Confessions of an Economic Hitman

"I vacillated between viewing such people as an actual conpiracy and simply seeing them as a tight-knit fraternity bent on dominating the world. Nonetheless, over time I began to liken them to the plantation owners of the pre-Civil War South. They were men drawn together in a loose association by common beliefs and shared self-interest, rather than an exclusive group meeting in clandestine hideaways with focused and sinister intent. The plantation autocrats had grown up with servants and slaves, had been educated to believe that it was their duty to take care of the 'heathens' and to convert them to the owners' religion and way of life. Even if slavery repulsed them philosophically, they could, like Thomas Jefferson, justify it as a necessity, the collapse of which would result in social and economic chaos. The leaders of the modern oligarchies, what now thought of as the corporatocracy, seemed to fit the same mold... Of course, we are not the first to do this. The list of practitioners stretches back to the ancient empires of North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, and works its way up through Persia, Greece, Rome, the Christian Crusades, and all the European empire builders of the post-Columbian era. This imperialist drive has been and continues to be the cause of most wars, pollution, starvation, species extinctions, and genocides. And it has always taken a serious toll on the conscience and well-being of the citizens of those empires, contributing to social malaise and resulting in a situation where the wealthiest cultures in human history are plagued with the highest rates of suicide, drug abuse, and violence." -John Perkins

I couldn't have said it any better myself; this guy knows what he's talking about because he was one of these oppressive beaurocrats. These men strive to build an empire. I see direct proof of this in the city I live in. Not only is Dayton considered to be the 4th most violent city in the COUNTRY, the "top dogs" are doing nothing to make the situation any better. They're raising taxes in the city and building new roads in the suburbs. Two elementary schools closed for inner-city kids while two suburban schools open next fall. Foreclosures are at an all-time high, yet new subdivisions continue to sprout overnight. The malls and stores stock their shelves in anticipation of holiday spending, while thousands of families wonder if they will be able to afford their heating bill this winter. The rich and well-to-do's are decorating their properties and preparing huge family meals, while the homeless and impoverished families line up to get their one hot meal this seaon from the soup kitchen. Doesn't anyone else see something wrong with this? Isn't there something morally wrong with the ever-increasing gap between the rich and the poor?!

John Perkins went to Indonesia on his first assignment and the first thing he noticed was that "the beauty was certainly present. Gorgeous women sporting colorful sarongs. Lush gardens ablaze with tropical flowers. Exotic Balinese dancers. Bicycle cabs with fanciful, rainbow-colored scenes painted on the sides of the high seats, where passengers reclined in front of the pedaling drivers. Dutch Colonial mansions and turreted mosques. But there was also an ugly, tragic side to the city. Lepers holding out bloodied stumps instead of hands. Young girls offering their bodies for a few coins. Once-splendid Dutch canals turned into cesspools. Cardboard hovels where entire families lived along the trash-lined banks of black rivers. Blaring horns and choking fumes. The beautiful and the ugly, the elegant and the vulgar, the spiritual and the profane. This was Jakarta, where the enticing scent of cloves and orchid blossoms battled the miasma of open sewers for dominance." When he was reading about the country before he went, all that was mentioned was the beautiful side. This is what our own contry does. The media displays luxury, that the "American Dream" is to buy as much stuff as possible, and that EVERYBODY has these same desires. The agenda of the media is directly reflected in the agenda of their audience. If Britney Spears says it's good, people believe that it's good. She sponsored Pepsi a few years ago. I'm sure that influenced a few people to drink the beverage over others. Soda is the worst thing you could put in your body, yet, people overlooked the health risks and drank it because Britney Spears said it's good. Ignorance. But this is neither here nor there.

My boyfriend would say that I could shit in one hand and complain in the other and see which hand fills up quicker... And I know. Talking and complaining about all this stuff doesn't do anything but vent my frustrations. I am not a person of power or stature, so I can't REALLY do anything. But I always hope that talking about this stuff will at least influence others to think about it. The more people that think pragmatically, the more of a difference we could possibly make in the future. That's all.

Peace and Pragmatism