-Caveat Lector-

>From http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/en/ppii.html

{{<Begin>}}
etruria oggi - issue no. 41 - May 1996
A world without direction
Planetary, Permanent, Immediate, Immaterial
How the "new emperors" determine the destiny of the World.
BY IGNACIO RAMONET
AS we near the end of the century and the end of a millennium western societies
are in search of an identity. Not one of the principles on which States have
been founded appear to have escaped the wave of self-doubt. On a planetary
scale today's world leaders remain stunned by the sudden collapse of political
structures erected after the Second World War. Intra-state civil wars have
multiplied. In the West an entire value system, adopted during the period of
Enlightenment, has itself been shattered by the end of the cold war and the
collapse of the Soviet Union. We face a crisis of intelligibility : the gap
between what we should understand and the conceptual tools needed for
understanding is widening. With the disappearance of certainties and the
absence of a collective purpose, must we now resign ourselves to living what
Max Weber called "world disenchantment"?

A world heavily shaken by formidable technological transformations, by the
persistence of economic disorder and by the increase in ecological dangers.
These three problem areas reveal themselves in the form of social disarray, the
explosion of inequality, the appearance of new forms of poverty and exclusion,
the inability to see work as a value, the profound sickness of power, mass
unemployment, the amplification of the irrational, the proliferation of
nationalism, fundamentalism, xenophobia and, simultaneously, the rapid increase
in ethical and moral concerns. In this context of disappointment and
uncertainty, two new paradigms structure the trend in thinking. The first of
these, communication, is slowly tending to take over the role formerly played
by progress, one of the main paradigms of the last two centuries.

>From education to business, from government to justice, in every sphere and in
all walks of life, only one thing really matters: we must communicate.
Replacing the ideology of progress with that of communication leads to all
kinds of upheavals, blurring the mission of political power itself. And this is
where the increasingly grating central rivalry between the powers and the mass
media stems from. In particular it leads some leaders to openly reject social
objectives of prime importance established by the republican watchwords of
"equality" and "fraternity". Executive power sees this new paradigm better
accomplished, better realised and better carried out by the media rather than
by itself.

The other paradigm is the market. It replaces that of machine, a form of
organisation whose mechanisms and operation previously assured the evolution of
a system. The mechanical metaphor, inherited from the 18th century, is
succeeded by the economic and financial metaphor. From now on everything must
adapt to the criteria of the "market", the ultimate panacea. The highest
ranking of these new values, profit - benefits, return, competition and
competitiveness - have taken over from the laws of nature, or of history, as a
general explanation of the evolution of societies. Here, too, only the fittest
survive, and in all legitimacy. Economic Darwinism and social Darwinism
(constant reminders of competition, selection and adaptation) naturally assert
themselves. Financial markets in particular become the model - thanks notably
to new communication technologies - towards which all sectors of activity tend
to gravitate. Such a system - "the PPII system" - is the spearhead of
globalisation, the main and determining phenomenon of our age. What is the PPII
system ? That which is planetary, permanent, immediate and immaterial. Four
characteristics that recall the four principal attributes of God himself. And
in fact this system sets itself up as a modern divinity, demanding submission,
faith, cult and new rituals. From now on everything tends to organise itself
according to the criteria of PPII : Stock Exchange values, monetary values,
information, television programmes, multimedia, cyberculture etc. That is why
so much is being said about "globalisation". Models of financial markets no
longer refer to the natural sciences - Newtonian mechanics or organic chemistry
- as a point of reference but the calculation of probabilities, the theory of
games, the chaos theory, fuzzy logic and the sciences of the living. At the
heart of the system lies money. "Money dominates everything", notes the
economist Michel Beaud, "more intelligence and resources are devoted to its
care than to saving the lives of people in difficulty. More than ever before in
your societies it has become the criterion, the guide, the supreme value; it
fascinates and blinds".

