The Big Picture Archives - Page 24 of 34

January 23, 2014

China: Roiling the Waters

Roiling the Waters: Why the United States needs to stop playing peacemaker and start making China feel uncomfortable.

BY Elbridge Colby, Ely Ratner

History has demonstrated the perils of focusing too much on stability at the expense of deterrence. The Cuban missile crisis, the modern world’s closest brush with the apocalypse, was precipitated by Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s perception that the United States, especially President John F. Kennedy, was overly concerned about stability and cooling tensions between the superpowers. Khrushchev’s sense that America could be pushed was formed by Kennedy’s cautious reactions to assertive Soviet moves toward Berlin, as well as Khrushchev’s measure of Kennedy at the 1961 Vienna superpower summit as “weak” and accommodating……..

OF COURSE, CHINA IS NOT THE SOVIET UNION. And 2014 is not 1962. The point is simply that a country with the power of the USSR or China, unsatisfied with features of the existing order, motivated to do something to change it, and skeptical of the resolve of the United States, could well pursue a policy of coercion and brinkmanship, even under the shadow of nuclear weapons. As historian Francis Gavin has argued, the whole history of the Cold War shows that countries like China — and, at times, the United States — can bluff, coerce, and threaten their way to geopolitical gain.

The worst way to deal with such a power is to leave it with the impression that these approaches work. Just as the United States would have been far better off if Kennedy, at the Vienna summit, had squelched Khrushchev’s doubts about his resolve to defend Berlin, it will be far better if the leadership in Beijing has the clear sense that the United States will meet each challenge to its and its allies’ interests resolutely.

Absence of ethics in advertising [video]

The Pitch from Gruen Planet asks two ad agencies to come up with a campaign concept to sell viewers on the idea of restricting advertising. The first ad is amusing, but the second is chillingly Orwellian.

The Pitch runs from 21:20 to 23:30.

The latter reminds me of Noam Chomsky’s observation about propaganda and the media:

The public relations industry, which essentially runs the elections, is applying certain principles to undermine democracy which are the same as the principles that [it] applies to undermine markets. The last thing that business wants is markets in the sense of economic theory. Take a course in economics, they tell you a market is based on informed consumers making rational choices. Anyone who’s ever looked at a TV ad knows that’s not true. In fact if we had a market system an ad say for General Motors would be a brief statement of the characteristics of the products for next year. That’s not what you see. You see some movie actress or a football hero or somebody driving a car up a mountain or something like that. And that’s true of all advertising. The goal is to undermine markets by creating uninformed consumers who will make irrational choices and the business world spends huge efforts on that. The same is true when the same industry, the PR industry, turns to undermining democracy. It wants to construct elections in which uninformed voters will make irrational choices. It’s pretty reasonable and it’s so evident you can hardly miss it.
~ From lecture titled “The State-Corporate Complex: A Threat to Freedom and Survival,” at the The University of Toronto, April 7, 2011

Two more quotes by Chomsky from Alternet.org:

The leading student of business propaganda, Australian social scientist Alex Carey, argues persuasively that “the 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.
~ From World Orders: Old and New

If the media were honest, they would say, Look, here are the interests we represent and this is the framework within which we look at things. This is our set of beliefs and commitments. That’s what they would say, very much as their critics say. For example, I don’t try to hide my commitments, and the Washington Post and New York Times shouldn’t do it either. However, they must do it, because this mask of balance and objectivity is a crucial part of the propaganda function. In fact, they actually go beyond that. They try to present themselves as adversarial to power, as subversive, digging away at powerful institutions and undermining them. The academic profession plays along with this game.
~ From Lecture titled ” Media, Knowledge, and Objectivity,” June 16, 1993

Chomsky has been painted as a wacko conspiracy theorist by mainstream media — and some of his later statements on global politics do strike me as odd — but his early insights into the unholy alliance between the media, business and politics and their use of propaganda are chillingly accurate and should not be ignored.

October 22, 2013

The EU should take inspiration from Switzerland in its attempts to increase democratic legitimacy | EUROPP

Joseph Lacey explains why the EU should follow the Swiss example:

Three major factors help to explain how Switzerland is possible. First, there are national elections and nationally-held referendums connected to the workings of a national government. Second, though national elections only take place every five years, referendums are far more frequent. On average, usually on three scheduled dates, Switzerland holds seven referendums annually. Some of these are constitutionally mandated, though the majority are demanded at the initiative of at least 100,000 citizen signatures. Third, unlike the case of Belgium where national consciousness is fragmented by two party systems divided along linguistic lines (French and Flemish), Switzerland has a single party system where the dominant cleavage is ideological, cutting across linguistic barriers and thereby allowing parties to draw common support from all public spheres.

October 10, 2013

The Surest Cure for America’s Political Insanity | Stephen M. Walt

All this mishigas is happening in part because the United States is in fact very secure, which leads many people to think it doesn\’t need a strong central state. They are therefore willing to countenance steps that they would not consider if the country were really facing a serious external danger.

~ Stephen M. Walt

October 7, 2013

Pro-nuclear greenies? Thinking outside the box with Pandora’s Promise

Ben Heard and Prof. Corey Bradshaw highlight the environmental and economic damage caused by pursuit of nuclear-free power.

Had Australia deployed a modest nuclear program starting in 1965, to build slowly to around 20% of electricity provided (as done in the USA), over 876 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) would have been avoided to this day.

…..In the OECD, three yes, only three countries have achieved success in all but eliminating fossil fuels from electricity supply. They are France, Sweden and Switzerland Finland will soon join them. All did it by embracing nuclear power generation. These nations deliver reliable, large-scale electricity supply with less than 1/10th the emissions of Australia. France in particular delivers the cheapest electricity in Western Europe, and is the second-highest net exporter of electricity in the world…..

