The Global Economic Crisis. The Great Depression of the XXI Century

Ever wonder why Michel Chossudovsky at Global Research in Canada never writes anything about Global Law, the Global System or the Global Religion? Do a keyword search at his website and see exactly how many articles he's written using the word "communitarian." Like revolutionary Tea Party founder Ron Paul, he never mentions it to his readers as part of his explanations or objections to globalization. Like Paul over on the extreme right, Global Researchers on the left write collaborative books on "the complex causes" of the economic crisis without ever once explaining the political theory behind the emerging economic system.

What continues to amaze me is how many "patriot" Americans still advertise these fakes. I used to refer to them as a source and many of their links are on my web pages. Like the Jones cartel, many of the disinformation experts have legitimate information at their sites.

"The complex causes as well as the devastating consequences of the economic crisis are carefully scrutinized with contributions from Ellen Brown, Tom Burghardt, Michel Chossudovsky, Richard C. Cook, Shamus Cooke, John Bellamy Foster, Michael Hudson, Tanya Cariina Hsu, Fred Magdoff, Andrew Gavin Marshall, James Petras, Peter Phillips, Peter Dale Scott, Bill Van Auken, Claudia von Werlhof and Mike Whitney." By Michel Chossudovsky and Andrew Gavin Marshall
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19025

I began a search for the contributing authors, starting with LA attorney Ellen Brown (who coincidentally is the topic of a Peter Myer's email forward today) . The first return was to a familiar source, one whose contributions to anti communitarian studies is well established. I especially appreciate the way this article explains how easily the sly communitarian solution is introduced in all these brilliant "exposes." (There were also many people who thought I would link favorably to this propaganda film.)

Zeitgeist Addendum: Toward a Technocratic, Communitarian, Cybernated Society

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Blog/?p=685

Next I looked up Tom Burghardt. Can't find him writing about it either, but his search led me to a recent Prison Planet.tv review of Jones' new documentary Invisible Empire: "The most contemporary branch of the agenda to enforce neo-feudalism and top-down communitarianism, in total hostility to the notion of true freedom and individuality – the phony environmentalist movement – which is driven by the global warming fraud, is also blown wide open." It appears the writers at Alex Jones' media cartel are slipping it in now the same way Clinton does! heh. http://stevenjohnhibbs.wordpress.com/category/clinton-regime/

Next I looked up Michel Chossudovsky and it led me back to this article, Bolivia: National Revolution and "Communitarian Socialism" by Federico Fuentes, a "frequent contributor" at globalresearch.ca: "The goal of the "historic project" of the indigenous peoples and popular movements is "a social formation where large private property of the means of production will given way to communitarian social property; the political power of the `colonial-imperialist oligarchic bloc' will be substituted by the revolutionary construction of a new power by the 'indigenous nations, revolutionary classes and urban sector bloc'."http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13339

Next I looked up Richard C. Cook, a former federal analyst who worked for 21 years for the U.S. Treasury. He writes zero about communitarian economics.

Then I found this looking for Shamus Cooke:

At the People’s World Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, the consistent message is ecological, indigenous, communitarian and anti-corporate. The great majority of speakers sound radical and have the support of the thousands of attendees. The message is welcome at the top, in the person of Evo Morales, the indigenous Aymara former farmer and union organizer who is Bolivia’s president

The World At 4 Degrees Celsius:
Last Call On Climate (PDF)
By Andrew Glikson

www.countercurrents.org/glikson210410.pdf

and this too:

The Military's War On The Earth: By Linda Greene

www.bloomingtonalternative.com/articles/2010/02/21/10311
sent by OrpRam since 76 days 3 hours 3 minutes

