Dow Chemical Company and Capitalism

On December 3, 1984, a Union Carbide (a division of Dow Chemical Company) plant in Bhopal, India leaked 40 tons of toxic methyl isocyanate and hydrogen cyanide gas, killing three thousand people on contact and injuring as many as six-hundred thousand others. At least twelve thousand deaths have been attributed to the spill since that date.

Contamination is still present at the site today, as the company has avoided pressures to sanitize the area. Chemical levels today lie at five-hundred times the legal limit.

But this was no accident, this a case of cutting corners. Due to falling sales, staff had been laid off and safety checks had become less frequent. As well, the methyl isocyanate tank refrigeration unit was disabled to save on utility costs.

In the aftermath, the CEO of Union Carbide fled homicide hearings in India, and the United States violated its extradition treaty with India by refusing to release him to Indian authorities.

On December 3, 2004, the twentieth anniversary of the disaster, a man claiming to be a Dow representative named Jude Finisterra was interviewed by the BBC. He claimed that the company had agreed to clean up the site and compensate those harmed in the incident. Immediately afterward, Dow’s share price fell 4.2% in 23 minutes, for a loss of $2 billion in market value. Apparently, the shareholders disagreed with the morality and of compassion embodied by the admission. Forget that, they disagreed with the simple admission of responsibility.

Dow immediately released a refutation denying any affiliation with Finisterra. Within their statement, they highlighted the importance of the bottom line, in a message so cold-hearted it’s surreal:

“Most importantly of all: Dow shareholders will see NO losses, because Dow’s policy towards Bhopal HAS NOT CHANGED. Much as we at Dow may care, as human beings, about the victims of the Bhopal catastrophe, we must reiterate that Dow’s sole and unique responsibility is to its shareholders, and Dow CANNOT do anything that goes against its bottom line unless forced to by law.” (Emphasis not added.)

Thousands have been compensated in India, with about $500 each. That’s enough to pay for one year of medical care in India, when these half a million people require care for the rest of their lives.

I find it disturbing that corporations are taxed as individuals here in the United States, but are in no way held morally responsible in the same way a human being would be. For example, someone, here, is responsible. Perhaps the person who suggested shutting down the refrigeration tanks or decreasing the frequency of safety checks. Remember the importance of the bottom line, responsible for this, the biggest and most horrific industrial catastrophe of all time. And the reluctance of Dow to take responsibility and compensate those… the half million lives that have been poisoned and destroyed. Utter contempt and malice for the values of mankind, embodied by the largest chemical corporation in the world. Truly, animus in the extreme is an emergent property of international capitalism.

Human error, misjudgment, and apathy contributed to the deaths of fifteen thousand people, but no one has come to trial for this to date, some twenty-two years later.

Data Mining

When the earliest hubbub erupted over the National Security Agency logging the phone calls of Americans, President Bush made a speech defending the policy, saying that the government was not combing through the personal lives of every American.

Instead, the government was “data mining.” There was never more blatant doublespeak from this man’s mouth. A rose would smell as sweet, Mr. President, and just because you euphemize the term doesn’t change the fact of the matter.

Allow me to explain: Data mining is the process of analyzing each individual call and analyzing calls from and to the same number for patterns. That is, if you call the same number in Pakistan five times a day, the government might get suspicious. That’s another thing: they’re only analyzing international phone calls. It’s a good thing there aren’t any terrorists in America. What a counterproductive, hypocritical limitation — at least from the standpoint of the Neocons. But I should be thankful.

On top of that, the fact is that numbers can be linked to names through public sources. For example, type a landline number into Google, and find out who owns it. As for cells, we’ve already seen that a number of corporations are willing to bend over backwards to accommodate the fascist policies of this administration.

So here we are: the government can see, in addition to the number that you’re calling, the name of the person, rather easily. And that’s a simple violation of the right to privacy previously established in a number of Surpreme Court cases, the Fourth Amendment, and the First Amendment right to associate.

Drop, approval ratings, drop!

And another thing: Do you think terrorists don’t know we’re monitoring their phone calls? Do you think they’re that stupid?

Haditha and Hayden: More than Mistakes

We’re finally hearing something from the mainstream media about the atrocities soldiers committed in the Iraqi city of Haditha: when a Marine convoy was hit by a roadside bomb, they retaliated against innocent civilians, taking twenty-four men, women and children from their beds and executing them while they were still in their pajamas.

The fact is, Democracy Now! was reporting on this at least a month ago, referencing a tape from an Iraqi journalism student. The same tape that ABC World News Tonight just aired. Why did it take them so long? Only now do we hear that the military has started an investigation, a month after there were allegations public enough to be reported by Democracy Now!

Well, I should be thankful that they’re investigating at all. Murder charges. I say give ‘em Hell.

In other news, General Hayden, an active military leader, was confirmed by the Senate to lead the CIA, a civilian agency. The vote went 78-15. That means at least twenty-two Democrats voted in his favor. Why are there seventy-eight people who are so dreadfully misguided? Nevermind that, who were the seven who were absent?

“Indifference is the silent support of the ones in power.”

By the way, Hayden is the man who was in charge of the NSA when it began logging every phone call made in the United States. I don’t trust this man to head a separate intelligence agency — one that’s more powerful on the international stage.

This administration, let me tell you…

Uncapitalist in a bad way

Because of the development of digital signals in television, the FCC is forcing all local stations — some 1,200 in the US, I believe — to switch over to broadcasting exclusively a digital signal by April 7, 2009. As of now, many stations are in transition, and continue to broadcast an analogue signal along with the digital.

My first impression was that this was very uncapitalist. In an affront to Adam Smith and his wonderful Invisible Hand, the government is forcing an entire industry to adopt a standard. When the strictly capitalist belief is to trust the industry and the greed of the individuals therein to do what’s best for everybody: Eventually, the stations that did have a digital signal would prevail because they would be sending a higher quality broadcast, or at least more options for the same quality and price. Consumers, of course, would be trusted to hop on the bandwagon and adopt the technology without a fight, and gladly fork over the cash for a new TV. And capitalism would save the day.

Instead, this measure shows an unAmerican lack of faith in capitalism — and not in the good way, not in the redistributing the wealth downwards way. Contrariwise, this measure hurts the poor by forcing the entire nation to adopt an expensive new technology from the top-down. Ninety-eight (98) percent of American homes have televisions. Seventy-six (76) percent of those have cable. So a full quarter of all television viewers rely on broadcast for their TV signal. Logically, these would be the poorer demographics.

And by forcing them to adopt a new, expensive technology within the next three years adds an additional strain. They should be expected to, instead, spend the money for a new TV on, oh, say, clothes or food. And reasonably so. In effect, the government is taking away their TV.

But! Compassionate Conservatives come to the rescue. John McCain is spearheading an effort that would give a $250 credit to poor households to buy a digital set-top converter that will convert the digital signal into an analogue signal for their analogue TVs.

For the love of God.

I was already miffed after hearing it took $2.5 million to buy 30 seconds during the last Superbowl. I was already miffed after hearing that even though every Friends star made one million dollars per episode, NBC still raked in $27 million on top of that.

How many people could twenty-seven million dollars feed? How many people could it house, clothe, and feed, for a lifetime? Some statistic came out a couple years ago about how much it cost to raise a child up to the age of 18. By that number, one episode of Friends could have clothed, housed, and fed 208 children until they were 18. Two hundred and eight children. That’s three-thousand seven-hundred forty-four years of food, clothing and shelter. Versus forty minutes of laughs (at best). There is absolutely no comparison. I am appalled.

Aren’t there better things we could be spending this money on? Let’s give poor people money for a TV. Why not food stamps or job training, for God’s sake? Teach a man to fish, why don’t you? There’s something fundamentally wrong with all of this, and if you’re not outraged, you certainly should be.

Of Horrors and Horses

Seventy civilians are dying every day in Baghdad alone, but the news just can’t get enough of this poor horse that broke its leg. God bless Barbaro.

“My achin’ tooth hurts me more than 10,000 dead Chinese.” -Newsroom maxim

Optimism and Stick-to-itiveness

I recently wrote a report on the 2004 campaign for President. The thesis, which I defended in 5500 words, boiled down to the fact that Bush was optimistic and sure — some would say stubborn. And although, as the race wore on, holes were being exposed and questions raised about the war, the weapons of mass destruction, etc., Bush was sticking to his guns. Even if what he was sure of was the wrong thing to do.

It bothers me on a fundamental level that the American public would elect a man on the grounds that he was ’sticking to his principles,’ etc. What if he had the wrong principles? Better, I suppose, than have someone who second-guesses the actions of a war-time President, dares to suggest that we should have to show to the rest of the world that we are waging a legitimate war, and threw back his well-earned medals in protest.

Really makes you wonder.

EDIT: My paper is available online in its entirety here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LockeShocke/Calming_the_Waters

Operation Merlin

The January issue of Rolling Stone, in the National Affairs section, makes reference to an “Operation Merlin,” conducted by the CIA in Tehran. The Central Intelligence Agency hired a Russian scientist to deliver flawed plans for a nuclear weapon to Iran. The hope was that the Iranians would waste time and resources building a dud, but the operation backfired when the Russian scientist noticed the mistakes in the plan and offered to help the Iranians fix them. I laugh.

The Case for Impeachment

I think that the Downing Street Memo pretty much seals the deal for Bush. It’s a shame we didn’t hear more about it here in the States. But because he still has Congress in his favor, and he hasn’t lied about any personal sexcapades, he hasn’t warranted a 40 million dollar investigation and a subsequent impeachment trial.

It’s odd, though, that when 50% of the public agree with the question, “If President Bush intentionally misled the public about the reasons for going to war in Iraq, then Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment,” and while the disapproval rating has been sitting pretty over 50%, our Representatives don’t seem to be very representative. I wish we would see more serious talk about these lies…

Maybe after the mid-term elections everything will be all better.

Lenin was Right

CIA flights, transporting prisoners between secret prisons in Europe violated a number of international treaties.

Dozens of prisoners — including United States citizens — are held indefinitely, without being charged, without the protections of the Geneva Convention, and without access to a lawyer. If they are given a lawyer, the FBI has permission to monitor the otherwise privileged conversations between attorney and client.

Eight prisoners have died of torture while in U.S. custody in Guantanamo. The soldiers posted a sign that reads, “If you don’t make them bleed, they can’t prosecute you for it.”

I, for one, am incensed by the practices of this administration. Ladies and gentlemen, you’re all being ruled by Nazis.

“Indifference is the silent support of the ones in power.” -Lenin

Oh, and: “A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.” -Edward Murrow

The Star-Spangled Banner

“Then conquer we must,
For our cause, it is just,
And this be our motto:
In God is our trust.”
-The Star-Spangled Banner

“Conquer we must…” Conquer we must?

Somewhere over the last 230 years, America changed its foreign policy from “isolation and neutrality” to “stay out of our hemisphere” to unabashed pre-emptive war. What kind of country…

Who knew it was always in our national anthem?