Sunday, December 12, 2010

James Moody (1925 – 2010) Homage to a Jazz Master


The Durgafilms Dance Company interprets King Pleasure's canonical version of "James Moody's Mood for Love". (Image editing by David Seaton)
David Seaton's News Links
The Great Jazz saxophonist, James Moody just died three days ago. He is best known for his 1949 solo improvisation of "I'm in the Mood for Love", which Eddie Jefferson wrote lyrics for and King Pleasure made into a big hit in 1954.  Since then practically every Jazz singer (and quite a few wannabes) have taken a shot at singing it with very irregular success.

I have reproduced the lyrics below in case readers get the urge to sing along with King Pleasure and the Durgafilms Dance Company.  If you manage to pull it off, you may, without knowing it, be a real jazz singer, because Moody's Mood For Love is a tune that separates the sheep from the goats. DS
(he) There I go there I go
There I go there I go
Pretty baby you are the soul
Who snaps my control

Such a funny thing but every time you're near me
I never can behave you give me a smile
And then I'm wrapped up in your magic
There's music all around me crazy music

Music that keeps calling me so very close to you
Turns me your slave come and do with me
Any little thing you want to
Anything baby just let me get next to you

Am I insane or do I really see heaven in your eyes?
Bright as stars that shine up above
You in the clear blue skies
How I worry about you

Just can't live my life without you
Baby come here don't have no fear
Oh is there a wonder why
I'm really feeling in the mood for love?

So tell me why stop to think
About this weather my dear?
This little dream might fade away

There I go talking out of my head again oh baby
Won't you come and put our two hearts together?
That would make me strong and brave

Oh when we are one I'm not afraid I'm not afraid
If there's a cloud up above us
Go on and let it rain

I'm sure our love together will endure a hurricane
Oh my baby won't you please let me love you
And give a relief from this awful misery?

(she)What is all this talk about loving me my sweet?
I am not afraid not anymore not like before
Don't you understand me?

Now baby please pull yourself together do it soon
My soul's on fire come on and take me
I'll be what you make me my darling my sweet

(he) Oh baby you make me feel so good
Let me take you by the hand
Come let us visit out there
In that new promised land

Maybe there we can find
A good place to use a loving state of mind
I'm so tired of being without
And never knowing what love's about

James Moody you can come on in man
And you can blow now if you want to
We're through

Thursday, December 09, 2010

What is next for Julian Assange?

We could be spectators for the start of the cyber Great War – and they’ve just knocked over Franz Ferdinand.(...) The difference now is that this battle is extra-national; it isn’t one country against another, so much as an establishment of nations fighting a global insurgency – with the soul of the Internet as the spoils.  Tom Mendelsohn -Independent

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said on Monday that American officials were conducting “a very serious, active, ongoing investigation that is criminal in nature” into the WikiLeaks releases.  New York Times

"This is a country where a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich."  Charles Krauthammer -  WaPost
David Seaton's News Links
Julian Assange has been arrested in the UK and is being held without bail.

Whatever the merits or demerits of the Swedish rape case against him, Julian Assange has been effectively immobilized and cut off from communicating with his organization. This situation could go on for weeks as Assange lawyers attempt to delay his extradition.

In my opinion that, not the extradition to Sweden, is the true object of the exercise.

He is fine in the UK as far as the US government is concerned: I can't think why he ever decided to go to ground in England. The UK is America's closest ally and as far as intelligence gathering and sharing, since World War Two, they have been "of one flesh". If I had made an attack on America's military and diplomatic interests the last place I would want to hide is in Great Britain. So it seems clear to me that the Swedish extradition measure is a ploy to keep him pinned down in Britain, while the US government plans how to crush him and his organization, which is going to be a complex operation, with simultaneous arrests in several countries.

The United States' legal machinery is ominously quiet right now. My impression is that they are very, very busy.  I have no doubt that NSC, Defense, State and the Justice Department have constituted some sort of "War Room" together with the FBI and the CIA and they are planning their next moves. I doubt that Wikileaks will receive any information about their plans.

The USA possesses some amazingly sophisticated electronic surveillance systems, which is why Osama bin Laden doesn't use a cellphone, even in a cave in Pakistan. It is doubtful if the Wikileaks activists or the people that are organizing the attacks on Amazon, PayPal and MasterCard are as prudent as bin Laden is. Fighting a war in the mountains of Afghanistan against the USA can be a winning proposition, because Americans don't like to spend much time where you can get diarrhea, but, you've got to be crazy to get into an electronic war with the US.

Make no mistake, the retribution is going to be severe. As Tom Mendelsohn writes in the Independent, this is "an establishment of nations fighting a global insurgency". As I have said before, it is like going up to a mafia hit-man and squirting him with a water pistol, while shouting "bang, bang you're dead"... the reaction will be totally out of proportion to the damage done. This is the excuse that the US government (and all the rest of them together) need to put tighter a control on the Internet. Attacking MasterCard and PayPal (and possibly Bank of America) guarantees it. This is the sort of thing that Lenin called "left-wing infantilism". A better definition then that would be hard to find.

I would think that the objective now, with Assange out of play for a while, is to keep a close electronic and perhaps "humint" surveillance on Assange's closest associates in order to discover, which of them has the "key" to the encrypted, "insurance policy" file and then arrest them all simultaneously before they can release the key. If the Wikileaks files prove anything, they show that America's allies tend to cooperate with the USA. Stay tuned. DS

Wednesday, December 08, 2010

A fairy tale as grim as Grimm could ever be (a fable for disgruntled Democrats)

David Seaton's News Links
Once upon a time in a far off and pleasant land, during the reign of King George the Idiot, there lived a young man who dreamed of fame and greatness.

He yearned so long and so deeply, that the Good Fairy was moved by his constant pleading and praying and appeared before him in all her beauty and magic splendor.

"Young man," she said, "because of the depth and especially because of the unusual insistence of your desires, I have decided to grant you three wishes. After each wish I shall disappear until the wish has been granted and then return to grant your next request. Now, think hard, what is the first boon that you wish for?"

The young man thought for a moment and said, "Oh Good Fairy, I would like to write my life story and have everyone in the kingdom read it and think that I am wonderful."

"Really?" asked the Good Fairy, "Since you are very young and haven't done very much, that will be a lot of work for me... Are you sure?"

"Puhleeeeeeeeeeze!" the young man begged.

"So be it!" said the Good Fairy, and disappeared.

No sooner had the Good Fairy left then the young man sat down at his table where the few sheets of paper on it magically multiplied into hundreds, and soon a magic quill pen appeared out of thin air, and taking it in his hand he began to write well into the night, as if his hand had a life of its own, which indeed it had.

