Tuesday 20 May 2008

The (inter)National Health Service

Immigration and the NHS

The articles below reveal the extent to which immigration is damaging the NHS and placing strain on the UK health facilities.

The time has come to end all immigration into the UK and also to deport all non-UK citizen immigrants who are resident in the UK with medical conditions who have been allowed to stay in the UK and use NHS facilities.

This has to be done on the grounds that their presence in the country threatens the public health and is also diverting resources away from UK citizens who are entitled to use the NHS through their National Insurance contributions, and also due to the contributions of their ancestors whose sacrifices in two world wars led to the creation of the NHS.



There were 5,711 new diagnoses of HIV to the end of September last year, the highest since records began in 1987. The rest of the increase, from a total of 41,700 diagnosed cases in 2001, was due to sufferers' blood being tested without their knowledge.

The number of new cases was 15 per cent up on the 4,982 diagnosed in 2001 and is expected to rise to 6,400 when all the reports are received. The rate of infection has more than doubled since 1997.

Two-thirds of the cases were acquired outside the UK, triggering renewed calls yesterday for immigrants to be screened. The cases' overseas origin - most from sub-Saharan Africa - has changed the nature of the epidemic, with heterosexual cases now outnumbering homosexual/bisexual infections two to one.

Of the 1,850 cases of HIV acquired in the UK during 2002, about 1,500 - 80 per cent - were among gay and bisexual men and 275 among heterosexuals.


Heterosexually infected Africans are the second largest group affected by HIV in the country, according to the National Aids Trust.

More than a thousand are thought to have Aids and most children born with HIV are African.


An "increasing pool" of people in the UK are living with HIV and Aids, official statistics show.

The Health Protection Agency says around 63,500 UK adults were living with HIV in 2005 - with as many as a third unaware of their infection.

Most new HIV cases in 2005 were infected abroad, but more cases are being contracted in the UK, it said.

However, the HPA figures show a relatively small increase in new HIV diagnoses, ompared to previous years.

The total number living with HIV in the UK in 2004 was 58,300.

The figures show there were 7,450 diagnoses in 2005, compared to 7,275 revealed in last year's HPA report.

Two thirds of all new cases diagnosed last year were in people who contracted HIV in other countries where the virus is more prevalent, such as sub-Saharan Africa.

A third were among gay and bisexual men.



The rise in drug-resistant tuberculosis cases in the UK has been linked to immigration and inadequate attempts to control the disease.

The Health Protection Agency (HPA) found more TB cases are now resistant to any of the drugs used for initial treatment.

The incidence of TB in England, Wales and Northern Ireland is rising, with more than 8,000 cases reported in 2006.

Hepatitis B.


One in ten of the Chinese immigrant population in Britain is carrying the hepatitis B virus, a survey suggests, leading to calls for all migrants to be screened upon entering the country.

There has been a massive surge in migration to Britain from areas of high HBV prevalence and a report from the Hepatitis B Foundation UK estimates that more than 325,000 people here are chronically infected with the virus - nearly double the Department of Health's 2002 estimate of 180,000. Most people infected will eventually clear the virus from their bodies, but about 5-10 per cent become chronic hepatitis B carriers, often without even knowing it.

Although the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in the resident population is only about 0.3 per cent, 96 per cent of new cases are imported by people who acquired the infection before coming to Britain.

Of 89 Chinese immigrants screened by the Chinese National Healthy Living Centre in London, 10 per cent were found to be hepatitis B positive.

There is a particular risk of transmission between children in playgroups, schools and nurseries as the virus is considered 100 times more infectious than HIV. At present in the NHS there is no requirement for doctors or nurses from overseas to be tested for infection and in 2003 alone, 700 doctors and about 6,000 nurses came to Britain from areas with a high incidence of hepatitis B.

Maternity Services.


The BBC has been told the influx of eastern Europeans to the UK has led to a
massive rise in pregnancies and abortion requests in some areas.

Health professionals warn that some antenatal services are stretched to
breaking point.

More than 500,000 eastern Europeans have migrated to the UK following the accession of eight new member states to the EU in 2004.

In one GP practice in Luton in Bedfordshire, 400 new patients register every month - and 80% are eastern European.
A decade ago one baby in eight (12.8%) was delivered to a foreign-born mother, figures from the Office of National Statistics show that in 2006 there were 154,000 births to foreign-born women, making up about one in five (21.9%) of the total births in the UK.

The number of births to European-born mothers other than from the UK and Ireland increased by 87% between 2001 and 2006 to 27,000 - almost 4% of all UK births.

While the number of babies born to British mothers has fallen by 44,000 a year since the mid-nineties, the figure for babies born to foreign mothers has risen by 64,000, the BBC reported.This 77% increase has pushed the overall birthrate to its highest level for 26 years.

The cost to the NHS of providing maternity services for foreign-born mothers has risen to more than £350 million a year, it has been reported. Record levels of immigration have pushed the cost up by £200 million in the past 10 years, according to analysis by the BBC.

Taking the Piss

Image - Oldham riots. Is this Britain ? NO - this is THE WASTELAND.

T.S. Eliot (1888–1965).

The Waste Land. 1922.

What is that sound high in the air
Murmur of maternal lamentation
Who are those hooded hordes swarming
Over endless plains, stumbling in cracked earth
Ringed by the flat horizon only
What is the city over the mountains
Cracks and reforms and bursts in the violet air
Falling towers
Jerusalem Athens Alexandria
Vienna London

The article below reveals just how much the government thinks the British people are mugs, and judging by the fact that a large percentage of the brain dead British people who are left behind in the country keep voting for the scum establishment parties - they are right.

The people who still vote Labour, Tory and Liberal are mugs.

Its like watching turkeys voting for christmas year in and year out.

They wont learn until it hits them personally.

That time though is fast approaching - the credit train is about to come off the buffers and all those mugs that kept on voting for the old parties are about to have a rude awakening.

The moral of this story is clear - ONLY MUGS VOTE LIB, LAB, CON !

The real tragedy though is this - I live in a village and I have watched two generations of my mates leave the country and move abroad.

The ones who have moved abroad have all been the ones with drive and determination to suceed and most of them now run their own companies in Canada, Thailand and Australia. About 14 of my mates have got nightclubs, bars, estate agents and property firms in Thailand and are millionaires.

Those lads should have been able to do as well as they have done over there as over here.

Instead we have seen millions of our brightest, best , hardest working people leave this country in order to fulfill their potential abroad - and in return we are shipping in millions of under educated, unskilled, unwanted slave labourers enter the country to replace them.

We are swapping quality for dross - and this process of the brain drain is going to accelerate our nations economic and social collapse.

The economy cannot grow when the people with the skills and drive have already gone and left the country - it will merely collapse faster and faster.

The crunch point is coming - and the faster it does the better.

The sooner the shit hits the fan the sooner we can get to work and restore this nation back to what it should be.

First comes the Winter, then follows the Spring.


The number of migrants granted UK citizenship reached an all-time record last year as separate figures revealed more than 200,000 Britons moving abroad.

A raft of statistics released by Whitehall revealed 164,635 foreign nationals were granted UK passports in 2007 - the equivalent of one every three minutes.

The figure is up seven per cent on the previous year and takes the total since Labour came to power to almost 1.2m.

But, while increasing numbers of foreign nationals opt to make a new life in Britain and naturalise their status here, UK citizens are heading abroad in record numbers.

More than 200,000 British citizens left the country in 2006 as emigration hit record levels.

Among 400,000 emigrants in 2006, the Office for National Statistics said 207,000 were British citizens.

Nearly one in three went to live in Australia or New Zealand. A quarter went to Spain or France, and around one in 12 went to the United States.

The rising rate of emigration meant that nearly 1.6 million Britons left the country to live abroad between 1997 and 2006.

The increase in the number of passports being given out comes despite Government attempts to make it harder for migrants to 'earn' the right to live here permanently.

At the end of 2005, the controversial 'Britishness' test was introduced - forcing foreign nationals to take a short multiple-choice quiz before citizenship was granted.

It was predicted this would lead to a drop in numbers, but while there was a small fall in the number of grants made in 2006 - the first full year of testing - last year the total number of migrants having their cases approved surged by seven per cent.

It pushed the total beyond the 2005 record of 161,700 to the new all-time high. In 1997, when New Labour was first elected, only 37,010 passports were handed out.

The mountain of statistics released today also contained bad news for the Government on asylum.

There was a 16 per cent rise in asylum applications in the first three months of this year, to 6,595, compared with the same period in 2007.

The number of failed asylum seekers deported from January to March was down 13 per cent to 2,805.

It means the total number of failed asylum seekers living in the UK - which already stands at 285,000 - is likely to have continued to grow.

The Home Office opted to focus on a fall in the number of arrivals from Eastern Europe, revealed in yet another statistical release.

The numbers arriving to work from the former Eastern Bloc was down by around 12 per cent to 45,000 in the first three months of this year - the lowest level since the start of 2005, when the influx began to gather pace.

The number of Bulgarians and Romanians applying to work in the UK has also dropped to its lowest level, with 8,205 applications in the first three months of this year, compared to 10,420 in the same period last year.

It is likely to fuel speculation that, as the economies of the former Eastern Bloc improve, and Britain faces uncertainty caused by the credit crunch, would-be migrant workers are instead opting to stay home.

Commenting on the asylum figures, Border and Immigration Minister Liam Byrne said the overall number of foreign nationals being removed was improving.

He said: "People in Britain welcome legal migrants who work hard and play by the rules.

"But we will not tolerate law breakers, which is why we will prioritise their expulsion from Britain. We are continuing to remove one person every eight minutes, last year that included a record number of foreign prisoners."

The Racism of the Rainbow Nation

Image - evil racist white south african policeman saving the life of black african man attacked by racist black south africans.

A tragedy of epic proportions is occuring in South Africa that the BBC has refused to publicise. During the apartheid era the BBC sought to depict all South African Whites as racists, except of course the ones who were members of the terrorist Communist group the ANC, and even though the townships of South Africa were based on ethnic and tribal lines and frequently slaughtered each other in inter-tribal conflicts, the inter ethnic racism of the black community was blamed on the Whites.

Now events in South Africa are revealing the true racism that afflicts the nation. Whilst White farmers are being murdered in a wave of racist pogroms across the country, a whole new form of racist violence has erupted in the black townships.

