austin-murphy-the-triumph-of-evil

258 THE TRIUMPH OF EVIL
they were before the creation of the modem capitalist state (Chatter­
jee, 1997). Given that there are numerous billionaires, each of whom is
richer than many countries (Foerstel, 2000), such a prediction is not all
that far-fetched.
There are also serious movements to privatize the police/judiciaU
prison system (Reynolds, 1994). Prisons in the USA are already in the
process of being privatized in order to create a virtual slave market
of nearly two million prisoners that corporations can exploit (Phillips,
2000). The privatization of the police system is also proceeding quickly,
with private police or security guards outnumbering public police by 3
to 1 in the USA (Reynolds, 1994). In addition, the private law enforce­
ment system is bolstered by incredible Orwellian technology, which per­
mits the private employment of a massive number of"security" cameras
that not only spy on people in private buildings, but also increasingly in
public areas (Ramirez, 1998). At work alone, 20 million employees are
watched with cameras by the corporate "Big Brother," 5 billion phone
calls are recorded annually, and employee email is read by 36% of all
employers (Dowd, 1997). Moreover, while technology has also long
provided the capacity to photograph people almost anywhere with sat­
ellite cameras (Zimmerman, 1988), technology now exists for cameras
to see through buildings and clothing (Hansen, 1997). Even if controls
are placed on government misuse of this technology, the potential for
unregulated private abuse is enormous.
Similarly, although government spokespeople are very effective in
spreading the message of global capitalism (Smith, 2000), and although
the CIA itself was one of the biggest publishers and disseminators of
pro-capitalist "information" (more appropriately labeled misinforma­
tion or disinformation) in the world during the Cold War (Schulz, 1982),
the USA's capitalist propaganda machine is not at all dependent on
the USA government. For instance, instead of quoting capitalist gov­
ernment leaders for opinions and descriptions of events, the capitalist
media can provide more analysis and reporting direct from corporate
executives and other capitalist leaders (Smith, 2000), whose opinions on
events the media already accepts and reports as fa ct (Phillips, 2000). In
addition, many of the CIA's prior publishing activities can now be spon­
sored by think-tank institutions that are well financed by rich conserva­
tives to spread the capitalist gospel (Strobel and Peterson, 1999). Cor-
CHAPTER 7 259
porations already use public relations (PR) firms extensively to ensure
that public opinion is manipulated to their liking (Phillips, 2000).
Moreover, much of the USA's propaganda continues to be perpetu­
ated by the same mainstream press whose ownership is even more heav­
ily concentrated in the hands of anticommunist rich owners than it was
in the Cold War times (Foerstel, 2000). In particular, Jess than 20 medial
entertainment conglomerates currently control the bulk of the world­
wide "information, entertainment, and mass culture" (Flounders, 2000),
with Time Warner, Disney, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., Viacom,
Sony, Seagram At&T/Liberty Media, Bertelsmann, and GE being the
dominant players in the USA (McChesney, 2000). In the USA, the
most recent increase in media concentration was made possible by the
deregulation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which the media
elite requested to be passed by USA politicians who themselves are
dependent on the media for their popularity and reelection (Phillips,
2000). Such deregulation of the media has also occurred elsewhere
under the pressure of capitalist globalization. For instance, the lAC
(1998a) reports, "In Eastern European countries, the first institutions
to undergo the transition to privatization seem to be the media, both
� ownership and content. Western capital helps to subsidize the media
m Poland, Hungary, Romania, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia. The
political views which are reported are virtually indistinguishable from
those of the U.S. media. Blitz, a newspaper funded by German capital,
appeared in Serbia on September 16, 1996. The paper, which at nine­
teen cents is the cheapest in the country, sells raffle tickets and gives
away cars. Within a month after its first printing Blitz had a circulation
0�10?,000. This process of moving toward a pro-capitalist, pro-imperialist
tdeological monopoly is described straight-faced by U.S. leaders
�the other hand, when confronted with an anti-USA media, NATO
actually come in with occupation troops (as in Yugoslavia) and
and media commentators as the 'democratization of Eastern Europe."'
closed
such undesirable media as a cynical means of "silencing broad­
� to encourage freedom of speech" (Parenti, 2000). As one journal­
Ill SUinmari zed when referring to censorship in the USA itself, "In the
era orus
.
tn" . .
.
h
d" 1
too
· · ump , ts even one alternative, somettmes ra tea , votce
lllany?" (Bernstein, 2000)
The Pro - USA/pro-capitalism bias in this concentrated media is often