He awoke the next morning to find that a thick manuscript sat on the table before him. As in a trance he took it in his arms and presented it to a publisher, who, as if hypnotized,  immediately ordered all other work in his print shop to stop and for all the printers to work at nothing else but printing the young man's life story.

The very next day the freshly printed life story of the young man appeared in all the book shops of the land, and it sold out immediately. In no time at all the entire Kingdom could talk of little else than the young man's fascinating life story.

He sat at home enjoying his new found fame, when the Good Fairy appeared for a second time.

"It is time for your second wish." the beautiful Good Fairy said, "Have you thought of what you want to wish for?"

"As a matter of fact I have." the young man replied, "I would like a golden tongue and the power of rhetoric, so that all who hear me will be enchanted by whatever I say, no matter how pompous and platitudinous it might be".

"That won't be so difficult." the Good Fairy said, "Talk is cheap. Are you sure that is all you want?"

"Puhleeeeeeeeeeeze!" the young man implored.

"So be it!" said the Good Fairy, and disappeared.

In a short time everyone in the entire kingdom sat in awe of the young man's marvelous speeches, their mouths dropping open, while visions of sugar-plums danced their heads, as they dreamed of the beautiful land of milk and honey that the young man's golden tongue evoked. Soon crowds followed him wherever he went hanging on his every word.

The Good Fairy appeared for the third time.

"Think carefully young man" she said slowly and gravely, "This is your last wish..." She paused, "Have you decided what you want now?"

"Oh yes!" he cried out, "Old King George is abdicating... I want to be King!"

The Good Fairy looked at him steadily and for a brief instant a cloud of melancholy crossed her charming features. "Are you absolutely sure, young man? George wanted the job as much as you do and look at what a horrible time he is having, all he wants to do now is to retire into the forest and cut brush like a common wood cutter. Are you absolutely sure?"

"Puhleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze!" the young man wailed.

She shrugged her pretty shoulders.

"So be it!" said the Good Fairy and disappeared.

No sooner than she had disappeared a great clamor rose up in the land and great cheering crowds appeared before the young man's home and he was carried on their shoulders though the gates of the palace and crowned king of the land with all pomp and splendor. Masses were sung and soldiers paraded and all was feasting and wassailing for days on end as the kingdom reveled in the joy of having such a splendid new ruler.

And then...

The magic spell wore off: the money lenders appeared with insatiable demands and the treasury was emptied by endless wars and sadness gripped the people. In the market place and in the countryside the peasants and nobles muttered and plotted against the new king. The adoring courtiers that once clustered around him, showering him with flattery, abandoned him to his fate and returned to their homes to write their memoirs.

The young man tried to speak to the people as of old, but his tongue seemed glued to his palate and nothing but mumbling issued from his mouth.

One night in the darkened palace, with his hair turned gray, he slumped on his throne in the empty throne room, abandoned by all, weeping disconsolately and ruing his fate.

"Woe is me," he sobbed, "How did I ever get into this mess?"

And then...

The Good Fairy appeared for a fourth time.

The young king fell on his knees and implored her, "Can you help me?" he groaned.

"Sorry, you're on your own now, buster", she replied, a hardness he had never seen before was in her eyes and a coldness he had never heard before was in her voice... once so sweet, now metallic. Slowly her beauty vanished and before him stood a hideous hag.

"You had your three wishes" the apparition said, "I gave you everything you asked for. You could have asked for wisdom, you could have asked for a long life and the gift of contentment, but this is what you wished for, so you have made this misery all by yourself."

"I wish I had never seen you!" the young king shouted, "I wish you didn't exist!"

"So be it." said the Good Fairy and disappeared for the last time.

Moral: Everyone has their wants and their wishes but if a fairy asks, don't tell. DS

Tuesday, December 07, 2010

Where is China headed?

China's high speed train system


David Seaton's News Link
I heard a talk over a year ago at a meeting of the Madrid Fulbright association: the speaker was professor Fisac, the head of Chinese studies at Madrid University. 

She said that in the course of conversation with an official of the Chinese Communist Party, she had asked him what he considered "socialism".  

He replied that Western Europe was an example of socialism with its good, free public schools and universities and its good, free public health systems.  

Some people listening to professor Fisac thought this Tea Partyish formulation was a joke. I didn't.

I remembered that before becoming head of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev and his wife Raisa visited France, invited by the PCF. They were impressed by the quality of French education and health services and at the same time dazzled by how well the French ate and dressed. Gorbachev decided that he wanted the same for the USSR: thus was Perestroika born.

Here is how Gorbachev defined it:
Perestroika means overcoming the stagnation process, breaking down the braking mechanism, creating a dependable and effective mechanism for acceleration of social and economic progress and giving it greater dynamism.
Perestroika means mass initiative. It is the conference of development of democracy, socialist self-government, encouragement of initiative and creative endeavor, improved water and disciplined, more glasnost, criticism and self-criticism in all spheres of our society. It is utmost respect for the individual and consideration for personal dignity.
Perestroika is the all-round intensification of the Soviet economy, the revival and development of the principles of democratic centralism in running the national economy, the universal introduction of economic methods, the renunciation of management by injunction and by administrative methods, and the overall encouragement of innovation and socialist enterprise.
Perestroika means a resolute shift to scientific methods, an ability to provide a solid scientific basis for every new initiative. It means the combination of the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution with a planned economy
Perestroika means priority development of the social sphere aimed at ever better satisfaction of the Soviet people's requirements for good living and working conditions, for good rest and recreation, education and health care. It means unceasing concern for cultural and spiritual wealth, for the culture of every individual and society as a whole.
He got into trouble when he combined it with Glasnost (transparency). Everything fell apart. Now the Soviet Union no longer exists,  education and health have deteriorated, the economy is in the hands of gangsters and the democracy (what there is of it) is of very poor quality.

My reading of the Chinese Communist Party is that they want Perestroika without the Glasnost, and I think they are going to pull it off. They saw what happened to Russia and have taken steps to avoid that outcome.

Of course Western Europe is the model of development that the Chinese are after. Any country that took the USA, with its paralyzed political system, deteriorating infrastructures, withering public education and uneven health  coverage for a model would be foolish.

Our problem is how we can have our own Perestroika without everything falling apart. DS

Monday, December 06, 2010

Speaking of China

David Seaton's News Links
I am in awe of the Chinese and have been since I was a child. I think Napoleon's famous phrase, "Let China sleep for when she awakes, she will shake the world" is an understatement. The only mystery was their decadence.

So finally, my intuition that China is behind Wikileaks stems from my reading, in translation, of Lao Tze, Sun Tzu, Confucius, Mencius and my admiration for the superiority of their culture to ours. I imagine that if they are able to appropriate Google's source code, and other American family jewels, that they are already reading most of America's electronic signals and they need something like Wikileaks to cover their tracks. And also -- and this is probably the bottom line -- to make the American government think twice about using the Internet and Twittter to destabilize foreign regimes, be they that of China herself or Iran's. The message is that America is not alone in being able to play that game and what better tool than a self-appointed New Age messiah like Assange to "send" it.

I think westerners and Americans in particular are encumbered by many mindsets developed during the propaganda laden ideological struggle of  the Cold War: mental structures that confuse what Barack Obama once referred to as "an awesome God", with market-capitalism and both of them with a certain libertarian idiosyncrasy peculiar to Americans. All of these concepts have their value, but none of them is necessarily related to the other. This heterogeneous baggage creates a mental confusion, which makes it nearly impossible for an American to understand something that is as "plain as the nose on your face".

The first thing that strikes a western observer, devoid of euro-centric-Hellenism chauvinism and the vapors of "Judeo-Christian" transcendentalism; for one who approaches the Chinese idiosyncrasy and China's world view in a spirit of humility, is its intense pragmatism. A pragmatism so intense that many mistake it for esoterica or confuse it with a branch of Hinduism's metaphysical speculation. Nothing could be further from its spirit, in my opinion. The Chinese, with all their subtlety, are at the same time, after thousands of years, quite streamlined in their plainness.

I have read that the Chinese ideogram for "life" is composed from the combined ideograms for "eat" + "drink" + "man" + "woman" =  "life". So much for "the meaning of life".

I have been told that the ideogram for "prosperity" consists of the figure of a man under the roof of a house accompanied by a pig. Ezra Pound, in his essays on Chinese poetry, maintained that it was impossible to do it justice in translation because every word was a poem in itself: the ideogram for "red" being a mixture of "blood", "flamingo" and "sunset". My greatest regret is not being able to read Chinese... if I think of the years I spent/wasted studying French, I could cry.

I was probably the youngest kid in greater Chicagoland (11yrs) to read the Tao Te Ching and it changed my life. I started reading Sun Tzu during the war in Vietnam because it was said that general Giap did. I continue to read it, I only wish I could read it in Mandarin.

Sun Tzu is to Clausewitz like Einstein is to your high school science teacher. To understand the metamorphosis of the Chinese Communist Party without having studied those texts would be impossible... that and the thought of Mao Zedong, of whom Deng Xiaoping said, "Mao 30% bad, 70% good", the same Deng who gave the best contemporary definition of Chinese pragmatism, "black cat, white cat, as long as it catches mice, it is a good cat"...  and I am fascinated by how Chinese traditional philosophy was able to incorporate and integrate Hegel, Marx and Lenin into their canon. And how something as seemingly esoteric as the thought of Lao Tze can be applied with immense effect to loosening the grip of a dominating power (USA) on China's future.

For example, compare the following texts:
"If you want to nourish a bird, you should let it live any way it chooses. Creatures differ because they have different likes and dislikes. Therefore the sages never require the same ability from all creatures. . . concepts of right should be founded on what is suitable. The true saint leaves wisdom to the ants, takes a cue from the fishes, and leaves willfulness to the sheep." Chuang-tzu

"For dialectical philosophy nothing is final, absolute, sacred. It reveals the transitory character of everything and in everything; nothing can endure before it except the uninterrupted process of becoming and of passing away, of endless ascendancy from the lower to the higher. And dialectical philosophy itself is nothing more than the mere reflection of this process in the thinking brain.” Thus, according to Marx, dialectics is “the science of the general laws of motion both of the external world and of human thought” V. I. Lenin
The Chinese, I am convinced, have one priority above all others: their complete and total sovereignty. The United States, with its idea of its "exceptionalism", its cosmopolitan corporate economy and the tatters of its "manifest destiny" cannot tolerate a world that it cannot control. That is the most important conflict in the world today and make no mistake America is the aggressor. Against this tragic impetus, the timeless subtlety of Sun-Tzu.

Frankly I think China is going to take world dominance away from the USA like taking candy from a baby and without firing a shot... and not necessarily replace it with a dominance of its own, but rather of a benign indifference. When the Chinese speak of "socialism with Chinese characteristics", they are speaking of a highly developed country, with first class public health and educational systems similar to those of Western Europe, with a large enough amount of economic freedom to assign resources efficiently and a very tight and nationalistic political control by the Communist Party of China, a mixture which fits comfortably into the traditions of Chinese Legalism and Confucianism. That is their goal and even if it takes several generations, that is where they are headed.

Summing up: Their obsession is to regain the preeminent position of total sovereignty that they enjoyed before the industrial revolution and western imperialism humiliated China. They were looking through western thought to find something they could use.  Hegel's dialectic, which Marx "turned upside down" was found congenial to their Taoist mentality and so is Lenin's version of it.  Because of the ideological and propaganda struggle of the Cold War we have endowed the idea of capitalism with certain moral and platonic qualities that it doesn't really possess; the Chinese see this more clearly than we do. For them it is merely a tool, "black cat, white cat" Deng Xiaoping said. Deng also said, that anyone who practices capitalism in China can get rich and anyone who talks about capitalism can go to jail. capitalism is an "energy" "qi or Chi" that the Leninist PCC is using to develop China. The protagonist is the party. Using this tool, they now have the US economy more or less at their mercy. That is pure Sun Tzu, but Lenin would have appreciated it too, I think. DS

Here is some further reading to give an idea of the Chinese context and their philosophy in action:
(In) 1793, when (China) was still one of the world's richest countries, with over 30% of global Gross Domestic Product. The Emperor Qianlong (1736-95), in a letter to George III prompted by the visit of the British delegation under Lord Macartney, grandly opined: "Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its own borders. There is therefore no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians in exchange for our own products."(...) it proved disastrous—China's share of world GDP declined to a low of about 4% in 1960. Qianlong's decision, condemning China to excluding the burgeoning Western machinery and manufactures, was not the only factor in that decline but was key to it. Martin Hutchinson

“It is beautiful to hope for a democratic China,” says Mark Chen, a Taiwanese ex-foreign minister. “But for us, there is the risk that that could spell disaster. With all those nationalist forces, a democratic China could be much uglier than what we have now.” Financial Times

For decades, corporate America championed investing in China and trade with China, though the massive transfer of U.S. factories, technologies and jobs was clearly empowering China and weakening America. Now, with U.S. political, military, industrial and strategic decline vis a vis China manifest to the world, we hear the wails of American businessmen that they are not being treated fairly by the Chinese. And the politicians responsible for building up China are now talking tough about confronting and containing China. Sorry, but that cat cannot be walked back.  Pat Buchanan

Sunday, December 05, 2010

Wikileaks (my latest theory)

David Seaton's News Links
After my waltzing around ever so long with trying to figure out who's behind Wikileaks, the penny finally dropped. It is so glaringly obvious to me now, that I'm surprised it never occurred to me before. The good news is that it isn't Israel.
(Hillary) Clinton likened online censorship by countries such as China, Vietnam and Iran to the rise of communist Europe, warning that a new "information curtain" threatened to descend on the world unless action to protect internet freedoms was taken. Her comments, which mark the Obama administration's first major foray into foreign policy online, come at a delicate time for relations between the US and China. Guardian, 01/21/2010

The May 18, 2009, cable, titled “Google China Paying Price for Resisting Censorship,” quoted a well-placed source as saying that Li Changchun, a member of China’s top ruling body, the Politburo Standing Committee, and the country’s senior propaganda official, was taken aback to discover that he could conduct Chinese-language searches on Google’s main international Web site. When Mr. Li typed his name into the search engine at google.com, he found “results critical of him.” That cable from American diplomats was one of many made public by WikiLeaks that portray China’s leadership as nearly obsessed with the threat posed by the Internet to their grip on power — and, the reverse, by the opportunities it offered them, through hacking, to obtain secrets stored in computers of its rivals, especially the United States. New York Times 12/04/2010

Kill with a borrowed knife (借刀殺人/借刀杀人, Jiè dāo shā rén) Attack using the strength of another (in a situation where using one's own strength is not favourable). Trick an ally into attacking him, bribe an official to turn traitor, or use the enemy's own strength against him.

Sacrifice the plum tree to preserve the peach tree (李代桃僵, Lǐ dài táo jiāng) There are circumstances in which you must sacrifice short-term objectives in order to gain the long-term goal. This is the scapegoat stratagem whereby someone else suffers the consequences so that the rest do not. 36 Strategems
Cutting to the chase: my theory is that Chinese intelligence is behind all of this... just to see how we like some of our own medicine... a "(fill in the color) Revolution" for the USA.

The US government and thinktankery in general have been treating Internet as if it was America's "secret" or not so secret weapon to weaken the Chinese leadership's power. Wikileaks proves that America's "regime" is as, or more, vulnerable than China's to the dissolvent of uncontrolled information.

Julian Assange is China's answer to the Dalai Lama and this year's Nobel Peace Prize to the Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.

Do I think that Julian Assange knows that he is being used by the Chinese?

Of course not. it would be essential for them to keep him totally in the dark. At some point or another American authorities are going to interrogate Assange and whoever is behind him wants the buck to stop right there.  Assange has been put into to play to carry the can. I'm sure that whoever is China's man in the operation has impeccable cover and morphology to avoid suspicion. 

Assange talks and acts like the leader of a religious sect similar to the one led by his mother's old guru, Anne Hamilton-Byrne. Manipulating someone like that into thinking that every idea in their head originated in their head is surprisingly easy. Certainly the Chinese are devious and patient enough (read Sun Tzu) to groom Wikileaks and Assange for years waiting to spring him. The fact that some of the cables are unflattering to China's leadership increase their appearance of innocence.

Up till now the Chinese have been playing defense, putting up their "Great Fire Wall" and stealing Google's source code, with Wikileaks they are now on the offense.

Certainly, if the Chinese are not behind all of this they can only be grateful for it. They are said to be compulsive gamblers, obsessed by luck. If they are innocent of Wikileaks they should at the very least burn a few joss sticks to Cai Shen, the Taoist god of fortune. DS

Friday, December 03, 2010

Wikileaks or the loneliness of Private Manning

For your eyes only











 David Seaton's News Links
The diplomatic corps of any sovereign country is an instrument of the state.  It does what the head of state and his/her government decide that it should do.

Even if there were a total regime change in the USA, one of any political color you like: a military junta, "socialist with American characteristics", an Islamic republic, you name it, the United States of America (or whatever it would be called) would still have over 300 million people and it presumably  would be bounded by Canada in the north and Mexico in the South, with a Pacific coast and and an Atlantic coast and would have much of the vital interests that it has today and it would have embassies around the world to defend those interests, and I would imagine most of the same people that represent it today would still represent it then.
Getting back to bare basics, as I said in a post awhile back:
Let us assume for a moment that the United States of America is a democracy and it's officials represent the American people and that its institutions genuinely represent, define and defend the interests of the American people.
That is the assumption, that we, as American citizens must question and no other. Is the government of the USA legitimately empowered to govern its citizens and to define and defend their interests? Then, that being so, I repeat, the diplomatic corp is merely an instrument for that. If that isn't so, we should fix it urgently, but not, I think by damaging America's diplomatic capabilities.

Assange has damaged that instrument. Not only America's but the instrument of all who wish or must deal with the USA. Thus Julian Assange has damaged something that belongs to the US government, which in its turn belongs to the citizens of the USA. Something must be done to deter him from doing this anymore and to punish him severely enough to deter others from imitating him.

I sincerely don't believe that anarchy is viable option for a country of 310,836,000 people.

I repeat, any conceivable political construction of the USA: junta, people's or Islamic republic, monarchy etc, would have to try to apprehend and punish Julian Assange, pour encourager les autres. That, or simply go out of the government business.

To avoid being punished, Mr. Assange affirms that he possesses a secret so secret that, if revealed, would cause unimaginable harm to the United States, and that this secret is in an encrypted file at the following address:  
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5741985/INSURANCE.AES256_WIKILEAKS.SECRET.DOCUMENT.2010.08.06  
And it is said that if any harm should befall him, his followers will publish the encryption key to this file on the Internet, thus causing even more harm to the interests of the American people (always supposing, remember, that the government of the USA represents the citizens of the USA.)

In short, Julian Assange has the chutzpah to blackmail the United States of America.

This is beginning to sound like the plot of a Bruce Willis, "Die Hard" film, twitchy terrorist included.

Finally, this is coming down to the question: are the people of the United States of America and its institutions Julian Assange's bitch?

Here is a sample of Assange's arrogance, in an answer to a quite civil question from a former British diplomat, this is taken from a live, blog interview in The Guardian:
JAnthony
Julian.
I am a former British diplomat. In the course of my former duties I helped to coordinate multilateral action against a brutal regime in the Balkans, impose sanctions on a renegade state threatening ethnic cleansing, and negotiate a debt relief programme for an impoverished nation. None of this would have been possible without the security and secrecy of diplomatic correspondence, and the protection of that correspondence from publication under the laws of the UK and many other liberal and democratic states. An embassy which cannot securely offer advice or pass messages back to London is an embassy which cannot operate. Diplomacy cannot operate without discretion and the protection of sources. This applies to the UK and the UN as much as the US. In publishing this massive volume of correspondence, Wikileaks is not highlighting specific cases of wrongdoing but undermining the entire process of diplomacy. If you can publish US cables then you can publish UK telegrams and UN emails.

