Naomi Klein: For Obama, No Opportunity Too Big To Blow

Another excellent article:

http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2009/12/obama-no-opportunity-too-big-blow

Naomi Klein: Revisiting No Logo

Looks like Naomi is releasing an extended introduction. I haven't read the book yet, but its on my to-read list. The article below is interesting as she wrote it in 1999, and in some ways is as applicable now as it was then.

http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2009/11/revisiting-no-logo-ten-years-later

Rebels in Search of Rules
By Naomi Klein, New York Times, December 2, 1999

It is all too easy to dismiss the protesters at the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle as radicals with 60's envy. A seemingly more trenchant criticism is that they are simply behind the curve, fighting against a tide of globalization that has already swamped them. Mike Moore, the director of the W.T.O., describes his opponents as nothing more than protectionists launching an assault on internationalism.

The truth, however, is that the protesters in Seattle have been bitten by the globalization bug as surely as the trade lawyers inside the Seattle hotels—though by globalization of a different sort—and they know it. The confusion about the protesters' political goals is understandable: this is the first movement born of the anarchic pathways of the Internet. There is no top-down hierarchy, no universally recognized leaders, and nobody knows what is going to happen next.

This protest movement is really anti-corporate rather than anti-globalist, and its roots are in the anti-sweatshop campaigns taking aim at Nike, the human rights campaign focusing on Royal Dutch/Shell in Nigeria and the backlash against Monsanto's genetically engineered foods in Europe.

At any time, one huge multinational company may be involved in several disputes—on labor, human rights and environmental issues, for example. Activists learn of one another as they aim at the same corporate target. Inadvertently, individual corporations have become symbols of the global economy in miniature, ultimately providing activists with name-brand entry points to the arcane world of the W.T.O.

This is the most internationally minded, globally linked movement the world has ever seen. There are no more faceless Mexicans or Chinese workers stealing our jobs, in part because those workers' representatives are now on the same e-mail lists and at the same conferences as the Western activists. When protesters shout about the evils of globalization, most are not calling for a return to narrow nationalism, but for the borders of globalization to be expanded, for trade to be linked to democratic reform, higher wages, labor rights and environmental protections.

This is what sets the young protesters in Seattle apart from their 60's predecessors. In the age of Woodstock, refusing to play by state and school rules was regarded as a political act in itself. Now, opponents of the W.T.O.—even those who call themselves anarchists—are outraged about a lack of rules and authority. They are demanding that national governments be free to exercise their authority without interference from the W.T.O. and asking for stricter international rules governing labor standards, environmental protection and scientific research.

Everyone, of course, claims to be all for rules, from President Clinton to Microsoft's chairman, Bill Gates. In an odd turn of events, the need for "rules-based trade" has become the mantra of the era of deregulation. But deregulation is by definition about the removal of rules. The W.T.O., charged with defining and enforcing deregulation, is only concerned with rules that regulate the removal of rules.

The W.T.O. has consistently sought to sever trade, quite unnaturally, from everything and everyone affected by it: workers, the environment, culture. This is why President Clinton's suggestion yesterday that the rift between the protesters and the delegates can be smoothed over with small compromises and consultation is so misguided.

The face-off is not between globalizers and protectionists, but between two radically different visions of globalization. One has had a monopoly for the last 10 years. The other just had its coming-out party.

Obama's Bad Influence by Naoimi Klein

Great article by Naomi Klein here.

Obama's Bad Influence

By Naomi Klein - October 15th, 2009

Published in The Nation

Of all the explanations for Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize, the one that rang truest came from French President Nicolas Sarkozy. "It sets the seal on America's return to the heart of all the world's peoples." In other words, this was Europe's way of saying to America, "We love you again"—sort of like those weird "renewal of vows" ceremonies that couples have after surviving a rough patch.

Now that Europe and the United States are officially reunited, it seems worth asking: is this necessarily a good thing? The Nobel Committee, which awarded the prize specifically for Obama's embrace of "multilateral diplomacy," is evidently convinced that US engagement on the world stage is a triumph for peace and justice. I'm not so sure. After nine months in office, Obama has a clear track record as a global player. Again and again, US negotiators have chosen not to strengthen international laws and protocols but rather to weaken them, often leading other rich countries in a race to the bottom.

