here but I can't see the fat bastard who must have farted. Probably it is a ghost. Fetch the Archbishop to conduct an exorcism.' Trump will take the hint. He will resign office and go set up a B&B in Vermont with his new husband- Vladimir Putin.
No comments:
Post a Comment