Well, I managed in the first day of this “serious” critique of Eric Walberg’s book, Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the great games, to make at least one factual error. I had assumed that Eric was of Jewish ethnicity. Not so, he informed me in his response: “A minor correction. I believe you think I’m Jewish too, but much as I admire (albeit it critically) the Jewish character and am often assumed to be Jewish, as far as I know (who knows?) my origins are Protestant Swedish/Irish. I am quite convinced that through the ages, the large majority of those born Jewish have assimilated (no records of these apostates are kept), and in any case, we are all related if we go back 7 generations.”
Just to remind us, here’s the thumbnail sketch of the book whose first section, the Introduction, I commented on in my piece yesterday.
— Introduction, pp17-28;color map -p.18;endnotes pp28-29
— Chapt 1,pp30-46;GGI: Competing Empires;endnotes pp46-49
— Chapt 2,pp50-91;GGII: Empire against Communism;endnotes pp92-98
— Chapt 3,pp99-152;GGIII: US-Israel—Postmodern Imperialism;endnotes
— Chapt 4,pp161-219;GGIII: Israel—Empire-and-a-half; Appendix: The Israel lobby
and ‘Dog wags the tail’ debates pp214-219;endnotes 219-232
— Chapt 5,pp233-276;GGIII: Many players, many games;Appendix III: The
ex-Soviet central Asian republics in GGIII,pp.273-276;endnotes 277-283
— Bibliography, pp.284-293, Bibliography – and Chapt 4 Appendix: Critique of
‘New NATO’ literature
— Index, pp.294-300
Yesterday I wrote about the Introduction of Eric’s book. Today I want to focus on his Chapt 1 which, with its endnotes, occupies pages 30-49. Of course you’re welcome to join in. Both Eric and I will be glad to learn your thoughts. And if you want, you can post them on my new blog. 
By The Great Games I (GGI) Eric is referring to the historical period during which the older “classical” empires seemed to be flourishing, with the British Empire superficially in control of a large chunk of the globe. However, Eric is far too savvy to accept that much publicized discourse. He’s focussed from the start on the global development of an overriding strategic apparatus for controlling the use of money and its relationship with the productive roles of differrent sectors of the world population. His analysis is rooted in the theoretical formulae of the Marxists, Leninists, Stalinists and Maoists. But not in a superficial way. It’s the central banks that he’s out to expose, the globalization of private ownership of all the world’s wealth in the hands of these few secretive institutions.
Here’s Eric (p.37): “By the outbreak of WWI, though Britain may still have ruled the waves, its loss of financial hegemony was ultimately more telling than maintaining a superior military might and even control of the known sources of oil. The international bankers, [Note: If you think that’s Eric’s euphemism for inordinately wealthy and greedy Jews, you’re not off the mark.] who enjoyed the protection of the British crown around the world, were well aware that the British government was virtually bankrupt by the outbreak of WWI. They were already focusing on the US and were able to pressure President Woodrow Wilson to sign the US Federal Reserve Act in 1913, putting money creation in the US in the hands of private bankers rather than of government, as it was already in Britain, France and Germany. These GGI central banks were already moving towards the financial endgame of imperialism — the creation of a world system of financial control in private hands, coordinated by them.
“The creation of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland, in 1930, ostensibly to manage German reparations payments, marked a new stage in the globalization of financial capital, with the (BIS) a ‘coordinator of the operations of central banks around the world’, intended to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. The capital flows in GGI originally consisted of the import from the periphery of gold and other valuables as part of the looting of the colonies during the early stages of colonization.”
But lest I give the impression that Eric is so negative in his evaluation of the imperial system that he doesn’t have a “balanced” view, I should emphasize that he does have positive things to say, and he lays them out for us to see. Thus he writes, (p.38) “The positive side . . . of this is that . . . there was [sometimes] substantial development during GGI in the colonies . . . being a British colony (especially a dominion, where the economy was directly administered by British officials) made loans cheaper and provided preferential tariffs. Given sufficient capital investment, access to new technology, migration (and ethnic cleansing of the natives), responsible administration (even if tilted to imperial interests) meant low corruption, and a colony could truly develop as did Canada and Australia, for example.
“Under the influence of British-Russian intrigues, from the 1890s on, both Central Asia and the Middle East, too, modernized somewhat. Reforms came from the top — the westernized Young Turks achieved a constitutional monarchy in the Ottoman Caliphate and introduced educational reforms. Under British occupation, Egypt experienced much improved administration and rapid economic development despite the need to pay off the excessive national debt. Under Russian and subsequent Soviet rule, Turkestan got railways, established a modern education system, and developed large-scale farming. Under British prompting, Afghan emirs and King Amanullah Khan attempted minimal reforms and improved relations with the West”.
