SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
global inequality
In Leaked Draft, Pope Francis Takes 'Hard Core' Stance on Climate Debate
The Earth 'is protesting for the wrong that we are doing to her, because of the irresponsible use and abuse of the goods that God has placed on her,' pope encyclical warns
Jun 16, 2015
In a lengthy and moving letter to Roman Catholic bishops leaked on Monday, Pope Francis unequivocally asserts that "human activity" is to blame for our planet's destruction, and the only solution is for humanity to change its "lifestyle" and "consumption."
The draft encyclical, published by Italian newspaper L'Espresso on Monday, three days before its intended release, is making waves among the international community as it boldly condemns both climate-deniers and carbon credit speculation, and upholds the growing climate movement and push to divest from fossil fuels.
"Humanity is called to take note of the need for changes in lifestyle and changes in methods of production and consumption to combat this warming, or at least the human causes that produce and accentuate it," he wrote in the draft. "Numerous scientific studies indicate that the greater part of the global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases ... given off above all because of human activity."
The letter was intended for release on Thursday, ahead of the pope's scheduled address to the United Nations in September and less than six months before the upcoming UN climate change summit in Paris. On Monday evening, the Vatican condemned the early release, and reportedly asked journalists not to publish details of the draft, saying it was not the final text.
The draft letter, addressed to bishops but intended as a wider statement on Catholic doctrine, targets those who remain skeptical about the man-made causes of climate change or who believe that geoengineering schemes and other technical advances will permit industrialized nations to continue business as usual.
"The attitudes that stand in the way of a solution, even among believers, range from negation of the problem, to indifference, to convenient resignation or blind faith in technical solutions," reads the text.
Translating the leaked encyclical, the Guardianreports:
At the start of the draft essay, the pope wrote, the Earth "is protesting for the wrong that we are doing to her, because of the irresponsible use and abuse of the goods that God has placed on her. We have grown up thinking that we were her owners and dominators, authorized to loot her. The violence that exists in the human heart, wounded by sin, is also manifest in the symptoms of illness that we see in the Earth, the water, the air and in living things."
He immediately makes clear, moreover, that unlike previous encyclicals, this one is directed to everyone, regardless of religion. "Faced with the global deterioration of the environment, I want to address every person who inhabits this planet," the pope wrote. "In this encyclical, I especially propose to enter into discussion with everyone regarding our common home."
According to the leaked document, the pope will praise the global ecological movement, which has "already travelled a long, rich road and has given rise to numerous groups of ordinary people that have inspired reflection".
In a surprisingly specific and unambiguous passage, the draft rejects outright "carbon credits" as a solution to the problem. It says they "could give rise to a new form of speculation and would not help to reduce the overall emission of polluting gases". On the contrary, the pope wrote, it could help "support the super-consumption of certain countries and sectors".
The encyclical is not Pope Francis's first foray into the climate debate. In a message sent to the UN Climate Convention in Peru last December, he stated that addressing climate change is a "grave ethical and moral responsibility" and warned that "the time to find global solutions is running out."
Though the climate community had expected a call to action from the pope, in addition to statement on the connection between global inequality and climate change, the draft text was seen as a very significant contribution to the climate debate.
Wow: the Pope comes out against carbon credits because they encourage speculation and over-consumption. hard core! https://t.co/YE46weCzfV
-- Naomi Klein (@NaomiAKlein)
June 15, 2015\u201cEven in various goofy translations, it's clear that the Pope's letter will be deep and powerful. Can't wait to read the actual thing\u201d— Bill McKibben (@Bill McKibben) 1434462244
\u201cNo one - religious or atheist - should be in any doubt that the Pope's encyclical on defending the natural world is a big deal.\u201d— George Monbiot (@George Monbiot) 1434443938
Keep ReadingShow Less
IMF Report Admits IMF's Obsession with Capitalism Is Killing Prosperity
"By releasing this report, the IMF has shown that 'trickle-down' economics is dead; you cannot rely on the spoils of the extremely wealthy to benefit the rest of us."
Jun 16, 2015
In light of how the International Monetary Fund has spent most of its existence parading around the world telling governments to make their economies more friendly for multinational corporations by suppressing wages, restricting pensions, liberalizing industries, and more or less advocating, they ignore the popular will of workers and the less fortunate--all in the name of market capitalism and endless economic growth--a new report released by the IMF on Monday contains an ironic warning: stop doing all that.
"This reinforces Oxfam's call on how we need to reduce the income gap between the haves and have-nots and scrutinize why the richest 10% and top 1% have so much wealth. By releasing this report, the IMF has shown that 'trickle-down' economics is dead; you cannot rely on the spoils of the extremely wealthy to benefit the rest of us."
--Nicolas Mombrial, Oxfam International
Though it perpetuates the idea that economic growth is the master to whom all should bow, the new research--conducted by the IMF's own economists and submitted under the title Causes and Consequences of Inequality (pdf)--argues that many of the policies promoted by the IMF have harmed nations by exacerbating widespread economic inequality. As many have noted, current disparities between the world's richest and poorest represent a nearly unprecedented level of global inequality, which the report describes as the "defining challenge of our time."