Let's start where the stakes are highest: climate change. During the Bush years, European politicians distinguished themselves from the United States by expressing their unshakable commitment to the Kyoto Protocol. So while the United States increased its carbon emissions by 20 percent from 1990 levels, the European Union countries reduced theirs by 2 percent. Not stellar, but clearly a case where the EU's breakup with the United States carried tangible benefits for the planet.

Flash forward to the high-stakes climate negotiations that just wrapped up in Bangkok. The talks were supposed to lead to a deal in Copenhagen this December that significantly strengthens the Kyoto Protocol. Instead, the United States, the EU and the rest of the developed countries formed a unified bloc calling for Kyoto to be scrapped and replaced. Where Kyoto set clear and binding targets for emission reductions, the US plan would have each country decide how much to cut, then submit its plans to international monitoring (with nothing but wishful thinking to ensure that this all keeps the planet's temperature below catastrophic levels). And where Kyoto put the burden of responsibility squarely on the rich countries that created the climate crisis, the new plan treats all countries the same.

These kinds of weak proposals were not altogether surprising coming from the United States. What was shocking was the sudden unity of the rich world around this plan—including many countries that had previously sung the praises of Kyoto. And there were more betrayals: the EU, which had indicated it would spend $19 billion to $35 billion a year to help developing countries adapt to climate change, came to Bangkok with a much lower offer, one more in line with the US pledge of... nothing. Oxfam's Antonio Hill summed up the negotiations like this: "When the starting gun fired, it became a race to the bottom, with rich countries weakening existing commitments under the international framework."

This isn't the first time a much-celebrated return to the negotiating table has resulted in overturned tables, with hard-won international laws and conventions scattered on the floor. The United States played a similar role at the UN conference on racism in Geneva in April. After extracting all sorts of deletions from the negotiating text—no references to Israel or the Palestinians, nothing on slavery reparations, etc.—the Obama administration decided to boycott anyway, pointing to the fact that the new text "re-affirms" the document adopted in 2001 in Durban, South Africa.

It was a flimsy excuse, but there was some kind of logic to it, since the United States had never signed the original 2001 document. What made no sense was the wave of copycat withdrawals from around the rich world. Within forty-eight hours of the US announcement Italy, Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Poland had pulled out. Unlike the United States, these governments had all signed the 2001 declaration, so they had no reason to object to a document that reaffirmed it. It didn't matter. As with the climate change negotiations, lining up behind Obama, with his impeccable reputation, was an easy way to avoid burdensome international obligations and look progressive at the same time—a service the United States was never able to provide during the Bush years.

The United States has had a similarly corrupting influence as a new member of the UN Human Rights Council. Its first big test was Judge Richard Goldstone's courageous report on Israel's Gaza onslaught, which found that war crimes had been committed by both the Israeli army and Hamas. Rather than prove its commitment to international law, the United States used its clout to smear the report as "deeply flawed" and to strong-arm the Palestinian Authority into withdrawing a supportive resolution. (The PA, which faced a furious backlash at home for caving in to US pressure, may introduce a new version.)

And then there are the G-20 summits, Obama's highest-profile multilateral engagements. When one was held in London in April, it seemed for a moment that there might be some kind of coordinated attempt to rein in transnational financial speculators and tax dodgers. Sarkozy even pledged to walk out of the summit if it failed to produce serious regulatory commitments. But the Obama administration had no interest in genuine multilateralism, advocating instead for countries to come up with their own plans (or not) and hope for the best--much like its reckless climate-change plan. Sarkozy, needless to say, did not walk anywhere but to the photo session to have his picture taken with Obama.

Of course, Obama has made some good moves on the world stage—not siding with the coup government in Honduras, supporting a UN Women's Agency... But a clear pattern has emerged: in areas where other wealthy nations were teetering between principled action and negligence, US interventions have tilted them toward negligence. If this is the new era of multilateralism, it is no prize.

