Majorityrights News > Category: World Affairs

Hillary Leaks: Pick Your Outrage

I was discussing this article with Kumiko. We came to the conclusion that the most charitable explanation for its penultimate confusion - exactly who, really, is to be persuaded and of what? has to do with perhaps a shyness in having to talk in a situation controlled by right wing interests: Euractiv, The EU, corporate industries invested in Asia, and German corporate interests - rather, the difficulty in getting them to see their interests aright.

Seeing the article’s argument more clearly, German, Dutch and other European workers and Asian workers should have higher salaries. That would allow Germans in particular to buy more of their own product and export less and allow Asian economies to buy more European exports in addition to their own domestic product.

The key is to dissuade corporate feudalism - the idea that low wages are a corollary to profitable business. The article argues in effect that low wages are only a corollary to enormous profit for a narrow group of elites, poorer workers and not to successful industry and healthy economic balance.

Where Germany, for example, does not let some of its industry go abroad, it should be incorporating more robotics to increase the better output as they might provide and “make-work” if necessary, with better paid “workers”, with more capacity to buy more of their own domestic product.

Euractiv, “Who fears the wolf of globalisation?”, 14 Oct 2016:

Trade unions and companies are more closely aligned against the harmful competition stemming from emerging economies’ low salaries and working conditions than ever before. The EU’s export of jobs is harming itself and the global economy, write Ernest Maragall and Jordi Angusto.

Ernest Maragall is an MEP with the Green/EFA group and Jordi Angusto is an economist.

They are accused of taking our jobs as a result of the low-cost products we buy from them. But the fact is that the EU’s external surplus has now reached an astonishing amount, close to half a trillion euros. This is 20% bigger than the Chinese surplus and both together pose a serious threat to the world economy.

In other words, by restricting our domestic demand through austerity we’re harming both ourselves and our major trading partners.

There is no ‘foreign enemy’ taking our jobs, rather the EU is taking jobs to the rest of the world. Prime examples are countries such as Germany and the Netherlands which are the main contributors to the EU surplus and which today have historically high employment thanks to third country demand, mostly from the US, UK, Canada, Brazil and Australia. And this is most definitely not because Germany and the Netherlands have low salaries.

In fact, companies tend not to invest where salaries are lower but where the difference between product per worker and salary is greater; i.e. where profitability can be greatest. In the case of Germany, the reunification process and the Schröder 2010 plan led to a huge contraction in wages and a notable increase in the product to salary difference.

Some might say they gained in terms of competitiveness, increasing economic activity, jobs and exports. Others, however, would see this not only as ‘beggar-thy-neighbour’, but their own people too, becoming unable to absorb increased production and depending on exports.

Whilst productivity gains can allow profits and wages to increase and support growth; competitiveness gained through wage dumping leads to a substitution effect, with jobs and profits gained here at the expense of jobs and profits lost elsewhere. This, in turn, leads to contraction because of a fall in demand.

That’s why institutions which could never be accused of being leftwing such as the IMF, the G20 and the OECD, have called upon Germany to increase domestic demand through public investment and salary increases, in order to help boost global growth whilst also contributing towards an improvement in labour conditions in emergent-economies.

Or do we think we’ll help them by competing to see who has the lowest salaries?

Globalisation brings many problems and with it comes the need for political action at a global level to heal our planet, eradicate tax havens and avoid the consolidation of a new corporate feudalism; but the fact that millions of people are emerging from poverty in Asia and Africa is not a problem. The critical problem today is much more how to convince those countries in surplus to increase their domestic demand.

Vistula Lagoon only accessible through an inlet in the north eastern part, in Russian Federation territory

The Moscow Times, “Jarosław Kaczyński, leader of Poland’s ruling party, has announced plans to build a canal to bypass a stretch of territory controlled by Russia” 14 Oct 2016:

“By building this canal, we will demonstrate that we are a sovereign country,” Kaczyński told journalists in the port city of Elbląg. “This is for political-military interests,” he added.

The canal will go through the Vistula Split, a stretch of land that separates the Vistula Lagoon from the Gdańsk Bay in the Baltic Sea. The only way to access the Baltic from Elbląg is to go through Russian controlled waters. The canal, which authorities plan to complete by 2022, aims to change that.

