My Encounter with the Poverty Pimps

Johannesburg, South Africa

The facade has faded. South Africa's government had been hoping that the Potemkin Village they created for the World Summit on Sustainable Development would last. But it didn't.

In addition to the Rumanian who was mugged outside his hotel, a few days before the Summit began, other incidents were reported as well. A group of Swiss delegates were held up at gun point. Other incidents were less well reported since the delegates in question were reluctant to report exactly what it is that the prostitutes did or what they stole.

At least the delegates were surrounded by police officers bused-in from all across South Africa. Hotel rooms were booked by the government for the police. Presumably this was to offer additional security to delegates. Some delegates may be now questioning that as well. It seems one of the police officers was wandering the hotel lobby wearing nothing more than a towel—according to some reports it was even less. Whether he was intoxicated has not yet been confirmed but he clearly was unhappy when a hotel security guard asked him to return to his room for some clothes. He shot and killed the security guard.

It may be that one reason the hotels were being used to house police officers was because the South African government botched up things for their own tourist industry. Months ago the government told all hotels in the area of the Summit to reserve all the rooms for delegates. Hotels were getting nervous days before the Summit since the confirmed bookings were far short of the 65,000 delegates being promised by the government.

The government not only assured the hotels this number was correct but noted that a shortage of space was likely. They started recruiting private homes to offer up rooms. Considering the rates being paid at the luxury hotels of Sandton, home owners felt it was fair that they get similar rates for their entire home. The government felt otherwise. In true African National Congress fashion the entire plan was going to be controlled by the State. First, no home could be offered for rent through the Summit unless it was first inspected by the government. And then they told owners that rooms should be let for no more than about $25 per day. Meanwhile a few blocks away hotel rooms were going for as much as $1,500 per day. Of course the most expensive suites were the first to be booked by the anti-poverty delegates.

In the Sandton City area some businesses were forced to close. Entire streets were blocked off from public access with dozens of police on each corner to assure that no one could walk through without UN accreditation. The convention center itself was across the street from Sandton City, a shopping mall and one of the largest such centers in Johannesburg.

Based on the glowing promises of the government, shop owners extended their hours to deal with the hordes of delegates. The huge police presence, the blocked roads, the limited access to Sandton City scared away the regulars. No matter they'd be replaced by delegates, spending foreign currency, who could take advantage of the declining South African rand. But the shops were empty. One restaurant reported a decline in sales of 50% in spite of extended hours. A restaurant I've never been able to eat at without a prior reservation had empty tables all over the place during lunch hour. It was like this throughout Sandton.

Something wasn't looking right. Certainly when I went in for my credentials just three days before the Summit was to begin, I walked through a massive tent filled with people—but they were all working there. Each delegate could have been helped by a dozen employees and some staff still wouldn't have had anything to do. Apparently this was no surprise to the South African government. Just days before the Summit they told a huge number of Summit volunteers that they would no longer be needed.

Registration took a few minutes. At the first counter the staff member couldn't understand that Jim is the informal of James. My letter of accreditation said Jim and my passport said James. This was quite baffling to him and he suspect that there were two delegates involved and he wasn't sure which one I was. A brief explanation sufficed and I went to have my photo taken for my credential badge. This took a bit longer. The staff member didn't know how to frame the photo. The camera was too low and cutting off the top of my head. Instead of having me step back or adjusting his lense all he could think of was having me squat down. I stepped back instead. But that made my head too small in the picture so he blew it up on the computer to fit. Of course that meant by the time he was done it was grainy. I suspect anyone could have used it to get in.

The UN Lies

By the time the registration's were over something was apparent. The number of delegates was no where near the promised amount. The UN issued a press release saying how thrilled they were that delegates numbers were far in excess of projections. In truth the turn out was less than 50% of prior projections. Yet the UN said the large turnout proved the importance of an environmental agenda for the world.

