Chomsky revealed something that I believe he himself falls foul of. He indicated that journalists had been ‘systemized’ into automatic self-censorship believing they were somehow warriors of truth when in fact they were just stooges playing their bit-part in the wider scheme of things. No doubt Adam Curtis would have a lot to say on this one.
Chomsky shows the same failings in finance:
“Bretton Woods was the system of global financial management set up at the end of the second World War to ensure the interests of capital did not smother wider social concerns in post-war democracies. It was hated by the US neoliberals – the very people who created the banking crisis” writes Noam Chomsky – http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20992.htm
Oh, so Bretton Woods wasn’t to cement the establishment of the new boy US as the leading power in the world, succeeding its previous master: (not so)great Britain, and to prevent a counter-culture outside of government control using gold as a effective means of independent trade, largely free of manipulation. Sounds like terrorism to me!
The following is benign then and the source of my miscomprehension, when Bretton Woods declaration that:
1) Only US dollars were redeemable for gold and
2) Only governments could redeem their dollars for gold
Not only that, but in ’71, the UK knocked on their greatest allies door and Tricky Dicky’s answered it, telling the Brits where to go with their stupid American fiat dollars, thereby instigating a further round of detachment from the gold standard. Wow Noam. I’m so happy you’ve told us the now despised neoliberals hate Bretton Woods and that B/W policy was drawn up from the soothing waters of altruism, totally free of wealthy bankers and industrialists to ensure ‘big money’ didn’t jostle ‘democracy’.
Such advocacy almost makes me think a 21st century Bretton Woods is just what we need. That’s right. Close down the old traditional ‘powerhouse’ economies, get everyone on the fascists dream of biometric DNA database and give us this electronic money. Please – no doubt that will will hailed as bringing ‘stabilization’ and protecting democracy too.
“In a functioning democratic society, a political campaign would address such fundamental issues, looking into root causes and cures, and proposing the means by which people suffering the consequences can take effective control.” – ibid
Ummm. Yeah, but really the issues are simple. The greatest device we have for maintaining stable economics (and virtually prevents multinational megalithic monsters) and that is gold, but B/W took that mechanism away from us, and actually creates Mussolini identified fascism:
“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” – Mussolini (Round Italian dude)
B/W forced us away from gold, and on to use this pretend money, which can breed or be burnt (‘burnt’ also by excessive breeding) seemingly as rapidly as bacteria. Those are the issues Noam.
Perhaps I’m being unkind to Mr. Chomsky, as immediately after, he raises the issue of risk management. This is one of the key factors which has brought the system into collapse. Risk is minimised using derivative trading, often through hedge funds, but Noam falls flat again, saying it’s a result of the failure of B/W in ’71. No Noam.
Chomsky also links B/W to “the public will” and even “democracy”. Ho ho! It was so democratic only a handful of abstract economists, many already effectively puppets of the US agreed this policy at Bretton Woods, new Hampshire.
“Investors and lenders can “vote” by capital flight, attacks on currencies and other devices offered by financial liberalisation.” – source 1.
Again Noam, all this is a symptom of the disease; Bretton Woods or not, so sorry mate, your self-censorship on what exactly macroeconomics is, what it used for and what it will be used for has been visibly displayed.