G8

C B

No I'm not a member unfortunatly

and if you are considering going to protest then I hope you get horsewhipped by the Italian police.

If you really want to fly abroad to affect global change spend a few months in sub-Saharan Africa doing something positive.

Otherwise just crawl back under the rock you came out of.

rowan

whoa there tiger. Not trying to start a mud flaming match. Just want to find other people going to Genoa so I can talk to 'em. There's three bus loads of people leaving Ireland next week, so I'm thinking maybe some of 'em might be on boards.ie.

ps. in January I spent 3 weeks in Djohong, Cameroon treating local people for intestinal parasites - ankylostoma, schistosoma mansoni and taenia saginata. No running water, no electricity, sleeping in mud huts etc. Does that count? Ask Evil Phil for confirmation.

C B

Well done, but what exactly are you and your friends going to do in Genoa?

Canaboid

More than you CB obviously.
If you're happy with the way the world is developing then good for you, go work for the IMF or OECD.

C B

O.K. can you please tell me what specific difficulties you have with the operations of the IMF, the World Bank, the OECD, G8 or other organisations?

Can you please tell me how smashing windows will make the world a better place?

Can you tell me how you want the world to develop? and why you believe you have a mandate to force development in that direction?

Evil Phil

'tis confirmed.

I'm not going to get into a long rambling post about the IMF and the World Trade Orginasation (who are as powerful, if not more so, as the United Nations). I would like to go to and I just might do. Just to see what it's like. I'm also starting to look into Reclaim the Streets, does anybody know anything about them?

Oh and CB, stop being a muppet. People have a right to decide how our (that's OUR) world develops. It is our world after all.

C B

Did I say that people didn't have a right to voice an opinion?
We do however live in a democracy and smashing window will not get you anywhere.

Please will somebody tell me what kind of world people want to live in and why the IMF etc. is stopping them.

Evil Phil

Most of the third world live in poverty as their contries try to pay back unpayable debt's to the IMF. All of the worlds famines this century have been the result of economics, not crop failures. Why, because the IMF want the debt paid. Corporations and those that represent them, like the IMF or the World Trade Organisation place profits and profit-making entities before human beings. We do not elect the IMF or the WTO but they have a huge impact on our lives and the planet. This is not right. Some of the coporations they protect have budgets larger then the budgets of the contries they exploit. This is why I have a problem with the IMF and the WTO.

I want to live in a world where people come before profits.

Puck

Well said Phil! Be careful though, keep talking like that and you'll lose your evil image.

---

John (yes THE John!)
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government."

JustHalf

But Evil Phil, there's also the problem of civil wars and militarisation of these countries. In some, what little money they have remaining goes to war.

BTW, *all* countries are in debt. It's really weird that - but the third world countries are being stiffled by it.

But sure, if that's what the capitalist society deems correct, then it must be right?

I'd just like to note that I have no problem with a Capitalist economic model... however, I do have a problem when an economic model overides our social responibilities, in a local, national or global community.

Evil Phil

The wars and militarisation, it could be argued, are just another example of the misery caused by the debt. Why don't we have the same situation in the first world? Because we have too much to loose. The third world don't.

I don't have a problem with capitalism on a whole, just on a most. When the cost of that system is in human misery something must be wrong. I know there is no immediate fix for this problem but we do need to start working towards one. The problems in the third world have the same cause as the environmental problems the rest of the world is experiencing. We're running out of time here so it's time to do something about it. It the G8 leaders face thousands of preacful protester's (regardless of the few rioters the corporate owned media focus on) every time they meet then at least they're made aware of how unpopular they are becoming, and this will affect change.

We don't just live in a capitalist society, we live in a democracy. Who elected the IMF?!


[This message has been edited by Evil Phil (edited 06-07-2001).]

Ri-ra

I'm with Evil Phil on this: it is a choice between democracy and global capitalism. One gives us a say, the other doesn't.

The window-smashing is more complex. If the news corporations focus on it in order to push an agenda, then the overall aim of that coverage is to tarnish the position of any and all protestors.

Having said that, window-smashing gets attention that otherwise might not be paid to the issue, and the other factions of the protest movement get coverage by a) distancing themselves from the "rioters", and b) sanely putting forward their view as they distance themselves from the "extremists." It's playing the media at their own game, and BOTH sides are necessary to the movement.

[This message has been edited by Ri-ra (edited 06-07-2001).]

