Or perhaps he could have said: "May you not get the government that you leftist morons so richly deserve".

Facts have to be faced. Many people around the world live in the delusional state that they can get rich and happy by stealing from other people, or by preventing clever and enterprising people from working, or whatever. Look at the recent comment thread on this blog that I initiated about free trade. Look at how some of the commenters, even quite bright ones, believe in the ideas of mercantilism. Now imagine what it is like in places like Ecuador.

Milton Friedman is dead, and we have a lot of work to do to spread his ideas, I am afraid.

Mr Correa proposes to re write the constitution, didn't the USA do that with all their laws on terrorism? Not a bad thing then. Mr Correa is now president of a country with roughly half the people living in poverty. Does anyone really think he'll last any serious length of time in office if his actions increases the amount ot those living in poverty? Remember, there hasn't been a president who has served a full term in Ecuador in quite a while.

If only it were as simple as that. Unfortunately, many developing or undeveloped nations that have agreed to free-trade with the US have ended up with sweatshops, unfair-trade, corporate wage-slavery, ecological disaster, and McDonalds (where the management have their christmas lunch).

Why is everyone so adamant that one side or the other of this bi-partisan approach (that we've suffered for some 50 years in this modern post-war world) works?

It quite f'ing obviously doesn't.

Be original, stick your neck out, THINK OF SOMETHING ELSE.

Or just keep playing air on a g-string like some brainwashed japanese schoolgirl while the auditorium burns down around your blocked ears.

Anyway, the world financial powers have very different plans for us. You think a socialist pro-UN (for a start, eh?) government in south america makes any difference? Wake up.

In fact, Paul Marks, referring to the people of Ecuador as 'sub-human scum' - no matter indirectly - from your middle-brow JP Morgan administrators desk-job in a heading article filed under 'Latin American Affairs' makes me want to fucking puke.

I bet behind closed doors you clink sherry glasses and toast bio-warfare mass-de-population. Think of something without your parents brain (or their wallet) and stop reading the fucking sunday times you twat.

I'd accept that sort of thing as a comment but otherwise I'm done with this blog. It was fun for a while. See you in hell.

. Unfortunately, many developing or undeveloped nations that have agreed to free-trade with the US have ended up with sweatshops, unfair-trade, corporate wage-slavery, ecological disaster, and McDonalds (where the management have their christmas lunch).

Anti-globalista boilerplate.

Close the door on the way out. I am sure Paul is thrilled to hear he works for JP Morgan. The beers are on you, Paul!

Anyway, the world financial powers have very different plans for us.

Da Jooo0oooosssssss!!!!11!!11!

I'm not sure the Ecuadorians are any more 'Subhuman scum" that, say, the English or the French or any other nation.

The usually vote to "throw out the bums", i.e. throw out the people in power, and change the governing party. Not a bad tactic, in principle.
One could wish the English had as much sense.

"Anti-globalist boilerplate." Foolish words. I'm afraid your second-rate public-school conservative politics won't wash with Jerusalem, MIT, and the IMF. Grow up. Anyway, I'm off. Find somewhere where people discuss real issues and credible solutions without slagging off people less fortunate than themselves (though, obviously, considerably wiser). [door closed].

I'm afraid your second-rate public-school conservative politics won't wash with Jerusalem, MIT, and the IMF.

I did not go to public school. I am libertarian, not a conservative.

I am also interested in your choice of locales: Jerusalem, MIT and IMF. Yep, I can smell where you are coming from. A really lovely smell.

I don’t like the ‘subhuman scum’ phrase either. Voting to be ruled by a socialist is surely a mistake, but then erring is human rather than subhuman and –if I remember correctly- this is one of the main reasons why we need competitive markets.
We should also remember de Soto’s(Link) point in this case. He modelled his theories on Latin America and, if he is right, markets there are often inaccessible to the poor. This is not an argument for socialism of course, it is merely an argument for making markets accessible. Having said all that, if Latin Americans become convinced that the kind of market structure they have become disillusioned with is the only one possible they may well be put off permanently.