Refugees from Zimbabwe and other nations are being hunted down and slaughtered by blacks from other ethnic and tribal groups who believe the refugees are taking their jobs and lowering their wages. At least 23 people have been murdered by these racist mobs in the last few days, and the main way they have been killed is being hacked to death with machetes or having a petrol filled tyre placed around their necks and it being set on fire.

The ANC cannot evade responsibility for this crisis. They have been in power since the end of apartheid and they are the main sponsors of Robert Mugabe who has caused millions of Zimbabweans to flee their own country and come to South Africa.

The ANC government allowed the Zimbabwe refugees to enter South Africa as by doing so the very people who would have voted Mugabe out in elections, were no longer able to vote in those elections.

By allowing mass immigration of Zimbabweans into South Africa this allowed Mugabe to stay in power. Now these racial riots have erupted the ANC must bear full responsibility for this.

The race riots in South Africa reveal how allowing people to flee their countries and claim asylum in other nations merely allows the tyrants in those nations to stay in power. When the very people who would resist the tyrants and vote them out of power are no longer in those nations to vote them out of power, then the tyrants are able to stay in power.

The process of asylum seeking is the tyrants best tool for keeping power as those in his country who oppose him are allowed to leave and live elesewhere thus destroying all opposition to them being in power.

The process of asylum seekers being allowed to settle in other nations then causes mass social anger in those recipient nations leading to events such as these in South Africa, and elsewhere across the world.

The whole process and logic of asylum seeking has to be stopped.

The article linked here contains shocking images.


Note the colour and race of the police officer in the top image who is attempting to save the life of the man who has been set on fire by his fellow blacks.

Note also the race and colour of the man in the second image holding the shotgun and who is attempting to keep the crowd away from killing the man.

Once the BBC demonised the South African whites and police as racists and criminals, but now it appears that the only people preventing South Africa from falling into racial and ethnic civil war are the white and black police.

The tragedy of White South Africa was that the blacks it imported into the country to act as slave workers would one day have inevitably demanded their rights. Their demands for civil rights had to be met. At that point they voted the whites out of government.

In history all nations or empires that import in foreign workers to do their work for them, end up being the slaves of the slaves they imported in.

Just as we import in aliens to do our work, one day we will be the alienated ones working for them.

The lesson of history is that those who follow the demands of economics and growth end up as the slaves of the slaves they come to depend upon.

Best we stand alone and live by our own sweat and toil than depend on others who will one day replace us and enslave us.

Monday 19 May 2008

The Seven Loose Peices of the Global Jigsaw Puzzle

The article below is one of the best writings against globalisation I have read so far.

[Translator's note: In June of 1997 the following document appeared in a European publication. It is an analysis of neoliberalism by Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation. Cecilia Rodriguez of the NCDM]

1. First piece: The concentration of wealth and the distribution of poverty
2. Second piece: The globalization of exploitation
3. Third piece: Migration, the errant nightmare
4. Fourth Piece; Financial globalization and the globalization of corruption and crime
5. Fifth piece; Legitimate violence on behalf of an illegitimate power?
6. Sixth piece: megapolitics and the dwarfs
7. Seventh piece: The pockets of resistance
"War is a matter of vital importance for the State, it is the province of life and death, the path which leads to survival or annihilation. It is indispensable to study it at length".
The Art of War, Sun Tzu.

Modern globalization, neoliberalism as a global system, should be understood as a new war of conquest for territories.

The end of the III World War or "Cold War" does not mean that the world has overcome the polarity and finds its stability under the hegemony of the victor. At the end of this war there was, without doubt a loser (the socialist camp), but it is difficult to say who was the victor. Western Europe? The United States? Japan? All of them? The fact is that the defeat of the "evil empire" (Dixit Reagan and Thatcher) signified the opening of new markets without a new owner. Therefore a struggle was needed in order to possess them, to conquer them.

Not only that, but the end of the "Cold War" brought with it a new framework of international relations in which the new struggle for those new markets and territories produced a new world war, the IV. This required, as do all wars, a redefinition of the national States. And beyond the re-definition of the national states, the world order returned to the old epochs of the conquests of America, Africa and Oceania. This is a strange modernity that moves forward by going backward. The dusk of the 20th century has more similarities with previous brutal centuries than with the placid and rational future of some science-fiction novel. In the world of the Post-Cold War vast territories, wealth, and above all, a skilled labor force, await a new owner.

But it is a position of owner of the world, and there are many who aspire to it. And in order to win it another war breaks out, but now among those who call themselves the "Good Empire".

If the III World War was between capitalism and socialism (lead by the United States and the USSR respectively) with different levels of intensity and alternating scenarios; the Fourth World War occurs now among the great financial centers, with complete scenarios and with a sharp and constant intensity.

Since the end of the Second World War until 1992, there have been 149 wars in all the world. The results are 23 million dead, and therefore there is no doubt about the intensity of this Third World War (Statistical source: UNICEF). >From the catacombs of international espionage to the astral space of the so-called Strategic Defense Initiative (the "Star Wars" of the cowboy Ronald Reagan); from the sands of Playa Giron, in Cuba, to the Mekong Delta in Vietnam; from the unbridled nuclear arms war to the savage blows of the State in the tormented Latin America; from the ominous maneuvers of the armies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to the CIA agents in the Bolivia which oversaw the assassination of Che Guevara; the badly-named "Cold War" reached temperatures which, in spite of the continuous change of scenery and the incessant ups-and downs of the nuclear crisis (and precisely because of that) ended up sinking the socialist camp as a global system, and diluted it as a social alternative.

The Third World War showed the magnanimity of the "complete war" ( in all places and in all forms) for the victor: capitalism. But the scenario of the post-war was profiled in fact, as a new theater of global operations. Great extensions of "No man's land" (because of the political, social and economic devastation of Eastern Europe and the USSR), world powers in expansion (The United States, Western Europe and Japan), a world economic crisis, and a new technological revolution: the revolution of information. "In the same way in which the industrial revolution had allowed the replacement of muscle by the machine, the information revolution replaced the brain (or at least a growing number of its important functions) by the computer." This "general cerebralization" of the means of productio n (the same as occurred in industry as in services) is accelerated by the explosion of new telecommunications research and the proliferation of the cyberworlds." (Ignacio Ramonet "La planete des desordres" in the "Geopolitique du Chaos" Maniere de Voir 3. Le Monde Diplomatique (LMD), April of 1997.)

The supreme kind of capital, financial capital, began then to develop its strategy of war towards the new world and over what was left of the old. Hand in hand with the technological revolution which placed the entire world, through a computer, on its desk and at its mercy, the financial markets imposed their laws and precepts on the entire planet. The "globalization" of the new war is nothing more than the globalization of the logic of the financial markets. The National States (and their leaders) went from being directors of the economy to those who were directed, better said tele-directed, by the basic premise of financial power: free commercial exchange. Not only that, but the logic of the market took advantage of the "porosity" which in all the social spectrum of the world, provoked the development of telecommunications and penetrated and appropriated all the aspects of social activity. Finally there was a global war which was total!

One of the first casualties of this new war was the national market. Like a flying bullet inside an armored room, the war begun by neoliberalism bounced from one side to the other and wounded the one who had fired it. One of the fundamental bases of power in the modern capitalist State, the national market, was liquidated by the shot fired by the new era of the financial global economy. International capital took some of its victims by dismantling national capitalism and wearing it out, until it disabled its public powers. The blow has been so brutal and definitive that the national States do not have the necessary strength to oppose the action of the international markets which transgress the interests of citizens and governments.

The careful and ordered escapade which the "Cold War" handed down, the "new world order" quickly became pieces due to the neoliberal explosion. World capitalism sacrificed without mercy that which gave it a future and a historic project; national capitalism. Companies and States fell apart in minutes, but not due to the torments of proletarian revolutions, but the stalemates of financial hurricanes. The child (neoliberalism) ate the father (national capitalism) and in passing destroyed all of the discursive fallacies of capitalist ideology: in the new world order there is no democracy, liberty, equality, nor fraternity.

In the global scenario which is a product of the end of the "Cold War" all which is perceptible is a new battleground and in this one, as in all battlegrounds, chaos reigns.

At the end of the "Cold war" capitalism created a new bellicose horror: the neutron bomb. The "virtue" of this weapon is that it only destroys life and leaves buildings intact. Entire cities could be destroyed (that is, their inhabitants) without the necessity of reconstructing them (and paying for them). The arms industry congratulated itself. The "irrationality " of nuclear bombs could be replaced by the new "rationality " of the neutron bomb. But a new bellicose "marvel" would be discovered at the same time as the birth of the Fourth World War: the financial bomb.

The new neoliberal bomb, different from its atomic predecessor in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, did not only destroy the polis (the Nation in this case) and imposed death, terror and misery to those who lived in it: or, different from the neutron bomb, did not solely destroy "selectively". The neoliberal bomb, reorganized and reordered what it attacked and remade it as a piece inside a jigsaw puzzle of economic globalization. After its destructive effect, the result is not a pile of smoking ruins, or tens of thousands of inert lives, but a neighborhood attached to one of the commercial megalopolis of the new world supermarket and a labor force re-arranged in the new market of world labor.

The European union, one of the megalopolis produced by neoliberalism, is a result of the Fourth World War. Here, economic globalization erased the borders between rival States, long-time enemies, and forced them to converge and consider political unity. From the National States to the European federation, the economist path of the neoliberal war in the so-called "old continent" would be filled with destruction and ruins, one of which was European civilization.

The megalopolis reproduced themselves in all the planet. The integrated commercial zones were the territory where they were erected. So it was in North America, where the North American Free Trade Agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico is no more than the prelude to the fulfillment of an old aspiration of U.S. manifest destiny: "America for Americans". In South America the path is the same in terms of Mercosur between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. In Northern Africa, with the Union of Arab States (UMA) between Morocco, Algeria, Tunis, Libya and Mauritania; in south Africa, in the Near East, in the Black Sea, in Pacific Asia, etc., all over the planet the financial bombs explode and territories are re-conquered.

Do the megalopolis substitute the nations? No, or not only. They also include them and reassign their functions, limits and possibilities. Entire nations are converted into departments of the neoliberal megacompany. Neoliberalism thus operated DESTRUCTION/DEPOPULATION on the one hand, and RECONSTRUCTION/REORGANIZATION on the other, of regions and of nations in order to open new markets and renovate the existing ones.

