Your browser does not support the HTML5 canvas tag.
Εγχειρίδιο χειρισμού κρίσεων λόγω πολιτικών ΔΝΤ από τη CIA! / Already confirmed: Civil liberties under attack! / Greece's creditors gone completely insane! / How the global financial mafia sucked Greece's blood / ECB's economic hitmen / Η Μέρκελ επιβεβαιώνει τα σχέδια των γραφειοφασιστών! /Greece: the low-noise collapse of an entire country/ How the neoliberal establishment tricked the masses again, this time in France / Ενώ η Γερμανία προετοιμάζεται για τα χειρότερα, η Ελλάδα επιμένει στο ευρώ! / Ένας παγκόσμιος "proxy" πόλεμος κατά της ελευθερίας έχει ξεκινήσει! / McCarthyism 2.0 against the independent information / Ο επικεφαλής του "σκιώδους συμβουλίου" της ΕΚΤ επιβεβαιώνει ότι η ευρωζώνη είναι μια χρηματοπιστωτική δικτατορία! / Venezuela case as an emphatic example of why the mainstream media propaganda in the West was so successful in previous decades / Δημοψήφισμα για Grexit: η τελευταία ευκαιρία να σωθεί η Ελλάδα και η τιμή της Αριστεράς / Populism as the new cliche of the elites to stigmatize anyone not aligned with the establishment / Δεν γίνεται έτσι "σύντροφοι" ... / Panama Papers: When mainstream information wears the anti-establishment mask / The Secret Bank Bailout / The head of the ECB “shadow council” confirms that eurozone is a financial dictatorship! / A documentary by Paul Mason about the financial coup in Greece / The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century / First cracks to the establishment by the American people / Clinton emails - The race of the Western neo-colonialist vultures over the Libyan corpse / Επιχείρηση Panama Papers: Το κατεστημένο θέλει το μονοπώλιο και στις διαρροές; / Operation "looting of Greece" reaches final stage / Varoufakis describes how Merkel sacrificed Greece to save the Franco-German banks / France officialy enters the neo-Feudal era! / The US establishment just gave its greatest performance so far ... / A significant revelation by WikiLeaks that the media almost ignored / It's official: the US is funding Middle-East jihadists! / Οι αδίστακτοι νεο-αποικιοκράτες του 21ου αιώνα / How to handle political unrest caused by IMF policies! / Πώς το νεοφιλελεύθερο κατεστημένο ξεγέλασε τις μάζες, αυτή τη φορά στη Γαλλία / Οι Γάλλοι νεοαποικιοκράτες επιστρέφουν στην Ελλάδα υπό 'ιδανικές' συνθήκες

21 September, 2017

Gary Cohn is giving Goldman Sachs everything it ever wanted from the Trump Administration

Gary Rivlin, Michael Hudson


Donald Trump, the “blue-collar billionaire,” has taken great pains to write grit and toughness into his privileged biography. He talks of military schools and visits to construction sites with his father and wrote in “The Art of the Deal” that in the second grade, “I actually gave a teacher a black eye. I punched my music teacher because I didn’t think he knew anything about music and I almost got expelled.” Yet when the authors of the book “Trump Revealed: An American Journey of Ambition, Ego, Money, and Power” spoke to several of his childhood friends, none of them recalled the incident. Trump himself crumpled when asked about the incident during the 2016 campaign: “When I say ‘punch,’ when you’re that age, nobody punches very hard.

Gary Cohn, however, is the middle-class kid and self-made millionaire Trump imagines himself to be. It appears that Cohn actually did slug a grade-school teacher in the face. “I was being abused,” Cohn told author Malcolm Gladwell, who interviewed him for his book, “David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants,” back when Cohn was still president of Goldman Sachs. As a child, Cohn struggled with dyslexia, a reading disorder people didn’t understand much about when Cohn attended school in the 1970s in a suburb outside Cleveland. “You’re a 6- or 7- or 8-year-old-kid, and you’re in a public-school setting, and everyone thinks you’re an idiot,” Cohn confessed to Gladwell. “You’d try to get up every morning and say, today is going to be better, but after you do that a couple of years, you realize that today is going to be no different than yesterday.” One time when he was in the fourth grade, a teacher put him under her desk, rolled her chair close, and started kicking him, Cohn said. “I pushed the chair back, hit her in the face, and walked out.