In this way chance, uncertainty and disorder become the important parameters
for measuring the new harmony of a world where poverty, illiteracy, violence
and illness are always on the increase. A world in which the richest fifth of
the population owns 80% of resources, whereas the poorest fifth scarcely owns
0.5%. A world where the value of transactions on money and financial markets
represents about fifty times the value of international commercial trade.
Fascinated by the short term and quick profits, markets are incapable of
foreseeing the future, of anticipating the future of mankind and the
environment, of planning the growth of cities, and ultimately of treating
social disintegration. "Wealth cannot be reduced to GNP per capita", Ralph
Dahrendorf today concedes after having long sung the praise of the market, "it
must take into consideration the entirety of conditions which compete to
constitute well-being. Exclusion is economically bad, but above all it is
socially corrosive and ultimately politically explosive". Today, as we prepare
to enter the 21st century, who are the true masters of the world? Who, beyond
appearances, really holds the reins of power? To ask questions such as these is
to confirm that more often than not governments, elected after titanic
electoral battles, find themselves impotent in the face of formidable forces
which operate on a planetary scale. These forces are not, as some futuristic
writers imagine, a sort of secret military elite plotting to take political
control of the world. It is more a case of forces acting unimpeded, strictly
applying the neoliberal vulgate and obeying precise precepts such as free
exchange, privatisation, monetarism, competitiveness, productivity, and whose
slogan could be: "Power to the market!".

Finance, commerce and the media, as well as other domains, stimulated by the
emergent technologies, have witnessed a veritable explosion. And they have
spawned economic empires of a different kind, writing their own laws,
relocating their production sites, moving their capital at the speed of light
and investing from one end of the planet to the other. They know neither
borders nor States nor cultures. They disregard national sovereignty. They
speculate with currencies, unconcerned by social consequences, provoke
recessions, and lecture governments. When governments are not accomplices to
their activities, they seem to be lost. Incapable of resolving at their level a
thousand serious problems - such as mass unemployment - caused by racketeering
among the new conquerors. Faced with such a situation ordinary people become
increasingly suspicious of the "elite". They are tempted by dissidence and
wonder what political reform should be introduced, at the international level,
to impose democratic control on these new masters of the earth. Those who, in
France and elsewhere, become involved in interminable electoral duels to win
power democratically, are they aware that, as this century draws to a close,
power has shifted position? That it has abandoned those former arenas of
political power? Are they not running the risk of revealing their impotence? Of
being forced bend, to withdraw, to go back on what they have said? And to
realise that true power lies elsewhere. Out of reach. One well-known French
weekly recently published a report on "the 50 most influential men on the
planet" and not a single state leader, head of government, minister or member
of parliament from any country whatsoever figured among them. A few weeks ago,
another weekly magazine devoted its front page to "the most influential man in
the world". Who was it? William Clinton? Helmut Kohl? Boris Yeltsin? No. It was
quite simply Bill Gates, the head of Microsoft, who dominates strategic
information markets and is preparing to take control of the information super-
highways. The tremendous scientific and technological changes of the past two
decades have to a large extent doped the ultraliberal theories of "laissez-
faire, laissez-passer" policies. And what is more the fall of the Berlin wall,
the disappearance of the Soviet Union and the collapse of communist regimes
have spurred them on. The globalisation of the exchange of signs in particular
has been accelerated to a phenomenal extent thanks to the revolution in
information science and communication. These have brought about a very real
explosion - the famous "big bangs" - in two sectors, the veritable nerve centre
of modern society : financial markets and information networks. The
transmission of data at the speed of light (300,000 kilometres per second) ;
the digitalisation of text, pictures and sound ; the now common place recourse
to telecommunication satellites ; the radio-telephone revolution ; the general
use of computers in most areas of production and services ; the miniaturisation
of computers and their application to world-networking capabilities have slowly
upset the order of the world.

