Thursday, November 28, 2013
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
A new report details how corporations are increasingly spying on nonprofit groups they regard as potential threats.
The corporate watchdog organization Essential Information found a diverse groups of nonprofits have been targeted with espionage, including environmental, antiwar, public interest, consumer safety, pesticide reform, gun control, social justice, animal rights and arms control groups.
The corporations carrying out the spying include the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Wal-Mart, Monsanto, Bank of America, Dow Chemical, Kraft, Coca-Cola, Chevron, Burger King, McDonald's, Shell, BP, and others. According to the report, these corporations employ former CIA, National Security Agency and FBI agents to engage in private surveillance work, which is often illegal in nature but rarely -- if ever -- prosecuted.
Gary Ruskin, author of the report, "Spooky Business: Corporate Espionage Against Nonprofit Organizations," and director of the Center for Corporate Policy, a project of Essential Information.
Posted by nickglais at 8:54 AM
Friday, November 22, 2013
Patrick Bond: Developing countries and green groups must evaluate if walkouts are the best way to get rich countries to address climate change
Posted by nickglais at 1:47 PM
Thursday, November 14, 2013
TPP Exposed: WikiLeaks Publishes Secret Trade Text to Rewrite Copyright Laws, Limit Internet Freedom
Political Economy Research says get past the CATO crap in the first few minutes and listen to Lori Wallach and think about what she is saying.
If you do not know anything about TPP watch the video at the bottom of this text first and the top video last.
WikiLeaks has published the secret text to part of the biggest U.S. trade deal in history, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
For the past several years, the United States and 12 Pacific Rim nations have been negotiating behind closed doors on the sweeping agreement.
A 95-page draft of a TPP chapter released by WikiLeaks on Wednesday details agreements relating to patents, copyright, trademarks and industrial design -- showing their wide-reaching implications for internet services, civil liberties, publishing rights,and medicine accessibility.
Critics say the deal could rewrite U.S. laws on intellectual property rights, product safety and environmental regulations, while backers say it will help create jobs and boost the economy.
President Obama and U.S. trade representative Michael Froman reportedly wish to finalize the TPP by the end of the year and are pushing Congress to expedite legislation that grants the president something called "fast-track authority."
However, this week some 151 House Democrats and 23 Republicans wrote letters to the administration saying they are unwilling to give the president free reign to "diplomatically legislate."
We host a debate on the TPP between Bill Watson, a trade policy analyst at the Cato Institute, and Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch.
For a long time now there has been concern about the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement and what it might mean for intellectual property laws and online rights but little is known about the negotiations for the treaty because talks are being held in secret.
However, WikiLeaks managed to obtain and release the chapter of the agreement concerning IP and people who've been following the talks are more worried than ever.
We spoke to journalist, writer and author of Rebel Code, Glyn Moody about just what the TPP is and the potential consequences of it being signed
Posted by nickglais at 2:52 PM
Monday, November 11, 2013
Political Economy Research says TAFTA is for the Atlantic has TPP is for the Pacific and both trade agreements if they can be called that put corporations above nations which is especially why the US is so eager to impose TPP on Pacific Rim and TAFTA on Europe.
TAFTA just like TPP gets very little media coverage because only knowing about it will create opposition to it - basically you have to be daft to support TAFTA and has the Pacific Rim is discovering mad to support TPP.
They hope to keep us ignorant while they do deals behind closed doors.
Also watch Max Keiser for how angry we should be with TAFTA and TPP
Posted by nickglais at 10:51 AM
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Dr Ying Kong is the founding Dean at the Tsinghua (Qianhai) International Business School is a Tsinghua Professor promoting the bankrupt idea of Carbon Trading in China and Green Market Economy - Tsinghua University is the ideological centre of free market fundamentalism in China has we have recently noted.
See videos below for shortcomings of carbon trading another idea from Goldman Sachs so popular at Tsinghua University and from Patrick Bond on failure of Green Market Economy.
For further reading visit here:
Posted by nickglais at 3:08 PM
Friday, October 25, 2013
Picture : G.N Saibaba
Political Economy Research has recently been sent this work of G.N Saibaba and we are pleased to publish it has it address's some fundamental questions about displacement and development in India.
The article is longer than what we normally publish but the effort in seriously studying this document will be repaid with deepened knowledge of Indian reality.
