A review of: The Next Decade: Where We've Been . . . and Where We're Going
by George Friedman
George Friedman is widely respected political scientist and scholar; still one can respect Friedman without necessarily agreeing with him. This review is included to illustrate the rapidly changing economic and related information technologies that are driving what we call globalization.
The review:
In this book, his basic premise that the 21st Century U.S. is an imperial power in the manner of the Roman Empire and British Empire is simply wrong by any rational standards. The Roman Empire, at its height, was a centrally administered political entity in which imperial officials governed subject provinces, provincial subjects paid taxes and served in the Roman army, and the Roman Army (Cohorts and Legions) were stationed throughout the empire to protect imperial frontiers and maintain internal security. The Roman Empire was a discernable political entity with clear lines of authority between rulers and ruled. The British Empire was a centrally administered commercial empire held together by the Royal Navy and the imperial civil service who provided administrators (police and governors) for its colonial possessions.
The United States, by virtue of an extraordinarily high military budget, may be the predominant military power in the world, but its far flung military presence is not any thing like the control exercised by the Roman Legions or Royal Navy. Although the U.S. economy is largest in the world, Washington D.C. does not exercise anywhere the same direct influence over world commerce that Rome and London did at the height of their respective empires. In short it is difficult to see how the U.S. can be equated to either empire so the question asked by Friedman, if the U.S. Republic can withstand the strains of empire is a moot one.
Having begun with a false premise, Friedman compounds the error by building a set of prognostic descriptions of U.S. relations with individual countries and regions as the decade of 2010-2020 moves forward. In this effort he apparently fails to understand the effects that the phenomenon of globalization is having on the international stage. Now `globalization' is a widely used term with many interpretations. In this case the term is used to mean the rapidly growing inter-connectivity and inter-dependence of both nation states and geographical regions both economically and culturally. It is a major mistake to treat U.S. relations to specific countries or regions of the world as simply one-on-one relations without recognizing their global implications.
For these reasons, although this book as usual contains a good deal of wisdom, in the end it fails to provide a realistic prediction of U.S. international progress over the next decade.
A major part of globalization is enabled by the tremendous growth and expansion of information/communication technologies including: computers, the Internet, cell phones, and all of the related magic. I use the term magic to describe how these technologies may seem to the vast majority of even those who use them. We are just beginning to see the effects of this revolution. It came about so rapidly that the realization of the profound changes in our lives is just starting to be realized. The political implications have prompted many totalitarian regimes to place controls on access to the Internet with varying degrees of success. The possible results of having free access to all of this information strikes fear into the hearts of all despotic rulers, even more than a free press. These tyrants can rather easily control the press and local media. On the other hand, virtually any access to the Internet will thwart most attempts at control.
Totalitarian regimes of many types are having to deal with the freedom of information exchange provided by the Internet. This freedom is indeed bringing vast changes to the minds and activities of people wherever governments do not shut down or severely limit Internet access. Because freedom of information exchange is the enemy of all who would control the lives of individuals, many political groups, and especially those on the left, will try to control the Internet where they can. Even in the US citizens hear rumblings from some politicians about controlling and/or taxing Internet access. These individuals are the same groups that would destroy individual freedoms and place us all under growing government control. Free men must always be vigilant to protect freedom from those who would take it away. It is obvious to all truly free men and women that the political left will always use government to control people and force them to do their bidding. Just look at what has happened in the United States in the last three years. Our Constitution, originally designed to protect the people from their government, has been abrogated Our indebtedness has tripled while our nation has been economically damaged severely. It is obvious that the agenda of the left is the economic destruction of the middle class in The United States, and the reduction of its citizens to servitude to and dependence on their government. By overburdening entrepreneurs and all businesses other than the very largest with taxes and regulations, these policies have resulted in the largest concentration of wealth in very few hands that we have ever had in our history as a nation.
The recent mortgage debacle resulted in the largest destruction of personal wealth among the middle classes that the US has ever experienced. It also resulted in the greatest transfer of real wealth from most Americans into the hands of a very few, mostly bankers like Goldman Sachs. While those in power decry the evil giant corporations and Wall Street Bankers, they make secret deals with them so they pay little or no taxes, (Like GE last year) have access to political power, can arrange advantageous financial deals and government contracts, and receive advantages denied America’s small, medium and even large corporations not in the elite inside group.
