RINF.COM : THE BREAKING NEWS ALTERNATIVE rinf.com ：突發新聞的替代 Monday, July 7th, 2008週一， 2008年7月7日 |  |
Breaking News 突發新聞 | | Forum 論壇 | | UK News 英國新聞 | | USA News 美國新聞 | | World News 世界新聞 | | Political News 政治新聞 | | Sci-Tech News 科技新聞 | | War & Terrorism News 戰爭和恐怖主義新聞 | | Sports News 體育新聞 | | Multimedia 多媒體 | | Set Homepage 設為首頁 | |
BREAKING NEWS 突發新聞 |
Bush-Led ‘Disaster Capitalism’ Exploits Worldwide Misery to Make a Buck布什領導的'災難資本主義' ，利用全球的苦難作出推卸責任 Monday, July 7th, 2008 週一， 2008年7月7日 By Naomi Klein由娜歐蜜克萊 The Nation民族 | Once oil passed $140 a barrel, even the most rabidly right-wing media hosts had to prove their populist cred by devoting a portion of every show to bashing Big Oil. |一旦石油通過140元每桶，即使是最rabidly右翼媒體的主機已證明其民粹主義cred所投入的一部分，每一個表演撲頭大石油。 Some have gone so far as to invite me on for a friendly chat about an insidious new phenomenon: “disaster capitalism.” It usually goes well — until it doesn’t.有些人竟然就邀請我對一個友好的交談約一個陰險的新的現象： “災難的資本主義” 。它通常順利-直到它沒有。 For instance, “independent conservative” radio host Jerry Doyle and I were having a perfectly amiable conversation about sleazy insurance companies and inept politicians when this happened: “I think I have a quick way to bring the prices down,” Doyle announced.舉例來說， “獨立保守”的電台主持人傑里杜可風和我有一個完美親切的交談約sleazy保險公司和無能的政客時，這件事： “我認為我有一個快速的方法來使價格下跌， ”杜可風宣布。 “We’ve invested $650 billion to liberate a nation of 25 million people. “我們已經投資六千五億美元解放一個民族， 25萬人。 Shouldn’t we just demand that they give us oil?難道我們不應該只是要求他們給我們的石油？ There should be tankers after tankers backed up like a traffic jam getting into the Lincoln Tunnel, the Stinkin’ Lincoln, at rush hour with thank-you notes from the Iraqi government … .應該有油輪後，油輪後盾，就像一個大塞車進入林肯隧道， stinkin '林肯，在交通尖峰時間與感謝您注意到，伊拉克政府… … 。 Why don’t we just take the oil?為什麼我們不只是採取石油？ We’ve invested it liberating a country.我們已經投入了它解放一個國家。 I can have the problem solved of gas prices coming down in ten days, not ten years.”我可以有解決問題的天然氣價格下跌，在未來十天，而不是十年“ 。 There were a couple of problems with Doyle’s plan, of course.有一對夫婦的問題，杜可風的計劃，當然。 The first was that he was describing the biggest stickup in world history.首先是，他描述的最大貼面，在世界歷史。 The second, that he was too late: “We” are already heisting Iraq’s oil, or at least are on the cusp of doing so.第二，他是為時已晚： “我們”已經heisting伊拉克的石油，或者至少是對正處這樣做。 It’s been ten months since the publication of my book The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, in which I argue that today’s preferred method of reshaping the world in the interest of multinational corporations is to systematically exploit the state of fear and disorientation that accompanies moments of great shock and crisis.它的被十個月以來，出版我的書的衝擊學說：崛起的災害資本主義，在我認為，今天的首選方法重塑世界上的利益，跨國公司是有系統地利用國家的恐懼迷失方向和伴隨的時刻，偉大的衝擊和危機。 With the globe being rocked by multiple shocks, this seems like a good time to see how and where the strategy is being applied.與全球正在遭遇多重衝擊，這好像一個好時機，看看如何及在何處的策略是目前適用的。 And the disaster capitalists have been busy — from private firefighters already on the scene in Northern California’s wildfires, to land grabs in cyclone-hit Burma, to the housing bill making its way through Congress.