Twitter

Part 1: https://twitter.com/bidetmarxman/status/1564267348017938434

Part 2: https://twitter.com/bidetmarxman/status/1564268574075940870

Archive

Part 1: https://archive.ph/BqBlW

Part 2: https://archive.ph/fmsQE

Threadreaderapp

Part 1: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1564267348017938434.html

Part 2: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1564268574075940870.html


Text Part 1

It is impossible to understand the current existential threat the US feels from China without first understanding what happened to Japan 37 years ago.

This is the story of the Plaza Accord 🧵

As Japan emerged shattered from WW2, the US was intent on establishing a forward operating base from which to combat communism in Asia. So in the spring of 1949, under allied occupation, Japan joined a US-led system of monetary management known as the Bretton Woods agreement.

The agreement pegged the currencies of the largest economies to the USD, and the USD to gold, establishing the dollar as the global reserve currency. As a concession, the US allowed Japan to peg the yen to dollar at a favorable rate of 360:1, buoying Japan’s export economy.

While initially tolerable, the rapid post-war growth of Japan’s export industry quickly allowed them to outcompete US manufacturing by producing similar quality goods at 1/3rd the price. This led to significant anti-Japan reaction in the US, particularly amongst auto workers. The Bretton Woods Agreement...

As a result of this growth, experts began predicting in the ’70s that Japan could overtake the US as the world’s largest economy by century’s end. This trend only accelerated when the US was hit by the ’73 oil embargo.

https://www.nytimes.com/1970/12/13/archives/the-emerging-japanese-superstate.html

Meanwhile in the US, the costly Vietnam war, high social spending, and growing negative trade balance were all being financed by money printing. But almost as soon as they were printed, these newly minted dollars left the country via the US’s negative balance of trade. As a result of this monetary inflation, it was becoming increasingly clear the USD was overvalued relative to its fixed gold tether and in 1968, this overvaluation manifested as a collapse of the London gold pool, when growing US debts caused a loss of confidence in the dollar.

In 1971, Nixon intervened to address rising inflation by instituting domestic price controls and a blanket 10% import tariff. He also officially ended the direct convertibility of dollars to gold, untethering the dollar and effectively kicking off the fiat currency era.

With the dollar untethered, it could now drift toward its ‘true’ value. In ’73, the USD was again devalued against its official rate as the price of gold continued to rise. Soon after, Japan and the EEC were forced to let their currencies float, ending the Bretton Woods system.

With the USD now in turmoil, the late 70s saw the worst US inflation in decades. When Reagan took office in ’81, inflation had reached a crisis. To get it under control, the Fed increased interest rates to the highest level ever, with the prime rate peaking in Aug ’81 at 20.5%

While this finally brought inflation under control, it came at the expense of dramatic economic slowdown and mass unemployment. What followed was an era of lower interest rates, slashed social spending, regressive taxation, and massive military spending, aka ‘Reaganomics’. Reagan’s policies of military spending while cutting tax revenues resulted in an exploding deficit. This deficit spending combined with the contraction of US exports needed to be financed somehow. And the solution that was chosen was to sell the debt.

As a result of the high interest rates of the early 80s, combined with a flood of new government debt entering the market, demand for USD soared, and between 1980 - 85 the dollar appreciated against the currencies of the next four largest economies by a whopping 50%.

While good news for the cost of imported goods, this strong dollar was disastrous for US exports, and contributed to the further collapse of domestic manufacturing.

But who was buying all this debt?

Japan.

By 1985, capital inflow attracted by these high interest rates meant that Japan owned more US-treasuries than any other country. But why buy only treasuries?

Because after the collapse of Bretton Woods, the US began stipulating that dollars accrued through trade surplus could not be used to buy major American companies, only allowing them to be recycled back into the American economy to purchase debt securities. With this, the USD had finally landed on a foundation seemingly more stable than gold: dollar recycling. This recycling became the way in which the US has been able to maintain both a budget deficit and a balance-of-payments deficit year-over-year, seemingly without consequence.

And while export countries gain a small but stable return from these US securities, they inadvertently finance the cost of surrounding themselves with 800 American military bases, which are then used to break any country that tries to form alternatives to this dollar system. But this system of maintaining the dollar created a new problem: too much indebtedness to one country would pose a strategic threat. And with Japan now the primary debt holder, the US needed to throw a wrench in the engine driving Japan’s growing leverage.

Enter the Plaza Accord Assembling leaders from the top 5 economies in Sept ’85, the Plaza accord was designed to boost US manufacturing and agricultural exports and lower the value of the US Treasury instruments purchased with the trade surpluses held by other countries. At least on paper. But the true aim of the accord was to cripple Japan’s manufacturing-driven economy.

