Islam Turns Against the West
by Peter Goodgame.
book: The Globalists and the Islamists: Formenting a 'clash of civilization' for a new world order.
As we have related, in his book A Brutal Friendship, Said Aburish defined three phases of Western-Islamic relations. The first was the period during which Britain used Islam to help legitimize the puppet dictators that they had installed over their Arab colonies after World War I. The second phase was a period during which Britain (and America) used militant Islam as a force to help topple governments such as Mossadegh's and Nasser's that were trying to fight Western domination. Aburish writes,
"The struggle between Nasser and the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots and Western and traditional Arab regimes' supporters continued until the 1967 War. Western support for Islam was provided openly and accepted by the leadership of the Islamic movements without reservation." (1)
Aburish notes that Islam had a good image in the West up to this time. The Islamic movement was noted most for its anti-communist outlook and there was little foresight that conservative Islam might turn against the West. Aburish then begins to describe the third phase,
"The third phase in the development of Islamic movements occurred after the 1967 war. The defeat of Nasser was a defeat for the force he represented, secularism, and with Nasser diminished, the Islamic movements moved to assume the political leadership of the masses of Arab Middle East." (2)
After 1967 the power of the Islamic movements greatly increased. Islamic theology overtook secularism and a more potent form of Arab nationalism emerged. The Six Day War saw the West stand by as Israel defeated her Arab neighbors, capturing the Sinai, the West Bank and the Golan Heights. It then became clear to most Muslims that the West favored Israel over the Arabs and resentment towards the West increased. This third phase of Western-Islamic relations began when factions of this predominantly anti-Western Fundamentalist Islamic movement began to exercise their new political influence throughout areas of the Muslim world.
After Nasser died in 1970 and was replaced by Anwar al-Sadat the new Egyptian president tried to appease the threat of militant Islam by releasing all of the imprisoned members of the Muslim Brotherhood, despite the fact that the Brotherhood had been involved in at least four separate assassination attempts on Nasser's life over the previous sixteen years. Sadat then joined forces with King Faisal of Saudi Arabia and they became sponsors and promoters of the Al Azhar Islamic university as well as Islamic movements such as Al Dawa and I'tisam. These leaders realized that it was best to at least appear to support the rise of the Islamic movements. (3)
On October 6, 1973 Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack on the Israeli Army in the Sinai and the Golan Heights. On October 16 OPEC raised the price of oil by a whopping 70%, and then the next day Arab OPEC leaders announced that they would enforce a progressive embargo against Europe and the United States until Israel was forced to withdraw to their pre-1967 borders.
Engdahl's book, A Century of War, relates how US National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger was able to convince Germany not to declare neutrality regarding the October war, while Britain "was allowed to clearly state its neutrality." Britain remained neutral throughout the entire episode and was one of the few Western countries not placed under the Arab oil embargo. (4)
The Yom Kippur War ended on October 26, but the effects were such that the Arab regimes came out much better in several respects. Firstly, they had finally been effective militarily against Israel and they had won back some territory. Secondly, their regimes were infused with a great deal of popular support and the voice of the Islamic militants was temporarily quelled. Lastly, the Arab nations suddenly became the benefactors of a huge increase in oil revenues, from $3.01 a barrel in early '73, to $11.65 a barrel in early '74. (5)
Engdahl relates that the rise in oil prices was something that had been planned previously by the Anglo-American Establishment and mentioned at the Bilderberg conference in May, 1973 in Saltsjoebaden, Sweden. Kissinger was the point man in engineering the Arab-Israeli conflict that created the excuse for the oil price hike that helped to rescue Britain's North Sea oil projects that had previously been seen as risky investments. The most catastrophic effect, however, was that the rise in energy prices put a quick halt to Third World industrialization, forcing many countries to borrow a great deal of money over the years to pay for energy, thus setting the stage for the long-term indebtedness of the Third World to Anglo-American banks (6).
After the war the Establishment awarded Kissinger the Nobel Peace Prize and later he received an honorary knighthood from Queen Elizabeth, for his lifelong devoted service to the Crown, in 1995.
The Arab regimes were suddenly greatly enriched as a result of the rise in oil prices, but the threat of the Islamic movements remained. King Faisal of Saudi Arabia feigned support for Islam, but was often forced to crack down on the religious leaders and organizations that seemed to constantly criticize the royal family's overt greed, luxury and corruption. Faisal was assassinated in 1975 by his nephew Prince Faisali bni Musad, in retaliation for Faisal's execution of Musad's Muslim Zealot brother who had attacked a TV station on the grounds that it was a violation of Islam. (7)
In Egypt Sadat's regime came under extreme pressure from the Islamic movements after he signed the Camp David Accords with Israel in 1978. This led to the assassination of Sadat, by members of Islamic Jihad, an offshoot group of the Muslim Brotherhood, on October 6, 1981.
In Syria, in 1982, there was a major conflict between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Syrian government at the city of Hamma that resulted in 20,000 casualties. In the aftermath Syria's President Asad revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood forces were armed with US-made equipment. Aburish comments on how none of these events seemed to change the way in which militant Islam was used,
"Hamma, the assassination of Sadat and Faisal and less portentous acts didn't interrupt Western and Arab client regimes' support for Islamic movements, and Saudi Arabia and Egypt allowed pro-Islamic use of their state propaganda apparatus... And Israel, forever inclined to back divisive movements, surfaced as another supporter of Islam and began to fund the Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestinian Islamic movement Hamas." (8)
The most noteworthy success of the Islamic movement during this time was of course the overthrow of the Shah of Iran and the installation of the Ayatollah Khomeini as the Islamic dictator. British Intelligence had used their contacts with Iran's mullahs and ayatollahs to help overthrow Mossadegh and install the Shah back in 1953, and these contacts were maintained and used again to overthrow the Shah when his regime fell out of favor.
The Establishment history of Iran's Islamic Revolution is that Khomeini's revolt was spontaneous and populist, and that it overthrew a repressive dictatorship that was hated by the people but supported wholeheartedly by the United States. It is true that the Shah's government was not a democracy and that his secret service, trained by the CIA, was one of the most effective intelligence organizations in the world. But what is not reported is that prior to the British-sponsored massive public relations campaign on behalf of the Ayatollah the government of the Shah was loved by the vast majority of the population.
After taking over from Mossadegh the Shah began to push forward a number of nationalist policies that increased his popularity at home but, in some cases, worried the Anglo-American Establishment. First, he signed petroleum agreements with ENI, the Italian oil company. Then in 1963 he pushed forward on a series of popular reforms that became known as the White Revolution. The Shah evolved into a nationalist whose path paralleled that of Nasser far too much for the Establishment's liking:- He bought land from the upper classes and, along with the crown's own land, sold it back cheaply to tenant farmers, allowing over one a half million people to become land owners and ending the old feudal system.- He allowed women the right to vote, and brought an end to the wearing of the veil, which were "Westernizing" moves unwelcomed by the religious sector.- He pushed forward on a $90 billion nuclear power program. - He moved to shut down the lucrative opium industry that had been created during the days of British Empire control that had been running for a hundred years. (9)
In 1973 The Economist magazine featured Iran on the front cover with the caption: "Iran the Next Japan of the Middle East?" Iran's economy had grown at a rate of 7-8% each year from 1965-1973 and was becoming an example for the developing nations of the world to follow. As far as the Anglo-American Establishment was concerned this could not be allowed to continue. Establishment goals were focused on world de-population and de-industrialization as formulated by policy makers like Lord Bertrand Russell and as advocated by establishment lackeys such as Kissinger, Zibigniew Brzezinski and Robert McNamara (the head of the World Bank), as well as by the British elites who controlled the World Wildlife Fund and other environmental front groups. Iran had to be brought down. (10)
The attack on the Shah's government came through the Muslim Brotherhood and through the mullahs and ayatollahs of Iran, supported and manipulated by British Intelligence. Dr. John Coleman, a former British Intelligence agent and author of a number of books and monographs detailing the Establishment's plan for a socialist world government, states in his report on Iran's Islamic Revolution (11) that the Muslim Brotherhood was created by "the great names of British Middle East intelligence, T.E. Lawrence, E.G. Browne, Arnold Toynbee. St. John Philby and Bertrand Russell," and that their mission was to "keep the Middle East backward so that its natural resource, oil, could continue to be looted..."
Dr. Coleman writes that in 1980 the broadcasts of Radio Free Iran divided the enemies of the Shah into four categories: 1. Iranian politicians bought by the Israeli Shin Bet, 2. The CIA's network of agents, 3. The feudal landowners, 4. The Freemasons and the Muslim Brotherhood (viewed as the same enemy).
