Get Mind Smart
see the bigger picture
Overstand the Corporate Plan
George Soros’s Institute for New Economic Thinking:
$50 Million Vanity Project – or New Trojan Horse? by Neil Maghami (March 2011)
Summary: George Soros literally wants to “reinvent” economics. He’s organizing conferences and making grants to promote new ideas that he hopes will discredit free market thinking, which he calls “market fundamentalism.” Is his plan foolish or fiendish?
In search of new mathematical methods outside of economics, INET gave a grant to three Carnegie-Mellon economists to show how new computer modeling techniques would resolve macroeconomic disputes. Steven Fazzari, the associate director of the Weidenbaum Center at Washington University, St. Louis, received a grant to develop a new model for Keynesian macroeconomics. To reduce the dominance of mathematics and statistics in economic training, UC Berkeley’s Barry Eichengreen and Duke University’s Bruce Caldwell, the Hayek scholar, received separate grants to support the training of more graduate PhDs in the history of economics.
At least ten grants support specific topics in the history of economics. They range from an analysis of the impact of banking crises on income inequality…
Despite the absence of a project on reflexivity theory, George Soros congratulated INET on its grants: “The Institute’s programs are encouraging economists to rethink the very foundations of economics, as the financial crisis has revealed the current paradigm as a failure. Supporting new economic thinking through initiatives such as the Grant Program will have a tremendous impact on people’s lives, as the economy is the foundation of our existence and determines how we live. INET is a philanthropic project I am most proud of.” https://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1298993272.pdf
Fri, 20 Apr 2012
Andrew Haldane, Executive Director for Financial Stability, Bank of England, speaking at the breakout panel entitled "How Can We Create a Financial System That Is Socially Useful?" at the Institute for New Economic Thinking's (INET) Paradigm Lost Conference in Berlin. April 14, 2012. He criticized high frequency trading. http://www.moneyscience.com/pg/blog/Admin/read/324039/video-andrew-haldane-creating-a-socially-useful-financial-system
INET website, several videos of speeches here, including Bretton Woods and Future of Finance http://ineteconomics.org/people/andy-haldane
The Open Society Institute (OSI) was founded in 1993 by the multibillionaire hedge-fund manager George Soros. When Soros attended the London School of Economics (LSE) beginning in 1947, he was exposed to the works of the Viennese-born philosopher Karl Popper, who taught at LSE, and whom Soros would later call his “spiritual mentor.”1 Most notably, Popper's 1945 book The Open Society and Its Enemies introduced Soros to the concept of an “open society,” which affected him greatly.2
The term “open society” had been originally coined in 1932 by the French philosopher Henri Louis Bergson, to describe societies whose moral codes were founded upon “universal” principles seeking to enhance the welfare of all mankind—as opposed to “closed” societies that placed self-interest above any concern for other nations and cultures.3 Popper readily embraced this concept and expanded upon it. In his view, the open society was a place that permitted its citizens the right to criticize and change its institutions as they saw fit; he rejected the imposed intellectual conformity, central planning, and historical determinism of Marxist doctrine.4 By Popper's reckoning, a society was “closed”—and thus undesirable—if it assumed that it was in any way superior to other societies. Likewise, any belief system or individual claiming to be in possession of “ultimate truth” was an “enemy” of the open society as well. Popper viewed all knowledge as conjectural rather than certain, as evolving rather than fixed.
Thus, by logical extension, Popper did not share the American founders' confident assertion that certain truths were “self-evident,” and that certain rights—such as the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” as referenced in the Declaration of Independence—were “unalienable” and thus not subject to doubt, because they had been granted to mankind by the ultimate authority, the “Creator.”5 George Soros, as he grew to maturity, would likewise reject the founders' premise. To Soros, “Popper's greatest contribution to philosophy” was his teaching that “the ultimate truth remains permanently beyond our reach.” http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5181
Soros also happens to figure in the financial underwriting of the non-governmental organization (NGO) that Stiglitz has created to carry his ideas forward. It’s called the Initiative for Policy Dialogue, based at Columbia University. His funders include:
At an event at Columbia University, Stiglitz appeared on a panel with Soros to discuss globalization. “People who write books generally don’t have time to read them. I actually read this book [Making Globalization Work] … and I’m glad I did,” Soros said. The panel moderator, Tina Rosenberg of the New York Times, declared:
….. Stiglitz was appointed by U.N. General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto to chair a high-level U.N. task force to review the global financial system. D’Escoto is the renegade Catholic Priest and former foreign minister of Communist Sandinista Nicaragua who advocates Marxist-oriented liberation theology and won the Lenin Peace Prize from the old Soviet Union. D’Escoto also claims a Master’s of Science from Columbia University’s School of Journalism.