The plan had 2 parts. The 1st part was to decrease the value of the USD, while the 2nd was to deregulate Japan’s economy, loosen monetary policy / liberalize markets, and cut government spending.

To accomplish the first, Germany agreed to dump a massive portion of its USD foreign reserves, flooding markets with USD and driving the relative value downward. The actual USD surplus that entered the market was less impactful than the implied threat of further intervention.

Almost overnight, the higher relative value of the yen made Japanese exports much less competitive. At the same time, Japanese capital was being incentivized by the US-backed deregulation of the Japanese economy into real estate, the stock market, and even more US treasuries.

The deregulation that followed also led to foreign capital flowing into Japan like a firehose. Tokyo’s stock market index rose 49% in the year after the accords. By 1989, it had risen 300% and Japanese stocks comprised almost half the entire world’s equity market cap. As the newly available cheap credit created by the Bank of Japan congealed within Japan’s real estate sector, a massive asset price bubble began to grow.

In 1987, Washington piled on further to break the back of Japan’s manufacturing base by imposing 100% tariffs on $300 million worth of imports from Japan, effectively blocking them from the US market.

Eventually, Japan’s financialized frenzy had to end. On the eve of 1990, the real-estate and stock market bubbles finally popped, resulting in widespread collapse and sustained stagnation of Japan’s economic growth, beginning a period now known as “the lost decades”.

And while Japanese exports became more expensive overnight, productive capital couldn’t shift as quickly. It took another 5 years after the financial bubble popped before the actual productive output of Japan finally began to sputter.

Where did production shift to? In response to the tariffs, some production, such as Japanese auto manufacturers, relocated to the US, while the rest, particularly electronic goods, moved to China. I

Given that this exact outcome was largely predictable at the outset of the accords, why did Japan agree to so thoroughly subordinate their own economy to US interests?

Because the post-WW2 US occupation of Japan never ended.

(End of part 1. Part 2 won't fit in this post)

  • buh [any]
    ·
    2 years ago

    The efforts to similarly infiltrate the Chinese political system have been severely hampered in recent years, first by the anti-corruption drive that began under Xi and then by massive purges of CIA spies.

    :fedposting: :xi-gun: :mao-clap:

    • Presents [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah, that was hilarious. The CIA used crappy encryption usually used when dealing with third world countries. Turns out, oops, China is good at this! Blindsided the CIA. They got their networks hacked and their entire operation in China was exposed. The Chinese were absolutely furious at the filthy traitors. They took them out and executed them in front of their horrified coworkers. Let everyone know a traitor's reward, let the news spread far and wide. And also let potential traitors know that the CIA can't be trusted - not that they don't have a long history of betraying their sources when they feel like it.

      • Homestar440 [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Reminds me of the story from first season of Blowback, when the CIA gave burner phones to a bunch of civilians to be informants, and eventually a handler got a call from someone clearly under duress, and when he answered a different voice could be heard saying, “We knew you were CIA” before it went dead.

  • Civility [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Plaza Accord - Part 2

    After much of Japan’s political left was eliminated after WW2 in the US-backed Red Purge, the remaining politicians and party members on the political right coalesced into the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), with some notable “help” from the CIA.

    Since then, Japan has been ruled by this one party for all but 9 yrs. Far from being an odd quirk of Japanese conservatism, this political consistency has been unwaveringly in service of US interests.

    And there’s no better recent demonstration of that subservience than Okinawa.

    As one of her first acts as Obama’s Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton flew to Japan to sign the “Guam Treaty” in Feb 2009. The treaty obliged Japan to construct and pay for a new US base on Okinawa and to contribute a massive sum towards constructing another on Guam.

    Popular resistance to the new US base in Okinawa grew. During Japan’s 2009 elections, the center left candidate Yukio Hatoyama campaigned on eliminating the US base in Okinawa. He rode this wave to win in a landslide victory, ending 54 years of LDP rule.

    Hotoyama quickly got to work normalizing relations with South Korea and China, and pulled support for the US war in Afghanistan. He began taking a “partnership of equals” approach to relations with the US, pivoting away from the US and toward building an East Asian economic zone.

    But less than a year into his term, Hotoyama inexplicably U-turned on the Okinawa promise, cryptically stating that removing the US base would be “impossible”. Shortly after, his coalition began to falter, and following the threat of a no-confidence vote, he resigned.

    After two short stints by PMs from the DPJ, the LDP regained their hold on political power 2 years later when Shinzo Abe was re-elected, ushering in an era of redoubled neoliberalism and tight realignment with US foreign policy goals.