On the first day of sessions something else became clear. Only a small fraction of accredited delegates would even be allowed within the building where the Summit was being held. A system of secondary passes was set up and only late registrants were told about it. It seems that the auditorium held 6,000 but more than four times that many delegates had been accredited. About 12,000 were UN delegates and another 12,000 were delegates from "Major Groups"—mainly non-governmental organizations. Of these 5,000 UN delegates were allowed in and only around 1,000 Major Group delegates. In the latter category over 90% could not gain admittance.

The various NGO's started screaming conspiracy. They never considered incompetency. After all the Summit knew how many people had been accredited long before people actually showed up in Johannesburg. Every accredited delegate received a letter saying they were accredited. The UN and South African organizers knew how many letters had been sent out and they knew that only 6,000 people could fit in the convention center. So why continue accrediting delegates well past the capacity of the center? Maybe because each person paid a registration fee. Well over a million US dollars was collected in accreditation fees from people who couldn't get into the building. How many more millins were spent on airfare, hotels and daily expenses is anyone's guess.

In addition when delegates registered they found out that Summit events were not centrally located. The main center for NGO's was well outside Johannesburg and on the opposite side of the city on the borders of Soweto. This meant delegates had to find a means of traveling from one location to another. Renting a car is not a good idea especially for people unfamiliar with the roads since a wrong turn could put one into danger relatively quickly. The South African hosts tried to downplay this fact. But they did tell delegates that much of the city is safe provided you are walking the streets during daylight. At night they suggest walking in groups. And they did suggest that one avoid three areas unless in groups of ten or more. The three areas were basically Soweto, Alexandra and the city centre. Together they hold the majority of Johannesburg residents. If one paid careful attention this would mean that the NGO convention centre was off limits unless one traveled in the "new" bus service set up for delegates. Delegates were ripped off for R600 for this (about $60). A monthly bus pass is a fraction of that and in this case the pass was only good for two weeks and had a very limited itinerary.

Delegates who tried the busses soon found that thy had a tendency of not arriving when scheduled. In some cases delegates claimed they waited over two hours for a bus. Others gave up and hired cab service. But the papers reported the cabs tended to take convoluted routes and charged far more than their published rates. In addition delegates had the problem of getting from their hotels to the Summit. Government public transit in South Africa is in shambles as virtually anyone who uses it can attest. One delegate told a local newspaper that she was flying out one week early. The government controlled agency that ran the Summit placed her in a home in an area with no public transit at all. She had to take cabs each day and spent her second week's budget on taxi service.

Add this frustration to that of being locked out of the Summit and it quickly became apparent why many NGO delegates were convinced that the United Nations, in cahoots with big business, had locked them out of the Summit. Conspiracy theories quickly abounded as the would-be radicals lamented to one another how the Summit had been bought out by big business.

Fudging the Facts

When the Summit actually got underway it became clear that South Africa would use it to push for massive amounts of international welfare. President Mbeki played the race card again—some suspect it's the only card in his deck. He talked about "international apartheid" . SA's Finance Minister Trevor Manuel went on television to lament how globalization had benefited some—the rich nations of the west. The World Bank released a report saying that the 20 wealthiest nations in the world were 30 times richer than the 20 poorest nations in the world. Every left-wing lunatic, fringe Green groupie, trade unionist, communist and eco-feminist was soon bleating the same tune.

Of these groups only the World Bank was technically correct though its spin was a bit deceptive and the gullible media couldn't figure out what this meant. Mbeki, Manuel and the chorus of Leftists were just plain uninformed about the facts. And if they knew the facts they were intentionally lying for political gain.

The World Bank has noted that the average "rich" nation of the world was growing by only about 2% per annum. This is not a growth rate to crow about by any means. On the other hand Third World (or poor) nations that globalized by reducing tariffs, increasing foreign trade, privatizing and deregulating were growing at a rate more than twice as fast as the rich nations: 5% per annum. If anything the real winners in globalization are poor nations that adopt market policies. Trevor Manuel's claims were the exact opposite of the facts. President Mbeki was just trying to use guilt to shame the West into more funding for corrupt African leaders.