The Yes Men: Dow Apology Hoax

The Yes Men's Dow Apology Hoax | Movies & TV | SPIKE.com

Exxon's Climate-Victim Candles

I'm definitely going to see their movie when it comes out on the 7th. In the mean time, check out this hilarious prank they pulled on Exxon.

http://www.theyesmen.org/hijinks/vivoleum

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/06/yes_men_strike_/

Capitalism - Sarah Palin Style

http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2009/07/capitalism-sarah-palin-style

An outstanding article. Here is a snippet:

This is not about Sarah Palin. It's about the meaning of that myth of constant "discovery," and what it tells us about the economic system that they're spending trillions of dollars to save. What it tells us is that capitalism, left to its own devices, will push us past the point from which the climate can recover. And capitalism will avoid a serious accounting—whether of its financial debts or its ecological debts—at all costs. Because there’s always more. A new quick fix. A new frontier.

That message was selling, as it always does. It was only when the stock market crashed that people said, "Maybe Sarah Palin isn't a great idea this time around. Let's go with the smart guy to ride out the crisis."

....

It's appropriate that we call this a "bailout." Financial markets are being bailed out to keep the ship of finance capitalism from sinking, but what is being scooped out is not water. It's people. It's people who are being thrown overboard in the name of "stabilization." The result will be a vessel that is leaner and meaner. Much meaner. Because great inequality—the super rich living side by side with the economically desperate—requires a hardening of the hearts. We need to believe ourselves superior to those who are excluded in order to get through the day. So this is the system that is being saved: the same old one, only meaner.

The Great American Bubble Machine

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/the_great_american_bubble_machine

A friend referred this article. Going to read it later when there's more time.

Voices in Iran

This is heartbreaking.

I'm not at all surprised on how things have turned out during the election, I am saddened, but not surprised. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely.

A picture says a thousand words. Some of the links below contain graphic images.

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/06/irans_disputed_election.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fhashemi/sets/72157619758530748/
http://picasaweb.google.com/bahramks/RiotsInTehran#

Monday June 15, 2009. Man being beaten, allegedly by state para-military force known as Basiji

Other sources of Iran protest photos are:

1. The Mousavi photostream www.flickr.com/photos/mousavi1388

2. Bahramk's excellent collection of over 399 photos from the protests in Iran: picasaweb.google.com/bahramks/RiotsInTehran#

Rules when supporting the Iranian People on Twitter:

1. Change your name and location to Tehran. This will provide cover for the Tweeters in Tehran.

2. If you have proxy IP numbers to contribute, keep them private. DM them to @stopAhmadi or @iran09

3. Use only #iranelection or #gr88

4. Use your common sense to sniff a tweet for Iranian government misinformation - try and find corroboration before you retweet.

5. Never name a source. Simply relay the information from an Iranian source using F/Iran at the beginning.

Message to News Organizations:

I have received a number of requests to use these photographs from multiple news organizations.

These are not my photographs. They have been collected from Twitter and other social networks. They are being gathered together in the Flickr collection for the convenience of the press and others and to ensure that there is an additional depository for these images in the event that their original location is compromised by hostile action.

As they are not mine, I do not have the ability to authorize their use. However, one major news network has decided that;

"We recognize the risks people are taking to get the pictures out and intend to use as many of them as editorially appropriate. We will not currently require formal license agreements considering the situation."

I would invite your news organization to reach a similar decision and to use all photographs that do not contain a watermark, or annotation, indicating that they were taken by professionals.

The individuals that took these photos, risked their lives to do so and it is incongruous that having done so they would not wish these photographs to be used by the world media. In light of this I beg your news organization to use these photographs and to disseminate them as wide as possible. Constant press coverage by the international media is the only thing preventing a massacre in Iran. The re-publication of these photographs will help to save lives. There is a clear moral duty in this context. Be human.

-----

Also, the photo below was taken in San Fransisco, I only link it here because I find it funny that Saks is in the background. I think there are some parallels to be drawn between big business and dictatorships.

Beyond Talk. Do something about climate change.

I signed up on this today.

http://beyondtalk.net/

California's Failed State

As much as I enjoy the thought of Arnold dressing up like Conan the Barbarian this Halloween, waving a greatsword- cleaving down any who get in his way.... it seems you can't throw a meatshield at a problem where a life-preserver is needed.

HUARGH GET INTO DA CHOOPA!
Elite fail Mr. Govenator

http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2009/06/schwarzenegger-s-shock-therapy-poor-pay-sins-rich

Mark Thomas - Put People First G20 Protest

A friend linked to this on facebook, I had to share it.

