Investing in Instability

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I would urge everybody to read this excellent thought piece by George Monbiot in today's Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,553766,00.html

He talks about how governments and corporations are using the crisis to impose authoritarian measures and 'invest in instability'.

Maybe I was naive before, but I've had a crash course in how this works over the last week, researching (often thanks to ILE posts) the links between, for instance, the oil company Unoco (which has donated 'equipment' to the Taliban) and its parent company Thorn (which sells arms).

― Momus, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I second Momus - it is an excellent article. I have a lot of respect for George Monbiot. His 'Captive State' is very good. Check that out as well.

― Will McKenzie, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Question is, why didn't the US culturally destabilise and co-opt the Middle East like they did with Europe after WW2?

― dave q, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Because it was being run by the British, and therefore counted pretty much as the British part of Europe which you suggest was chopped up.

― Pete, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I read it. Typically excellent and well-thought-out writing from Monbiot.

― Robin Carmody, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

He makes a good point about the fact that, who knows what is going on in the world right now? Everyon e is paying attention to the tragedy. they could put Reagan's face on Rushmore and no on e would know.

― Pennysong Hanle y, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Dammit, Mike, you found me out. And I was just about to start with Nancy too.

― Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Don't Forget Lee Iacoca

― Pennysong Hanle y, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

The article seems written by someone with strong views but who doesn't know much about the subjects, which allows for simple equations. It seems to present everything within the focus of a political left vs right struggle. I'm not sure I even undertand the main point of it. It just seems like a blanket condemnation of American corporations and government, as if America got what it deserved, and teh teroroists are hardly to blame.

― Curt Schilling, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I was hoping this post was called "investing in invisibility" *sigh*

― jel, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

But that's Monbiot for you. I admire him no end, and I always read his columns, but even *I* think he goes too far with the anti- corporate, anti-American line sometimes. But not this time, IMO.

― Robin Carmody, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Curt Schilling!

― Kris, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

After about 5 gross exaggerations I had trouble reading the piece. Is there some sort of Evil America script program these people are using?

― bnw, Wednesday, 19 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

The second half seemed playing-to-the-crowd, but the first half does make good points about a right-wing political turn and also how governments can exploit instability - and bear in mind the first example he gave of this was British.

I've noticed incidentally - and this is a general point about debate rather than any attack on BNW or anyone else - that once people have perceived a 'tendency' of some kind - be it anti-Americanism in the Guardian or anti-Rockism on ILM - they go into a mode where simply naming that tendency is enough, rather than replying to the points it might be making.

― Tom, Wednesday, 19 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I thought the article was OK, except for the 'what if global capitalism disappears only to be replaced by something else' - it's like, is this man ever going to happy? Beware of getting what you 'want', in case of being exposed as being reflexively negative (as opposed to 'idealistic')

― dave q, Wednesday, 19 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.