InterVentions

Federal Appeals court rejects torture victims' suit

The reasoning, especially coming after the Supreme Court's judgment in Boumediene, is so disgusting it's mind boggling. Basically: no reasonable government official could have known that torturing these people is a violation of the constitution. Is the divide between moral reasoning and moral knowledge and legal reasoning and legal knowledge so wide that with a straight face we can render judgments like this court did? You don't have to be a 'natural law' theorist to believe that something has gone seriously wrong here. SCOTUS gave this Appeals Court a chance to revisit their ruling; evidently, they didn't take their responsibility seriously.

Decider-in-Chief

Interesting article in the WaPost detailing the process by which the torture memos were released. Obama set up a debate format in which opponents and proponents of release took turns airing their arguments. This is the kind of willfully deliberative process that I imagine was non-existent during the Bush years. Even more impressive is the following: "When it ended, Obama dictated on the spot a draft of his announcement that the documents would be released, while most of the officials watched, according to an official who was present." He must have been leaning in a certain direction prior to the debate, but nevertheless Obama's capacity to make a decisive judgment immediately following what must have been a complex and emotional debate strikes me as a first-rate virtue for a commander in chief. Now we use Bush's quip that he is the decider-in-chief without shame and forboding.

Self-Caused Disaster Capitalism

Naomi Klein coined the term 'disaster capitalism' to describe the advent of economic opportunism grounded on catastrophic and unforeseen events. AIG, the recipient of $160 billion from the US government (so far!), forces us to coin another phrase, 'self-caused disaster capitalism'. Not as elegant an expression for sure, but highly descriptive. Instead of corporations waiting for disasters to happen, they now cause them and dare the government to let them fail.

In a 'secret' memo, AIG executives warned US officials that allowing AIG to fail would have systemic disastrous consequences for the world's financial system. Apparently, it worked, since taxpayers are now on the hook for another $30B.

This illustrates 'moral hazard' in the genuine sense: motivate reckless economic behavior by guaranteeing that financial immolation is doused with tax-payer funds.

A world of discontent

Mass protests and lines of anxious customers at bank doors: Ukraine is the latest scene of social unrest as the economic crisis continues. Last weekend, 120,000 people marched through the streets of Dublin to protest against government austerity measures targeted largely at public sector workers. The French Carribbean island of Guadaloupe has seen weeks of strikes and protests, while in France over a million workers have gone on strike against Sarkozy's policies; mass protests have brought down governments in Iceland and Latvia as their economies effectively collapse; popular anger and protest continues in Greece, where public sector workers held a 24-hour stoppage last week. There are reports of unrest in China, as growth slows. As unemployment grows this year, we can expect more of the same: the question is where and how well this popular anger will be directed.

Join the Home Defenders Campaign

ACORN has begun organizing a civil disobedience campaign to stop home foreclosures. ACORN wants to put together networks of concerned people across the country that will come out in an emergency and surround homes authorities are trying to seize and whose occupants they want to evict. This way poor, struggling people who, unlike banks and their shareholders, aren't getting bailed out by the state can stay in their homes.

Please have the courage to sign up and act in solidarity with your fellows. If you're in New York, there will be training sessions this weekend.

Bizarro world, cont.

Amidst pressures from the Empire's henchmen, Charlotte-based Bank of America, Lindsey Graham (R-SC) continues to endorse the nationalization of banks. He asserts, plainly and in terms everyone can understand, "The truth is we put more money into the Bank of America than it's worth. That's not nationalization. That's just stupid."

Indeed. Is it possible that a Republican is seriously endorsing this strategy? Or is it some Jedi mind trick/ruse to get Obama to stake a position? Inquiring minds want to know.

Khatami to Run for President

Former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami has announced that he will challenge Ahmadinejad in elections in June. Khatami is a reformer who has fought for a more democratic Iran and is known for his friendliness toward the West. How he fares in the upcoming elections will be interesting in many ways. First, we will have to see how hard the conservative establishment tries to thwart his bid. This establishment has formal control over the electoral process in Iran and can block his candidacy if it chooses to. Second, with the new US administration taking a more conciliatory note toward Iran, it is possible the Iranian electorate will welcome a less hardline President. One major contributing factor in Amadinejad's victory four years ago was the aggressive policies of the Bush administration.