The country that is more developed industrially only shows, to the less developed, the image of its own future
--Marx, Capital, Vol I
An epitome of beauty, serenity and colonial charm…
--An advertisement for The Carlton, a luxury hotel created by the Rahejas in Kodaikanal, Tamil Nadu
Land, development and displacement has once again become the central point of debate in India. Curiously the debate is on industrial development ostensibly, under capitalism. Suddenly it has dawned upon the learned Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his policy experts that land and agriculture cannot be the main basis for the economy of a country like India that is marching ahead in the 21st century. The often erudite, soft spoken PM has even gone to the extent of calling all those, who oppose the present road map of prosperity and growth laid out by his government, anti-development and hence anti-national. The Prime Minister has equated the present policy prescription for growth tempered by the diktats of the World Bank and IMF with the ‘national interest’. Dr. Manmohan Singh is not alone in his concern about the future of the so-called ‘second generation reforms’, otherwise known as Liberalisation, Privatisation and Globalisation (LPG).
He is joined by the likes of Dr. Amartya Sen who is always ready to ‘grade’ the ‘performance’ of the Indian economy. In one of his interviews to The Telegraph while trying hard to pull the CPM-led West Bengal government out of the ignominy of Nandigram and Singur the Nobel Laureate has made it loud and clear that whatever is happening in the form of Special Economic Zones throughout the sub-continent is development through industrialisation that India badly needs. And make no mistake. This development package will inevitably have to exploit land that was / is fertile or otherwise. Gone are the days when agriculture alone could provide to the developmental needs of the Indian economy which as per Sen the economist is poised for a growth of more than 9 percent, mainly propelled through foreign direct investments. At best, it is nothing but Sen and the art of consensus building. Incidentally, when the people of Singur was protesting against land being taken from them against their will, Telegraph had carried photographs of CPM cadre moving in hordes on motorcycles in Singur with red flag and the life size portrait of Ratan Tata trying to ‘educate’ the people about the virtues of the TATAs as the harbinger of industrialization in post-47 India. Perhaps both, the Nobel laureate and the lumpen brigade of the CPM, were conveying the same, albeit, in different ways.
It’s official now. Agriculture cannot be the main provider of employment for the vast sections of the masses abounding rural India. In fact, the first official warning came in the form of an innocuous survey of the NSSO—about which the government had made a song and dance, not to mention the media that had gone overboard—proclaiming that about 40 percent or more of the peasantry in India would want to rid their lives of agriculture.
Yet in the maze of this publicity blitzkrieg by the proponents of LPG, what is carefully ignored is the question of development itself. The question as usual is deliberately posed in a manner where the pertinent aspects on the ramifications of a development model—that is totally reliant on foreign capital / dependent on imperialism—for the vast sections of the masses of this country hardly gets any mention.
What is argued is that displacement is inevitable in development. The rest of the arguments are just a logical corollary of this initial refrain. Since the peasantry cannot provide labour opportunities through agriculture anymore for the bulk of the masses as required by the circumstances coupled with the diminishing returns for the farmers with a high input cost and low market price / support price for the output, there is no more incentive for them to continue in the same productive activity.
Amidst all this effort of consensus building are the shocking and gripping accounts of violence and repression from the killing fields of Kashipur, Kalinganagar, Nandigram, Raigada, Jagatsinghpur and Singur. When this is being written the CPI (M) has resorted to the worst carnage in Nandigram which even the die hard supporters of CPI (M) itself have shockingly compared it to the worst genocide that followed the post-Godhra riots in the state of Gujarat in 2002. The scope of this article does not permit to deal with the entire happenings in Nandigram. It may be dealt in a separate piece.
Is displacement due to development or the development of displacement an inevitable thing like ones own shadow, a necessary evil that has to be lived with when one thinks about development? Or is there a possibility of a development which is free of any form of displacement; any form of violence on the people? Is this phenomenon of displacement due to development a new feature in the trajectory that India followed post-47? These are vital questions we cannot shy away from if we are serious in fighting the four dreaded Ds—Displacement, Destruction, Destitution and Death, especially in a social reality like South Asia and that too at a time when private capital—foreign and domestic—is considered as the main vehicle of implementation of the policies of LPG.
Posted by nickglais at 2:25 PM
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Posted by nickglais at 1:33 PM