“We already know that Russia will be against the building of the canal. But we will do it anyway. Soon, we will be celebrating the dig of the first shovel,” said Kaczyński.

Ecologists and locals, many of whom live off holiday-makers who travel to the split’s sandy beaches every year, have voiced concerns over the canal. But ministers say security concerns in the Kaliningrad region come before ecological threats.

“We already know that our eastern neighbors will be protesting this decision on ecological grounds,” said Poland’s minister for maritime trade Marek Gróbarczyk. “I call on ecological circles: do not become tools of their actions.”

                                             
Presently, the only inlet to the bay is to the upper right of the map, just below Baltiysk, Kaliningrad, Russian Federation.

        Related stories -

Intermarium: Alliance of nations between Germany and Russian Federation that can be a bulwark of nationalism against propositional imperialism and internationalism; it can also play a key part in The Silk Road and Alliance with the Asian region and ethno-nationalisms.

Photo credit: Saab

Defense News, “Poland Likely to Award Sub Deal to Saab”, 14 Oct 2016:

WARSAW, Poland — In the aftermath of the spat between Poland and France over Warsaw’s decision to cancel the Caracal helicopter deal with Airbus Helicopters, the Polish Defence Ministry is most likely to purchase three A26-class submarines from Sweden’s Saab.

France’s DCNS, which pitched its Scorpene-class sub, is no longer considered as the forerunner in Poland’s sub procurement, Defence Ministry sources told pro-government daily Nasz Dziennik. Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, which offers its HDW-class sub, is also regarded as having low chances of securing the contract. The deal is estimated to be worth up to 10 billion zloty (US $2.6 billion).

Earlier this month, Poland’s Ministry of Economic Development decided to end its negotiations with Airbus Helicopters, whose Caracal was chosen by the previous government under its transport helo procurement. Since then, relations between Poland and France have remained stringent.

Following Warsaw’s decision, French President Hollande decided to cancel his official visit to Poland, which was scheduled for Oct. 13, and Paris withdrew an invitation to a delegation of Polish officials for the forthcoming Euronaval trade show.

Defense News
France Withdraws Euronaval Invitation to Polish Officials

In response, Polish Defence Minister Bartosz Kownacki said in a televised interview that while there was no diplomatic war between the two countries, the French “learned to eat with a fork from us several centuries ago, so perhaps this is their way of behaving”.

Under its Orka (or Orca) program, the Polish Defence Ministry is aiming to replace the Navy’s outdated Kobben-class subs, which are to be decommissioned by 2021.

        More Related Stories -

World
Russia at the Heart of a Conspiracy Theory Dividing Poland

Russia
One NATO Battalion Enough to ‘Deter Russian Aggression,’ Poland Says

Russia
Kaliningrad Court Declares German-Russian House a ‘Foreign Agent’

Russia
Poland Set to Demolish 500 Soviet Monuments

READ MORE...

Trump’s “anti-global elite speech”

He sandwiches a claim to be challenging the corrupt global elite on behalf of the (propositional) American people around a belabored defense against charges of sexual impropriety.

Besides going on a bit too long in defense against those claims, it is a skillful speech. He does much better than in the first two debates.

Of course he also skillfully bypasses the fact that he is in bed with the YKW and their global plans. While not necessarily a plant, Trump was obviously offered a chance at the presidency if he would take on the Iran deal. Upon his acceptance of that task, they opportunistically put him in front of trends that they can play to their advantage - not dog whistles, but biscuits and bones with even a bit of meat to throw at America’s proposition nation: “anti-globalism and internationalism”.. “the alternative right”..and “exposure of corrupt government” .. now that the Internet has made hiding these issues less possible… with panmixia already well under way anyway, suddenly WN are no longer encouraged to abide their long standing perspective of wryly looking upon the Republicans/Democrats as two sides of the same coin….The YKW have done well to corral WN into a voting block pro-American, anti PC with the “counter” of being anti-discriminatory ..to co-opt White nationalism and defuse it into propositionalism. Some Whites will continue to get richer there - the kind who do not care very much about race and the deteriorating prospects for ethnonationalism - prospects which will deteriorate further with a Trump presidency (no endorsement of Hillary implied).

ONENN, “Remark by Hillary’s top aide infuriates Jewish people”, 9 Oct 2016:

Hillary C. with Huma AbedinHuma Abedin – the longtime top aide of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – was caught disparaging the Jewish community in an email exchange that recently surfaced in the Democratic presidential nominee’s ongoing private email scandal.

