In a 1978 political essay, Power of the Powerless, dissident and former Czech president Vaclav Havel painted a scenario of a greengrocer who has been sent a poster announcing “Workers of the world unite” by the authorities along with his vegetables. Explaining why the grocer would put the poster up in his shop window, Havel wrote: “He does it because these things must be done if one is to get along in life. It is one of the thousands of details that guarantee him a relatively tranquil life ‘in harmony with society.’”
In this context, the poster’s message has become devoid of meaning, Havel wrote. Nobody believes in it. They just have to behave as though they do.
“They must live within a lie. They need not accept the lie. It is enough for them to have accepted their life with it and in it. For by this very fact, individuals confirm the system, fulfil the system, make the system, are the system,” he wrote.
Illustration: Mountain People
However, Havel asked, what if one day the grocer decides to take the poster down? The personal penalty would be huge, but the political ramifications could be considerable also.
“By breaking the rules of the game, he has disrupted the game... He has broken through the exalted facade of the system and exposed the real, base foundations of power... He has enabled everyone to peer behind the curtain. He has shown everyone that it is possible to live within the truth. Living within the lie can constitute the system only if it is universal,” he wrote.
Carmen Segarra, in the spirit of Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden before her, is like the greengrocer who said no. Segarra, a former employee of the New York Federal Reserve, was fired after she refused to tone down a scathing report on conflicts of interest within Goldman Sachs. She sued the New York institution over her sacking, but the case was dismissed by a judge without ruling on the merits because, he said, the facts did not comply with the statute under which she had filed. Segarra is now appealing.
Before she left, she secretly recorded her bosses and colleagues, exposing their “culture of fear” and servility when dealing with the very banks they were supposed to be regulating. The US Federal Reserve is the government agency charged with overseeing the financial sector — a task it singularly failed to achieve in the run-up to the recent financial crisis. What emerges from Segarra’s tapes — released by the investigative Web site ProPublica — is a supine watchdog wilfully baring its gums before a known burglar so that he may go about his business unperturbed.
It is as though all the Fed employees were told to put a small sign on their desk saying: “Under capitalism, everyone is equal before the law,” and Segarra took hers down. She has disrupted the game, and now everyone can peer behind the curtain; the Fed is the system, and lives within the lie.
The details of her dispute are intricate. The European Banking Authority had demanded that European banks raise their capital holdings to make them less vulnerable to future shocks. To comply, Spanish bank Santander asked if Goldman would look after some of its shares in its Brazilian subsidiary for a few years for a fee of about US$40 million.
One Fed employee referred to it as Goldman “getting paid to hold a briefcase.”
Segarra’s boss, Michael Silva, said it was “legal but shady,” and was told by a superior to leave the matter alone.
That is worrying. “Legal but shady,” along with downright criminal, was precisely the ethical yardstick that sent the dominoes tumbling last time.
Segarra discovered that the contract appeared to include a clause that required Goldman to inform the Fed of the terms and confirm that it had no objection. Goldman did not do that.
The consequences of this particular incident might be limited — though helping Santander to curate its accounts would also have had an effect on the eurozone — but the mindset it reveals is illuminating. The recordings vividly illustrate the spinelessness of a US government agency charged with holding to account an entity to which it clearly feels subordinate and beholden.
Discussing how the Fed should respond to Goldman’s omission, one examiner suggests telling them: “Don’t mistake our inquisitiveness, and our desire to understand more about the marketplace in general, as a criticism of you as a firm necessarily.”
Others advised sending a letter outlining their concerns, but without threatening any consequences.
Silva talks a good game. He pledges that when they meet, he will put “a big shot across their bow.”
However, when the meeting takes place, he waits 45 minutes before delivering this blistering dressing-down: “Just to button up one point. I know the term sheet called for a notice to your regulator. The original term sheet also called for expression of non-objection — sounds like that dropped out at some point, or...”
When the Fed meets later, Silva is back to talking big. His pusillanimous intervention has been reimagined as major: “I guarantee they’ll think twice about the next one. I fussed at ‘em pretty good... They were very, very nervous.”
“One common thread runs through the many different stories of denial,” writes Stanley Cohen in States of Denial. “People, organizations, governments or whole societies are presented with information that is too disturbing, threatening or anomalous to be fully absorbed or openly acknowledged. The information is therefore somehow repressed, disavowed, pushed aside or reinterpreted. Or else the information ‘registers’ well enough, but its implications — cognitive, emotional or moral — are evaded, neutralized or rationalized away.”
The key implications from this expose are twofold. First, it shows who is really running the US. The Fed is supposed to be working for the people, not the banks. Goldman is a private institution — rescued by public money — that has paid billions in settlements after selling dubious products that contributed to a major financial crisis.
Segarra is told to show some humility, but that is an attribute Goldman would do well to acquire. Instead its chief executive still believes it is doing “God’s work.”
So the state genuflects before capital, with those whose sole task it is to enforce the law deferring to those whose sole task is to make money.
Second, it indicates that the US has apparently learned nothing from the financial crisis. As recently as 2012, a Goldman employee wrote on the day he left the company: “I don’t know of any illegal behavior, but will people push the envelope and pitch lucrative and complicated products to clients even if they are not the simplest investments or the ones most directly aligned with the client’s goals? Absolutely. Every day.”
When terrorists strike, people are told nothing will ever be the same. The full power of the state is marshaled to prevent a recurrence. If innocent people have to go to jail and basic human rights are violated, so be it. Lives are on the line.
However, when banks defraud the country into crisis, precious little changes. The bonuses keep coming. Profits keep rising. Regulation remains weak. If wealthy, guilty people have to remain free to make money, and the living standards of working people have to decline, so be it.
It is just livelihoods on the line.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs