I will talk about education this week as today I end with the big picture of global politics. Remember, if you know what the global political goals are you will know what the President and Congress have in mind with their legislation as well as state and local government. That is why we must stop listening to these talking points and campaign promises and know these pols from where they live. I talked last time about neo-conservative global views because Baltimore is controlled by the biggest neo-conservative institution in the world---Johns Hopkins. You can see the Democratic capture when all Baltimore pols are Democrats pushing Hopkins' policy.
I know neo-cons and neo-liberals plan to bring back global corporations and allow them to operate as they do overseas because that was the plan when Reagan/Clinton neo-liberals expanded globally and went to free trade---to escape all US labor and civil rights laws. I know that all of the dismantling of US Constitutional rights and Federal agencies that provide oversight and accountability is not only about the Republican states rights----this is what Republican voters though was happening. Global corporate pols do not look at the US as a sovereign nation so we know they plan to bring back these global corporations to do as they did overseas.
JUST LOOK AT THE TERMS OF TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT AND HOW MOST OF IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRADE POLICY-----IT MOSTLY WRITES HOW A GLOBAL CORPORATE TRIBUNAL WILL INTERACT WITH NATIONS SIGNING THIS TREATY. IT STATES THAT A GLOBAL CORPORATION WILL NOT LOSE PROFIT BY OPERATING IN THE US AND THAT MEANS IT WILL BE ALLOWED TO WORK AS IT DOES IN THAT DEVELOPING NATION.
Please take a look at this article---it's too long to post but it describes the end of neo-liberalism around the world even as Clinton and Obama with Bush neo-cons are trying to keep it alive. IT IS DEAD AND WE NEED TO SHAKE THE REST OF THE GLOBAL CORPORATE POLS OUT OF OUR AMERICAN DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PARTIES!
Trans Pacific Trade Pact is the desperate attempt by Clinton neo-liberals and Bush neo-cons to do a hale Mary football pass to keep this global free market policy alive and the rest of the world is throwing it out----AND AMERICANS NEED TO WAKE UP AND DO THE SAME....STOP ALLOWING THESE GLOBAL POLS TO POSE PROGRESSIVE WITH REPRESSIVE POLICY.
IT IS DEAD AND WE NEED TO SHAKE THE REST OF THE GLOBAL CORPORATE POLS OUT OF OUR AMERICAN DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PARTIES!
Below you see where Obama and Congressional neo-liberals get the phrase RACE TO THE TOP in Education Reform-----
The World is Not Flat
How Thomas Friedman gets it wrong about globalization. An excerpt from How to rule the World: The Coming Battle Over the Global Economy (Nation Books, 2008)
By Mark Engler
Published in the May/June 2008 issue of Dollars & Sense. Democracy Uprising
The difference between Friedman and Nader is that the New York Times columnist approves of this situation. He does not condemn it as an assault on democracy; he says it’s just the way things are. Of the Democrats, he writes, “Mr. Clinton effectively kidnapped the Democratic Party… moved it into the Republican economic agenda — including free trade, NAFTA and the WTO for China — while holding onto much of the Democrats’ social agenda.” Any Democrat who would try to move it back meets Friedman’s wrath. In the new global age, all those to the left of Ronald Reagan on economic policy are simply out of luck.
In an eloquent critique of The World Is Flat, Indian eco-feminist Vandana Shiva writes:
“Friedman has reduced the world to the friends he visits, the CEOs he knows, and the golf courses he plays at. From this microcosm of privilege, exclusion, blindness, he shuts out both the beauty of diversity and the brutality of exploitation and inequality…
That is why he talks of 550 million Indian youth overtaking Americans in a flat world. When the entire information technology/outsourcing sector in India employs only a million out of a 1.2 billion people. Food and farming, textiles and clothing, health and education are nowhere in Friedman’s monoculture of mind locked into IT. Friedman presents a 0.1 percent picture and hides 99.9 percent… In the eclipsed 99.9 percent are the 25 million women who disappeared in high growth areas of India because a commodified world has rendered women a dispensable sex. In the hidden 99.9 percent economy are thousands of tribal children in Orissa, Maharashtra, Rajasthan who died of hunger because the public distribution system for food has been dismantled to create markets for agribusiness.”