Use as many low-energy lightbulbs as you like, turn down the thermostat and drive a hybrid car, but whatever you do as an individual -- indeed, the sum of what we all do for the environment -- does almost nothing to alleviate the U.S. military's destruction of the earth. --- --- In ‘The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism’, Barry Sanders writes that like other capitalist institutions, "each military branch ... must grow larger and fatter each year; expansion is the life blood of imperialism." --- Further, Sanders asserts, "The military can brook limits of no kind whatsoever. ... The Pentagon conducts its business behind very thick and very closed doors. It writes its own rules and either follows them or violates them, depending on the situation." --- Almost all "military numbers remain off of official reports, secret and out of sight." Sanders obtained the information he cites in the book by gleaning what he could from "arcane reports" and obscure Web sites belonging to the Department of Defense and Government Accounting Office, plus books and articles. --- Sanders describes, in horrifying detail, how the military is "the largest single source of pollution in this country and in the world: the United States military -- in particular the military in its most ferocious and stepped-up mode -- namely, the military at war." --- He goes on to say, "When we declare war on a foreign nation, we now also declare war on the Earth, on the soil and plants and animals, the water and wind and people in the most far-reaching and deeply infecting ways." --- --- --- "Sanders has a solution to the environmental devastation the military causes: Banning War." --- This goal, Sanders says, can be achieved if "our efforts ... expand exponentially, in a communitarian movement around the globe the likes of which no one has ever witnessed, one that refuses to make compromises about a basic respect for life." - "In the 21st century the military is the most sacrosanct institution in our country." - So far, almost no one has dared to criticize its policies and practices, let alone its budget. --- That silence, Sanders insists, must end.

John Bellamy Foster is a Marxist professor of Sociology at UO, Eugene. (You'd think this guy would know what communitarianism is.) http://sociology.uoregon.edu/faculty/foster.php

Michael Hudson is a former Wall Street analyst who writes nothing about communitarianism.

Tanya Cariina Hsu is a British political analyst who apparently has no idea what political communitarianism is.

Fred Magdoff is a professor of plant and soil science who has no idea what it is either. He did lead me to this article at Monthly Review (where the above mentioned Foster is editor) http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2009/douzinas290509.html:

The individualism of universal principles forgets that every person is a world and comes into existence in common with others, that we are all in community. Being in common is an integral part of being self: self is exposed to the other, it is posed in exteriority, the other is part of the intimacy of self. Before me comes the (m)other. I am I because the other and language has called me 'you', 'Costas'. My face is always exposed to others, always turned toward an other and faced by him or her never facing myself. On the other hand, being in community with others is the opposite of the communitarian common being or belonging to an essential community. Most communitarians define community through the commonality of tradition, history and culture, the various past crystallisations whose inescapable weight determines present possibilities. The essence of the communitarian community is often to compel or 'allow' people to find their 'essence', common 'humanity' now defined as the spirit of tradition, or the nation, religion, the people, the leader. We have to follow traditional values and exclude what is alien and other. Community as communion accepts human rights only to the extent that they help submerge the I into the We, all the way till death, the point of 'absolute communion' with dead tradition.⁶

Andrew Gavin Marshall published an article last month called Global Oppression: Transnational Security State, and he never mentions it once. http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=67&contentid=6833

James Petras is very familiar with the word communitarianism; in fact he openly discussed the Chilean transition to a communitarian society in a book he wrote in 1969: http://petras.lahaine.org/articulo.php?p=1758

Not sure is this is the same Peter Phillips, but this one teaches economics at UToronto and studies communitarian integration procedures and methodology

Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat and professor at Berekley who writes books about communitarians, but apparently he doesn't know that's what they're called yet. http://www.peterdalescott.net/q.html

Bill Van Auken has an article at the World Socialist Website that I linked to from the ACL's Community Policing page http://nord.twu.net/acl/commpolicing.html

Claudia von Werlhof is a German sociologist who wrote The Interconnectedness of All Being: A New Spirituality for A New Civilization. A student of Gramsci?, she understands the "new paradigm shift" but doesn't use the word that describes it, instead she tells us:

In this context, Renate Genth (2002) says that we need a new “politics of civilization”, since we are experiencing a “civilization crisis”. This new politics of civilization has to focus on a new relationship to nature, a new relationship between the sexes, a new relationship between the generations, and a new relationship to “the transcendent”. The transcendent generally means religious needs and our relationship to death. I would say that the relationship to the transcendent is the relationship to earth spirituality.

