It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Tuesday, July 12, 2022
By Andrew Silver
Image: European Space Agency
James Webb Space Telescope is a joint initiative of Canada, Europe and the United States
Politicians and scientists have hailed the first image from the James Webb Space Telescope, a €10 billion collaboration between the Canadian, European and US space agencies to replace the Hubble Space Telescope in providing unprecedented images of the universe.
The first image (pictured) from the JWST was unveiled by US president Joe Biden on 11 July, after the three agencies spent months positioning the telescope a million miles from Earth and opening and testing its various delicate instruments following its launch in December last year.
Biden described the unveiling of the image as “a historic moment for science and technology, for astronomy and space exploration, for America and all of humanity”, adding that it helped to illustrate “why the federal government must invest in science and technology, more than we have in the past”.
Nasa administrator Bill Nelson said the image was “the deepest, sharpest infrared image of the distant Universe so far” obtained. He said researchers using the JWST would be able to tell whether distant planets were habitable, and that the telescope was going to be able to answer scientific questions that have yet to be formulated.
Macarena Garcia Marin, an instrument scientist at the European Space Agency, agreed that the image was just a “first glimpse” of what the JWST could do. She said she “can’t help but think of what images and science results are just around the corner in the many years to come”.
The power of joining forces
Leaders of the agencies also said the JWST success shows what they can do when they work together, after they spent almost two decades collaborating on its development.
Esa director general Josef Aschbacher said: “Only with teamwork, dedication and the human drive to push boundaries and explore have we arrived at this historical moment.”
Nelson said the JWST was “just the start of what we can accomplish in the future when we work together”.
Eddie Bernice Johnson, the chair of the US House of Representatives science committee, said she hoped the images provided by the JWST would “inspire an entire generation”.
On the day the image was released, the European Space Agency announced it had created an advisory group to guide its human and robotic space exploration. The 12-person group will provide an independent analysis of the geopolitical, economic and societal relevance of such work, as well as making recommendations, the agency said.
The group includes Anders Fogh Rasmussen, former Nato secretary general and former prime minister of Denmark, as well as economist Mariana Mazzucato, who advised the EU on its research and innovation missions.
Hadron Collider Scientists Discover Three Subatomic Particles Never Seen Before
Beneath the Swiss Alps lives the world’s largest and most powerful particle accelerator and recently scientists found three new subatomic particles never seen before. NBC News’ Jacob Ward is joined by Yale University physics Professor Dr. Sarah Demers to discuss how this week’s discovery could help researchers learn how the universe was born and what the future looks like.
The United States Supreme Court’s decision last week to overturn Roe v Wade and eliminate the right to an abortion was one of the most consequential constitutional opinions in its history – even for a court that has already done violence to settled precedent in areas like gun control, religion and immigration.
But conspicuously absent from the constitutional analysis in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health was any acknowledgement of Article VI of the Constitution, which provides that treaties are “the supreme law of the land.”
Two such treaties – the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) – recognise the human rights to life, privacy, and non-discrimination. Taken together, these treaties, and the rights they safeguard, require access to safe and lawful abortion services as a matter of law.
The US, moreover, has signed and ratified both instruments, which means that the ICCPR and ICERD are binding laws upon our country.
First, Article 6 of the ICCPR provides that “[e]very human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.”
As guaranteed by the ICCPR, the right to life does not apply prenatally. In fact, during the ICCPR’s drafting – in which the US played a key part – the delegations specifically voted against adding language stating that the right to life began at conception. The UN Human Rights Council has held in multiple cases that the right to life does not apply from conception. On the contrary, it has emphasised the need to uphold a women’s right to life by protecting abortion access.
The UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner has likewise stated that, consistent with the right to life, countries (1) “should not introduce new barriers” to abortion and (2) “should remove existing barriers that deny effective access by women and girls to safe and legal abortion”.
This interpretation of the ICCPR is supported by evidence that abortion bans do not eliminate abortions,but rather result in more unsafe abortions. Unsafe abortions increase maternal morbidity and mortality. More women will, therefore, die unnecessarily because of abortion bans – the very definition of arbitrary deprivation of life.
Second, although Dobbs rejects the notion that the Constitution provides for a right to privacy, that right is guaranteed by the ICCPR. Article 17 of the ICCPR provides that “[n]o one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation”. The UN Human Rights Committee has concluded, in varying contexts, that restrictions on abortion infringe upon this privacy right.
Most recently, it held that Ireland’s forcing a woman to choose between continuing an unwanted pregnancy or travelling to another jurisdiction to receive a safe, legal abortion at her personal expense was an intrusive interference contrary to the ICCPR. After Dobbs, women in nearly two dozen states are faced with that exact same choice today.
Third, Article 26 of the ICCPR provides that “the law shall … guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status”. ICERD, in Article 5, contains similar language.