Celt

Phil CB wasnt disagreeing with you, he was asking how rioting is going to help?

Greenbean

Peacefull demonstrations work because they appeal to the common and decent people in society. In effect you start to change the opinions of a HUGE silent majority.

Smash a window for cheap publicity and your ideas can easily be associated with violence and destruction (and will eagerly be done so). Smoke dope up a tree, wear hippy clothes, and you can be derided as a naive idealist. What you really want is the average and normal person protesting - the man in the suit, the nurses, the worker men; these are the real people to target to obtain change. A clique society of "cool" people who "care" stays that way; clique.

The peacefull demonstrations win - each year they gain more support as they are so obviously fair and rational and the ideas associated with them are only good ones.

DadaKopf

But when the efficacy of peaceful protest is futile???

bugler

CB makes me laugh.He obviously lives in a fantasy land, where the US and the rest of the Western World are good and noble, who wouldn't do anything against the interest of humans no matter their race or creed. CB, if you don't know why people have problems with the IMF et al, then may I strongly suggest you go read some alternative press.

No doubt you were born and raised with a silver spoon in your mouth, your lack of savvy concerning world (and local for that matter) affairs is astounding. Have you ever considered that people other than yourself and people like you might be affected by the IMF etc? Despite what you might think, the world does not revolve around you, and just because everything is ok with you doesn't mean the world is working just fine.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">"Debt is an efficient tool. It ensures access to other peoples' raw materials and infrastructure on the cheapest possible terms. Dozens of countries must compete for shrinking export markets and can export only a limited range of products because of Northern protectionism and their lack of cash to invest in diversification. Market saturation ensues, reducing exporters' income to a bare minimum while the North enjoys huge savings. The IMF cannot seem to understand that investing in ... a healthy, well-fed, literate population ... is the most intelligent economic choice a country can make."</font>

-- Susan George, A Fate Worse Than Debt, (New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1990)

The IMF lends money to poor countries, sounds great doesn't it? Except of course they have imposed conditions on this lending. Such as ensuring that the governments in question are required to cut back on social spending.So, no new schools or new health care facilities for you! The fact that a huge number of these countries do not have proper democratic governments (lets face it, who has?) means that the money goes off to other ends.Such as maybe luring foreign investors, or paying for nice expensive wars.

Look here:

The Structural Adjustment policies of the IMF also means that these countries must export more in order to raise enough money to pay off the debts in a timely manner.
Because there are so many nations being asked or forced into the global market place -- before they are economically and socially stable and ready -- it is like a big price war.
The resources then become even more cheaper from the poorer regions (which favors consumers in the West).
Governments then need to increase exports (by further reducing costs, making the resources even cheaper etc) just to keep their currencies stable (which may not be sustainable, either).
Governments therefore must:
*spend less
*reduce consumption
*remove or decrease financial regulations
and so on.

Over time then:
the value of labor decreases
capital flows become more volatile
and we get into a spiralling race to the bottom.
These nations are then told to peg their currencies to the dollar. But keeping the exchange rate stable is costly due to measures such as increased interest rates etc.
Investors obviously concerned about their assets and interests can then pull out very easily if things get tough.
In worst cases capital flight can lead to economic collapses like we have seen in the Asian/global financial crisis of 1997/98/99, Mexico, Brazil and many other places -- of course, the blame by mainstream media and free trade economists is laid on emerging markets and their government's restrictive or inefficient policies, crony capitalism etc, which is a cruel irony.
Keeping the exchange rates in their favor, by IMF donors, means that the poor nations remain poor, or get even poorer. Even the 1997/98/99 global economic financial crisis around the world can be partly blamed on structural adjustment and overly aggressive and early deregulation for emerging economies.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Competition between companies involved in manufacturing in developing countries is often ruthless. We are seeing what Korten described as 'a race to the bottom. With each passing day it becomes more difficult to obtain contracts from one of the mega-retailers without hiring child labour, cheating workers on overtime pay, imposing merciless quotas, and operating unsafe practices.'"</font>

-- John Madeley, Big Business Poor Peoples; The Impact of Transnational Corporations on the World's Poor.

