An Economic Hit Man Reveals Why the Global Economy IMPLODED -- and How to Fix It (John Perkins Economic Hitman Series)

This book is surprising timely (rare to read something that speaks to current issues when they are happening). The beginning is quick historical summary and then into the morass of our current situation. The ending was uplifting and hopeful which in today's mass media prophesying of doom and gloom was a welcomed break. There is no quick fix, but strong willed people can effect change by being conscious beings (look at what you buy and who you elect and continue to ACT)! Thank you for the history, revelations, and hopeful and helpful actions we can take. Great list of resources. Buy, borrow, recommend, and lend this book!

A well researched and informative book which tells us just how it is in the real world of corporate exploitation and destabilization of sovereign nations. A strategy of "predatory capitalism" primarily used in the developing world during the last 40 years or so, but which has now been applied in the last decade to the US and European nations with comparable disastrous consequences. A painful read for anyone who believes that all humans can carry on living like we have unlimited resources and are not building up severe environmental problems for future generations. Don't misunderstand me here, it is not simply a case of more recycling, low energy light bulbs, etc., but more fundamentally a radical change in how everybody lives, works and plays. Unless we pull our heads out of the sand sooner, rather than later, we will have change forced upon us by extreme catastrophes both man-made and natural, rather than having the chance to start making changes now in a more controlled manner to alleviate the systemic problems currently lying within the heart of Western economies.

Perkins's "Hoodwinked" is predominantly a rehash of his past material. He begins by reminding readers that the most common task of an economic hit man is to identify countries with resources our corporations covet, seduce, bribe, and/or extort their leaders to accept loans (usually World Bank origin, requiring use of U.S. contractors) that cannot be repaid, for the exploitation of privatized national assets that ultimately are taken over in loan default. Perkins contends that this strategy began in the Third World and has now spread to the U.S. and rest of the world. Robert McNamara, George Shultz, Dick Cheney etc. are reputed to have been early leaders in these conspiratorial efforts. Perkins role in this was supposedly facilitated by his employment as head economist at Charles Main, strategic consulting firm that I never heard of - subsequently taken over. His qualifications - graduation from the Boston University School of Management, two years' of Peace Corps experience in Ecuador, approval by the NSA, and hiring by Norwegian attorney Einar Greve. Perkins was then trained/seduced by a beautiful older woman. Seems a bit far-fetched to me.

Perkins then shifts focus to Iceland, booming in 2007 supposedly because of its hydro and geothermal power resources. Alcoa arranged to build 'a water-too-aluminum' facility that included a dam and power-plant generating over 600 MW, compared to the rest of Iceland using 300 MW. This required a large loan, collateralized by the sale of power. Then Iceland's banks, playing amongst the global giants, collapsed in 2008. Perkins alleges that Iceland's utility users lost money every time Alcoa used electricity but offers no explanation or data to support this.

Eventually Perkins moves to 'explaining' the current economic mess - for the 1,000th time. (It was interesting to read, however, that $3.2 billion was spent in the 2007 elections, and lobbyists go through another $2.5 billion/year doing their thing. Also, that the price of corn in Mexico fell 70% from 1994 to 2002, thanks to NAFTA allowing subsidized American farmers to drive native growers out of business.)

Perkins earlier books were much more compelling - I'm now wondering if I should revisit them with a more critical eye.

In this book John Perkins chastised multinational corporations such as Nike and Wal-Mart for exploiting workers in developing countries with extremely low wages and terrible working conditions.He also ask his readers, most of them citizens in advanced economies I suppose, to take consumer responsibility, stop buying from companies that earn enormous profits from their"sweat shops", and shift to companies that pay workers "fair-trade" wages.Although the prices of "fair-trade" products are often way higher than that of their "sweat shop" counterparts, the author argues that consumers should realize that the price premium is an investment in the collective future of the humanity - buying products from socially responsible companies will help to create a just and safe world for future generations.

This is a beautiful and passionate argument, which I can see will win the sympathy of many well-educated liberals.Reducing global inequality and increasing living standards of third-world countries are important courses, to be sure.However, whether asking people to buy the more expensive products is a solution to this goal is a totally different question.It is not difficult to see why the approach won't be effective.Even if buying fair-trade products is a collectively worthy investment in the future, any individual purchase will be too small and uncertain a contribution to the end goal, while the sacrifice at present is very tangible to the individual decision maker.On the other hand, every such purchase creates positive externality to the society, i.e., the person who made the purchase will not receive the full return of his "investment", which almost certainly will render fewer such purchases than socially desirable in a society dwelled by mostly rational individuals.It is difficult to rely on people's spontaneous sense of justice and innate altruism - though those virtues do exist -- to make social changes sustainable.Especially true when the going gets tough, our survival instincts and rational calculation will triumph.The fact that despite its poor record in human rights and social responsibility, Wal-Mart's profit even increases with the economic downturn is just one more example to remind us of this simple truth.Therefore, asking people to act noble as if they can internalize the welfare of the whole society is probably not the best way to change the world.Our species just hasn't evolved to that level yet.I believe that accepting this fact will create a more solid ground for any attempt to change the world for the better.

Inequality in wealth distribution around the globe is a structural problem that can hardly be solved by such local, band-aid solutions as asking consumers in the rich countries to pay more for the welfare of workers in the poor countries. It is easy to blame big corporations for not paying their workers enough.However, it is more useful to ask: if not plan A, what would be other options? Are plan Bs and Cs actually better?The fact that Nike's "sweat shop" is able to establish itself in Mexico and hire enough workers despite the extreme low wages says a lot.If the Nike factory is not there, the country will probably suffer from a higher rate of unemployment.Though the workers have barely enough food to feed their families right now, the alternative scenario would mean that they have nothing to eat at all!This doesn't mean that Nike and other multinational corporations are the saviors for the poor people in third world countries.They are not. In fact, in some circumstances free trade and the introduction of foreign competition to local markets contributed to income inequality and unemployment in those countries.For example, the import of mass-produced, cheaper corns from US crushed small farmers in Mexico and made their original occupation extinct.They had to look for other ways to support themselves and probably ended up in a low-paying factory run by US corporations.The story is not unlike what happened to English farmers at the beginning of the industrial revolution 300 years ago, which led to clashes between classes and Marxism (but that's another story).Conservative economics teaches that free trade is welfare-enhancing for both exporting and importing countries.After all, Mexican consumers get to buy cheaper corns.What international trade theory neglects is that this gain from trade is very unevenly distributed among the population.The world today is certainly very different than 300 years ago.For example, many countries have implemented or attempt to implement minimum wage laws.However, setting aside the loss of economic efficiency accompanied with these regulations, their effects are in many cases marginal in terms of improving living standards of low income population.
To read the rest of this review, go to http://www.natashache.com/2010/03/global-economic-inequality-why-it.html

Eye-opening. Although hard to believe at times, confirmation of certain incidences can be found in various publications by Prof. Noam Chomsky, namely "Hegemony or Survival". If you're tired of drinking the Kool-Aid and want to know more about the behind the scenes politics, read this. Read Chomsky for that matter.

I read this after Michael Lewis' "The big short" and before "Boomerang." Both of those books are fantastic; however, Hoodwinked never covers the topic like I expected. This guy hates corporations and capitalism. He even puts down non-profits like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that are funded by profits from corporations.
The best example of a country that manages corporations and environmental issues, according to "Hoodwinked?": China.

For a more academic read on Perkins' theme see Susan Strange's book "The Retreat of the State"

tomkThe Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy (Cambridge Studies in International Relations)

Perkin's take on the system of systems that emerged following the Bretton Woods conference is valid, in my view, and Susan Strange supplies the footnotes and citiations in her work to back up both author's positions.

tomk

I read his first book and was frightened to learn the facts about the economic 'hit men' but it all made sense somehow. Part of me wishes his story isn't true, but I'm trusting that this is based on fact... even if it's not, it's a great read.