If the nuclear bombs have a dissuasive, coercive, and intimidating character in World War III, in the IV global conflagration the financial hyperbombs play the same role. These weapons serve to attack territories (National States) DESTROYING the material bases of national sovereignty (all the ethical, judicial, political, cultural and historic obstacles against economic globalization) and producing a qualitative depopulation on their territories. This depopulation consists in detaching all those who are useless to the new market economy (as are the indigenous).

But, in addition to this, the financial centers operate, simultaneously a RECONSTRUCTION of the National States and they REORGANIZE them according to the new logic of the global market ( the developed economic models are imposed upon weak or non-existing social relations).

The IV World War in rural areas, for example, produces this effect. Rural renovation, demanded by the financial markets, tries to increase agricultural productivity, but what it does is to destroy traditional economic and social relations. The results: a massive exodus from the countryside to the cities. Yes, just as in a war. Meanwhile, in the urban zones the market is saturated with labor and the unequal distribution of salaries is the "justice" which await those who seek better conditions of life.

Examples which illustrate this strategy fill the indigenous world. Ian Chambers, director of the Office for Central America of the ILO (of the United Nations), declared that the indigenous population of the world, estimated at 300 million, live in zones which have 60% of the natural resources of the planet.

Therefore the "MULTIPLE CONFLICTS DUE TO THE USE AND FINAL DESTINATION OF THEIR LANDS AS DETERMINED BY THE INTEREST OF GOVERNMENTS AND COMPANIES IS NOT SURPRISING(...)THE EXPLOITATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES (OIL AND MINERALS) AND TOURISM ARE THE PRINCIPAL INDUSTRIES WHICH THREATEN INDIGENOUS TERRITORIES IN AMERICA" (interview with Martha Garcia in "La Jornada". May 28, 1997). Behind the investment projects comes the pollution, prostitution and drugs. In other words, the reconstruction/reorganization of the destruction/depopulation of the zone.

In this new world war, modern politics as the organizer of National States no longer exists. Now politics is solely the economic organizer and politicians are the modern administrators of companies. The new owners of the world are not government, they don't need to be. The "national" governments are in charge of administering the businesses in the different regions of the world.

This is the "new world order", the unification of the entire world in one complete market. Nations are department stores with CEO's dressed as governments, and the new regional alliances, economic and political, come closer to being a modern commercial "mall" than a political federation. The "unification" produced by neoliberalism is economic, it is the unification of markets to facilitate the circulation of money and merchandise. In the gigantic global Hypermarket merchandise circulates freely, not people.

As in all business initiatives (and war), this economic globalization is accompanied by a general model of thought. Nevertheless, among so many new things, the ideological model which accompanies neoliberalism in its conquest of the planet is old and moss-covered. The "American way of life" which accompanied the Northamerican troops in Europe during World War II, and in Vietnam during the 60's and more recently, in the Persian Gulf War, now goes hand in hand (or hand in computers) with the financial markets.

This is not only about material destruction of the material bases of the National States, but also (and in a very important and rarely -studied manner) about historic and cultural destruction. The dignity of indigenous history of the countries of the American continent, the brilliance of European civilization, the historic wisdom of Asian nations, and the powerful and rich antiquity of Africa and Oceania, all the cultures and histories which forged nations are attacked by the model of Northamerican life. Neoliberalism in this way imposes a total war: the destruction of nations and groups of nations in order to homogenize them with the Northamerican capitalist model.

A war then, a world war, the IV. The worst and cruelest. The one which neoliberalism unleashes in all places and by all means against humanity.

But, as in all wars, there are combats, winners and losers, and torn pieces of that destroyed reality. In order to construct the absurd jigsaw puzzle of the neoliberal world many pieces are necessary. Some can be found among the ruins this world war has left on the planetary surface. At least 7 of these pieces can be reconstructed and can fan the hope that this world conflict not end with the death of the weakest rival: humanity.

Seven pieces to draw, color, cut, and arrange, next to others to form the global jigsaw puzzle.

The first is the double accumulation, of wealth and poverty, at the two poles of global society. The other is the total exploitation of the totality of the world. The third is the nightmare of the migrant part of humanity. The fourth is the nauseating relationship between crime and Power. The fifth is the violence of the State. The sixth is the mystery of megapolitics. The seventh is the multi-forms of pockets of resistance of humanity against neoliberalism.

Also published in Chiapas Revealed which you can print out as a PDF file

The concentration of wealth and the distribution of poverty.
The first figure can be constructed by drawing a dollar sign.

In the history of humanity, different social models have fought to hoist the absurd as a distinctive world orders. Surely, neoliberalism will have a place of privilege at the time of the awards, because its "distribution" of social wealth does no more than distribute a double absurdity of accumulation: the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few, and the accumulation of poverty in millions of human beings. In the actual world, injustice and inequality are distinctive characteristics. . Planet earth, third of the solar planetary system, has 5 billion people. Of them, only 500 million live with comfort while 4 1/2 billion live in poverty and levels of subsistence.

Doubly absurd is the distribution among rich and poor: the rich are few and the poor are many. The quantitative difference is criminal, but the balance between the two extremes is secured with wealth: the rich supplement their small numbers with millions upon millions of dollars. The fortune of the 358 wealthiest people of the world (thousands of millions of dollars) is superior to the annual income of 45% of the poorest inhabitants, something like 2 1/2 billion people.

The gold chains of the financial watches are converted into a heavy chain for millions of beings. Meanwhile the "total number of transactions of General Motors is larger than the Gross National Product of Denmark, that of Ford is larger than the GNP of South Africa, and that of Toyota far surpasses the GNP of Norway" (Ignacio Ramonet, In LMD 1/1997 #15). For all workers real salaries have fallen, in addition to having to survive the personnel cuts in companies, the closing of factories and the relocation of workplaces. In the so-called "advanced capitalist economies" the number of unemployed has arrived at a total of 41 million workers.

Little by little, the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few and the distribution of poverty among many begins to trace the profile of modern global society: the fragile equilibrium of absurd inequalities.

The decadence of the neoliberal economic is a scandal: "The world debt (combining that of all companies, governments and administrations) has surpassed 33 trillion dollars, or 130% of the global GNP, and grows at a rate of 6 to 8% per year, more than 4 times the growth of the global GNP" (Frederic F. Clairmont. "Ces deux cents societes qui controlent le monde", in LMD, IV/1997.

The progress of the great transnationals does not imply the advancement of developed Nations. To the contrary, while the great financial giants earn more, poverty sharpens in the so-called "rich nations".

The chasm between the rich and poor is brutal and no tendency appears to the contrary, indeed it continues. Far from lessening, we won't say eliminating it, the social inequality is accentuated, above all in the developed capitalist nations: in the United States,1% of the wealthiest Americans have conquered 61.6% of the total national wealth between 1983 and 1989. 80% of the poorest Northamericans share only 1.2% of the wealth. In Great Britain the number of homeless has grown; the number of children who survive on social welfare has gone from 7% in 1979 to 26% in 1994, the number of British who live in poverty (defined as less than half of minimum wage) has gone from 5 million to 13,700,000; 10% of the poorest have lost 13% of their purchasing power, while 10% of the richest have gained 65% and in a period of the past 5 years the number of millionaires has doubled (statistics from LMD,IV/97).

At the beginning of the decade of the 90's "...an estimated 37,000 transnational companies held, with their 170,000 subsidiaries, the international economy in its tentacles." Nevertheless, the center of power situates itself in the most restrictive circle of the first 200: since the beginnings of the 80's, they have had an uninterrupted expansion through mergers and "rescue" buy-outs of companies.

In this way, the part of transnational capital in the global GNP has gone from 17% in the middle of the 60's to 24% in 1982 and more than 30% in 1995. The first 200 are conglomerates whose planetary activities cover with distinction the primary, secondary, and tertiary sectors: great agricultural exploitation, manufacturing production, financial services, commercial, etc. Geographically, they are divided amongst 10 countries: Japan (62), the United States (53), Germany (23), France (19), United Kingdom (11), Switzerland (8), South Korea (6), Italy (5), and others (4)". (Frederic F. Clairmont, Op.Cit.).

Number of Companies
Profits (billions)
% of Global Businesses
% of Global Profits







South Korea


UK/ *Lower Countries

*Lower Countries



Belgium/*Lower Countries






Global GNP



(Frederic F. Clairmont. Op. Cit.)

*LOWER COUNTRIES - loosely-translated as city-states, regions, autonomous zones

$$ Here you have the symbol of economic power. Now paint it the green of the dollar. Don't worry about the nauseating odor, the aroma of manure, mud, and blood which it carries since its birth...

The globalization of exploitation
The second piece is constructed by drawing a triangle.

One of the fallacies of neoliberalism is that economic growth of the companies brings with it a better distribution of wealth and a growth I employment. But this is not so. In the same way as the growth of political power of a king does not bring as a consequence a growth of political power of the subjects (to the contrary), the absolute power of financial capital does not better the distribution of wealth nor does it create major employment for society. Poverty, unemployment and instability of labor are its structural consequences.

During the years of the decades of 1960 and 70's, the population considered poor (with less than a dollar a day of income for their basic necessities, according to the World Bank) was about 200 million people. By the beginning of the decade of the 90's this number was about 2 billion. In addition to this the "mainstay of the 200 most important companies of the planet represent more than a quarter of the world's economic activity; and yet these 200 companies employ only 18.8 million employees, or less than 0.75% of the world's labor force." Ignacio Ramonet in LMD. January 1997, #15).

More poor human beings and an increase in the level of impoverishment, less rich and an increase in the level of wealth, these are the lessons of the outline of the First Piece of the neoliberal jigsaw puzzle. To achieve this absurdity, the world's capitalist system "modernizes" production, circulation and the consumption of merchandise. The new technological revolution (the information revolution) and the new political revolution (the emerging megalopolis on the ruins of the National States). This social "revolution is no more than a readjustment, a reorganization of the social forces, principally the labor force.

The Economically Active Population on a global level went from 1,376 million in 1960 to 2,374 million workers in 1990. More human beings with the capacity to work, in other words, to generate wealth.

But the "new world order" not only rearranges this new labor force in geographic and productive spaces, it also re-orders its place (or lack of a place, as in the case of the unemployed and subemployed) in the globalizing plan of the economy.