My question to you is: why should we not hold you personally responsible when next an international crisis goes unresolved because diplomats cannot function.
Julian Assange:
If you trim the vast editorial letter to the singular question actually asked, I would be happy to give it my attention.
The guy's on a roll, next thing you know he'll be trashing hotel rooms.

I was talking this morning to a fellow who does mergers and acquisitions for one of the big Spanish banks: they've done deals in the USA, in South America, in China, in the Middle East... in a sense the M&A people are like the bank's diplomats... They are in constant conversations with people who are not exactly adversaries, but of a different organization. The Bank people know what they are willing to pay, but it is important that the people across the table not have that information. All the bank's internal conversations are held in the utmost confidentiality, as are those with the people they are negotiating with... it is essential. 

My friend is totally mystified. What he couldn't understand is how the Americans let a hamburger like Private Manning  have access to such important information.  He wonders, as I do, if America is showing signs of dementia praecox. That is the real story here, because the basic lines of American policy, warts and all, we already knew and it has been going on for decades. As yet I have not seen anything that really surprises me, except the fact that I am able to read this confidential traffic on the Internet and what that means going forward.

What I am driving at, and what I think that the British diplomat and my banker friend were asserting, is that doing deals is a process, one where confidentiality is vital and where without confidentiality the deals cannot be done, and Assange is making that more difficult, perhaps impossible.  Since these are deals with enormous economic and geopolitical significance, the freezing up of communication between diplomats could have historic consequences... bad consequences... and then there is this too: who ever elected Julian Assange to dynamite the foreign policy of the United State of America? Who is he responsible to? To "God and history" as Franco said he was?

In closing this post, just to note that, in a parliamentary democracy, something as big as this might bring down the government, might lead to early elections. In our system that isn't an option, but I think it would be a good idea if Hillary Clinton tendered her resignation. 

This disaster probably isn't Hillary's fault, but it has happened in her department, on her watch, and the government can't just go on as if nothing had happened. Heads must roll and all those responsible must pay for their errors. Or is the only one that is left holding the bag for all this going to be poor Private Manning? He may spend the rest of his life in jail... alone? DS

Thursday, December 02, 2010

Wikileaks: Getting serious for a moment

David Seaton's News Links
For the time being the USA is the major pillar of stability of some sort that the world has. Like it or not, that is a fact. Anything that affects that stability causes extremely unpredictable outcomes, blowback and damage everywhere. I am certainly not "pro status quo", but on the other hand neither am I a nihilist or an anarchist or a juvenile delinquent. At some point frivolity becomes a mortal sin... America is fast reaching or may have already overshot that point by some distance.

There is something very few people in the blogosphere  seem to taking into account in talking about Wikileaks. Right now we are living a moment of tremendous economic instability and turbulence... not to mention two wars running and two more (Iran and Korea) waiting in the wings, world food prices are rising... it goes on and on. Bad times, the worst times since the 1930s, and you may remember how they ended.

Obviously this is a moment where those who have been chosen (democratically or otherwise) to take decisions which affect the lives, income and welfare of millions of people should be able to communicate frankly and calmly with each other and reach agreements quickly.

To put it mildly, people like Julian Assange or Glenn Beck are not helpful right now. To tolerate them is frivolous.  

What irritates me especially in the middle of all this is the monumental incoherence and myopia of those who applaud and enable the tactics of Wikileaks.

If the powerful of the world are as evil, brutal, venal and unscrupulous as the Wikileaks data-dump makes them out to be... and they could be all of that, and much, much worse, do you think that they are just going to sit back quietly and watch while the "truth" sets us "free"?

Only a fool could believe that.

This is like going up to a Mafia hit-man and squirting him with a water pistol.

What we are going to get from this, minimally, is an "Official Secrets Act" like the British have and if that don't get it, there will be legislation passed that, if necessary, will rival "China's Great Firewall"... don't doubt if for a minute. And I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the Newspapers that are publishing the material come to regret having done so.

Remember that Wilson passed the Sedition Act of 1918, and that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War.

But we are not really at war, you say.

No problem, a Gulf of Tonkin provocation is engineered and we actually declare war on Iran.

But that would have terrible consequences, you say, it would damage the economy and many people would die.

Don't think for a minute that the people who started such a war would lose money on the deal or send their sons to fight in it.

I would like a revolution as much as the next man, but Wikileaks isn't going to bring a revolution, it is going to bring a counterrevolution... And that may be what is behind it all in the first place. DS

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Wikileaks: America's senior moment


So this is what the eclipsing of American power looks like, with the disgorging of so much of its sensitive diplomatic correspondence in one fell swoop. Arguably not since Berlin fell to the Red Army in 1945 has there been a compromise of state secrets as breathtaking as that brought about by WikiLeaks. Yet while the drift of much of the ensuing commentary has been that there is not much new in the 250,000 leaked cables, the truth is that the damage to American credibility and diplomacy is incalculable. Robert Baer - Financial Times

The US government must surely be ruing, and urgently reviewing, its weird decision to place a whole library of recent diplomatic correspondence on to a computer system so brilliantly secure that a 22-year-old could download it on to a Lady Gaga CD. Gaga, or what? Timothy Garton Ash - Guardian
David Seaton's News Links
"Gaga" is a French world that means senile.

In the opinion of many observers, the Wikileaks data-dump is America's "senior moment".

America's present day foreign policy shenanigans are beginning to look like one of those caper comedies, full of hilarious gags and prat falls, the kind where everything goes wrong.

Historians are not going to find much to surprise them in the documents themselves, nothing or very little that they won't already know; what they are going to be interested in is who is behind the massive leaks and what they hoped to achieve by destroying the credibility of the US State Department. 

This goes beyond mere "whistle blowing".

I'm not against whistle blowing in itself. It can perform many useful services: for example, in exposing corporate wrongdoing or dangerous pharmaceutical products. In politics it can also serve the public interest by revealing a specific error or crime. For instance I was in favor of showing the video of the helicopter murder of the Reuters reporters in Iraq.

But this "data-dump" of masses of mostly banal material, dotted with tasty information truffles of the kind Zbigniew Brzezinski calls "pointed",  in the video above, is wantonly destructive of diplomatic "back channels"  as former CIA operative  Robert Baer writes in the Financial Times. 

And as Dr. Brzezinski says, the leaks are probably being manipulated by a foreign intelligence service or services yet unknown. That has been my feeling since day one and I am glad to find myself in such illustrious company.

Certainly the wikileaked materials are already being used in furthering  some countries specific national interests. 

An article by a top Israeli journalist Aluf Benn in Haaretz entitled: "WikiLeaks cables tell the story of an empire in decline" we can read the following:
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was the first world leader to leverage the WikiLeaks revelations for his own purposes. At a press conference on Monday, Netanyahu used the leaked cables to trash Obama's position and advance the agenda of "Iran first." The cables prove, he said, that there's no truth in the narrative that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the greatest threat to the region and its future. Aluf Benn - Haaretz
Why is Netanyahu in such a hurry to use Assange's material?

