Felon Advises Merkin on Fund Management - While in Federal Prison!

Richard Silverstein provides an intriguing and amusing discussion of the corrupt social networking among Madoff associates in Felon Advises Merkin on Fund Management—While in Federal Prison!

There could hardly be a more graphic example of the criminal behavior that I discuss in Corrupt Jewish Social Networking Rules!

This sort of corruption has direct implications on the process of globalization as discussed by Uri Ram in The Globalization of Israel, McWorld in Tel Aviv, Jihad in Jerusalem. (For other blog entries pertaining to Uri Ram, see Conundrum of Jewish Arab Identity and The Changing Agenda of Israeli Sociology, Theory, Ideology and Identity by Uri Ram.)

On pp. 9-11 Ram addresses models of the sociology of globalization:

GLOBALIZATION: BETWEEN DURKHEIM AND MARX

McWorld and Jihad are two facets of globalization. But what is globalization? The reality of globalization is too complex and the literature about it too huge to be summarized here.' The following comments are thus meant only as a launching pad toward the more substantial discussion of the issues, which '­offered in the balance of the book.

Approaches to globalization differ. One famed way of classifying them was offered by David Held and his associates. This classification divides the scholars of globalization into three camps: "hyper-globalizers" "sceptics," and “transformationalists" (Held et al. 1999). Hyper-globalizers regard globalization as an economic and technical juggernaut that reshapes human societies by creating a unified global market. Sceptics view what they sometimes call "globalony" as a much­ exaggerated talk about processes that are not that new and not that omnipotent. Transformationalists are those in between who recognize the epochal impact of globalization yet think it is susceptible to modification by local responses and policies.

As useful as this classification might be, it shrouds a more fundamental theoretical distinction regarding the causes and effects of globalization, a distinction between two schools that may be traced back to Emile Durkhejm and Karl Marx. The Durkheimian school regards globalization in terms of systemic evolution and social development, whereas the Marxist school regards globalization in terms of capital accumulation and social conflict. In short, whereas for Durkheimians globaliza­tion signifies a new stage of modernity, for Marxists it signifies a new stage of capitalism.

In the spirit of Durkheim's argument about the origins of social change in the heightened "volume" and "density" of social interaction (Durkheim 1947), and furthermore in the spirit of Talcott Parsons's articulation of social development as a process of functional differentiation and social reintegra­tion (Parsons 1951), the mainstream approach to globalization depicts it mainly as a process that is rooted in the transforma­tion of the spatial-temporal boundaries of society. Globaliza­tion is thus about attributes such as stretching, intensification, speeding up, velocity, and impact of social transactions. From suchlike perspective David Held and his associates define glo­balization as follows:

A process (or set of processes) which embodies a transforma­tion in the spatial organization of social relations and transactions–assessed in terms of their extensity, intensity, velocity and impact–generating transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction and the exercise of power. (Held et al. 1999, 16)

They thus characterize globalization around the stretching of social, political, and economic activities across frontiers; the intensification, interconnectedness, and flows of trade, finance, migration, messages, and so on; the speeding up of global interactions and processes; the increased velocity of the diffu­sion of ideas, goods, information, capital, and people by the development of a worldwide system of transportation and communication; and the deepening impact of all the above "such that the effects of distant events can be highly signifi­cant elsewhere and specific local developments can come to have considerable global consequences [so that] the bound­aries between domestic matters and global affairs become increasingly fluid" (Held and McGrew 1999, 1).

Just as a correct understanding of Zionism requires an expansion of concept of nation-state to include the notion of a Virtual Colonial Motherland, analyzing the political economy of Jews in the Age of Globalization requires awareness of the history of Jewish trade and intellectual networks and a willingness to discuss openly the propensity of the Zionist intelligentsia and political economic oligarchy to use vast highly evolved Jewish social networks in media, finance, politics, academia and other areas to cheat when they are competing with non-Jews or when they are attempting to destroy non-Jews as is happening in Palestine.

The issue is particularly important for Muslim Americans because a wealthy and highly politically-connected and influential network of Jewish Zionists is working on an ongoing project to marginalize and to demonize Islam apparently in order to make the world safe for the State of Israel but really in order to solidify Zionist imperial power throughout the world.

Muslim Americans will be the first victims of the process in which the Zionist oligarchy and intelligentsia attempt to manipulate globalization to prevent Muslims from reaping any benefits from global transformation.

The Bush administration Neocon policy of incinerating Arab and Muslim countries represented an important aspect of Zionist international anti-Islamic globalization policy. With some many Jewish Zionist subversives in the Obama administration, we must assume the policy will continue although perhaps in a sneakier fashion.


Posted using ShareThis

Sphere: Related Content