EXAMPLE: The Export-Import Bank of the United States’ recent deal to provide Petrobras, Brazil’s petroleum giant with two billion dollars (that’s billions with a “b”) to fund offshore drilling, while using federal law to prevent American companies from drilling off our shores. It’s strange, isn’t it that one of the largest investors in Petrobras happens to be George Soros. The same multi billionaire George Soros who funds and runs moveon.org and other left leaning activist organizations.
This reference to George Soros leads us directly into the meat of this article.
Think Tanks and Political Organizations
In addition to donating directly to political candidates, parties and committees, the Kochs and Soros have funded numerous political think tanks and advocacy groups. These groups are not required to reveal their donors, therefore making it hard to come up with a comprehensive list of organizations that have financial ties to these individuals. The institutions mentioned are those most well-connected with the Koch brothers and George Soros.
Charles Koch co-founded the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, along with Edward Crane in 1977. Charles and David Koch, along with Richard Fink and Jay Humphries, co-founded the Citizens for a Sound Economy in 1984. In 2004, CSE broke off into two groups: Koch-linked Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks, headed by former congressman Dick Armey. According to its website, Americans for Prosperity "is committed to educating citizens about economic policy and a return of the federal government to its Constitutional limits." In addition to those mentioned above, Charles Koch has helped to build the Institute for Humane Studies, the Bill of Rights Institute and the Market-Based Management Institute.
David Koch is currently on the board of directors at Cato, as well as the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a research center dedicated to “market-oriented ideas.” He is a trustee at the Libertarian Reason Foundation whose goal is to advance “free minds and free markets.”
George Soros founded the Open Society Institute which is his primary philanthropy organization. According to the website, "The Open Society Foundations fund a range of programs around the world, from public health to education to business development." While the foundation spends much of its resources on democratic causes around the world, OSI has also contributed to political advocacy groups such as the Tides Foundation. In 2004, Soros pledged $3 million to the progressive think tank, Center for American Progress. Soros is also a major financial backer of the Democracy Alliance, an organization committed to drive progressive activist funding and the recently formed Institute for New Economic Thinking, which was jump started by a $50 million pledge from Soros.
Both the Koch brothers and Soros have given generously to nonpartisan charitable organizations. David Koch, who is still receiving treatment for prostate cancer has donated $120 million to cancer research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, $40 million to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, $100 million to renovating New York City Ballet and Opera Theater, and $20 million to the American Museum of Natural History, among other donations. Soros recently pledged $100 million to Human Rights Watch, and he has made many other charitable donations such as $50 million for the Millennium Promise initiative to eradicate extreme poverty in Africa. In 2003, PBS estimated Soros had donated more than $4 billion since the 1980s.
VERDICT: Given the difficultly in tracking donations to nonprofits and charitable organizations, it's almost impossible to quantify whether the Koch brothers or Soros dominate this political realm. That said, both the Kochs and Soros have spent incredible riches in this area with no sign of stopping.
Capital Rivals is OpenSecrets Blog's ongoing series that plays political foes against one another on the playing field of money in politics.
Ever since Jane Mayer's recent New Yorker piece earlier this month, much of the media has risen to debate how much influence conservative and libertarian-leaning businessmen David and Charles Koch, the owners of Koch Industries, have in American politics.
Some critics of the article argue that the media cries foul over the Koch brothers, yet largely ignores liberal George Soros, the Hungarian-American currency speculator and stock investor, who has spent millions of dollars on liberal and nonpartisan causes (including the Center for Responsive Politics).
HoJo NOTE: What else would you expect our left leaning media to do
OpenSecrets Blog is here to investigate the numbers behind these bold-faced names in our new feature, Capital Rivals.
For starters, both Soros and the brothers Koch (pronounced "coke") are incredibly rich. And their political endeavors are numerous.
Koch Industries, started as an oil refiner, and is the nation’s second largest private company with about $100 billion in annual revenue. Soros is chairman of Soros Fund Management, a highly successful hedge fund that has provided financial and investment strategies to a variety of funds. As of June 30, 2009, the hedge fund had holdings valued at $4.2 billion.
David and Charles Koch are tied at No. 24 on Forbes top billionaires list with a personal fortunes of $17.5 billion each. Soros is No. 35 on the list with a net worth of $14 billion.
The Koch brothers, Soros and their respective companies have spent millions of dollars on politics, ranging from federal lobbying to candidate support to bankrolling political committees, according to a Center for Responsive Politics review of their political activity.