Again, the UN Human Rights Committee has issued authoritative guidance stating that interference with women’s access to reproductive health care, including failure to ensure that pregnant people do not have “to undergo life-threatening clandestine abortions,” violates these rights to non-discrimination. And in response to Dobbs, Michelle Bachelet, the UN high commissioner for human rights, reiterated this point, emphasising that “[a]ccess to safe, legal and effective abortion is firmly rooted in international human right law and is at the core of women and girls’ autonomy and ability to make their own choices about their bodies and lives, free of discrimination, violence and coercion”.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has brought international law into heightened focus in recent months. Courts, policy experts, and legislators from both sides of the political spectrum have condemned Russian aggression in violation of international law. Countries around the world have expressed a renewed commitment to building on international and multilateral agreements. Yet by allowing states to ban abortion, the Supreme Court has staked a position that plainly runs afoul of the US’s treaty obligations. If we are to demand that other countries and states respect their international commitments, then we should, too. The Constitution requires no less.
The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
The post Dobbs, glass houses and international law appeared first on Al Jazeera.
July 11, 2022
Women across Iran are defying the rule that says they must cover their hair in public, posting videos of themselves removing their hijabs in protest against the country’s hardline president.
President Ebrahim Raisi, a cleric supported by the country’s very conservative religious elite, described the recent backlash of mostly young people to the hijab law as “an organised promotion of moral corruption in Islamic society.”
The authorities are cracking down on the rebellion and plan to celebrate “Hijab and Chastity” day on Tuesday. The events will include a rally in Azadi Stadium, a large football stadium in Tehran, to encourage women to follow the hijab rule.
The Iranian security forces have stepped up their moral policing patrols across Iran to reinforce the strict dress code in recent months, and many women are rebelling against the stricter rules.
The law in Iran requires women to wear a head covering, but the restrictions vary from one administration to the next, depending on the political background of the incumbent president.
Some regions are more liberal than others, with women in the religious Mashhad and Qom provinces tightly monitored while those in Tehran or Shiraz can often get away without wearing a full head covering.
Since Raisi’s victory last year, more restrictive guidance has been introduced, and officials have given directives to refuse “badly veiled” women into government offices, banks, and public transport.
Iranian women have followed the Islamic hijab rule for the past four decades, since it was mandated after the Islamic Revolution in 1979. People have found ways around the limitation of the laws to wear colourful fabric and show some of their hair. Religious scholars have long been concerned about this, saying they are breaching the Islamic republic’s principles of “chastity and hijab” guidance.
The Imam of Tehran’s Friday prayers, Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, bashed women who defied the regime’s mandatory hijab laws in his sermon and said, “Stealing, embezzling, and removing hijab are all sins, and by the way, the majority of those unveiled women are either wives or daughters of those thieves.”
The country’s ‘fashion police’ units, officially called the Guidance Patrols, have stepped up enforcing the “hijab law” across Iran. The branch has been pictured and filmed by bystanders rounding up women and warning them about their clothing.
In June, the government introduced two organisations to tackle the “badly veiled” phenomena. A number of incidents circulated on social media showed women contesting the authorities.
Campaigns against the regime’s restrictive policies are organised mostly by political activists and dissidents outside of Iran, but young women inside Iran have started to post selfies without the hijab in defiance of increasing pressure from the government.
In an incident in Shiraz, a city known for its loose implementation of the dress code, a group of teenage girl and boy skaters gathered, with girls not wearing their headscarves on the 23rd of June. Ten of them were arrested.
Iran’s “Hijab and Chastity Day” on Tuesday is designed to tackle the “badly veiled” trend and promote the state-approved dress code.
The post Women in Iran Are Rebelling Against the Compulsory Hijab Law appeared first on VICE.
Paul Nowak will take over from Frances O’Grady when she retires after 10 years
Richard Partington Economics correspondent
@RJPartingtonTue 12 Jul 2022
The Trades Union Congress has named Paul Nowak, a former call centre worker from Merseyside, as its next general secretary.
Nowak will become general secretary designate at the TUC Congress in Brighton in September and take over from Frances O’Grady when she retires at the end of the year after 10 years at the helm.
A union member from the age of 17 when he worked part-time at Asda, Nowak said it was an “honour” to be chosen to lead the movement amid the cost of living emergency.
He was the sole candidate nominated by trade unions to lead the umbrella group, which supports the activities of 48 separate member unions representing 5.5 million workers across the country.
Nowak, 50, had been the TUC’s deputy general secretary since 2016. He worked in the coronavirus pandemic leading union efforts to push the government to publish strong safe working guidance, helping to negotiate improvements to ensure millions of people had a safe environment to work in.
O’Grady, the TUC’s first female secretary general, had played a central role in the creation of the furlough scheme, working closely with Rishi Sunak while he was chancellor to protect jobs during the pandemic.
Nowak’s appointment comes amid growing industrial unrest across Britain, with the prospect of renewed strike action on the railways and a summer of public sector pay disputes across the economy.
Before Boris Johnson’s resignation as prime minister on Thursday, the government had warned against workers taking bigger pay rises, saying it would risk a 1970s-style “wage-price spiral” that would force the Bank of England to raise interest rates further to curb persistently higher rates of inflation.
However, workers are currently suffering the biggest real-terms hit to average pay packets on record, as typical pay awards fail to keep pace with inflation soaring to the highest level in four decades.
Nowak said unions were rising to the challenge and fighting back. “A decade of standstill wages, overseen by successive Tory governments, has left working people at the mercy of this cost of living crisis. But unions are rising to the challenge and fighting back,” he said.