October 6, 2013

Swiss to vote on basic income referendum| Reuters

Organizers submitted more than the 100,000 signatures needed to call a referendum on Friday……..Under Swiss law, citizens can organize popular initiatives that allow the channeling of public anger into direct political action. The country usually holds several referenda a year.

October 2, 2013

China: US Shutdown Exposes ‘Ugly Side of Partisan Politics’

Reuters Shanghai:

China on Wednesday said the U.S. government shutdown had exposed “the ugly side of partisan politics” in Washington and expressed concern about its effect on the world economy.

An editorial on the state-run Xinhua news service, considered a channel for Beijing’s official views, said: “The United States, the world’s sole superpower, has engaged in irresponsible spending for years.”

“In the view of the latest political failure, a replay of the 2011 summer drama seems likely, which is certainly a concern for U.S. foreign creditors,” it said.

“With no political unity to redress its policy mistake, a dysfunctional Washington is now overspending the confidence in its leadership,” the editorial said.

Chinese leaders must be both puzzled and perplexed by the current spat between Congress and the Senate. How can a government which considers itself a beacon of democracy — and which advocates democracy to emerging nations — exhibit such disfunctional behavior? Separation of duties between the President, Congress and the Senate — designed to safeguard the nation from excessive concentration of power — have evolved into a recurring political logjam. Both major parties are guilty of burdening future taxpayers with public debt, in order to buy off existing voters, and kicking the can down the road — avoiding unpopular political decisions that are in the long-term interests of the nation. Failure to address unsustainable welfare spending, for example, has allowed unfunded liabilities to balloon to more than $70 trillion by 2012.

Weak political coalitions have also led to unstable government and a short-term focus in many Western democracies. These issues are completely foreign to China’s Central Committee.

The Central Politburo Standing Committee (“PSC”) of the Communist Party of China is a committee of 7 members appointed by the Chinese Communist Party to run the country, with Li Jinping acting as General Secretary. No political group has the power to block decisions of the Committee, allowing them to focus on long-term goals rather than short-term considerations. Ascendancy of the PSC is one of the major contributing factors to China’s phoenix-like rise from the ashes of decades of political turmoil.

I am not advocating that we abandon democracy and revert to a one-party state, but we need to address the weaknesses in our current system and adopt some of the strengths of others. An outstanding example of this is the Swiss system where a similar central committee is democratically elected, based on proportional representation. All parties are represented on the 7-member Federal Council and decision-making is collective. Council members serve one year terms as the largely-ceremonial head of state. The strength of the system is its stability, with only one change to the composition of the 7-member Council over the last 50 years. This enables members to focus on long-term goals rather than on short-term political concerns — one of the reasons why the Swiss economy is one of the most stable and successful, ranked 8th in the world in terms of GDP per capita according to the IMF.

Powers of the central committee are restrained by a vibrant direct democracy where citizens regularly vote on national referendums. The power of voters to overturn their decisions maintains a strong check on the central committee throughout their elected term and would also curb the influence of special interest groups, another abscess on butt of many democracies.

While most recognize the need for change, a major obstacle is the power of vested interests that are likely to impede progress at every turn. Only a major ground-swell of popular support could sweep them aside. In a way we should welcome crises like the current impasse, as further cracks in the dam wall of public opinion. When the wall breaks, hopefully we can build a better system…..if we have learned from our past mistakes.

September 19, 2013

Companies Unplug From the Electric Grid, Delivering a Jolt to Utilities | WSJ.com

On a hill overlooking the Susquehanna River, two big wind turbines crank out electricity for Kroger Co.’s KR +0.02% Turkey Hill Dairy in rural Lancaster County, Pa., allowing it to save 25% on its power bill for the past two years.

….From big-box retailers to high-tech manufacturers, more companies across the country are producing their own power. Since 2006, the number of electricity-generation units at commercial and industrial sites has more than quadrupled to roughly 40,000 from about 10,000, according to federal statistics.

By REBECCA SMITH and CASSANDRA SWEET

September 11, 2013

Retired general speaks out against across-the-board spending cuts

Retired General Carter Ham, former head of U.S. Africa Command, speaks out against across-the-board spending cuts at the National Association for Business Economics in San Francisco:

“My least-favorite saying on the planet is to ‘do more with less.’ You don’t do more with less, you do less with less,” Gen. Ham said. “You have to figure out what’s most important.”

One solution would be to give federal agencies the flexibility to find savings where they can, rather than mandating how they make the cuts, he said. The government also needs to have frank discussions about how to reduce the military budget and shift priorities to address current and future threats.

~ From Sarah Portlock at WSJ online.

August 29, 2013

The Qatar Problem – By Jeremy Shapiro | The Middle East Channel

Jeremy Shapiro at Foreign Policy discusses the role played by Qatar in the Middle East, their expansion of Al-Jazeera into the US, and their support for the Muslim Brotherhood:

On the face of it, Qatar has been one of the United States’s most valuable allies in the Middle East over the last decade. Qatar hosts a large U.S. Air Force base in the Persian Gulf and has often provided political and financial support for U.S. initiatives in the Middle East. Indeed, Washington has often encouraged Qatari activism to legitimize U.S. diplomacy, including its political support at the Arab League of a potential U.S. strike against Syria.

But Qatar’s role in the United States’s Middle East policy is far more problematic than is commonly recognized. The tiny yet ambitious Gulf emirate has sought to use its immense hydrocarbon wealth to finance and arm civil wars in Libya and Syria, to support Hamas in Gaza, and to mediate disputes in Sudan and Lebanon. Its interest sometimes align with the United States’s — but too often, they do not. The launch of Al-Jazeera America, the news network its government owns, should redirect attention to Doha’s goals and means……