Raging Inequality May Cause Unrest and Violence In America and the Rest of Western World → Washingtons Blog
Raging Inequality May Cause Unrest and Violence In America and the Rest of Western World - Washingtons Blog

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Raging Inequality May Cause Unrest and Violence In America and the Rest of Western World


Preface: While conservatives are against redistribution of wealth and liberals want to tax the affluent, conservatives and liberals, the affluent and the less well-heeled should all agree that we have to stop the surge in inequality from rising further:

  • As Robert Shiller said in 2009:
    And it's not like we want to level income. I'm not saying spread the wealth around, which got Obama in trouble. But I think, I would hope that this would be a time for a national consideration about policies that would focus on restraining any possible further increases in inequality.
  • The father of modern economics - Adam Smith - didn't believe that inequality should be a taboo subject
  • Warren Buffet, one of America's most successful capitalists and defenders of capitalism, points out, "There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war ...."
  • Conservatives - as well as liberals - are against rampant inequality. But all Americans underestimate the amount of inequality in our country

And while I am not calling for violence, I wonder if this is like South Africa at the end of the Apartheid era, where those in power had to hand over the reins to the majority to prevent violence.

And even if there is not a revolt, we are already seeing increased crime and the breakdown of society. See this and this.


Raging inequality was largely responsible for the Great Depression and for the current financial crisis.

I noted in January:

Egyptian, Tunisian and Yemeni protesters all say that inequality is one of the main reasons they're protesting.

However, the U.S. actually has much greater inequality than in any of those countries.

Is there any way that the growing inequality could cause unrest in America or the rest of the Western world?

Initially, the Greek and Spanish riots have grown out of bailouts and other windfalls for the big banks and hedge funds (see this, this and this), and austerity for the working stiff. So in a sense, they are about inequality.

Moreover, I pointed out in February:

Agence France-Press reports today:
The International Monetary Fund stands ready to help riot-torn Egypt rebuild its economy, the IMF chief said Tuesday as he warned governments to tackle unemployment and income inequality or risk war.

Forbes reported in February:

Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff, co-author of a best-selling book on financial crises, “This Time It’s Different,” told Forbes today in an exclusive interview, that the high unemployment rate and high levels of debt in the U.S. will sooner or later trigger serious “social unrest from the income disparities in the U.S.”

The Obama administration has “no clue,” he told me what do about this terrible disparity in the economy that is bound to erupt sooner or later, he feels.

“I don’t understand why people don’t wake up to the crisis they are creating,” he said to me just minutes after appearing at a Council on Foreign Relations round-table on “Currency Wars.”

And I wrote in June:

CNN's Jack Cafferty notes that a number of voices are saying that - if our economy continues to deteriorate (which it very well might) - we are likely headed for violence, and civil unrest is a growing certainty.

Watch the must-see CNN viewer comments on this issue:

Newsweek wrote two weeks ago:

Reality is beginning to break through. Gas and grocery prices are on the rise, home values are down, and vast majorities think the country is on the wrong track. The result is sadness and frustration, but also an inchoate rage more profound than the sign-waving political fury documented during the elections last fall.

***

In search of the earthly toll of this outrage, NEWSWEEK conducted a poll of 600 people, finding vastly more unquiet minds than not. Three out of four people believe the economy is stagnant or getting worse. One in three is uneasy about getting married, starting a family, or being able to buy a home. Most say their relationships have been damaged by economic woes or, perhaps more accurately, the dread and nervousness that accompany them.

Could these emotions escalate into revolt?

Why Are People So Angry?

Why are people so angry?

Well, as the Newsweek article points out:
Corporate earnings have soared to an all-time high. Wall Street is gaudy and confident again. But the heyday hasn’t come for millions of Americans. Unemployment hovers near 9 percent, and the only jobs that truly abound, according to Labor Department data, come with name tags, hairnets, and funny hats (rather than high wages, great benefits, and long-term security). The American Dream is about having the means to build a better life for the next generation. But as President Obama acknowledged at a town-hall meeting in May, “a lot of folks aren’t feeling that [possibility] anymore.”
By way of background, America - like most nations around the world - decided to bail out their big banks instead of taking the necessary steps to stabilize their economies (see this, this and this). As such, they all transferred massive debts (from fraudulent and stupid gambling activities) from the balance sheets of the banks to the balance sheets of the country.

The nations have then run their printing presses nonstop in an effort to inflate their way out of their debt crises, even though that effort is doomed to failure from the get-go.

Quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve is obviously causing food prices to skyrocket worldwide (and see this, this and this).

But the fact is that every country in the world that can print money - i.e. which is not locked into a multi-country currency agreement like the Euro - has been printing massive quantities of money. See these charts.

Moreover, the austerity measures which governments worldwide are imposing to try to plug their gaping deficits (created by throwing trillions at their banks) are causing people world-wide to push back.