In basic economic terms, it's well put by J.W Smith, of the 'Institute for Economic Democracy'. He says: "If a society spends one hundred dollars to manufacture a product within its borders, the money that is used to pay for materials, labor and, other costs moves through the economy as each recipient spends it. Due to this multiplier effect, a hundred dollars worth of primary production can add several hundred dollars to the Gross National Product (GNP) of that country. If money is spent in another country, circulation of that money is within the exporting country. This is the reason an industrialized product-exporting/commodity-importing country is wealthy and an undeveloped product-importing/commodity-exporting country is poor."

And of course, the IMF's raison d'etre is to ensure these countries stay exporting their sources of potential wealth.

I'll write plenty more if you want, but I'd much prefer if you became a little more curious and started wondering about the world and those who are not fairing out so well, and found out for yourself why people have problems with the IMF and World Bank. Storming onto a thread making assumptions when you don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about is bad form, really.




[This message has been edited by bugler (edited 06-07-2001).]

Evil Phil

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by WhiteLancer:
Phil CB wasnt disagreeing with you, he was asking how rioting is going to help?</font>

and I replied

rowan

Anyone going to Genoa for G8?

Evil Phil

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DadaKopf:
But when the efficacy of peaceful protest is futile???</font>

But in this case I hope it's not. These affairs are no longer the domain of economists, big businessmen and governments. It's in our domain now, and ordinary people like us are educating themselves. And protesting in anger, and as already said each year the protest gain more support. Something has to change, or we're up the creek without a paddle. The massive starvation of the poor, the huge relocation of peoples to come because of the sea levels rising, mass extinctions and the fact that the planet is already running out of fresh water all point to a massive disaster. This has to be stopped, by us, while we still have the chance. And if peaceful doesn't work we have an alternative!

If you're familiar with escatology <the study of beliefs in the apocolypse> like me, then this has a scary ring to it. It's almost like a battle of Good against Evil. Shame, being Evil used to be so cool.



[This message has been edited by Evil Phil (edited 07-07-2001).]

GreenHell

Nope don't have any agenda with the G8 so I'll just be sitting back and seeing the results of what they get up to.

Shinji

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">But when the efficacy of peaceful protest is futile???</font>

... Then the hell with it, throw some rocks, at least the folks back home can get a good chuckle out of watching the hippies get battered senseless by riot police.

If the world is going to hell in a handbasket, may as well get some quality entertainment out of it, eh?

Ri-ra

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">If the world is going to hell in a handbasket, may as well get some quality entertainment out of it, eh?</font>

Testify, my man!!!

DadaKopf

Well, Rowan, the answer must be 'no'. I do know a couple of people who are going, though. It'll certainly be interesting.

It's a strange kind of irony, I think, in that the more the movement to expose and reform/destroy the World Bank/IMF, the more isolated and secretive they become. Basically because they're not a political institution and they don't have to answer to the public because they don't operate on that kind of popular level.

Of course, Bugler hit the nail on the head about the IMF's shady methods of false structural-developmental aid - of course it's a supranational corporation which ensures that poorer countries' valuable resources (from raw materials to labour) get sucked out into the vacuum that is global capitalism. There are always prominent examples of IMF successes like Uganda - but the authorities always fail to mention human rights abuses and social injustices carried out by president Museveni's government (his brother is widely known to be carrying out his sibling's dirty work).

What I worry about is the way in which the IMF/World Bank, large corporations and Wester governments (but especially the IMF) are placing these provisos on countries to adhere to semblances of liberal democracy. Now, Europe has a strong tradition of it since it's gone through the motions, as has America, but can anyone really expect countries like Iraq, the Balkans, Nigeria, Peru and so on to genuinely understand the system?

One primary necessity for the success of any democracy is that the population understand the system, that they have an affinity for it and desire it. That's straight political theory. The notions of self-determination and global pluralism are pretty defunct if you ask me, given the ruthless nature in which capitalist liberal democracy and its supranational institutions have relieved themselves on the right for a country to run itself the way it wants.

Maybe it would be more historically efficous for the Balkans to go up in flames, for Nigeria to return to tribal conflict, for Peru to scrap a clearly incompatible democratic systsm, for Iraq to continue to be led by a historically familiar form of state leadership - the sultan.

But no, money talks and freedom walks. Simple.

rowan

I'm reminded of that scene in Life of Brian where the woman calls for action to save Brian, and the men sit around and keep talking about how important it is to stop talking and take action.

I take it the answer to my original question is no then...

ConUladh

I have to say I think CB's getting a rough deal here. He obviously assumed that Rowan had a violent agenda (he shouldn't have but he did). No-one bothered to point out to him that he'd got it @rseways, they just called him an idiot and told him to shut up.

Other than that he asked what people's problems were and he got flamed for that as well. Bugler was the only the only one who made an attempt to explain it. He expressed an interest in learning about it, not going to win too many converts if you only listen to people who already know the details.

I'd assume CB has a dod*** history around here, I hope he does cause that's the only justification I can see for his treatment in this thread.

Maybe I'm taking this too seriously but I think what I'm saying is basically right.

bugler

I don't think CB was merely asking for an explanation as to why people had problems with the IMF/World Bank etc.Reading over his posts again, it seems he was sure no-one could give an answer to that, when the reality is that anyone who doesn't know why people are opposed to these organisations has led a very sheltered life

R. Daneel Olivaw

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Evil Phil:
Most of the third world live in poverty as their contries try to pay back unpayable debt's to the IMF. All of the worlds famines this century have been the result of economics, not crop failures. Why, because the IMF want the debt paid. I want to live in a world where people come before profits.</font>

No offence, and I am not trolling, but that is a load of bull****. Did the IMF or whatever cause drought in Ethiopia, in Somalia? Where and how do you figure that "ALL" of the famines are due to IMF activities? To say such inflammatory and baseless things is pretty careless.

R. Daneel Olivaw

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Greenbean:
. In effect you start to change the opinions of a HUGE silent majority.

What you really want is the average and normal person protesting - the man in the suit, the nurses, the worker men; these are the real people to target to obtain change.
B]</font>

And why would these people, the vast majority of the western population, interupt their lives for such tasks as demonstrations. How the hell do you think the world keeps going - the people you refer to are the people that build the roads you march on, the buildings you raid or smash, the hospitals are staffed by those who work and help those who turn to violent protest, through obligation to keep the world from becoming utter anarchy.

Maybe a broader view on you behalf would enable a more balanced opinion: how would it be possible for this silent majority to support protests; I wonder where these protestors get the time and money to demonstrate and effectively tour the world with G8 and so on. Where does the money to travel come from? Jobs? Do they take holidays to do this? If they have jobs, they would need pretty high-paying ones to afford the travel expenses.

But then again, the majority appear not to have to pay for criminal damage to private property. It all seems like they are getting a pretty much free ride on the backs of that silent majority who keep the protestors' world relatviely safe, and in such a state as to ALLOW them to demonstrate. You are given that right and that ability by those who sacrifice a life of philosophical debate as the demonstrators have.

The world would remain in stasis, without any development or social evolution, if capitalism was not performed and used to it's fullest extent, until it has run it's course and new horizons in 50 or 100 years are available.

We would all be simple animals without the essential human need to advance oneself, to progress. Those who lack it are the hangers on of evolution.

Furthermore, you should feel priveleged to live in a democratic society in which you can freely voice your opinion. Look at countries like China and see how the communism thing doesn't work, and creates impossibly wealthy and very few elite. At least here, in western capitalism, you can either go for as much money as you can, we have free education to a graduate level. Or you may decide not to, the choice is up to you. Remember that people were thrown in prison in the more tradtional socialist countries (i.e., National Socialist Party of Germany in world war II), or in Communist Russia or China these days for voicing opinion against the state. Maybe it's just guilt that you feel you need to side with poorer countries, which are poor simply by history. You were born in a rich country. Deal with it.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed is good. Greed works. Greed is right. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed in all its forms - greed for life, money, love, knowledge - has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed - you mark my words – will save... you all.

[This message has been edited by R. Daneel Olivaw (edited 09-07-2001).]

Von

Where do you all you fresh faced swivel chair monkeys get your political opinions from? Sky News? The Sun? The man in the pub? Where?

C B

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bugler:
CB makes me laugh.He obviously lives in a fantasy land, CB, if you don't know why people have problems with the IMF et al, then may I strongly suggest you go read some alternative press.

No doubt you were born and raised with a silver spoon in your mouth, </font>

Oh I don't share your opinions then I must be an uneducated as$hole who never reads anything.

How fu(king dare you assume how I was brought up based on me asking people to defend their opinions. You have absolutely no idea of my family background or the circumstances in which I live.

Somebody posted a thread with a malevolent devil smiley asking if anyone was going to Genoa. I managed to turn a thread that was heading for crappy smash capitalism trolls into an actual discussion. The reason that I get ****ed off over violent protest is that it drowns out the voice of those with reasoned opinions.