The government this week approved controversial plans to allow agency staff to replace striking workers, despite widespread anger over mass sackings at P&O Ferries when the company drafted in low-paid temporary workers to replace the employees it fired. Ministers had promised an employment bill in 2019 to strengthen workers’ rights, only to repeatedly drop the plan.
“As TUC general secretary, I will push back on attacks on workers’ rights, make the voices of workers heard, and back our unions to grow and win for their members and for all working people,” Nowak said.
“It doesn’t matter if you work in a care home, a supermarket or a power station – everyone deserves decent pay, job security and dignity at work.”
The Evertonian who went from the shop floor to the top
Standing up for workers’ rights has been an almost life-long mission for Paul Nowak, having first joined the GMB union at the age of 17 while working part-time at Asda while growing up on the Wirral.
Born in Bebington on the peninsula between north Wales and Liverpool – a city with a long legacy of trade union leaders – Nowak has served as a union rep and activist while working in a call centre for BT, at Cheshire county council’s bus information team, and as a hotel night porter.
Before becoming a union official in the late 1990s, he had always been employed on temporary and agency contracts, long before the boom in the gig economy that followed the 2008 financial crisis and the current battle over economic insecurity.
A member of the first intake of the TUC’s organising academy in 1998 – alongside Sharon Graham, now general secretary of Unite and Roz Foyer, the general secretary of the Scottish TUC – he has worked closely with unions and employers to negotiate successful resolutions to major disputes with companies including Royal Mail and British Airways.
A lifelong Everton fan, he has a wife, Vicky, three grown-up children and still lives on the Wirral. Nowak is of mixed heritage and is the grandson of immigrants: his grandfathers came to the UK during the second world war from Poland and China respectively, before settling and raising families in Liverpool.
In his spare time, when not watching his beloved Blues, he can be found spending time with family, playing the guitar with friends, or exploring Britain’s canals.
UK's Ministry of Defence believes the broadcaster's 'Panorama' programme 'jumps to unjustified conclusions'
The 'Panorama' report alleged senior officers, including former head of the British Army Gen Sir Mark Carleton-Smith, did not report the alleged murders. PA
The National
Jul 12, 2022
British special forces soldiers allegedly killed detainees and unarmed men in suspicious circumstances during counter-insurgency operations in Afghanistan, according to a BBC investigation.
The Panorama investigation reportedly uncovered 54 suspicious killings carried out by one British SAS unit on a six-month tour of Afghanistan in 2010-11.
It also claimed that senior officers, including former head of the British Army Gen Sir Mark Carleton-Smith, did not report the killings and did not disclose evidence held by UK special forces to the military police.
Sir Mark declined to comment, the BBC said.
The Ministry of Defence (Mod) said it believes the Panorama programme “jumps to unjustified conclusions from allegations that have already been fully investigated”.
The Mod added that “two Service Police operations carried out extensive and independent investigations into allegations about the conduct of UK forces in Afghanistan”.
It said neither investigation “found sufficient evidence to prosecute” and that “insinuating otherwise is irresponsible, incorrect and puts our brave armed forces personnel at risk both in the field and reputationally”.
The Mod said it “stands open to considering any new evidence, there would be no obstruction”, adding: “We will always investigate allegations to the full, but our independent police and prosecutors can only act on the evidence before them.”
Units deployed to Afghanistan had been tasked with targeting Taliban leaders and the bomb-making networks causing frequent casualties using improvised explosive devices, Panorama said.
From 2009 onwards, the SAS conducted hundreds of raids on suspected Taliban targets to arrest key insurgency leaders and those involved in bomb-making networks.
However, Panorama reported that intelligence flaws meant innocent civilians were caught up in the operations.
One man who attended meetings in 2011 where targets were selected told the programme: “There were mistakes at every single level, serious mistakes — serious organisational mistakes.
“The scope for misidentification was so high in Afghanistan because we didn’t understand the villages. We didn’t understand the tribes. And therefore, the sausage machine that is producing these names is going to make tonnes and tonnes and tonnes of mistakes.”
Sources within UK special forces reportedly told Panorama that senior officers at headquarters in London were worried about the number of people being killed during the raids.
Panorama also said it has seen internal documents showing alarm at the SAS accounts of killings, with often many more people dead than weapons reportedly recovered.
A senior officer who worked at UK special forces HQ reportedly told the programme: “Too many people were being killed on night raids and the explanations didn’t make sense. Once somebody is detained, they shouldn’t end up dead.
“For it to happen over and over again was causing alarm at HQ. It was clear at the time that something was wrong.”
According to the programme, insiders who worked on an investigation into the way British troops behaved in Afghanistan, called Operation Northmoor, claimed they were stopped from getting to the truth.
Panorama said one senior Royal Military Police officer, who did not want to be identified, said: “I believe there was pressure from above to shut down the investigation.
“It became increasingly clear to me that it didn’t matter what evidence we were able to gather, these cases were never going to be allowed to go to court.”
Panorama SAS Death Squads Exposed: A British War Crime? will air on BBC One on Tuesday at 9pm.
