austin-murphy-the-triumph-of-evil

250 THE TRIUMPH OF EVIL
power), and although Chapter 2 documents the fact that communism
is superior to capitalism in virtually all respects fo r virtually all people
except the super rich, most are still swayed by the very successful USA
propaganda to the contrary. 1
In addition, the USA propaganda is so powerful that many ignore the
fact that the USA itself only advocates "free market" capitalism when
it is to its own advantage to do so. For instance, the USA itself was historically
one of the most protectionist countries in the world (Bairoch,
1993), and its protectionist unfair trade strategy (combined with its successful
imperialist policies) greatly facilitated its wealth accumulation
(Smith, 2000). Now that it has accumulated such a large amount of
capital from plundering the world for so long (through both trade and
military conquests, which complemented one another), the USA currently
advocates "free markets." In particular, the USA's higher productivity
per worker (relative to that of most workers of less developed
countries, whose lack of loot results in them having far less capital
and technological equipment with which to operate) enables USA corporations
to be extremely competitive in most industries (insofar as
the greater mechanization of production in the USA enables it to have
lower overall costs even with much higher hourly labor costs). Nevertheless,
even today, whenever USA industries are threatened by foreign
imports, the USA government either subsidizes its domestic indus·
try (Matthews, 1999) or engages in all kinds of protectionist policies,
including imposing quotas, tariffs, and artificial technical standards
against foreign imports in many different industries like citrus, sugar,
meat processing, steel, and textiles (Moffett, 1997).
There is therefore a great deal of hypocrisy in the USA advocating
free trade at the same time that it itself employs protectionism, includ·
ing against imports from countries that are more oriented to free mar·
kets than the USA and that have larger balance of payments problems
(Hilsenrath, 1999). Such unfair trading practices are engaged in not
only by the USA but also by other wealthy countries (like Westem
Europe and Japan), and they are typically directed against even the
poorest countries (whose income per capita is less than 1/60 that of the
richest countries), which are thereby hindered from earning the export
income they need to finance growth and attract foreign investment and
technology (Economist, 1992). Although the WTO is supposed to be a
CHAPTER 7
worldwide organization that represents the world in terms of promoting
and enforcing fair trade practices, the WTO is widely acknowledged to
be run by the USA, albeit with some minor input from its Western European
and Japanese allies in worldwide exploitation (Cooper, 1999). One
USA think tank itself has stated, "There is a widespread view abroad
that globalization is being forced on the world by American corporations,
that globalization is Americanization" (Washington Post, 1999).
25 1
Besides serving as a very valuable tool for the USA to propagandize
the superiority of its capitalist system (and motivate its globalization
to the USA's advantage), the USA's Cold War victory now enables the
USA to more easily slaughter people of countries that refuse to submit
to USA wishes and demands (such as nations refusing to submit to
capitalist globalization), as there is little hope of outside help from
a more benevolent, balancing power like the Soviet Union. Although
there is some competition for economic power in some regions from
other exploitative capitalist countries such as those of Western Europe
(Griswold, l999a), the USA's strategy for world domination was con­
finned in a February 18, 1992 policy statement issued by the Pentagon
in conjunction with the National Security Council and in consultation
with the USA President (Tyler, 1992). Reflecting on "the fundamen­
tally new situation which has been created by the collapse of the Soviet
Union ... and the discrediting of Communism as an ideology," the Pen­
tagon document states, "our strategy must now refocus on precluding
the emergence of any potential future global competitor," and "we will
retain the pre-eminent responsibility for addressing selectively those
�ngs which threaten not only our interests, but those of our allies or
friends, or which could seriously unsettle international relations" (New
York nmes, 1992). Secretary of Defense William Perry spoke even more
to the point in 1997, "Since we are the only superpower in the world,
every country is in our national interest" (lAC, 1998a), and there are
now �SA occupation troops and military bases in more than half the
COUntries of the world (Catalinotto, 1997).
The USA's world dominance is often subtly referred to as a man­
datory internationalism which however is very one-way insofar as
Americans "find it quit� natura'l to press�e the Japanese to make _ life
� for their consumers the South Koreans to abandon crony capltal­
tsrn, the Russians to coll;ct taxes" (Grunwald, 2000), but it goes with-