和災害資本家一直忙於-從私人消防人員已經在現場在北加州的野火，土地抓住在氣旋受災緬甸，向房屋條例草案作出自己的方式在國會通過。 The bill contains little in the way of affordable housing, shifts the burden of mortgage default to taxpayers and makes sure that the banks that made bad loans get some payouts.條例草案載有沒有什麼方式，負擔得起的住房，輪班的負擔，按揭貸款拖欠還款給納稅人，並確保銀行不良貸款取得了一些支出。 No wonder it is known in the hallways of Congress as “The Credit Suisse Plan,” after one of the banks that generously proposed it.怪不得，這是眾所周知的在走廊的國會為“瑞士信貸計劃， ”後，其中的銀行慷慨的建議。 Iraq Disaster: We Broke It, We (Just) Bought It伊拉克的災難：我們打破了它，我們（只）買了 But these cases of disaster capitalism are amateurish compared with what is unfolding at Iraq’s oil ministry.但這些案件災害資本主義是業餘相比，什麼是展開在伊拉克的石油部。 It started with no-bid service contracts announced for ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and Total (they have yet to be signed but are still on course).它開始與沒有申辦服務合約，宣布為埃克森美孚，雪佛龍，殼牌， BP和總（他們還沒有得到簽署，但仍對課程） 。 Paying multinationals for their technical expertise is not unusual.支付跨國公司為他們的技術專長並非不尋常。 What is odd is that such contracts almost invariably go to oil service companies — not to the oil majors, whose work is exploring, producing and owning carbon wealth.什麼是多的是，這些合同幾乎無一例外地去石油服務公司-不是向石油巨頭，他們的工作是探索，生產和擁有的碳財富。 As London-based oil expert Greg Muttitt points out, the contracts make sense only in the context of reports that the oil majors have insisted on the right of first refusal on subsequent contracts handed out to manage and produce Iraq’s oil fields.作為總部設在倫敦的石油專家格雷格muttitt指出，合約意義只有在上下文的報告認為，石油巨頭們都堅持的權利，首先拒絕對後來的合同交給了管理和生產伊拉克的石油領域。 In other words, other companies will be free to bid on those future contracts, but these companies will win.在其他換句話說，其他公司將免費申辦對那些今後的合同，但這些公司將勝出。 One week after the no-bid service deals were announced, the world caught its first glimpse of the real prize.一周後，沒有申辦服務交易宣布，世界陷入其第一次看到真正的獎。 After years of back-room arm-twisting, Iraq is officially flinging open six of its major oil fields, accounting for around half of its known reserves, to foreign investors.經過多年的回到房間的手臂扭，伊拉克是正式開放6 flinging其主要油田，佔一半左右，其已知的儲備，對外國投資者。 According to Iraq’s oil minister, the long-term contracts will be signed within a year.根據伊拉克的石油部長，長期合同將簽署一個年。 While ostensibly under control of the Iraq National Oil Company, foreign firms will keep 75 percent of the value of the contracts, leaving just 25 percent for their Iraqi partners.雖然表面上的控制之下，伊拉克國家石油公司，外國公司將保持75 ％的價值的合同，只剩下25 ％ ，為他們在伊拉克的合作夥伴。 That kind of ratio is unheard of in oil-rich Arab and Persian states, where achieving majority national control over oil was the defining victory of anticolonial struggles.這樣的比例是聞所未聞的，在盛產石油的阿拉伯和波斯的國家，其中大多數實現國家控制的石油是確定的勝利， anticolonial的鬥爭。 According to Muttitt, the assumption until now was that foreign multinationals would be brought in to develop brand-new fields in Iraq — not to take over ones that are already in production and therefore require minimal technical support.