Government Tapped Journalist's Phones

On the Media reports on revelations by whistleblower Russell Tice that under the Bush administration, intelligence officials tapped the phones of American journalists. This monitoring was more than simply noting the foreign contacts journalists had. In fact, the intelligence community examined the content of any call, including domestic calls. This had a chilling effect on the ability of journalists to cover the affairs of the state as government sources became afraid of talking. What's most disturbing about the story is that because of federal legislation this monitoring may no longer be illegal.

Competing historical lessons

Mitch McConnell, Senate minority leader and all around nay-sayer, offers us two historical precedents to explain why a large stimulus package will fail: the Great Depression and Japan in the 1990's. According to McConnell, it didn't work then, and we shouldn't believe it will work now. On the other hand, liberal economist, and recent Nobel prize winner, Paul Krugman just released a revised edition of his book, 'The Return of Depression Economics' in which he argues that those same two historical precedents show that a large stimulus package will work. Who's right?

I know where my bets would go. McConnell's strategy smacks of Rovian duplicitousness: take your opponent's strengths, shake and distort, and use to your own advantage.

Government to buy debt, not banks

The New York Times reports that the Obama administration has decided on a bailout plan for the banking industry that would have the federal government buy or otherwise support their bad mortgage-backed assets. The plan would not involve state-ownership of the banks themselves. It would, in other words, be a rescue package to the industry that caused our present economic woes.

If this is true, it is extremely disappointing. Not only does it mean that already rich bankers get a huge amount of welfare, it also doesn't address the coercive power they exercise over us. They can go on determining the fate of the world and expect to be supported by their victims when times are tough.

Tax breaks for banks

The Treasury's newfound broad powers is suspect as a constitutional matter, but surely ill advised as a prudential matter.

We now know, via the Washington Post, that a tax law that conservatives have been anxiously and vigorously attacking for decades, has been quietly (really, secretly) 'reinterpreted' by the Treasury. The law forbids corporations from using offshore shell companies as tax shelters. The upshot of the reinterpretation: a $110bn tax windfall for banks. Evidently, due to the complexity of the bailout, few or no members were aware of the change. Due to the delicate nature of corporate executives in our current economic 'crisis' (who are otherwise at all other times vicious tigers) , the article suggests that Congress is wary of coming out to declare the illegality of this maneuver: who wants to be the cause of the next Great Depression?

Could there be any better example of Naomi Klein's thesis of the 'shock doctrine'? I suspect we will be hearing of further outrageously hidden 'reinterpretations' of law. Hopefully (can we hope?) the newly empowered Democratic Party will do the right thing and methodically bring back law and order after 8 years of chaos.

What's Actually in the bailout proposal

The proposed bailout contains two particularly disturbing provisions. Section 8 reads:
"Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."
Yes, that's right: no oversight whatsoever. We are being asked to trust Henry Paulson-- whose previous job, in case you'd forgotten, was as CEO of Goldman Sachs-- to get us out of a mess he played a significant part in creating. He will have a free hand to hire Wall Street companies to value the toxic assets of, you guessed it, Wall Street companies-- and no-one will be able to do anything about it.You could not make this stuff up!
The key phrase of Section 6 reads:
"The Secretary's authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under this Act shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time."
In other words, this is not a $7 billion bailout; the actual cost could be many times that. As economist Nomi Prins explains here, "[i]t means that if everything we American taxpayers buy re-evaluates down to zero, we get to buy more. That's hardly taxpayer "protection." With several hundred billion dollars of write-downs already announced this year by the part of the industry compelled to post their losses, it's a safe bet that $700 billion worth of the junkiest assets in existence will be heading to zero the second they are purchased."
Enough said!

Friday, July 10, 2009

Shock and Shame in NY

After the month-long stalemate in the NY State Senate caused by defecting senator Pedro Estrada, the distinguished New York congressmen have finally found a way out that tops the embarrassment of their constituency. They have decided to offer Estrada (yes, the betrayer!!!) the majority leadership in order to draw him back from the Republican caucus. Yes, believe it. This is not a Buñuel movie or a crooks novel, it is our honorable New York State Senate right now. Because the majority leadership is the highest senate position, short of their wives it is not clear what Republicans can offer Estrada to woo him back.