Volumes of emails that President Barack Obama’s State Department was ordered to release in its ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit were obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation, which discovered a problematic troubling email trail involving involving an anti-Semitic comment made by Abedin while serving under Clinton during the standing president’s first term.

According to the Daily Caller, Abedin portrayed a hostility toward the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) – and toward Jewish People in general.

Islamic anti-Semitism?

Huma Mahmood Abedin, who currently serves as vice chairwoman of Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, is the daughter of fundamentalist Muslim parents. Her father, who is of Indian descent, was an Islamic and Middle Eastern scholar who founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs and ran the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. Abedin’s mother was born in present-day Pakistan in a highly Islamic region.

It is inferred that her strong upbringing in Islam has grounded her anti-Semitism that was demonstrated in her 2009 email exchange, where she calls attendees at AIPAC “that crowd” and suggests that former President Bill Clinton not associate with such people.

An analysis of the back-and-forth Abedin had regarding the Jewish American event has led many to believe that Clinton’s relationship with Jewish Americans and Israel would be strained, at best – if elected president of the United States in November.

“Huma Abedin – Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s closest aide – urged former President Bill Clinton in 2009 to reject a speaking invitation before the American Israel Public Affairs Council (AIPAC), asking his assistant in an email: do ‘u really want to consider sending him into that crowd?’” the Daily Caller reported.

Continuing Obama’s anti-Israeli foreign policy legacy in the White House?

The slight was not taken lightly by many in top positions who realize that anti-Semitism at such a high level in the government can adversely affect Jewish American relations in the United States and Israeli relations abroad, where the Jewish State is constantly being bombarded by Palestinian jihadists and Islamic militants in the surrounding volatile region of the Middle East – often referred to as the “Powder Keg.”

“Abedin’s comment about ‘that crowd’ has sparked anger and consternation among Jewish and non-Jewish leaders who consider it hostile to Jews and to the State of Israel,” the daily informed. “Her comments are raising uncomfortable questions about Abedin’s past and her family’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Zionist Organization of America National President Morton Klein was repulsed by Abedin’s condescending remark geared toward the Jewish community in her email.

“[Abedin’s email is] appalling,” Klein expressed, according to the Daily Caller. “[It] shows hostility toward Jews and Israel, in light of the fact that ‘that crowd’ gives huge ovations to White House speakers.”

Klein asserts that earlier reports circulating about connections Abedin’s family has with a recognized Islamic terrorist group raises even more cause for concern with the unleashing of the controversial emails from Clinton’s top aide.

“It makes me think about the allegations about her parents and other family members who were associated with the Muslim Brotherhood,” Klein voiced.

Although authentic, historic Belarusian nationalism has been distinct, bitterly opposed and brutally suppressed in war and conflict with Russia, the Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko is tightening alliance with Russia, claiming that “The Russians are our brothers, with whom we have been living for a very long time.”

By contrast, The Intermarium Project would like to have Belarus and Ukraine on its side (i.e., the countries between Russia and Germany). Belarusians are a distinct people from Russians (who comprise about 11% of the population of Belarus). Historically, Belarus has suffered horrific destruction - including quelling of its identity - they were “Lithuanians”, but had imposed upon them the Russifying name, “Belarus”; along with Russian language as opposed to Belarusian language; and worst of all, suffered horrific genocide of their people - no western nation suffered more in terms of casualties from the impositions prior to, but culminating in those of Peter The Great, The Northern War, Bolshevik Revolution, The Soviet Union… 

Lukashenko, famous for his many faux pas, has proclaimed that the Belarusian army is ready to die for Russia. Well, Belarusians have already died for Russia, by the tens of millions.

The Ugly Truth, “RUSSIA – Army of Belarus ready to die for Russia”, 8 Oct 2016:

PRAVDA – President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko said that the army of Belarus, the modernization of which was nearly completed, was ready to defend Russia in the western direction.

“We, together with the Russian people, the Russians, will defend our common homeland in the highly important for Russia western direction. We will be dying in this direction to defend Belarus and Russia,” Alexander Lukashenko said, RIA Novosti reports.

According to Lukashenko, the Army of Belarus will be able to show resistance to any aggressor.