Mike Whitney is a writer at counterpunch http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney10162008.html, here's a blog that republished one of Whitney's articles where the owner links to Amitai Etzioni under the heading of an "Independent Thinker" (hahhahah!)

http://thecommons4change.blogspot.com/2005/03/mike-whitney-scalia-and-opus-dei.html

Israel may face UN court ruling on Gaza conflict

Communitarian Network founder Amitai Etzioni is a leading voice in the growing consensus over the ineffectiveness of the UN's soft power. To centrist PeaceHawks like Etzioni, the need to combine the authority of the UN with the military and financial power of the USA is the most pressing global security issue in the world.

What if the Zionist state and their entire history of inhumane attacks on Arab civilians was just one of many British theosophical tools used to manipulate human social evolution into a British-Dutch synthesized world government system? There is enough evidence pointing in that direction to justify further inquiry.

Are there other possible solutions to the Hegelian conflict in Gaza besides taking the case before the UN court?

Yes, there are. We don't need to grant the UN Court Supreme Communitarian powers over Israel. The United States funds Zionism. The only reason communist Israel ever survived was the same reason the communist USSR survived: American tax dollars. Israel has the military power to destroy Gaza because the US people give it to them (and it has the nuclear power because Zionist spies steal American military secrets). Wouldn't cutting off their automatic, yearly US tax money supply (and paying closer attention to Israeli dual nationals working in US Top Security areas) be a lot more cost and life efficient than using more US tax dollars and more US-NATO soldiers to enforce a UN ruling that has no hard authority without our military and tax backing?

Are we all so gullible that we will finance senseless wars of destruction and then finance the interventions to stop the senseless wars, interventions that will in turn usurp our supreme national law and place us all under the control of a global communitarian justice system? Why would free, educated people appoint the same PeaceHawks who start and manage wars of aggression to write the global peace process?

The Case Against Pinochet was the first big test of UN Communitarian Supremacy of law. The UN's Case Against Israel is not pilot test. It's the real deal.

From Peter Meyer's elist:

(3) Israel may face UN court ruling on Gaza conflict

From: Kenneth Rasmusson Date: 14.01.2009 03:13 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/14/israel-gaza-un-court-palestine

14 January 2009

Israel may face UN court ruling on legality of Gaza conflict

by Afua Hirsch, legal affairs correspondent

Israel faces the prospect of intervention by international courts amid growing calls that its actions in Gaza are a violation of world humanitarian and criminal law.

The UN general assembly, which is meeting this week to discuss the issue, will consider requesting an advisory opinion from the international court of justice, the Guardian has learned.

"There is a well-grounded view that both the initial attacks on Gaza and the tactics being used by Israel are serious violations of the UN charter, the Geneva conventions, international law and international humanitarian law," said Richard Falk, the UN's special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories and professor emeritus of international law at Princeton University.

{The surname Falk also just happens to be Etzioni's German birth name ~ Niki}

"There is a consensus among independent legal experts that Israel is an occupying power and is therefore bound by the duties set out in the fourth Geneva convention," Falk added. "The arguments that Israel's blockade is a form of prohibited collective punishment, and that it is in breach of its duty to ensure the population has sufficient food and healthcare as the occupying power, are very strong."

A Foreign Office source confirmed the UK would consider backing calls for a reference to the ICJ. "It's definitely on the table," the source said. "We have already called for an investigation and are looking at all evidence and allegations."

An open letter to the prime minister signed by prominent international lawyers and published in today's Guardian states: "The United Kingdom government ... has a duty under international law to exert its influence to stop violations of international humanitarian law in the current conflict between Israel and Hamas."

The letter argues that Israel has violated principles of humanitarian law, including launching attacks directly aimed at civilians and failing to discriminate between civilians and combatants.

The letter follows condemnation earlier this week from leading QCs of Israel's action as a violation of international law, and a vote by the UN's human rights council on Monday on a resolution condemning the ongoing Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip.