The World Bank and the IMF do some good things they do some awfully misguided things. They are not responsible for poverty and they will not remedy it on their current path. This is not a war between good and evil. waving a poster saying "I'm anti-poverty" does not meant that their is some global conspiracy which is pro poverty. The Third World will not become wealthy by scrapping the debt.

Evil Phil

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by C B:
The Third World will not become wealthy by scrapping the debt.</font>

They won't become wealthy by paying it either. The 3rd world countries that pay the debt get the loans on the grounds that paying the debt will take priority over that countries education, health and social services systems. So the majority of a government’s money will go back to the IMF or World Bank and the remainder can be spent on their public. That's why there is such huge poverty in the third world.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Where and how do you figure that "ALL" of the famines are due to IMF activities?
</font>

I didn't say the IMF were responsible for all of the centuries famines, I said economics were. But take the example of the Ethiopian famine: The reason the poor starved was because the land that wasn't affected by famine was being used to grow cash crops like coffee, tea and tobacco. These crops were being grown to pay off the debt. And the debt had to be paid or the IMF would (and does) threaten to cancel all future aid. The IMF, the World Bank and the WTO can put serious pressure on other countries to impose trade embargoes and economic sanctions on a country. They can do this without being elected. They do this by placing first world profit at the top of the agenda and let the world's poor starve. If the debt was cancelled then they wouldn't starve. Sure they'd have other problems but nothing can change over night, and nothing will change until debt relief is introduced.

These things are not baseless; they are common knowledge that is why there is such a huge movement behind cancelling the debt. That is one of the reasons why we have anti-globalisation protests and riots. And to say these things is not careless. It shows a willingness to take responsibility for what the first world had done to the third world. That is not careless.


[This message has been edited by Evil Phil (edited 09-07-2001).]

path

someone asked at the start of this thread if anyone here is going. i am. and now really looking forward to it.

the window smashing (yes it will happen) will of course recieve the most media coverage but most people are heading over for a week long conference of talks, discussions, and workshops, which are being put on by the Genoa Social Forum. these talks are aimed at heightening peoples awareness of a range of issues. the full listing of the talks is available at:

http://www.genoa-g8.org

the protests will happen but there is a concrete ideology behind them, people should try not to be so cynical all the time with idealists when there is so much suffering in the world that needs to be changed.

regards

rowan

Nice one, Path. Can I now ask anyone who wants to continue posting about the *politics* of G8/anti-capitalism to start a new thread under that topic, and leave this thread for discussion for people actually going to Genoa (the original intention).

Path, I'm on a bus leaving Sunday 15th with Gluaisteacht/Globalise Resistance. How/when are you travelling? Do you have accomodation booked, or are you planning on camping? Also, just wondering, are you bringing a video camera?

Rowan.

ps. CB, ah now I see, the evil smiley caused all the trouble. For me that smiley read 'laughing in the face of authority while peacefully protesting' whereas for you it read 'random violent thuggery, mindless of underlying implications'. If you think those people stirring violence during protests should crawl back under their rocks, I'm with you. Again, *don't* reply to this here... all politics to a new thread, please.

JustHalf

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw:
The world would remain in stasis, without any development or social evolution, if capitalism was not performed and used to it's fullest extent, until it has run it's course and new horizons in 50 or 100 years are available.</font>

Nice. You can't have change *now*, wait for half a century or so before something better comes up. No better concept for society has appeared or will appear until then.

Sorry, but that sounds like what you're saying.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw:
We would all be simple animals without the essential human need to advance oneself, to progress. Those who lack it are the hangers on of evolution.</font>

Can you explain.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw:
Furthermore, you should feel priveleged to live in a democratic society in which you can freely voice your opinion. Look at countries like China and see how the communism thing doesn't work, and creates impossibly wealthy and very few elite. At least here, in western capitalism, you can either go for as much money as you can, we have free education to a graduate level. Or you may decide not to, the choice is up to you. Remember that people were thrown in prison in the more tradtional socialist countries (i.e., National Socialist Party of Germany in world war II), or in Communist Russia or China these days for voicing opinion against the state. Maybe it's just guilt that you feel you need to side with poorer countries, which are poor simply by history. You were born in a rich country. Deal with it.</font>

Tsk tsk tsk.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw:
The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed is good. Greed works. Greed is right. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed in all its forms - greed for life, money, love, knowledge - has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed - you mark my words – will save... you all.</font>

Me thinks you missed the irony Oliver Stone was trying to put across when he made Wall Street. Gekko ain't the source of all wisdom, boyo.