The World Bank's statistic is true but misleading. The 20 poorest nations are nations that have centralized control over the economy, protectionists trade policies and corrupt governments. The Bank has admitted elsewhere that poor countries that refuse to globalize are seeing their economies shrink by 1.5% per annum. So globalization ends up getting blamed for the results in nations which refuse to globalize. Considering that rich nations with liberal market policies are growing at 2% and poor nations with authoritarian policies are shrinking at 1.5%, then the differences in wealth between them will continue to grow. But poor nations adopting market policies are catching up with the West very quickly.

This did reveal something that has being going on since Jesus told the story of the rich and Lazarus. The wealthy of the world are constantly blamed for the poverty of others regardless of whether they are responsible in any way. The policies that make the West rich do not impoverish the Third World regardless of how many times the Pope, Mbeki or Greenpeace pretend it's so. Poor nations today are poor because they have poverty-enhancing economic policies. It's their own fault they are poor and if they continue listening to the Pope, Mbeki and Greenpeace they will always remain poor.

Of course such facts go contrary to the policies being promoted by the Poverty Pimps of the NGOs and the Vampire Elite who rule African nations. These groups want aid not trade. The Poverty Pimps earn their living acting as the conduits by which the West passes aid to Third World nations. The Vampire Elite are the people to whom the aid is given. This allows them the luxury of lucrative Swiss bank accounts, fancy cars, the latest defense weapons and other goods. They can channel money to favored causes, regions or tribes for personal political gain—much the way Mugabe's land redistribuiton policy has enriched his wife and closest friends. Aid becomes a tool by which the Vampire Elite subjugate their own people. It is a means of controlling the masses while enriching oneself. Trade is a bit more difficult to control since Individual companies or entrepreneurs tend to trade with each other. This doesn't leave much for the Poverty Pimps or Vampire Elite. Their bias will always be for more aid since that is what directly benefits them. Bugger the poor.

March for Capitalism

On Wednesday, August 8 a unique march for capitalism took place in Johannesburg. As mentioned in an earlier report the ANC government, which claims to represent poor blacks, pushed all the poor blacks out of the Summit area and they were angry. They make a living selling on the streets and they were forbidden from doing that. Street hawkers in Johannesburg had long been working with the Free Market Foundation. In addition many market oriented groups like the Liberty Institute of India, the Sustainable Development Network and others were also working with the FMF.

Some time before the Summit this collection of groups obtained permission to stage a march and rally for development and against the Green agenda of poverty perpetuation. Banned from the convention halls, like most delegates, this was a march I could join.

The contrast couldn't be more extreme. Carrying his placard, the man in front of me was clearly one of the poorest of the poor. His shoes were not threadbare they were tattered, merely rags barely being held together. He shuffled down the streets of affluent Sandton just outside the chic conference center and the five star hotels.

Protesters at such events are expected. Every year affluent Europeans and American full-time "radicals" fly off to demonstrate on behalf of the world's poor. Rarely do the poor themselves actually participate in these elite demonstrations.

This time it was different. Far more different than first meets the eye. You had to read the signs these poor people were carrying to understand how much their message contrasted with that of affluent protesters from the Northern Hemisphere. If you stepped in front of the man with slivers of leather attached to his feet you'd see his sign said: "Trade Not Aid."

The marchers in this protest were mainly poor, virtually all black, and mostly women. They were street traders and farmers. Without fail everyone had a sticker saying: "Freedom to Trade."

Farmers from India marched side by side with Zulu women wearing T-shirts saying: "Biotechnology for Africa."

On the sideline the press and Summit delegates stood aghast. What do you say to poor people with signs reading: "Stop Eco-Imperialism" or "Save the Planet from Sustainable Development" or "Free Trade IS Fair Trade".

The Green Left wants to paint globalization as rich versus the poor but the rich are supposed to be in favour of free trade while the poor are opposed. But here the situation was precisely the opposite. The anti-globalization protesters were those who could afford to fly in on international flights and stay at hotels that local street traders could never afford to visit.

