Back in April, I wrote a two-part review about the book Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins. It seems that my post pops up for people who are searching for that book, but with an additional word added to their search: DEBUNK.
Now I agree that we should all be suspicious about broad-sweeping accusations such as the ones leveled in Perkins’ book. But before all of you looking to write Perkins off as a whack job close the case in your mind, I recommend you watch a documentary from 2001 about Jamaica’s economy and the IMF. Life and Debt by Stephanie Black uses the stark contrast between the tourist side of Jamaica and that of the native population to highlight how post-colonial Jamaica was exploited by the IMF.
I know a term like exploited is harsh and that the IMF is not only to blame, but Michael Manley, former Prime Minister of Jamaica and by no means a saint, asks a tough question about the IMF. He says that to find out whose interest is served by the IMF, one must look at who setup IMF up in the first place.
The U.S. currently has 16.79% of the vote in the IMF. While 16.79% seems like a small percentage, when compared to the next closest country Japan, who has a whopping 6.02%, the disparity starts to stand out. When that disparity is shown in real numbers, the U.S. has 371,743 votes and Japan 133,378, a difference of 238,365 votes, it becomes obvious who calls the shots.
So when a documentary like Life and Debt shows how the Jamaican dairy industry is devastated by U.S. companies dumping powered milk into the country at prices far below cost, one has to ask how those U.S. companies got the right to do so in the first place. Considering that at the time milk powder had a 137% subsidy from the U.S. government and America’s dominance of the IMF, dairy farmers in Jamaica didn’t stand a chance.
Good luck in your quest to debunk. I hope you don’t pass over the truth however by blindly trying prove America’s innocence, and by extension yours. I think we all wish what he said wasn’t true, but the lives of others prove differently.
-mike
December 3, 2009 at 2:00 am
Now that Obama has committed 30,000 troops to Afghnistan, let’s also pay attention to the fact that Pakistan was laced through his speech as well.
Here is a quote from Perkins’ book that I used in my book review and is something that should make people re-examine whether his book should be debunked or not.
This is Perkins talking about an Indonesian puppet show he saw sometime between ‘71 and ‘75:
“A map of the Middle East and Far East appeared behind the two…
…Nixon immediately approached the map, lifted Vietnam off its hook, and thrust it to his mouth. He shouted something that was translated as, “Bitter! Rubbish. We don’t need any more of this!” Then he tossed it into the bucket and proceeded to do the same with other countries.
I was surprised however, to see that his next selections selections did not include the domino nations of Southeast Asia. Rather, they were all Middle eastern countries – Palestine, Kuwait, Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Syria, and Iran. After that he turned to Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Each time, the Nixon doll screamed out some [anti-Islamic] epithet… “Muslim dogs,” “Mohammed’s monsters,” and Islamic devils.””
The point his Indonesian friends make later is that ultimately there would be a Christian/Muslim showdown.
Why? Because we both want to take over the world and have a faith system that back us up and won’t let us back down.
-mike