Evil Phil

Workshops sounds good to me. I want to go, but depending on the responsibilities I have over the next few days I mightn't be able to. How much does it cost to go on that bus? And where are you sleeping.

path

flying to genoa. ryanair were doing dirt dirt cheap flights (and possibly still are). we got them for about 120 punts. the plane is leaving from stanstead next monday morning at 7am or something equally ridiculous. we are going to london first for a music festival first. we arrive in genoa on monday the 16th, and leave on tuesday the 24th.

accomodation wise: bit of a grey area there. we are down for accom. with wherever globalise resistance are going (must double check that). we are bringing a tent with us, and praying that the weather will be good. not bringing any form of recording equipment, not even a camera. this trip is clandestine.

regards

path

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw:
I wonder where these protestors get the time and money to demonstrate and effectively tour the world with G8 and so on. Where does the money to travel come from? Jobs? Do they take holidays to do this? If they have jobs, they would need pretty high-paying ones to afford the travel expenses. </font>

I am taking holidays from work. I get the money the same as most other people. This will have been the first time I have attended any sort of political protest abroad. Here are the expenses, roughly for eight/nine days:

Flight to Genoa: 120 punts.
Accomodation: 200 punts, approx.
Sundries: 200 punts at most.

I dont think that's too much money at all for travelling, most people on lower incomes will pay that for a 'sun holiday' no problem.

Presumably people who live in mainland Europe can get there for much cheaper by train or by car.

The buses leaving from Dublin cost 110 quid.

That's pretty much within everyone's reach.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed is good. Greed works. Greed is right. </font>

It "works" for us because we are (now) a rich country. Try telling starving children or workers in sweatshops that greed is good.

Its a shame to see this sort of posting coming from people in a country that went through years of economic misery, with poverty rampant.

If there are people out there who want to go to Genoa still, then you should get in touch with GR, they will definitely try to accomodate you as much as possible.

You should go early as well - the workshops and talks will be interesting.

regards

DadaKopf

Make special editions of the [path] to be distributed to people a little more receptive than Temple Bar goths/nu-metallers.

That'd rock, yeah!

path

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DadaKopf:
Make special editions of the [path] to be distributed to people a little more receptive than Temple Bar goths/nu-metallers.

That'd rock, yeah!</font>

Heh, that was Undo (the other half of the freesheet) who were in charge of that days distribution. Yours truly went up there later on and collected a good few from the.. eh, path, and used some others to wipe the puke off the teenagers faces.

regards

DadaKopf

Ahh, poor ol' Tom always getting the rough end of the schtick.

AWWWWWW!

You want any more photos? Not that I know you.

---

"I collect spores, moulds and fungus."

rowan

Evil Phil,

I'm paying £100 to go on a bus leaving Sunday 15th, there's still places left. This gang of people will be tenting it, probably be staying in stadium/campsite. I've a list of one-star hotels in the city, if necess.

I'm meeting a few people in the Wellcome tonight (monday) at 7pm, to talk about filming in Genoa, but drop along cos we'll be talking about general Genoa stuff.

Evil Phil

If I have a job by then I'll come along, I'm sure I can borrow a tent from somebody. Sorry I missed last night but I didn't see it until today.

bugler

wasn't sure whether to post here or on the other thread.Anyway, CB, my astonishing "tirade of personal abuse" was perhaps a bit harsh, but not unmerited. Asking such questions as

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">O.K. can you please tell me what specific difficulties you have with the operations of the IMF, the World Bank, the OECD, G8 or other organisations? </font>

and

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Please will somebody tell me what kind of world people want to live in and why the IMF etc. is stopping them. </font>

was to me, on a par with asking "Is killing new born children and eating their brains wrong?"
You steamed onto a thread and immediately had a go at the person who started the thread, not bothering to give him common courtesy or even, god forbid, get your facts sorted before wading in.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I managed to turn a thread that was heading for crappy smash capitalism trolls into an actual discussion. </font>

Good man! You saviour of threads! How might I ask, do you have a clue about what would have been discussed.Are the new boards policeman? Are you a moderator? No.Don't worry your mind about what threads "might" develop into.That is what the board moderators are for.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">The World Bank and the IMF do some good things they do some awfully misguided things. They are not responsible for poverty and they will not remedy it on their current path. </font>