    So what really happened? Did the US covertly overthrow the Japanese govt in 2010?

    While this may sound far-fetched even to those familiar with US history of meddling in foreign govts, it wouldn’t even have been the only western govt coup’d that year!

    Literally overnight, a handful of factional warlords, including US “protected sources,” engineered Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s ouster, entirely behind the backs of the population.

    But even if we approach this from outside the controlled political arena, after decades of stagnant wages and an oppressive work culture, why hasn’t Japanese labor organized to demand better working conditions? They have. But members of labor organizations, particularly those expressing anti-americanism, have been brutally suppressed through an alliance between the CIA, the LDP, and organized crime syndicates like the Yakuza through intimidation, attack, and murder.

    And so while Japan’s initial compliance with US demands guaranteed they wouldn’t have to pay WW2 reparations and their ruling class avoided any socialist reform or standing trial at the Hague, their ongoing subservience can be harder to understand. However no arrangement like this would be stable for so long without an exchange of consideration. Which is why, for their continued compliance, Japan has been allowed to play junior partner to US imperialism.

    Now, almost four decades after the Plaza accords, a superficially similar scenario is emerging as China economically eclipses the US, with one important difference: the US doesn’t have the direct ability to hamstring China’s economy like it did with Japan.

    But not for lack of trying!

    The efforts to similarly infiltrate the Chinese political system have been severely hampered in recent years, first by the anti-corruption drive that began under Xi and then by massive purges of CIA spies.

    In contrast to Japan’s subservience, the US deems China’s refusal to bend the knee as a major threat. Repeated US tantrums branding China as a “currency manipulator”, expose this frustration.

    One of the most basic pillars of sovereignty is being able to adjust one’s own economic and monetary policies to best serve one’s own people. When the US imposed the disastrous Plaza accords on Japan, it demonstrated the degree to which Japan remains an occupied country.

    Marx's foundational theory shows that while capitalism first develops the productive forces, it inevitably becomes a brick wall in the way of further development, holding it back and even destroying those very forces it brought into being.

    In this way, a major tension is again building as US global monetary strategy comes to a head, with the US wanting a strong dollar to combat inflation, while simultaneously needing a weak dollar to maintain foreign investment and dollar recycling.

    In the past, this tension could be resolved by bringing peer economies to heel, as was done to Japan in the 80s and Russia in the 90s. But now, the newest economic superpower is not only proving impervious to US efforts to subordinate it, it is forging an alternative pathway.

    In 1971, John Connally, Richard Nixon's treasury secretary, famously told a delegation of Europeans worried about exchange rate fluctuations that the American dollar “is our currency, but your problem.”

    But now, in 2022, the ‘dollar problem’ is coming home.

    • cogito_ergo_cum [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I wonder how the situation in Europe plays into this. After all, they are becoming far more dependent on the US after cutting off Russia. Maybe they can sustain the beast for a while longer?

  • Presents [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    In 1971, Nixon intervened to address rising inflation by instituting domestic price controls and a blanket 10% import tariff. He also officially ended the direct convertibility of dollars to gold, untethering the dollar and effectively kicking off the fiat currency era.

    Nobody ever mentions the French.

    The US government was spending so much money on their little hobby of war in Vietnam that other countries started to doubt that US dollars could be exchanged for gold, as the US government had always promised. So France loaded up a destroyer with pallets of Federal Reserve Notes and sailed it into New York Harbor, asking for the gold which they had been assured existed. Naturally it was a lie and no such gold existed. The US government could not pay what it had borrowed. So Nixon took us off the gold standard, poof. Gone.

    And after 1971 the US working class got crushed. This story about the French is never told, and if it is it's mentioned in passing, in a single sentence.

      • cogito_ergo_cum [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I'm imagining a slapstick comedy sketch where the french are in New York asking hon hon where is le gold? and the yanks scramble to come up with shitty alternatives and distractions like you can have some of our cheese reserves, you people love le fromage, right? If you think about it it's kind of like edible gold, haha! No? Uhh, we can't access the gold right now, Fort Knox is undergoing renovations. There's a bedbug infestation, you can't go in there and see.

    • wtypstanaccount04 [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Did this actually happen? I'm looking for this and I can't find any evidence that this is real.

      Edit: I found some evidence, notably this article but I can't find any pictures.

  • JoeByeThen [he/him, they/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Fascinating stuff. Amazing how everytime i start diving into modern history the bad shit is always accompanied by US involvement somewhere along the way. Maybe China will be able to save humanity if they can hold out against us a bit longer. 🤞

  • Antiwork [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Thanks for making this easy to read, but Jesus I hate threads like this. write a medium post or something.