A Race to the Top? The corporate globalization that Friedman champions has alarming changes in store not just for the poor of the global South, but also for working people in the United States and Europe. One of the things that Friedman particularly lauds about Reagan and Thatcher is their success in breaking unions. He writes: “it may turn out that one of the key turning points in American history, going into the millennium, was Ronald Reagan’s decision to fire all the striking air traffic controllers in 1981. No single event,” he notes with satisfaction, “did more to alter the balance of power between management and workers.” Echoing the trickle-down, Reaganite logic, he argues that everyone wins from this since “[t]he easier it is to fire workers, the more incentive employers have to hire them.” Because America busted its unions and Western European countries did not, he contends, the U.S. developed a more dynamic economy.
What Friedman fails to note is that real wages for working people in the U.S. have been largely stagnant since the early 1970s, while working hours have skyrocketed. When compared with workers in Western Europe, the average American works 350 hours more per year, the equivalent of nine extra weeks. A study by the International Labor Organization reported that in 2000 the average U.S. worker put in 199 more hours than in 1973. Dramatizing such realities, a group of union and nonprofit activists now observe “Take Back Your Time Day” every October 24. On that day, if the U.S. workload were on par with the rest of the industrialized world, Americans would have the rest of the year off.
Friedman utters not a word of protest about the trend toward more work; in fact, he celebrates it. He argues that European social democracies are obsolete, even though they are successful capitalist countries. These nations are running on the wrong version on “DOScapital,” Friedman contends, and need to shift to U.S. standards. Never mind that economies like Sweden’s have performed very well over the past decade, all while maintaining a much higher quality of life for their citizens.
He has a special hatred for the French, who, he writes, “are trying to preserve a 35-hour work week in a world where Indian engineers are ready to work a 35-hour day.” In what he calls a “race to the top,” Friedman predicts a turbulent decade for Western Europe, as
aging, inflexible economies—which have grown used to six-week vacations and unemployment insurance that is almost as good as having a job—become more intimately integrated with Eastern Europe, India and China in a flattening world… The dirty little secret is that India is taking work from Europe or America not simply because of low wages. It is also because Indians are ready to work harder and can do anything from answering your phone to designing your next airplane or car. They are not racing us to the bottom. They are racing us to the top…. Yes, this is a bad time for France and friends to lose their appetite for hard work—just when India, China and Poland are rediscovering theirs.
It is unclear what Friedman sees as getting to the “top” if paid vacations, unemployment insurance, and retirement-benefits traditionally regarded as signs of a civilized economy-must be sacrificed. In The World Is Flat, he approvingly quotes a Microsoft “team member” in China describing his group of recruits: “They voluntarily work fifteen to eighteen hours a day and come in on weekends. They work through holidays, because their dream is to get to Microsoft.”
That Indian and Chinese workers are willing to sell themselves into bondage for Microsoft, of course, is a dubious sign of global progress. But, Friedman tells us, that is the new reality. His recipe for success in this climate is to “work harder, save more, sacrifice more.” To what end is unclear. Bumper stickers remind us that the activists of the labor movement were the “folks that brought you the weekend.” In Friedman’s account, corporate globalization is the force that will take it away. Yet we are supposed to be happy about it.
Ultimately, the “race to the top” is another of Friedman’s botched metaphors. In the long-standing progressive argument that corporate globalization creates a “race to the bottom,” it is not Indians or Chinese workers that are doing the racing at all. It’s capital. Deregulation allows corporations to wander the globe in search of ever lower wages and environmental standards. The moment workers stand up for their rights, refusing to tolerate a “35-hour day,” a company can pick up and move elsewhere. The governments that might curb such abuses are in straightjackets. The unions that workers might have organized themselves into have been busted. All Friedman can offer is this cryptic and seemingly masochistic advice: “When the world goes flat-and you are feeling flattened-reach for a shovel and dig into yourself. Don’t try to build walls.”
Globalization From Below
An interesting aspect of Friedman’s renewed focus on corporate globalization at the end of the Bush era is that governments and international financial institutions have faded from his picture of the integrating world. Even corporations are becoming less relevant. In his view, the new era of “Globalization 3.0″ is all about individuals. Today, it is up to all people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. He writes, “every person now must, and can, ask: Where do I as an individual fit into the global competition and opportunities of the day, and how can I, on my own, collaborate with others globally?”