In his report Dr. Coleman writes that in Iran, "At one time there was even a joke about the mullahs being stamped 'made in Britain.'" When the Shah introduced his plan for modernization in 1963 the Ayatollah Khomeini emerged as the leader of the religious opposition. Up until his exile from Iran in 1964, Khomeini was based at the religious city of Qom. Dr. Coleman relates that Radio Free Iran claimed that while at Qom Khomeini received a "monthly stipend from the British, and he is in constant contact with his masters, the British."
Khomeini was kicked out of Iran and settled in Iraq. He lived there for a number of years until he was arrested by the Iraqi government and deported in 1978. French President D'Estang was then pressured to offer Khomeini refuge in France to continue his "Islamic studies." While in France he became a Western celebrity and the symbol of the anti-Shah Islamic revolution. Coleman writes, "Once Khomeini was installed at the Chateau Neauphle, he began to receive a constant stream of visitors, many of them from the BBC, the CIA and British intelligence."
At the same time Amnesty International was continuing its intense campaign against the Shah's government, accusing it of torture and other terrible human rights abuses. The international press picked up on this theme and carried it around the world.
The BBC then became the Ayatollah's main promoter. Dr. Coleman writes, "It was the BBC, which prepared and distributed to the mullahs in Iran all of the cassette tapes of Khomeini's speeches, which inflamed the peasants. Then the BBC began to beam accounts of torture by the Shah's SAVAK to all corners of the world... In September and October 1978 the BBC began to beam Khomeini's inflammatory ravings direct to Iran in Farsi. The Washington Post said, 'the BBC is Iran's public enemy number one.'"
The BBC Persian Service came to be nicknamed in Iran the "Ayatollah BBC" for its non-stop coverage of everything that Khomeini wanted to say (12). Soon a large segment of the Iranian public, most of them impressionable young students, became convinced that the Shah truly was evil and that a return to pure shi'ite Islam under the Ayatollah's leadership was the only way to save their country. The Carter Administration, manipulated by British lackey Zbigniew Brzezinski, then collaborated with the British to topple the Shah and install Khomeini.
Dr. Coleman relates that Carter appointed Trilateralist George Ball to head a commission on U.S. policy in the Persian Gulf. Ball's recommendation was that the U.S. should withdraw its support for the Shah's regime. Dr. Coleman quotes from the Shah's own memoirs to confirm the American stance, the reality that is contrary to the mass-marketed Establishment line that the U.S. supported the Shah to the end,
"I did not know it then, perhaps I did not want to know - but it is clear to me now, the Americans wanted me out. What was I to make of the sudden appointment of Ball to the White House as an advisor to Iran? I knew that Ball was no friend of Iran. I understood that Ball was working on a special report on Iran. But no one ever informed me what areas the report was to cover, let alone its conclusions. I read them months later when I was in exile, and my worst fears were confirmed. Ball was among those Americans who wanted to abandon me, and ultimately my country."
After the Shah stepped down in 1979 and fled the country his "firm ally," the United States, even refused to allow him asylum forcing him to move with his family to Egypt. During the subsequent takeover of the American embassy when supporters of the Ayatollah kept Americans hostage for 444 days it became crystal clear to the entire world that the anti-democratic, anti-Israel Islamic movement was also very anti-West. Nonetheless the Anglo-American Establishment continued to support and promote radical Islam.
In 1977 Bhutto of Pakistan, who we will cover shortly, was removed; in 1979 the Shah of Iran was removed; in 1981 Sadat was assassinated, and in 1982 the Muslim Brotherhood revolted in Syria. Before 1977 the Middle East was on the verge of achieving stability and industrial and economic parity with the West through nationalist policies and high oil prices, but by the early '80s the Middle East was in flames. Egypt was reeling and Mubarak was consolidating a shaky hold on power. Iran and Iraq, both armed by the West, were beginning their long war. Israel and Syria were invading Lebanon that was fighting a civil war, and Russia was invading Afghanistan whose rebels were being supported by Pakistan. The de-population and de-industrialization scheme advocated by the British and adopted by the Americans was off to a great start.
Showing posts with label Islamic fundamentalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islamic fundamentalism. Show all posts
Nov 25, 2007
Nov 23, 2007
GWOT over 100 years.
OK folks this was written in late 2004, and I am not going to change it, even though I am not happy with the language, published on an online rag.
http://www.bangladesh-web.com/view.php?hidRecord=32865
Introduction: The story of what has been going on in Afghanistan and Iran, with the vast amounts of death and destruction through the portal of Islamic fundamentalists, was written in the North East of America about thirty years ago.
