Written by schuftan@gmai.com   

Food for an intermezzo thought (1)

 

Human Rights Reader 559a

[I interrupt the regular weekly uploading of my Readers to share with you a really important piece very much in the spirit of this Reader. It is rather longish so I am splitting it into two. Your feedback will be shared with the author].

Kristian Laubjerg*  https://www.other-news.info/2020/12/the-mask-of-democracy/

 

[TLDR (too long didn’t read): This Reader is about the UN’s collusion with the corporate sector, about free market inequality and about democracy being imposed top-down, all these with implications for human rights. For a quick overview, just read the bolded text].

 

-Many a government, in alliance with big corporations and banks, have created an empire that brings servitude, misery, and death to millions of people. (John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, New York, Plume, 2004).

 

The context

 

1. Democracy actually provides cover for continued exploitation by a handful of oligarchs. Corporate business benefits from its adulterated version of democracy. The business community has successfully developed and implemented a perverted kind of democracy with help from its agents in corporate-endowed-foundations, in the media and in the UN. This leaves claim holders the world over with little room for action against a situation, that keeps them in perpetual servitude, while ‘democracy’ provides cover for their continued exploitation by a handful of oligarchs. The following propositions support this argument.

UN collusion with the corporate world

-During my employment by a UN agency as head of country offices in a number of African countries over two decades, I became weary of the role I was asked to play vis-a-vis government counterparts.

 

2. My apprehension became particularly obvious when we were asked to develop partnerships with civil societies and NGOs, rather than with government partners. Since at least 2001, the expectations of the UN to advance democracy had become noticeable. The new catchword was a ‘civil society’ which was increasingly given a major role to play in providing services to local communities as a counter-performance to elected governments. Governments in some of the poorest countries had to accept a minor role in their development if they wanted any donations from the international community, as well as from bilateral development agencies.

 

3. I observed that the UN increasingly served the well-being of the corporate world in the name of democracy promotion, even if it meant growing inequality and poverty. I had --perhaps naively-- joined the UN to work for a better world, based upon justice and equality. I became increasingly confused by the obvious conflicts between what liberal democracies claimed to be their objectives for mankind and the obvious wealth accruing to a small group of oligarchs. The frequent visits to my office of the US Ambassador only added to my mistrust about the entire mission of the UN.

 

4. I was worried, and at the same time fascinated, by the global results in entire populations from decades of manipulation and indoctrination directed by corporate foundations, think tanks and the media. The ruling class in capitalist democracies has an obvious interest in ensuring that a population in a given country is committed to a certain type of governance that perpetuates the system to its own advantage, regardless of negative consequences to others. Those in power have a commitment to capitalism and present their values as desirable for all, although they may only benefit a small powerful group of individuals --the oligarchs. Islamic fundamentalism, Putin, Chinese Communism, White Supremacists, Black Power were seen as grave risks.

 

Manufacturing inequality

5. Once upon a time, democracy offered people a certain measure of equality and a decent living standard. A quick comparison between China and the USA, the leader of capitalist democracies, suggests that the Chinese communist system has been more successful in terms of creating decent and equal living conditions for its people, while the USA is witnessing an increasing number of households falling below the poverty line. It is widely accepted that the economic system promoted by the US government and the Bretton Woods institutions results in millions of avoidable deaths if only because people do not have enough to eat. Little importance is given to those deaths happening in a ‘democracy’. It underlines the falsehood of the ‘world’s greatest democracy’ when it claims to have a moral duty to lead the world towards human rights for all. The economic policy promoted and imposed upon the world by capitalist democracies has produced the death of a child every five seconds. At the same time, roughly a third of the world’s food is wasted. That is about 1.3 billion tons a year.

 

Free-Market democracy

 

6. Following the attempt of the US government to justify its democracy promotion, the UN (always with a US citizen as its director) took this role as a common denominator for all peoples of the world. It prepared several papers and guidelines on good governance, seemingly in competition, but really to keep in sync with the intention of the USA to uphold its leadership among nations of the so-called ’free world’.

 

7. Key words for good governance became ‘civil society’ and ‘deregulation’. (It would had perhaps been more honest say that general elections were in practice replaced by a system of representatives from shadow banks, the arms industry and TNCs). In fact, this is what is already happening although popular elections still keep taking place with regular intervals. Taking advise from non-elected influential individuals, the elected representatives regularly let the market determine the ‘right’ direction…

 

Freedom as a pursuit of happiness

 

8. The behavior of the self-proclaimed leader among democracies, the USA, has prompted political scientists and philosophers to seek to define what indeed constitutes a democracy. Most have abstained from explicitly placing the US and like- minded countries among a list of rogue states. As for the USA itself, it is not inclined to be bogged down by philosophical discourses. In line with its liberal policies, it leaves the ‘thinking’ to foundations and so-called think tanks. Therefore, Freedom House (“championing democracy”), in consultation with the State Department determines whether a country is democratic. Freedom House defines a democratic country as one where its citizens have freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, and freedom of religion. It is hardly surprising that Freedom House, which is 88 % financed by US Government grants, emphasize liberty as the most important element of democracy. Ever since the declaration of independence on July 4 in 1776 the Americans have been told: “… that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. The degree of freedom is seen as the key indicator of a democratic state. Unnoticeable to most Americans, the pursuit of happiness has come to mean the satisfaction of greed by a small influential and thus powerful elite --the oligarchs.