AIG, blatant disregard

What a cesspool of greed.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/mar2009/db20090317_032819.htm?campaign_id=bwdaily_related

TAKE A HINT FROM THE JAPANESE: Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) said that AIG execs should take responsibility by resigning or killing themselves. In a Mar. 16 interview with a Cedar Rapids radio station, he said: "I suggest, you know, obviously, maybe they ought to be removed. But I would suggest the first thing that would make me feel a little bit better toward them [is] if they'd follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say: 'I'm sorry,' and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide."

'BEST AND BRIGHTEST': From a New Jersey Star-Ledger editorial: "AIG officials have, understandably, been hard-pressed to defend this bonus and retention boondoggle. But that hasn't deterred them from trying." As [Edward M.] Liddy, AIG's president, told Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, the payments are needed "to retain the best and the brightest talents" to run AIG.

Surely he jests.

"This band of 'best and brightest' just blew a $62 billion hole in the company. What's to retain? Heads should be rolling. Besides, is there really that much cutthroat competition for such an overpaid bunch of losers? Maybe there is—which would explain a lot about what passes for talent around lower New York City these days and, if so, is downright frightening."

DEFLECTING ATTENTION: The Wall Street Journal, in a Mar. 17 editorial, says that the furor over the bonuses is shifting attention from the fact that many of the AIG counterparties that received billions in payments funded by the federal government are overseas financial institutions. "Given that the government has never defined 'systemic risk,' we're also starting to wonder exactly which system American taxpayers are paying to protect. It's not capitalism, in which risk-takers suffer the consequences of bad decisions. And in some cases it's not even American. The U.S. government is now in the business of distributing foreign aid to offshore financiers, laundered through a once-great American company."

Give me a freaking break.

The world is rioting... Why aren't we?

I thought this was a very interesting article...

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/124836/the_whole_world_is_rioting_as_the_economic_crisis_worsens_--_why_aren%27t_we/?page=1

To quote a few paragraphs:

Over the past few years, a series of riots spread across what is patronizingly known as the Third World. Furious mobs have raged against skyrocketing food and energy prices, stagnating wages and unemployment in India, Senegal, Yemen, Indonesia, Morocco, Cameroon, Brazil, Panama, the Philippines, Egypt, Mexico and elsewhere.

For the most part, those living in wealthier countries took little notice. But now, with the global economy crashing down around us, people in even the wealthiest nations are mad as hell and reacting violently to what they view as an inadequate response to their tumbling economies.

The article continues by citing specific cases of unrest in several countries including Greece, Latvia, France, Iceland, Britain, and Russia...

Notably absent from the list of countries where the economic crunch is rending the social fabric is the good ole US of A, a state with the greatest level of economic inequality in the wealthy world.

Outside of a few scattered and quickly contained protests, the citizens of the U.S. -- a country born of revolution, but with an elite that's been terrified of that legacy since immediately after its founding -- have been calm, despite opinion polls showing that Americans are more dissatisfied with the direction in which the country has been headed since they began measuring such things.

It's a baffling disconnect, considering that real wages for all but the top 10 percent of the economic pile haven't increased in 35 years.

President's first Weekly Address

Find it here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/president-obama-delivers-your-weekly-address/

These are bold plans! FINALLY we have a President who is IN OFFICE for a change. Here are the goals of his Recovery Plan talked about in this weeks address:

• Doubles renewable energy generating capacity over three years. It took 30 years to reach current levels of renewable energy production. This plan will double that level over the next three years – enough to power 6 million American homes.
  
  
• Undertakes the largest weatherization program in history, modernizing 75% of federal buildings and two million homes.
  
  
• Computerizes every American’s health record in five years, reducing medical errors and saving billions of dollars in health care costs.
  
  
• Launches the most ambitious school modernization program on record, sufficient to upgrade 10,000 schools and improve learning environments for approximately 5 million children.
  
  
• Enacts the largest investment increase in our nation’s roads, bridges and mass transit systems since the creation of the national highway system in the 1950s.

Here is how they are planning on doing it:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/Documents/Recovery_Plan_Metrics_Report_508.pdf

Obama's Speech Writer

Ever wonder who writes Obama's addresses? Its this guy, 27 year old Jon Favreau. Reading through the article, its pretty amazing what this guy has done. It's his writing style and Obama's cadence in delivering them that have enthralled a nation.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/20/barack-obama-inauguration-us-speech

Now thats some talent.

