When will latest World dominance by 5% of World population end?

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
903
Interesting interview by Noam Chomsky here: Noam Chomsky: Trump Is Trying to Exploit Tension With Iran for 2020

As with previous World empires, basic concepts such as national independence and control over your own raw resources and territory are anathema to continued dominance by a superpower. The US represents less than 5% of the World's population but its corporations own about 50% of the World's output and its Government wants a veto on the actions of other countries. Their dominance has started to end with countries starting to ignore them but how slow and painful will the ending be? Here is a quote from the Chomsky interview:

You’ve often quoted George Kennan, the venerated State Department official, in his famous 1948 memo: “We have 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population…. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity.” That was 1948. I was interested to discover that two years later, he made a statement about Latin America to the effect of, “The protection of our raw materials” in the rest of the world, particularly in Latin America, would trump concern over what he called “police repression.”
 


Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,929
Twitter
No
The most alarming statement, and probably the truest, on any political forum would be that 'it is pretty lucky for the 5% that the other 95% don't actually realise in any great numbers'.

Everyone has dreams of being among the 5% so rarely stop to wonder why that figure is so low.
 

joe sod

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2005
Messages
14
Its always been like that and has actually improved alot compared to when the royal families and aristocracy ruled everything. In the nineteenth century it would have been less than 1% that controlled the wealth of the world. Then the other 99% were in genuine poverty and were actually starving in many cases ala the famines here and in tzarist russia . The 5% that own the wealth today are alot different to the 5% of even 20 years ago because of the rise of the tech billionaires and the influence they now have (that is actually the bigger issue). Its also the case that an average earner today has alot better life than the aristocrats of the nineteenth century because of the advancement of technology
 

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
903
Its always been like that and has actually improved alot compared to when the royal families and aristocracy ruled everything. In the nineteenth century it would have been less than 1% that controlled the wealth of the world. Then the other 99% were in genuine poverty and were actually starving in many cases ala the famines here and in tzarist russia . The 5% that own the wealth today are alot different to the 5% of even 20 years ago because of the rise of the tech billionaires and the influence they now have (that is actually the bigger issue). Its also the case that an average earner today has alot better life than the aristocrats of the nineteenth century because of the advancement of technology
The average earner in Europe etc. is fine but there are huge numbers of impoverished countries and citizens in many parts of the World. This impoverishment is ultimately propping up the economy of the US e.g. the diversion of much needed money to purchase arms from American companies.
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,394
Twitter
No
OP

It's not clear which other 5% should dominate instead?

Usually "rulers" are there because they are better organised. Organised armies, money, and bling.

Then there's the mugabe formula for personal financial freedom:

 

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
903
OP

It's not clear which other 5% should dominate instead?

Usually "rulers" are there because they are better organised. Organised armies, money, and bling.

Then there's the mugabe formula for personal financial freedom:

Would be much better if no other country emerged as the next superpower to replace the Americans, better if countries stopped building their wealth by heaping misery on others. In the long-term though, it will be Asian countries who gain a much greater share of wealth than they currently have. In 50 years time, the EU may be like Italy - a nice place to visit but no longer an influence.
 

Lonewolfe

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2011
Messages
16,987
Nev
Interesting interview by Noam Chomsky here: Noam Chomsky: Trump Is Trying to Exploit Tension With Iran for 2020

As with previous World empires, basic concepts such as national independence and control over your own raw resources and territory are anathema to continued dominance by a superpower. The US represents less than 5% of the World's population but its corporations own about 50% of the World's output and its Government wants a veto on the actions of other countries. Their dominance has started to end with countries starting to ignore them but how slow and painful will the ending be? Here is a quote from the Chomsky interview:

You’ve often quoted George Kennan, the venerated State Department official, in his famous 1948 memo: “We have 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population…. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity.” That was 1948. I was interested to discover that two years later, he made a statement about Latin America to the effect of, “The protection of our raw materials” in the rest of the world, particularly in Latin America, would trump concern over what he called “police repression.”
Never. It's a natural hierarchy.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,216
Twitter
Deiscirt
Interesting interview by Noam Chomsky here: Noam Chomsky: Trump Is Trying to Exploit Tension With Iran for 2020