They are geared toward profit, at the expense of the poor.They do very few good things, they do almost nothing good unless it also allows them to gain in some way.The last thing they want is to remedy poverty.If they did that, they'd lose out.Evil Phil has answered most of this anyway.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">waving a poster saying "I'm anti-poverty" does not meant that their is some global conspiracy which is pro poverty. The Third World will not become wealthy by scrapping the debt. </font>

There is no conspiracy, it is quite plain to see if you are willing to look for it.On the subject of third world debt, I had reservations of the Jubilee campaign to cancel the debt.Mainly because alot of these countries have corrupt or undemocratic regimes who will do nothing to take advantage of the debt cancellation.They will still borrow to build nice fancy government buildings, or wage border wars, and buy new tanks and fighter jets.In many cases, it is quite simply ineffective to cancel debt.It will just be run up again, as I have said above, Phil has answered most your 'points' ahead of me, but seen as you (the righteous saver of threads from troll oblivion) were so grieviously wounded by my "personal tirade" I felt it necessary to post.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bugler:
On the subject of third world debt, I had reservations of the Jubilee campaign to cancel the debt.Mainly because alot of these countries have corrupt or undemocratic regimes who will do nothing to take advantage of the debt cancellation.They will still borrow to build nice fancy government buildings, or wage border wars, and buy new tanks and fighter jets.</font>

The original proposals were to cancel the debts ON THE PROVISO that the governments then spent the saved cash in specific areas - health, education, etc.

If you go into a bank and ask for half a million quid, and offer no tanbgible way to pay it back, the bank will look at you funny. If you then tell them that you want it to buy stuff which is completely non-essential, they will look at you even funnier.

The IMF, however, handed money hand over fist to countries to spend on areas they knew were not essential, and in amounts they knew the country would never be able top pay back without crippling itself.

You can blame the corrupt governments for spending the money, but the IMF gave it to them, knowing what it would be used for. Ergo, the IMF is very directly responsible for the unmaintainable levels of national debt these countries have, as it acted irresponsibly in handing out the readies in the first place.

jc

C B

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bugler:
Anyway, CB, my astonishing "tirade of personal abuse" was perhaps a bit harsh, but not unmerited.
</font>

Making assumptions regarding my upbringing and personal circumstances (which are untrue) can not be considered meritable with any rationale. Just apologise.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by C B:
Making assumptions regarding my upbringing and personal circumstances (which are untrue) can not be considered meritable with any rationale. Just apologise.</font>

I think you should re-read your first post on this thread and see whether or not you would view it as needlessly antagonistic and insulting. I know when I read it first, I assumed you were looking for a fight.

Having re-read it, I think I see what you were saying, but you do not have to open a discussion with such antagonistic statements. Honestly - it doesnt achieve anything except what we have seen here - a discussion crossed with a flame-war.

Telling someone to go work in the sub-saharan continent or crawl back under a rock, simply because they asked who was going to G8 is making assumptions about *their* circumstances, and is highly insulting. When this was pointed out to you, complete with the rider that a flame war was not soughtt, you posed a fairly simple question, almost immediatley followed by asking what the smaking of windows would accomplish.

With no poster having ever having advocated or even hinted towards violence, you asked them what violence would achieve in a manner which more or less indicates that you believe that is what they are going there for.

And then you take offense when someone else makes personal remarks about you?

Neither side is without fault.

Both of you are standing on your high horses, waiting for the apology from the other. Maybe you should both acknowledge that neither of you are blameless. You can work on apologies after you take that first step.

And no - I am not trying to stir up another war. I think both of you are pretty intelligent people who have valid points of view. I also think you are wasting everyones time sniping at each other, and would like to see both of you get over it.

At the risk of getting de-karma'ed or flamed....you both need to grow up a bit here.

jc




[This message has been edited by bonkey (edited 12-07-2001).]

C B

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bonkey:

I think you should re-read your first post on this thread and see whether or not you would view it as needlessly antagonistic and insulting.

Fuirthermore, telling someone to go work in the sub-saharan continent or crawl back under a rock is "Making assumptions regarding their upbringing and personal circumstances."
</font>

No it isn't. it is making assumptions regarding the motives behind the post which have been agreed to be false and resolved amiacably. I made an understandable mistake given the devil smiley and the likelihood of violence at the protest under discussion.