The World Population employed by sector was substantially changed in the last 20 years. In fishing and agriculture it went from 22% in 1970 to 12% I 1990; in manufacturing from 25% in 1970 to 22% in 1990; while in the tertiary sector (commerce, transport, banking and services) it grew from 42% in 1970 to 57% in 1990; while the population employed in the agricultural and fishing sector fell from 30% in 1970 to 15% in 1990. (Statistics from "The Labor Force in the World Market in Contemporary Capitalism". Ochoa Chi, Juanita del Pilar. UNAM. Economy. Mexico, 1997).

This means that each time more workers are channeled towards the necessary activities to increase production or to accelerate the elaboration of merchandise. The neoliberal system operates in this way like a mega-boss, conceiving the world market as a single company, administered with "modernizing" criteria.

But neoliberal modernity appears more like the beastly birth of capitalism as a world system, than like utopic "rationality". "Modern" capitalist production continues to base itself in the labor of children, women and migrant workers. Of the 1 billion, 148 million children in the world, at least 100 million of them live in the streets and almost 200 million of them work. It is expected that 400 million of them will be working by the year 2000. It is said as well that 146 million Asian children labor in the production of auto parts, toys, clothing, food, tools and chemicals. But this exploitation of child labor does not only exist in underdeveloped countries, 40% of English children and 20% of French children also work in order to complete the family income or to survive. In the "pleas ure" industry there is also a place for children. The UN estimates that each year a million children enter sexual trafficking (Statistics in Ochoa Chi, J. Op. Cit.).

The neoliberal beast invades all the social world homogenizing even the lines of food production "IN global terms if we observe particularities in the food consumption of each region (and its interior), the process of homogenization which is being imposed is evident, including over those physiological-cultural differences of the different zones." ("World Market of means of Subsistence. 1960-1990. Ocampo Figueroa, Nashelly, and Flores Mondragon, Gonzalo. UNAM. Economy.1994).

This beast imposes upon humanity a heavy burden. The unemployment and the instability of millions of workers all over the world is a cutting reality which has no horizons and no signs of lessening. Unemployment in the countries which make up the Organization for Cooperation and economic Development went from 3.8% in 1966 to 6.3% in 1990. In Europe alone it went from 2.2% in 1966 to 6.4% in 1990.

The imposition of the laws of the market all over the world, the global market, have done nothing but destroy small and medium-size businesses. Upon the disappearance of local and regional markets, the small and medium-size producers see themselves without protection and without any possibility of competing against gigantic transnationals.

The results: massive bankruptcy of companies.
The consequence; millions of unemployed workers.

The absurdity of neoliberalism repeats itself: growth in production does not generate employment, on the contrary, it destroys it. The UN calls this stage "Growth without employment."

But the nightmare does not end there. In addition to the threat of unemployment workers must confront precarious working conditions. Major on-the-job instability, longer working days and poor salaries, are consequences of globalization in general and the "tertiary" tendency of the economy (the growth of the "service" sector) in particular. "In the countries under domination, the labor force suffers a precarious reality: extreme mobility, jobs without contracts, irregular salaries and generally inferior to the vital minimum and regimes with emaciated retirement benefits, independent activities which are not declared and have hit-and-miss salaries, in other words, servitude or forced labor within populations which are supposedly protected such as children" (Alain Morice. "Foreign workers, advance sector of instability." LMD. January 1997).

The consequences of all this translates itself into a bottoming out of global reality. The reorganization of productive processes and the circulation of merchandise and readjustment of productive forces, produce a peculiar excess: left-over human beings, not necessary for the "new world order", who do not produce, or consume, who do not use credit, in sum, who are disposable.

Each day, the great financial centers impose their laws to nations and groups of nations in all the world They reorder and readjust their inhabitants. And, at the end of the operation, they find they have "left-over" people. "They fire upon the volume of the excess population, which is not only subjected to the brunt of the most cruel poverty, but which does not matter, which is loose and separate, and whose only end is to wander through the streets without a fixed direction, without housing or work, without family or social relations-with a minimal stability--, whose only company are its cardboard and plastic bags (Fernandez Duran, Ramon. "Against the Europe of capital and economic globalization". Talasa. Madrid, 1996).

Economic globalization "made necessary a decline in real salaries at the international level, which together with the reduction of social costs (health, education, housing and food) and an anti-union climate, came to constitute the fundamental part of the new neoliberal politics of capitalist reactivation_ (Ocampo F. and Flores M. Op. Cit.).

Here is the illustration of the pyramid of global exploitation:

/ \
/_______ \

The third figure is constructed by drawing a circle.

We spoke beforehand of the existence of new territories, at the end of the Third World War, which awaited conquest (the old socialist countries), and of others which should have been re-conquered by the "new world order". In order to achieve it, the financial centers carried out a criminal and brutal third strategy; the proliferation of "regional wars" and "internal conflicts", which mobilized great masses of workers and allowed capital to follow routes of atypical accumulation.

The results of this world war of conquest was a great ring of millions of migrants in all the world "Foreigners" in the world "without borders" which the victors of the Third World War promised. Millions of people suffered xenophobic persecution, precarious labor conditions, loss of cultural identity, police repression, hunger, prison, death.

"From the American Rio Grande to the "European" Schengen space, a double contradictory tendency is confirmed. On one side the borders are closed officially to the migration of labor, on the other side entire branches of the economy oscillate between instability and flexibility, which are the most secure means of attracting a foreign labor force" (Alain Morice, Op. Cit.).

With different names, under a judicial differentiation, sharing an equality of misery, the migrants or refugees or displaced of all the world are "foreigners" who are tolerated or rejected. The nightmare of migration, whatever its causes, continues to roll and grow over the planet's surface. The number of people who are accounted for in the statistics of the UN High Commission on Refugees has grown disproportionately from some 2 million in 1975 to 27 million in 1995.

With national borders destroyed ( for merchandise) the globalized market organizes the global economy: research and design of goods and services, as well as their circulation and consumption are thought of in intercontinental terms. For each part of the capitalist process the "new world order" organizes the flow of the labor force, specialized or not, up to where it is necessary. Far from subject ing itself to the "free flow" so clucked-over by neoliberalism, the employment markets are each day determined more by migratory flows. Where skilled workers are concerned, whose numbers are not significance in the context of global migration, the "crossing of brains" represents a great deal in terms of economic power and knowledge. Nevertheless, whether skilled labor, or unskilled labor, the migratory politics of neoliberalism is oriented more towards destabilizing the global labor market than towards stopping immigration.

The Fourth World War, with its process of destruction/depopulation and reconstruction/reorganization provokes the displacement of millions of people. Their destiny is to continue to wander, with the nightmare at their side, and to offer to employed workers in different nations a threat to their employment stability, an enemy to hide the image of the boss, and a pretext for giving meaning to the racist nonsense promoted by neoliberalism.

This is the symbol of the errant nightmare of global migration, a ring of terror which roams all over the world.


The fourth figure is constructed by drawing a rectangle

The mass media reward us with an image of the directors of global delinquency: vulgar men and women, dressed outlandishly, living in ridiculous mansions or behind the bars of a jail. But that image hides more than it shows: the real bosses of the modern Mafiosi, or their organization, or their real influence in the political and economic regions are never divulged publicly.

If you think the world of delinquency is synonymous with the world beyond the grave and darkness , you are mistaken. During the period called the "Cold War", organized crime acquired a more respectable image and began to function like any other modern company. It also penetrated the political and economic systems of the national States. With the beginning of the Fourth World War, the implantation of the "new world order" and its accompanying opening of markets, privatization, deregulation of commerce and international finance, organized crime "globalized" its activities as well.

"According to the UN, the annual global income of transnational criminal organizations are about 1000 billion dollars, an amount equivalent to the combined GNP of countries with weak income (according to the categories of the global banks) and its 3 billion inhabitants. This estimate accounts for the product of drug trafficking, the illegal trafficking of arms, contraband of nuclear materials, etc., and the profits of activities controlled by the Mafiosi (prostitution, gambling, black market speculation...).

However, this does not measure the importance of investments which are continuously realized by criminal organizations within the sphere of control of legitimate businesses, nor the domination which they exert over the means of production within numerous sectors of the legal economy" (Michel Chossudovsky, "La Corruption mondialisee" in "Geopolitique du Chaos". Op. Cit.).

The criminal organizations of the 5 continents have made theirs the "spirit of global cooperation" and, associated, participate in the conquest and reorganization of the new markets. But they participate not only in criminal activities, but I legal businesses as well. Organized crime invests in legitimate businesses not only to "launder" dirty money, but to make capital for their illegal activities. The preferred business endeavors for this are luxury real estate, the vacation industry, mass media, industry, agriculture, public services and ... banking!

Ali Baba and the 40 bankers? No, something worse. The dirty money of organized crime is utilized by the commercial banks for its activities: loans, investments in financial markets, purchase of bonds for foreign debt, buying and selling of gold and stocks. "In many countries, the criminal organizations have become the creditors of the States and they exert, because of their actions on the markets, an influence over the macroeconomic politics of the governments. Over the stock markets, they invest equally in the speculative markets of finished products and raw materials" (M. Chossudovsky, Op. Cit.)

As if this were not enough, organized crime can count on the so-called fiscal paradises. There are all over the world at least 55 fiscal paradises (One of these, the Cayman Islands, has fifth place in the world as a banking center and has more banks and registered companies than inhabitants). The Bahamas, the British Virgin Islands, the Bermudas, Saint Martin, Vanuatu, the Cook Islands, Luxembourg, Maurice Island, Switzerland, the Anglo-Normandy Islands, Dublin, Monaco, Gibraltar, Malta, are good places so that organized crime can relate with the great financial companies of the world.

In addition to the "laundering" of dirty money, the fiscal paradises are used to avoid taxes, so they area point of contact between those who govern, CEO's and capos of organized crime. High technology, applied to finances permits the rapid circulation of money and the disappearance of illegal profits. "The legal and illegal businesses overlap more and more, they introduce a fundamental change in the structures of capitalism of the post-war era. The Mafiosi invest in legal businesses, and inversely, they channel financial resources towards the criminal economy, through the control of banks and commercial companies implicated I the laundering of dirty money or which have relations with criminal organizations. The banks pretend that the transactions are carried out I good faith and their directors ignore the origin of the funds deposited. The rule is to ask no questions, the bank secretary and the anonymity of transactions, all this guarantee the interests of organized crime, they protect the banking institution from public investigations and from blame. Not only do the large banks accept laundered money, in view of their heavy commissions, but they also concede credits to at high interest rates to the Mafiosi, to the detriment of productive industrial or agricultural investments." (M. Chossudovsky, Op. City.).