As with previous World empires, basic concepts such as national independence and control over your own raw resources and territory are anathema to continued dominance by a superpower. The US represents less than 5% of the World's population but its corporations own about 50% of the World's output and its Government wants a veto on the actions of other countries. Their dominance has started to end with countries starting to ignore them but how slow and painful will the ending be? Here is a quote from the Chomsky interview:

You’ve often quoted George Kennan, the venerated State Department official, in his famous 1948 memo: “We have 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population…. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity.” That was 1948. I was interested to discover that two years later, he made a statement about Latin America to the effect of, “The protection of our raw materials” in the rest of the world, particularly in Latin America, would trump concern over what he called “police repression.”
Can you explain how America has a "veto on the actions of other countries" in a way other super powers don't. Example China. Can you explain how America demonstrates its opposition to countries having control over their own resources or territory? Has it occurred to you that US corporations are responsible for the large share because of American entrepreneurial and technological might? Do you have examples of America's largest companies as having somehow pillaged some non-American company to usurp its business.

Because the above just looks to me like the same old Chomskian anyone-but-us shtick.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,216
Twitter
Deiscirt
The average earner in Europe etc. is fine but there are huge numbers of impoverished countries and citizens in many parts of the World.
There has never in human history been fewer of them. Awful isn't it?

This impoverishment is ultimately propping up the economy of the US e.g. the diversion of much needed money to purchase arms from American companies.
How does the existence of people with no money to spend "prop up" American companies? You did a better job at disguising your gormless anti-Americanism in the OP. But the mask has slipped here and your agenda is on full display.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,216
Twitter
Deiscirt
money to purchase arms from American companies.
Some day this will sink in to the drones stuck on repeat: Rubber tires are more important to the US export economy than arms.
 

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
903
Can you explain how America has a "veto on the actions of other countries" in a way other super powers don't. Example China. Can you explain how America demonstrates its opposition to countries having control over their own resources or territory? Has it occurred to you that US corporations are responsible for the large share because of American entrepreneurial and technological might? Do you have examples of America's largest companies as having somehow pillaged some non-American company to usurp its business.

Because the above just looks to me like the same old Chomskian anyone-but-us shtick.
You should read a bit of World news.

Let’s start with Turkey where you make a purchase we don’t like and we won’t do business with you: https://www.ft.com/content/d75f8baa-a8cc-11e9-b6ee-3cdf3174eb89

Let’s move to Okinawa where the US refuse to leave: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/12/tens-of-thousands-rally-for-removal-of-us-base-from-japanese-island.html

The ban on Huawei and arrest of senior executive on US behalf: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/econographics/my-way-or-the-huawei-5g-at-the-center-of-us-china-strategic-competition

The pursuit of Assange: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/10/politics/julian-assange-us-extradition-request/index.html

US involvement in regime change: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change

When will they leave Diego Garcia: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/25/asia/uk-chagos-mauritius-intl/index.html

CIA assasinations: https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cia-has-attempted-to-assassinate-50-foreign-leaders-including-chavez/5326864

Grabbing control of oil in Venezuela: https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/John-Bolton-Admits-US-backed-Coup-in-Venezuela-Is-About-Oil-Not-Democracy-20190130-0020.html

Invade and then charge full costs multiplied exponentially against the natural resources of the country US invaded: https://newrepublic.com/minutes/152389/trump-reluctantly-gives-dream-plundering-iraqs-oil
 
  • Like
Reactions: edg

Apple in Eden

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,674
The most alarming statement, and probably the truest, on any political forum would be that 'it is pretty lucky for the 5% that the other 95% don't actually realise in any great numbers'.

Everyone has dreams of being among the 5% so rarely stop to wonder why that figure is so low.
As my father used to say you can shove the red flag up your atse I've got my foremans job at last.
 

Apple in Eden

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,674
Just protecting the security and economic interests of themselves and allies. Now check our exports and see just how important the US is to our little rock then bugger off and moan elsewhere.
 

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
903
Just protecting the security and economic interests of themselves and allies. Now check our exports and see just how important the US is to our little rock then bugger off and moan elsewhere.
All about you and yours is it? Some day maybe you may find concern for those exploited to keep you happy.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,216
Twitter
Deiscirt
You should read a bit of World news.