Especially the world of finance, which has successfiJlly reunited the four
qualities that make up a model perfectly adapted to the new technological
order: immaterial, immediate, permanent and planetary. Divine attributes, as it
were, which logically give rise to a new cult, a new religion. That of the
market. We exchange information instantaneously, 24 hours a day, from one end
of the earth to the other. The main stock exchanges are linked together and
operate in rotation. Non-stop. While throughout the world thousands of over-
educated over-talented young people spend their days in front of electronic
screens, phone in hand. These are the market clerks. They interpret the new
economic rationale. The one that is always right and before which all other
reasoning - especially if it is of a social or humanitarian order - must bow.
More often than not, however, markets appear to operate blindly, applying rules
which may just as well have been borrowed from a book of spells or at best from
high-street psychology such as: "the hearsay-economy, the analysis of sheep-
like behaviour, or even the study of contagious mimicry"... And as a result of
these new features the financial market has perfected a range of new products -
such as derivatives and futures - which are so extremely complex and volatile
that few experts truly master them. And this gives them a considerable
advantage in financial transactions - though not without risk, as the collapse
of the British bank Barings has recently shown. There are barely a dozen in the
world who know how to act usefully - that is, for their greater benefit - on
the foreign exchange markets. They are considered to be the "market masters";
one word from one of them could set everything rocking, the dollar drops, the
Tokyo stock market collapses.

Faced with the power of these giants of the financial world, States can do very
little. The recent financial crisis in Mexico, which began in late December
1994, demonstrated this clearly. What weight do the cumulative currency
reserves of the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, the United
Kingdom and Canada that is, the seven richest countries in the world - have
when faced with the financial attacking force of private investment funds, for
the most part British or Japanese? Not a lot. Just as an example, let us
consider that in the greatest financial elilort made in modern economic history
in favour of a country - in this case Mexico - the great States of the world
(including the United States), the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund managed, together, to raise about 50 billion dollars. A considerable sum
of money. Well, the big three American pension fund managers, Fidelity
Investments, Vanguard Group and Capital Research and Management control 500
billion dollars. The managers of these funds hold in their hands a financial
power of indescribable proportions - one that no government minister or central
bank governor in the world possesses. In a market that has become instantaneous
and planetary, any sudden movement from one of these veritable financial giants
can cause the economic destabilisation of any country. Political leaders of the
major world powers meeting with the 850 most important economic decision-makers
in the world at the Davos International Forum in Switzerland last January,
clearly stated the degree to which they feared the superhuman power of these
fund managers whose fabulous wealth has freed itself from government control
and who act as they wish on the cyberspace of world finance. The latter
represents a kind of New Frontier, a New Territory on which the fate of a large
proportion of the world depends. With no social contract. No sanction. No
rules. Except for those arbitrarily drawn up by the main protagonists. For
their greater profit.