    • Des [she/her, they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      yeah twitter absolutely sucks for long form content like this it makes my head want to burst

      • spectre [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I feel braindead reading it, and it makes me feel extremely contemptuous toward anyone who uses Twitter when I read these, especially if they are decent.

        • Beaver [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Imagine when you have to write articles in the form of a series of 30 second tik tok vids

          • spectre [he/him]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Lol I mean people did that too until 3/10 mintue videos became available.

            it is pretty funny to see the horrible story times sometimes though with 45-90 seconds of rambling about nothing and "omg I didn't expect that to blow up"

    • Presents [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Sadly, important people read Twitter but little else. Putting a link to a Medium.com post will get few clicks. If it had been, would it have been shared here? No. It only got posted because it was on Twitter.

  • Rem [she/her]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I simply cannot understand cause and effect when people talk about international monetary policy. Higher currency value is bad, buying debt, everything about interest rates, what counts as a bubble, it's all entirely too much 😔

    • AvgMarighellaEnjoyer [he/him,any]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Higher currency value is bad

      this is because a currency that's too strong will kill your local economy. it becomes cheaper to import anything rather than produce stuff at home.
      the inverse is also true: if you have a currency that is disproportionately weak it will make exporting much, much more lucrative than selling your commodity to your domestic market, so you might have a country that produces a lot of a commodity but whose population doesn't have access to that commodity.
      idk if that helped

      • ssjmarx [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        If you have a too-strong currency, could you solve that problem by devaluing it by printing more money? Similarly could you solve a too-weak currency problem by printing less?

        • machiabelly [she/her]
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          yes! but I think what the post is saying is that the value of currency has huge implications on international relations. So shifts in value of currency can upend the status quo. The US devalued its own currency to capitalize on foreign manufacturing but then the outlying countries became too powerful. Because of this they enacted policies to weaken those countries and reign them in. The lack of control that the US over china puts them in a no win situation where they can't both cripple Chinese power and reduce inflation.

          I don't understand it fully but I think thats the gist of it.

          Edit: its this last bit that is the most important

          "US wanting a strong dollar to combat inflation, while simultaneously needing a weak dollar to maintain foreign investment and dollar recycling."

          Dollar recycling is when foreign countries take on large amounts of USD debt while not being able to use that to buy american companies. This gives a best of both worlds situation where the US gets to import cheap goods without giving up domestic power and control. It is a relationship only functional when one country is dominant over another. So with China being as powerful as it is the gameplan from the past won't necessarily work. The USA needs to find a way to curtail chinas growth without furthering their inflation. If they are able to do that it will have to be with a method that we haven't seen historically, or one that requires the USA to gain direct control over china the way it had over Japan which seems unlikely.

        • Tankiedesantski [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          In theory, yes. But there's more complex flow on effects. For example, printing more money does devalue currency but it also causes inflation and raises the relative cost of imports. That fucks over a different group of people who rely on imported goods.

          This is especially bad because most countries import energy, raw materials, and food - the basic inputs of an economy. Therefore if you make the inputs more expensive, the outputs become more expensive too, so now your exports still aren't much cheaper and you have inflation fucking with people's lives.

        • AvgMarighellaEnjoyer [he/him,any]
          ·
          2 years ago

          you could, but that'd also have implications to your own economy as other comrades have pointed out. you print too much and you might get inflation, print too little and you might get deflation. i think generally central banks do a combination fucking with the rate of 'money printing' + interest rates + their foreign reserves. that said i'm not very well versed on monetary policy unfortunately, so i can't go much deeper than this.

      • Rem [she/her]
        ·
        2 years ago

        this is because a currency that’s too strong will kill your local economy. it becomes cheaper to import anything rather than produce stuff at home.

        Why thoooo

        ur still paying ur own currency to other places right? So why is it worth more abroad but not in ur own country?

        • AvgMarighellaEnjoyer [he/him,any]
          ·
          2 years ago

          kinda. i know that in my country if you're gonna do business with a foreign company what happens is that you send the money to that company in our local currency (brazilian reais) but it doesn't actually go to that company in reais, the central bank is responsible for making the conversion from reais to dollars and i think the central bank from the company that is receiving the money does the same thing, making the exchange from dollars to their local currency. so, in practice, the local market is pegged to the dollar and every commodity's price is dictated by the global market.
          what this means is that generally speaking you need to weigh local labor costs and the exchange rate when deciding if you're gonna buy a commodity from the domestic market or if you're just going to import it. using my own country as an example again, Brazil has been rapidly deindustrializing - not that we were ever an industrialized country - because of our lackluster technological development, our somewhat strong currency and labor costs (these last two haven't been true for the last few years but still) makes it so it's almost always cheaper to import something from China rather than producing or buying it here.
          now that our currency has weakened meat and oil prices soared even though we are the largest meat producer in the world (i think) and are self sufficient or almost self sufficient in oil production, because it's more lucrative to sell it abroad than to sell it to the local population.