The farmers from India were demanding the right to grow crops that were genetically modified. Other speakers at the rally demanded the end of subsidies for agriculture—something contrasting with the day before when the English group Oxfam called for more subsidies for farmers in "poor" countries.

One rally speaker was Barun Mitra of the Liberty Institute of New Delhi, India. He announced that they wanted to give a well--deserved award to various Green and anti-globalization groups which he said were perpetuating poverty in the Third World. He announced that he wanted to grant the "Bullshit Award" to Greenpeace and other such groups. The mere mention of Greenpeace brought loud and derisive remarks from the marchers.

Surely this must have been the environmentalists' worst nightmare. Real poor people marching in the streets and demanding development while opposing the eco-agenda of the Green Left.

These were people who had real concerns. They need development. They need economic prosperity. As one of the street traders told me: "I've got children to feed. I don't want to be a criminal." Her words brought an immediate chorus of agreement from several other woman standing with her.

Wealth Alleviation

Meanwhile that day another Green group officially released another report demanding less free trade, less development, and less prosperity. They specifically said that it would be wrong to economically develop poor nations. Instead we should impoverish wealthy nations so everyone is equal. They called for "wealth alleviation". One of the authors of that report is Green guru Anita Roddick who once gushed the sentiment, "how quickly you could fall in love with the economics of less."

The economics of less wouldn't mean much to Roddick. She's a multimillionaire. But the people in the streets of Sandton couldn't survive on the "economics of less." Less to feed their children means the children starve.

Unlike the well-funded anti-globalization elite these people couldn't afford to fly around the world for conferences. They crammed into small mini-vans just to get to the Summit while UN delegates rode by in chauffeur driven limousines with police escorts.

These weren't the Poverty Pimps from the North: that band of elite Westerners who are paid to lobby full-time on behalf of what they think the poor need. These people were the poor themselves and they were demanding something that baffles the Left: freedom.

And how would the media report this? The press was there. Any march or rally was well covered. The media was hoping for pictures of riots, of angry anti-capitalist demonstrators screaming for the blood of businessmen. This march was peaceful and politically incorrect.

News Manipulation

That evening I turned on E-TV, one of two stations that are not government owned and the only independent station allowed to have a news program. Coincidentally of course, it is owned by a company run by a former trade union official with staunch ANC credentials. Their report was very brief. The signs saying "Freedom to Trade" were visible. Any other footage showing anti-Green signs was carefully avoided. The E-TV report claimed that violence had been "averted" because at the last minute permission for the march had been granted. In fact it had been granted some time in advance and I was informed of it at least one week prior. The reporter also said it was a march of street traders protesting the government policy and that "other groups" tried to hijack the march by joining it. Presumably he meant the various groups that had helped organize the march. Only two days before the street traders sat in the FMF offices with the other groups The media just couldn't bring themselves to report that people were demonstrating for globalization and free trade. They distorted the facts because the truth was not one that fit their ideological framework.

A Summit newspaper "WSSD GEM" ran a long article about the march and had five pictures from the march. But the article ignored the main thrust of the march to concentrate on street traders. In one picture, if you look carefully, you can see a sign saying "Free Trade IS Fair Trade" but mainly the pictures taken were those saying "Freedom to Trade". Thus trade in a local and international context was reinterpreted to mean trade as in selling tomatoes on a street corner only. A brief mention of Indian farmers, who came with the Liberty Institute, was made. But again the message was one that the Left would agree with: ending subsidies to Western farmers. Left-wing and Green groups pushed that idea heavily not because they support free markets but because they want any excuse to bash the West. In this case they just happen to be right, but this is more from expediency than from any principles on their part.

The South African papers were silent about the march. The Johannesburg Star is now owned by a pro-ANC company which doesn't hesitate to promote the party line. They published a special "Green" paper throughout the Summit promoting every Left-wing extremist of any note. For instance they gave a full page of coverage to anti-globalization guru Naomi Klein who had come to South Africa to throw her support behind a communist-front group which promised to disrupt the Summit.