The Kochs and Soros have also funded think tanks, foundations and political organizations -- money that is sometimes notoriously difficult to track.
These individuals aren’t exactly flying under the radar as the Kochs hold leadership positions and are featured on the websites for the Cato Institute, Reason Foundation and the Mercatus Center among others. Soros also runs the Open Society Institute -- website Soros.org -- as well as the recently created Institute for New Economic Thinking.
Still these individuals have provided major funding to groups that aren't particularly transparent, such as Soros-backed Democracy Alliance, which doesn't provide information on the projects it funds.
David Koch's Americans for Prosperity Foundation has a more detailed website, but it is unclear why Koch is seemingly uninvolved in the similar organization, Americans for Prosperity. David Koch contends that no Koch foundations have provided funding to Americans for Prosperity, the citizen advocacy group organizing Tea Party events around the country. A Washington Post article from January of this year connects the Kochs with the Tea Party movement, citing records of their foundation giving $3.1 million to Americans for Prosperity, but according to the Kochs, this is false, as the money only went to the Americans for Prosperity Foundation.
Below is the Center for Responsive Politics' analysis federal political activity by Soros and the Kochs. Note that while direct political donations are relatively easily to track, it's difficult to create a full compilation of the political groups that these individuals are connected with due to secondary and indirect affiliations. Therefore, the groups listed at the end of the are the most well-known organizations linked to these three individuals.
Organization-Driven Political Activity
The Koch brothers’ company, Koch Industries, has been a big player in both campaign donations and lobbying. Koch Industries currently leads the oil and gas industry as the top contributor to federal candidates and parties, and is the fifth highest lobbying spender in the industry this year. Soros’ hedge fund, Soros Fund Management, has also lobbied at the federal level, but employees have not made campaign donations through a Soros-sponsored political action committee. Because of the notable lobbying involvement of a Soros-funded think tank, the Open Society Policy Center, this group's data is also included for the purpose of this comparison:
Political Action Committee Spending (1989 to 2010)
Koch Industries: $5,938,993 (83 percent going to Republicans)
Soros Fund Management: $0
527 Group Contributions (2001 to 2010)
Koch Industries: $574,998 (100% going to Democrts.)
$186,598 – Democratic Governors Association
$150,000 – Republican State Leadership Committee
$103,400 – Republican Governors Association
Soros Fund Management: $0
Lobbying Expenditures (1998 to 2010)
Koch Industries: $50,972,700
Soros Fund Management: $860,000
Open Society Policy Center (Soros-Funded): $11,930,000
According to federal lobbying reports, Koch Industries’ top issues include energy, environmental, tax and homeland security policies. The Open Society Policy Center has mainly lobbied on issues relating to foreign relations, civil rights, and law enforcement policy. The graph below outlines these organizations lobbying history since 1998:
Koch vs Soros Lobbying Expenditures.bmp
VERDICT: When it comes to the combination of institutional lobbying, 527 group donations and PAC expenditures, Koch Industries far out-spends Soros’ hedge fund and think tank, $57.4 million to $12.8 million. Most of this money is attributable to lobbying expenditures.
Individual-Funded Political Activity
Soros and the Koch brothers have all donated to federal political campaigns and committees. While Soros has far out-spent the Koch brothers in donating to 527 groups, especially when considering his incredible $23.7 million in donations to the groups between 2003 and 2004, the Koch brothers have donated more money to federal candidates and committees.
The Koch brothers give almost exclusively to Republicans just as Soros donates predominately to Democrats and Democratic organizations. Overall, Soros has spent $34.24 million and the Kochs have spent $4.06 million. (Note: This study only covers donations to federal candidates - to see donations to state candidates, go to Followthemoney.org and search for Soros and Koch. For example, as Ben Smith of Politico wrote recently, David Koch and his wife have given $74,000 to a Democrat, Andrew Cuomo, New York's State Attorney General.)
Individual donations to federal candidates, parties and political action committees (1989 to 2010)
Koch Brothers: $2.58 million
George Soros: $1.74 million
David Koch: $2,224,170
$667,500 – National Republican Congressional Committee
$555,000 – Republican National Committee
$191,400 – National Republican Senatorial Committee
Charles G. Koch: $363,100
$58,900 – National Republican Senatorial Committee
$50,000 – Republican National Committee
George Soros: $1,748,627
$252,670 – Democratic National Committee
$147,216 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
$259,716 – Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
David Koch’s Favorite congressional members:
$17,100 – Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.)