Inauguration day in America

Check out the new website: www.whitehouse.gov

The day has finally arrived, the day that Bush walks away from the helm and his successor, President Obama steps into the presidency. I don't have much to say, other than I'm hopeful. I'm hopeful that his talk becomes more than just political rhetoric. Our country desperately needs much of what he preaches. Our country needs to rebuild on so many levels, and I'm hopeful that President Obama truly believes the things he's talked about.

You know, the biggest thing I'm looking forward to, is the paradigm shift that is coming. Good bye are the days of radio addresses and a President we only see when shoes are being thrown his way. Hello are the days of regular Saturday YouTube addresses, and a transparency that we've never seen in this country. Ever.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/change_has_come_to_whitehouse-gov/
"One significant addition to WhiteHouse.gov reflects a campaign promise from the President: we will publish all non-emergency legislation to the website for five days, and allow the public to review and comment before the President signs it."

Do I believe Obama and his cabinet can change the world? I do. But it sure will be a long journey. Good luck to you Mr. President in these first four years of your term. Lord knows you'll need it...

Obamas blocked from Blair House

Okay okay okay wait. So President Bush has blocked the Obama's from moving in to the presidential hotel because some Australian former prime minister is staying there???

Just one more reason I can't stand this man...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-goldsmith/blocked-from-blair-house_b_154889.html

Given that the Obamas want to move to Blair House ten days before the traditional January 15 pre-inaugural start date -- so that they're in DC for Sasha and Malia's first day of school -- which Bush administration official decided to shut them out of the official presidential guest house and tell them to book a hotel?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2009/01/06/blair_house_mystery_solved_its.html?hpid=topnews

The veil is lifted. We now know who is booked at Blair House, kicking President-elect Barack Obama and his family to the waiting list and across Lafayette Park to the Hay-Adams Hotel.

The only overnight visitor at the presidential guest manse is none other than John Howard, a former Australian prime minister and leading member of President Bush's coalition of the willing in Iraq.

Hackers and Spending Sprees

Great article on Newsweek here:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/167581/page/1

This is somewhat shocking, though I can't say that I didn't see it coming:

NEWSWEEK has also learned that Palin's shopping spree at high-end department stores was more extensive than previously reported. While publicly supporting Palin, McCain's top advisers privately fumed at what they regarded as her outrageous profligacy. One senior aide said that Nicolle Wallace had told Palin to buy three suits for the convention and hire a stylist. But instead, the vice presidential nominee began buying for herself and her family—clothes and accessories from top stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus. According to two knowledgeable sources, a vast majority of the clothes were bought by a wealthy donor, who was shocked when he got the bill. Palin also used low-level staffers to buy some of the clothes on their credit cards. The McCain campaign found out last week when the aides sought reimbursement. One aide estimated that she spent "tens of thousands" more than the reported $150,000, and that $20,000 to $40,000 went to buy clothes for her husband. Some articles of clothing have apparently been lost. An angry aide characterized the shopping spree as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast," and said the truth will eventually come out when the Republican Party audits its books.

Also... a candid Obama moment on page 2, made me laugh.

77 Days

77 Days left of Bush

Ramble: Election day in America

Well, today's the day.

We're finally to that day where we know tomorrow we won't receive 10+ phone calls from the republican party pleading for us to cast our vote for that "maverick" McCain for president.

THANK GOD TODAY IS THE DAY.

I hope all of you who read this, today and any day after, can say that today you cast your vote. In times such as these, it is so imperative that we don't take our freedoms for granted. This year's election is perhaps the single largest political event in my life to date. My hope is that in 30 years, I can look back on this time in our country's history and proclaim: "I was there. I was part of that."

It's no secret that my family supports Obama, our prayer is that the Obama/Biden team can step up and fulfill the plans that they have laid out. We'll be watching today, as American's flood in to the polls, eager to participate in the 2008 election.

And we'll be watching tomorrow, as I hope, will all of you.

One other thing- thank GOD for absentee ballots. We waited a whole of 5 minutes when we cast our vote two weeks ago...