          so, to give some examples:

          a) strong currency

          say you want a sheet of steel or whatever. let's pretend that the raw materials are priced the same everywhere for the sake of simplicity.
          a brazilian worker and a chinese worker make each $5/hour. for whatever reason the local unit of currency in Brazil becomes more valuable and becomes equivalent to the dollar. the chinese currency didn't fluctuate. suddenly, even though the only thing that might've changed is the exchange rate, the brazilian worker makes $10/hour and the chinese worker still makes $5/hour, despite their pay having not changed in their local currency. as labor costs are embedded into the price of a commodity, the chinese-made commodity will have become cheaper in comparison to the brazilian-made commodity.

          this can be overcome with State planning and intervention, but as most national governments are sleepwalking neoliberal zombies most will let the market dictate their fates.

          b) a weak currency

          let's now pretend that the real is pegged to the dollar. let's say oil is a dollar a barrel. if the brazilian currency shrinks to 1/4 of its value, suddenly the cost to produce a gallon of oil becomes a quarter lower. because of that the oil producer can sell it to the global market at a higher profit margin than selling it domestically. this causes domestic prices to go up even though productions costs might not have increased and there's no need to import oil.

          obviously i grossly simplified a lot of what goes into the price of a commodity but this is the easiest way to try to explain how the exchange rate affects a country's economy and its trade balance. both of the examples i gave are based on the actual brazilian economy. i hope the examples are intelligible, i don't write that well so sometimes my posts can be confusing to read. either way, if you still have questions or didn't understand something i'd love to try to help you.

          • Rem [she/her]
            ·
            2 years ago

            I kinda understand? Maybe? I didn't realize they went Currency A > USD > Currency B, like still using the dollar even when the US isnt involved. That probably has deep implications I'm not wrapping my head around.

            Is a currency becoming weaker the same as inflation? Like u can buy less with it.

    • blobjim [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I can't tell how much of it is just capitalist BS that even left-wing people take almost at face value versus how much actually matters.

    • Presents [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/07/michael-hudson-discusses-the-imf-and-world-bank-partners-in-backwardness.html

      Here's a long-form read that explains it, by a banking insider.

      BONNIE FAULKNER: Why does the World Bank prefer to perpetrate world poverty instead of adequate overseas capacity to feed the peoples of developing countries?

      MICHAEL HUDSON: World poverty is viewed as solution, not a problem. The World Bank thinks of poverty as low-priced labor, creating a competitive advantage for countries that produce labor-intensive goods. So poverty and austerity for the World Bank and IMF is an economic solution that’s built into their models. I discuss these in my Trade, Development and Foreign Debtbook. Poverty is to them the solution, because it means low-priced labor, and that means higher profits for the companies bought out by U.S., British, and European investors. So poverty is part of the class war: profits versus poverty.

      BONNIE FAULKNER: In general, what is U.S. food imperialism? How would you characterize it?

      MICHAEL HUDSON: Its aim is to make America the producer of essential foods and other countries producing inessential plantation crops, while remaining dependent on the United States for grain, soy beans and basic food crops.

      BONNIE FAULKNER: Does World Bank lending encourage land reform in former colonies?

      MICHAEL HUDSON: No. If there is land reform, the CIA sends its assassination teams in and you have mass murder, as you had in Guatemala, Ecuador, Central America and Columbia. The World Bank is absolutely committed against land reform. When the Forgash Plan for a World Bank for Economic Acceleration was proposed in the 1950s to emphasize land reform and local-currency loans, a Chase Manhattan economist to whom the plan was submitted warned that every country that had land reform turned out to be anti-American. That killed any alternative to the World Bank.

    • Ecoleo [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I can't hold on to these sickos for much longer...

  • CheGueBeara [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Incidentally this thread is basically just Michael Hudson's book Superimperialism

    • anoncpc [comrade/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Yea, and the chip 4 will be for Taipei and Japan again for the chip industry. S Korea already bail

  • wtypstanaccount04 [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Excellent thread. There's a lot more to recent history in :japan-cool: than meets the eye.

  • anoncpc [comrade/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    America shield a bunch of eastern nazi from getting hang in turn, they’re turning their country into Uncle Sam kids.