Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

ForeignPolicy

Chomsky: Poorer Countries Find a Way to Escape U.S. Dominance

By Michael Shank, Foreign Policy in Focus. Posted February 12, 2008.


The famous critic lays out the emerging alternatives to the U.S.-dominated international financial institutions of the last century.
Advertisement

Noam Chomsky is a noted linguist, author, and foreign policy expert. On January 15, Michael Shank interviewed him on the latest developments in U.S. policy toward regional challenges to U.S. power.

Michael Shank: In December 2007, seven South American countries officially launched the Bank of the South in response to growing opposition to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other International Financial Institutions. How important is this shift and will it spur other responses in the developing world? Will it at some point completely undermine the reach of the World Bank and the IMF?

Noam Chomsky : I think it's very important, especially because, contrary to the impression often held here, the biggest country Brazil is supporting it. The U.S. propaganda, western propaganda, is trying to establish a divide between the good left and the bad left. The good left, like Lula in Brazil, are governments they would've overthrown by force 40 years ago. But now that's their hope, one of their saviors. But the divide is pretty artificial. Sure, they're different. Lula isn't Chavez. But they get along very well, they cooperate. And they are cooperating on the Bank of the South.

The Bank of the South could turn out to be a viable institution. There are plenty of problems in the region. But one of the striking things that's been happening in South America for quite a few years now is that they are beginning to overcome for the first time, since the Spanish invasion, the conflicts among the countries and the separation of the countries. It was a very disintegrated continent. If you look at transportation systems they don't have much to do with each other. They're mostly oriented toward the imperial power that was dominant. So you send out resources, you send out capital, the rich tiny elite have their chateaus on the Riviera, and that sort of thing. But they have not much to do with each other.

There was also a huge internal divide between a rich, mostly white, Europeanized elite and a massive population. For the first time, both of those kinds of disintegration, internal to the countries and among the countries, are being confronted at least. You can't say they're overcome but they're being confronted. The Bank of the South is one example.

Actually what's happening in Bolivia is a striking example. The mostly white, Europeanized elite, which is a minority, happens to be sitting on most of the hydrocarbon reserves. And for the first time Bolivia is becoming democratic. So it's therefore bitterly hated by the West, which despises democracy, because it's much too dangerous. But when the indigenous majority actually took political power for the first time, in a very democratic election of the kind we can't imagine here, the reaction in the West was quite hostile. I recall, for example, an article - I think it was the Financial Times - condemning Morales as moving towards dictatorship because he was calling for nationalization of oil. They omitted to mention, with the support of about 90% of the population. But that's tyranny. Tyranny means you don't do what the United States says. Just like moderation means that you're like Saudi Arabia and you do do what we say.

There are now moves toward autonomy in the elite-dominated sectors in Bolivia, maybe secession, which will probably be backed by the United States to try and undercut the development of a democratic system in which the majority, which happens to be indigenous, will play their proper role, namely, cultural rights, control over resources, political and economic policy, and so on. That's happening elsewhere but strikingly in Bolivia.

The Bank of the South is a step towards integration of the countries. Could it weaken the IFIs, yes it can, in fact they're being weakened already. The IMF has been mostly thrown out of South America. Argentina quite explicitly said, "Okay, we're ridding ourselves of the IMF." And for pretty good reasons. They had been the poster child of the IMF. They had followed its policies rigorously and it led to terrible economic collapse. They did pull out of the collapse, namely by flatly rejecting the advice of the IMF. And it succeeded. They were able to pay off their debts, restructure their debts and pay them off with the help of Venezuela which picked up a substantial part of the debt. Brazil in its own way paid off its debt and rid itself of the IMF. Bolivia is moving in the same direction.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: chomsky, bank of the south, hegemony


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Macro-Micro tomayto-tomahto
Posted by: ankhet on Feb 12, 2008 12:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chomsky says, "For example, if I lend you money, and I know you're a bad risk, so I get high interest payments, and then you tell me at one point, sorry I can't pay anymore, I can't call on my neighbors to force you to pay me. Or I can't call on your neighbors to pay it off. But that's the way the IMF works."

That's the way our financial institutions are working, too. That's the pattern everywhere, at every level. So, let's complete it - push for universal debt forgivenness. Just like countries, individuals ought to have that recourse, especially since the debt-load has been accumulated by outrageous trickery, which, encouraged by corporate-dominated government is what's making people so angry. That's why foreclosers are trashing the houses they can't afford anymore.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Macro-Micro tomayto-tomahto Posted by: Ipsi Dixit
thank goodness for his words
Posted by: sleepingdog on Feb 12, 2008 1:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chomsky is a well informed and highly logical voice in our country. I give many thanks for people like him, defenders of reason, shatterers of illusion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chomsky. . .
Posted by: The Old Hippie on Feb 12, 2008 1:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
 
Every time I read, listen, or watch Chomsky, I realize I have witnessed a knowledgeable reality-based perspective I didn't have before, even though I consider myself well informed.

I actively research the internet every day for the current socio-political happenings worldwide, as much for myself, as well as for my web site and blog, but Chomsky never fails to inform me of perspective I simply had failed to put together.

Thank you for presenting the interview.

Mike - - The Old Hippie at. . .
The Old Hippie's Groovy Site
The Old Hippie's Groovy Blog
 
“Frivolous Names - Serious Content”
 

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Chomsky. . . Posted by: cherylholmes
» RE: Chomsky. . . Posted by: off-the-radar 2
Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Feb 12, 2008 2:37 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the third world can figure out how to escape US dominance maybe it's time for the American voting public to figure it out, too.

Government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Direct Democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

South America is not "escaping"
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Feb 12, 2008 7:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
South America is not escaping US dominance. That's not an accurate description of what is happening. What's happening is that the US is collapsing. Its sphere of influence is fading.

The trump card has been played... we've made our final play... and its for the middle east, and for neverending fear-based oil wars. The people never really had a choice in the matter, and they certainly wont have a choice in '08. (Hillarain = McCainary)

How many times has it been said that the US electoral system is a complete sham? We may as well have an openly declared dictatorship. Yet still no one supports the anti-war candidate? Not even Chomsky...

The powers that are destroying this country will abandon its rotting husk after they have stripped it of all its wealth. If they can take this country and destroy it with such precision, then rest assured, they will get control of south america too. Hell, they already got half the rain forest cut down so they can make friggin hamburgers. Chomsky is dreaming if he thinks Bank of the South is going to shield the region. But what can you expect from someone who is still in denial about 9/11?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The 1776 experiment has failed Posted by: billwald
» RE: The 1776 experiment has failed Posted by: nochicagoboys
Money is Power
Posted by: Southern Gal on Feb 12, 2008 9:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These South and Central American countries have figured out that they need control of their money to control their lives. The people of this country also need control of their money, their lives and their government. Now that the powers that be have figured out that we are in a recession, the stock market is jumping around, the housing market has tanked, the credit card industry fiasco looms on the horizon and the people didn't spend enough money over Christmas, the governement proposes incentives to get people back to spending. You have the power of how you spend your money. For example you have been asked to spend your incentive money to stimulate the economy. Save that money or use if for necessities. The White House, Congress and the stock market react when people stop spending their money. Our whole economy is based on your spending your money on things that you don't really need and your incurring debt. Your money is the only power that you have in this corporate controlled country and economy. If enough people exert this power of self control of their money there will be a reaction from the government and corporate America. Will people lose jobs if you save your money? Will the economy suffer more downturn if you save your money? Will the economy get bad enough that the government will have to respond? Just how bad will it get before the government will have to respond to we the people? Money and use of money wields power when nothing else can.I'm feeling very cynical today and without hope of any real change in this country through our Presidential and Congressional elections and business as usual.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good comment. Posted by: rockpicker
Very concerning
Posted by: g50 on Feb 12, 2008 10:09 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I admit that I prefer my radical academics to be European, so I guess I am a kind of Chomsky skeptic.

But I am having a WTF moment. He says that in Bolivia, the Euro minority owns the land that's got the oil, and the indigenous majority is only doing the "proper" thing by appropriating these resources for the national community.

I am initially uncomfortable with this for reasons of private property - taking people's wealth is stealing, though obviously this wouldn't be the first time that happened.

But it becomes clear to me what I am thinking when an analogy comes to me. I live along the shores of the great lakes. There is a persistent fear that people in the prairie, the west, and the south - who have got themselves into a bit of a pickle because there isn't enough water in the long run - will run big pipes and drain the lakes. And by way of Chomsky's logic, that this kind of appropriation of resources for the broader political community and opposing the local claims to ownership, it is perfectly justified to drain the great lakes to satisfy thirst in other parts of the country.

In my opinion, this is a somewhat appropriate analogy. And in both cases, the whole notion seems wrong. Criminal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Talk is cheap! Posted by: Cathyc
» Great post (idiot) Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: Very concerning Posted by: bigbad
» RE: Very concerning Posted by: g50
» RE: Very concerning Posted by: Boatboy
» RE: Very concerning Posted by: Kuressaare
World Bank to force Iraq to end food rations program
Posted by: sarahk on Feb 12, 2008 10:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A particulary nasty example of the World Bank's meddling is it's insistance that Iraq end by June the food rations program that most Iraqi families depend on for survival. (On the Alternet's War in Iraq page there is a small article on this.)

I can't imagine why the World Bank thinks that causing malnutrion for Iraqis is a good thing. Perhaps they are stupid and think that the food rations are a "crutch" and keep the Iraqis from being self-sufficient. This was the view of the CPA idiots as detailed in the book "Life in the Emerald City".
Or maybe they are interested in keeping Iraq in turmoil by using food shortages as a weapon of destabilization.
The end result will certainly be death by malnutrion of many children-as children always die first when food shortages happen.

I will be writing letters to the World Bank and to the Iraqi PM in protest. It may not do any good, but they need to know that not all US citizens think that ending the Iraqi food rations is a good idea.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No Justice No Peace
Posted by: sofla100 on Feb 12, 2008 3:14 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So-called "private property" in S. America, consists primarily of expropriated land of indigenous peoples of the region. Stolen by Spanish conquistadors and later, more of it stolen by a ruling elite that owns and controls most of these countries. In Venezuela, clear title to millions of pieces of property never even really existed. It was just that, if you went on this land, you were going to be shot and killed by the "owners" private militia. And, that's the way it still is in Brazil. Criminals steal the property, turn the people into minimum wage dogs and then use the government or private armies to act as "enforcers." More recently in the historical cycle, it's using American forces, such as American military advisers and American weapons to control the people. To feed the right wing goons and death squads. For America, the stripped natural resources and the slave labor are the motivating factor, along with a belief that the indegenous people, the Indians are somehow inferior.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

___Chomsky's Relevancy___
Posted by: MobileSucks on Feb 12, 2008 4:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Something incredible to me was the reaction an article which brought up Chomsky's position on 9-11 received. It was here on Alternet awhile back. Chomsky does not subscribe to the notion that 9-11 was "an inside job". Yes, that's right. OH MY GOD!! Well, that's it for Chomsky. He's worthless now. "Chomsky is irrelevant" some posters said. I was amazed and depressed at how many of these people, who are to me obviously intelligent and with decent political views, could dismiss Chomsky entirely.

I'll just say this: Even if Chomsky turned out to be wrong about 9-11 somehow (and it was planned and carried out by the Bush administration or people in our government) -even if he was wrong on that, he is still our best and most useful critic of US power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ___Chomsky's Relevancy___ Posted by: fringedweller
» RE: ___Chomsky's Relevancy___ Posted by: sekfetenmet
Thank you
Posted by: thelostsailor on Feb 12, 2008 5:50 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for more Chomsky thoughts. His thoughts are always big and he usually has all the angles covered. He's one of the few people that can openly criticize our government and still make it to, even some corporate, print.
Why can't we get this guy as president???!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tariffs
Posted by: Ardie on Feb 12, 2008 6:33 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Both Great Britain and the U.S. became economic powerhouses in the 19th by using tariffs to protect fledgling industries at home. Then when they became economically strong--they sold the scatology of free markets. NAFTA, for example, is an attempt of strong countries to make smaller countries weak, so they can never compete. The trick is to give the U.S. the highway fico and impose huge tariffs on anything from the U.S. Brazil is doing it. Japan and Korea did it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chomsky
Posted by: Dboy on Feb 13, 2008 12:27 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I figured this would be a good thread to ask this question in. For anyone who has studied Chomsky, who hopefully has deep knowledge of him..I'd like to know if Chomsky is such a radical, why has he not been shut down yet? How can he hold his MIT position if he is such a threat? Is there somebody behind him? Having read his original articles back to the 1970's, it seems to me he's legit. Am I missing something? Who is protecting him?

dboy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

globalization and democracy: some basics
Posted by: Herman on Feb 15, 2008 8:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17777.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

not sure the money elite in Asia and South America any better
Posted by: whealeydj on Feb 15, 2008 9:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It may feel good for I-told-you-so American leftists to rejoice at the demise of American power due to wasteful profligacy of military spending, but I am not convinced things will be better under dominance of economic elites in South America and Asia...and they might be worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

salamah.mahdi@gmail.com
Posted by: salamah on Feb 16, 2008 12:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chomsky forgot the Hydro-Carbon Bourse that Iran is trying to set up to get the crude oil sales out of Wall Street and the City of London. Sooner than later, a parallel United Nations will also be set up. Remember what the Japanese Ambassador to the League of Nations called this predecessor of the UN. He called the League of Nations a "TALKING SHOP" run by Great Britain and France, all WHITES! Good riddance then, good riddance soon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Classic Chomsky!
Posted by: Ipsi Dixit on Feb 18, 2008 9:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As usual, a brilliant - and brilliantly understated - analysis by Chomsky. Hits the mark every time!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]