據muttitt ，假設到現在是，外國跨國公司可能帶來的在發展的嶄新領域在伊拉克-不接管那些已經在生產，因此需要最低限度的技術支持。 “The policy was always to allocate these fields to the Iraq National Oil Company,” he told me. “這項政策是一貫分配這些領域向伊拉克國家石油公司， ”他告訴我。 This is a total reversal of that policy, giving INOC a mere 25 percent instead of the planned 100 percent.這是一個總的逆轉這一政策，給予INOC的只佔25 ％ ，而不是計劃的100 ％ 。 So what makes such lousy deals possible in Iraq, which has already suffered so much?因此，什麼使這種糟糕的交易有可能在伊拉克，已經遭受了這麼多？ Ironically, it is Iraq’s suffering — its never-ending crisis — that is the rationale for an arrangement that threatens to drain its treasury of its main source of revenue.諷刺的是，這是伊拉克的痛苦-其永無休止的危機-這是理安排威脅到其流失，庫務署，其主要的收入來源。 The logic goes like this: Iraq’s oil industry needs foreign expertise because years of punishing sanctions starved it of new technology and the invasion and continuing violence degraded it further.邏輯是這樣的：伊拉克的石油工業需要外國專家，因為多年的懲治制裁餓死，它的新技術和入侵和持續不斷的暴力退化，它進一步。 And Iraq urgently needs to start producing more oil.和伊拉克的迫切需要開始生產更多的石油。 Why?為什麼？ Again because of the war.再次由於戰爭。 The country is shattered, and the billions handed out in no-bid contracts to Western firms have failed to rebuild the country.該國是破碎，以及數十億交給了在沒有競標的合約，以西方企業未能重建國家。 And that’s where the new no-bid contracts come in: they will raise more money, but Iraq has become such a treacherous place that the oil majors must be induced to take the risk of investing.和的情況下，新的不來申辦的合同在：他們將提出更多的錢，但伊拉克已經成為這樣一個變化莫測的地方，大型石油公司必須採取誘導的風險投資。 Thus the invasion of Iraq neatly creates the argument for its subsequent pillage.因此，入侵伊拉克整齊創建的論據，其隨後的掠奪。 Several of the architects of the Iraq War no longer even bother to deny that oil was a major motivator.幾位建築師對伊拉克戰爭的不再，甚至懶得否認，石油是一個重要的動力。 On National Public Radio’s To the Point, Fadhil Chalabi, one of the primary Iraqi advisers to the Bush Administration in the lead-up to the invasion, recently described the war as “a strategic move on the part of the United States of America and the UK to have a military presence in the Gulf in order to secure [oil] supplies in the future.” Chalabi, who served as Iraq’s oil under secretary and met with the oil majors before the invasion, described this as “a primary objective.”關於國家公共電台的向點，法迪勒沙拉比，其中一個主要的伊拉克顧問向布什政府在帶頭行動，入侵，最近所描述的戰爭“的戰略舉措對部分美國和英國有一個軍事存在，在海灣地區，以確保[石油]用品在未來“ 。沙拉比，誰擔任伊拉克的石油下司，並會見了與石油巨頭入侵之前，形容這是”一首要目標“ 。 Invading countries to seize their natural resources is illegal under the Geneva Conventions.入侵各國抓住他們的天然資源，是非法的，根據日內瓦公約。 That means that the huge task of rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure — including its oil infrastructure — is the financial responsibility of Iraq’s invaders.這意味著，龐大的任務是重建伊拉克的基礎設施-包括其石油基礎設施-是財政的責任，伊拉克的侵略者。 They should be forced to pay reparations.他們應該被迫支付賠款。 (Recall that Saddam Hussein’s regime paid $9 billion to Kuwait in reparations for its 1990 invasion.) Instead, Iraq is being forced to sell 75 percent of its national patrimony to pay the bills for its own illegal invasion and occupation. （記得，薩達姆政權支付90億美元，對科威特進行賠償其1990年入侵） 。