Updated: July 12, 2022, 5:03 AM
Joe “I am a Zionist” Biden’s Statement on Abu Akleh Investigation
by Carlos Latuff / July 8th, 2022
Image credit: mondoweiss.net
Myths and Facts about the Israeli Siege on Gaza
15 Years of Failed Experiments
by Ramzy Baroud / July 7th, 2022
15 years have passed since Israel imposed a total siege on the Gaza Strip, subjecting nearly two million Palestinians to one of the longest and most cruel politically-motivated blockades in history.
The Israeli government had then justified its siege as the only way to protect Israel from Palestinian “terrorism and rocket attacks”. This remains the official Israeli line until this day. Not many Israelis – certainly not in government, media or even ordinary people – would argue that Israel today is safer than it was prior to June 2007.
It is widely understood that Israel has imposed the siege as a response to the Hamas takeover of the Strip, following a brief and violent confrontation between the two main Palestinian political rivals, Hamas, which currently rules Gaza, and Fatah, which dominates the Palestinian Authority in the occupied West Bank.
However, the isolation of Gaza was planned years before the Hamas-Fatah clash, or even the Hamas’ legislative election victory of January 2006. Late Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was determined to redeploy Israeli forces out of Gaza, years prior to these dates.
What finally culminated in the Israeli Disengagement from Gaza in August-September 2005 was proposed by Sharon in 2003, approved by his government in 2004 and finally adopted by the Knesset in February 2005.
The ‘disengagement’ was an Israeli tactic that aimed at removing a few thousand illegal Jewish settlers out of Gaza – to other illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank – while redeploying the Israeli army from crowded Gaza population centers to the border areas. This was the actual start of the Gaza siege.
The above assertion was even clear to James Wolfensohn, who was appointed by the Quartet on the Middle East as the Special Envoy for Gaza Disengagement. In 2010, he reached a similar conclusion: “Gaza had been effectively sealed off from the outside world since the Israeli disengagement … and the humanitarian and economic consequences for the Palestinian population were profound.”
The ultimate motive behind the ‘disengagement’ was not Israel’s security, or even to starve Gazans as a form of collective punishment. The latter was one natural outcome of a much more sinister political plot, as communicated by Sharon’s own senior advisor at the time, Dov Weisglass. In an interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, in October 2004, Weisglass put it plainly: “The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process.” How?
“When you freeze (the peace) process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem,” according to Weisglass. Not only was this Israel’s ultimate motive behind the disengagement and subsequent siege on Gaza but, according to the seasoned Israeli politician, it was all done “with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress.” The President in question here is no other than US president at the time, George W. Bush.
All of this had taken place before Palestine’s legislative elections, Hamas’ victory and the Hamas-Fatah clash. The latter merely served as a convenient justification to what had already been discussed, ‘ratified’ and implemented.
For Israel, the siege has been a political ploy, which acquired additional meaning and value as time passed. In response to the accusation that Israel was starving Palestinians in Gaza, Weisglass was very quick to muster an answer: “The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.”
What was then understood as a facetious, albeit thoughtless statement, turned out to be actual Israeli policy, as indicated in a 2008 report, which was made available in 2012. Thanks to the Israeli human rights organization Gisha, the “redlines (for) food consumption in the Gaza Strip” – composed by the Israeli Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories – was made public. It emerged that Israel was calculating the minimum number of calories necessary to keep Gaza’s population alive, a number that is “adjusted to culture and experience” in the Strip.
The rest is history. Gaza’s suffering is absolute. 98 percent of the Strip’s water is undrinkable. Hospitals lack essential supplies and life-saving medications. Movement in and out of the Strip is practically prohibited, with minor exceptions.
Still, Israel has failed miserably in achieving any of its objectives. Tel Aviv hoped that the ‘disengagement’ would compel the international community to redefine the legal status of the Israeli occupation of Gaza. Despite Washington’s pressure, that never happened. Gaza remains part of the Occupied Palestinian Territories as defined in international law.
Even the September 2007 Israeli designation of Gaza as an “enemy entity” and a “hostile territory” changed little, except that it allowed the Israeli government to declare several devastating wars on the Strip, starting in 2008.
None of these wars have successfully served a long-term Israeli strategy. Instead, Gaza continues to fight back on a much larger scale than ever before, frustrating the calculation of Israeli leaders, as it became clear in their befuddled, disturbing language. During one of the deadliest Israeli wars on Gaza in July 2014, Israeli right-wing Knesset member, Ayelet Shaked, wrote on Facebook that the war was “not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority.” Instead, according to Shaked, who a year later became Israel’s Minister of Justice, “… is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people.”
In the final analysis, the governments of Sharon, Tzipi Livni, Ehud Olmert, Benjamin Netanyahu and Naftali Bennett failed to isolate Gaza from the greater Palestinian body, break the will of the Strip or ensure Israeli security at the expense of Palestinians.
Moreover, Israel has fallen victim to its own hubris. While prolonging the siege will achieve no short or long-term strategic value, lifting the siege, from Israel’s viewpoint, would be tantamount to an admission of defeat – and could empower Palestinians in the West Bank to emulate the Gaza model. This lack of certainty further accentuates the political crisis and lack of strategic vision that continued to define all Israeli governments for nearly two decades.
Inevitably, Israel’s political experiment in Gaza has backfired, and the only way out is for the Gaza siege to be completely lifted and, this time, for good.
