檢驗國家秩序，不是多少百萬富翁，而是群眾是否饑餓

檢驗一個國家秩序的標準，不是看它擁有多少百萬富翁，而是看它的群眾是否有饑餓的情況

The Test of a Country Is Not the Number of Millionaires It Owns, but the Absence of Starvation Among Its Masses: The Forty-Fourth Newsletter (2019).

https://thetriContinental.org/newsletterissue/the-test-of-a-country-is-not-the-number-of-millionaires-it-owns-but-the-absence-of-starvation-among-its- 大眾四十四通訊-2019/

巴格達， 2019 年 10 月 31 日

親愛的朋友們，

來自三大洲社會研究所辦公桌的問候。

年輕女子走在高速公路上。 她舉著伊拉克國旗。 她希望生活在一個她的願望能夠得到滿足的國家，而不是被伊拉克悲慘曆史的廢墟所窒息。 槍聲很熟悉； 它已經返回城市，子彈飛向抗議者。 文化民兵組織成員、詩人 Kadhem Khanjar 在 Facebook 上捕捉了正在發生的事情的本質：

我們就是這樣死去的。

簡單的人殺死簡單的人。

在希望的邊緣，有弗朗茨·法農所說的“國家賴以生存的古老花崗岩塊”發出的槍聲。 在抗議的那一刻，當槍聲響起時，一切都清晰了。 人們不應該對精英的性格感到天真，他們的微笑掩蓋了通過咬緊牙關向追隨者發出的指示，他們的“簡單人”準備殺死“簡單人民”。 在最好的情況下，“花崗岩塊”聳聳肩，洗牌內閣，提供適度的改革； 最糟糕的是，士兵們——他們捂著臉，不讓眼淚流出來——向家人開槍。

在遙遠的倫敦、巴黎、法蘭克福和華盛頓特區，精英們聞著，擦掉肩上的頭皮屑。 他們在談到聖地亞哥和巴格達的精英時說，“我們不像他們”，盡管每個人都知道他們是相同的，因為他們不久前才派出機器警察來羞辱黃背心和占領華爾街。

幾十年前，智利裔阿根廷作家阿裏爾·多爾夫曼 (Ariel Dorfman) 坐在巴黎地鐵裏閱讀海因裏希·伯爾 (Heinrich Böll) 的《小醜》(The Clown，1963)。 “這一定是一個悲傷的職業，”坐在多夫曼對麵的一名男子說道，他指的是小醜。 多夫曼和那個男人都意識到對方很傷心。 該男子說他來自巴西。 他們因共同的困境而互相擁抱——他們的國家處於獨裁之下。 “我很傷心，”該男子說道，“因為我希望我們獲勝，但在我心裏，我認為我們不會贏。”

這個人談到了現實的堅硬外殼，即精英們根深蒂固地固守在花崗岩塊中，不願讓人類粉碎它並釋放出人類道德的最佳品質。 盡管兩人都想贏，但兩人都明白這一點。 正是對勝利的渴望驅使超過一百萬人走上聖地亞哥（智利）的街頭，正是這數百萬人唱起了維克多·哈拉（Victor Jara）的歌曲El derecho de vivir en paz（“和平生活的權利”）， 1971 年，賈拉為胡誌明和越南人演唱了這首歌。兩年後，智利獨裁政權逮捕並殘酷殺害了賈拉。

El derecho de vivir en paz，2019 年 10 月。

本月，成千上萬的人在聖地亞哥的街道上唱著《哈拉》，旋律既悲傷又挑釁，表明了哈拉的平反。

1916 年 12 月 22 日，M. K. 甘地在阿拉哈巴德（印度）的繆爾中央學院經濟學會發表演講。 在這裏，甘地提出了一個衡量文明的簡單標準——他說，“衡量一個國家秩序的標準不是該國擁有百萬富翁的數量，而是該國群眾是否有饑餓現象”。

一百年後，這句話仍然令人震驚，隻有一個修正——不是百萬富翁，而是億萬富翁。 主要銀行瑞士信貸發布了全球財富年度報告。 本月發布的最新報告計算出，僅世界最富有的1%人口就擁有全球總財富的45%，而最富有的10%人口則擁有全球總財富的82%； 下半部分財富持有者——即人類的 50%——所擁有的財富不到全球總財富的 1%。 這個小百分比（1%）構成了花崗岩塊的核心。 超過一半的最富有的人居住在北美和歐洲； 擁有超過 5000 萬美元的超級富豪、超高淨值人士中，恰好有一半居住在北美。 Wealth-X 的 2019 年億萬富翁普查顯示，美國有 705 名億萬富翁，遠遠超過人口普查中接下來的 8 個國家的億萬富翁人數總和。

智利是經濟合作與發展組織（OECD）國家中不平等率最高的國家。 它的億萬富翁將錢分散到所有主要政黨的口袋裏，產生了這樣一種觀點：民主就是從主要資本主義集團籌集資金，而不是將人民的願望轉化為政策。 Angelinis、Paulmanns、Cuetos、Solaris 和 Luksics 可能支持不同的政治派別，但最終——無論誰獲勝——這些億萬富翁及其企業集團才是決定未來發展的人。

政策並從中受益。 這就是為什麽超過一百萬人走上街頭演唱維克多·哈拉 (Victor Jara) 的原因。 他們想要和平生活的權利，掌控自己生活的權利。

甘地的標準不僅涉及超級富豪的數量，還涉及那些每天與饑餓作鬥爭的人。 幾個月前，世界衛生組織發布了一份關於饑餓問題的報告，報告顯示，至少有8.21億人晚上餓著肚子上床睡覺。 這是一個可怕的數字。 但這還不夠。 聯合國機構的研究發現，估計有 20 億人（四分之一的人）處於中度至嚴重的糧食不安全狀態，這意味著他們“無法定期獲得安全、營養和充足的食物”。

所以，我們到了。 根據甘地的簡單公式，世界沒有通過考驗。

智利被阿根廷和玻利維亞包圍。 在阿根廷，總統選舉將馬克裏驅逐出境，他因重返國際貨幣基金組織而受傷。 玻利維亞的埃沃·莫拉萊斯第四次連任。 盡管他們麵前的“政策空間”仍然有限，但他們的勝利意義重大。 埃沃一直在努力擴大這一空間，盡最大努力推動玻利維亞走向進步。 智利的增長率為 1.7%，而玻利維亞的增長率為 4.2%。 但這些數字還不夠。 帝國主義的壓力限製了左傾政府將人民的願望納入治理邏輯的能力。

聯合國貿易和發展會議 (UNCTAD) 最近發布的貿易和發展報告回顧了貿發會議自 1964 年成立以來一直在說的話：全球南方國家需要巨大的政策空間“以追求其國家優先事項”。 “政策空間”的概念最初由貿發會議於 2002 年提出，隨後在貿發十一大 2004 年《聖保羅共識》中獲得正式地位。 該術語匯集了三個相互關聯的原則：

國家主權平等原則（《聯合國憲章》第 2.1 條）。

發展權原則（《發展權宣言》，聯合國大會第 41/128 號決議，1986 年）。

給予發展中國家特殊待遇的原則，特別是提供特殊和差別待遇（《發展權利宣言》，聯合國大會第41/128號決議，1986年，第4.2條）。

確實，即使“政策空間”縮小，政府仍保留一些重要工具。 然而，這些工具常常因國際貨幣基金組織和世界銀行等跨國組織設定的“優先事項”、貿易協定、七國集團的壓力以及長期迷失方向的主流經濟學專業而受到削弱。 如果左傾政府一意孤行，他們就會受到製裁威脅的進一步削弱。 但“政策空間”還不是一個充分的問題； 更大的問題是缺乏資金。

阿根廷和玻利維亞等政府左傾的國家根本沒有能力為本國人民通過選舉確定的優先事項籌集資金。 選民可能會對緊縮政策說不，但正如希臘人所發現的那樣，他們的聲音比銀行業和帝國主義國家的力量要小。 對於希臘人來說，這是三駕馬車（國際貨幣基金組織、歐洲央行和歐盟）。 貿發會議的最新報告指出了通過創建國有公共開發銀行（PDB）進行融資的重要性。 Jomo Kwame Sundaram 和 Anis Chowdhury 根據該報告提出了 PDB 的機製：

為公共銀行提供更多資本以擴大貸款規模，包括通過直接融資。
通過明確的政府授權、績效指標和問責機製來支持開發銀行業務，並重視財務標準之外的其他標準。

防止 PDB 服從短期商業標準。

鼓勵資產估計為7.9萬億美元的主權財富基金引導資源支持PDB。

確保銀行監管機構正確理解公共銀行（尤其是PDB）的獨特使命。

近幾十年來，各國央行通常通過“通脹目標製”，擺脫對價格穩定的狹隘關注，從而發揮更大膽、更積極的發展作用。

大眾經濟工人聯合會（CTEP）和大祖國陣線的胡安·格拉布瓦（Juan Grabois）向《人民快報》講述了阿根廷新政府麵臨的挑戰。

巴格達路上的年輕女子、聖地亞哥高唱維克多·哈拉的人們、阿根廷和玻利維亞的選民、雅典街頭的資深抗議者——他們希望政府製定符合他們願望的政策。 他們希望這些政策能夠減少饑餓人口和億萬富翁。 他們想贏。 他們不想像多夫曼和他的巴西朋友一樣——悲傷是因為他們想贏，但又擔心贏不了。

