-------- Original Message --------
Subject: The Global Empire Strikes Back
Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 14:20:53 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Eisenscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: PACH
To: undisclosed-recipients:;

Sunday Herald (Scotland)
  7 May 2000
  The Global Empire Strikes Back

Last week's riots in London didn't just upset Middle England. The
multinationals who were the targets of demonstrators' anger can no
longer dismiss such action as the deeds of the lunatic fringe. Big
business is retaliating with touchy-feely gestures, but will all
its talk of a new eco-capitalism placate the movement against it?

Publication Date: May 7 2000 It wasn't the lecture you might have
expected from the chief executive of one of the world's largest
and richest petro-chemical companies. When BPAmoco's Sir John Browne
took to the rostrum for his Reith lecture in Edinburgh last month,
at the top of his agenda was the fight against world poverty and
the need to preserve the world's natural resources.

Browne isn't the only global capitalist to apparently discover a
new social conscience and an interest in green concerns. American
coffee giants Starbucks, for instance, last month agreed to sell
brands which guarantee a fair price to coffee bean farmers.

Not everyone, however, is convinced. The thousands who took to the
streets in London's anti-capitalist demonstrations last week, and
others who took part in smaller marches in Glasgow and Man chester,
are in no doubt that BPAmoco, Starbucks and McDonald's are the
enemy.

While Middle England was outraged by violence at the demonstrations,
and particularly by the image of Sir Winston Churchill's daubed
statue, don't be fooled into thinking the guardians of capitalism
dismiss such actions as those of a harmless lunatic fringe.

"Capitalism is running scared and big companies are desperately
trying to change their image," says Mark Lynas of Corporate Watch,
which investigates the less salubrious activities of multinational
firms such as BP, McDonald's, Gap and Nike. "BP, for example, which
is one of the main corporations causing catastrophic global climate
change, is now putting a device on top of petrol stations to generate
solar power in order to put petrol into the car. That's a joke if
ever there was."

Sir John Browne's speech certainly raised hackles throughout the
growing dissident movement. But for Dr Iain Ferguson, a lecturer
in the department of applied social studies at Paisley University,
the choice of subject matter was highly significant. "The fact BP
feel obliged to stand up and say they'll fight poverty and tackle
environment damage shows they are indeed very sensitive to pressures,"
says Ferguson. "Com panies such as BP are concerned and are trying
to change their image and make minor adjustments to the way they
do business. But there is also a concern that people are beginning
to ask questions about the conditions under which goods are produced."

Anyone who doubts how seriously corporations are taking the threat
posed by the anti-capitalist movement need look no further than a
book produced by Burson-Marsteller, a leading public relations firm
in Washington DC. The publication, which was distributed to the
firm's clients less than three months after violent demonstrations
at the World Trade Organisation's Seattle summit last year, included
profiles of dozens of groups who took part. It named leaders, gave
website addresses, and outlined the aims and methods of individual
organisations and sold itself as a "must have" for company executives
with an eye on future world developments.

"I don't believe this is simply another youthful movement which is
here today and gone tomorrow," says Ferguson. "There is a real
sense of pessimism in Britain at the moment. You only have to look
at Ken Livingstone's victory in the London mayoral elections to
realise people are looking for alternatives." Ferguson adds, though,
that the absence of the trade unions in Britain from the anti-capitalist
movement is still a significant feature. "If you look at the
demonstration in Birmingham a few weeks ago and you link this with
what happened in London on Thursday, what you have is a very high
level of discontent.

Trade unionism and the wider anti-corporate movement have not come
together yet the way they did in Seattle, but all the elements are
there. And if they do come together, that will be a very powerful
force indeed."

The majority of the people who took part in the protests were young.

Some were students, some unemployed. Some belonged to environment
groups such as Reclaim the Streets and Friends of the Earth, and,
of course, some were anarchists intending to cause trouble.

Their anger may have shocked political leaders and left the police
looking unprepared, but it shouldn't have come as a surprise. The
anti-capitalist movement is far from its infancy. Experts believe
its roots lie in the Zapatista rebellion of January 1994 in southern
Mexico.

The rebels, who took over six towns and declared war on the Mexican
government, which they accused of genocidal policies, were eventually
defeated by the army.

A year later, the remaining rebels were joined by representatives
of the movement for landless peasants in Brazil to form the People's
Global Action, and from there the message denouncing multi national
companies along with the World Bank, the WTO and the Inter national
Monetary Fund spread throughout South America and filtered into
the USA. The World Bank, the WTO and the IMF had, they argued,
propped up corrupt Third World regimes by lending billions of pounds
to untrustworthy dictators.

Not surprisingly, the elites failed to pay back the money, meaning
that the debts were inherited by the population.

When the movement arrived in North America it tapped into a zeitgeist
of anti-consumerism. Third World debt still stands at more than $2
trillion, and paying the interest has become the single largest
budget expense for dozens of poor countries, despite a high-profile
campaign of debt cancellation backed by rock stars Bono, Sting and
Bob Geldof.

The Jubilee 2000 campaign persuaded the G8 to draw up a package
reducing debt payments. But Oxfam described the initiative as
something that would make little difference to countries faced with
IMF austerity measures forcing debtor countries to cut public
spending on health, education and welfare, devalue their currencies
and lower barriers to foreign ownership of industries, land and
assets.

Throughout the late 1990s, opposition to the corporate world
developed further, attracting a wide range of single-issue groups
including small farmers, environmentalists, animal rights activists
and trade unionists.

By 1999, dozens of organisations dedicated to exposing multi
nationals exploiting workers in the developing world and damaging
the environment had sprung up across the US. They included Public
Citizen, Global Exchange and the Direct Action Network, which led
last year's demon stra tions. Through the internet and months
touring the USA spreading the word, the groups managed to get 50,000
people on to the Seattle streets and claim a significant victory.
An agreement cutting tariffs and trade barriers failed to materialise
as negotiations broke down between developing countries and the
world's wealthier nations.

The movement is already thinking about its next course of action,
planing to target the World Bank's annual meeting in Prague in
September. There are also those who hope to show their power by
shutting down a single corporation. Some businesses are retaliating.
Yesterday, Nike announced withdrawing its sponsorship from American
universities because of the activities of anti-capitalists.

But why should people in Britain share the concerns about the WTO
and World Bank felt by South American peasants and students,
environmentalists and trade unionists in the USA? For Mark Lynas
the answer is clear - the world is becoming a smaller place. He
believes a growing inequality of wealth in Britain coupled with
unease over GM foods and fears over BSE have fuelled distrust
towards the government and made people more able to identify with
the world's poor.

"The gap between rich and poor is growing. In 1890, the pro portion
of wealth divided between the developing world and the West was
one to two, in 1965 it was one to 30, now its one to 65," he says."I
believe there is a growing awareness in Britain of people seeing
themselves as part of a collective global movement. And they realise
that if there is going to be an alternative to capitalism, it's
got to be practised globally."

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  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 credence 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
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
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