"The blockade of humanitarian relief, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, and preventing access to basic necessities such as food and fuel are prima facie war crimes," a group of leading QCs and academics, including Michael Mansfield QC and Sir Geoffrey Bindman, wrote in a letter to the Sunday Times.

Israel has already been found to have violated its obligations in international law by a previous advisory opinion of the ICJ, and is likely to vigorously contest arguments that it is an occupying power. It previously stated that occupation ceased after disengagement from Gaza in 2005.

Its stance raises questions as to the utility of an advisory opinion by the ICJ after Israel rejected its finding in a previous case, which found the wall being constructed in the Palestinian territories to be a violation of Israel's obligations under international humanitarian law.

Questions are also being raised as to whether the international criminal court, which deals with war crimes and crimes against humanity, would have any jurisdiction to hear cases against perpetrators of the alleged crimes on both sides of the conflict. Neither Israel nor the Palestinian territories are signatories to the Rome statute, which brings states within the jurisdiction of the ICC.

More likely, experts say, is the establishment of ad-hoc tribunals of the kind created to deal with the war in the former Yugoslavia and the genocide in Rwanda.

"If there were the political will there could be an ad-hoc tribunal established to hear allegations of war crimes," Falk said. "This could be done by the general assembly acting under article 22 of the UN charter which gives them the authority to establish subsidiary bodies."

Is the financial crisis leading to a Global Marshall Plan?

Chris Bieber just sent out an email about President Bush's new idea how to spend some of the $700 billion bailout.

"The administration plans to spend $250 billion of the $700 billion government rescue program passed by Congress on Oct. 3 to make stock purchases this year. The first purchases will be in nine large banks, officials said. The industry and government officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the details were yet to be formally released.

"The decision represents a remarkable turnaround for the $700 billion rescue program, already the largest bailout in U.S. history. As the plan sped through Congress, the administration said the money was needed to purchase bad mortgage-related assets that are weighing on the books of financial institutions, never mentioning direct stock purchases.

"However, as the financial crisis gained new intensity last week, sending U.S. stocks down by a record amount, the administration decided to shift focus and adopt a bolder program modeled more along the lines of bank rescue efforts being put together in Britain and other European countries."http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown

Amitai Etzioni says we need to seek a "balance" between the unfettered rights of the individual and the rights of the community, and that the world needs a new global architecture. His book, "From Empire to Community" is now being used to train top US military professionals. But we don't need to know anything about that, right?

Here's The Global Marshall Plan to "Balance the World"
http://www.globalmarshallplan.org/

Global Marshall Plan
http://sustsci.aaas.org/content.html?contentid=692
Submitted By: Ralf Klemens Stappen
Contact Person: Franz Josef Rademacher, Clube of Rome
Contact Email: info@globalmarshallplan.org

"Project Description: As a result of economic globalization and driven by the information technology revolution, the world-wide economic system is unleashed by factors prescribed by nations. The pre-eminence of policy becomes lost, because the core structures thereof remain either national or continental, but are never global. The rapid growth of the world's population is aggressively moving towards the 10 billion-mark and pushing hundreds of millions of people into the resource-focused lifestyles of the major industrialized nations. The consequences of these effects can prove to be a strain on our ecological systems.

"Representatives from economic politics, science, media and non-government organizations around the world and across all party lines therefore met in 2003 to begin the Global Marshall Plan Initiative. Included in this group are representatives from the Club of Rome, the Eco-Social Forum, ATTAC, BUND and churches, as well as members of the Federal Association for Economic Development and Foreign Trade, UN organizations, the European Parliament, and many other national parliaments.

"It is our goal to establish a world-wide economic, political and civil society system for a new era of cooperation which will achieve global security, peace and prosperity for everyone. The Global Marshall Plan is modelled after the success of the United States' Marshall Plan for Europe after the second world war and applies the positive experiences of the European Union expansion process to the rest of the world.

The Global Marshall Plan combines a pragmatic concept for achieving the Millennium Development Goals with the long-term perspective of a worldwide Eco-social market economy as the framework of global order. This presumes that the richer countries are ready to co-finance development in financially poorer countries, which would lead to a global economic miracle.