His handle said it all really
Fangs for the comments Emptymirror
Now back in your box, dawn is approching.

In fact, Paul Marks, referring to the people of Ecuador as 'sub-human scum' - no matter indirectly - from your middle-brow JP Morgan administrators desk-job in a heading article filed under 'Latin American Affairs' makes me want to fucking puke.

Whilst I realise you no doubt think you are sure Paul Marks is a well off middle-brow guy with a desk job (because after all, how could someone working as, say, a security guard, POSSIBLY have such views against their 'class interest' (as I am sure you would see it)). Sorry, emptymirror, do not pass go, do not collect £100... did it ever occur to you that Paul Marks might take that view because he has the education and intelligence to have thought this through and is neither poisoned by Marxist thinking thus does he refuse to scorn thieves just because they are poor and living in Ecuador.

First "sub human scum" (which I was careful to put into quotation marks - with the rest of the "speech") - a reaction to the endless flattery that candidates toss at voters (turning false praise into insults is a long tradition in British humour - although I should have guessed that it would not be understood) - the "wise" voters, the "noble" people (and so on and so on). Having a cadidate openly insult the voters (rather than offer a hidden insult by using terms of false phaise) would make a nice change.

Yes emptymirror - I am poor (and have always been - and will never be anything else). However, I am not as poor as many of the people of Ecuador are - their poverty being due to such things as the high inflation of the past, the historical instablity of the country (both political and geological), and the endless regulations (such as the price controls that cover the main products of what the "Daily Telegraph" absurdly called "free market" Ecuador).

As for "theemptymirror" - well, no, free trade agreements (although they are normally not really free trade agreements - just slightly less unfree trade agreeements) with the United States do not lead to lower wages and all the other bad things you think they do.

In the United States (as Johnathan Pearce pointed out) many people believe that trading with nations that have lower wages will make American wages lower, it is even more absurd for people in a low wage country to believe that trading with people in a high wage country will make their wages even lower (I would have thought that even an academic could not be such a cretin - oh dear I have used another insulting word).

As for the American laws on terrorism rewriting the American Constitution. Of course the United States Constitution has been under threat for many decades - for example F.D.R. got rid of (after a long struggle) the idea that Federal government could only spend money on certain things (things specifically listed in the Constitution) by treating the OBJECTIVE of the powers granted to Congress "the general welfare" as a POWER IN ITS OWN RIGHT (i.e. any spending was O.K. as long as it was for "the general welfare).

On regulations the F.D.R. Administration also (again after a struggle) managed to transform a limited regulation power into a power to pass regulations on most aspects of life.

This remains the case today. As for the terrorism laws - actually the Supreme Court has ruled against their application to American citizens (ruleing that just because President Lincoln did varrious things in the Civil War does not make them constitutional). The Supreme Court has also made rulings against some aspects of the laws even as they apply to noncitizens - hence the laws have had to be changed.

As for the desire to rewrite the Constitution of Ecuador - it is a Chevez type move. Not quite "one person, one vote, but only one election" but close to it -as the President Elect clearly wishes to make sure the system will be so rigged that he (like Chevez) can not be removed from office by peaceful means.

As for my own opinion of the people of Ecuador - no I do not think they are "subhuman scum", but nor do I think that they are "clever", "wise", "noble" or all the other things that the defeated "Banana King" called them (I used one extreme of language to counter another - neither is true).

In the words of H.L. M. "democracy is the system by which people get to ask for what they want and they deserve to get it - good and hard".

[humbly] Yes, London Libbo: I agree - I'm sorry to have cast the second stone.

I just don't think there's anything progressive - particularly in the current climate - about laissez-faire economics or the phrase 'subhuman scum' when referring to south american people and/or their politics of choice.

As regards my locale, Mr. Pearce, I'm honestly not quite sure what you mean. If you are referring to the smell of anti-semitism, I concur only inasfar as referring to Ecuadorians as 'subhuman scum' for voting with a socialist conscience (if nothing else).

World financial powers are a reality, my friend: whether they are Jewish or Arab owned.

Have any of you read American Hegemony or ANY Chomsky? Do you not believe he even has HALF of anything important to say? [insert Hugo Chavez quip here].

It's good to see S.America standing up for itself. Let's hope the same will eventually happen in Africa, the middle east, and SE Asia.

Mulilateral sovereign nations working together is a start.

In a similar vein, I would point out that someone who approves the use or sanction of violence to take things from somebody else is at least a thief.

Subhuman? Doubtful. But innocent? Hardly.

All in all, this post made my day, and I would leave "subhuman" just where it is for the rhetorical flourish.

[humbly] Yes, London Libbo: I agree - I'm sorry to have cast the second stone.

I just don't think there's anything progressive - particularly in the current climate - about laissez-faire economics or the phrase 'subhuman scum' when referring to south american people and/or their politics of choice.

As regards my locale, Mr. Pearce, I'm honestly not quite sure what you mean. If you are referring to the smell of anti-semitism, I concur only inasfar as referring to Ecuadorians as 'subhuman scum' for voting with a socialist conscience (if nothing else).

World financial powers are a reality, my friend: whether they are Jewish or Arab owned.

Have any of you read American Hegemony or ANY Chomsky? Do you not believe he even has HALF of anything important to say? [insert Hugo Chavez quip here].

It's good to see S.America standing up for itself. Let's hope the same will eventually happen in Africa, the middle east, and SE Asia.

Mulilateral sovereign nations working together is a start.

I'm afraid your second-rate public-school conservative politics won't wash with Jerusalem, MIT, and the IMF

rinse and repeat

Da Jooo0oooosssssss!!!!11!!11!

Great post, Paul. Fully agree.

And a hearty welcome to the foaming imbeciles. You're always good for a laugh. Looks like Johnathan's enjoying himself.

I just don't think there's anything progressive - particularly in the current climate - about laissez-faire economics or the phrase 'subhuman scum' when referring to south american people and/or their politics of choice.

And if their 'politics of choice' is statist theft, then they deserve all the poverty they get.

Have any of you read American Hegemony or ANY Chomsky?

I have probably read everything Chomsky has ever published and I regard him as the most intellectually dishonest writer since, well, Karl Marx.

However he is not without value as he is as dependable as a compass that always points south, so if one is simply too busy to fully explore some issue, simply taking the diametric opposite position to Chomsky is a quick and easy short cut to finding the objective truth in many things :-)

Where does Perry keep the troll spray? We need a button.

CFM

I'd accept that sort of thing as a comment but otherwise I'm done with this blog. It was fun for a while. See you in hell.

Anyway, I'm off. Find somewhere where people discuss real issues and credible solutions without slagging off people less fortunate than themselves (though, obviously, considerably wiser). [door closed].

Well then GO allready!

Libertarians, end your futile quest. Discard your hollow contradictory rationale. "Haven't you read any Chomsky???" is the insurmountable retort.

Mulilateral sovereign nations

Doesn't matter. The educated and skilled middle class will flee to the U.S. We will get hard working engineers, doctors and businessmen who fled elite socialism and superstitious peasants. If the leftist idiots only knew that skilled, self motivated people are the higher value and that basic commodities are available world wide at very low margins of profit. Let them keep their minerals. With leftist management techniques they will soon lose money on every ton or barrel, but make it up on quantity.

They will have a soon dishearten populace, a la 1968 Cuba, Cambodia, Russia, Iran. People have to learn some how. Reality is a painstaking teacher.

Rinse, lather, repeat.

Besides, now that the Cubans will soon dragging lefties behind their 1958 Chevy’s, the lefties needs new places to go and be fawned over by locals and take digital pictures to show at their next meetup.

James,

"Some deep idiocy is afoot. Marvel in it. "

Like the flickering and glowing reflections of flames cast upwards on the undersides of low, Chicago clouds by a solitary self immolation. Strangely attractive but passing never the less, and signifying nothing..

Have any of you read American Hegemony or ANY Chomsky? Do you not believe he even has HALF of anything important to say? [insert Hugo Chavez quip here].

Yes, I have read enough to know the man is an intellectual charlatan of the first order. If you believe anything he writes, then you are beyond hope. He peddles the sort of blame-America-first nonsense that would shame a 6th former.