While Trump’s father was a wealthy real estate developer, Cohn’s father was an electrician. When Trump sought to get into the casino business, his father loaned him $14 million. When Cohn couldn’t find a job after graduating from college, all his father could do was find him one selling aluminum siding. While Trump has the instincts of a reality show producer and an eye for spectacle, Cohn prefers to operate in the shadows.

But they likely recognize much of themselves in the other. Both Cohn and Trump are alpha males — men of action unlikely to be found holed up in an office reading through stacks of policy reports. In fact, neither seems to be much of a reader. Cohn told Gladwell it would take him roughly six hours to read just 22 pages; he ended his time with the author by wishing him luck on “your book I’m not going to read.” Both have a transactional view of politics. Trump switched his voter registration between Democratic, Republican, and independent seven times between 1999 and 2012. In the 2000s, his foundation gave $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation, and he contributed $4,700 to Hillary Clinton’s senatorial campaigns. He even bought and refurbished a golf course in Westchester County a few miles from the Clinton home, in part, Trump once admitted, to ingratiate himself with the Clintons. Cohn is a registered Democrat who has given at least $275,000 to Democrats over the years, including to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, but also around $250,000 to Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.

There are also striking similarities in their business histories. Both have a knack for weathering scandals and setbacks and coming out on top. Trump has filed for bankruptcy four times, started a long list of failed businesses (casinos, an airline, a football team, a steak company), but managed, through his best-selling books and highly rated reality TV show, to recast himself as the world’s greatest businessman. During Cohn’s tenure as president, Goldman Sachs faced lawsuits and federal investigations that resulted in $9 billion in fines for misconduct in the run-up to the subprime meltdown. Goldman not only survived but thrived, posting record profits — and Cohn was rewarded with handsome bonuses and a position at the top of the new administration.

Cohn’s path to the White House started with a tale of brass and bluster that would make Trump the salesman proud. Still in his 20s and stuck selling aluminum siding, Cohn made a play that would change his life. In the fall of 1982, while visiting the company’s home office on Long Island, he stole a day from work and headed to the U.S. commodities exchange in Manhattan, hoping to talk himself into a job. He overheard an important-looking man say he was heading to LaGuardia Airport; Cohn blurted out that he was headed there, too. He jumped into a cab with the man and, Cohn told Gladwell, who devoted six pages of “David and Goliath” to Cohn’s underdog rise, “I lied all the way to the airport.” The man confided to Cohn that his firm had just put him in charge of a market, options, that he knew little about. Cohn likely knew even less, but he assured his backseat companion that he could get him up to speed. Cohn then spent the weekend reading and re-reading a book called “Options as a Strategic Investment.” Within the week, he’d been hired as the man’s assistant.

Cohn soon learned enough to venture off on his own and established himself as an independent silver trader on the floor of the New York Commodities Exchange. In 1990, Goldman Sachs, arguably the most elite firm on Wall Street, offered him a job.

Goldman Sachs was founded in the years just after the American Civil War. Marcus Goldman, a Jewish immigrant from Germany, leased a cellar office next to a coal chute in 1869. There, in an office one block from Wall Street, he bought the bad debt of local businesses that needed quick cash. His son-in-law, Samuel Sachs, joined the firm in 1882. A generation later, in 1906, the firm made its first mark, arranging for the public sale of shares in Sears, Roebuck. Goldman Sachs’s influence over politics dates back at least to 1914. That year, Henry Goldman, the founder’s son, was invited to advise Woodrow Wilson’s administration about the creation of a central bank, mandated by the Federal Reserve Act, which had passed the previous year. Goldman Sachs men have played important roles in U.S. government ever since.

There was the occasional scandal, such as Goldman Sachs’s role in the 1970 collapse of Penn Central railroad, then the largest corporate bankruptcy in U.S. history. Still, the firm built a reputation as a sober, elite partnership that served its clients ably. In 1979, when John Whitehead, a senior partner and co-chairman, set to paper what he called Goldman’s “Business Principles,” he began with the firm’s most cherished belief: The client’s interests come before all else.

Two years later, Goldman took a step that signaled the beginning of the end of that culture. In the fall of 1981, Goldman purchased J. Aron & Co., a commodities trading firm. Some within the partnership were against the acquisition, worried over how profane, often crude, trading culture would mix with Goldman’s restrained, well-mannered way of doing business. “We were street fighters,” one former J. Aron partner told Fortune magazine in 2008.