To strengthen economies, the report declares, nations should admit that "trickle-down" theories of wealth and prosperity do not work. Instead of those, the study recommends raising wages and living standards for the bottom 20 percent, installing more progressive tax structures, improving worker protections, and instituting policies specifically designed to bolster the middle class.
"Fighting inequality is not just an issue of fairness but an economic necessity," said Nicolas Mombrial of Oxfam International in response to the report. "And that's not Oxfam speaking, but the International Monetary Fund."
This is not the first time the IMF's research has bolstered its biggest critics' arguments. According to the International Business Times, the new analysis on inequality "echoes previous IMF research that show that redistributive policies have a positive effect on countries' economic output."
But as the Guardian's economics editor Larry Elliott notes, the new paper creates obvious "tension between the IMF's economic analysis and the more hardline policy advice" it continually gives to countries seeking foreign assistance or development funds. With Greece as the most obvious example, Elliott cites details from the report and writes:
During its negotiations with Athens, the IMF has been seeking to weaken workers' rights, but the research paper found that the easing of labor market regulations was associated with greater inequality and a boost to the incomes of the richest 10%.
"This result is consistent with forthcoming IMF work, which finds the weakening of unions is associated with a higher top 10% income share for a smaller sample of advanced economies," said the study.
"Indeed, empirical estimations using more detailed data for Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries [34 of the world's richest nations] suggest that, in line with other forthcoming IMF work, more lax hiring and firing regulations, lower minimum wages relative to the median wage, and less prevalent collective bargaining and trade unions are associated with higher market inequality."
The study said there was growing evidence to suggest that rising influence of the rich and stagnant incomes of the poor and middle classes caused financial crises, hurting both short- and long-term growth.
No one should be fooled into thinking that the new research aims to alter the IMF's central commitment to advancing the financial interests of the global elite.
In fact, part of the argument presented in the paper is that such enormous levels of global economic inequality could seriously undermine the institution's public defense of capitalism's overall supremacy. "For example," the paper states, "[too much inequality] can lead to a backlash against growth-enhancing economic liberalization and fuel protectionist pressures against globalization and market-oriented reforms."
According to a recent report by Oxfam International, almost half the world's wealth is owned by one percent of the population, while the bottom half of the world's population owns the same wealth as the richest 85 people in the world. For Oxfam's Mombrial, who heads the international anti-poverty group's office in Washington D.C., the IMF's report is a welcome development that should put a nail in the coffin of the austerity-driven policies prescribed by governments and powerful financial institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and others.
"The IMF proves that making the rich richer does not work for growth, while focusing on the poor and the middle class does," Mombrial said. "This reinforces Oxfam's call on how we need to reduce the income gap between the haves and have-nots, and scrutinize why the richest 10 percent and top 1 percent have so much wealth. By releasing this report, the IMF has shown that 'trickle-down' economics is dead; you cannot rely on the spoils of the extremely wealthy to benefit the rest of us. Governments must urgently refocus their policies to close the gap between the richest and the rest if economies and societies are to grow."
As Oxfam and other international campaigners have been saying it for decades, he concluded, "The IMF has set off the alarm for governments to wake up and start actively closing the inequality gap, not just between the rich and poor, but for the middle class too. Their message to them is pretty clear: if you want growth, you'd better invest in the poor, invest in essential services and promote redistributive tax policies."
Keep ReadingShow Less
World Bank 'Development' Driving--Not Solving--Inequality and Poverty
Apr 09, 2014
Our Land, Our Business (English)Right now, millions of people are being thrown off their land because large corporations are being given special rights. The World ...
The thing about "international development" is that it's a bit of a murky, catch-all term. It's got a good feel to it - if you're involved in international development, you're more often than not seen as one of the good guys. It's swirling about in a bucket of meaning alongside "foreign aid" and "disaster relief". It's about "doing good", which is about helping people improve their situation, right? It could be helping people escape from the ruins of an earthquake or the ruins of economic mismanagement but that's what "international development" is generally understood to be about.
How would you feel, then, if you could be convinced that "international development" was a term hiding something darker, less altruistic and far more self-interested? What if the people charged with leading global the development were actually doing more for the 1% than the 99%? Would that piss you off?
Then prepare to be pissed off. Because the World Bank, with its $30 billion annual budget, is doing just that, and causing misery and environmental destruction along the way.
The Bank's mission is to "[E]nd poverty within a generation and boost shared prosperity." Like almost all governments and multilateral institutions, the Bank subscribes to the current economic orthodoxy in as much as all of its models for poverty reduction have economic growth as a prerequisite. For the purposes of this argument, whether they are right or not is not is a secondary, albeit not irrelevant point. The primary point is that it is such a given that almost any sort of growth is considered positive. If it can go on a country's books as growth - in the form of GDP - it's good.