Conveniently enough, accepting this idea makes it impossible to oppose neoliberalism. In a world of extreme individualism, no one in particular is responsible for setting the rules of the world order. It is pointless to protest governments or international financial institutions. Globalization is unstoppable because people want it.
In truth, these arguments are not new. With scant evidence, Friedman has long claimed that there is a “groundswell” of people throughout the developing world demanding corporate globalization. Of course, the massive protests of the past decade would seem to contradict his assertion. But he does not see this as a problem. He dismisses global justice activism by arguing, “from its origins, the movement that emerged in Seattle was primarily a Western-driven phenomenon.” The backlash that does exist in poorer countries, he argues, is not rational politics but simple lawlessness: “what we have been seeing in many countries, instead of popular mass opposition to globalization, is wave after wave of crime-people just grabbing what they need, weaving their own social safety nets and not worrying about the theory or the ideology.” In the end, Friedman seems ideologically incapable of accepting that people in the global South could organize their own movements or articulate a coherent politics of resistance.
Today, with much of the world in open rebellion against neoliberalism, this fiction is getting harder and harder to maintain. That Friedman has perpetually failed to spot the vibrant network of grassroots organizations that has built a worldwide campaign against the Washington Consensus is not a sign of widespread support for corporate globalization. It is an indictment of his reporting. Well before Seattle, there had been protests of millions of people throughout the global South against the “Golden Straightjacket.”
When Baltimore City Hall passes legislation on development you will see what the goal is if you look at these national political actions. We know Obama and Congress were not trying to strengthen public education and public health when Trans Pacific Trade Pact seeks to end public subsidy in other nations. We know Baltimore's education reform will be tied to these International Economic Zone models in nations not having democratic public education. Stop allowing these global pols to wrap these autocratic laws in progressive titles.
Look below at what has been the terminology of third world health care development and you see it mirrors the current Affordable Care Act-----HEALTH CARE FOR ALL----which means preventable care for all. To understand the goals of these policies written by global corporate pols-----you look to the World Health Organization and not American public health for over a century. The focus of preventative care against communicative disease vectors which is exactly what the Affordable Care Act and these state health systems are building. If you live in a developed world that has the best health infrastructure you think that means Expanded and Improved Medicare for All which means everyone has access to all health care available. When Clinton Wall Street global corporate neo-liberals and Bush neo-cons promote Health Care for All it is the same World Health Organization clinic care being built in third world nations over several decades. Affordable Care Act takes US health care access to third world preventative care minus all of the developed world advanced care. ACA is not health care for all----it is health care just like developing nations for 80% and more of Americans. THAT IS NOT PROGRESSIVE FOLKS!
SEE HOW LOOKING AT US POLICY GLOBALLY ALLOWS AMERICANS TO SEE WHAT CONGRESS HAS IN MIND WITH POLICY?
Health Care for All means this World Health Organization clinic care for all in the US just as they build in Haiti or Afghanistan....third world health care in the US.
The Global Health Debate It’s time to make “health for all” a global reality.
By Adam Parsons. Edited by John Feffer, September 18, 2009 Foreign Policy in Focus
The United States is destined to play a pivotal role in the outcome of these debates both on the domestic and international scene. Many health professionals worry that the same neoliberal thinking that contributed to the decimation of health systems in the 1980s will still prevail through U.S.-influenced institutions like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO. The U.S. Agency for International Development is well known for supporting these same structural adjustment programs, and today still leans toward market-based health systems and privatization policies. U.S. foreign aid also continues to support only disease-based initiatives that ultimately hinder the comprehensive health systems development central to PHC, despite Obama recently calling his increased funding for combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria “a new comprehensive global health strategy.”
While the three prominent reports released by the UN and civil society in 2008 signal a shift in the right direction, a PHC strategy is still far from implementation. Although the WHO is again attempting to foster PHC, there are no adequate global initiatives and no sufficient coalitions of global institutions to address the social and economic determinants of health. Civil society has long criticized the WHO itself for being too “disease-focused” and supportive of selective, vertical interventions that undermine its own PHC vision.
For many, the WHO’s attempt to foster PHC is inadequate given the prevailing macroeconomic order, in which private actors like the Gates Foundation spend more than double the core budget of the WHO on health care in developing countries. A basic criticism of the Foundation’s work also concerns its bias toward biomedical and technological solutions, and its business-oriented approach to health improvement that has fragmented health systems and diverted resources away from the public sector. As the WHO’s CSDH report concluded, technocratic solutions cannot resolve global health problems unless combined with the political and power structure changes needed to redistribute economic and social resources more equitably.