Here is how Noam Chomsky compares the relevance of the Wikileaks on the true situation in the Middle East:
NOAM CHOMSKY: (...) Hillary Clinton and Benjamin Netanyahu surely know of the careful polls of Arab public opinion. The Brookings Institute just a few months ago released extensive polls of what Arabs think about Iran. The results are rather striking. They show the Arab opinion holds that the major threat in the region is Israel—that’s 80%. The second major threat is the United States—that’s 77%. Iran is listed as a threat by 10%. With regard to nuclear weapons, rather remarkably, a majority—in fact, 57%—say that the region would have a positive effect in the region if Iran had nuclear weapons. Now, these are not small numbers. 80%, 77%, say the U.S. and Israel are the major threat. 10% say Iran is the major threat.  (HT: readytoblowagasket)
You might imagine that as they hold opinions directly opposed to their subjects, the rulers of America's clients, the Arab security states, might think twice before ever speaking frankly to an American diplomat again. That might have serious consequences going forward. Especially if preparation for war gathers speed.

Many are shocked by what they read in these cables.  They seem to be suffering from a political version of "primal scene", you know, the trauma little children experience when they first discover what mommy and daddy do after they tuck the toddlers into bed.

I'm beginning to think that Bismark was right, politics are like sausages, they are easier to eat when people don't know how they are made.

Diplomacy is not, repeat not a a business and the relations between sovereign "armed and dangerous" states are not the same as the relations between a bank or a pharmaceutical company and their customers. Lehman Brothers crashing or a bank screwing its customers is not the same as bombing Iran.

So many of history's wars have begun through misunderstanding or miscalculations. Often the only thing standing between the guns of the opposing armed forces of dozens of countries are the world's diplomats. For hundreds of years they have only had their endless conversations to gauge the intentions of allies and potential or real enemies.

Taken as a whole their information and access to the minds of the governments and peoples where they are stationed is of immense value.

They all live in a boring, itinerant, community who spend most of their working careers outside their home countries, people who see each other over and over again in an endless, purgatorial round of cocktail parties and dinners and when they finally move on to a new post, they find themselves thrown again into the same company of diplomats from their own and other countries where they were posted before and again and again they renew old friendships... this goes on for years and years until they retire and is quite endogenous. They learn to read the meanings of each other's carefully chosen words and even more careful silences.

Taken as a whole the diplomatic community is very sensitive and valuable animal. Their understanding and their relationships can come in handy when there is an international crisis on and to freeze and clog it up could be really, really, dangerous at a time like now, when there is a imminent danger of a war breaking out.

So this mega data-dump is not the same as exposing some corporation that is selling infected chicken liver. This could end up in with thousands of people killed and the world economy off into the abyss. DS

Monday, November 29, 2010

Why isn't Julian Assange in Guantanamo? Where are the drones?

Peter King, a member of the House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee, said the latest release "manifests Mr Assange's purposeful intent to damage not only our national interests in fighting the war on terror, but also undermines the very safety of coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan".  BBC News
David Seaton's News Links
Let us assume for a moment that the United State of America is a democracy and it's officials represent the American people and that its institutions genuinely represent, define and defend the interests of the American people.

Let us also assume, merely for argument's sake, that as Congressman and member of the Homeland Security Committee of the House of Representatives, Peter King, says, the  release of the latest batch from Wikileaks proves Julian Assange's, "purposeful intent to damage not only our national interests in fighting the war on terror, but also undermines the very safety of coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan". 

Taking these two assumptions as true: that one, America's government has the democratic legitimacy to define and defend the interests of the American people, and two, Julian Assange is aiding the enemies of the United State in time of war, then the following question arises.

Why isn't Julian Assange either dead or imprisoned in the Guantanamo Bay prison camp?

If this question seems overly provocative,  a mere boutade, let me remind readers that at this very moment remote control, drone aircraft are probably flying the skies of Pakistan and Yemen, armed with rockets, looking to fire them at men, women and even children who the US government believes to have "purposeful intent to damage not only our national interests in fighting the war on terror, but also undermines the very safety of coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan". And of course, Guantanamo Bay prison is chock full of people held without trial or habeas corpus, who the US government believes to have "purposeful intent to damage not only our national interests in fighting the war on terror, but also undermines the very safety of coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan".

What makes Assange any different from all of them?

You might think it is because Julian Assange, although not a citizen of the United States, is an Australian and Australia is an American ally... But, there have been  quite a few Australians in Guantanamo and Brits and citizens of other allied countries and American drones over Pakistan have killed citizens of countries allied to the USA and even American citizens

What makes Assange any different from all of them? 

Frankly the only difference I can see is that Mr. Assange is not a Muslim.

It is hard not to come to the conclusion that the United States of America has finally gathered to itself, under one flag, all the venal, violent defects of a militaristic empire and combined them with all the potential feebleness of a democracy and the results of this mixture are being splashed all over the world's newspapers and the only reaction up till now is that Sweden is accusing Julian Assange of date-rape. DS

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

North Korea or Murdoch: the art is knowing how to push the envelope

Korean strongman, Kim Jong-il and his son and successor, Kim Jong-un

David Seaton's News Links
There is a lot of speculation, and practically no hard intelligence, as to why North Korea is behaving so strangely of late. Sinking a South Korean ship and killing 45 sailors, showing off their advanced atomic facilities to a visiting American scientist and now, shelling a South Korean island near the capital Seoul, again causing loss of life... and apparently nobody really knows why.
A war between the two Koreas  could take place, a miscalculation or a misreading could set off a nuclear exchange... that is how serious this bizarre business is.
Why is all this happening?

Anybody's guess it seems?

Here is mine.

I have long had the impression that the behavior of the players of international politics is very similar to that of small unsupervised, schoolchildren... Out on the "playground", left to their own devices they are savages and when they are constrained by superior force, they behave no better than said schoolchildren in the hands of a befuddled, substitute teacher, they try to see what they can get away with.
Look at this sequence:
(E)very time North Korea flexes its muscles, threatens its neighbor, or violates international law it gains stature unavailable to it via any other means. Think about it: North Korea has a GDP smaller than Costa Rica, roughly the half the size of that of say, the Sudan. Finally, every time the North does one of these things, the response of the rest of the world actually, brings about benefits. After the "official condemnations" die down and the sanctions are proved to be ineffective -- as they inevitably are when pitched against a country in which the will or discomfort of the people does not exactly drive the political system -- North Korea gets a reward of some sort, a deal, an aid package, energy supplies, food. Best of all, the rest of the world accepts its word on vital matters even though North Korea has never ever kept its promises. David Rothkopf - Foreign Policy

"Mr. Lee said he expects further incidents by the North — including perhaps another nuclear test — in the coming weeks, perhaps to coincide with Kim Jong-un’s birthday on Jan. 8. The North has previously tested two nuclear devices." Lee Sung-yoon,professor of international politics at Tufts University, quoted in the New York Times
The other day I wrote about why I thought Rupert Murdoch's creature, Glenn Beck, was being allowed to engage in Jew-baiting, something which in American discourse, in the context of a top rated network TV program, is the political equivalent of testing a nuclear device. My conclusion is that Murdoch did it just to prove he could.

He did it, he has gotten away with it and now some very powerful people feel themselves less powerful and see Murdoch as even more powerful than they did before.

My conclusion is that the North Korean's motive is the same as Murdoch's: by showing what they can do and not be punished they underline their power and raise the price that would have to be paid to make them cease and desist.

The major difference in my mind is that Rupert Murdoch is much more powerful and more dangerous than North Korea. Like the poet said, "things fall apart". DS

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Homage to Ireland in Her Hour of Need



Now that they've gone stone broke and are dirt poor again. Lets send the Irish a big hug and kiss for all the fun they've always provided. Just as a token, this trailer from my favorite Irish theme film, (apologies to John Ford and "The Quiet Man")... Alan Parker's, "The Commitments".

You think this film is merely "Oirish" and not really Irish? Here is a Youtube comment on this film from a Mick who signs "DoctorWeeTodd"
"Do you not get it, lads? The Irish are the blacks of Europe. And Dubliners are the blacks of Ireland. And the Northside Dubliners are the blacks of Dublin. So say it once, say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud."
DS

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Haitian cholera: opening soon in theaters near you... not


Haitian Venus
A Collier County woman is Florida's first documented case of cholera imported from Haiti. The woman, who lives in southwest Florida, had been visiting family in the region of the earthquake-devastated nation that is at the center of its cholera epidemic.(...)"We really don't anticipate that we will see any sustained transmission caused by Haiti in Florida or anywhere else in the United States," Torok said. "The risk is so low because our water and sanitation systems really minimize the risk to folks." The cholera outbreak in Haiti, officially reported in late October, has claimed more than 1,000 lives, according to the World Health Organization. St. Petersburg Times
David Seaton's News Links
What is most obscene about the cholera outbreak in Haiti is that the woman lying naked and close to death on the pavement in the photo above, is only a short distance from the USA and that the highly contagious disease, one that is killing her and hundreds more like her, is not considered a major health risk in the USA, where a case has already been reported, because, "our water and sanitation systems really minimize the danger to folks".

I invite my readers to roll all that around in their minds for a while and consider the implications.
And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?  And he [God] said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground. -- Genesis 4: 9-10

Religion in the United States has a high adherence level, compared to other developed countries, and diversity in beliefs. Wikipedia
Go figure. DS

Monday, November 15, 2010

Beck, rhymes with yecch: Murdoch flirts with antisemitism... Why?

Welcome to the "Glenn Beck Program," where Jews are Nazis and those who exploit ancient anti-Semitic conspiracy narratives are friends of the Jews.  Michael Wolraich - CNN

“Soros' people called me to say I am an anti-Semite because I was going to air this," he says in one program. "Probably, I am more supportive of Israel and Jews than George Soros." Haaretz

“While I, too, may disagree with many of Soros’ views and analysis on the issues, to bring in this kind of innuendo about his past is unacceptable. To hold a young boy responsible for what was going on around him during the Holocaust as part of a larger effort to denigrate the man is repugnant. The Holocaust was a horrific time, and many people had to make excruciating choices to ensure their survival. George Soros has been forthright about his childhood experiences and his family’s history, and there the matter should rest." Abraham Foxman, Chairman, Anti-Defamation League

"Go to bed with dogs, wake up with fleas"
Old Spanish proverb
David Seaton's News Links
I'm not sure that the true significance of Glenn Beck's attack on George Soros is being evaluated correctly and in the proper perspective.

The question that people should be asking themselves is not whether Glenn Beck's remarks are antisemitic, because the only people who can define antisemitism are the Jewish people themselves and Abe Foxman is the person America's Jewish community has endowed with the power to decide what is or isn't defamation. Thus if Foxman, speaking ex-cathedra on this question, says that Beck's remarks are "unacceptable" and "repugnant", then that clinches it: Beck has crossed the red line into antisemitism.

That being so, the question people should be asking themselves is why Rupert Murdoch (Beck is merely Murdoch's creature) has decided to play with what is considered the "third rail" (touch it and you die, your career is finished) to end all third rails in US politics, which is antisemitism. And even to take it upon himself to break one of the touchiest of all taboos, which for a gentile to say who is a "good" or a "bad" Jew. And even more provocatively, he has allowed, or most probably encouraged,  Glenn Beck to connect the word "Jew" with the word "conspiracy". In today's America this, as Michael Wolraich points out at CNN, is to enter the world of Lyndon LaRouche. Murdoch has also allowed Beck to mention the most unmentionable of all unmentionables, the "don't go there" of all the don't go there subjects: the Jews that collaborated with the Nazis. No less than Hannah Arendt, one of the 20th century's most prestigious political scholars, was dragged over the coals for mentioning it in her controversial book "Eichmann in Jerusalem". 

In short it would be nearly impossible to offend more Jewish sensibilities in such a short time than Beck has, all the while professing his "more papist than the pope" loyalty to the Jewish people and to the state of Israel. Perfectly outrageous. People are outraged. Mission accomplished

Why is Murdoch doing this?

My theory is that he is doing it to prove he can do it.

To prove that he, Rupert Murdoch, can break all the rules and emerge unscathed, can waltz blithely where others have had to crawl on their bellies in abject repentance or be expelled to the outer darkness where there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth .

Why should Murdoch want to do that?

He is playing a mind game with the Zionist right wing, both in America and Israel.

Why?

I think he wants to shake down AIPAC, that is why, and he is "talking trash" to make them nervous.

At this moment the Obama administration is trying to get a settlement freeze and then define the borders of a Palestinian state with a view to creating said state, thus ending the dream of a "Greater Israel". To fight this off, AIPAC is going to need all the help they can get and Fox would have to be a key player in that fight.

Murdoch doesn't want to be taken for granted... that is his message.

He wants to show all observers that he is the boss. That people crawl before him, that he doesn't crawl before anyone...  that his support is costly.