Due to the fact that I am not anti-globalisation bugler assumed that I "was born with a silver spoon in my mouth" which is very far from the truth.

C B

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bugler:
I don't think CB was merely asking for an explanation as to why people had problems with the IMF/World Bank etc. Reading over his posts again, it seems he was sure no-one could give an answer to that, when the reality is that anyone who doesn't know why people are opposed to these organisations has led a very sheltered life </font>

It may be a better idea to read what I wrote rather than trying to read through it. I asked people who espouse a certain world view to defend it some did some didn't.

Asking people to defend their opinion does not mean that I disagree with it.

Eliminating the World Bank and the IMF and scrapping debt will not bring wealth to the third world and you know that as well as I do. It is debateable to what extent it will even make them better off.

Free trade will result in a better standard of living for everybody no institution has the right to stop two people or business located in two different parts of the world from voluntarily engaging in trade.

In reality it is third world governments who prevent their own citizens access to free markets in order to increase their personal wealth. The crime of the IMF/WTO is that they do not attack these government policies strongly enough. Why not? because they are controlled by western governments who gain from access to third world markets and don't care if ordinary citizens in the developing world have the same access.

R. Daneel Olivaw

You seemed to make a disticntion between the IMF/WTO and western governments which I'm not sure is a correct thing to do.

Most of the big money pools are pretty much controlled by the Council on Foreign Relations and the TC; okay so it's part of the whole conspiracy theory, but reality is that the debt thing means that the third world countries will be likely to ask for UN help (also controlled by CFR, etc., ) and help advance the New World Order thing that Rockefeller, Rothschilds and everyone in the Skull & Bones society from Yale are trying to create.

1. European Union (rapid expansion, reforming the old Roman Empire - why do they expand so much?)
2. American Union (NAFTA expanding to encompadd all of the Americas)
3. Asian Union
4. Soviet Union (under democratic guidance, not communist)

5. World Union

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by C B:
Eliminating the World Bank and the IMF and scrapping debt will not bring wealth to the third world and you know that as well as I do. It is debateable to what extent it will even make them better off. </font>

No, but maintaining the debt will ensure that they remain in poverty.

On the other hand, removing their debt, on the proviso that the same amount of money is accountably spent in "proper" areas such as health and education is practical, and would go a massive way to trying to give these countries a hope of economic stability.

There are some countries, who in order to meet their national debt INTEREST repayments require in excess of 70% of their national revenue. There can be no justification for the continuation of this. Fine - if you dont trust the countries' governments to play fair, then let them pay the money, and hand it straight to international care foundations such as UNICEF to be ploughed back into the country. No risk.

Alternately, all you need is a proviso that if the national government are found to be cheating the system, or mis-spending , then the debt become reinstated in full, or that you revert to the previous suggestion.

The extent to which it will make them better off is debateable, but it is simply a question of "how much" and not if.

The point is that the IMF have been directly responsible for many of these problems. They loaned money knowning it could never be repaid, but now hold countries to ransom for repayment. They loaned money to starving and penniless nations to allow corrupt governments to buy weaponry, and in some cases went so far as to subsidise the weaponry to make it more affordable to encourage the purchases.

And now they tuirn around and lay the responsibility on corrupt governments who abused their position? Excsuse me, but does anyone really believe that.

They are deliberately perpetuating the suffering of millions of people on the vaguest of "you dont know how much better you can make it" arguments - the same basic argument that Dubbya has just used to break from the Kyoto agreements (no-one can prove that global warming is man made, nor what it will result in).

The "cant be sure" argument is no excuse to sit by and condone the suffering of millions, especially if you (that is, the IMF) are one of hthe major causes for the problem in the first place.

jc


[This message has been edited by bonkey (edited 12-07-2001).]

[This message has been edited by bonkey (edited 12-07-2001).]

C B

I did not endorse a "can't do anything" policy. I plainly set out my opinions as to a possible solution. Tell thirld world governments that if they want inward investment and access to markets that access will have to be unrestricted. Allowing companies to operate in special zones (policy in many Central american countries) will give western companies the access they want without reciprocle access being granted to the indigenous population.

As long as thirld world governments refuse to accept that free trade is the key to prosperity these countries will languish in poverty. They will also be exploited because developed world governments and companies understand the benefits of trade and will always attempt to gain access to these markets.

[This message has been edited by C B (edited 13-07-2001).]