相反，伊拉克正被迫出售的75 ％ ，其國家遺產支付條例草案為自己的非法入侵和佔領。 Oil Price Shock: Give Us the Arctic or Never Drive Again石油價格的衝擊：給我們北極或從未驅動器再次 Iraq isn’t the only country in the midst of an oil-related stickup.伊拉克不是唯一的國家正處於一個與石油有關的貼面。 The Bush Administration is busily using a related crisis — the soaring price of fuel — to revive its dream of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).布什政府正在忙著用一個相關的危機-暴漲的燃料價格-重振的夢想，鑽井，在北極國家野生動物保護（a n wr）。 And of drilling offshore.和鑽井的離岸。 And in the rock-solid shale of the Green River Basin. ，以及在堅如磐石的頁岩的綠色流域。 “Congress must face a hard reality,” said George W. Bush on June 18. “國會必須面對的艱難現實，說： ”喬治W布什6月18日。 “Unless members are willing to accept gas prices at today’s painful levels — or even higher — our nation must produce more oil.” “除非大家願意接受天然氣價格在今天的痛苦水平-甚至更高的-我們的國家要生產更多的石油”。 This is the President as Extortionist in Chief, with gas nozzle pointed to the head of his hostage — which happens to be the entire country.這是總統extortionist在行政，與氣體噴嘴指出，該國元首，他的人質-這恰恰是整個國家。 Give me ANWR, or everyone has to spend their summer vacations in the backyard.給我anwr ，或者每個人都有用他們的暑假，在後院。 A final stickup from the cowboy President.最後貼從牛仔總統。 Despite the Drill Here.儘管這次演習在這裡。 Drill Now.現在演練。 Pay Less bumper stickers, drilling in ANWR would have little discernible impact on actual global oil supplies, as its advocates well know.少付的保險槓貼紙，鑽井在anwr沒有什麼可辨的影響，實際全球的石油供應，作為其主張，以及知道。 The argument that it could nonetheless bring down oil prices is based not on hard economics but on market psychoanalysis: drilling would “send a message” to the oil traders that more oil is on the way, which would cause them to start betting down the price.的說法，但它可以把石油價格是不是基於經濟學的努力，但對市場心理分析：鑽井將“發送郵件”向石油交易商認為，更多的石油，是對未來路向，這將促使他們開始投注降低價格。 Two points follow from this approach.兩點跟進，從這種做法。 First, trying to psych out hyperactive commodity traders is what passes for governing in the Bush era, even in the midst of a national emergency.第一，試圖走出心理動商品交易是通過執政，在布什時代，即使在處於全國緊急狀態。 Second, it will never work.第二，它絕不會的工作。 If there is one thing we can predict from the oil market’s recent behavior, it is that the price is going to keep going up regardless of what new supplies are announced.如果有一件事我們可以預言，從石油市場近期的行為，那就是價格是要保持持續上升，無論什麼新的用品宣布。 Take the massive oil boom under way in Alberta’s notorious tar sands.採取大規模的石油繁榮下的方式在艾伯塔省的臭名昭著的瀝青砂。 The tar sands (sometimes called the oil sands) have the same things going for them as Bush’s proposed drill sites: they are nearby and perfectly secure, since the North American Free Trade Agreement contains a provision barring Canada from cutting off supply to the United States.焦油砂（有時被稱為油砂）有相同的東西，為他們作為布什的建議，演練地點：他們是附近的和絕對的安全，自北美自由貿易協定載有一項規定，禁止從加拿大切斷供應給美國。 And with little fanfare, oil from this largely untapped source has been pouring into the market, so much so that Canada is now the largest supplier of oil to the United States, surpassing Saudi Arabia.和很少大張旗鼓，石油從這個尚未開發的主要來源，已湧入市場，以致現在是加拿大的最大供應石油給美國，超過了沙特阿拉伯。 Between 2005 and 2007, Canada increased its exports to the States by almost 100 million barrels.