The J. Aron team moved into the Goldman Sachs offices in lower Manhattan, but didn’t adopt its culture. Within a few years, it was producing well over $1 billion a year in profits. They were 300 employees inside a firm of 6,000, but were posting one-third of Goldman’s total profits. The cultural shift, it turned out, was moving in the other direction. J. Aron, according to a book by Charles D. Ellis, a former Goldman consultant, brought to Goldman “a trading culture that would become dominant in the firm.

Lloyd Blankfein, who ascended to chairman and CEO in in 2006, started his Goldman career at J. Aron, a year after Goldman acquired the firm. “We didn’t have the word ‘client’ or ‘customer’ at the old J. Aron,” Blankfein told Fortune magazine two years after taking over as CEO. “We had counter-parties.” Cohn joined J. Aron eight years after Blankfein did, in 1990. Four years later, Blankfein was put in charge of the firm’s Fixed Income, Currency, and Commodities division, which included J. Aron. Cohn, loyal and hard-working, with an instinct for connecting with people who can help him, became Blankfein’s “corporate problem solver.

The emergence of “Bad Goldman” — and Cohn’s central role in that drama — is really the story of the rise of the traders inside the firm. “As trading came to be a bigger part of Wall Street, I noticed that the vision changed,” said Robert Kaplan, a former Goldman Sachs vice chairman, who left in 2006 after working at the firm for 23 years. “The leaders were saying the same words, but they started to change incentives away from the value-added vision and tilt more to making money first. If making money is your vision, what lengths will you not go?

At the height of the dot-com years, a debate raged within the firm. The firm underwrote dozens of technology IPOs, including Microsoft and Yahoo, in the 1980s and 1990s, minting an untold number of multimillionaires and the occasional billionaire. Some of the companies they were bringing public generated no profits at all, while Goldman was generating up to $3 billion in profits a year. It seemed inevitable that some within Goldman Sachs began to dream of jettisoning the Goldman’s century-old partnership structure and taking their firm public, too. Jon Corzine was running the firm then — he would later go into politics in the Goldman tradition, first as a U.S. senator and then as New Jersey governor — and was four-square in favor of going public. Corzine’s second in command, Henry Paulson — who would go on to serve as Treasury secretary — was against the idea. But Corzine ordered up a study that supported his view that remaining private stifled Goldman’s competitive opportunities and promoted Paulson to co-senior partner. Paulson soon got on board. In May 1999, Goldman sold $3.7 billion worth of shares in the company. At the end of the first day of trading, Corzine’s and Paulson’s stakes in the firm were each worth $205 million. Cohn’s and Mnuchin’s shares were each worth $112 million. And Blankfein ended up with $168 million in company stock.

Like any publicly traded company, there would now be pressure on Goldman Sachs to make its quarterly numbers and “maximize shareholder value.” Discarding the partner model also meant the loss of a valuable restraint on risk-taking and bad behavior. Under the old system, any losses or fines came out of the partners’ pockets. In the early 1990s, for example, the firm was involved in transactions with Robert Maxwell, a London-based media mogul who was accused of stealing hundreds of millions of pounds from his companies’ pension funds. The $253 million that Goldman Sachs paid to settle lawsuits brought by pension funds over its involvement was split among the firm’s 84 limited partners. Now any losses are paid by a publicly traded entity owned by shareholders, with no direct financial liability for the decision-makers themselves. In theory, Goldman could claw back bonuses in response to executives’ bad behavior. But in 2016, when Goldman paid over $5 billion to settle charges brought by the Justice Department that the firm misled customers in the sale of a subprime mortgage product during Cohn’s time overseeing that unit, the Goldman board declined to dock Cohn’s pay. Instead, the company awarded him a $5.5 million cash bonus and another $12.6 million in company stock.

As Blankfein moved up the corporate hierarchy, Cohn rose along with him. When Blankfein was made vice chairman in charge of the firm’s multibillion-dollar global commodities business and its equities division, Cohn took over as co-head of FICC, Blankfein’s previous position. That meant Cohn was overseeing not just J. Aron and the firm’s commodities business, but also its currency trades and bond sales. By the start of 2004, Blankfein was promoted to president and COO, and Cohn was named co-head of global securities. At that point, Cohn had authority over the mortgage-trading desk. Under Cohn, the firm aggressively moved into the subprime mortgage market, using Goldman’s own money and that of its customers to help stoke the housing bubble.

