Canada’s Liberals train Britain’s Tories – Look out for ‘days of action’

This was drafted in August, 2009, before the 2010 defeat of Britain’s Labour government and the election of the “ConDems.” Given events since, it has some facts that are still relevant in 2011. (Part of a series of articles, “Reflections on 2010”)” • Two former leading Liberal government figures from Canada – former top bureaucrat Jocelyne Bourgon and former cabinet minister Marcel Massé – earlier this summer met with leading British Tories including Philip Hammond, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury.[1] If Britain’s Tories intend to follow in the footsteps of Canada’s Liberals, then there is trouble ahead for workers and the poor in Britain.

Reflections on 2010

The long nights of winter are always a good moment in which to take stock of the work of the previous few months. Working through the detritus of a tumultuous year, I came across several writing pieces not uploaded to this blog. Some have been published elsewhere (links provided where possible), but given the restrictions of print publications, often in edited form. Others were 90 per cent finished, but never completed and published. All but one were written in the last 12 months. The one exception, dating from the summer of 2009, is included because it deals with something that became quite topical in 2010 – the return to office of Britain’s Tories, and the opening up of another era of cutbacks and resistance in that country. The challenge was, before the nights got too much shorter, to see if a few of these couldn't make the light of day. Eight are done, and that's enough. Comments, as always, welcome.


1. August, 2009: “Canada’s Liberals Train Britain’s Tories – Look out for ‘days of action’”
2. January, 2010: “What France Owes Haiti” (edited version published in The Globe and Mail.)
3. March, 2010: “Our Debt to Haiti”
4. March, 2010: “Cheri DiNovo and the need for ‘Apartheid 101’”
5. April, 2010: “The Question of China” (book review, slightly longer version of the review published in Socialist Studies)
6. May, 2010: “Colombia, not Venezuela, is the problem” (submitted as a brief to the Government of Canada)
7. May, 2010: “Bolivia and the birth of a movement for Climate Justice” (longer version of report published in Rabble.ca)
8.  December, 2010: “Tiger Woods – The Issue is Racism”



(c) 2011 Paul Kellogg

Message to the U.S. – Blame the Wars, not China

DECEMBER 2, 2010 – There is a growing chorus of voices in the media and the academy singling out the actions of the Chinese state as central to the dilemmas of the world economy. This focus finds its most articulate presentations, not in the xenophobia of the right, but in the polite analysis of many left-liberals. Paul Krugman, for instance, writing in the run-up to November’s G20 summit in South Korea, praised the United States’ approach of creating money out of nothing (“Quantitative Easing”) as being helpful to the world economy, and criticized the Chinese state’s attempts to keep its currency weak as being harmful. “The policies of these two nations are not at all equivalent,” he argues, adding his influential voice to the chorus which is increasingly targeting China for the world’s woes.[1] Krugman’s, however, is a simplistic analysis which overlooks the role of the U.S. over decades in creating huge imbalances in the world economy, and has the dangerous effect of scapegoating one of the poorest nations of the world (China) for the problems created by the world’s richest.

Another G20 Summit: The new club of ‘hostile brothers’

The G20 – an entity virtually unknown just two years ago – now seems to be holding meetings every month. While people in Canada were still reeling from the militarized display of force that accompanied G20 meetings in Toronto, Canada, last June, a second summit was held November 11 and 12 in Seoul, South Korea. In general, it is the rhythm of economic slump which is driving these recurring summits. In particular, the Korea summit was fixated on the danger of currency wars between the major powers – in particular between the United States and China.

Remember the Dead – Remember all the dead

If you travel to Washington D.C., and you visit only one historic site, make it the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. A gentle scar in the park that surrounds it, the modest stone wall slowly emerges into view as you walk towards it. On the pathway by the wall, medals lie propped up, along with letters, teddy bears – mementos of loved ones who passed away in the hell that was the American War in Vietnam. And on their knees, head in hand, or on their toes, reaching up to touch a name carved on a high portion of the wall, middle-aged men bear witness to fallen friends – hair now white, mouths set in anger, eyes fixed with grief. It is a simple, powerful memorial to the 58,220 United States men and women who died in Indochina between 1965 and 1975.[1]

Ecuador, Venezuela: Danger South of the Border

OCTOBER 26, 2010 – It is not difficult to see that the events of September 30, in the Latin American country of Ecuador, amounted to an attempted right-wing coup d’état.[1] Mass mobilizations in the streets and plazas of Quito (the capital) and other cities – in conjunction with action by sections of the armed forces which stayed loyal to the government – stopped the coup before the day was out. But those few hours highlighted, again, the deep dangers facing those fighting for progressive change in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Currency Wars and the Privilege of Empire

OCTOBER 23, 2010 – In uncertain times, the headline was soothing - "Secretary Geithner vows not to devalue dollar."[1] United States Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner was saying, in other words, that if there were to be "currency wars" - competitive devaluations by major economies in attempts to gain trade advantage with their rivals - the United States would not be to blame. Who, then, would be the villain? China, of course. Earlier this year, Democratic Party congressman Tim Murphy sponsored a bill authorizing the United States to impose duties on Chinese imports, made too inexpensive (according to Murphy and most other commentators) by an artificially devalued Chinese currency. "It's time to deliver a strong message to Beijing on behalf of American manufacturing: Congress will do whatever it takes to protect American jobs."[2] But the Geithner balm and the Murphy hyperbole are simply matching sides of a deep hypocrisy. For three generations, the United States has leveraged its position as the centre of empire to print dollars with abandon, devalue at will, and "debase" its currency at a rate impossible for any other economy. But the privileges of empire are starting to unravel, and the U.S. economy is wallowing in the consequences of 60 years of irresponsible monetary policy. Emotional attacks on China are simply a cover for problems deeply rooted in the U.S. itself. One part of that is a long history of currency wars, where the U.S. dollar has been used as a weapon in a manner without parallel in the modern world economy. That story has four aspects - Bretton Woods; the Nixon Shock of 1971; Petrodollars; and Quantitative Easing. This article will look at each in turn.