Achieving Self-Funding Local Sovereignty as Global Food Systems Collapse
by Ellen Brown / July 10th, 2022
The solution to the current food crisis is small and local, including growing food locally. But how to fund local food co-ops without pricey loans from big banks?
“Deglobalizing” and “dedollarizing” have been much in the news. Reducing dependence on the global supply chain and the U.S. dollar are trends that are happening not just internationally but locally. In the United States, we have seen movements both for local food independence and to divest from Wall Street banks. The burgeoning cryptocurrency movement is another push to “dedollarize” and escape the international bankers’ control grid.
This article is a sequel to one discussing home gardens and community food co-ops as local counter-measures to an impending food crisis. The question to be addressed here is how to fund them. What sort of local currency could fund food co-ops independently of the credit dollars we get from banks?
But first, some framing of the problem. It’s not just about temporary food shortages. It’s about sovereignty from the sort of global control foreshadowed in Henry Kissinger’s notorious statement, “Control food and you control the people.”
The War on Food
Alarmed commentators are observing that our food systems seem to be under attack. In a June 14 article, ZeroHedge republished a list of 99 accidental fires hampering America’s food supply chain since January 2021. Meanwhile, many farmers are unable to get the supplies they need to produce food, from fertilizers to herbicides to tractor parts; and small trucking companies that deliver food to grocery stores are being driven into insolvency by unprecedented diesel gas prices. There has also been a surge of cyberattacks on agricultural companies during critical planting and harvest seasons. And an estimated 10,000 head of cattle died mysteriously in Kansas feedlots. The deaths were officially attributed to a heat wave but that explanation is disputed by farmers.
In July 2020, the Rockefeller Foundation published a white paper called “Reset the Table: Meeting the Moment to Transform the U.S. Food System.” It summarized discussions of over 100 leaders and experts brought together to design a “reset” of the food system. A skeptical Irish blogger notes:
The first question anybody should be asking is “How would the Rockefeller Foundation know about upcoming food shortages” in 2020. Naturally it was just a calculated guess on their part. Isn’t it also interesting that the title was “Reset the Table.”
Surely just another coincidence considering “The Great Reset” was announced on 3rd June 2020. Amazing how they can get all their ducks in a row lined up so quickly considering Covid had only officially been on the block for a few months.
The hunger problem in July 2020 stemmed from unemployment and Covid-19 lockdowns, which had just begun nationally at the end of March. A January 2022 meta-analysis from Johns Hopkins University concluded that “lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, [but] they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.”
To the Rockefeller Foundation, however, the Covid crisis and policy response were an “opportunity” to make transformative changes in our food system, including “modernizing data and technology platforms.” The July 2020 white paper proclaimed:
Food is medicine … One of Covid-19’s legacies should be that it was the moment Americans realized the need to treat nutritious food as a part of health care …. By integrating healthy food into the health care system, doctors could prescribe produce as easily as pharmaceuticals and reduce utilization of expensive health services that are often required because of nutrition insecurity.
“Doctors could prescribe produce as easily as pharmaceuticals ….” Food can be prescribed, controlled and rationed. The Irish blogger wrote, “The plan is to centralize and control the food supply into one body, one single executive office.” In a May 2022 podcast, Christian Westbrook, the “Ice Age Farmer,” mused:
Where vaccine passports failed, food passports will now be eagerly accepted by hungry people who can’t afford rapidly inflating food prices. This is the realization of a longstanding agenda by the Rockefeller/UN/WEF crowd to, as Kissinger put it, “control food, and control people.”
That sort of control grid is what concerns preppers” and “survivalists” – people preparing for large-scale societal collapse. But we don’t need to go down that controversial rabbit hole for confirmation that a major food crisis is on the horizon. President Biden has said as much, and the head of the UN World Food Program has warned that we are heading into the worst humanitarian crisis since World War II.
The crisis is systemic, predating Covid. As Australian author Dr. Liz Elliott colorfully illustrates the problem in an as-yet-unpublished preface to her book “A New Way Now: Solutions to Financial and Climate Collapse”:
Corporations have become bigger than ancient countries, steamrolling over Life like invading armies.… Long supply chains are making food, machines and energy insecure. So much transport, needing so much oil, just to bring carrots and soap from cheap labour places. Third World people are realizing the money driven system is the extension of Colonialism; exploitation of their work and land by those who control money and weapons.…
These few then drive public policy towards more centralization, more scientific determinism, more technocratic “solutions,” more standardization, more war, more ideology.…
If large corporations and banks are the problem, then the solution is small and local.… The path to decentralization is already being forged in a million initiatives everywhere.
The solution is small and local, including growing food locally. But how to fund local food co-ops without pricey loans from big banks?
Food-backed Local Credit as Money
In a 2014 article titled “The Truth Is Out: Money Is Just an IOU, and the Banks Are Rolling in It,” the late David Graeber underscored the fact that money is basically just credit. What triggered his article was the Bank of England’s acknowledgment in its first quarterly report that year that virtually all of the money we use in trade is simply created on the books of banks when they make loans. It is credit advanced by the bank against the borrower’s promise to repay it, preferably backed by some form of collateral. Local currencies and cryptocurrencies can work in the same way.