Project Website: http://www.globalmarshallplan.org
Project Publication:
Paper: Franz Josef Rademacher. 2004. "Global Marshall Plan: A Planetary Contract for a Worldwide Eco-Social Market Economy." Hamburg: Global Marshall Plan Initiative.

"The text provides considerations on a Global Marshall Plan in terms of a Planetary Contract, i.e. in response to the difficult situation of world politics at the beginning of the new century. This Contract is intended as a step towards a global Eco-Social Market Economy, which we regard as an attractive win-win alternative in compliance with the idea of a sustainable development, versus the extensively unregulated globalization processes prevalent today." {boldface added ~ Niki}

Looked through the long list of supporters and organizations supporting the Global Marshall Plan and almost all of them are German. I guess that's because the Germans are the experts on how the Marshall Plan was implemented. Every now and then I hear from someone who's been to Germany lately, and they tell me their society has been completely communitarianized, far beyond what can be noticed in the US. I'm guessing Germany was a pilot test of many of the new behavior modifications. We all have to be taught to become responsible, eco aware, global citizens, and we must be properly trained how to CHANGE our outdated notions of national and individual sovereignty and to respect and OBEY the new global laws that protect the whole planet.

History of the European Marshall Plan: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/marshall/

In related news, "On Thursday at the World Conservation Congress in Barcelona, Spain, WWF and Indonesian authorities announced a political agreement – signed September 18 in the Indonesian capital Jakarata between all 10 governors on the island and four federal ministers – to "agree to save and conserve the ecosystem of Sumatra Island."" (because it's a "global problem") http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/agreement-forged-to-save-vanishing-sumatran-forests/

And if you ever wondered why the highly respected and trusted New York Times never tells you anything about communitarian programs, policies or laws... go poke around the dot earth blog and you'll see exactly what kinds of policy changes the NYT supports.

Creating a Communitarian North American Union (NAU)

It's finally dipping below zero.

The door will look like this for the rest of the winter... it's kind of a good idea to keep an axe handy.

Nobody's needed a flashlight around here for a week.

When I have time, I take every link I see to a website that claims to fully explain the North American Union (NAU). I search these sites looking for other global government researchers who identify Communitarianism as the power structure for the emerging supra-national synthesis. This is a mostly frustrating endeavor. As more and more "experts" on globalization and the NAU come into the "fray" (as I'm beginning to see the research community), the reality of communitarianism as the foundation for the entire new system is buried even deeper under the hoards of materials devoted to "exposing the New World Order." I must have visited a million websites since 1999, and I utilize their site search engines. I can say that the number of search returns for the word "communitarianis" has significantly increased in the past eight (almost nine) years. But, even with a current 371,000 returns on google, most "expose" websites have nothing onsite using that term. Government websites using the term are also rare. The best place to find it are in upper academia and European governments in the EU.

This continuing obscurity in publications geared toward American readers is unbelievable. Communitaranism is the legal system. It's a primary ingrediant in the globalist's soup; it's the name of the recipie. I'm getting suspicious in my old age, and I'm slowly beginning to understand how the emerging government planted their disinformation operatives a long time ago, because I think the whole anti-globalist movement operates like a perfectly contrived Hegelian scenario.

The "left" side of the opposition leads the street protests and anti-WTO rallys. It was a leftist coalition of professional agitators that shut down the ministerial meetings in November, 1999. The left's variety of street theatre and actions were planned by an organization called DAN, the Direct Action Network. Very professional and efficent, DAN trained American volunteers in numerous actions designed to disrupt and "shut down the WTO." Part of the loosely connected but highly organized group were the National Lawyers Guild (who trained witnesses), the human chains (who locked arms around the convention center), the human barricades (who laid down in the intersections), and last but not least, the London and Eugene anarchists (who destroyed the property of carefully selected corporate stores that profit from slave labor).

The literature produced by the left will not explain that the WTO is a communitarian court, set up as a temporary justice system prior to NAU regionalisation and a new NAU parliment.

The "right" side of the opposition also leads their people in street protests, trains them to shut down abortion clinic actions, and they sponsor anti-SPP/NAU rallys. They are not nearly as professionally trained, organized or supported as is the left. The "right" includes the John Birchers (the most visable opponets of the U.N. since their inception) , the Libertarians (who are also pro-U.N. globalists), the Free American, the World Net Daily, the Constitution Party (who want to restore a Biblical constitution), the Klammath Bucket Brigades and the Sawgrass Rebellion (both exceptions to the unorganized reference above), Stop Agenda 21, the National Rifle Association, Stop the Trans-Texas Corridor, the Minutemen, We the People Foundation and, my all-time favorite, Stop the NAU.

In all the literature produced by the right, only a handful of researchers will define the emerging NAU justice system as communitarian law.

The NRA has two very good articles on specific balancing acts under communitarian law (on communitarianism and the 2nd amendment). Devvy Kidd, Berit Kjos, Charlotte Iserbyt, Detective Phillip Worts, Joan Veon, Michael Shaw, Darren Weeks, Nancy Levant, Chris Gerner, and Bobby Garner have all written original articles or books that include the term communitarianism (some more than others). Bobby, Darren , Chris, Berit and Nancy have written numerous original articles explaing communitarian thinking in great detail. But for the most part, very few writers on the right seem willing to do more than mention it once or twice.

Lately, very weird things have started happening, not the least being my communitarian law research was plagiarized by Dave Hodges, Director of the Arizona Constitution Party, (I don't include his articles on communitarian law in the above list of researchers for obvious reasons). This could mean several things, all of them seeming way too "cloak and dagger" for me to seriously consider... but I do plan to meet these obstacles as if I knew their game. I've also met a bunch of new people, and apparently not all of them are who or what they claim to be either.

Then there's this super weird (even for me!) group of Fusionsts at leftrightunite.com. Nord calls them the borg, and they keep trying to engage me in boring dialectical arguments. Terry Hayfield, their leader, is a Fusionist associated with the rightwing Birchers and leftwing labor, who uses 666 in his email address. His twist on us outright calls our studying communitarianism WRONG, not because he knows more or differently about communitarianism and can dispute our thesis, but because he's an expert on Permanent Revolution and Marxist economic theory. He refuses to even discuss communitarianism because it's a waste of his expert time. He also seems to think him and I are in some kind of an undergraduate contest of egos, defending and arguing over other people's theories. He never addresses mine and Nordica's original and published Hegelian-communitarian thesis, or our original, undisputed conclusion. He prefers instead to insist that I am a just stubborn, uncompromising, selfish idiot, and an anti-semitic to boot. Now, so does his borg. It's creepy, to say the least.

As more sites pick up on my article Dialectical Freedom, I should expect more weirdness. And in the funny way that this old world works, all this new harassment has inspired me to do a complete assessment of the leading Western and English speaking theorists writing about the NAU, the Bilderberg, the G-8, the U.N., the Fed, the IRS, the CFR, the TR, and CAFTA, in order to determine which ones actually talk about the emerging system.

Bur first Nordica and I are going to revise 2020 for a 2008 edition that includes a whole new section on international communitarianism. Currently ordered books should be going out by next Monday, I am so sorry but we've had one horrible delay after another; if anyone knows a good, reliable printer in Anchorage or even online, please let us know. Sure with I knew how to put it online for download ordering, Nordica does but she's swamped with work and the baby.

I'm also thinking about building my place into an anticommunitarian school and offer once in a lifetime "seminars" in Alaska. I'll invite folks to study with us, share their stories, write articles and books and take side trips exploring our wilderness neighborhood. I can build GerTees for housing our guests, travel GerTees for overnight backcountry expeditions (and I found a guy with draft horses) a big meeting GerTee tha seats 1oo+ people, and finally build a GerTee bathhouse/sweat lodge. I want to call it GerTeeville. That nice WTC architect who wrote me about them hated the name, but I like sounding like a character out of Horton Hears a Who.