GLOBALIZE THIS!

Friday, March 26, 2004

FRIDAY BLOGGING

My blogging has been slow this week as my home computer is in the shop and I am having mondo hassles with Fed Ex trying to get it delivered back to me. (Apparently guaranteed over night delivery by 10:30 am should not be taken at face value). I've been using the down time to comb through two days of testimony before the 9/11 commission and to sort through all the statements by and counter-statements against insta-celebrity Dick Clarke.

Would the real Dick Clarke please stand up...

In the mean time, I've been perusing the sites of a number of my fellow blogonauts. Specifically, I've been checking out Blogstreet's rankings of top blogs in an attempt to learn just what it takes to publish a popular blog (could I say blog more times in one sentence?). Some of them I find excellent. Others, I find myself asking, "Huh?"

I can't seem to discern any hard and fast rules for what makes a blog succeed, so I decided to make up my own, universal rule for good blogging. Bind it as a sign upon your doorpost. Speak of it when you lie down and when you rise up.

Blogs must add value to the public discourse. Add new information that isn't already out there, or flies under the radar of the mainstream outlets. Provide insightful analysis that obliterates the conventional wisdom. Entertain the world with your creativity. And so on.

Any schmoe can post a hyperlink to the latest Paul Krugman column. Any schmoe can reproduce content that they lift from other sites. Some people even have the gall to beg readers for money for such a shallow service (and somehow they manage to be ranked no. 1/2?!?).

¶ 3/26/2004 03:33:24 PM

Thursday, March 25, 2004

WHO'S AFRAID OF IMF DEMOCRACY?

Not these guys.

They are the people behind last week's ministerial statement calling for a more democratic approach to appointing the new IMF Managing Director.

Hell, when the Swiss are calling for more transparency in international financial affairs, you know big things are afoot.

¶ 3/25/2004 04:14:44 PM

WHY WE NEED OSHA...AND UNIONS

On this day in 1911, 146 people died in the Triangle Shirtwaist fire.

People jumping out of windows broke holes in the sidewalk.

But surely, anti-union critics say, this could never happen in today's modern age. Workers today aren't killed by their employer's negligence and greed.

Oh, and getting back to the things that really matter in life, I heard on the radio this morning it's Sarah Jessica Parker's birthday today. She's 37.

¶ 3/25/2004 08:50:58 AM

Wednesday, March 24, 2004

WAL-MART OPENS CAPITOL HILL FRANCHISE

This WSJ story on Wal-Mart's foray into Washington lobbying will really make your stomach turn.

In 1998, the retailer hired its first lobbyist -- a retired Air Force lieutenant general -- and set out to transform itself from a company without a Washington presence to one that could bend public policy to suit its business needs...Unlike most corporations, which contribute to both parties in rough proportion to Congress's partisan split, about 85% of Wal-Mart's checks go to Republicans. And recently Mr. Allen was named a "Pioneer" by the Bush campaign, meaning he has raised at least $100,000 by getting friends and colleagues to make contributions of up to $2,000 each...Congressional allies rushed to offer advice, including Trent Lott, then Senate majority leader. Mr. Lott arrived in Bentonville in late 1999 with a simple message, according to a congressman who attended the meeting: Increase your profile and open your wallet.

Wal-Mart has been successful in raising PAC money (nearly $1.5 million, making it the second largest) by relying upon many of the same tactics it uses to force employees to work unpaid overtime:

For some employees, the pressure to contribute became a point of contention. "With my district manager sitting 3 inches over my shoulder, you think I didn't sign up?" recalls Jon Lehman, a Wal-Mart manager who quit in November 2001 and is now working with union organizers to enlist Wal-Mart workers. Current Wal-Mart employees, who asked not to be named, also report feeling pressured to give to the PAC.

In defense of their political activities, Wal-Mart offered that they were merely donating to candidates who shared the company's priorities. Truly a laudable goal.

¶ 3/24/2004 02:46:51 PM

9/11 BLAME GAME: ALSO OF NOTE

Commissioner Timothy J. Roemer took National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to task for her refusal to testify before the 9/11 commission:

I want to start, Mr. Chairman, by, I believe, underscoring something you said in your opening statement.

You said that we have invited Dr. Rice to talk to this 9/11 commission. Well, we have a book issued by Richard Clarke which is a blistering attack on the Bush administration. We have Dr. Rice on the airwaves saying that she strongly condemns and disagrees with Mr. Clarke's assessments and analysis. I would hope that this discussion would not be for the airwaves and would not be a partisan type of discussion that we have, but belongs in this hearing room tomorrow in a substantive way so that the 10 commissioners can ask factually based questions and so the American people have the access to those answers to try to make this country safer. So I would underscore your comments, Mr. Chairman, that I hope Dr. Rice will reconsider and come before our commission for the sake of the American people tomorrow. (APPLAUSE)

¶ 3/24/2004 11:57:49 AM

THE 9/11 BLAME GAME

Last night and this morning I have been frantically sorting through yesterday's testimony before the September 11 Commission and awaiting the full release of today's transcript.

