Mafias y sistema económico

Mafias y liquidez económica

Clase de Carlos Fazio sobre Economía Criminal y Reconfiguración de las Políticas de Control

El golpe de Estado en Italia. Lo negativo , para la sociedad italiana, del Tratado de Maastricht. La seudo democracia de los tecnócratas

Visión de los vencidos ( relaciones de los indígenas de la Conquista Española), visto desde el siglo XXI

República de los Consejos de Baviera. Anarquismo alemán, comunismo y nazismo

esclavo

via Erich Mühsam y la revolución de Baviera

ACADEMIA: LA INTELIGENCIA NO PAGADA, PERO …

goya-2
CITA DE NORBERTO BOBBIO : Es un destino del cual no se escapa, apenas se plantea el problema de qué cosa son los intelectuales. Quien se plantea este problema se convierte, por el solo hecho de planteárselo, en un intelectual, es decir en alguien que no hace cosas sino que reflexiona sobre las
cosas, alguien que no maneja objetos sino símbolos y cuyos instrumentos de trabajo no son las máquinas sino las ideas.(Cfr artículo en este enlace: http://www.peu.buap.mx/web/seminario_cultura/Los_intelectuales_y_el_poder.pdf

FUENTE https://dissidentvoice.org/2018/05/de-briefing-academics-unpaid-intelligence-informants/

De-Briefing Academics: Unpaid Intelligence Informants
by James Petras / May 5th, 2018

Over the past half-century, I have been engaged in research, lectured and worked with social movements and leftist governments in Latin America. I interviewed US officials and think tanks in Washington and New York. I have written scores of books, hundreds of professional articles and presented numerous papers at professional meetings.

In the course, of my activity I have discovered that many academics frequently engage in what government officials dub ‘de-briefing’! Academics meet and discuss their field-work, data collection, research finding, observations and personal contacts over lunch at the Embassy with US government officials or in Washington with State Department officials.

US government officials look forward to these ‘debriefings”; the academic provided useful access to information which they otherwise could not obtain from paid, intelligence agents or local collaborators.

Not all academic informants are very well placed or competent investigators. However, many provide useful insights and information especially on leftist movements, parties and leaders who are real or potential anti-imperialist adversaries.

US empire builders whether engaged in political or military activities depend on information especially regarding who to back and who to subvert; who should receive diplomatic support and who to receive financial and to military resources.

De-briefed academics identify ‘moderate’ and ‘radical’ adversaries, as well as personal and political vulnerabilities. Officials frequently exploit health problems or family needs to ‘turn’ leftists into imperial stool pigeons.

US officials are especially interested in academic gate-keepers who exclude ‘anti-imperialist’ critics, activists , politicians and government officials.

At times, US State Department officials claim to be sympathetic ‘progressives’ who oppose ‘Neanderthals’ in their institution, in order to elicit inside information from leftist academic informants.

Debriefing is a widespread practice and involves numerous academics from major universities and research centers, as well as non-governmental ‘activists’ and editors of academic journals and publications.

Academic participates in debriefing frequently do not publicize their reporting to the government. Most likely they share their reports with other academic informers. All claim they are merely sharing research and diffusing information for ‘science’ and to further ‘humane values’.

Academic informers always justify their collaboration as providing a clear and more balanced picture to ‘our’ policymakers, ignoring the predictable destructive outcomes likely to ensue.

Academics in the Service of Empire

Academic informants never study, collect research and publicize reports on US covert, overt and clandestine policies in defense of multi-nationals and Latin American elite which collaborate with empire builders.

US officials have no interest in ‘debriefing’ academics conducting anti-imperialist research.

US officials are keen to know any and all reports on ‘movements from below’: who they are, how much influence they have, their susceptibility to bribes, blackmail and invitations to the State Department, Disneyland, or the Wilson Center in D.C.

US officials fund academic research on militant trade unions, agrarian social movements, feminist and ethnic minorities engaged in class struggle ,and anti-imperialist activists and leaders, as they all serve as targets for imperial repression.

The officials are also keen on academic reports on so-called ‘moderate’ collaborators who can be funded, advised and recruited to defend the empire, undermine the class struggle and split movements.

Academic informants are especially useful in providing personal and political information on Latin American left-wing intellectuals, academics, journalists, writers and critics which allows US officials to isolate, slander and boycott anti-imperialists, as well as those intellectuals who can be recruited and seduced with foundation grants and invitations to the Kennedy Center at Harvard.

When US officials have a difficult time understanding the intricacies and consequences of ideological debates and factional divisions within leftist parties or regimes, ex-leftist academic informers, who collect documents and interviews, provide detailed explanations and provide officials with a political roadmap to exploit and exacerbate divisions and to guide repressive policies, which undermine adversaries engaged in anti-imperialist and class struggle.

The State Department works hand and glove with research centers and foundations in promoting journals which eschew all mention of imperialism and ruling class exploitation; they promote ‘special issues’ on ‘class-less’ identity politics, post-modern theorizing and ethnic-racial conflicts and conciliation.

In a study of the two leading political science and sociological journals over a period of fifty year they published less than .01% on class struggle and US imperialism

Academic informants have never reported on US government links to narco-political rulers.

Academic informants do not research widespread long term Israeli collaboration with death squads in Colombia, Guatemala, Argentina and El Salvador, in cases because of their loyalties to Tel Aviv and in most cases because the State Department is not interested in debriefings which expose their allies and their joint complicity.

Academic Informants: What do they want and what do they get?

Academic informers engage in debriefing for various reasons. A few do so simply because they share the politics and ideology of the empire builders and feel it is their ‘duty’ to serve.

The great majority are established academics with ties to research centers who inform because it fattens their CV — which helps secure grants, prestigious appointments and awards.

Progressive academics who collaborates have a Janus face approach; they speak at Leftist public conferences, especially to students and in private they report to the State Department.

Many academics believe they can influence and change government policy. They seek to impress self-identified ‘progressive’ officials with their inside knowledge on how to ‘turn’ Latin critics into moderate collaborators. They invent innocuous academic categories and concepts to attract graduate students to further collaboration with imperial colleagues.

The Consequence of Academic Debriefing

Former leftist academic informers are frequently cited by the mass media as a reliable and knowledgeable ‘expert’ in order to slander anti-imperialist governments, academics, and critics.

Ex-leftist academics pressure rising scholars with a critical perspective to adopt ‘moderate’ reasonable critiques, to denounce and avoid anti-imperialist ‘extremists’ and to disparage them as ‘polemical ideologues’!

Academic informants in Chile helped the US Embassy identify neighborhood militants who were handed over to the secret police (DINA) during the Pinochet dictatorship.

US academic informants in Peru and Brazil provided the Embassy with research projects which identified nationalist military officials and leftist students who were subsequently purged, arrested and tortured.

In Colombia, US academic informers were active in providing reports on rural insurgent movements which led to massive repression. Academic collaborators provided detailed reports to the embassy in Venezuela on the grass roots movements and political divisions among Chavista government and military officials with command of troops.

The State Department financed academics working with NGO who identified and recruited middle class youth as street fighters, drug gangsters and the destitute to engage in violent struggles to overthrow the elected government by paralyzing the economy.

Academic reports on regime ‘violence’ and ‘authoritarianism’ served as propaganda fodder for the State Department to impose economic sanctions, impoverishing people, to foment a coup.US academic collaborators enlisted their Latin colleagues to sign petitions urging right-wing regimes in the region to boycott Venezuela.

When academic informers are confronted with the destructive consequences of imperial advances they argue that it was not their ‘intention’; that it was not their State Department contacts who carried out the regressive policies.The more cynical claim that the government was going to do their dirty work regardless of the debriefing.

Conclusion

What is clear in virtually all know experiences is that academic informers’ ‘de-briefings strengthened the empire-builders and complemented the deadly work of the paid professional operatives of the CIA, DEA, and the National Security Agency.

Globalizar la violencia , característica esencial de las democracias neoliberales posmodernas

img_5674
Subjetividad y Cultura
Revista Subjetividad y Cultura
http://subjetividadycultura.org.mx
Coloquio “La globalización de la violencia”
Stephen A. Hasam
Con la participación de analistas, escritores e investigadores de las universidades Autónoma
Metropolitana-Xochimilco, Ben Gurión del Neguev, Libre de Berlín y Nacional Autónoma de
México tuvo lugar del 17 al 19 de marzo el coloquio internacional Globalización de la Violencia
en la sede en Ciudad de México del Instituto Goethe
Bajo la coordinación del escritor y filósofo berlinés Horst Kurnitzky, los ponentes fueron
invitados a desarrollar temas de su especialidad relacionados con formas específicas de
violencia características del mundo actual, a partir de un planteamiento elaborado por el propio
Kurnitzky:
A lo largo de la historia de la civilización, la dominación y el control de la violencia han sido
elementos decisivos en la formación de la sociedad: tanto en lo que se refiere a la violencia que
emana de la naturaleza, como a la que emana de la naturaleza de los seres humanos. La
domesticación de la violencia, así como su limitada aceptación en rituales y su sublimación en
cultura y civilización, fueron el fundamento de la constitución de los seres humanos en
sociedad. Las fiestas de sacrificio fueron la expresión sensorial de un sistema de dones y
contradones, de economía. Transformados en actos de intercambio, los sacificios constituyen
la base de la reproducción social, sostenida por una frágil relación con la violencia.Todas las
relaciones –las relaciones entre los sexos, las relaciones al interior de las comunidade; dentro
de una misma sociedad y en su relación con otras sociedades–están determinadas por su
relación con la violencia. La contención y dominación de la violencia fueron el impulso esencial
de la formación de la sociedad; y la violencia sale de nuevo de la sociedad misma, cuando
fracasa en equilibrar intereses antagónicos.La violencia es un privilegio social, la relación con la
violencia está inscrita en el proceso de la civilización.
En la domesticación de la violencia reconocemos a la sociedad civilizada.Tanto la realidad
concreta como el discurso ideológico que la acompaña y legitima apuntan hacia una negación,
un rechazo a la contención y domesticación de la violencia. Todo lo contrario. Premisa
subyacente a todas las ponencias fue que éstos son tiempos contracivilizatorios, en los cuales,
en vez de buscar una domesticación de la violencia equilibrando intereses antagónicos, impera
el llamado a la violencia, en el ejercicio de ésta como en la ideología del neo socialdarwinismo
elevado a religión: la fe neoliberal, -que no es ni “neo”, ni “liberal”-, la mano invisible de la Ley
Divina, ergo Natural, única y total. El equilibrio cósmico del laisser faire expresado en la
competencia por la sobrevivencia de los más aptos. Desde el escolar que realiza a su manera
el neoliberalismo en el patio de la escuela con una navaja o arma de fuego, hasta los chantajes
y las guerras del sistema internacional.
En un franco desafío a la moda posmoderna -el bagaje cultural del neoliberalismo- en el
coloquio se pretendió comenzar a analizar la “globalización de la violencia” como un todo, a
partir de distintas disciplinas y de casos y problemas específicos que sirvieran como referencias
paradigmáticas, e incluir algunas reflexiones filosóficas globales como ensayos sintetizadores.
1 / 3