The next pillar of belief is that for developing countries to develop, they must be connected to global markets. They must be able to sell what they have to the people who want it. Oil, grain, rare earth, cotton, diamonds . . . in fact practically any natural resource, preferably in its raw form. And these days, one of the things that developing countries have that others want is arable land. Rich and powerful people aren't stupid; much as political leaders may prevaricate over climate change politically, the 1% know what's coming. They know that land - especially land connected to water - is going to become increasingly rare, and therefore increasingly valuable. It is already in huge demand, both by those looking to build industrial, often monoculture operations, and those looking to turn a quick buck by playing the market.
The thing is, practically all of the land being traded is already owned, mostly by smallholder farmers, pastoralists and Indigenous People; exactly the sort of people "international development" is supposed to be about. Unfortunately, for millions of such people, from Cambodia to Ethiopia to Guatemala, however, they don't have the right paperwork. The fact that they have been tending the same land for generations, or that they are already feeding 80% of the developing world, or that their methods are environmentally sustainable where industrial agriculture is hugely toxic, is irrelevant. No paperwork, no claim. Or, more to the point, no paperwork, therefore their land must belong to the government, and therefore it becomes visible to the world as a tradable asset.
Enter the World Bank.
Through a system called the Doing Business (DB)rankings, the Bank uses its considerable financial and political power to make it as easy as possible for these now visible and tradable assets to, well, be traded, in huge plots. And the only people with the capital to buy assets on that scale are the 1%, in the guise of foreign corporations or local elites. So the people the World Bank is helping are the 1%. But wait, you may well cry, investment brings jobs and tax revenue and expertise to a country; that is development! It would be if it did. In far to many cases, however, corporations are given tax breaks, and jobs and expertise are firstly often scant, because industrial farming is designed to operate with minimal human input, and secondly because even those few jobs that do exist are more often than not kept in a relatively closed loop of expat workers or a handful of local people. It does do one critical thing, though. It brings more economic activity into the country than previously existed, which registers as growth. Never mind that little or none of it is actually benefits the country, as it is whisked away through tax havens as soon as it appears. It is, briefly, there. And so it seems perfectly logical to the World Bank because they are, in theory, helping developing countries connect to global markets, and thereby achieve economic - GDP - growth.
It works by technocrats in Washington awarding points to countries when they act in favor of the "ease of doing business" and then publishing an annual ranking in a report they are very proud to claim, "has served as an incomparable catalyst for business reform initiatives".In other words, reforms that service the needs of intensive, large-scale international business are rewarded and ones judged to stand in its way are punished.
For example, the fewer regulations there are on the purchase land, the higher the rating, with maximum points being awarded to countries with total freedom of purchase. More modest corporate taxation gets some reward; most points are awarded for zero corporate taxation. Countries are even punished for offering their workers minimum wages.It is the neoliberal blueprint for economic development: low corporate taxation, low worker wages and protection, maximum privatisation and minimal standards of environmental protection. Everything, in other words, to maximize wealth extraction and concentration.
The World Bank claims that the rankings are merely about minimizing bureaucracy, but even a brief look at what happens to countries as they move up and down the rankings clearly shows that they are little more than a bulldozer used to clear the path of smallholder farmers, and whatever local labor or environmental protections exist so that large western corporations or local elites can move in and start extracting the wealth of the country.
For example, in the 2012 rankings, Cameroon jumped four spots (from 165 to 161) because it made it easier to "start a business" by allowing company founders to produce only a sworn declaration instead of a hard copy of their criminal records.
Liberia was placed in the top ten DB reformers in 2008-2009 because of the measures it took (with the help of the doing Business reform advisory Team) in the areas of "starting a business," "dealing with construction permits," and "trading across borders." an improvement in the DB ranking resulted in increased FDI from including investments from palm oil giants such as the British equatorial palm Oil in 2008, Malaysian Sime Darby in 2009, and Singaporean golden agri-resources in 2010, resulting in the corporate takeover of millions of acres of land and local populations' loss of farms, resources, and livelihoods.
Sierra Leone has also been praised as a good reformer. Its DB ranking increased by 15 points between 2008 and 2010, with key steps taken in the area of "protecting investors" (up 22 points). Sierra Leone's improvements in 2008 nonetheless mainly consisted of reducing companies' tax burden and introducing flexible tax rates for investors, none of which helps Sierra Leone's citizens.
Similar stories can be told about Guatemala, Sri Lanka, Nicaragua, Senegal, Honduras and the Philippines. In all cases, the needs of ordinary people have fallen under the tracks of the World Bank's Doing Business bulldozer. Around the world, millions of people are being displaced, and their lives ruined, to help create a wealth they will ever see.
We've launched a campaign to try and get them to throw out this ranking system. The Bank has the first of two big meetings this year on April 11 - 13th. With farmers groups and civil society organizations from around the world, we're going to use that moment to introduce them to theOur Land, Our Business campaign, and then work through till the Annual Meeting in October to get as many people, from as many countries as possible to hear about this and stand with us. With lots of signatures, press activity, off line protests and social media, we believe we can generate enough critical and very public attention to force them to abolish the Doing Business system. The Bank hates bad publicity and has changed its ways because of it in the past, so we're going to give them some.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular