Close to 800,000 French citizens lost much if not all of
their monetary wealth including a reported 15,000 single women in the Panama
scandal. 510 politicians had pocketed
bribes to keep the matter out of the public eye. Many were indicted. Of the few who went to trial for admitted corruption,
all were acquitted save one minister for city development who committed
suicide. After the press broke the
scandal, there were allegations that the leak of information to the public was
part of some deeper anti-Semitic agenda as some of the middle-men were dodgy
Jewish financiers. When all was said and
done, corrupt politicians involved in covering up the deception pocketed over
half the total 1.8 billion Francs that were stolen from the public. And nothing changed. This was 123 years ago and the event was the
bankruptcy of the Panama Canal Company.
The public outcry led to lasting reform and the people all got the
justice that for so long had been denied them.
Oops! No. In fact, this evisceration of public
investment led to the distressed acquisition of the Panama Canal by the United
States for about $40 million dollars and the permanent loss of economic assets
by the French public.
When the report of the leaked 80 gigabits of records of
Mossack Fonseca was published in February 2015 (a year before the public
learned of the “Panama Papers” scandal) in Süddeutsche Zeitung the scope of corruption of public
officials and corporations was not fully understood. The next 2.6 terabytes of data – ultimately uploaded
to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) in
Washington D.C. – were reviewed revealing the records of nearly 10% of all
offshore companies with land holdings in Britain. Edward Snowden referred to the Panama Papers
as the “biggest leak in the history of journalism,” knowing full well he’s
holding onto the even bigger leak about other corporate activities that will
make tax evasion and asset hiding child’s play.
And by this, I’m not referring to the SZ comment that, “what’s
coming next,” may include a lot more information about Americans and American
corporations. What I’m referring to is the
massive number of U.S. corporations that have used their commercial access
around the world for corrupt and clandestine purposes referenced in Hank
Crumpton’s The Art of Intelligence: Lessons from a Life in the CIA’s Clandestine
Service.
What do the Panama
Paper’s tell us about ourselves? What is
the significance of the Panama Papers in the larger context of the economic
system in which we operate? What does it
say about our political leadership to realize those who are setting public
policy see their own policies as so odious that they need to evade their own
rules?
The Panama Papers
evidence, above all else, that the illusion of the dominant economic framework
of our time is a rigged game. While I’ve
been a long-standing critic of the immoral worldview that was promulgated by
the Judeo-Christian contrivance of human “dominion” over everything – these papers
genuinely indict those who perceive beneficence in the “unseen hand” in the
market place. The unseen hand is
connected to the public’s pocket and has been picking it for longer than anyone
wants to admit. The hypnosis under which
most of the general public operate – that finance and politics are beyond the
remit of the pedestrian brain – is as much to indict as the actors that prey on
this apathetic social meme. And it’s
rather important to note that the ICIJ did not release all of the records. In other words, editorial decisions about who
to vilify and who to shield were part and parcel of the “greatest leak” to
date. In short, even those who are
allegedly at the vanguard of disclosure are still holding onto the illusion
that someone somewhere needs to be the “bad guy” and someone else is “not”. Like so many disclosures before, the
paternalistic determination of what the “public needs to know” supports the
very information arbitrage that keeps those in power in power and those without
power impotent against the certainty that corruption marches on unabated.
The Panama Papers
conveniently demonstrate the genius of the British Empire. In the First Article of the Treaty of Ghent
ending the War of 1812, the groundwork for revenue shifting and base erosion
(the OECD’s term for tax evasion) was laid in subtle most favored nations
concessions ratified by the United States, His Britannic Majesty and the Dey of
the Regency of Algiers. In the agreement
to an inviolable, universal peace – a lofty sounding concession – the ability
for the Empire to preserve its banking and asset shielding status was
solidified. And while the United States –
having recently gained independence from Great Britain – was going to turn into
an industrial juggernaut compared to its former colonial master, Great Britain,
its laws, its concessions to aristocracy, and its financial institutions was
going to have the last laugh repatriating the wealth from the very lands it had
“lost”. In short, the brash American
experiment failed before it even had a generation under its belt and the Panama
Papers are just the tip of the iceberg when we see how much the British Empire
controls or holds in terms of global assets.
I have encountered,
over the past month, a stream of humanity who have all lamented their
incapacity to “do something” about the certainty that they have that the economic
house of cards is about to collapse in a manner far worse than the GFC in
2007-08. From the “consciousness-minded”
to the mercantile industrialist to the entrepreneur, the sense that the game is
rigged is universal but equally universal is the perception that there’s not a
damn thing that you can do about it.
This is not the case. But like
most other systemic failures, when massive “leaks” are released, it’s important
to look at what else is moving in the shadows while the focus is on the “leaks”. For example, during the week that the world
was focused on the Panama Papers, no one seemed to focus on the 2016
National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers issued by the
White House. In this document, the
Obama Administration addresses the motivations behind the Trans-Pacific
Partnership Agreement signed in February 2016 in Auckland. So while we’re talking about tax shelters, we’re
explicitly working to install tax policies that favor U.S. trade advantage for
the estimated $131 billion per year from our trading partners in the Pacific, “because
we know that when the playing field is level, our workers and businesses can
compete – and win – in the global economy.”
Cool thing is that when level means “flowing in favor of the U.S.” the
winning is a bit easier. Create enough
noise in the Atlantic and Caribbean and no one will look in the Pacific!
So what’s it going to
be? 123 years from now, will this
bluster in the Caribbean be yet another in the long line of humanity being
robbed, feeling like it’s incapable of responding, and then being primed to be
robbed again? Is this another time when
we acquiesce to the establishment and our notion that corruption is a necessary
evil? Are we unwilling to call out the
violations of social dignity because somewhere we know we’d do it ourselves if
we had the resources and the power to do so?
Or are we ready to play on a different playing field – one that doesn’t
require leveling because all the contours and sand traps are known to all the
players? Are we willing to use models
that are not based on corrupt incumbencies and be courageous enough to face a
world in which our “salaries”, “assets” and our “economic status” do not define
us but our productive engagement and social utility does?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment. I look forward to considering this in the expanding dialogue. Dave