The full story has not yet fully unfolded. Iran is the decisive shield which prevents further follow up action, against the first tier countries which are Syria and Pakistan. Then the second tier countries of Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Where they call every day in America for greater NATO involvement, and yet expand the Iraqi and Afghan security apparatus at snails pace. Bosnia after nearly ten years of ‘independence’ is now run by the local Mafia, foreign troops and NGO’s.
That is the long term plan of powerful sections of the Jewish lobby in America. The key for entry into such states, as with Afghanistan, and to an extent Iraq is Islamic fundamentalists. This group in America through the manipulation of pliant short sighted foolish proxies, and most notably the Pakistanis, have used the very weak failed state of Afghanistan to recruit and train Islamic fundamentalists, who then spread themselves out to the 57 Muslim countries of the world, and most notably with significance, in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq, and Yemen.
This lobby will attempt to facilitate this objective over the next twenty years in the Greater Middle East via various serving administrations within America and not obviously just one. They have been quite desperate in achieving their objectives in that they were prepared to sacrifice 3000 lives on their own soil to achieve such an agenda.
They are doing this for two primary reasons, the first one is that they think they are full filling a vendetta based on perceived historical injustice done against their people by the people of Iran, Afghanistan and South Asia, because of that areas association with Aryans, Zoroastrians and the Swastika symbol. The second reason they are doing it is because they think they are accomplishing a service to the state of Israel by weakening and destabilizing Arab and Muslim states that are in the vicinity of Israel.
The logical response to this Jewish lobby story being manufactured through the tentacles of the sole super power on earth is for those immediate states concerned, notably Syria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and the Muslim world in general, to first ensure that Iran, as the decisive shield against future follow up action comes to no out side initiated harm. That involves intense lobbying in Iran for the mullahs to come to their senses, and equally intense lobbying in Washington.
The second very important response and strategy is to totally eliminate that portal and tool which gives the American’s the cause and excuse to invade Muslim counties. That is Islamic fundamentalists in all Muslim countries, rather then let this Jewish lobby story unfold slowly over the next 10-20 years. It means not being passive spectators of the scenery and merely watch this story slowly unfold, but actively doing something about it.
That means through the use of state propaganda in Muslim countries portraying al-Qaeda as the tool of the Jewish lobby of America where this organization has caused, directly and indirectly, the occupation of two very important Muslim lands and yet more are threatened with occupation, once the Americans digest Iraq next year. How then does al-Qaeda who kill innocent women and children in the name of Islam, and who do not carry out any social welfare work unlike Hamas and Hezbollah, rightfully claim to be the champions of the Muslim community.
Al-Qaeda is an extremist Saudi Wahabi nationalism movement which wears the Islamic cloak to generate support from other Muslims around the world. The Pakistanis should thus deal with this leadership as soon as possible and spare no effort in finding them, since their presence on their territory serves absolutely no purpose at all to Pakistan and the Muslim world in general.
In that sense the Egyptian security apparatus have done a very excellent job, rounding up to 20,000 Islamic fundamentalists. In addition the Egyptian state has raised the level of public consciousness to new heights. Where in Egypt if you look like a fundamentalist with very suspicious activities, then ordinary people will surround you and ask you very intrusive questions and even initiate civilian body searches.
The Egyptian security apparatus is one of the best in the Third World, and thus Egypt has enjoyed political stability for the last fifty-six years of independance, and no foreign predatory power has been able to destabilize it and put a puppet regime in their place. Saddam’s Iraq, North Korea and the Chinese, also have/had good security systems. That is the level of standard that other Third World countries must aspire to.
But sadly in the case of Pakistan with the al-Qaeda and Taliban leadership operating freely on their territory, together with Syria, where both governments hug and kiss fundamentalists publicly. When they allow them to operate freely in elections and where they have clearly marked large offices in all the major cities with thousands of madrasses as the recruiting point. Then these countries are asking for trouble in the future, and are really playing with fire.
The time to act is now before it is too late. To act means not merely giving speeches to lawyers associations about the evils of Islamic fundamentalism. What is needed from all Muslim governments is a comprehensive well coordinated government financed program which targets the role of fundamentalists in such societies. They should not need to be prodded by America to do this. If we have problems of what to do perhaps all the Muslim countries should consult the Egyptians.