Just after the 2008 crash and it became evident to Americans that we had a criminal and corrupt government and corporations looting the US Treasury and people's pockets of trillions of dollars----the rich promoted the societal change that would come with all the wealth moving to the world's few-----they call it MOVING FORWARD. If you noticed all Clinton neo-liberals used this slogan right after the crash and the Clinton neo-liberal outlet MOVE ON-----has Moving Forward as its slogan.
All of this was planned as a global assault from the rich in proposing what they saw this 21st Century global corporate tribunal flat world society and this Zeitgeist Movement was developed by this global corporate tribunal. It's goal was to tell the world how to live now that no one has any money----now sustainability is not about environmental protection----it is about how 99.9% of people in the world are going to survive in poverty.
Clinton neo-liberals are the same as Bush neo-cons----it is all about global rule by a few of the world's richest and people of the world as simply human capital.....AND THE WORLD IS TELLING THEM TO GO JUMP IN THE LAKE----WAKE UP AMERICA----FIRST WORLD TO SECOND WORLD AND WITH TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT ---TO THIRD WORLD
This is why all the talk in the US and politics now centers on sustainability. In Baltimore Johns Hopkins is all about sustainability as was O'Malley as Governor of Maryland. None of this has anything to do with environment-------it's about 99% of people not having any money.
See where all these policy terms originate?
ZEITGEIST: MOVING FORWARD
| OFFICIAL RELEASE | 2011 TZMOfficialChannel
This is the Official Online (Youtube) Release of "Zeitgeist: Moving Forward" by Peter Joseph. [30 subtitles ADDED!]
On Jan. 15th, 2011, "Zeitgeist: Moving Forward" was released theatrically to sold out crowds in 60 countries; 31 languages; 295 cities and 341 Venues. It has been noted as the largest non-profit independent film release in history.
All over the world citizens are voting neo-liberals and neo-liberalism out and in the US ------citizens do not even know what neo-liberalism is. THAT IS BECAUSE ALL OF THE LABOR AND JUSTICE ORGANIZATIONS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN EDUCATING FOR A FEW DECADES HAVE LEADERS THAT ARE CAPTURED BY CLINTON NEO-LIBERALS. OUR AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES THAT WOULD BE GROUND ZERO FOR EDUCATING AGAINST NEO-LIBERALISM HAVE BEEN MADE INTO CORPORATE RESEARCH CENTERS.
Europeans are holding back the Trans Atlantic Trade Pact.
The Party of the European Left encourages the Italian people to vote for the list of Civil Revolution, against neoliberalism
23 February 2013
On 24 and 25 February the Italian people will vote for a new parliament. It is an important vote for Italy, but also for the destinies of all the peoples of Europe. They are finding themselves affected by the crisis of financial capitalism, austerity and neoliberal policies. Especially young people, women and workers pay the highest price.
For these reasons, we, activists from the Party of the European Left, express our support and encourage the Italian people to vote for the list of Civil Revolution lead by Antonio Ingroia. It is composed by men and women from civil society, political and social forces that are opposed to neoliberalism and that represent a clear alternative to Berlusconi and Monti and those who supported him. We are fighting for a Europe of the people and not of the banks.
It is therefore important that left forces in Italy that fought against the Berlusconi and Monti governments unite, prevail and offer an alternative program - a program putting people before profit, struggling for full employment, social justice, human rights, environmental protection, peace and disarmament.
Throughout Europe we are fighting against the fiscal compact and austerity policies. These policies exacerbate the crisis, help only speculation and banks and lead to an increase in unemployment, social inequality and attack social rights, public services and common goods. They are supported by the EU-Commission, ECB and from both center-left and center–right governments, but not by us.
This is a good article but too long to post-----check it out ----see how nations having to deal with this neo-liberal policy installed after American wars ----Japan, South Korea, and Viet Nam are moving this neo-liberalism out.
