> -----Original Message----- > From: Craven, Jim > Sent: Monday, June 07, 1999 1:15 PM > To: Craven, Jim > Subject: Liberalism: Classical or Neo, Same Shit > > From "Year 501: The Conquest Continues" by Noam Chomsky, South End Press, > Boston, 1993 > > "Adam Smith may have eloquently enumerated the beneficial impact on > the people of England of 'the wretched spirit of monopoly' in his bitter > condemnations of the East Indian Company. But his theoretical analysis was > not the cause of the decline. The 'honorable company' fell victim to the > confidence of British industrialists, particularly the textile > manufacturers who had been protected from the 'unfair' competition of > Indian textiles, but call for deregulation once they convinced themselves > that they could win a 'fair competition', having undermined their rivals > in the colonies by recourse to state power and violence, and used their > new wealth and power for mechanization and improved supply of cotton. In > contemporary terms, once they had established a 'level playing field' to > their incontestable advantage, nothing seemed more high-minded than an > 'open world' with no irrational and arbitrary interference with the honest > entrepreneur, seeking the welfare of all. > > Those who expect to win the game can be counted on to laud the rules > of 'free competition'--which however, they never fail to bend to their > interests. To mention only the most obvious lapse, the apostles of > economic liberalism have never contemplated permitting the 'free > circulation of labor...from place to place,' one of the foundations of > freedom of trade, as Adam Smith stressed." > (pp 10-11) > > 'A significant fact which stands out is that those parts of India which > have been the longest under British rule are the poorest today', > Jawaharlal Nehru wrote: 'Indeed some kind of chart might be drawn up to > indicate the close connection between length of British rule and > progressive growth of poverty.' In the mid-18th century, India was > developed by comparative standards, not only in textiles. 'The ship > building industry was flourishing and one of the flagships of a British > admiral during the Napoleonic Wars had been built by an Indian firm in > India.' Not only textiles, but other well-established industries such as > 'ship building, metal working, glass, paper and many crafts,' declined > under British rule, as India's development was arrested and the growth of > new industry blocked, and India became 'an agricultural colony of > industrial England.' While Europe urbanized, India 'became progressively > ruralized', with a rapid increase in the proportion of the population > dependent on agriculture... (p 14) > > Indigenuous Peoples know about "Liberalism"--classical, neo and > hybrid--very well: > > "Hugo Grotius, a leading 17th century humanist and the founder of > modern international law, determined that the 'most just war is against > savage beasts, the next against men who are like beasts.' George > Washington wrote in 1783 that 'the gradual extension of our settlements > will as certainly cause the savage, as the wolf, to retire; both being > beasts of prey tho' they differ in shape.' What is called in official PC > rhetoric 'a pragmatist', Washington regarded purchase of Indian lands > (typically through fraud or threat) as a more cost-effective tactic than > violence. Thomas Jefferson predicted to John Adams that the 'backward' > tribes at the borders 'will relapse into barbarism and misery, lose > numbers by war and want, and we shall be obliged to drive them, > with the beasts of the forests into the Stony mountains..." (p22) > And from Thomas Jefferson, the patron saint of Libertarians, classical liberals and even neo-liberals, summing up the ugly essence and modus operandi behind the myriad masks of liberalism: "...but this letter being unofficial and private, I may with safety give you a more extensive view of our policy respecting the Indians, that you may better comprehend the parts dealt to you in detail through the official channel, and observing the system of which they make a part, conduct yourself in unison with it in cases where you are obliged to act without instruction...When they withdraw themselves to the culture of a small piece of land, they will perceive how useless to them are their extensive forests, and will be willing to pare them off from time to time in exchange for necessaries for their farms and families. To promote this disposition to exchange lands, which they have to spare and we want, for necessaries which we have to spare and they want, we shall push our trading houses, and be glad to see the good and influencial individuals among them run in debt, because we observe that when these debts get beyond what the individuals can pay, they becomne willing to lop them off by cessation of lands...In this way our settlements will gradually circumscribe and approach the Indians, and they will in time either incorporate with us as citizens of the United States, or remove beyond the Mississippi. the former is certainly the termination of their history most happy for themselves; but in the whole course of this, it is essential to cultivate their love. As to their fear, we presume that our strength and their weakness is now so visible that they must see we have only to shut our hand to crush them." (Classified Letter of Thomas Jefferson to William Henry Harrison, Feb. 27, 1803)