Monday, July 6, 2009

Lessons for Honduras

As democratically elected president Manuel Zelaya was flying back to Honduras this morning thousands marched to the airport to welcome him. But the warm encounter never took place. Zelaya’s plane was not allowed to land by army vehicles occupying the runaway and the crowd was dispersed by security forces loyal to the de facto authorities of Honduras. The reported result is a 10-year old dead and many injured while the unlawful regime holds on to power for another day.

This is the 3rd or 4th attempt to restore the rule of law in Honduras by peaceful means. A few days ago, Secretary General of OAS, José Miguel Insulza, visited the country in a last-ditch attempt to reconcile positions before expelling Honduras from the organization. Insulza made a career in Chilean politics for his tough political intelligence in handling difficult ideological conflicts (e.g. Isulza was Chile’s minister of foreign affairs when Pinochet was arrested in London at Garzon’s request). And in this case he was able to quickly work out a unanimous repudiation of Honduras’ coup by all American countries—a remarkable achievement if one dwells on Zelaya’s affiliation with Hugo Chávez. However, the de facto authorities of Honduras have proved recalcitrant.

Though the international response has been dramatically different, the internal circumstances that have led to this coup are reminiscent of Venezuela’s 2002 coup or, going further back, of Chile’s 1973 coup. In all three cases there was a democratically elected president (cf. Chavez 1998, Allende 1970) pushing significant reforms to the constitution. The reforms are either targeted at favoring the lower classes or the government quite explicitly vows to do so and the reforms aim at perpetuating the regime. The higher classes are terrified that they are going to loose their privileges, be them legitimate or not.

The result of this conjunction of circumstances is invariably an extreme polarization of the society at hand and eventually social turmoil. In Chile it led to Pinochet’s 17-year dictatorship marked by atrocious violations of human rights. In 2002 the international conditions were significantly different and Carmona’s coup in Venezuela did not survive a week. The international conditions are even less favorable to the de facto government in Honduras but it remains to be seen if Zelaya’s popular support has enough strength to bring him back to office, as the social movement in Venezuela did with Chavez in 2002.

The case of Honduras is also important in another respect: it is the first time since the coup in Venezuela in 2002 that a Latin American country takes an unconstitutional line to resolve its own conflicts. After decades of political turmoil, it seemed that Latin America had finally found a lasting constitutional equilibrium. The coup in Honduras brings out fears of a dark past.

But it also invites reflection on the limits of democracy and its mechanisms of conflict resolution. It seems hard to contest that Zelaya’s government was democratic. However, it was partial to the poor in the social struggle between classes. The economic and political elites felt threatened and feared what they regarded as an illegitimate rewriting of the social contract. But they were outnumbered and the government would eventually be able to achieve this goal. It is understandable (though not for that reason justifiable) that the elites were going to wave their power against what they regarded as unjust and unlawful.

Because the cases of Chile, Venezuela and Honduras led to the same outcome irrespective of the diverse international conditions (cf. the coup in Chile was supported by the US) one could infer that a fracture of these dimensions at the heart of a society almost invariably leads to an unconstitutional outcome. And this is unsurprising if one looks at the problem through the lens of social contract theories. After all, cooperation is the glue that keeps society together. When different factions begin looking at each other suspiciously, not as teammates working for the well-being of all but as ruthless competitors for the scarce resources, all trust is lost. Scruples and knightliness quickly become obsolete in the game of survival and turmoil ensues.

For their own sake countries need to find social arrangements perceived as fair and beneficial by all. This is an old lesson drawn by many philosophers and political scientists since at least Rousseau. But it remains as valid as ever. Honduras confirms it once more. May Honduras learn the lesson in the light of the unfortunate events of this week.

Friday, July 3, 2009

Washington Post death watch

Wow. What is going on over at the Washington Post?

Evidently, the once proud newspaper attempted to solicit funds in exchange for access to its news division and editorial staff. The events were supposed to be in the form of self-styled 'salons'. According to the nature of things, the newspaper now vehemently denies any impropriety, citing that it would never compromise its news division's integrity: it was all a misunderstanding, the advertising flyer was not vetted, blah, blah, blah.