I thought you said you were leaving. Please do so and stop wasting our bandwidth.

I like the bit about "public school". Actually I did go to a "public school" - if we use the American definition of the term.

I went to a government schools in Kettering (one of which has since been shut down).

These local schools did not even teach me to read. An old women (Williams by name) in a local village taught me to read.

I recently passed by the house that the lady used to live in and said to the person I was walking with "that was were I was taught to read as a boy".

"So you are local" was the reply.

This will not be understood by people who have no knowledge of British humour.

Geez, for someone who was leaving, that guy had more exit lines than a dying soprano in a Verdi opera.

Empty something, all right, but it wasn't just a mirror.

A bold prediction---no matter what happens to Ecuador, or Bolivia, or Venezuela, or Cuba, anything bad will be the fault of the evil American imperialists, just as all bad things everywhere have always been their fault, except for all that stuff the jews did, of course.

As the father of two very teenage teenagers at the moment, if I had any sighs left in me, I would sigh.

Actually, I feel very sympathetic to emptybrainpan. Knowing everything is such a burden. It must be so exhausting to have everything all figured out, and then nobody will listen.

Life is so unfair.

I'm an italian journalist (for conservative newspaper L'Opinione, Libero etc).
Excuse me for the O.T., but in Italy and UK we are in a bad situation, after the murder of Alexander Litvinenko. In Italy the Commissione Mitrokhin (a Parlamient structure to investigate about the KGB crimes in Italy) is criminalized by the leftist newspapers. Mr Prodi (and more politicians) was accused by Gerald Batten to be a communist sponsor (you can find the Batten word in european Union brussels parlament at yuouTube adress: search "Batten & Prodi"). Now NO ONE italian newpaper writes nothing about this (It's like if G.W. Bush would be accused to be an old russian spy... and all american media be silent!). Litvinenko, the ex russian officer is dead, and the men of italian Mitrokhin Commission are accused by the leftist media! See also this post: http://leguerrecivili.splinder.com/1164818341#10069209
Tanks, Paolo

Hmm. For all the name calling and apparent certainty there's few facts and figures here. Or examples. I'm not exactly sure what the point was. Did anyone actually make a point? If this is political debate blogging-style, I might have to start watching TV again.

Silly Someone who isn't Emptymirror,

Just because you come on here, flashing your undergraduate doctrinaire-left boilerplate (thankyou, Johnathan), doesn't guarantee you a discussion over your juvenile contentions - which have been convincingly disproven over the years by liberal philosophers and the effects of the policies they've devised.

Personally, I don't debate you here for the exact same reason why I wouldn't debate a small child when it feels it's entitled to some insignificant privilege at my expense.

Have any of you read American Hegemony or ANY Chomsky?

Emptymirror:

I recommend that you read Russil Wvong's review of Chomsky, and particularly the section on misrepresentation. (Admission: Russil is a personal friend.)

Russil is, apparently, one of the few people to bother following up on the references and quotes in some of Chomsky's books, and what he discovers is pretty shocking for anyone who -- as I did -- read Chomsky believing that he was a credible academic.

Don't get me wrong, Chomsky's work on linguistics is, by all accounts, unparalleled. But he should have stayed in that field.

With a record cold spell upon my community in Canada, I've had the opportunity to enjoy my favourite sweater. It's an alpaca sweater I bartered for at a public market in Otavalo, Ecuador a few years ago. It is my favourite not only because of its luxurious comfort and warmth (almost too warm as I can only wear it on the coldest of days), or its artistic quality (I've received many complements), but because for me it is a symbol of a successful public market established largely by the Quechua Indians in Ecuador.

I was thoroughly impressed by how well the Quechua had organized not only the markets, but the local hotels, transportation and other amenities necessary to draw in the dollar-laden tourists a few hours into the Andes from Quito. It is one of the finest craft markets I've ever visited in Latin America, or anywhere else. In creating and selling a rich assortment of hand crafts, they have developed not only an effective supply chain, but more importantly a (partially at least) self-funding means of cultural preservation. (I should add: the enterprise is not exclusive to the Quechua).

