Posted on 10/17/2001 4:21:08 AM PDT by Mr. Mulliner
October 16, 2001Barbarians at the Gate
by Steve H. Hanke
Steve H. Hanke is a professor of applied economics at The Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, chairman of the Friedberg Mercantile Group, Inc. in New York and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.Don't make the mistake of interpreting the events of Sept. 11 purely in terms of terrorism and murder. There is a bigger context here. There is more to this story -- much more. The terrorists are a virulent subset of a much larger group of anti-capitalists, one that includes many politicians, bureaucrats, writers, media types, academics, entertainers, trade unionists and, at times, church leaders.
The barbarians at the gates are more numerous than you thought.
The distinctive feature of their ideology is a bitter hostility toward the West, toward the rule of law and toward the market system. That ideology begins with nasty-minded fantasies of Western exploitation that supposedly produces Third World poverty. It ends with demands for huge international income redistribution and calls to expropriate private property.
The worldwide public's sorrow and rage over the attacks found few echoes among the anti-capitalist crowd. Defiantly, Bernard Cassen -- chairman of protest group Attac France and a spark plug of the assault on the July G-8 meetings in Genoa -- was quoted as saying: "Life goes on, and we see no reason to change our analysis or our actions." How noble.
Closer to home, writer Susan Sontag found it within herself to admire the twisted suicidal thinking that animated the hijackers. She wrote in the New Yorker that "whatever may be said about the perpetrators of Tuesday's slaughter, they were not cowards." What an accolade.
Now is the time for President Bush to acknowledge reality and engage not only the terrorists but also the anti-capitalists who are bent on destroying the core of Western civilization. His inspiration should be Ronald Reagan, who reminded the citizenry what they were fighting for and what against. This will prove to be no easy task. Taking on the anti-capitalists will require some straight talk. Namely, that handouts and protectionism, which this bunch champions, are counterproductive.
For a reference, I suggest the recently released book by the World Bank's William Easterly, The Elusive Quest for Growth (MIT Press, $30). That treatise documents how the West has dished out $1 trillion in foreign aid as grants, debt relief and concessionary loans to the Third World since the 1960s. Coupled with an endless convoy of "expert" advisers from Easterly's employer and the International Monetary Fund, the effort has been a monumental flop. Much of Latin America, Asia and sub-Saharan Africa are economic weaklings, despite all the aid, writes Easterly, thus upsetting his bosses at the World Bank.
When the World Trade Organization's meetings convene in Doha, Qatar on Nov. 9, the United States must stand up for free trade, the essence of capitalism. It should insist that the meetings not get upended by unelected anti-capitalists, as did the 1999 WTO conclave in Seattle. The party-crashers' flotilla of protest boats should not be allowed in the harbor.
Next, the United States must confront the elected protectionists -- primarily socialists from Europe -- with a few facts about free trade. A working paper -- "Trade, Growth and Poverty" -- by David Dollar and Aart Kraay, again from the World Bank, provides good ammunition. They divided developing countries into two groups: those that embraced free trade (Argentina, India) and ones that were protectionist (Pakistan, Honduras). Then they analyzed measures of economic performance since 1980.
The developing countries that have adopted free trade since 1980 have seen trade as a percentage of their economies increase, growth rates in per capita GDP accelerate and the level of poverty fall. Not surprisingly, these developing countries grew more rapidly than the rich, developed countries, closing the income gap between them. On all counts, the performance was the reverse for those countries that embraced protectionism.
The Bush Administration's message for the Doha gathering should be clear: Free trade will do the most to foster the economic growth that decent people want for all. That message may disturb the exquisite sensibilities that haters of capitalism love to display. But the U.S. has a winning hand. Let's play it.
This article was first published in Forbes, October 29, 2001.
The legend of Saudi fugitive Osama bin Laden is that of the world's richest terrorist, a business-savvy nomad who has used a vast inheritance and a constellation of companies to finance a global network of violence.
[snip]
In Sudan in the 1990s, bin Laden engaged in construction and agriculture.
[snip]
Ever since his days as a student of economics and finance at King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, bin Laden has shown a special affinity for raising and managing money.
[snip]
After the Soviet pullout from Afghanistan, bin Laden moved his activities to Sudan, but also spent time in Saudi Arabia, working for the family construction business.
[snip]
In Sudan, bin Laden invested in a variety of businesses -- including construction, farming and banking. He built bridges, an international airport and a major roadway. He harvested peanuts, fruit, sesame, white corn, sunflowers and wheat. He dealt in imports and exports.
[snip]
He paid $50 million for part ownership of a Khartoum bank, and he ran Taba Investment Co., which invested in global stock markets. He formed ventures with members of Sudan's ruling National Islamic Front, using his wealth to win favor and protection.
-----------------
Like I said, he's a capitolist.
It must take a lot of effort to miss the main point, which was quite clear.
Of course the Islamic fundamentals don't dwell on the nuances, and may not even be aware of them.
They are merely the shock troops of the larger army.
As to the world-wide wealth redistribution element? is it any suprise that even the ex-First Rapist now repeats that need shamelessly?
Maybe Merriam-Webster can clear things up for you:
Main Entry: cap·i·tal·ist
Pronunciation: -ist
Function: noun
Date: 1792
1 : a person who has capital especially invested in business; broadly : a person of wealth : PLUTOCRAT
2 : a person who favors capitalism
I'll need an explanation of this one to make sense of it. People can have money, not give it away, spend it on whatever they want...and that doesn't make them a capitalist.
The Cato institute does not support nor advocate unregulated and unrestricted immigration. The problems with immigration being discussed here are mainly a result of the Clinton/Gore administration's corruption. They weakened and overloaded the INS in order to get more Democrat voters into the country. They knew we were getting many other undesirables but voters were more important than national security.
It was a fact during the boom of the late 80s through the 90s that we needed more qualified workers than this country was producing, thanks in large part to the Democrats destruction of our education system, the welfare state, and the demands of labor unions. We needed not only the cheap labor described but also educated, intelligent, and willing workers for our high tech industries. Many of those came from India, Pakistan, Israel, and other countries in that area. Unfortunately, our overworked, undermanned, and politically manipulated INS could not do the necessary job of keeping up with all these people so many bad guys got in and stayed.
Most of the Hispanics I have met personally are conservative thinkers and hard woprkers. I know some are lefties and many are willing to exchange votes for welfare, but I don't see Hispanics as a longterm threat to our society.
The anti-capitalist, I guess that is more politically correct than my term "lefties", do permiate all areas of this country. Faulty thinking is non-discriminating.
These days; [Especially, SY, in our part of the world] since criminally-inspired prohibitions have seen to it that all of the really BIG money finds its way into the clutches of the world's most Evil people; the probability is extremely low that anyone ostentatiously cash rich is a Capitalist.
Most of the world's liquid wealth is in the hands of [Drugs, arms, prostitution-racketeering] criminals; of those [Bankers -- including America's "Fed," which manipulates the money supply to allow for drug trafficing -- lawyers and accountants] who launder and "invest" their ill-gotten gains -- and in the hands of the [Politician] owners and operators of the gummints; including most, at every level, of America's and Europe's -- and all of Asia's; which facilitate all of the above!
Osama isn't looking through our eyes, though. When he looks at the WTC, he sees a physically large target which is easy to hit by beginner pilots, containing a large number of non-believers to murder, centered in one of our largest population centers for maximum fear factor.
You said it. I agree with you.
In the contemporary world, what is called capitalism is nothing but socialism given a different name. We have large "communes" (called "corporations") with sophisticated "re-distribution of wealth" schemes (only instead of "each according to his ability to each according to his need" it is "each according to his job description to each according to his shares") and underneath it all we have the same dehumanizing mechanisms where INDIVIDUALS are accorded second place status (only instead of the "good of the community" we have individuals being sacrificed for the "good of the shareholders").
Let's remember that bin Laden's family controls one of the biggest construction companies in the world. When the Taliban falls and the IMF "loans" the new Afgan government 10 billions dollars to rebuild, there's little difference between the people who will get the money and the people who did the destruction. And, through all this destruction and re-building, it is not the business world that will be doing the bulk of the suffering. (Sure, some US companies may go under. But others will profit to the tune of billions.)
It's not a war of capitalism vs. anti-capitalism. It a war of this bunch of global socialists against that bunch of global socialists and NONE of them care about individuals per se...
Mark W.
Take the good life away from them and they will change their tune. Just don't take me down with you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.