$7,600 – Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.)
$7,200 – Mark Foley (R-Fla.)
$6,600 – James Inhofe (R-Okla.)
$5,000 – Sam Brownback (R-Kan.)
George Soros’ favorite congressional members:
$6,500 – Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.)
$6,200 – Jon Cranley (D-Ohio)
$6,000 – Ken Salazar (D-Colo.)
$6,000 – Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.)
$5,500 – Tom Perriello (D-Va.)
Individual donations to 527 organizations (2001 to 2010)
George Soros: $32.5 million
Koch Brothers: $1.5 million
A note from Howard Johnson about NPOs: Non-profit, tax exempt organizations (NPOs) sound great, don't they? These marvelous organizations are without the stigma of that terrible word, PROFITS. However, They do pay their employees, sometimes quite handsomely. They can thus become a practical conduit for all kinds of donations, government grants, and other subsidies, into the pockets of those on their payrolls. These individuals, frequently the organizer of the NPO, may not take out profits, but they can charge travels and stays at fancy hotels and resorts to the NPO in addition to their pay. Although their pay is subject to income taxes, their travel and miscellaneous expenses as well as the costs of often lavish offices and support personnel are not. This certainly applies to 527 groups. They seem to act just like many members of our legislatures, don't they?
So-called 527 groups are non-profit, tax-exempt organizations that are allowed to raise money for political activities including voter mobilization efforts, issue advocacy and other actions. They are allowed to raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations and unions. Until earlier this year, they could not use these unlimited contributions to expressly advocate for the election or defeat of a federal candidate. Federal court rulings -- including Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission -- have broken down that restriction.
As mentioned previously, Soros spent $24 million in under two years and did so in his determination to defeat George W. Bush in 2004. He told the Washington Post in November 2003, "America under Bush, is a danger to the world. I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is." Since December 2008, Soros has only donated $4,000 to these types of groups.
NOTE from Howard Johnson: Did you ever wonder why George Soros hated George w. Bush so much that he spent more then $20 million of is own money trying to defeat him in 2004?
Consider the source of his money and then consider the same thing for the Koch brothers. Soros is a hedge fund operator and has made much of his money manipulating currencies using other people's money. This type of speculation generates zero wealth and few jobs. In 1992 he made more than a billion dollars (that's with a "b") by "shorting" the British pound, one basic method of manipulating a currency if you have enough money and can get enough people with money to go with you. According to many financial experts, "Soros brought down the Bank of England with a $10 billion leveraged position." Many of the records of his financial dealings are hidden from public view so it is difficult o get a full picture. There were few jobs created in the US because of his efforts. I'll only mention the $2 billion that the Export-Import Bank of the United States intends to loan to finance exports to the Brazilian oil company Petróleo Brasileiro S.A., known as Petrobras, over the next several years. This has been heralded by Obama as a plus for the US. Or is it really a plus for Obama supporter, George Soros, who is heavily invested in Petrobras?
On the other hand, the Kochs, through their parent company, Koch Industries, made their billions in the oil refining, and associated business, right here in the US. Koch Industries is the largest privately owned corporation in the US with petroleum related transport and refining locations on the west coast, mid-west and Calgary, Alberta. Their subsidiary companies include, Koch Minerals, LLC and Koch Carbon, LLC with diverse operations all over the world. Recent acquisitions include, Invista, the world's largest fibers company, and Georgia Pacific, the American pulp and paper products giant. Their companies employ thousands of Americans and make a major contribution to our manufacturing and refining industries. Remember the differences with George Soros organizations as you read the remainder of this blog.
On June 30th of this year, David Koch made a $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association, his largest one-time donation to date.
David Koch: $1,472,000
$1,352,000 – Republican Governors Association
$100,000 – Americans for Better Government
George Soros: $32,506,500
$12.05 million – Joint Victory Campaign 2004
$7.5 million – America Coming Together
$2.5 million – MoveOn.org
$3.65 million – America Votes
$3.5 million – The Fund for America
$150,000 – Win Back Respect
$120,000 – Majority Action
$100,000 – Campaign Money Watch
Soros certainly wins the 527 group spending battle, beating the Koch brothers $32.5 million to $1.5 million. A graph below show the history these donations:
Soros vs Koch 527 donations CORRECT.bmp VERDICT: Soros rules this category, having poured more than $34.2 million into political channels, compared to $4.06 million for the Koch brothers.
No comments:
Post a Comment