“We can say that we have nearly completed the modernisation of the Russian army. We have adapted the army to the possible wars that can be unleashed against our state – from information warfare to hot war,” said Alexander Lukashenko.

Earlier, the Belarusian president, speaking to the parliament, said that he would not allow the country’s opposition to set up enemy’s image from Russia.” “The Russians are our brothers, with whom we have been living for a very long time,” Lukashenko said, TASS reports.

READ MORE...

Macleans, “China is buying Canada: Inside the new real estate frenzy”

How China’s affection for Canada’s real estate is reshaping the nation’s housing market well beyond Vancouver

Paul Shen can tick off the reasons Mainland Chinese people buy property in Canada as surely as any fast-talking B.C. realtor. Some long to escape the fouled earth and soupy air of their country’s teeming cities, he explains, while others are following relatives to enclaves so well-populated by other Chinese expats they hardly feel like foreigners.

The richest, of course, regard homes in the West as stable vessels for disposable cash, but Shen lays no claim to such affluence. Last spring, the 39-year-old left behind his middle-management advertising job in Shanghai to seek the dream of home ownership he and his wife couldn’t afford in their home city. “We just followed our hearts to begin a totally different life,” he tells Maclean’s, adding: “We can make the house dream come true in Canada.”

The starting point was one-half of a modest duplex near downtown Victoria, close to the university where his wife is seeking a master’s degree, and priced about right for their limited means. Selling points ranged from the quiet of the street—perfect for their six-year-old son—to the stunning Vancouver Island vistas all around. High on his list, though, was Victoria’s comfortable distance from the bustling Chinese communities of B.C.’s Lower Mainland. As Shen—betraying his limited knowledge of pre-settlement Canadian history—puts it: “We wanted a place that would allow us to live with the natives.”

It’s hard not to smile at his idealism. Substitute any one of two dozen nationalities, after all, and you have a chapter in Canada’s cherished narrative of migration, settlement and shared prosperity.

But as a Chinese newcomer with a buy-at-all-costs resolve, Shen also personifies a phenomenon dividing those “natives” he’d like to call his neighbours. In the past five years, the flow of money from mainland China into Canadian real estate has reached what many consider dangerous levels, contributing to a gold-rush atmosphere in the nation’s leading cities, while stirring anger among young, middle-class Canadians who feel shut out of their hometown markets.

Its impact on Vancouver’s gravity-defying boom is the best known—and most hotly debated—example, as eye-popping price gains leave behind such quaint indicators as average household income, or regional economic activity. “We’re bringing in people who just want to park their money here,” says Justin Fung, a software engineer and second-generation Chinese-Canadian who counts himself among those frustrated by Vancouver’s surreal housing market. “They’re driving up housing prices and simply treat this city as a resort.”  Full story at Macleans

Related story:

BCBusiness, “China, Foreign Ownership & B.C. Resources”

B.C.’s natural resources are being gobbled up by foreign entities at a record pace. Increasingly, those entities are controlled by governments, such as China’s, that may have motives beyond mere profits. (Return to B.C.‘s Top 100 of 2011.)

[...]

It’s that potential for conflict of interest that has a few people worried. Jock Finlayson, executive vice-president of the Business Council of B.C., appreciates the “investment renaissance” that B.C. is now experiencing, but recommends a cautious approach.


“Canada needs to look at this,” he says. “I don’t know what the right answer is, but I do agree that the private-sector rules don’t apply to state-owned organizations, and it’s not just the Chinese. It requires an explicit look. Do we hold them to a higher test? They are going to have to do it sooner rather than later.”


John Bruk, who 27 years ago co-founded and headed the Asia Pacific Foundation, pulls no punches on this topic. He sees a need for some concerted action before too many horses have fled the barn. Bruk has prepared a comprehensive analysis of the track record of the foundation; he believes the government-funded organization needs to be re-energized in part because of China’s growing economic influence, and believes it needs to do much more to help Canada address an unsustainable trade deficit with China. (Disclosure: I provided editing services for Bruk on this paper.)


“Is trading our ownership and control of core assets for more consumer goods, resulting in unsustainable trade deficits, good for Canada?” Bruk asks in his report. “Are we jeopardizing prosperity for our children and grandchildren while putting at risk our economic independence? In my view, this is exactly what is happening.”