It also requires creating a first class security apparatus filled with intelligent graduates from the best universities which is well indoctrinated. It means tightening the security grip on the country. But one can not be like Saddam’s Iraq, or North Korea both of whom have or had excellent security apparatuses, but failed to deliver in other areas.
The second and equally important requirement, after creating a very strong security state, is economic development. So that a rapidly expanding national cake satisfies everybody to a greater and lessor degree, as with China. Attracting $53.6 billion in foreign direct investment in 2004, and yet a Communist dictatorship. Nobody tells China to democratize.
The Chinese started cultivating their commercial sector very seriously twenty five years ago, and that $53.6 billion foreign business endorsement just in one year is the result of consistent twenty five years of effort.
Economic success is thus defined by 6/7 % real annual GDP growth over a consistently long period of time. Policies for economic development involves creating a business friendly environment with political stability. In addition sound fiscal policies, with balanced budgets, a tax to GDP percentage which is at least over 20% of the overall registered GDP. Registration of as much of the unregistered economy as possible.
In many Third World societies this could be anything upwards of 60%-80%. There are many excellent consultancy organizations who are in a position to advise Third World governments about registering the black economy. So we are really talking about sound good governance, backed by a very efficient civil service.
Singapore for example, which in the last thirty years has gone from being a mosquito infested mangrove swamp once filled with half naked Malay tribesmen, to a society enjoying living standards of the first world, but is not yet a democracy.
The third requirement is using the surplus finances of the expanding prosperous state to redistribute that wealth and invest into a civil society. That means an expanding social welfare program, especially in free universal education and health. It also involves giving women, that vital part of the population which make up 50%, greater freedoms and rights, as it has been proven that progress and modernization only works when women have greater freedoms and rights both within the frame work of customary and state law.
The final requirement and goal is democracy, since some of the most successful countries in the world are democracies. Ultimately an open society filled with argument, discourse and choice is better placed to meet the challenges of that society then one that is a closed society which is run by a self serving elite (USA). But this long term goal should be tempered with the fact that there are predatory powers in this world who take advantage of Third World societies which are vulnerable and open, and thus for now I put democracy as the last requirement of the four key above requirements for Third World societies. (..........To Be continued )
http://www.bangladesh-web.com/view.php?hidRecord=32865
Introduction: The story of what has been going on in Afghanistan and Iran, with the vast amounts of death and destruction through the portal of Islamic fundamentalists, was written in the North East of America about thirty years ago.
The full story has not yet fully unfolded. Iran is the decisive shield which prevents further follow up action, against the first tier countries which are Syria and Pakistan. Then the second tier countries of Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Where they call every day in America for greater NATO involvement, and yet expand the Iraqi and Afghan security apparatus at snails pace. Bosnia after nearly ten years of ‘independence’ is now run by the local Mafia, foreign troops and NGO’s.
That is the long term plan of powerful sections of the Jewish lobby in America. The key for entry into such states, as with Afghanistan, and to an extent Iraq is Islamic fundamentalists. This group in America through the manipulation of pliant short sighted foolish proxies, and most notably the Pakistanis, have used the very weak failed state of Afghanistan to recruit and train Islamic fundamentalists, who then spread themselves out to the 57 Muslim countries of the world, and most notably with significance, in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq, and Yemen.
This lobby will attempt to facilitate this objective over the next twenty years in the Greater Middle East via various serving administrations within America and not obviously just one. They have been quite desperate in achieving their objectives in that they were prepared to sacrifice 3000 lives on their own soil to achieve such an agenda.
They are doing this for two primary reasons, the first one is that they think they are full filling a vendetta based on perceived historical injustice done against their people by the people of Iran, Afghanistan and South Asia, because of that areas association with Aryans, Zoroastrians and the Swastika symbol. The second reason they are doing it is because they think they are accomplishing a service to the state of Israel by weakening and destabilizing Arab and Muslim states that are in the vicinity of Israel.
The logical response to this Jewish lobby story being manufactured through the tentacles of the sole super power on earth is for those immediate states concerned, notably Syria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and the Muslim world in general, to first ensure that Iran, as the decisive shield against future follow up action comes to no out side initiated harm. That involves intense lobbying in Iran for the mullahs to come to their senses, and equally intense lobbying in Washington.
The second very important response and strategy is to totally eliminate that portal and tool which gives the American’s the cause and excuse to invade Muslim counties. That is Islamic fundamentalists in all Muslim countries, rather then let this Jewish lobby story unfold slowly over the next 10-20 years. It means not being passive spectators of the scenery and merely watch this story slowly unfold, but actively doing something about it.