Goldman was already enabling subprime predators, such as Ameriquest and New Century Financial, by providing them with the cash infusions they needed to scale up their lending to individual home buyers. Cohn would steer the firm deeper into the subprime frenzy by setting up Goldman as a patron of some of these same mortgage originators. During his tenure, Goldman snapped up loans from New Century, Countrywide, and other notorious mortgage originators and bundled them into deals with opaque names, such as ABACUS and GSAMP. Under Cohn’s watchful eye, Goldman’s brokers then funneled slices to customers they sold on the wisdom of holding mortgage-backed securities in their portfolios.

One such creation, GSAA Home Equity Trust 2006-2, illustrates Goldman’s disregard for the quality of loans it was buying and packaging into security deals. Created in early 2006, the investment vehicle was made up of more than $1 billion in home loans Goldman had bought from Ameriquest, one of the nation’s largest and most aggressive subprime lenders. By that point, the lender already had set aside $325 million to settle a probe by attorneys general and banking regulators in 49 states, who accused Ameriquest of misleading thousands of borrowers about the costs of their loans and falsifying home appraisals and other key documents. Yet GSAA Home Equity Trust 2006-2 was filled with Ameriquest loans made to more than 3,000 homeowners in Arizona, Illinois, Florida, and elsewhere. By the end of 2008, 65 percent of the roughly 1,400 borrowers whose loans remained in the deal were in default, had filed for bankruptcy, or had been targeted for foreclosure.

In just three years, Goldman Sachs had increased its trading volume by a factor of 50, which the Wall Street Journal attributed to “Cohn’s successful push to rev up risk-taking and use of Goldman’s own capital to make a profit” — what the industry calls proprietary trading, or prop trading. The 2010 Journal article quoted Justin Gmelich, then the firm’s mortgage chief, who said of Cohn, “He reshaped the culture of the mortgage department into more of a trading environment.” In 2005, with Cohn overseeing the firm’s home loan desk, Goldman underwrote $103 billion in mortgage-backed securities and other more esoteric products, such as collateralized debt obligations, which often were priced based on giant pools of home loans. The following year, the firm underwrote deals worth $131 billion.

In 2006, CEO Henry Paulson left the firm to join George W. Bush’s cabinet as Treasury secretary. Blankfein, Cohn’s mentor and friend, took Paulson’s place. By tradition, Blankfein, a trader, should have elevated someone from the investment banking side to serve as his No. 2, so both sides of the firm would be represented in the top leadership. Instead he named Cohn, his long-time loyalist, and Jon Winkelried, who also had history on the trading side, as co-presidents and co-COOs. Winkelried, who had started at Goldman eight years before Cohn, had probably earned the right to hold those titles by himself. But Cohn had the advantage of his relationship with the CEO. Blankfein and Cohn vacationed together in the Caribbean and Mexico, owned homes near each other in the Hamptons, and their children attended the same school. Winkelreid was out in two years. The bromance between his fellow No. 2 and the top boss may have proved too much.

With Blankfein and Cohn at the top, the transformation of Goldman Sachs was complete. By 2009, investment banking had shrunk to barely 10 percent of the firm’s revenues. Richard Marin, a former executive at Bear Stearns, a Goldman competitor that wouldn’t survive the mortgage meltdown, saw Cohn as “the root of the problem.” Explained Marin, “When you become arrogant in a trading sense, you begin to think that everybody’s a counterparty, not a customer, not a client. And as a counterparty, you’re allowed to rip their face off.

Source, links:

[1] [2]


Η Αριστερά και η Βενεζουέλα

του Κλάουντιο Κατς

Μέρος 3ο - Μορφές ενός πραξικοπήματος

Τα ΜΜΕ, με τα ρεπορτάζ τους, στηρίζουν τι πραξικοπηματικές επιδιώξεις της αντιπολίτευσης. Η βενεζουελάνικη αντιπολίτευση δεν μπορεί να φέρει σε πέρας τις συνήθεις αναταραχές, του είδους που οδήγησαν στο πραξικόπημα του Πινοτσέτ, και έτσι προσπαθεί να ανατρέψει τον πρόεδρο Μαδούρο εκτοπίζοντας την κοινωνία. Επαναλαμβάνει αυτό που επιχείρησε τον Φεβρουάριο του 2014, προκειμένου να διαπράξει συνταγματικό πραξικόπημα παρόμοιο μ’ αυτό της Ονδούρας (2009), της Παραγουάης (2014) ή της Βραζιλίας (2016). Ελπίζει ότι θα επιβάλει με τη βία αυτό που αργότερα θα επικυρώσει στις κάλπες.