"Markets vote daily", according to M. George Soros, the billionaire financier.
"They force governments to adopt unpopular but indispensable measures. It is
markets that have a sense for Statehood". To which the former French prime
minister M. Raymond Barre, great defender of economic liberalism, replies : "It
is certainly no longer possible to leave the world in the hands of a group of
irresponsible 30-year-olds who think of nothing but making money !". He feels
that the international finance system does not possess the institutional means
needed to withstand the challenges of globalisation and the general opening of
markets. The same conclusion is reached by M. Boutros-Ghali, general secretary
of the United Nations: "The reality of world power largely eludes States. It is
particularly true that globalisation implies the emergence of new powers which
transcend state structures". Among these new powers that of the mass media
appears to be one of the most powerful and most formidable. The conquest of
massive audiences on a planetary scale triggers off titanic battles. Industrial
groups are engaged in a fight to the death for the control of multimedia
resources and information superhighways which, according to the American vice-
president, Albert Gore, "represent for the United States today what road
transport infrastructure meant for the middle of the 20th century". For the
first time in the history of the world, messages (news, songs etc.) are
permanently addressed, by means of television channels transmitted by
satellite, to the whole planet. There are, at present, two world-wide channels -
 Cable News Network (CNN) and Music Television (MTV) - but in the near future
there will be dozens of them, transforming habits and cultures, ideas mid
opinions. And they will have an effect on, or even short-circuit, the voice as
well as the behaviour of governments. "Groups more powerful than states",
confirm two French writers, "are laying siege to democracy's most precious
possession: information. Will they impose their law on the whole world or,
alternatively, open a new era of individual freedom ?" In such circumstances,
should we be surprised that inequalities of wealth, particularly in the United
States, continue to get worse ? And that, as the Herald Tribune noted on April
19 1995: "The richest 1% of people control about 40% of national wealth, that
is, twice as much as in the United Kingdom which is the most inequitable
country in western Europe" ? Neither Ted Turner of the CNN nor Rupert Murdoch
of News Corporation Limited, nor Bill Gates of Microsoft, nor Jeffrey Vinik of
Fidelity Investment, nor Robert Allen of ATT, not even George Soros or the
dozens of other new masters of the world have ever put their activities to the
test of universal suffrage. Democracy is not for them. They are above these
interminable discussions where concepts such as the public good, social
contentedness, freedom and equality still have a sense. They have no time to
waste. Their money, their products and their ideas cross the frontiers ofworld
markets without hindrance. In their view, political power is only the third
power. First of all there is economic power, then comes media power. And when
one possesses these two - as Berlusconi has shown in Italy - seizing political
power is a mere formality. That is why many citizens continue to seek meaning
and values. Again, each of us feels the need to be part of a collective
project, an objective, the great scheme of things. For, as the philosopher Jean-
Luc Nancy observes : "Beyond the fever of great technical, social and
geopolitical change we find ourselves without a sense of history to
counterpoise the course of events. How can order be reinstated in a world that
is erupting everywhere? Where civil, ethnic and religious wars are multiplying
? With what intellectual tools can it be understood ? What is the rationale or
the logic that can explain current conflicts ? There is no lack of information
since it increases ten-fold every year. Formerly rare and expensive,
information now tends towards becoming over-abundant and almost free. Radio, TV
channels and cyber-networks like Intemet offer it for next to nothing. Offers
flood the market. It is no longer information that citizens need but sorting,
selection, a choice which corresponds precisely to what one is looking for,
depending on his activities, his convictions or his identity. The media
explosion, the multiplication of new television channels and the rise in
computer technologies open the way to new practices linked to knowledge,
understanding, creation and leisure. Once again, a new world is approaching ;
yet at the same time market capitalism is snatching it away with its mammoth
means - think of the present megaconcentrations Time Warner-Turner Broadcasting
System or Walt Disney-ABC - and steals for its own profit all the potential
that the new technologies could offer for the cultural fulfilment of citizens.
Slowly, in France (where there are three million unemployed, a million on
unemployment benefit and five million social outcasts) people are beginning to
admit that we are entering a new era where decline, chaos and tragedy are all
possibilities. Where political leaders have no control over our problems, and
the tremendous potential of rebellion, as we saw in December 1995, is beginning
to awaken. Bogged down. In today's democracies more and more citizens are
starting to feel bogged down, restrained by a viscous sort of doctrine that is
imperceptibly enveloping all rebel thought, inhibiting it, worrying it,
paralysing it and finally suffocating it. This is the doctrine of "single
thought", the only one authorised by an invisible and omnipresent opinion
police. The arrogance, pride and insolence of this doctrine have reached such a
level since the fall of the Berlin wall, the collapse of communism and the
demoralisation of socialism that one may, without exaggerating, define this new
ideological craze as modern dogmatism. What is single thought it is the
translation into supposedly universal, ideological terms of the interests of a
group of economic forces, in particular those of international capital. In a
sense it has been formulated and defined since 1944, on the occasion of the
Bretton-Woods agreement. Its main sources are the large economic and monetary
institutions - the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the General Agreement
on Trade and Tarilils, the European Commission, the Bundesbank, the Banque de
France etc. which, through their financing enrol others to their way of
thinking, right across the planet, in many research institutions, universities
and foundations which then, in their turn, refine and spread the good word.