That means through the use of state propaganda in Muslim countries portraying al-Qaeda as the tool of the Jewish lobby of America where this organization has caused, directly and indirectly, the occupation of two very important Muslim lands and yet more are threatened with occupation, once the Americans digest Iraq next year. How then does al-Qaeda who kill innocent women and children in the name of Islam, and who do not carry out any social welfare work unlike Hamas and Hezbollah, rightfully claim to be the champions of the Muslim community.
Al-Qaeda is an extremist Saudi Wahabi nationalism movement which wears the Islamic cloak to generate support from other Muslims around the world. The Pakistanis should thus deal with this leadership as soon as possible and spare no effort in finding them, since their presence on their territory serves absolutely no purpose at all to Pakistan and the Muslim world in general.
In that sense the Egyptian security apparatus have done a very excellent job, rounding up to 20,000 Islamic fundamentalists. In addition the Egyptian state has raised the level of public consciousness to new heights. Where in Egypt if you look like a fundamentalist with very suspicious activities, then ordinary people will surround you and ask you very intrusive questions and even initiate civilian body searches.
The Egyptian security apparatus is one of the best in the Third World, and thus Egypt has enjoyed political stability for the last fifty-six years of independance, and no foreign predatory power has been able to destabilize it and put a puppet regime in their place. Saddam’s Iraq, North Korea and the Chinese, also have/had good security systems. That is the level of standard that other Third World countries must aspire to.
But sadly in the case of Pakistan with the al-Qaeda and Taliban leadership operating freely on their territory, together with Syria, where both governments hug and kiss fundamentalists publicly. When they allow them to operate freely in elections and where they have clearly marked large offices in all the major cities with thousands of madrasses as the recruiting point. Then these countries are asking for trouble in the future, and are really playing with fire.
The time to act is now before it is too late. To act means not merely giving speeches to lawyers associations about the evils of Islamic fundamentalism. What is needed from all Muslim governments is a comprehensive well coordinated government financed program which targets the role of fundamentalists in such societies. They should not need to be prodded by America to do this. If we have problems of what to do perhaps all the Muslim countries should consult the Egyptians.
It also requires creating a first class security apparatus filled with intelligent graduates from the best universities which is well indoctrinated. It means tightening the security grip on the country. But one can not be like Saddam’s Iraq, or North Korea both of whom have or had excellent security apparatuses, but failed to deliver in other areas.
The second and equally important requirement, after creating a very strong security state, is economic development. So that a rapidly expanding national cake satisfies everybody to a greater and lessor degree, as with China. Attracting $53.6 billion in foreign direct investment in 2004, and yet a Communist dictatorship. Nobody tells China to democratize.
The Chinese started cultivating their commercial sector very seriously twenty five years ago, and that $53.6 billion foreign business endorsement just in one year is the result of consistent twenty five years of effort.
Economic success is thus defined by 6/7 % real annual GDP growth over a consistently long period of time. Policies for economic development involves creating a business friendly environment with political stability. In addition sound fiscal policies, with balanced budgets, a tax to GDP percentage which is at least over 20% of the overall registered GDP. Registration of as much of the unregistered economy as possible.
In many Third World societies this could be anything upwards of 60%-80%. There are many excellent consultancy organizations who are in a position to advise Third World governments about registering the black economy. So we are really talking about sound good governance, backed by a very efficient civil service.
Singapore for example, which in the last thirty years has gone from being a mosquito infested mangrove swamp once filled with half naked Malay tribesmen, to a society enjoying living standards of the first world, but is not yet a democracy.
The third requirement is using the surplus finances of the expanding prosperous state to redistribute that wealth and invest into a civil society. That means an expanding social welfare program, especially in free universal education and health. It also involves giving women, that vital part of the population which make up 50%, greater freedoms and rights, as it has been proven that progress and modernization only works when women have greater freedoms and rights both within the frame work of customary and state law.
The final requirement and goal is democracy, since some of the most successful countries in the world are democracies. Ultimately an open society filled with argument, discourse and choice is better placed to meet the challenges of that society then one that is a closed society which is run by a self serving elite (USA). But this long term goal should be tempered with the fact that there are predatory powers in this world who take advantage of Third World societies which are vulnerable and open, and thus for now I put democracy as the last requirement of the four key above requirements for Third World societies. (..........To Be continued )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)