與2005年和2007年，加拿大增加了其出口到國家的近100萬桶。 Yet despite this significant increase in secure supplies, oil prices have been going up the entire time.然而，儘管這顯著增加，安全用品，石油價格已持續了整個時間。 What is driving the ANWR push is not facts but pure shock doctrine strategy — the oil crisis has created the conditions in which it is possible to sell a previously unsellable (but highly profitable) policy.什麼是駕駛anwr推動，是不是事實，但純休克學說的策略-石油危機創造了條件，其中是有可能的出售以前u nsellable（但高利潤的）政策。 Food Price Shock: Genetic Modification or Starvation糧食價格的衝擊：基因改造或飢餓 Intimately connected to the price of oil is the global food crisis.有著密切的聯繫，以石油價格是全球的糧食危機。 Not only do high gas prices drive up food costs but the boom in agrofuels has blurred the line between food and fuel, pushing food growers off their land and encouraging rampant speculation.不僅高油價推高的食物費用，但景氣在agrofuels已模糊之間的分界線食品和燃料，推動糧食種植者過他們的土地，並鼓勵猖獗的投機活動。 Several Latin American countries have been pushing to re-examine the push for agrofuels and to have food recognized as a human right, not a mere commodity.幾個拉丁美洲國家一直在推動重新審視，推動agrofuels ，並有食物確認為一項人權，不只是商品。 United States Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte has other ideas.美國副國務秘書約翰內格羅蓬特有其他的想法。 In the same speech touting the US commitment to emergency food aid, he called on countries to lower their “export restrictions and high tariffs” and eliminate “barriers to use of innovative plant and animal production technologies, including biotechnology.” This was an admittedly more subtle stickup, but the message was clear: impoverished countries had better crack open their agricultural markets to American products and genetically modified seeds, or they could risk having their aid cut off.在同一講話中兜售美國的承諾，緊急糧食援助，他呼籲國家降低其“出口限制和高關稅”和消除“障礙，利用創新的植物和動物的生產技術，包括生物技術” ，這是一個無可否認，更微妙的貼面，但信息是明確的：貧窮國家有較好的裂紋開放其農產品市場，美國產品和轉基因種子，或他們可以有可能的援助，切斷。 Genetically modified crops have emerged as the cureall for the food crisis, at least according to the World Bank, the European Commission president (time to “bite the bullet”) and Prime Minister of Britain Gordon Brown.轉基因作物已成為cureall為糧食危機，至少根據世界銀行，歐洲聯盟委員會主席（以時間來“咬子彈” ）和首相，英國財政大臣布朗。 And, of course, the agribusiness companies. ，當然，農業產業化公司。 “You cannot today feed the world without genetically modified organisms,” Peter Brabeck, chairman of Nestlé, told the Financial Times recently. “你不能今天飼料世界上沒有轉基因生物體， ”彼得布拉貝克主席，雀巢公司，告訴金融時報最近。 The problem with this argument, at least for now, is that there is no evidence that GMOs increase crop yields, and they often decrease them.問題與這樣的說法，至少在現在，是有沒有證據表明轉基因生物的增加作物產量，他們往往減少他們。 But even if there was a simple key to solving the global food crisis, would we really want it in the hands of the Nestlés and Monsantos?但即使有一個簡單的關鍵，解決全球糧食危機，我們真的想在它手中的nestlés和monsantos ？ What would it cost us to use it?會怎樣，它的成本，我們要使用它？ In recent months Monsanto, Syngenta and BASF have been frenetically buying up patents on so-called “climate ready” seeds — plants that can grow in earth parched from drought and salinated from flooding.