I'm planning more on this once I've had some time to digest the bulk of it (yesterday's transcript from the NYT is 70 some pages long). Until then, I wanted to share this excerpt from Madeline Albright's testimony, which lucidly captures the nature of the American conflict with Al Qaeda, and the path forward for a more secure world. Disappointingly, much of her vision is lost in the Bush administration's response:

We were not attacked on September 11th by a noun, terrorism. We were attacked by individuals affiliated with Al Qaida. They are the enemies who killed our fellow citizens and foreigners, and defeating them should be the focus of our policy. If we pursue goals that are unnecessarily broad, such as the elimination not only of threats but also of potential threats, we will stretch ourselves to the breaking point and become more vulnerable -- not less -- to those truly in a position to harm us. We also need to remember that Al Qaida is not a criminal gang that can simply be rounded up and put behind bars. It is the center of an ideological virus that has wholly perverted the minds of thousands and distorted the thinking of millions more. Until the right medicine is found, the virus will continue to spread, and that remedy begins with competence. Bin Laden and his cohorts have absolutely nothing to offer their followers except destruction, death and the illusion of glory. Puncturing this illusion is the key to winning the battle of ideas. The problem is not combating Al Qaida's inherent appeal, for it has none. The problem is changing the fact that major components of American foreign policy are either opposed or misunderstood by much of the world. According to the State Department's advisory group on public diplomacy, published recently, the bottom has indeed fallen out of support for the United States. This unpopularity has handed bin Laden a gift that he has eagerly exploited. He is viewed by many as a leader of all those who harbor anti-American sentiments, and this has given him a following that is wholly undeserved. If we are to succeed, we must be sure that bin Laden goes down in history not as a defender of the faith or champion of the dispossessed, but rather as what he is: a murderer, a traitor to Islam and a loser. The tarnishing of America's global prestige will require considerable time and effort to undue, and that's why we need long- range counterterrorism plans that advantage of the full array of our national security tools. This plan must include the comprehensive reform of our intelligence structures; a vastly expanded commitment to public diplomacy and outreach, especially within the Arab and Muslim worlds; a far bolder strategy for stabilizing Afghanistan; revised policies toward the key countries of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia; expansion of the Nunn-Lugar program to secure weapons of mass destruction materials on a global basis; a new approach to handling and sharing of information concerning terrorist suspects; and a change in the tone of American national security policy to emphasize the value of diplomatic cooperation.

¶ 3/24/2004 11:42:12 AM

Tuesday, March 23, 2004

EL SALVADOR'S ELECTION, FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE POND

The FT and the WSJ weigh in on El Salvador's recent election.

Here are the headlines, respectively:

"Voters give big win to El Salvador rightwinger"

and

"Our Friends in Salvador"

According to the WSJ, El Salvador's new president's favorite political hero is Ronald Reagan. Under Reagan, of course, the US government fomented civil war in El Salvador with covert operations and military aid throughout the 1980s in support of a military junta--trained at the School of the Americas--that terrorized Salvadorans with death squads, torture, extrajudicial executions and "disappearances" for the good part of 12 years. You know, "our friends."

In contrast, the main opposition candidate staked his bid on a platform of pulling Salvadoran troops from the U.S.-led occupation force in Iraq, renewing diplomatic ties with Cuba's communist regime, and raising taxes on the rich to finance social programs for the poor.

¶ 3/23/2004 10:56:03 AM

TED RALL: THE TYRANNY OF CORPORATE MEDIA CONSOLIDATION

¶ 3/23/2004 09:34:21 AM

Monday, March 22, 2004

AMERICA AND THE POSTMODERN SLAVE TRADE

The free trade automatons over at theWashington Post editorial board finally get it...sort of: multinational corporations are profitting from slave labor in China. A speacial thanks to John Sweeny and the 13 million strong memebers of the AFL-CIO.

¶ 3/22/2004 12:32:36 PM

DEMOCRACY (OF SORTS) AT THE IMF?

Though the IMF is a member organization of 184 countries, in practice everything important that happens at the IMF must pass through the organization's board of directors, comprised of representatives of 24 countries, but dominated by the US Treasury (see Global Gamble by Peter Gowan for more) and, to a lesser extent, Europe.

By tacit agreement, historical convention has deemed that the US picks the head of the World Bank and Europe picks the head of the IMF, with US approval. But just as European finance ministers were expected to meet this week for a session of horsetrading top positions at the IMF and the European Central Bank, a group of IMF executive directors representing more than 100 countries--developing countries as well as Russia, Australia, Switzerland, et. al.--released this statement:

"The G-11 Executive Directors, representing emerging and developing countries from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East, joined by a group of Executive Directors from Australia and Switzerland, who each represent a range of countries, along with the Executive Director from the Russian Federation-well over 100 countries-met today to discuss the selection process for a new Managing Director of the IMF, arising from the resignation of Mr. Horst Köhler.

1. The above group is of the strong view that the candidate nominated for the position must be an eminent person, familiar with the goals of the institution.

2. The process of identifying and selecting the candidate must be open and transparent, with the goal of attracting the best person for the job, regardless of nationality. A plurality of candidates representing the diversity of members across regions would be in the best interest of the Fund.

3. All members of the Executive Board should be consulted in the process of considering candidates that lead to the selection of the Managing Director and informed in a timely manner regarding candidates, including their credentials and knowledge of the institution."

Not quite this, but its a start.

¶ 3/22/2004 11:33:19 AM

WHY I LEFT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION

A note from Rand Beers (via JFK '04):

“One year ago yesterday, I resigned from the Bush Administration to protest the Administration’s rush to war.

George Bush may have declared “Mission Accomplished,” ten months ago, but yesterday’s horrific bombing in Iraq shows that American soldiers and Iraqis are still very much in harm’s way. But while Baghdad was bombed, Dick Cheney emerged from his bunker to engage in partisan attacks. It’s time for the President, the Vice-President, and the Secretary of State to stop playing politics with national security. We need to fix their failed go-it-alone policy that is making Iraq more dangerous for our soldiers and harder for them to secure the peace.

I signed up with John Kerry because I know his values, experience and toughness will make peace a reality.

Having worked with John for almost a year now, I feel confident he will restore America’s leadership in world affairs, but he needs your help now. Please join us; your donation to John Kerry is a statement that you’ll fight for change.”

¶ 3/22/2004 10:53:47 AM