I very much hope the outcome of this election doesn't damage the prospects of this excellent market. As I understand it, the Quechua as a group wield a certain amount of political clout, yet I don't know where their position is in all of this.

PS Perhaps emptymirror you can one day travel to Ecuador and explain to the clever Quechua how misguided they are, and perhaps convince them of their victimhood. You know, the sweatshops and all.

Favorite Chomski rhetorical tactics, the 600 word run sentence, and the common ability to find a scrap of paper, amongst billions of pages, by some obscure official that could be interpreted as advocating something. For instance finding a State Department sub-clerk in the Monrovia, Liberia embassy that on the back of a manila envelope mentioned 'ties' of the Queen of England, opium and the CIA. For Chomski this proof positive.

Another Chomski technique if you mention specifics, he dismisses that as aberrations and his general assertion is still true. If you should make a general assertion, he mentions a few specific aberration that, in his mind, annul your generalization. For Chomski, heads he wins, tails you lose.

Lastly, I love a conspiracy........story. Listening to Chomski is like sitting next to a warm fire. You can just feel yourself shutting down in an all-embracing suspension of critical thinking.

Not that I have read/listened to ol'Nome, I was always a S.I. Hayakawa man myself.

The comment from the Italian gentleman was, if correct, important.

Not a single Italian newspaper printing the accusations (by the member of the European "Parliament" - a man whose constituent was just murdered) that the Prime Minister of Italy (and former President of the European Commission) was an agent of influence for the K.G.B.-F.S.B.

As the accusation was made in the European "Parliament" there could be no question of libel action for any newspaper that simply reported what was said. So (if it is true that no newspaper is reporting the story and no television station broadcasting it), then there is some other factor at work.

My guess would be that it is the "chilling factor" of Prodi (and the other leftists - including several communists) being in power.

A report of their K.G.B. links might lead to a "tax audit" or other such action.

It will be the same in Ecuador. I should guess that when the President Elect becomes President (and starts getting his own people in key positions, writing a new constititution and so on) any newspaper or radio station that says things he really does not like will find themselves with tax or regulation problems.

Remember, to the left, freedom is a "positive" thing (the "well being of the people") it is not some "negative" govenment noninterventionism.

As for Britain - if there has been reporting of the Prodi story, I have not seen it.

For example the "Financial Times" reported that evil pro C.I.A. Italian intelligence agency chiefs had made charges against Mr Prodi (and that this was good reason to purge these evil proAmerican people) - but it was careful NOT to say what these charges were.

This is no surprise given how many K.G.B. contacts have worked for the Financial Times over the years.

Of course the President Elect of Ecuador learned his antiAmericanism in Belgium and American universities (odd how a man who was supposedly so poor could afford to study in two foreign countries), but the Italian establishment (that controls most of the universities and the courts) is much the same.

Part of the long march through the institutions suggested by A. Gramsci.

If low skill low wage American jobs go elsewhere in the hemisphere because of NAFTA and CAFTA, so be it. What's the lesson? America, your labor force is worth more than those low skill low wage jobs, and those low wages are too high in the USA. [Other country to where the job fled], you are finding out exactly what your labor force is worth. Congratulations on moving up a step from subsistence farming and the state farm. This is an important step in your development until you learn about political and economic freedom and the rule of law and entrepreneurship well enough to take more steps.

Message to the unemployed American worker whose job has fled: time to get a new job, or to get more training to get new skills and get a new job. Here, the government will help you out with that. (WIA)

Message to the newly employed Latin American: congratulations. Your raise will become effective when you are.

The Latin American has more purchasing power, and the American has lower prices at the Megalo Mart. Everybody wins.

A lot of Americans have suspicions about Latin America...and their obstinate choices for socialism, statism, against freedom and trade. The WASPy type Americans blame something defective about Spanish and/or Catholic culture, ignoring the intense Masonic and Marxist influences in LA.

Still, they are free to choose to shoot themselves in the foot. I'm sure some slaves really wanted to stay on the plantation.