Via Politico: (the text of the solicitation)

Offered at $25,000 per sponsor, per Salon. Maximum of two sponsors per Salon. Underwriters’ CEO or Executive Director participates in the discussion. Underwriters appreciatively acknowledged in printed invitations and at the dinner. Annual series sponsorship of 11 Salons offered at $250,000 … Hosts and Discussion Leaders ... Health-care reporting and editorial staff members of The Washington Post ... An exclusive opportunity to participate in the health-care reform debate among the select few who will actually get it done. ... A Washington Post Salon ... July 21, 2009 6:30 p.m. ...

"Washington Post Salons are extensions of The Washington Post brand of journalistic inquiry into the issues, a unique opportunity for stakeholders to hear and be heard," the flier says. "At the core is a critical topic of our day. Dinner and a volley of ideas unfold in an evening of intelligent, news-driven and off-the-record conversation. ... By bringing together those powerful few in business and policy-making who are forwarding, legislating and reporting on the issues, Washington Post Salons give life to the debate. Be at this nexus of business and policy with your underwriting of Washington Post Salons.

Embarrassing at best. At worst, another nail in the coffin of the Washington Post. After the Dan Froomkin debacle, the powers that be are doing all they can to chase away their audience.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Chile and human rights

Chile becomes the final country in S. America to ratify the Rome Statute. Among other things, this brings Chile in line with the international community on human rights norms involving genocide and crimes against humanity.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Michael Jackson's Uncensored Obituary

Michael Jackson’s sudden death has drawn the world’s attention all at once onto him likely for the last time. Michael Jackson was unquestionably one of the most famous and admired music icons of the modern world, sharing that pantheon only with a few (e.g. Elvis Presley, The Beatles or Madonna, come to mind). He was a prodigy: a massive-media, pop-culture version of Mozart, only deeply admired worldwide by the rich and the poor alike. And while I understand the fans’ admiration, I myself never was one of his followers. Perhaps because of the objectivity this might confer me, throughout the course of Michael Jackson’s life I couldn’t help the feeling of pity for him. For while Michael Jackson is the prototype of the music idol, whom all the kids and teenagers (and sometimes even a little older ones) imitate and see as the role model, for this very reason he also is an example of the worst abominations of our times. Because he is the pinnacle of modern fame, he also exemplifies in the worst form possible how public attention can corrode a human being.

Michael Jackson was a great pop musician and dancer but he was also a victim of his time. Physically and psychologically Michael Jackson was a freak. He was an eternal child trapped in childish dreams completely unable to understand a world that worshipped him. Now everybody remembers him but only a few days ago he was alone, locked in his Neverland world. In reality, this was not just a bad ending, it was also a bad beginning. Michael Jackson was alone for most of his life incapable of leading a normal life behind the scenes. But this was not the fault of his family and friends. Nor was it his own fault—how could it be, if he never had a choice? Again, Michael Jackson is a product of his times, the result of the unconditional love and admiration of millions who followed him since he was a boy. His case should give us food for thought regarding the values of modern society and the relentless aspiration to fame. Goodbye Michael, may you find peace finally.

Monday, June 22, 2009

death of the Washington Post

I used to read the Washington Post because of its good coverage of Guantanamo and detainee treatment. But I just heard (been tucked away in a technology-free zone) about its firing of Dan Froomkin and well that spells the death of the WaPost for me.

As usual, Glenn Greenwald has some insightful points to make on a topic he writes about quite often. In short: Froomkin was too much of a real journalist for the Washington Post's editorial board to handle, because according to it, the function of journalism is to cater to the prevailing political masters.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Yoo civil lawsuit allowed to proceed

See here. Also, see the Washington Post's editorial criticizing the decision. Its argument is summed up by the following:

Moreover, Mr. Yoo provided legal opinions on what he believed the law allowed the executive to do, but he did not make the final policy decisions. Allowing Mr. Padilla's case to proceed could have a chilling effect on the ability of government lawyers to give candid, good-faith advice for fear of being held personally liable.