To be useful today as “money,” a currency is said to need these four main attributes. It should serve as:
- A medium of exchange
- A standard of deferred payment
- A store of wealth
- A measure of value or unit of account
A medium of exchange is something that people actually use and will accept in trade. Today, that would largely rule out both gold and blockchain cryptocurrencies on the model of Bitcoin (BTC). You can’t buy groceries with gold (the grocer wouldn’t know how to make change), and Bitcoin is little used in trade. It is too volatile to be a reliable measure of value and is held chiefly as a speculative asset. As one commentator puts it, “Can you imagine owning a small business and having to pay your employees’ salaries denominated in Bitcoin. The actual value paid could vary by 50% or more from paycheck to paycheck. No company would commit to this as the risk would be way too high.”
To retain its value, a currency should ideally be backed by some asset that has a stable value itself. Gold and silver have been used historically, but the gold-backed money system failed because the banks did not have enough of that precious metal to satisfy the liquidity needs of the economy. The result was periodic bank runs and banking crises.
What sort of asset would hold its value and be widely available as collateral in a local community trading system today? With the threat of impending food shortages, food could satisfy that requirement. Garden co-ops can issue their own cryptocurrencies or community currencies, backed by the food they will produce. Sellers are often reluctant to accept unbacked community currencies in payment, because other sellers may not accept them in trade; but food-backed currencies hold their value. They are promises to pay in food, or advances against future productivity. They are paper or digital stores of food that can be reclaimed in the future, cashed in for fresh produce long after storage food in the refrigerator would have gone bad.
Grain-Backed Crypto Tokens
Grain-backed cryptocurrencies are already happening at the corporate level. In March 2022, banking giant Santander signed an agreement with an Argentinian company named Agrotoken, which has created a cryptocurrency to tokenize grain. Santander agreed to accept Agrotoken’s soy-, corn-and wheat-backed coins as loan collateral. Each token is backed by one ton of grain held in a storage facility. Farmers generate tokens by selling their crops to participating grain elevators, which validate the existence of the commodity. The loans will be made on a blockchain, with the tokens locked into smart contracts. Agrotokens were listed on an Argentinian commodities derivatives exchange, a key to getting the lending project started.
Santander called the project the first to use cryptocurrency tokens backed by agricultural commodities as lending collateral. It said in a blog post that the project uses an innovative digital solution that “will allow farmers and the agro ecosystem to have easy and fluid access to a new financing system, expanding credit capacity by using tokenized grains.”
Agrotoken was recently the subject of a case study by Accenture, which said it was bringing “new financial options to the multi-trillion-dollar agribusiness sector by letting farmers convert tons of soybean crops into a commodity-backed stablecoin that could be spent with merchants and investors.” Longer term, the company plans to move beyond grains into other agricultural commodities, offering Tokenization-as-a-Service (TaaS). The goal, Accenture said, is to develop “a token-collateralized loan system that would allow farmers easy, fluid access to a new system of credit at competitive rates.”
Holochain
Agrotokens are issued on a blockchain, the sort of distributed ledger technology involved in Bitcoin, Ethereum and Hashgraph. But an agricultural supply chain startup called Producers Token has rejected that technology in favor of a more localized peer-to-peer technology called Holochain. Holochain developer Arthur Brock says it is rooted in biomimicry (“how nature functions and scales”). Users are not buying coins created by wealthy “miners” in China but are creating their own money, simply by extending credit to other users.
According to Colin Stewart, Director of Agricultural Technology for Producers Token:
[Holochain’s] method of cryptographic accounting allows for the creation of asset-backed cryptocurrencies, and this is really interesting because what we’re designing and implementing in our platform is a method for agricultural producers to mint their own cryptocurrencies that are actually backed by their goods. So you can think of the cryptocurrency as a forward contract.
A typical “forward contract” might be an agreement between a wheat farmer and a grain processor for the sale of the farmer’s crop at a certain price on a certain date. The currency issued by the farmer would act as a receipt for future delivery of the wheat. A food-backed cryptocurrency tied to an asset with real value is considered to be more stable than blockchain-based tokens, which again are notoriously volatile.
For Stewart, another problem with blockchain technology involves its “consensus” feature. Most versions require the entire network to agree about the order of events. But Stewart asked, “If I’m an apple grower in Washington State… why should I have to know that the avocado grower in Michoacán sold his avocados?” He explained that Holochain, like blockchain, provides for transparency, accountability, and immutability, but without the inefficiencies of using one monolithic ledger that contains the history of all transactions in the network. Instead, Holochain is “agent-centric,” with users having their own individual hash-chains of data. For more on Holochain, see here.
Homegrown Food-backed Currencies
If all that sounds too high-tech for your friendly neighborhood food co-op, there are more modest local alternatives. Community currency expert Thomas Greco, author of The End of Money, maintains that a produce-backed currency could be issued without even creating a cryptocurrency. A group of local farmers could be organized to jointly issue farm currency as a paper or digital community currency, which could be spent into circulation to buy what the farmers needed to produce their crops. The currency would circulate in the local community and would be accepted back by the farmers in payment for the products they sell.
“So the currency has a beginning and an end, it’s created and it’s extinguished,” says Greco. “It’s created by the act of spending and it’s extinguished in the act of redemption, not in some other currency, but in goods and services that have been promised.”