The crisis of the world debt, in the 80's caused the price of prime materials to go down. This caused the underdeveloped countries to dramatically reduce their income. The economic measures dictated by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, supposedly to "recuperate" the economy of these countries, only sharpened the crisis of the legal businesses. As a consequence, the illegal economy has developed in order to fill the vacuum left by the fall of national markets.

In accordance with a report by the United Nations, "The intrusion of the crime syndicates has been facilitated by the structural adjustment programs with the indebted countries have been obliged to accept I order to access the loans of the International Monetary Fund" (United Nations. "La Globalization du Crime" New York, 1995).

So here you have the rectangular mirror where legality and illegality exchange reflections.

On which side of the mirror is the criminal? On which side of the mirror is the one who prosecutes the criminal?

Fifth Piece
The legitimate violence of an illegitimate power?
The Fifth Piece is constructed by drawing a pentagon.

The State, in neoliberalism, tends to shrink to the "indispensable minimum". The so- called "Benefactor State" does not only become obsolete, it separates itself of all it was made up of as such, and it remains naked.

In the cabaret of globalization, the State shows itself as a table dancer that strips of everything until it is left with only the minimum indispensable garments: the repressive force. With its material base destroyed, its possibilities of sovereignty annulled, its political classes blurred, the Nation States become, more or less rapidly, a security apparatus of the megacorporations that neoliberalism builds in the development of this Fourth World War. Instead of directing public investment towards social spending, the Nation States, prefer to improve their equipment, armaments and training in order to fulfill with efficiency a duty that its politics could no longer carry out some years hence: control of society.

The "professionals of legitimate violence" as the repressive apparatus of the modern states call themselves. But, what is there to do if violence is already under the laws of the market? Where is the legitimate violence and where is the illegitimate? What monopoly of violence can the battered Nation States pretend if the free game of supply and demand defies that monopoly? Didn't the Fourth Piece demonstrate that organized crime, governments and financial centers are more than well related? Isn't it evident that organized crime counts on real armies which have no borders except the fire power of its rival? And so the "monopoly of violence" does not belong to the Nation States. The modern market has put it on sale. . .

This is taken into account because under the polemic between legitimate and illegitimate violence, there is also the dispute (false, I think) between "rational" and "irrational" violence.

A certain sector of the world's intellectuals (I insist that their duty is more complex than to simply be of the "left or right", "pro-government or opposition", "good etcetera or bad etcetera") pretends that violence can be exerted in a "rational" manner, administered in a selective way, (there are those, also, who to something like the "Market technology of violence"), and can be applied with the ability "of a surgeon" against the evils of society. Something like this inspired the last stage of arms policy in the United States: precise "surgical" weapons, and military operations like the scalpel of the "new world order". This is how the new "smart bombs" were born (which, as a reporter who covered Desert Storm told me, are not that intelligent and have difficulty distinguishing between a hospital and a missile depository. When in doubt, the smart bombs don't abstain, they destroy). Anyway, as the compaƱeros of the Zapatista communities would say, the Persian Gulf is farther than the state capital of Chiapas (although the situation of the Kurds has horrifying similarities with the indigenous of a country who praises itself as "democratic and free"), and so let us not insist on "that" war when we have "ours".

And so the struggle between rational and irrational violence opens an interesting and lamentable path of discussion, it is not useless in present times. We could take for example what is understood as rational. If the response is that it is the "reason of the State" (assuming that this exists, and that above all, one would be able to recognize some reason in the actual neoliberal state) and then one can ask if this "reason of the state" corresponds to the "reason of society" (always assuming that today's society retains some reason and furthermore if the rational violence of the state is rational to the society. Here there is no point in rambling (idly), the "rationale of the state" in modern times is none other than the "rationale of the financial markets".

But, how does the modern state administer its "rational violence"? And, paying attention to history, how much time does this rationality last? The time it takes between one election and another or coup (depending on the case)? How many acts of violence by the State, that were applauded as "rational" during that time, are now irrational?

Lady Margaret Thatcher, of "acceptable" memory for the british people, took the time to prologue the book "The Next War" of Caspar Weinberg and Peter Schweizer (Regnery Publishing, Inc. Washington, D.C. 1996).

In this text Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, advances some reflections about the three similarities between the world of the Cold War and that of the Post Cold War: The first of these is that the "free world" will never lack potential aggressors. The second is the necessity of the military superiority of the "democratic" states above possible aggressors. The third similarity is that this military superiority should be, above all, technological.

To end her prologue, the so-called "iron lady" defines this "rational violence" of the modern state by stating: "A war can take place in different ways. But the worst usually happens because one power believes it can reach its objectives without a war or at least with a limited war that can be won rapidly, resulting in failed calculations."

For Misters Weinberg and Schweizer the scenes of the "Future Wars" are: North Korea and China (April 6, 1998), Iran (April 4, 1999), Mexico (March 7, 2003), Russia (February 7, 2006), and Arabs, Latinos and Europeans. Almost the entire world is considered a "possible aggressor of modern democracy".

Logic (at least in neoliberal logic): In modern times, the power (that is, financial power) knows that it can only reach its objectives with a war, and not with a limited war that can be won rapidly but with a total war, world wide in every sense. And if we believe the secretary of state Madeleine Albright, when she says: "One of the primary objectives of our government is to ensure that the economic interests of the United States can extend itself to a planetary scale" ("The Wall Street Journal". 1/21/1997), we need to understand that all the world ( and I mean everything, everything) is the theater of operations of this war.

We should understand then that if the dispute for the "monopoly of violence" does not take place according to the laws of the market, but is rejected and defied from the bottom, the world power "discovers" in this challenge a "possible aggressor". This is one of the defiances (of the least studied and most condemned among the many it represents), launched by the armed indigenous rebels of the Zapatista National Liberation Army against neoliberalism and for humanity. . .

This is the symbol of North American military power, the pentagon. The new "world police" seeks that the "national" army and police only be the "security corps" that guarantee "order and progress" in the neoliberal magapolis.

Sixth Piece
Megapolitics and the dwarfs
The Sixth Piece is constructed by drawing a scribble.

We said before that Nation States are attacked by the financial centers and "obligated" to dissolve within the megalopolis. But neoliberalism not only operates its war "unifying" nations and regions, its strategy of destruction/depopulation and reconstruction/reorganization produces one or various fractures in the Nation State. This is the paradox of the Fourth World War: it is made to eliminate borders and "unite" nations, yet what it leaves behind is multiplication of the borders and a pulverization of the nations that die in its claws. Beyond the pretexts, ideologies and banners, the current world dynamics of the breaking up of the unity of the Nation States responds to a policy; equally universal, that knows it can better exert its power, and create optimum conditions for its reproduction, on top of the ruins of the Nation States.

If someone had doubts about characterizing the process of globalization as a world war, they should discard it when adding up accounts of the conflicts that have been provoked by the collapse of some nation states. Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR are examples of the depth of the crisis that leaves in shreds not only the political and economic foundations of the Nation States but also the social structures. Slovania, Croatia and Bosnia in addition to the present war within the Russian federation with Chechnia as a backdrop, not only mark the outcome of the tragic downfall of the socialist camp in the forbidding arms of the "free world", all over the world this process of national fragmentation repeats itself in variable stages and intensity. There are separatist tendencies in the Span ish state (the Basques, Catalonia and Galicia), in Italy (Padua), in Belgium (Flanders), in France (Corsica), United Kingdom (Scotland, Galic peoples), Canada (Quebec). And there are more examples in the rest of the world.

We have also referred to the process of the construction of the megalopolis, now we talk of fragmentation of countries. Both processes are based upon the destruction of the Nation States. Is it about two parallel, independent processes? Two facets of the globalization process? Are they symptoms of a megacrisis about to explode? Are they merely isolated cases?

We think it is about an inherent contradiction to the process of globalization, one of the essences of the neoliberal model. The elimination of commercial borders, the universality of tele-communications, the information super highways, the omnipresence of the financial centers, the international agreements of economic unity, in short, the process of globalization as a whole produces, by liquidating the nation states, a pulverization of the internal markets. These do not disappear or are diluted in the international markets, but consolidate their fragmentation and multiply. It may sound contradictory, but globalization produces a fragmented world, full of isolated pieces (and often pieces which confront each other). A world full of stagnant compartments, communicating barely by fragile economic bridges (in any case as constant as the weathervane which is finance capital). A world of broken mirrors reflecting the useless world unity of the neoliberal puzzles.

But neoliberalism not only fragments the world it pretends to unite, it also produces the political economic center that conducts this war. And yes, as we referred to before, the financial centers impose their (laws of the market) to nations and grouping of nations, and so we should redefine the limits and reaches pursued by the policy, in other words, duties of political work. It is convenient than to speak of Megapolitics> Here is where the "world order" would be decided.

And when we say "megapolitics" we don't refer to the number of those who move in them. There are a few, very few, who find themselves in this "megasphere". Megapolitics globalizes national politics, in other words, it subjects it to a direction that has global interests (that for the most part are contradictory to national interests) and whose logic is that of the market, which is to say, of economic profit. With this economist (and criminal) criteria, wars, credits, selling and buying of merchandise, diplomatic acknowledgements, commercial blocks, political supports, migration laws, coups, repressions, elections, international political unity, political ruptures and investments are decided upon. In short the survival of entire nations.

The global power of the financial centers is so great, that they can afford not to worry about the political tendency of those who hold power in a nation, if the economic program (in other words, the role that nation has in the global economic megaprogram) remains unaltered. The financial disciplines impose themselves upon the different colors of the world political spectrum in regards to the government of any nation. he great world power can tolerate a leftist government in any part of the world, as long as the government does not take measures that go against the needs of the world financial centers. But in no way will it tolerate that an alternative economic, political and social organization consolidate. For the megapolitics, the national politics are dwarfed and submit to the dict ates of the financial centers. It will be this way until the dwarfs rebel . .

You have here the figure that represents the megapolitics. You will understand that it is useless to try to find within it a rationality and even if you untangle it, nothing will be clear.