This is taken up and reproduced by the main organs of economic information,
notably by the "bibles" for investors and stock market players - The Wall
Street Journal, The Financial Times, The Economist, Far Eastern Economic
Review, Reuters etc. - often property of large industrial and financial groups.
More or less everywhere, faculties of economics, journalists, writers and
politicians adopt these main commandments of the tables of the law and repeat
them ad nauseam knowing full well that in our media-run societies repetition is
the same as proof. The first principle of single thought is so strong that an
absent-minded Marxist would not deny it: economics prevails over politics.
It is by adopting such principles that, for example, an instrument of such
importance in the hands of the executive as is the Banque de France was made
independent in 1994, with hardly a murmur of opposition, and in sense
"sheltered from political hazards". "The Banque de France is independent,
apolitical and transpartisan", affirms its chairman, Jean-Claude Trichet adding
however : "We are asking for the public debt to be reduced", and "we follow a
strategy of stable currency". As if these two objectives were not political! In
the name of "realism" and "pragmatism" - expressed by Alain Minc in the
following manner : "Capitalism cannot collapse, it is the natural condition of
society. Democracy is not the natural condition of society. But the market is."
- the economy has been put in the driving seat. An economy which is of course
devoid of social conscience - as if this were a sort of pathetic strait jacket
whose weight might lead to decline and crisis. The other key concepts of single
thought are well known: the market, whose "invisible hand smoothes out the
bumps and dysfunctions of capitalism", and especially the financial markets
whose "signals direct and determine the general movement of the economy" ;
competition and competitiveness which "stimulate and motivate businesses
leading them to permanent and beneficial modernisation" ; free exchange without
borders, "the common denominator in the development of commerce and therefore
also societies" ; globalisation of both manufacturing output as well as the
flow of money ; the international division of work which "moderates union
claims and lowers the cost of salaries" ; strong currencies, "a stabilising
factor" ; deregulation ; privatisation ; liberalisation, etc. Always "less of
the State", constant arbitration in favour of capital revenue and against
income from work. And indifference with regard to the ecological cost. The
constant repetition in the media of this catechism by practically all
politicians, whether left or right, endows it with such an intimidating power
that it smothers any efsort of free thought, and makes resistance against this
new obscurantism extremely difficult.

One might even begin to wonder whether the 22 million unemployed Europeans, the
urban decay, the general precariousness, inner-city rioting, the ecological
devastation, the return of racism and the masses of social outcasts are simply
mirages, guilty hallucinations, deeply discordant in this best of worlds that
single thought constructs for our anaesthetised consciences. And this is
because, imperceptibly, as we edge towards the end of the century, new concepts
mould our way of looking at reality. After the fashion of a dominant ideology,
they infiltrate everywhere, establish themselves as natural, and are adapted by
the mass media (television, radio, press), by a large number of the "elite",
opinion-makers and partisans of this "single thought".

It is also shocking to note how, paradoxically, the degree of ferment, crisis
and peril of the present day coincides with an overwhelming ideological
consensus, imposed by the media, by surveys and by advertising thanks to the
manipulation of signs and symbols and thanks also to the new mind-control.
Happily, here and there, both in the North and in the South, intellectuals,
scientists and creative thinkers do not hesitate to denounce this asphyxiating
consensus and to join intellectual battle. They resist, question, rebel. They
offer other arguments, other theses in order to escape from mind control and to
help transform the world. In so doing they help us to better understand the
meaning of our times.

Translated by Humphrey Liddiard
Ignacio Ramonet is the Director of the French monthly Le Monde diplomatique.
This article has been published by etruria oggi
English Edition : Attilio Brilli, Editor
EDITORIAL BOARD
Servizio Segretaria Generale of the Banca Popolare dell'Etruria e del Lazio.
Corso Italia, 179 52100 Arezzo


{{<End>}}

A<>E<>R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said
it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your
own reason and your common sense." --Buddha
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers." Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut." Ernest Hemingway
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to