The struggle against neoliberalism in South Korea: history and lessons
Korean Alliance against the Korea-US FTA (KoA)
The transformation of South Korean society by neoliberalism and resistance
The 1980s military government
The Korea-US FTA is the consummation of the forward march of neoliberal globalisation since 1980. This Korea-US FTA, and other FTAs, are at the heart of neoliberal policy. This becomes even more the case as common people continue to face greater hardships ensuing from neoliberal globalisation. The consequences of the Korea-US FTA will henceforth have a decisive impact on the path of the Korean economy. At present, the Korea-US FTA needs only to be ratified by the National Assembly. Now it is vitally important to focus effectively and build the strength of the mass movement, which has gone on now for over a year, and to use the presidential and general elections as a new opportunity to move the political topography in a more progressive direction.
Canada’s transformation under neoliberalism
Jim Stanford Canadian Business, Canadian Politics, Globalization, Labour March 29, 2014
Neoliberalism represented a multi-faceted, deliberate, global strategy by elites (in both the financial and the real spheres of the economy) to turn the whole ship around. A generation later, it is sobering to consider how successful that strategy has been. It has clearly empowered and enriched corporations and those who own them, and put workers on the defensive everywhere. On the other hand, despite these successes, neoliberalism has not succeeded in creating a world economy which is stable (witness the dramatic events of 2008–09), efficient, or successful in meeting real human needs.
Neoliberalism has been applied harshly in Canada, consistent with the international trend, but also reflecting the unique features (and weaknesses) of Canadian capitalism. In my review of the history of neoliberalism in Canada, I identify three crucial transition points: historical moments when neoliberal principles and practices were introduced, consolidated, and ideologically cemented.
Democracy Against Neoliberalism in Argentina and Brazil Juan Pablo Ferrero
Melbourne to host international solidarity forum |... www.greenleft.org.au
Melbourne to host international solidarity forum Friday, March 9, 2007 - 11:00
- The organisers of the Latin American and Asia Pacific International Solidarity Forum, "Fighting and organising globally against neoliberalism", are calling on all activists, organisations and communities who are committed to building a better world to join together in Melbourne on October 11-14.
The forum, initiated by the Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Network (AVSN), the Asia Pacific International Solidarity Conference (APISC) and the Latin American Solidarity Network (LASNET), is a response to the cracks beginning to appear worldwide in the capitalist system, Lisa Macdonald, one of the organisers told Green Left Weekly. "In the Asia-Pacific region, neoliberal governments face a crisis of legitimacy and mass movements of resistance are on the rise. In Latin America, a people's rebellion is growing across the continent."
"There is a rich discussion and debate around workers' control and management; Indigenous autonomy and self-determination; building trade unions and social movements; electoral campaigning and counter-power strategies across Latin America. And these are giving birth to some of the most dynamic and successful social movements and political organisations in decades", Macdonald said.
Many of these movements and political organisations are winning. They are strengthening people's participation, strengthening their communities, developing people's power and inspiring a new generation of political activists. Popular governments have won elections with the support of social movements, and in countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador we are seeing progressive and radical changes. The Venezuelan idea of a new socialism for the 21st century is giving renewed hope and energy to other liberation processes around the world.
Against this backdrop, Macdonald explained, one of the main aims of the forum is share ideas and experiences between Australian, Latin American and Asia-Pacific social movements, political organisations and individual activists, and strengthen global coordination and campaigning.
A second and equally important aim is to increase the support for, and solidarity with, grassroots movements and political organisations fighting neoliberalism and resisting the transnationals' and governments' plunder of their natural resources. "There is a history of Australian support for such movements, and we hope this forum will extend that."
Some of the many discussion themes will include the histories of struggles and movements of resistance, campaigning and organising strategies, anti-capitalist and revolutionary theory and practice, alternatives to neo-liberalism, ecological sustainability, Indigenous struggles and cultural action.
Activists from Venezuela, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Indonesia, the Philippines, East Timor, Pakistan, India, Mauritius, Malaysia and New Zealand are already confirmed to attend, and many more have been invited.
The forum organisers are encouraging trade unions, NGOs, progressive political parties, social movements, academics and activists from across Australia and around the world to mark the dates in their diaries and submit proposals for workshops.
To register for the forum, to sponsor it, to submit a workshop proposal or to be added to the forum e-list for updates email <firstname.lastname@example.org> or phone Jorge Jorquera 0431 720 787, Lisa Macdonald 0413 031 108 or Lucho Riquelme 0402 754 818.
"We intend this forum to be a contribution to popular global resistance and struggle against neoliberalism, war and injustice", Macdonald concluded.
From GLW issue 702