The seventh figure can be constructed by drawing a pocket

"To begin with, I beg you not to confuse Resistance with political opposition. The opposition does not oppose power but a government, and its achieved and complete form is that of a party of opposition: while resistance, by definition (now useful) cannot be a party: it is not made to govern at its time, but to...resist."

Tomas Segovia. "Allegations". Mexico, 1996.

The apparent infallibility of globalization clashes with the stubborn disobedience to reality. At the same time as neoliberalism carries out its world war, all over the world groups of those who will not conform take shape, nuclei of rebels. The empire of financial pockets confront the rebellion of the pockets of resistance.

Yes, pockets. Of all sizes, of all colors, of the most varied forms. Their only similarity is their resistance to the "new world order" and the crime against humanity that the neoliberal war carries out.

Upon its attempt to impose its economic, political, social and cultural model, neoliberalism pretends to subjugate millions of human beings, and do away with all those who do not have a place in its new distribution of the world. But as it turns out these "disposible" ones rebel and they resist against the power who wants to eliminate them. Women, children, the elderly, the indigenous, the ecologists, homosexuals,lesbians, HIV positives, workers and all those men and women who are not only "left over" but who"bother" the established order and world progress rebel, and organize and struggle. Knowing they are equal yet different, the excluded ones from "modernity" begin to weave their resistance against the process of destruction/depopulation and reconstruction/reorganization which is carried out as a world war, by neoliberalism.

In Mexico, for example, the so-called "Program of Integrated Development for the Isthmus of Tehuantepec" pretends to construct a modern international center of distributio and assembly for products. The development zone covered an industrial complex which would refine the third part of Mexican crude oil and elaborate 88% of petrochemical products. The routes of interoceanic transit will consist of highways, a water route following the natural curve of the zone (the river Coatzacoalcos) and as an articulating center, the trans-isthmus railroad line (in the hands of 5 companies, 4 from the United States and one from Canada). The project would be an assembly zone under the regime of twin plants.

Two million residents of the place will become stevedores, assembly line workers, or railway guards (Ana Esther Cecena. "El Istmo de Tehuantepec: frontera de la soberania nacional". "La Jornada del Campo", May 28, 1997.) In Southeast Mexico as well, in the Lacandon Jungle the "Program for Sustainable Regional Development for the Lacandon Jungle" begins operations. Its final objective is to place at the feet of capital the indigenous lands which, in addition to beig rich in dignity and history, are also rich in oil and uranium.

The visible results of all these projects will be, among others, the fragmentation of mexico (separating the southeast from the rest of the country). In addition to this, and now we speak of war, the projects have counterinsurgency implications. They make up a part of a pincer to liquidate the antineoliberal rebellio which exploded in 1994. In the middle stand the idigenous rebels of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN).

(A parenthesis is now convenient int he theme of indigenous rebels: the Zapatistas think that, in Mexico (attention: in Mexico) the recuperation and defense of national sovereignty is part of an antineoliberal revolution. Paradoxically, the EZLN is accused of pretendeing to fragment the Mexican nation. The reality is that the only ones who have spoke of separatism are the businessmen of the state of Tabasco (rich in oil) and the federal deputies of Chiapas who belong to the PRI. The Zapatistas think that the defense of the national state is necessary I view of globalization, and that the attempts to slice Mexico to pieces comes from the governing group and not from the just demands for autonomy for the Indian Peoples. The EZLN, and the best of the national indigenous movement, does not want the Indian peoples to separate from Mexico, but to be recognized as part of the country with their differences.

Not only that, they want a Mexico with democracy, liberty and justice. The paradoxes continue because while the EZLN struggle for the defense of national sovereignty, the Mexican Federal Army struggles against that defense and defends a governmet who has destroyed the material bases of national sovereignty and given the country, not just to powerful foreign capital, but to the drug traffickers).

But resistance does not only exist in the mountains of Southeast Mexico against neoliberalism. In other parts of mexico, in latin America, in the United States and Canada, in the Europe which belogs to the Treaty of Masstrich, in Africa, in Asia, in Oceania, the pockets of resistance multiply. Each one of them has its own histoyr its differences, its equalities, its demands, its strugles, its accomplishments.

If humanity still has hope of survival, of being better, that hope is in the pockets formed by the excluded ones, the left-overs, the ones who are disposible.

This is a model for a pocket of resistance, but don't pay too much attention to it. There are as many models as there are resistances, and as many worlds as in the world. So draw the model you prefer. As far as this things about the pockets is concerned, they are rich in diversity, as are the resistances.

There are, no doubt, more pieces of the neoliberal jigsaw puzzle. For example: the mass media, culture, pollution, pandemias. We only wanted to show you here the profiles of 7 of them.

These 7 are enough so that you, after you draw, color and cut them out, can see that it is impossible to put them together. And this is the problem of the world which globalization pretends to construct:

the pieces don't fit.

For this and other reasons which do not fit into the space of this text, it is necessary to make a new world.

A world where many worlds fit, where all worlds fit...

Peak Oil and Malthus

If you really want to understand the way Peak Oil will impact on our society then read this article and go to this link -

Be Afraid - be very, very afraid


Was Malthus just off a few decades?

May 18, 2008

In 1798, Robert Malthus, in his "Essay on the Principle of Population," concluded that as population grows, "the price of labor must tend toward a decrease, while the price of provisions would at the same time tend to rise."

In 1968, Paul Ehrlich in the book "The Population Bomb," predicted disaster for humanity owing to the "population explosion." Ehrlich was also one of the first to talk about rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and introduced the Impact Formula: I=PAT (where I=Environmental Impact, P=Population, A=Affluence and T=Technology).

In 1969, the Rockefeller Commission Report on the U.S. population concluded "that our country can no longer afford the uncritical acceptance of the population growth ethic that 'more is better.' And beyond that, after two years of concentrated effort, we have concluded that no substantial benefits would result from continued growth of the nation's population."

President Nixon, who appointed the commission but never released the report, nevertheless said, "One of the most serious challenges to human destiny in the last third of this century will be the growth of the population. Whether man's response to that challenge will be a cause for pride or for despair in the year 2000 will depend very much on what we do today."

In 1972, The Club of Rome, an independent think tank, in its book "The Limits to Growth," suggested that a growing population can approach carrying capacity and adjust to it before it is reached, can over-shoot the carrying capacity and then die back in either a smooth or oscillatory way, or can overshoot the limits and in the process decrease the ultimate carrying capacity by consuming some necessary nonrenewable resource.

All of these writers were much maligned as cheap fossil fuels made possible chemical fertilizers, pesticides and irrigation, and new technologies such as genetically engineered crops enabled industrial agriculture to keep food production up with population growth.

In the last few years a new group of environmental scholars has also concluded that our population size and growth is a major problem. One of the most notable is Richard Heinberg, who recently spoke in Vermont. In his book, "Peak Everything: Waking up to the Century of Declines," he states, "If we want peace, democracy and human rights, we must work to create the ecological conditions for these things to exist: i.e., a stable human population at — or below — the environment's long term carrying capacity." Do Heinberg and the other current authors have it right this time or are they also to be maligned?

Once again the world's food situation is bleak. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the price of wheat is more than 80 percent higher than a year ago, and corn prices are up by 25 percent. Global cereal stocks have fallen to their lowest level since 1982. Prices have gone so high that the United Nations World Food Program, which aims to feed 73 million people this year, reported it might have to reduce rations or the number of people it will help. Food riots are happening in many countries and threaten to bring down some countries as starving people demand better from their government.

However, this time the problem will not be so easy to solve. There are some 75 million more people to feed each year! Consumption of meat and other high-quality foods — mainly in China and India — has boosted demand for grain for animal feed. Poor harvests due to bad weather in this country and elsewhere have contributed. High energy prices are adding to the pressures as some arable land is converted from growing food crops to biofuel crops and making it more expensive to ship the food that is produced.

According to Lester Brown, president of the World Policy Institute, "This troubling situation is unlike any the world has faced before. The challenge is not simply to deal with a temporary rise in grain prices, as in the past, but rather to quickly alter those trends whose cumulative effects collectively threaten the food security that is a hallmark of civilization. If food security cannot be restored quickly, social unrest and political instability will spread and the number of failing states will likely increase dramatically, threatening the very stability of civilization itself."

The cheap fossil fuels that permitted industrial agriculture, and thus our burgeoning population, are beginning to run out. Although neither the media nor our politicians ever mention it, production of oil in the United States peaked in 1970. Now, worldwide production of oil has peaked or is about to peak in the next few years, and then will begin a decline each year. Even Jeroen van der Veer, CEO of Royal Dutch Shell, admits it. Without using the term "peak oil," he said, "After 2015, easily accessible supplies of oil and gas probably will no longer keep up with demand." Others say it will be sooner. In the meantime, oil-producing nations will be increasingly likely to save those reserves for their own use. There are no easy fixes for the problem. Alternative energy sources such as solar, wind or even nuclear will not be able to support our current population size, never mind the much larger population size that we are currently headed toward.

Maybe Malthus and the earlier authors were off by a couple of centuries or a few decades (a relatively insignificant amount of time in the course of human history). However, now we are at a stage of having not just approached, but having overwhelmed the carrying capacity of our environment given the standard of living that we demand. A growing number of the world's major marine and terrestrial biomes or ecosystems are being ever more severely degraded, some of them now on the verge of collapse. Some have predicted that global warming and the resulting droughts and rising sea levels will force 1 billion people to move in the next 100 years, compounding our problems.

In the absence of extremely harsh environmental regulation and economic restriction, human reproduction can no longer be seen as a right, but as a privilege that must be exercised responsibly.

George Plumb is a longtime environmental activist in Vermont. He may be reached through the Vermonters for a Sustainable Population Web site at www.vspop.org.

Sunday 18 May 2008

The Eco-Nationalist Model

I have been asked to define a bit more clearly some of the points I made in the article about Eco-Nationalism, and so I will be posting up over the next few days a series of articloes I have written that I have been waiting for th right time to publish ;

There are three primary motivating principles of Eco-Nationalism ;

1) The preservation and promotion of the interests of the indigenous peoples of the British Isles

2) The preservation and promotion of the indigenous cultures of the British Isles

3) The preservation and protection of the British natural environment in a sustainable manner so that future generations of British citizens may have access to resources, natural beauty and an environment that may sustain them and future generations of our people.

These principles apply to all nations, all indigenous peoples and all cultures around the world.