每隔幾

幾年來，地球上的人們站起來並宣布全球起義已經開始。 幾個月後，他們的希望破滅了，而公式仍然是一樣的——更多的億萬富翁，更多的饑餓人口。 但是，總有一天，陽光會普照，曆史的天使會與之微笑； 陽光將融化古老的花崗岩塊，我們將擁有和平生活的權利。

維傑

The test of orderliness in a country, is not the number of millionaires it owns, but the absence of starvation amongst its masses

https://thetricontinental.org/newsletterissue/the-test-of-a-country-is-not-the-number-of-millionaires-it-owns-but-the-absence-of-starvation-among-its-masses-the-forty-fourth-newsletter-2019/

OCTOBER 31, 2019

Baghdad, October 2019.

Dear Friends,

Greetings from the desk of the Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research.

The young woman walks down the highway. She carries the Iraqi flag. She wants to live in a country where her aspirations can be met and not suffocated by the detritus of Iraq’s tragic history. The sound of gunfire is familiar; it has returned to the city, with the bullets flying towards the protestors. The poet Kadhem Khanjar, a member of the Culture Militia, takes to Facebook to capture the essence of what is happening:

That’s how we simply die.

Simple people kill simple people.

At the edge of hope lies the gunfire from what Frantz Fanon called ‘the old granite block upon which the nation rests’. At the moment of protest, when the gunfire starts, clarity arrives. One should not be naïve about the character of the elite, whose smiles camouflage the instructions given through clenched teeth to the henchmen, their ‘simple men’ ready to kill the ‘simple people’. At its best, the ‘granite block’ shrugs, shuffles its cabinet, offers modest reforms; at its worst, its soldiers – their faces covered to prevent the tears from showing – fire at their family members.

Far away, in London, Paris, Frankfurt, and Washington, DC, the elites sniff, they brush the dandruff from their shoulders. ‘We are not like them’, they say of the elites in Santiago and Baghdad, although everyone knows that they are identical, for they had not long ago sent out their robocops to humiliate the yellow vests and Occupy Wall Street.

Decades ago, the Chilean-Argentinian writer Ariel Dorfman sat in a metro in Paris reading Heinrich Böll’s The Clown (1963). ‘Must be a sad profession’, said a man sitting across from Dorfman, referring to the clown. Both Dorfman and the man recognised that the other was sad. The man said he was from Brazil. They embraced each other for their common predicament – their countries under dictatorship. ‘I am sad’, said the man, ‘because I want us to win, but in my heart, I don’t think we will’.

The man spoke of the hard crust of reality, the sense that the elites are entrenched in their granite block, unwilling to let humanity shatter it and release the best of human ethics. That is what both men understood, although both wanted to win. It is the desire to win that drove more than a million people into the streets of Santiago (Chile), and it was these millions that sang Victor Jara’s song, El derecho de vivir en paz (‘The Right to Live in Peace’), which Jara sang for Ho Chi Minh and the Vietnamese in 1971. Two years later, the dictatorship in Chile arrested and brutally killed Jara.

El derecho de vivir en paz, October 2019.

That thousands sang Jara on Santiago’s streets this month, the melody both sad and defiant, suggests the vindication of Jara.

On 22 December 1916, M. K. Gandhi gave a lecture at the Muir Central College Economic Society in Allahabad (India). Here, Gandhi offered a simple measure for civilisation – ‘the test of orderliness in a country’, he said, ‘is not the number of millionaires it owns, but the absence of starvation amongst its masses’.

A hundred years later, the phrase remains electric, with only one emendation – not millionaires, but billionaires. The major bank Credit Suisse releases an annual report on global wealth. The current report, released this month, calculates that the top 1% of the world’s population alone owns 45% of total global wealth, while the richest 10% owns 82% of total global wealth; the bottom half of the wealth holders – 50% of humanity – accounts for less than 1% of total global wealth. This small percentage, the 1%, forms the core of the granite block. More than half of the wealthiest people live in North America and Europe; exactly half of the ultra-wealthy, the Ultra-High Net Worth individuals who have more than $50 million each, live in North America. The Billionaire Census 2019 from Wealth-X shows that the United States has 705 billionaires, far more than the combined number of billionaires in the next eight countries in the Census.

Chile has the highest inequality rate amongst the countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Its billionaires scatter money into the pockets of all the major political parties, generating the view that democracy is about raising money from the major capitalist blocs rather than about raising the aspirations of the people into policy. The Angelinis, Paulmanns, Cuetos, Solaris, and Luksics might support different political fractions, but at the end of the day – whoever wins – these billionaires and their conglomerates are the ones that set the policy and benefit from it. That is why over a million people came onto the streets to sing Victor Jara. They want the right to live in peace, the right to control their lives.

Gandhi’s standard is not only about the number of ultra-rich, but also about those who struggle each day with hunger. A few months ago, the World Health Organisation released a report on hunger which showed that at least 821 million people go to bed at night hungry. This is a ghastly number. But this is not enough. Studies by the UN agencies find that an estimated 2 billion people – one in four people – are moderately to severely food insecure, which means that they ‘do not have regular access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food’.

So, there we are. According to Gandhi’s simple formula, the world fails its test.

Chile is surrounded by Argentina and Bolivia. In Argentina, the presidential elections ejected Macri, who was wounded by his return to the IMF. Bolivia’s Evo Morales held his seat for a fourth term. Their victories are significant, although the ‘policy space’ before them remains limited. Evo has fought to widen that space, to push as hard as possible to move Bolivia in a progressive direction. While Chile’s growth rate stumbled at 1.7%, Bolivia grew at 4.2%. But these numbers are not enough. The pressure of imperialism narrows the ability of a left-leaning government to admit the desires of the people into the logic of governance.

The recent trade and development report from the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) recalls something that UNCTAD has been saying since its formation in 1964: that the countries of the Global South need significant policy space ‘to pursue their national priorities’. The idea of ‘policy space’ was first developed by UNCTAD in 2002, and then it gained official status in the São Paulo Consensus of 2004 at UNCTAD XI. The term brings together three linked principles:

1. The principle of the sovereign equality of States (UN Charter, article 2.1).
2. The principle of the right to development (Declaration on the Right to Development, UN General Assembly Resolution 41/128, 1986).
3. The principle of special treatment for developing countries, notably the provision of special and differential treatment (Declaration on the Right to Development, UN General Assembly Resolution 41/128, 1986, article 4.2).

It is certainly true that even with the narrowed ‘policy space’, several important instruments remain with governments. However, these instruments are often blunted by the ‘priorities’ set by multinational organisations such as the IMF and the World Bank, by trade agreements, by pressure from the G7, and by the mainstream economics profession that has long lost its way. They are further blunted by threats of sanctions if left-leaning governments go their own way. But ‘policy space’ is not a sufficient problem; the greater problem is lack of financing.

Countries like Argentina and Bolivia – with left-leaning governments – simply do not have the ability to raise funds for the priorities set by their own people through elections. The electorate might say no to austerity, but – as the Greeks found – their voice had less power than that of the banking industry and the imperialist states; for the Greeks, this was the troika (the IMF, the European Central Bank, and the European Union). UNCTAD’s latest report points to the importance of financing through the creation of state-owned Public Development Banks (PDB). Drawing from the report, Jomo Kwame Sundaram and Anis Chowdhury lay out the mechanism for the PDBs:

1. Provide public banks with more capital to scale up lending, including through direct financing.
2. Support development banking with clear government mandates, performance indicators, and accountability mechanisms valuing other criteria besides financial ones.
3. Prevent PDBs from being subordinated to short-term commercial criteria.
4. Encourage sovereign wealth funds, with assets estimated to be US$7.9 trillion, to direct resources in support of PDBs.
5. Ensure that bank regulators treat public banks, especially PDBs, with appropriate understanding of their distinctive mandates.
6. Free central banks from their typically narrow focus on price stability, usually by ‘inflation targeting’ in recent decades, to take on bolder, pro-active development roles.

Juan Grabois, Confederation of Workers of the Popular Economy (CTEP) and Frente Patria Grande speaks to People’s Dispatch about the challenges for the new government in Argentina.

The young woman on the road in Baghdad, the people singing Victor Jara in Santiago, the voters in Argentina and Bolivia, the veteran protestors from the streets of Athens – what they want is for their government to produce policies that come from their aspirations. They want these policies to produce less hungry people and less billionaires. They want to win. They don’t want to be like Dorfman and his Brazilian friend – sad because they want to win but fear that they won't.

Every few years, the people of the planet rise up and announce that the Global Intifada has begun. A few months later, their hopes are crushed, and the formula remains the same – more billionaires, more hungry people. But, someday, the sun will shine, and the angel of history will smile with it; the sunbeams will melt the old granite block and we will have the right to live in peace.

Warmly, Vijay.