 

Freedom to live in misery

 

9. Countries categorized as free by Freedom House are increasingly becoming more unequal in terms of income, wealth, access to education and health and other human rights considered the hallmarks of capitalist democracies. Simultaneously, we notice that these states, especially the US, are becoming more militarized, more violent and with more police brutality in facing minority groups. If this is freedom, it is certainly not felt as justice by ordinary people. Capitalist oligarchies attribute high importance to the mere right to vote at regular intervals. Indeed, it could be considered a minimum condition for democracy if those voted into law making assemblies actually legislated for the protection and promotion of decent working and living conditions for people who voted for them. However, lawmaking in all capitalist democracies remains in favor of those with influence.

 

10. The US propaganda machine presents an image of Cuba as the opposite of the democratic ideal. Cuba is looked upon by most Americans as the only non-democratic country in the Western Hemisphere. However, in comparison with a series of Latin American countries --El Salvador, Guatemala, Chile, Colombia, Uruguay, Haiti and Honduras-- Cuba has one of the very best economic, social and cultural rights records. Other Latin American countries, including those mentioned, have seen death squads eliminating opposition representatives, massacres of peasants, of indigenous people, of students and of religious groups. Countries with large populations living in poverty, homeless, untended and sick, and unemployed or tortured are referred to by Freedom House as democracies. While the USA never ceases to advocate for human rights as essential for democracy, it is alone among developed countries to ignore rights that protect against dying from hunger, from lack of access to affordable healthcare, or growing up in a context of total deprivation. Democracy, as seen from the White House, has surely nothing to do with our cherished human rights.

 

Freedom vs. equality

 

11. It is beyond doubt that freedom-driven democracy as it has been promoted since the late 1970s has been implemented at the cost of not protecting minorities and the more vulnerable groups of society. During the last 40–50 years, the impact of a liberal economy has meant a free hand for market forces to benefit large transnational companies with resulting inequality in most countries that have adopted a governance system dictated by enterprises --and recommended by UN agencies! Few would deny that justice is at the heart of democracy. But what just system allows top management of large corporations to pocket more than 1000 times more than the average employees?

 

12. National borders were never respected by corporations. But after 2005, they could count on a helping hand from the US military and the ‘coalition of the willing’. With Saddam Hussein’s intervention into Kuwait and following the Iraq war, the world took a different look at the rights of sovereign states. The official justification for tearing down borders of sovereign countries is to prevent genocide or other atrocities on civil populations. The hidden agenda is more often to smash borders for easy access to foreign markets and/or natural resources, even if this perpetuates abject poverty in countries that gave up protecting their own industries. The benefits would mainly accrue to overseas stockholders and a small elite in the countries concerned while living conditions of the population, in general, remain unaffected by the interventions undertaken in the name of democracy and of human rights.

 

13. The rule of law is another principle praised by capitalist democracies. With legislation put in place, the USA was able to speed up its empire-building. Probably, the most important was the Advance Democracy Act of 2005 made into law in 2007. This law emphasizes that the promotion of freedom and democracy in foreign countries is a fundamental component of U.S. foreign policy. The objective is “to advance and strengthen democracy globally, through peaceful means and to assist foreign countries to implement democratic forms of government, to strengthen respect for individual freedom, religious freedom, and human rights in foreign countries through increased United States advocacy…” Time would soon show that the USA did not limit its efforts to peaceful means and advocacy.

 

14. One of the co-authors of the new law, the late Senator McCain stated: “The expansion of democracy and freedom is inseparable from the long-term security of the United States and is intimately bound with the values Americans hold dear. We must, I believe, promote democracy, the rule of law and social modernization just as we promote the sophistication of our weapons and the modernization of our militaries.” As John McCain said this, his country had already begun promoting democracy in Iraq --using its military power.

 

15. This was the law the corporate world and the military industry had been waiting for. It would give the USA adequate excuses to ignore the international community and the international institutions, if these did not cooperate. Military interventions would now be made under the pretext of advancing democracy and human rights --but rather promoting corporate interests and the expansion of the empire.

 

Imposing democracy – USA style

 

16. In spite of its doubtful democratic achievements at home, the USA embarked with missionary zeal on democracy promotion in many parts of the world, with particular emphasis on the Middle East.

 

17. With the Democracy Promotion Law the US Government could now legally undertake interventions in sovereign countries without having to go through the UN. A spokesperson to the Ministry of Home Security is quoted for having said that ‘the planet is our home’.

 

18. Such attempts at justifying overseas wars seem rather absurd when one recalls the absence of democratic rights for a great many people in the USA and many of those countries under its freedom-umbrella. One of the justifying arguments frequently heard is that military interventions aim at introducing free and fair elections with opportunities to choose among candidates from several parties. President Obama coined the phrase ‘humanitarian wars’ However, families who daily have to struggle to stay alive are more likely to give priority to the welfare and survival of their families rather than having a rather symbolic right to vote.

 

[end of part 1]

 

Claudio

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

 

————————-

— Article published in The Wall Street International on December 20, 2020.

—————————

*Kristian Laubjerg studied at the University of Copenhagen, (1968-1974). Master of Arts, 1977-1980, Doctor of Philosophy. Senior Program Officer & Deputy Representative, Nigeria, United Nations Children’s Fund since 1990. Senior Tech Advisor, Tech Advisor Division to the Board, Danish International Development Agency, Denmark, Socio-Economic Coord, Program Division, United Nations Children’s Fund, Bangladesh, 1983-1986.