I've addressed the distinction between advice and policy here. In Yoo's case, that distinction doesn't apply in the usual way, and the Washington Post's editorial is, once again, an utter failure.

Friday, June 12, 2009

New York, 3rd World State

I have vast experience in 3rd World politics and can testify that the spectacle we have witnessed in the New York State Senate this week easily matches the worst episodes of corruption I have known about in Latin America or Africa. Two Democratic senators were apparently "persuaded" by a tycoon (who is not even part of the senate or any political party but who recently financed some important democratic state campaigns) to defect from the Democratic party allowing Republicans to seize control of the closely divided chamber.

This billionaire patron was indignant at the Democratic majority because of their plan to raise taxes on the rich to compensate the spiraling state deficit. Unable to deter them from going ahead with their plan, he opted for the healthy alternative of inviting a couple of senators with God knows what incentives to move to the opposite party.

In case this is not fishy enough, one of the defecting senators had been drawn to the Democratic side not long ago with promises of power and protection from the countless charges of corruption that he has faced lately. The other defecting senator was recently indicted with charges of having stabbed his companion.

You gotta wonder what the heck is going on in New York. The current governor, David Paterson, replaced the elected governor, Eliot Spitzer, who resigned last year after being linked to a prostitution ring. Like in the worst crooks movies, New York politics seems to be dominated by an underworld of corruption and personal interest. Democrats have taken legal measures against the Republican coup and a judge is set to deliberate on the issue next week. Whatever the outcome of this mess, the situation illustrates the need to clean the sordid political landscape of New York State as soon as possible.

Monday, June 8, 2009

Boumediene 2: Bush 0

This is what Lakhdar Boumediene's homemade t-shirt reads, as related in his recent interview with ABC News. It refers to his two victories over the morally bankrupt Bush administration who willfully and needlessly kept him at Guantanamo for 7 years. The first victory was SCOTUS's judgment in Boumediene v. Bush which enabled him to get judicial review. The other was U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon's decision to free him upon reviewing the 'thin reed' of evidence the administration had against him.

Boumediene makes the following remarkable statement about the duration of his detainment:

"The first month, okay, no problem, the building, the 11 of September, the people, they are scared, but not 7 years. They can know whose innocent, who's not innocent, who's terrorist, who's not terrorist," he said.

"I give you 2 years, no problem, but not 7 years."

It's remarkably generous to offer 2 years of your life for a gross mistake (assuming that it's just that), especially given the credible charge of being tortured whilst incarcerated. But leaving that aside, Boumediene's point should strike a mortal blow to any proponent of executive privilege who wants to assert that the executive is better qualified than any other branch of government to handle matters of war--a standard talking point for the right. After 7 years, the executive could not (or would not) determine Boumediene's innocence. On the other hand, it took Judge Leon only 5 months after Boumediene v Bush to sift through all the evidence and render his judgment (PDF file). In which institution would you place more trust?

Friday, June 5, 2009

Berlusconi's Innocent Villa

After Veronica Lario, Belusconi's wife, filed for divorced accusing him of shameless sexual corruption, Italian paparazzi caught the Italian president enjoying an "innocent" afternoon (as he himself referred to the pictures) with some of his friends (here).

InterVentions

National March on Wall Street April 4

A world of discontent

Join the Home Defenders Campaign

Italy's Madhouse

Eulana Englaro

Say it ain't so.

Khatami to Run for President

Government Tapped Journalist's Phones

Competing historical lessons

Government to buy debt, not banks

Daschle is out

Support the Sit-In at Republic

Bush: Don't Blame Capitalism

Tax breaks for banks

What's Actually in the bailout proposal

Friday, July 10, 2009

Shock and Shame in NY

Monday, July 6, 2009

Lessons for Honduras

Friday, July 3, 2009

Washington Post death watch

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Chile and human rights

Friday, June 26, 2009

Michael Jackson's Uncensored Obituary

Monday, June 22, 2009

death of the Washington Post

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Yoo civil lawsuit allowed to proceed

Friday, June 12, 2009

New York, 3rd World State

Monday, June 8, 2009

Boumediene 2: Bush 0

Friday, June 5, 2009

Berlusconi's Innocent Villa

About Us

Call for Submissions

Label Cloud

Blog Archive