Η Δεξιά δεν διαθέτει τη στρατιωτική δύναμη που χρησιμοποιούσε στο παρελθόν για να επανέλθει στην κυβερνητική εξουσία. Αλλά επιχειρεί να αναδημιουργήσει τις δυνατότητες τέτοιας παρέμβασης διεξάγοντας αψιμαχίες στους στρατώνες, πυρπολώντας αστυνομικά τμήματα ή διοργανώνοντας πορείες στα στρατιωτικά επιτελεία.

Το σχέδιό της συνδυάζει το σαμποτάζ της οικονομίας με τις ταραχές που προκαλούν ένοπλες ομάδες οι οποίες , σε αντίθεση με την Κολομβία, δρουν ανώνυμα. Αυτές οι ενέργειες εμπλέκουν τον εγκληματικό υπόκοσμο και τρομοκρατούν τους εμπόρους.

Περιλαμβάνουν φασιστικές μεθόδους που πατρονάρονται από τα πιο βίαια ρεύματα κατά του τσαβισμού. Ιδιοποιούνται τον εξεγερσιακό συμβολισμό που σφυρηλάτησαν τα λαϊκά κινήματα και παρουσιάζουν το πλιάτσικο ως ηρωική στάση. Ο ηγέτης της αντιπολίτευσης Λεοπόλντο Λόπες δεν είναι ένας αθώος πολιτικός. Όποιο δικαστήριο λειτουργεί βάσει του κράτους δικαίου θα τον είχε καταδικάσει σε ισόβια κάθειρξη για τις εγκληματικές ευθύνες του.

Η Δεξιά προωθεί κλίμα εμφυλίου πολέμου, προκειμένου να πλήξει το ηθικό της λαϊκής βάσης του τσαβισμού που επηρεάζεται από την έλλειψη τροφίμων και φαρμάκων. Η θέση της υπέρ της ξένης επέμβασης είναι σαφής και διαπραγματεύεται με τις πιστώτριες τράπεζες τη διακοπή της πρόσβασης της Βενεζουέλας στην πίστωση.

Η αντιπολίτευση ελπίζει να λιντσάρει τον Μαδούρο για να θάψει τον τσαβισμό. Διεξάγει αυτή τη μάχη στους δρόμους για να κατακτήσει την κοινή γνώμη και για να οδηγήσει σε κατάρρευση την οικονομία. Τις εκλογές τις βλέπει απλώς ως κορύφωση αυτής της επίθεσης.

Αντιμετωπίζει, όμως, αυξανόμενα εμπόδια. Η βία που κυριαρχεί στις κινητοποιήσεις της αποξενώνει την πλειονότητα των δυσαρεστημένων και φθείρει τους οπαδούς της. Όπως έγινε το 2014, η απόκρουση των φασιστικών ομάδων υπονομεύει όλη την αντιπολίτευση. Επιπλέον, η αποφασιστικότητα του Μαδούρο αποτρέπει τη συμμετοχή στις πορείες της αντιπολίτευσης. Οι δυνάμεις της δεξιάς αντιπολίτευσης δεν έχουν κατορθώσει να εισχωρήσουν στις λαϊκές γειτονιές όπου πιθανώς θα αντιμετωπίσουν τον κίνδυνο μιας δυσμενούς ένοπλης σύγκρουσης.

Η μεγάλη αστική τάξη της Βενεζουέλας υποκινεί σε πραξικόπημα έχοντας την περιφερειακή υποστήριξη των Μάκρι (προέδρου της Αργεντινής), Τέμερ (της Βραζιλίας), Σάντος (της Κολομβίας) και Πένια Νέτο (του Μεξικού). Επί μήνες προωθούσε ένα σχέδιο αποσταθεροποίησης στον Οργανισμό Αμερικανικών Κρατών. Αλλά απέτυχε σ’ αυτόν τον τομέα. Οι προτεινόμενες κυρώσεις κατά της Βενεζουέλας δεν πέτυχαν λόγω της εναντίωσης πολλών και διαφόρων ξένων υπουργείων. Δεν επιτεύχθηκε η ομοφωνία με την οποία εκδιώχθηκε η Κούβα από τον Οργανισμό Αμερικανικών Κρατών τη δεκαετία του 1960.