I define them in the terms of Britain and Europe as I am British, but the model applies to similar Trading Zones around the world including an African Trading Zone, An Eastern Trading Zone and also an Americas Trading Zone.

Each will regulate themselves according the principles of Eco-Nationalism and once they have created their own environmental trading zones, then other trading zones around the world may trade with them.

These three principles are the inner principles around which all politicial, economic, social, and industrial decisions taken by governments must be based upon.

Any politicial decision taken by a government that infringes or breaks one of these three principles can thereby be revealed as based on factors which are not motivated for the interests of our people, culture, land and heritage.

The primary motivating principles of Eco-Nationalism are the preservation and protection of our native Land and People.

Allied with those principles is the recognition amongst eco-nationalists that political and state power comes only from the people and that power therefore should always be as localised as possible and also that state power should only be applied at the level of the individual, the community and the nation by the government either in pursuit of the primary motivating principles of eco-nationalism or in the interests of National Security to ensure the survival of the land and people.

Eco-Nationalism as political concept asserts that both the individual and the national community are unified within the social and national organism and that the local and national environment must be maintained and preserved in order to sustain future generations of the people.

The problem is that most of the nationalist governments in history have at some time undertaken military, political, social, economic or industrial activities which have conflicted with the primary principles of nationalism leading to xenophobia, resource competition and eco-conflict, war, industrial and economic over development and environmental over exploitation. They have gone from being Nationalist to Hyper-Nationalist.

This has primarily been due to over population and the need for new living space leading to wars and imperialism, over exploitation of the national enviroment and national resources leading to a commodity surplus which requires economic expansion into new markets in order to sell those surplus goods or simply corruption and greed.

What is now required is a new form of Environmental Nationalism based on the Bottom Up theory of power. This is the creation of an Eco-Nationalism of the People rather than the Top Down Nationalism of State Nationalism. Power must be devolved from the national state complex to local people so that local communities can be empowered to create sustainable social, economic, agricultural, energy and water systems in their own local environments.

A nation that is not self sufficient is not an independent nation.

Environmental sustainability and national self sufficiency are fundamental aspects of National Security. The environment is not an economic issue, it is the foundation of our very existence.

A nation dependent upon foreign oil for its social complexity and development, is a hostage to the demands of those foreign nations.

Ensuring Energy Security and National Security are both essential aspects of the Eco-Nationalist critique.

Globalisation is a process in direct contradiction with the goals of Environmental Nationalism. With the trans-national corporate takeover of the British economy, the transfer of sovereignty by successive British governments to supra-national bodies such as the EU, WTO and UN, White Flight emigration and the increasing arrival of immigrants and environmental refugees into Britain driven by climate change and the economic effects of globalisation, this means that new national economic and industrial models must be developed that allow Britain to restore its lost sovereignty and also to adopt national environmental protectionist policies that destroy globalisation but that do not lead to the associated problems of aggressive Hyper-Nationalism.

We must never again let the Liberal appeasers, the global Capitalists, International Socialists, the EU and Hyper-Nationalists lead us into another European Brothers War or into a future of endless Eco-Conflicts.

Another problem that will relate to Hyper-Nationalist states in a post peak Oil world will relate to our National and European security. A Hyper-Nationalist state experiencing resource problems would be willing to sell its military technology to nations who could represent a threat to our nation and Europe as well. In a post Peak Oil world nations such as China that have depleted its own environment and natural resources will either implode or adopt aggressive imperialist expansionist policies and be forced to seek new resources outside its own borders. This will be done either via invasion, mass emigration of the Chinese population into our nations or into nations such as Africa (which is happening now) leading to wars and mass emigration into the UK and Europe, and as a result this will accelerate our own internal social breakdown due to this influx of new immigrants. Resultant famine, wars and social chaos in Africa or the Chinese state will accelerate the global econ-conflict crisis. At the moment China is creating vassal states in Africa that are being stripped of their resources in order feed its internal economy in return for military and social aid, but this will merely ensure that at some point Africa will experience its own immigration and resource wars.

As a result of this Chinese expansion nationalist states in a post-EU Europe voted into power by angry populations may become Hyper-Nationalist in the post Peak Oil era.

This is why nationalism as an expression of the anger of indigenous peoples aroud the world in the Peak Oil era must be directed into the channel of Eco-Nationalism, as that way we cn avoid the endless wars that will arise if Hyper-Nationalism rises again.

During this Post Peak oil era the one advantage that Europe has over China and other nations is its military technological advantage.

This advantage must be retained.

Only by being strong will we manage to repel the desperate.

Our enemies must fear our wrath if we are to avoid a global nuclear war with those nations driven to desperate means by the post-Peak Oil nightmare.

Therefore any European nation that supplies the enemies of our nations with military technology that damages our strategic interests and national security should be regarded as a pariah state. In fact the European Trading Zone I sketch out below should be used in such a way so that such pariah nations that betray us become economically and politically isolated within Europe.

Nations such as France who have supplied China with military equipment should be banned from being allowed to do so. Both nations that are involved in such activities, importer and exporter, will be denied access to the European Trading Zone. In the European Trading Zone economic restrictions, sanctions, seizure of state and corporate assets, currency controls, an economic blockade and the suspension of their right to transport goods outside Europe and into their nations via the use of European transportation infrastructure within the European Trading Zone should be imposed on such rogue states.

Such nations should not be allowed to function as sponsors of terrorism or possible enemies and be allowed to stay within the European Trading Zone. Neither should they be allowed to threaten the national security of our nations or the security of Europe itself. It will be the job of the European Trading Zone to ensure such states are subject to restrictions that prevent such actions.

Liberal appeaser nation States governed by weak liberal elites will not resist either military invasion or mass immigration. Therefore they can never be trusted with National Security.

The Eco-Nationalist State is not state that is shackled by the shibboleths of political correctness or liberalism, as both PC and Liberalism are cultural artefacts of the pre-peak oil 20th Century, and as such have no meaning or relevance in the 21st century or in the Peak Oil era.

The Eco-Nationalist state is a Guardian State, one that acts in defence of the fundamental principles, not one that places esoteric idealism and nonsensical ideolgical internationalist utopian visions before those principles.

International Socialist States and Global Capitalist States regard the environment simply as a supply base for economic and industrial development. The long term interests of the land and people and the interests of National Security and Energy Security are not even regarded as issues to be taken into account.

The problem with all previous political models, both national, pan-European and international is that the interests of the national, European and global environment and the necessity of securing our National and European security have never been regarded as fundamental to the operation of the ideology. Global Environmental Security has never been a feature of any of those previous ideologies, and the recent 'green' debate on climate change has merely been another excuse to create more supra-national institutions based on the International Corporate Fascist Model of globalism that will merely accelerate globalism as a process, and hence accelerate the destruction of the national and global environments.

Each of the previous economic ideologies in human history have regarded the environment as just an aspect of providing the essential resources for industrial and economic development. National Security, Energy Security, National Environmental Security and Global Environmental Security have never featured in any of the previous economic models.

Economics has been ideological in design but Darwinian in action. This has resulted into the creation of political, economic and social mechanisms which are against the fundamentals of human and environmental survival. Therefore we have the worst of all possible worlds. We have economic Darwinism (globalism and consumerism) as the engine of economic and industrial development as the dictates of Political Correctness being imposed, via taxation of business and individuals, at the social level through the political structures of the national state, the EU and international institutions.

This is because all economic or industrial models are just theoretical ideological thought forms, they have no clear natural or organic basis for their validity or existence. Economics is not a science. Economics is politics. Each political party in Britain has its own unique economic, social and industrial model for society. No clear political, intellectual or academic consensus exists as to the objective validity of any political model as being the most efficient primary engine of progress, for if it did then all nations would already be utilising it.

Economic progress is measured simply as a product of increasing GDP, even if this increase in GDP is going to ensure the death of the national environment, the globl environment and future generations of our people.

Those who created the past economic and industrial systems of the planet are all guilty of the eco-cide of the national environment and the planet. Their logic has led to the environmental crisis that the planet is facing today.

The European Union is not a trading mechanism, it is a political mechanism for the dismantling of national state sovereignty and the creation of a Pan-European political union designed to place absolute executive, legislative and judicial power in the hands of a politicised class of administrative elites who act in the interests of globalisation. The European Union was designed to be the preliminary stepping stone to the creation of a global world government. Its takeover was to be gradualist as opposed to revolutionary.

The EU is just a mechanism for the process of accelerating globalisation.

Jean Monnet, regarded as the founding father of the EU was also named the Deputy Secretary General of the League of Nations in 1919 by the French Premiere Clemenceau and by the British statesman Balfour, architect of the Balfour Declaration that created a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Monnet also inspired the alliance between Churchill and De Gaulle during the Second World War and also acted as an adviser to President Roosevelt. In 1941 Monnet created the Victory Plan that brought the United States into the Second World War.

During a meeting in Algiers on the 5th August 1943 with the exiled French government Monnet said “ There will be no peace in Europe if the states are reconstituted on the basis of national sovereignty…. The countries of Europe are too small to guarantee their peoples the necessary prosperity and social development. The European states must compose themselves into a federation. “ On the 9th May 1950 with the West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer and French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Robert Schuman signed a declaration integrating the German coal and steel industries. The foundation of the present European Union The European Steel and Coal Community was then born. In 1958 the Common Market was formed by the Treaty of Rome, in 1967 the European Commission was formed, Britain joined in 1973, then came the European Monetary System and European Parliament in 1979.

Therefore the roots of the EU are poisoned and the entire European Union must be dismantled.

The entire political, social, industrial and economic models it operates are pernicious to the people of the nation states that are members of its institutions and the national, European and global environment.

In its place must be established a European Trading Council, staffed with nominated national delegates that regulate a specific territorially defined European Trading Zone. The European Trading Council will pass regulations and legislation that will be binding across the entire European Trading Zone. The decisions of the European Trading Council will based on utilising the best independent scientific advice available to protect the National, European and Global Environments.

The European Trading Zone must be run on the principles of Environmental sustainability, creating and securing the operation and functions of an European Trading Zone based on Fair Trade principles and Environmental Protectionism requiring the creation of an managed internal market mechanism based on fair and free competition between nation states and corporations operating to the highest environmental standards in order to secure both the national and European for the benefit of future generations of Britons and Europeans.

The protection of our national and the Global Environment can only be secured by nations states forming regional trading Zones that can then trade with other similarly regulated trading blocs.