As I warned in February 2009 and again in December of that year:

Numerous high-level officials and experts warn that the economic crisis could lead to unrest world-wide - even in developed countries:

  • Today, Moody's warned that future tax rises and spending cuts could trigger social unrest in a range of countries from the developing to the developed world, that in the coming years, evidence of social unrest and public tension may become just as important signs of whether a country will be able to adapt as traditional economic metrics, that a fiscal crisis remains a possibility for a leading economy, and that 2010 would be a “tumultuous year for sovereign debt issuers”.
  • The U.S. Army War College warned in 2008 November warned in a monograph [click on Policypointers’ pdf link to see the report] titled “Known Unknowns: Unconventional ‘Strategic Shocks’ in Defense Strategy Development” of crash-induced unrest:
    The military must be prepared, the document warned, for a “violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States,” which could be provoked by “unforeseen economic collapse,” “purposeful domestic resistance,” “pervasive public health emergencies” or “loss of functioning political and legal order.” The “widespread civil violence,” the document said, “would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.” “An American government and defense establishment lulled into complacency by a long-secure domestic order would be forced to rapidly divest some or most external security commitments in order to address rapidly expanding human insecurity at home,” it went on. “Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States. Further, DoD [the Department of Defense] would be, by necessity, an essential enabling hub for the continuity of political authority in a multi-state or nationwide civil conflict or disturbance,” the document read.
  • Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair said:
    "The global economic crisis ... already looms as the most serious one in decades, if not in centuries ... Economic crises increase the risk of regime-threatening instability if they are prolonged for a one- or two-year period," said Blair. "And instability can loosen the fragile hold that many developing countries have on law and order, which can spill out in dangerous ways into the international community."***

    "Statistical modeling shows that economic crises increase the risk of regime-threatening instability if they persist over a one-to-two-year period."***

    “The crisis has been ongoing for over a year, and economists are divided over whether and when we could hit bottom. Some even fear that the recession could further deepen and reach the level of the Great Depression. Of course, all of us recall the dramatic political consequences wrought by the economic turmoil of the 1920s and 1930s in Europe, the instability, and high levels of violent extremism.”

    Blair made it clear that - while unrest was currently only happening in Europe - he was worried this could happen within the United States.

    [See also this].
  • Former national security director Zbigniew Brzezinski warned "there’s going to be growing conflict between the classes and if people are unemployed and really hurting, hell, there could be even riots."
  • The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff warned the the financial crisis is the highest national security concern for the U.S., and warned that the fallout from the crisis could lead to of "greater instability".
Others warning of crash-induced unrest include:
Unemployment is soaring globally - especially among youth.

And the sense of outrage at the injustice of the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer is also a growing global trend.

Countries worldwide told their people that bailout out the giant banks was necessary to save the economy. But they haven't delivered, and the "Main Streets" of the world have suffered.

As former American senator (and consummate insider) Chris Dodd said in 2008:
If it turns out that [the banks] are hoarding, you’ll have a revolution on your hands. People will be so livid and furious that their tax money is going to line their pockets instead of doing the right thing. There will be hell to pay.
Of course, the big banks are hoarding, and refusing to lend to Main Street. In fact, they admitted back in 2008 that they would. And the same is playing out globally.

As I noted in February:

***

No wonder former U.S. National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski ... warned the Council on Foreign Relations that:

For the first time in human history almost all of humanity is politically activated, politically conscious and politically interactive. There are only a few pockets of humanity left in the remotest corners of the world that are not politically alert and engaged with the political turmoil and stirrings that are so widespread today around the world.

***

America needs to face squarely a centrally important new global reality: that the world's population is experiencing a political awakening unprecedented in scope and intensity, with the result that the politics of populism are transforming the politics of power. The need to respond to that massive phenomenon poses to the uniquely sovereign America an historic dilemma: What should be the central definition of America's global role?

[T]he central challenge of our time is posed not by global terrorism, but rather by the intensifying turbulence caused by the phenomenon of global political awakening. That awakening is socially massive and politically radicalizing.
It is no overstatement to assert that now in the 21st century the population of much of the developing world is politically stirring and in many places seething with unrest. It is a population acutely conscious of social injustice to an unprecedented degree, and often resentful of its perceived lack of political dignity. The nearly universal access to radio, television and increasingly the Internet is creating a community of shared perceptions and envy that can be galvanized and channeled by demagogic political or religious passions. These energies transcend sovereign borders and pose a challenge both to existing states as well as to the existing global hierarchy, on top of which America still perches.

***
That turmoil is the product of the political awakening, the fact that today vast masses of the world are not politically neutered, as they have been throughout history. They have political consciousness.