The New York Times noted that D’Escoto believes the way out of the global financial crisis “should be lined with all manner of new global institutions, authorities and advisory boards,” including the Global Stimulus Fund, the Global Public Goods Authority, the Global Tax Authority, the Global Financial Products Safety Commission, the Global Financial Regulatory Authority, the Global Competition Authority, the Global Council of Financial and Economic Advisers, the Global Economic Coordination Council, and the World Monetary Board.
…. the official U.N. list of “experts” behind the plan included Stiglitz. His name appeared on a separate list of 15 “special advisers” to D’Escoto obtained from the U.N. by Inner City Press. Another name on the list was Noam Chomsky-is on the board of the Communist Party spin-off, the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism.
Aides to D’Escoto “point out repeatedly that the president got many of his ideas from a distinguished panel of experts led by an American economist and Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz,” the Times noted.
Another one of the “experts” the Times neglected to mention was Robert Johnson, former managing director at Soros Fund Management and board member of the Institute for America’s Future, a sponsor of the annual “Campaign for America’s Future” conferences. Johnson was on the board of the Democracy Alliance, a wealthy liberal group that includes Soros and is committed to “fostering collaboration among progressive leaders and institutions…” But he then moved on to help establish, with $50 million from Soros, the Institute for New Economic Thinking. Johnson is the executive director.
The Governing Board of the group includes:
The advisory board consists of:
The Institute for New Economic Thinking sponsored a “Bretton Woods II” conference, in order to lay the groundwork for new global institutions. The speakers were:
"Manufacturing Dissent": the Anti-globalization Movement is Funded by the Corporate Elites
The People's Movement has been Hijacked, by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, September 20, 2010
The WSF defines itself as "an open meeting place for reflective thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of proposals, free exchange of experiences and inter-linking for effective action, by groups and movements of civil society that are opposed to neo-liberalism and to domination of the world by capital and any form of imperialism, and are committed to building a society centred on the human person". (See Fórum Social Mundial, accessed 2010).
The WSF is a mosaic of individual initiatives which does not directly threaten or challenge the legitimacy of global capitalism and its institutions. It meets annually. It is characterised by a multitude of sessions and workshops. In this regard, one of the features of the WSF was to retain the "do-it-yourself" framework, characteristic of the donor funded counter G7 People's Summits of the 1990s.
This apparent disorganized structure is deliberate. While favoring debate on a number of individual topics, the WSF framework is not conducive to the articulation of a cohesive common platform and plan of action directed against global capitalism. Moreover, the US led war in the Middle East and Central Asia, which broke out a few months after the inaugural WSF venue in Porto Alegre in January 2001, has not been a central issue in forum discussions.
What prevails is a vast and intricate network of organizations. The recipient grassroots organizations in developing countries are invariably unaware that their partner NGOs in the United States or the European Union, which are providing them with financial support, are themselves funded by major foundations. The money trickles down, setting constraints on grassroots actions. Many of these NGO leaders are committed and well meaning individuals acting within a framework which sets the boundaries of dissent. The leaders of these movements are often co-opted, without even realizing that as a result of corporate funding their hands are tied.
Global capitalism finances anti-capitalism: an absurd and contradictory relationship.
"Another World is Possible", but it cannot be meaningfully achieved under the present arrangement.
A shake-up of the World Social Forum, of its organizational structure, its funding arrangements and leadership is required.
There can be no meaningful mass movement when dissent is generously funded by those same corporate interests which are the target of the protest movement. In the words of McGeorge Bundy, president of the Ford Foundation (1966-1979),"Everything the [Ford] Foundation did could be regarded as 'making the World safe for capitalism'". http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21110