Community currencies operate on the same sort of credit clearing system that banks use to create the “bank money” composing the majority of our money supply today, but they do it without manipulation by profiteering middlemen. Money is created as a debit in an account and is extinguished when the debt is repaid. No interest is charged, so there is no built-in imperative for growth. Community currencies also allow communities to make decisions about where capital should flow rather than giving decision-making power solely to banks, and they foster human relationships, building community and encouraging people to interact with one another.
Spreading Financial Sovereignty: From Communities to Cities to Countries
Local currencies don’t need to be printed on paper or issued as cryptocurrencies. “Mutual credit clearing systems” can keep track of credits and debits on a simple ledger. Participants of mutual credit clearing systems around the world can trade with each other, and this is already being done.
Cities and towns can also issue their own community currencies; and many have, particularly in times of depression. A major hurdle is getting sellers to accept the local currency, but this could be fixed by backing it with some public service. Tom Greco suggests “Solar Dollars” – credit instruments of a local utility company, spent into circulation by the company as credit against future electricity services. Other services the city could provide include fiber-optic broadband, circumventing the perceived hazards of 5G; and ethanol fuel generated by a community-owned still, processing not corn and other foodstuffs but weeds and other organic waste. The currency could be issued by the city through a publicly-owned bank.
Combining these possibilities, a global monetary system might be devised that is independent of the control grid manipulated by international financial megaliths. But that is a big subject, which will have to be addressed in another article.
• This article was first posted on ScheerPost.
COVID, Capitalism, Friedrich and Boris
by Colin Todhunter / July 7th, 2022
And thus it renders more and more evident the great central fact that the cause of the miserable condition of the working class is to be sought, not in these minor grievances, but in the capitalistic system itself.
— Friedrich Engels, The Condition of the Working Class in England (1845) (preface to the English Edition, p. 36).
The IMF and World Bank have for decades pushed a policy agenda based on cuts to public services, increases in taxes paid by the poorest and moves to undermine labour rights and protections.
IMF ‘structural adjustment’ policies have resulted in 52% of Africans lacking access to healthcare and 83% having no safety nets to fall back on if they lose their job or become sick. Even the IMF has shown that neoliberal policies fuel poverty and inequality.
In 2021, an Oxfam review of IMF COVID-19 loans showed that 33 African countries were encouraged to pursue austerity policies. The world’s poorest countries are due to pay $43 billion in debt repayments in 2022, which could otherwise cover the costs of their food imports.
Oxfam and Development Finance International (DFI) have also revealed that 43 out of 55 African Union member states face public expenditure cuts totalling $183 billion over the next five years.
According to Prof Michel Chossudovsky of the Centre for Research on Globalization, the closure of the world economy has triggered an unprecedented process of global indebtedness. Governments are now under the control of global creditors in the post-COVID era.
What we are seeing is a de facto privatisation of the state as governments capitulate to the needs of Western financial institutions.
Moreover, these debts are largely dollar-denominated, helping to strengthen the US dollar and US leverage over countries.
It raises the question: what was COVID really about?
Millions have been asking that question since lockdowns and restrictions began in early 2020. If it was indeed about public health, why close down the bulk of health services and the global economy knowing full well what the massive health, economic and debt implications would be?
Why mount a military-style propaganda campaign to censor world-renowned scientists and terrorise entire populations and use the full force and brutality of the police to ensure compliance?
These actions were wholly disproportionate to any risk posed to public health, especially when considering the way ‘COVID death’ definitions and data were often massaged and how PCR tests were misused to scare populations into submission.
Prof Fabio Vighi of Cardiff University implies we should have been suspicious from the start when the usually “unscrupulous ruling elites” froze the global economy in the face of a pathogen that targets almost exclusively the unproductive (the over 80s).
COVID was a crisis of capitalism masquerading as a public health emergency.
Capitalism
Capitalism needs to keep expanding into or creating new markets to ensure the accumulation of capital to offset the tendency for the general rate of profit to fall. The capitalist needs to accumulate capital (wealth) to be able to reinvest it and make further profits. By placing downward pressure on workers’ wages, the capitalist extracts sufficient surplus value to be able to do this.
But when the capitalist is unable to sufficiently reinvest (due to declining demand for commodities, a lack of investment opportunities and markets, etc), wealth (capital) over accumulates, devalues and the system goes into crisis. To avoid crisis, capitalism requires constant growth, markets and sufficient demand.
According to writer Ted Reese, the capitalist rate of profit has trended downwards from an estimated 43% in the 1870s to 17% in the 2000s. Although wages and corporate taxes have been slashed, the exploitability of labour was increasingly insufficient to meet the demands of capital accumulation.
By late 2019, many companies could not generate sufficient profit. Falling turnover, limited cashflows and highly leveraged balance sheets were prevalent.
Economic growth was weakening in the run up to the massive stock market crash in February 2020, which saw trillions more pumped into the system in the guise of ‘COVID relief’.
To stave off crisis up until that point, various tactics had been employed.
Credit markets were expanded and personal debt increased to maintain consumer demand as workers’ wages were squeezed. Financial deregulation occurred and speculative capital was allowed to exploit new areas and investment opportunities. At the same time, stock buy backs, the student debt economy, quantitative easing and massive bail outs and subsidies and an expansion of militarism helped to maintain economic growth.
There was also a ramping up of an imperialist strategy that has seen indigenous systems of production abroad being displaced by global corporations and states pressurised to withdraw from areas of economic activity, leaving transnational players to occupy the space left open.
While these strategies produced speculative bubbles and led to an overevaluation of assets and increased both personal and government debt, they helped to continue to secure viable profits and returns on investment.
But come 2019, former governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King warned that the world was sleepwalking towards a fresh economic and financial crisis that would have devastating consequences. He argued that the global economy was stuck in a low growth trap and recovery from the crisis of 2008 was weaker than that after the Great Depression.
King concluded that it was time for the Federal Reserve and other central banks to begin talks behind closed doors with politicians.
That is precisely what happened as key players, including BlackRock, the world’s most powerful investment fund, got together to work out a strategy going forward. This took place in the lead up to COVID.
Aside from deepening the dependency of poorer countries on Western capital, Fabio Vighi says lockdowns and the global suspension of economic transactions allowed the US Fed to flood the ailing financial markets (under the guise of COVID) with freshly printed money while shutting down the real economy to avoid hyperinflation. Lockdowns suspended business transactions, which drained the demand for credit and stopped the contagion.
COVID provided cover for a multi-trillion-dollar bailout for the capitalist economy that was in meltdown prior to COVID. Despite a decade or more of ‘quantitative easing’, this new bailout came in the form of trillions of dollars pumped into financial markets by the US Fed (in the months prior to March 2020) and subsequent ‘COVID relief’.
The IMF, World bank and global leaders knew full well what the impact on the world’s poor would be of closing down the world economy through COVID-related lockdowns. Yet they sanctioned it and there is now the prospect that in excess of a quarter of a billion more people worldwide will fall into extreme levels of poverty in 2022 alone.
In April 2020, the Wall Street Journal stated the IMF and World Bank faced a deluge of aid requests from scores of poorer countries seeking bailouts and loans from financial institutions with $1.2 trillion to lend.
In addition to helping to reboot the financial system, closing down the global economy deliberately deepened poorer countries’ dependency on Western global conglomerates and financial interests.
Lockdowns also helped accelerate the restructuring of capitalism that involves smaller enterprises being driven to bankruptcy or bought up by monopolies and global chains, thereby ensuring continued viable profits for Big Tech, the digital payments giants and global online corporations like Meta and Amazon and the eradication of millions of jobs.
Although the effects of the conflict in Ukraine cannot be dismissed, with the global economy now open again, inflation is rising and causing a ‘cost of living’ crisis. With a debt-ridden economy, there is limited scope for rising interest rates to control inflation.
But this crisis is not inevitable: current inflation is not only induced by the liquidity injected into the financial system but also being fuelled by speculation in food commodity markets and corporate greed as energy and food corporations continue to rake in vast profits at the expense of ordinary people.
Resistance
However, resistance is fertile.
Aside from the many anti-restriction/pro-freedom rallies during COVID, we are now seeing a more strident trade unionism coming to the fore – in Britain at least – led by media savvy leaders like Mick Lynch, general secretary of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT), who know how to appeal to the public and tap into widely held resentment against soaring cost of living rises.
Teachers, health workers and others could follow the RMT into taking strike action.
Lynch says that millions of people in Britain face lower living standards and the stripping out of occupational pensions. He adds:
COVID has been a smokescreen for the rich and powerful in this country to drive down wages as far as they can.
Just like a decade of imposed ‘austerity’ was used to achieve similar results in the lead up to COVID.
The trade union movement should now be taking a leading role in resisting the attack on living standards and further attempts to run-down state-provided welfare and privatise what remains. The strategy to wholly dismantle and privatise health and welfare services seems increasingly likely given the need to rein in (COVID-related) public debt and the trend towards AI, workplace automisation and worklessness.
This is a real concern because, following the logic of capitalism, work is a condition for the existence of the labouring classes. So, if a mass labour force is no longer deemed necessary, there is no need for mass education, welfare and healthcare provision and systems that have traditionally served to reproduce and maintain labour that capitalist economic activity has required.
In 2019, Philip Alston, the UN rapporteur on extreme poverty, accused British government ministers of the “systematic immiseration of a significant part of the British population” in the decade following the 2008 financial crash.
Alston stated:
As Thomas Hobbes observed long ago, such an approach condemns the least well off to lives that are ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short’. As the British social contract slowly evaporates, Hobbes’ prediction risks becoming the new reality.
Post-COVID, Alston’s words carry even more weight.
As this article draws to a close, news is breaking that Boris Johnson has resigned as prime minister. A remarkable PM if only for his criminality, lack of moral foundation and double standards – also applicable to many of his cronies in government.
With this in mind, let’s finish where we began.
I have never seen a class so deeply demoralised, so incurably debased by selfishness, so corroded within, so incapable of progress, as the English bourgeoisie… For it nothing exists in this world, except for the sake of money, itself not excluded. It knows no bliss save that of rapid gain, no pain save that of losing gold. In the presence of this avarice and lust of gain, it is not possible for a single human sentiment or opinion to remain untainted.
— The Condition of the Working Class in England (1845), p. 275.