“[B]y the end [of World War I] Britain and France were in hock to US banks, with JP Morgan Britain’s official financial representative in the US, and the war debt guaranteed by the [p.39] US government. The world currency was already no longer the pound, and the financial center for the world was already no longer London, despite the British victory” . . . When [Great Britain] was finally forced to abandon the gold standard in 1930, it effectively ceded its imperial status to the US, which by then controlled more gold and had far fewer military expenses. It is no wonder that even as the Round Table circle was organizing RIIA [Royal Institute of International Affairs (1920)] in London in 1919, the CFR [Council on Foreign Relations (1921)] was established in New York, financed by Morgan money, which would be the mouthpiece of the American branch of the now Anglo-American empire. The US was not an active international player in the post-WWI GGI endgame; however, as WWII approached, it became more and more the world financial refuge, preparing the way for the post-WWII US empire”.
Where Eric Walberg’s true sentiments are best (some would say most flagrantly) displayed is in such passages as his shredding away the vestiges of pseudo-greatness of one of the most brutal, unconscionable mass murderers of the ages, Winston Churchill. Here is Walberg at his best, a skilled surgeon slicing away the baloney of pseudo-history, on p.45:
“The glorious pomp hiding the cruelty and inhumanity of GGI is best epitomized by the figure of Winston Churchill, a swashbuckling romantic who saw military action in British India, participating in the slaughter of Afghan Pashtuns, who were angry that Britain had stolen half of their lands as part of its Great Game with Russia. He earned a comfortable living as a war correspondent there, in the Sudan, and during the second Boer War, using the new mass media ‘soft power’ to promote the imperial cause and, first and foremost, himself.
“He gained fame and notoriety as an adventurer, rhetorician, adventurer and sybarite, and eventually during WWII murderer on a mass scale, who never had second thoughts about the imperial project until it collapsed under his feet. As mentioned above, GGII actually dates from the beginning of the GGI endgame, rather than from Churchill’s notorious Iron Curtain flourish in 1946, when the Soviet Union was at its peak of prestige and authority. The 1917 Russian revolution was the logical outcome of the imperialism of competing empires, bankrupting themselves in senseless wars and exploiting the periphery countries, creating famine and horrors too numerous to list here. Churchill knew what the score was, who the enemy of empire was, and demanded that Bolshevism, a “conspiracy [of] . . . atheistic Jews”, be “strangled in its cradle”. The imperial powers, led by Britain and the US, invaded the new Russia in 1918 to try to defeat the communists GGI-style and failed, though they left a trail of devastation and were, over the next few decades, able to cripple the new state and eventually bring it down.”
OK, that’s it for Chapter I. I hardly need do more than select the most trenchant parts of Walberg’s epic work, and add a few explanatory remarks here and there. Eric cuts through in a way that Alan Hart fails to do. I think Alan was used (in the worst sense) by the woman whose friendship he believed was genuine, Golda Meir. She was the epitome of the ambitious, dishonest, brutal Jewish Zionist liar. Of course Alan, and all the good people whose sympathies for the “poor Jewish victims of the Nazi Holocaust” are aghast and infuriated to see the “Chosen People” slaughtering tiny children. Justice insists that Palestine — all of it — be returned to its indigenous inhabitants. Step I in rebuilding our world.
Sketch for a humane resolution of the Palestine/Israel conflict. http://site.www.umb.edu/faculty/salzman_g/t/2010-11-13.htm
Date: Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 4:09 AM
From: Eric Walberg <email@example.com>
Hi George, You have been hard at work. I can’t believe you are 86. I am delighted by your discourse — very anarchist. I too believe that you must write with passion or not at all (though the rewriting of a book should tone the text down so that the reader can provide his/her own passion).
>lightly-written but serious treatise
Eric: “Good to hear. That’s what I strove for.”
>It starts with quotes from two British empire-builders and a glimpse of the
Eric: “I’m not sure where ‘a glimpse of the author’ in what follows the Curzon quote has ‘To me, I confess, they are the pieces on a chessboard’ but that’s Curzon. You have a lively style which is enjoyable to read. Thanks again.”
Eric: “A minor correction. I believe you think I’m Jewish too, but much as I admire (albeit it critically) the Jewish character and am often assumed to be Jewish, as far as I know (who knows?) my origins are Protestant Swedish/Irish. I am quite convinced that through the ages, the large majority of those born Jewish have assimilated (no records of these apostates are kept), and in any case, we are all related if we go back 7 generations.”
Eric: “I think Mexico has many interesting and talented North American expats. It would be interesting to read a good book about you/them. Canada’s legendary skater/artist toller Cranston lives on a hill top in San Miguel de Allende.”
Eric: “My hope for my own book is that it can become a reference book for progressives and appear on reading lists. I am working on getting it translated into Arabic at present. I look forward to your further reflections, Eric <http://ericwalberg.com/>”
George Salzman is a former American Jew living in Oaxaca, Mexico, an ex-physics prof, Univ of Massachusetts-Boston.
All comments and criticisms are welcome. <firstname.lastname@example.org>