Επίσης, διαβόητη είναι η υποστήριξη πραξικοπημάτων από τις ΗΠΑ με στόχο την ανάκτηση του ελέγχου στα μεγάλα αποθέματα αργού πετρελαίου της ηπείρου. Το Στέιτ Ντιπάρτμεντ θέλει να επαναλάβει τις επιχειρήσεις που διεξήγαγε στο Ιράκ ή στη Λιβύη, εφόσον γνωρίζει ότι μετά την ανατροπή του Μαδούρο ουδείς θα θυμάται πού βρίσκεται η Βενεζουέλα. Αρκεί να δει κανείς πώς τα δελτία ειδήσεων των ΜΜΕ παραλείπουν κάθε αναφορά στις χώρες στις οποίες ήδη έχει επέμβει το Πεντάγωνο. Η λογική των κυρίαρχων ραδιοτηλεοπτικών μέσων είναι να αλλάζουν το θέμα των ειδήσεών τους από τη στιγμή που οι ιμπεριαλιστές διαλύουν τον αντίπαλό τους.

Τους στρατηγικούς στόχους του ιμπεριαλισμού δεν τους αντιλαμβάνονται εκείνοι που δίνουν υπερβάλλουσα σημασία στο φλερτ κάποιας αμερικανικής εφημερίδας με τον πρόεδρο της Βενεζουέλας ή στις ρητορικές αμφισημίες του Τραμπ. Φαντάζονται ότι αυτά τα άσχετα γεγονότα υποδηλώνουν την απουσία σύγκρουσης μεταξύ των ΗΠΑ και του τσαβισμού. Και ταυτόχρονα δεν βλέπουν πόσο μοχθηρά επιτίθεται η τεράστια πλειονότητα του Τύπου στον Μαδούρο και το ότι ο πολυεκατομμυριούχος του Λευκού Οίκου διαψεύδει κάθε ημέρα αυτά που έλεγε την προηγούμενη.

Ο Τραμπ δεν είναι ούτε αδιάφορος ούτε ουδέτερος. Απλώς αναθέτει στη CIA και στο Πεντάγωνο την εκπλήρωση της συνωμοσίας «καθημερινή διατάραξη της κοινωνικής ζωής» και των σχεδίων «Ελευθερία για τη Βενεζουέλα νο 2». Αυτές οι επιχειρήσεις περιλαμβάνουν κατασκοπία, ανάπτυξη στρατευμάτων και κάλυψη τρομοκρατικών πράξεων. Εξελίσσονται κρυφά, ενώ τα ισχυρά ΜΜΕ απαξιώνουν οποιαδήποτε καταδίκη τους. Ιδίως αμφισβητούν τις «υπερβολές της Αριστεράς», ώστε κανείς να μην ενοχλεί τους συνωμότες.

Ορισμένοι αναλυτές θεωρούν ότι η παρουσία της εταιρείας Chevron στη Βενεζουέλα – ή οι συνεχιζόμενες συναλλαγές της κρατικής επιχείρησης πετρελαίου PDVSA με τις ΗΠΑ-- αποτυπώνουν μια στενή σχέση μεταξύ των δύο κυβερνήσεων. Απ’ αυτό συμπεραίνουν ότι δεν υπάρχει σενάριο πραξικοπήματος. Όμως, αυτές οι σχέσεις δεν επηρεάζουν ούτε στο ελάχιστο την απόφαση της αυτοκρατορίας να ανατρέψει την μπολιβαριανή κυβέρνηση.

Οι αμερικανικές εταιρείες δραστηριοποιούνται στη Βενεζουέλα (και οι ομόλογές τους στις ΗΠΑ) καθ’ όλη τη διάρκεια της μπολιβαριανής κυβέρνησης. Κι όμως ο Μπους, ο Ομπάμα και ο Τραμπ επιδίωξαν να ανακτήσουν τον άμεσο ιμπεριαλιστικό έλεγχο του πετρελαίου. Δεν μπορούν να το επιτύχουν μέσω μιας τεταμένης σχέσης μεταξύ εταίρων ή πελατών. Θέλουν να εγκαταστήσουν το μοντέλο ιδιωτικοποίησης που κυριαρχεί στο Μεξικό και να εκδιώξουν τη Ρωσία και την Κίνα από την πίσω αυλή τους.

Πηγή, παραπομπές:

[1] [2]

Saudi Arabia, US and Britain "celebrate" 900 days of slaughter in Yemen

900 days have passed since the start of the violent war launched by Saudi Arabia against Yemen in March 2015, with the support of the United States and Great Britain.

It would not be an exaggeration at all, if one would say that the war has destroyed Yemen. From the daily bombardments, a total of 12,907 Yemeni citizens have been killed while 21,165 injured.

Also, 34,072 demolitions of buildings, factories and all kinds of facilities have been recorded.

The Legal Center for Rights and Development organization recorded with details every loss caused by the bombardments in Yemen.

The results of 900 days in one chart:

It is worth noting that the lists above include only the losses directly related to bombardments and military operations. Yet, besides these, it is estimated that 247,000 people have died from cholera, lack of health care, malnutrition and all the conditions resulting from the embargo imposed by Saudi Arabia.

Info from:

Τι είπε ο άνθρωπος!

Νίκος Μπογιόπουλος

«Δεν τρέφω αυταπάτες για μια κοινωνία χωρίς ανισότητες, κάτι τέτοιο είναι αντίθετο στην ανθρώπινη φύση, όσοι το επιχείρησαν καταστρατήγησαν τελικά την ίδια τη δημοκρατία και τα ατομικά δικαιώματα».

Ποτέ ίσως άλλοτε στην ιστορία αυτού του τόπου σε μια φράση δεν έχουν ειπωθεί τόσα πολλά.

Για την ακρίβεια δεν είχε προσφερθεί στο φιλοθεάμον κοινό τέτοιο ξεβράκωμα από τον γυμνό βασιλιά του νεοφιλελευθερισμού.

Τι μας είπε ο «μετριοπαθής», ο «ήπιος», ο «κεντροδεξιός» κύριος Μητσοτάκης;

Ότι η κοινωνική ισότητα καταστρατηγεί τη δημοκρατία και ότι κινείται στον αντίποδα της ανθρώπινης φύσης!

Ότι η «ανισότητα» (προσέξτε: η ανισότητα» και όχι η «διαφορετικότητα») αποτελεί στοιχείο του ανθρώπινου DNA και άρα είναι ο αρμός πάνω στον οποίο πρέπει να οικοδομούνται οι ανθρώπινες κοινωνίες!

Ο κ.Μητσοτάκης,ακολουθώντας τον «ευθύ» δρόμο του νεοσυντηρητισμού και όχι την σοσιαλδημοκρατική τεθλασμένη του κ.Τσίπρα (ιδού η… διαφορά τους) ήταν αποκαλυπτικός:

Δια των χειλέων του η κοινωνική ανισότητα έφτασε να συνιστά ξετσίπωτα πολιτικό πρόταγμα και να ξεστομίζεται επίσημα ως προεκλογικού τύπου διακηρυκτικός λόγος!

Τύφλα να έχει ο κοινωνικός δαρβινισμός! Τύφλα να έχει ο Μάλθους!

Ο κύριος Μητσοτάκης, ο οποίος αγορεύει περί το μέλλον, ο οποίος ομιλεί εν έτει 2017 για να μας πουλήσει τα οράματα του για το πώς θα είναι η Ελλάδα το 2030, μας το ξεκαθάρισε (εν τη πολιτική αφελεία του;): Θέλει μια χώρα, μια κοινωνία κι έναν λαό που θα ζούνε… 250 χρόνια πίσω.

Πίσω κι από εκείνο το «Ελευθερία – ΙΣΟΤΗΤΑ – αδελφοσύνη» της Γαλλικής Επανάστασης!

Τόσο «μαύρο» είναι το μέλλον που μας τάζουν. Φτιαγμένο με τα ίδια πάντα καπιταλιστικά υλικά, με τις ίδιες θεωρίες περί «άξιου και ικανού», με την ίδια κατασταλτική ιδεοληψία που αντανακλά και θέλει να αναπαραγάγει σε επίπεδο συνείδησης την επιβολή του «δίκιου του ισχυρού».

Και που όταν ανοίγουν οι υπόνομοι του συστήματος, εμφανίζονται κάποιοι και τα χρησιμοποιούν όλα αυτάγια να οδηγήσουν την ανθρωπότητα στους νόμους της Νυρεμβέργης.