Tag Archives: monopoly

Oil Cartel: Competition Is A Sin

Via: corbettreport

 

COMPETITION IS A SIN

When asked how he could justify the treachery and deceit with which he pursued the creation of the Standard Oil monopoly, John D. Rockefeller is reputed to have said: “Competition is a sin.” This is the mentality of the monopolist, and it is this justification, framed as religious conviction, that drove the oiligarchs to so ruthlessly eliminate anyone who would dare rise up as a pretender to their throne.

 

read the full transcript

 

 

 

 

We are swimming in oil

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lessons Of The British ‘Free Trade’ Opium Monopoly: An Un-American Trade Policy That Creates Vast Fortunes For Priviledged Elites

“Oh! A dreadful man! A Scotchman, richer than Croesus, one McDruggy, fresh from
Canton, with a million of opium in each pocket, denouncing corruption, and
bellowing free trade.” – —Benjamin Disraeli, Sybil, p. 54

 

 

“If the trade is ever legalized, it will cease to be profitable from that time. The more difficulties that attend it, the better for you and us.
— Directors of Jardine-Matheson

Via: Wikipedia

In the 18th century, Britain had a huge trade deficit with Qing Dynasty China and so in 1773, the Company created a British monopoly on opium buying in Bengal. As the opium trade was illegal in China, Company ships could not carry opium to China. So the opium produced in Bengal was sold in Calcutta on condition that it be sent to China.

Despite the Chinese ban on opium imports, reaffirmed in 1799 by the Jiaqing Emperor, the drug was smuggled into China from Bengal by traffickers and agency houses such as Jardine, Matheson & Co and Dent & Co. in amounts averaging 900 tons a year. The proceeds of the drug-smugglers landing their cargoes at Lintin Island were paid into the Company’s factory at Canton and by 1825, most of the money needed to buy tea in China was raised by the illegal opium trade.

The Company established a group of trading settlements centred on the Straits of Malacca called the Straits Settlements in 1826 to protect its trade route to China and to combat local piracy. The Settlements were also used as penal settlements for Indian civilian and military prisoners.

In 1838, with the amount of smuggled opium entering China approaching 1,400 tons a year, the Chinese imposed a death penalty for opium smuggling and sent a Special Imperial Commissioner, Lin Zexu, to curb smuggling. This resulted in the First Opium War(1839–1842). After the war Hong Kong island was ceded to Britain under the Treaty of Nanking and the Chinese market opened to the opium traders of Britain and other nations.  The Jardines and Apcar and Company dominated the trade, although P&O also tried to take a share. A Second Opium War fought by Britain and France against China lasted from 1856 until 1860 and led to the Treaty of Tientsin.

Read the East India Company article

 

 

 

The Boodle Boys

Narco Dollars For Dummies

A Case Against ‘Free Trade’

ebook: The Opium Monopoly

The Opium Trade

British East India Company Opium Factories In India

ebook: Drugging A Nation

American Opium Wealth: Astor  Delano Sturgis Low Forbes Perkins Russell

Promises Of ‘Free Trade’ Prosperity For Americans Are Lies!

“Give us a protective tariff, and we will have the greatest nation on earth.”   Abraham Lincoln

“If the Americans should manufacture a lock of wool or a horse shoe, I would fill their ports with ships and their towns with troops.”  William Pitt- Prime Minister of  Great Britain( 1766-1768)

Via: Huffington Post

by Ian Fletcher

Contemporary American politics is conducted in the shadow of historical myths that inform our present-day choices. Unfortunately, these myths sometimes lead us terribly astray. Case in point is the popular idea that America’s economic tradition has been economic liberty, laissez faire, and wide-open cowboy capitalism. This notion sounds obvious, and it fits the image of this country held by both the Right, which celebrates this tradition, and the Left, which bemoans it. And it seems to imply, among other things, that free trade is the American Way. Don’t Tread On Me or my right to import.

It is, in fact, very easy to construct an impressive-sounding defense of free trade as a form of economic liberty on the basis of this myth. Unfortunately, this myth is just that: a myth, not real history. The reality is that all four of the four presidents on Mount Rushmore were protectionists. (Even the pseudo-libertarian Jefferson came around after the War of 1812.) Historically, protectionism has been, in fact, the real American Way.

This pattern even predates American independence. During the colonial period, the British government tried to force its American colonies to become suppliers of raw materials to the nascent British industrial machine while denying them any manufacturing industry of their own. The colonies were, in fact, the single biggest victim of British trade policy, being under Britain’s direct political control, unlike its other trading partners. The British knew exactly what they were doing: they were happy to see America thrive, but only as a cog in their own industrial machine. As former Prime Minster William Pitt, otherwise a famous conciliator of American grievances and the namesake of Pittsburgh, once said in Parliament,

If the Americans should manufacture a lock of wool or a horse shoe, I would fill their ports with ships and their towns with troops.

Thus the American Revolution was to some extent a war over industrial policy, in which the commercial elite of the Colonies revolted against being forced into an inferior role in the emerging Atlantic economy. This is one of the things that gave the American Revolution its exceptionally bourgeois character as revolutions go, with bewigged Founding Fathers rather than the usual unshaven revolutionary mobs.

It is no accident that after Independence, a tariff was the very second bill signed by President Washington. It is also no accident that the Constitution — which notoriously does not authorize a great many things our government does today — explicitly does give Congress the authority “to regulate commerce with foreign nations.” (Article I, Section 8.) This fact drives flag-draped libertarians crazy, but there it is.

Full Article


Free Trade– The Price Paid

Free Trade Is UnAmerican

The Case Against Free Trade