What is his price? I have no idea as yet. All I know is that with Ayn Rand dead, Rupert Murdoch is one of the nastiest pieces of work to share our planet and whatever the price, it will be a devil's bargain. DS

Friday, November 12, 2010

UK Students trash British Conservatives' HQ ... the children's crusade

Students have finally had enough. Fees were introduced in 1998 and we hardly heard a squeak; they were bumped up to over £3,000 in 2006 and no one revolted. But today students smashed their way into the Tory party campaign HQ in a show of anger against a political elite they believe have abandoned them. Patrick Smith - Guardian
David Seaton's News Links
I am quite sure that the student protests in London are as significant as the recent student protests in France,  perhaps more so, and they represent what may quickly become a Europe-wide trend.

Up till now the children of the credit bubble have had little to rebel against, all the things that the 1968 generation fought for, especially sexual freedom, this generation have had in abundance. While they enjoyed their freedom or became bored with it they became proficient with computers, cell phone messaging and social nets, all valuable skills for potential agitators. Now as politicians like David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy are attacking their futures, their education and even their future pensions, they have something more challenging than "Grand Theft Auto" to test their skills against.  And perhaps they will be able to do something that the students of 1968 couldn't do in those times of prosperity and full employment, make common cause with working people and the older generations.

Now the battle is not just about personal freedom and imperialist wars as it was back them, it is about health, education and welfare: the basics.

I'm astounded at how oblivious Cameron and Sarkozy are to the danger they are running.

Regular readers of this blog know that one of my favorite hobby horses is criticizing the blockheadedness of post Cold War politicians who seem to have totally lost their fear of popular wrath.

Those who are cheerfully going about the work of dismantling the welfare state seem blissfully unaware that the welfare state was created by men as, or even more conservative then themselves, (Bismark, for example) in order to avoid revolutionary social movements which would destabilize and jeopardize the entire economic system and society itself. This was a strategy that was so eminently successful that it practically has destroyed revolutionary praxis. 

In my opinion dismantling the welfare state at this time is similar to a person who has successfully survived an operation for lung cancer and endured the ensuing chemotherapy and then, finding himself now in  remission, decides that it is ok for him to go back to smoking, the very thing that caused his cancer in the first place: idiotic.

It occurs to me that this tunnel vision, expressed in the obsession of  placating the financial markets,which  ignores popular anger, is the result of the rise and predominance of the FIRE (finance, insurance, real estate) economy and the diminishing influence of manufacturing and agriculture.

The financial sector works with platonic mathematical models: money in the abstract moves with the speed of light. Fortunes that buy admiration, sex and luxury are made by simply tapping the key of a computer in a cubicle or on a trading floor.  All very clean and a bit autistic.

Reality, unfortunately, in as much as it touches living organisms, is never that clean and neat.

Thus farmers and manufacturers understand how the world of living creatures works better than financiers do.

They understand better, because both farmers and manufacturers exploit living creatures for profit and, leaving ethical question aside, to do this they need to have what farmers call "stock sense": an understanding of the animal off of which they make their living.

Take pigs for example.

A pig lives on death row from the day he is born.

Few animals are as reviled as the pig, the very word "pig" is an insult... and yet, perhaps no other animal on earth is eaten with such relish as the pig. Thus there is money to be made in raising pigs

Very few of those who live off of pigs like them personally, however pig raisers make sure that their pigs get plenty to eat, clean water to drink and clean air to breathe and they make sure that their charges excrement is removed at timely intervals... They also provide them with free veterinary care. The farmers don't do this for love of the pig or from the goodness of their hearts, but simply because if pigs aren't treated like this, they wont get fat soon enough or their flesh pass health inspection after they are slaughtered.

Pigs are not alone.

The short time that chickens pass among the living is also accompanied by a careful attention to their health and diet, as commodity chickens are terribly vulnerable to contagious diseases: plagues that can wipe out a farmer's investment in only a few days or sometimes hours.

Dairy cows have a bit better time of it than most food producers, live longer lives and often get special treatment, as it has been shown that not only clean food and air and lack of stress improves the quantity and quality of the milk they produce, even playing classical music for the cows helps increase milk production. To get the most and the best milk from a cow a farmer will even play Mozart for her.

So, if not properly cared for hens don't lay, pigs don't get fat and cows don't give milk.

In short, farmers know that to make decent a profit from their animals they must treat them carefully and that signs such as wet noses, shiny fur, neat feathers, bright eyes and a good appetite and the quantity and quality of their droppings, all must be watched closely if a good business is to be made from them.

In manufacture everything we have said about pigs, chickens and cows goes in spades for people too.

Manufacturers know as much about the human beings  they exploit as farmers know about pigs, chickens and cows and for much the same reasons: their livelihood depends on getting as much work, both in quantity and quality that they can with the smallest cash outlay possible. 

As an example of how the techniques of animal husbandry can be advantageously applied to humans, soccer became the British working class passion par exellence, because 19th century factory owners encouraged their workers to play football in order to keep them healthy and productive in the miserable conditions of the industrial revolution.

Exploiting human animals is a dicey business however.

We are talking about a very bad monkey here, one who can sabotage a factory, go slow, work to rule, go on strike: an animal that to be most profitable requires much training and re-training and much "motivation".

Like farming, manufacture is a messy, hands-on affair, filled with the sort of intangible things that sentient beings produce that are difficult to quantify in  numbers. This makes farming and manufacture unattractive for most Masters of Business Administration.

People don't feel right spending all those years at Harvard or Stanford, just to have to get a recalcitrant assembly line up and running or to stand up to their knees in manure in the middle of a freezing night holding a lantern for a vet himself up to his elbows performing a breech delivery on a struggling milch cow.

To leave the farm, to leave the factory floor and then move to a quiet office to follow numbers that flit across a screen, and while doing it make millions of dollars more than ever would be possible in either the factory or on the farm is a no-brainer.

Managing filthy pigs or cantankerous people with grease on their hands is not an attractive career choice for a good student today. Pigs are a drag.  So are people.

Truly though, I can't imagine Walt Whitman celebrating these masters of the universe.

A curious thing: if nobody ate pigs or eggs or chickens or drank milk, there would be no cows, pigs or chickens: nobody keeps them for pets. That's the way things work.

Here is an example: right up until the 1970s Spain used to be filled with donkeys, an emblematic animal, Sancho Panza rode one, they had a million uses... now there are hardly any donkeys left... The modern world doesn't need donkeys and donkeys can't do anything about it.

In many developed countries it appears that what goes for donkeys goes for human beings too. Their messy needs and wants get in the way of the beautiful numbers. Let us then move all the messy things far away and leave ourselves to contemplate our  exquisite numbers as they shimmer and dance on the screen and fill our bank accounts.

And so in love are they with their platonic models and their markets, that they blithely assume that those whose lives they disrupt and futures they jeopardize will simply oblige them by just shriveling up and blowing away.

But, unlike donkeys, human beings, before they disappear, can do much nastier things than just bray and kick. That is what I think is beginning to happen in the streets of London and Paris. DS