在最近幾個月孟山都，先正達和巴斯夫公司已frenetically購買專利，因此，所謂的“氣候作好準備， ”種子-植物可以生長在地球炎熱乾旱和s alinated免受洪水災害。 In other words, plants built to survive a future of climate chaos.在其他換言之，植物建成生存的未來氣候混亂。 We already know the lengths Monsanto will go to protect its intellectual property, spying on and suing farmers who dare to save their seeds from one year to the next.我們已經知道長度為孟山都將到會保護其智慧財產權，刺探和起訴的農民誰也不敢以挽救他們的種子，從一年到下一年。 We have seen patented AIDS medications fail to treat millions in sub-Saharan Africa.我們已經看到專利的艾滋病藥物不能以治療數百萬在撒哈拉以南非洲地區。 Why would patented “climate ready” crops be any different?為什麼會獲得專利的“氣候作好準備， ”作物有任何不同？ Meanwhile, amid all the talk of exciting new genetic and drilling technologies, the Bush Administration announced a moratorium of up to two years on new solar energy projects on federal lands — due, apparently, to environmental concerns.與此同時，中，所有的話題，令人振奮的新的遺傳和鑽井技術，布什政府宣布暫停長達兩年的新的太陽能項目對聯邦土地-因為，很顯然，要對環境的關注。 This is the final frontier for disaster capitalism.這是最後的邊疆災害資本主義。 Our leaders are failing to invest in technology that will actually prevent a future of climate chaos, choosing instead to work hand in hand with those plotting innovative schemes to profit from the mayhem.我們的領導人未能投資於技術，實際上會防止未來的氣候混亂，而是選擇的工作，另一方面在手與那些策劃的創新計劃，以利潤從混亂。 Privatizing Iraq’s oil, ensuring global dominance for genetically modified crops, lowering the last of the trade barriers and opening the last of the wildlife refuges … Not so long ago, those goals were pursued through polite trade agreements, under the benign pseudonym “globalization.” Now this discredited agenda is forced to ride on the backs of serial crises, selling itself as lifesaving medicine for a world in pain.私有化，伊拉克的石油，以確保在全球的統治地位，為轉基因作物，降低最後的貿易壁壘和開放的最後野生動物的庇護所…並非如此，前不久，這些目標的追求，通過禮貌貿易協定下，良性化名“全球化“現在，這個抹黑議程是被迫坐就背上串行危機，出售自己作為救生醫藥的世界中的痛苦。 Naomi Klein’s latest book is The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.娜歐蜜克萊的最新著作是休克學說：崛起的災害資本主義。 See More: 看到更多的： USA News 美國新聞Have Your Say: Bush-Led ‘Disaster Capitalism’ Exploits Worldwide Misery to Make a Buck 你說：布什主導的'災難資本主義' ，利用全球的苦難作出推卸責任 Please note, only selected comments will be published.請注意，只有選定的評論將出版。 Or discuss this report in our new forums 或討論這個報告在我們的新論壇 This entry was posted on Monday, July 7th, 2008 at 9:10 am and is filed under 此項目被張貼在週一， 2008年7月7日在上午09時10分，並提交下 Political News 政治新聞 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反應，此項目通過 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 餵養。 You can 您可以 leave a response 留下的回應 , or ，或 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 從你自己的網站。 | Translations 翻譯               Free Newsletter 免費通訊 Related News 相關新聞
Email This Page To A Friend 電子郵件此頁給朋友 Latest Headlines 最新的新聞標題
More更多 Breaking News突發新聞 Archive 存檔
|
About 大約 | | DVD Store DVD的商店 | | Opinion 民意 | | Reviews 評語 | | Special Guests 特別來賓 | | Webmasters 網站管理員 |
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. 所表達的意見，在rinf新聞電線和通訊是唯一的責任作者（ S ）和並不一定反映的意見，網站管理員。 RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. rinf.com ：突破新聞與其他的媒體是copyleft的-複製及分發自由。 News Forum 新聞論壇 |