Let’s start with Turkey where you make a purchase we don’t like and we won’t do business with you: https://www.ft.com/content/d75f8baa-a8cc-11e9-b6ee-3cdf3174eb89

The example of this veto is one where the country in question went ahead and did something the US didn't want them to do anyway. We're off to a bad start.


The US base is there with the approval of the government. This is akin to saying US is refusing to stop using Shannon as a refueling base because even though they have the permission to do so, a bunch of head-bangers and professional malcontents protested their presence. Two attempts so far. Two fails.

The ban on Huawei is down to the backdoors the Chinese government builds into the system so as to be able to intercept messaging. It is fundamentally not secure. Which is why communist Vietnam has also banned it from their infrastructure.


Assange is a (very smelly) criminal whose recklessness in pursuit of self-glorification has put an unknown number of people in danger. I look forward to him facing justice.

What are you talking about here? Iraq? What has that got to do with your OP? Nothing. You're just flailing around with your USA = BAD laundry list. So far, it's not stacking up well.


The Island is administered by the UK. They haven't asked them to leave. So far we're holding steady at zero successful attempts to back up the roofless nonsense in your OP. Maybe you're saving the best till last?
Ah yes. Global Research. Russian-backed purveyors of anti-western, anti-vax and anti-capitalist conspiracy for over a decade. How embarrassing. For you.

This story has been debunked and you'll not find it in any reputable media outlet. Your admonishment that I read more news is starting to look a bit silly. They probably have a piece on the "electro-magnetic-pulse" the capitalists used to take down their powergrid this week too?

Invade and then charge full costs multiplied exponentially against the natural resources of the country US invaded: https://newrepublic.com/minutes/152389/trump-reluctantly-gives-dream-plundering-iraqs-oil
How much oil did the USA "take" from Iraq? Simple question. (Hint: None).

Anyway, well done you for doing a far better job than I ever could to unmask your agenda here. Ignorant, moonbattery motivated by virulent anti-Americanism you can't even provide coherent reason for when given all the time and space you could need.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,216
Twitter
Deiscirt
So, here's the list of questions I asked based on your OP which you still have no answer to.

1. Can you explain how America has a "veto on the actions of other countries" in a way other super powers don't. Example China.
2. Can you explain how America demonstrates its opposition to countries having control over their own resources or territory?
3. Do you have examples of America's largest companies as having somehow pillaged some non-American company to usurp its business.
4. How does the existence of people with no money to spend "prop up" American companies?
 

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
903
So, here's the list of questions I asked based on your OP which you still have no answer to.

1. Can you explain how America has a "veto on the actions of other countries" in a way other super powers don't. Example China.
2. Can you explain how America demonstrates its opposition to countries having control over their own resources or territory?
3. Do you have examples of America's largest companies as having somehow pillaged some non-American company to usurp its business.
4. How does the existence of people with no money to spend "prop up" American companies?
You need to turn the light on to understand my answers. For example the problem with Turkey buying planes off Russia is not that they went ahead and bought them but rather that the US tried to force them not to. Reflect on the difference.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,216
Twitter
Deiscirt
You need to turn the light on to understand my answers. For example the problem with Turkey buying planes off Russia is not that they went ahead and bought them but rather that the US tried to force them not to. Reflect on the difference.
Your claim was that the US has a veto on the actions of other countries. You've failed to provide any proof of the claim. It wasn't planes from Russia, it was a missile system. The planes were to be from the US.
 

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
903
Your claim was that the US has a veto on the actions of other countries. You've failed to provide any proof of the claim. It wasn't planes from Russia, it was a missile system. The planes were to be from the US.
The US vetoes the behaviour of other countries in many ways. In recent years economic sanctions are the most visible method that they are using. Historically and still today organising a coup to remove democratically elected governments who are not their puppets was and still is a favourite. Military interventions is another well used method. If you cannot understand how these methods work, then you need to visit the people who are at the suffering end of these actions. What is new of late is their attempt to prevent other countries competing with them, as the US goes into decline the bullying starts in earnest.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,216
Twitter
Deiscirt
I am trying to help you show that you aren't just engaging in another "I hate America" information-free screed by inviting you for the third time to

"... explain how America has a 'veto on the actions of other countries' in a way other super powers don't. "

Your OP is an unfocused re-heated list of complaints straight out of the looney left/stop-the-war playbook.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top