The function of the World Trade Organisation must also be revised in order to secure as its fundamental goal the principle of national global environmental sustainability. Its operations and decisions as between disputes in the regional trading Zones must be based solely on securing that fundamental goal of ensuring national and global environmental sustainability.

The Kyoto Treaty is predicated primarily on the basis that economic and industrial development are goals that are of an equivalence to environmental sustainability. As a treaty to prevent any more climate damage it will not work. It creates an international framework for increasing global inter-dependency instead of ensuring nationally sustainable energy regimes based on nations taking care of their own environments.

In effect the Kyoto Treaty removes all sovereign national control from nations over their own environmental and industrial development and hands it over to the United Nations. It is the first real process of the UN that imposes direct control over the internal political structures of nation states. Carbon trading under the Kyoto Treaty merely allows the rich corporations to buy off developing nations and carry on polluting. The treaty will not work and therefore should be abandoned. The Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto treaty allows industrialised nations to invest in schemes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in developing nations whilst they continue to accelerate their own industrial development. This is just globalist nonsense. The complexity of the scheme and monitoring it is so vast it can never work.

Examples of the EU trying to get in on the environmental protection racket have been disastrous both for the environment and British business. The EU Emissions Trading Scheme has been since 2005 operating Phase 1 of the scheme has led to British businesses paying an extra 500 million pounds per year for their permits than their European competitors including a rise of 25 % in wholesale energy prices in the UK since phase 1 began. Phase 2 of the scheme is about to begin in 2008 with expected rises in energy prices for UK based businesses and also the off shoring of many industries from the EU to nations such as China which will merely exacerbate climate change. The fact that China is planning 560 new coal fired power stations by 2012, and is currently building a new coal fired station per week, will merely make off shoring of industry and manufacturing from the EU to China more appealing to those companies that put profits before their duty to our own people.

As long as the UK and the EU still buy and import in those products made in China, India and other nations that exploit their, and other nations national environments, then the farsical rules as per Kyoto and other bogus treaties, will change nothing.

This is why Environmental Protectionism must be imposed on all nations, so that no products or commodities produced anywhere in the world via environmentall damaging means may be imported into our nations.

The Fair Trade rules in the European Trading Zones will be designed to protect British workers, farmers and national agriculture production and ensure that the nations of Europe can work together to protect our common European environment. Environmental Protectionism is to be used in order to ensure that foreign imports into the European Trading Zone are not from environmentally damaging or un-ethical sources eg Chinese coal supplies, sweat shop and child labour produced Indian clothing, Brazilian rain forest timber, Brazilian beef produced from slaves and rain forest cattle, GM engineered Chinese soya and rice.

Efficiency and environmental sustainability, and not just the deadly fetishes of either selfish profit motive or the desire for perpetual economic development, must become the primary motivating factors for both the Nation state and private corporations.

Business and industries registered in the UK and whose owners re British citizens either resident in the UK or outside it will be prohibited from moving capital out of the UK that is then invested in manufacturing in nations such as China which are in breach of the Environmental Sustainability rules.

The situation where UK citizens can close down profitable companies in the UK and the European Trading Zones and export them to China whilst throwing our workers onto the scrapheap will end. Such activities will be prohibited within the UK and the European Trading Zone.

Those that do not wish to agree to these laws can always surrender their UK passports and reside elsewhere with whatever residual wealth we allow them to export out of the country with them.

Article 59 of the EC treaty already provides for the adoption of measures for six months at a time as voted for by a majority of EU finance ministers, with no veto right for the UK, to restrict the flow of capital into and out of the EU if the stability of the Euro is threatened.

Article 111-22 of the Maastricht Treaty also gives the EU the right to determine exchange rate policies.

Therefore such policies are already recognised as legal rights essential for the protection of the EU, and will also form an essential part of the operations of the European Trading Zone in order to restrict corporations from exploiting British and European workers, the British and European environment and also to prevent the exploitation of those workers and the natural environment outside the European trading Zone.

If the Chinese state cannot sell those goods to foreign markets that it creates using environmentally damaging means, then it will not create those goods. At the same time if the Chinese state, and other states who adopt similar environmentally destructive economic and industrial models, are unable to import the raw resources they require to create those goods then they will not be able to produce those goods.

This will of course create a starving lion, and this is why the Eco-Nationalist state must be a strong state militarily. The creation of a new military model for the British Military is required - I have written on this before and the neccesity for a British National Defence Model and also the need for a new Fourth Wing of the British military, an integrated Assymetric Warfare unit with a 24 / 7 global reach and strike action capacity to target not just conventional threats but also terrorist threats to the UK. The UK must create an independent military model capable of aggression defence action. Those nations in the era of Peak Oil and Eco-Conflict that will seek to threaten the UK once the oil runs out, will think twice once we have created the British National Defence Model.

The principle of Environmental Localism as a political mechanism necessitates the devolution of National State power to local community organisations that can operate to the highest environmental standards within the nation state and the European Trading Zone. Water, energy production, agricultural production and the manufacturing of products must be as localised as possible. Community farms, local recycling plants, local energy production units and local resource use must be localised. Efficiency and environmental sustainability must become the driving motives of Environmental Localism.

Wherever the economies of scale and efficiency demand a specific national mechanism in order to ensure the fulfilment of the imperatives of the fundamental principles then the National State structure will become involved to ensure that the most fitting economic mechanism and social systems are able to do that job.

If private industry and business cannot create or operate any specific process for profit that is required in an Environmental Nationalist State, then the State will assist local community groups and individuals to do the job for individual and community profit and if individuals and community groups are unable to operate the process for profit then the Nation State will take on the job of ensuring the function of the process itself and thereby ensure that the required process operates via the mechanism of the State itself.

For example we require the canal network re-opened, the railways re-opened and expanded, trams to replace cars and buses in towns and cities, a new energy efficient national energy grid to gather surplus national energy produced by local energy networks and put it into the national grid.

We require British industries to create and build new renewable energy systems and the integrated infra-structure required to operate it.

We require a new Green Industrial Revolution. Only when we are able to produce 100 % of our own national energy needs from our own national renewable energy sources then can we say we are an independent nation.

The renewable energy systems we will create to ensure our national energy needs we can then give or sell to developing nations so they can solve their own energy needs, and this will stop the problem of mass emigration from those nations due to social breakdown becoming our problem of mass immigration causing social breakdown in our nation.

All previous ideological based solutions to securing the efficient functions of the internal economic and industrial mechanisms essential to ensuring the long term National Security, energy security and environmental interests of the People, Nation and State must be abandoned in favour only of the purest utilitarian pragmatism, and therefore form must follow function.

Rules and regulations will be established by the European Trading Council that are designed to ensure that no individual nations or corporations in the Trading Zone are able to exploit their own national environments in order to gain an unfair market competitive advantage in the Trading Zone.

Resource production, manufacturing, transportation and consumer mechanisms are all to be regulated in order to ensure the requirements of the driving motives of environmental sustainability are fulfilled.

The regulations will also ensure that no nations or private corporations are able to import in raw resources from outside the Trading Zone that also distort the internal market mechanisms of the Trading Zone.

In all nations within the European Trading Zone, National Environmental Courts will be established and also Environmental Investigation Agencies tasked with the authority to investigate any alleged breaches of the rules and regulations of the European Trading Council and any abuses of the national environment by national governments or corporations in the jurisdiction of the court.

The regulations will only permit imports foreign imports that are in line with strict environmental standards set by the Trading Council scientific advisory boards, and National Environmental Courts will have the authority to investigate any breaches of the import regulations by either corporations or the national state structures themselves.

If the Environmental Court finds the nation state or corporations guilty of serious breaches of any of the environmental regulations then the European Trading Council can impose financial and trade sanctions against the companies and nation states guilty of any breaches of the law.

The National Environmental Courts will apply laws based on the strictest environmental standards as agreed in the European Trading Council scientific advisory boards based on independent scientific evidence as agreed by an internal environmental auditing system comprised of independent scientific advisers from all nations within the Trading Zone. They will sit and act and give advice solely in the interests of national, european and global environmental sustainability. Their recommendations will form the environmental regulations and laws that the Environmental Courts will follow and apply.

Cases involving individuals, corporations and the British state will all face investigation by the Environmental Courts. If found guilty then remedies available to the courts would include fines, environmental restitution orders, imprisonment and recommendations for trade sanctions to be applied against individual states. Recommendations for trade sanctions against any nation state in the event of non-compliance with a court order can be passed up to the European Trading Council for a majority vote and sanctions be imposed inclusing a trade embargo on that nation if it ignores the orders of the environmental court and the European Trading Council.

Those nations that refused to abide by the Court decisions and that after a specified period of time would suffer sanctions and then expulsion from the European Trading Council and the European Trading Zone.

All nations therefore would retain their right of national sovereignty and the ability to exercise national autonomy.

If they did not want to be in the European Trading Zone they can leave at any time they wish.

Other European Trading Council members would then be required not to trade with the self removed ex-member state, as to allow members states to continue to trade with the self removed state would be to distort the internal market system of the Trading Zone itself.

If any nation wanted total national self sufficiency and to be an independent nation then its status as an independent nation would be guaranteed by the rest of the European Trading Council.

The final phase of the Eco-Nationalist Model would be such that the neccesity for the European Trading Zone would itself become redundant. Once all nations on the planet had adopted the principles of Eco-Nationalism and each lived and worked within its own sustainable environmental limits, then the need for such regulatory bodies would wither away.

The model of Eco-Nationalism is a model for all nations. It is the only way each of the nations of the planet, the peoples of the planet and the planet itself will survive.

The success of the Eco-Nationalist Model will be when all nations of the world live in accord with the three principles of Eco-Nationalism.

The indices of a progressive society are not defined solely by an increase in GDP or increased economic or industrial activity. Environmental sustainability and an improvement in the quality of life as a regards health, housing, clean water, less energy use, healthier food production and consumption, animal welfare and the preservation of bio-diversity are also factors to be taken into account as regards Environmental Nationalism.

What is the point of life in a world devoid of natural beauty.

If future generations will be born that will never hear see a tiger in the wild, never swim with dolphins or never hear the song of a nightingale then that is a crime against humanity.

In the 21st Century as the break down of the global environment accelerates due to climate change, resource competition and over population then the flaws in the present political supra-national and nationalist paradigms will become clearer.

This model seeks to offer a solution before the crisis hits.