John Perkins has such a broad experience in government and big business that he offers an integrative world view that is shocking as to the manipulation by government and the corporatocracy but still is optimistic and offers us solutions. Wake up America to someone who is telling the truth.

He reaffirms awareness that things aren't what's reported but also unknowily reaffirms the invisible arm (during the Nike part). I've always said the problem in America is the lack of micro economic understanding in voters (dollar spenders). I was awakened 15 years ago, if more were things would progress faster for the better.

Hoodwinked is another great book by John Perkins. He continues his quest to reveal the truth about the union of American corporations and politics and talks specifically about what we need to do to fix the system. Bravo!

Revealing and a promulgation of a review of the corporate world. How to implement a change requires much analysis and effort. The political scenario painted by this book, should be required reading for all Americans

John Perkins does not, he assures us, believe in conspiracy theory. What he does believe in are shadowy economists who work for corporations as hit men and are often seduced by beautiful women in green dresses before they go topple governments in concert with the CIA. Perkins was one of "many" such hit men, but he has reformed now and he wants to come clean by explaining how our perverted system of capitalism really works, why China's is better, and how Milton Friedman is to blame for it all.

Suffice to say, I am singularly unimpressed by all of this. Perkins sets up his argument by suggesting that the modern economic world is a result of a debate between Keynes and Friedman. The latter won, and this is why Iceland is on the verge of economic collapse, as are we. Having read both Keynes and Friedman, however, I did not recognize either of them in the description Perkins provided. What I saw was a mishmash of sources. On one page he cited an eighteen year old freshman student followed quickly by Paul Krugman (it's not clear which of those two is better informed) and shortly thereafter Perkins referred to an article which claimed airlines did not go bankrupt under regulation. The latter point is correct, incidentally. They also did not offer low fares, compete, or save fuel by flying full planes using a hub and spoke system. For a man who is concerned about global warming and the wasted resources of corporate capitalism, it is hard to see how this little detail escaped his notice. Or the detail that Whole Foods Market, which he praises, is founded by a libertarian inspired by, you guessed it, Milton Friedman. Or that many of the corporations he attacks found it convenient to donate money to the Obama campaign; hardly what you would expect of out of control free market corporate CEOs.

Still, having said all that, you should read this book. My two star review means, literally, that I did not like it. But it should be read nonetheless. People with a penchant for free market thought often assume that it is sufficient to demonstrate that Keyne's money multiplier effect does not, in fact, function as he predicted, in order to partially discredit the 'General Theory.' What this book suggests is that for many on today's "left," what Keynes actually had to say is not nearly as relevant as what they want to believe. Systematic analysis on the effects of tax cuts and increases, the money supply, and effect of regulations on the job market are all irrelevant to those who view (most) corporations as the embodiment of evil and Friedman as a "diminutive academic with dragonfly glasses."(p.29) So read it. If you have a left wing bent, you will probably find your biases confirmed. And the rest of us will get an insightful glimpse into the alternative reality that informs a significant percentage of the voting public.

After reading a series of good books about the economic swamp we're in, I thought this would be another useful contribution. Instead it was very light on real information and was mostly the author's rantings with many unsubstantiated opinions. A couple of interesting ideas, but read "Bailout Nation" if you want something really useful.

I enjoyed "Confessions"-it matched what Ecuadorians have told me, and put together things I had long suspected. But I find Hoodwinked contradictory. He says our current situation is all Milton Friedman's fault, and we need more govt. regulation. He misses that the govt.'s following Keynes with abandon is what has bankrupted the U.S. in just a couple of years. Friedman was correct-the real problem is govt. coercion. These companies get away with what they do because they have the U.S. govt's guns behind them.

Perkins would not have felt obligated to sell his energy company if the acquirer had threatened to take him to arbitration or mediation. It was the threat of being tied up in the govt's inefficient and backlogged courts that allowed that coercion.

We are blessed in the U.S. to have a parallel system-there is nothing the U.S. govt. does that the private sector doesn't also do-other than blowing up other countries and assinating leaders. At the same time, Americans cannot do anything that is not regulated and/or taxed. Our best solution is to immediately dismantle the U.S. govt. completely, and get it out of our lives. The private sector is already in place to fill the gaps left. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening-there are too many teats being suckled, from the richest to the poorest.

Perkins is correct that our actions can change things. Choose to use the private sector rather than the govt entities and protectorates. So let's buy organic fruits instead of Dole's products, use email and UPS/Fedex instead of the post office, consider solar panels where sunny, and just generally start thinking about the source of the items we consume. Don't say you support Israel when you drive an SUV, etc. And I would have told my daughter to buy a used crib-saves money and landfill space. There is no need to pay for a new one-sustainable or not.

"True confessions," true or not, often sell books, just like Dan Brown sells religion. But the most serious risk we face of being "hoodwinked" here is by Mr. Perkins himself.

As an investigative journalist who's devoted decades to studying corruption in dozens of developing countries, I have never once encountered any evidence for "economic hit men" - apart from Mr. Perkins' claims.

That might simply be because, whatever John was doing, he admits to having stopped doing it by 1980-81, long before the real debt crisis.

But in fact the whole notion that the Third World debt crisis was some sort of massive US government plot is just pure hogwash. It masks the real story -- the self-organizing misbehavior of powerful private interests, especially banks, local elites, and officials.

As for Torrijos, it was hard for him NOT to be more nationalistic than Noriega, who sold his soul to the CIA and Medellin. But Omar was also a corrupt tyrant who overthrew elected presidents, shuttered newspapers, promoted "visionary" buffalo farms, and made Noriega possible.

At his trial, a desperate Noriega claimed the CIA killed Torrijos, when he himself was the most likely culprit. But John takes Noriega's word for it.

I challenge Perkins to corroborate his wild-eyed assertions. I speak for a legion of serious journalists who could not be more critical of US policy, but are just sick and tired of doing all this hard work, only to get lumped together with popularizers of dubious provenance.

Now listening to this author on BookTV - after 5 minutes cannot stand another second. Full of hippy-dippy New Age nonsense and wild-eyed simplistic claims (ex. "we were all born into this time for a reason," "now is the most revolutionary time in history, more important than the agricultural revolution, industrial revolution, American revolution, French revolution," and other navel-gazing comments.) The clincher was the author's claim that the ancient prophesies of every indigenous population on the planet predict the specialness of this particular time. Pretty good indication that there is little critical thinking to be found in the book.

This book was just painfully bad. There are so many adjective that fit and none of them good. It was nonsensical, hypocritical (while pointing the finger of hypocrisy at everyone and everything like some kind of tourettes OCD victim) silly, paranoid and pretentious. It was naive nonsense from someone claiming an experienced insiders perspective. It claimed the need to move past our adolescent economic model and worldview to a more mature one while the entire tone of the book reeked of a sixteen year old wanna be hippe girl lounging in her room in her parents house listening to "Imagine" while staring at her "War is not good for children or other living things" and hanging kittens posters.
I had to force myself through this tree hugging hippie crap screed because I kept thinking it had to get better. I was wrong. I have never involuntarily rolled my eyes so many times in the space of one book. I knew a friend of a friend who was a spoiled drug addled waste of life and a parasite on his family and those around him and most of this claptrap in this waste of paper reminded me of his ranting. From his life story and the fact that he is a grandfather I guess I have to rule out teenage angst inexperience to explain this so I'm thinking maybe there was a stroke in this authors recent past. So far off the mark in so many instances that all I can do now is laugh and pity the poor teenager that picks this up and takes it seriously.