***

Politically awakened mankind craves political dignity, which democracy can enhance, but political dignity also encompasses ethnic or national self-determination, religious self-definition, and human and social rights, all in a world now acutely aware of economic, racial and ethnic inequities. The quest for political dignity, especially through national self-determination and social transformation, is part of the pulse of self-assertion by the world's underprivileged

***

We live in an age in which mankind writ large is becoming politically conscious and politically activated to an unprecedented degree, and it is this condition which is producing a great deal of international turmoil.

That turmoil is the product of the political awakening, the fact that today vast masses of the world are not politically neutered, as they have been throughout history. They have political consciousness.
Watch an excerpt:



6 comments:

  1. This growing unrest and the potential energy that it is generating MUST be turned towards positive ends. We will be wasting precious time and resources if we allow justified anger to be turned toward violent and divisive ends. We must concentrate on building resiliency and sustainability in the face of economic instability and dislocation.

    We have to focus on building cooperative communities, restoring the productive capacity of the soils and the waters. Violent civil unrest will only serve to justify oppression by The Powers That Be. THEY can only be disempowered by our collective and peaceful refusal to serve.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Not Australia! We have raised interest rates. That is now stopped. We offer 7% deposit rates!!! Gold has fallen in AUD terms!

    Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia! Australia!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Not this canard again. Quote: [ I wonder if this is like South Africa at the end of the Apartheid era, where those in power had to hand over the reins to the majority to prevent violence. ] No. Power was not handed over to the majority I repeat not handed over to the majority! MI6 simply recruited a wealthy Xhosa Chieftan named Nelson [ <----- he was named NELSON by BRITISH MISSIONARIES!!!!! THINK PEOPLE PLEASE!!!!! ] Mandela back in the 1950s to one day become the PUPPET leader of the ARTIFICIAL construct of "South Africa". Furthermore: what "majority" do you speak of? There is NO MAJORITY IN ALL OF "SOUTH AFRICA"!!!!! The British named "South Africa" is an artificial MACRO STATE which FORCED MANY DIFFERENT PEOPLES into it. South Africa is home to Sothos / Xhosas / Zulus / Tswanas / Boers / Indians / Pedis / Cape Coloureds / Cape Malays / Cape Dutch [ Afrikaners ] / Anglos / Khoisan [ the aboriginal peoples of Africa ] / Griquas etc. NONE OF WHOM IS A MAJORITY!!!!! Reducing the vast & DIVERSE population down to RACE is totally misleading because the four main racial groups ie: White / Black / Coloured & Indian are incredibly diverse within themselves. The various groups once had their own countries before the British came & conquered everyone & forced them into an ARTIFICIAL macro State construct.

    Please get this short article out to everyone & Google bomb the term:

    South Africa is an artificial British created macro state construct.

    This was among the articles I was hoping to pull.

    South Africa & the RSA was th
    e result of foreign legislation.


    Folks often do not realize that South Africa was not created by its various peoples but was put in place by the British – after they conquered the Boer people [ & later lumped them in with the formerly pro British Cape Dutch & renamed them all "Afrikaners" as a way to conjure their loyalty to the new macro State of South Africa ] & rescinded their Boer Republics as they had done to the other local groups who had their own collectivites during the nineteenth cent. The British started the policies which became known as Apartheid [ even though the term segregation could have been used ] & began to recruit Afrikaans speakers to act as the surrogate Colonial ruler of the new macro State. The later National Party government was an anti-British arm of the Afrikaner puppet regimes which led to the establishment of the pro-British ANC puppet regime. Do not be misled by the mainstream press propaganda of “handing power over to the [ undefinable ] ‘majority’ ” when all that happened was that the British elite simply recruited yet ANOTHER surrogate Colonial regime to administer their artificial macro State. The macro State has all those peoples in it for the very purpose of creating FRICTION [ the same reason other countries have excessive immigration policies ] so that the elite can continue to steal the resources of the region.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Glad to see this information. Thanks for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. My children were in he street in the 60s and 70s protesting the Viet Nam war, but I honestly can't see their children, who will have to do the protesting, out there, as they are too self-absorbed. Perhaps my great grandchildren will be the ones to bring a change here in the U.S.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good post. Some solutions are posted here:
    http://neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com/2011/08/poverty-joblessness-and-job-guarantee.html

    ReplyDelete

→ Thank you for contributing to the conversation by commenting. We try to read all of the comments (but don't always have the time).

→ If you write a long comment, please use paragraph breaks. Otherwise, no one will read it. Many people still won't read it, so shorter is usually better (but it's your choice).

→ The following types of comments will be deleted if we happen to see them:

-- Comments that criticize any class of people as a whole, especially when based on an attribute they don't have control over

-- Comments that explicitly call for violence

→ Because we do not read all of the comments, I am not responsible for any unlawful or distasteful comments.