But whether they will be allowed to disrupt anything remains to be seen as of this writing. When the poor and the free market people marched, each marcher seemed to have his own personal police escort. At the meeting point for the march a few hundred police gathered. As the march progressed there was a solid line of police officers on each side and several police vehicles behind and in front of us. As we reached the site of the rally we came within view of the Summit convention center. A veritable wall of angry looking policemen faced us. They had helmets on, plastic visors over their faces, and batons held against their chest for all to see. At this one point we were surrounded by well over 1,000 armed government agents. It was quite intimidating. One black woman giggled as she told me: "This is the part where they tear gas us and chase us through the streets. You better be ready to run."

Once our marchers moved on to return to the staging grounds the police mostly dispersed. A few of us were standing there and decided to go to Sandton City for lunch—after all its easy getting a table there. But only accredited delegates are allowed through the streets around the Summit. This turned out to be virtually the only thing that the accreditation was worth. To get to Sandton City from where we were, which is normally a half block walk, would be a 6 or 7 block walk because of "security" measures. And of the six of us wanting to eat I was the only one with credentials.

The others suggested we climb over the wall erected to keep demonstrators away from the Summit. This did not appeal to me. I had seen the viciousness of the South African police in the last days of apartheid and didn't want to go through that again. But despite my protests they were already climbing over. There were around 20 police in the immediate vicinity. I was waiting for one of them to bash my friends over the skull for being terrorists. After all, earlier in the week, they blew up a parked car they thought suspicious because its license plate was expired—it's good I didn't use my car to get to Sandton.

I looked at my friends and then at the police. The cops were gossiping but ignoring this obvious breach of security. Maybe it was because they assumed these whites had to be delegates. Still reluctant, I climbed over anyway and walked right past the main doors of the Summit and then up the stairs leading to the mainly empty restaurant.

I was told later by Barun Mitra that some of the international press gave a fairer treatment of the march but I never got to see any of that coverage.

The Big One

As far as demonstrations go the big one is still coming. Every radical group in the country is pledging to disrupt the Summit and all the big NGO's, with similar agendas, will be joining them. But South Africa is not a nation with civil liberties at heart. It wasn't under apartheid and it still isn't today. The one good thing from this confrontation is that many of these demonstrators were in the streets not that long ago promoting the ANC. Yet it will be ANC tear gas they endure and ANC batons that smash their skulls. This will be interesting.

The politicians and dictators are now arriving in Johannesburg. All the penthouse suites are no doubt fully booked—many of them presumably paid for with the tax funds of US taxpayers. As Lord Peter Bauer so aptly noted: foreign aid is taking money from the less wealthy in the First World and giving it to the more wealthy of the Third World. Marxist, racist Robert Mugabe is supposed to arrive in a couple of days, as is Cuba's dictator Fidel Castro. Both are bosom buddies of Mbeki. Already anti-Mugabe refugees in South Africa are planning further demonstrations against Mugabe. And his presence should rationally be discussed, since Mbeki's new aid plan for Africa promises that Africa will police itself against bad governance. But Mbeki has said repeatedly that Zimbabwe will not be on the agenda at the Summit. Unfortunately for him many thousands of other people aren't so sure about that.

The US is getting bashed because President Bush has refused to attend. Considering that every UN conference always turns into an anti-US demonstration by every third rate failure of a nation, his lack of attendance should come as no surprise. What is surprising is that the US continues to send anyone to these hate-America festivals. Of course the Summit seems full of US office holders, invariably Democrats, who want to show solidarity with the anti-US coalition.

What does appear to be happening so far is that this Summit will represent a shift from the Rio Green Summit.

Africa's Vampire Elite and the Poverty Pimps will undoubtedly get more aid to prop themselves up. The poor won't see much of it and what they do see may end up doing more harm than good. Europe will be under pressure to end their protectionism against the Third World, but Europeans have a mind set that is rooted in feudalism to this day. They just can't comprehend an order based on freedom except in very limited amounts. What the Europeans will do is jump on the bad science of the Greens and use that to justify "environmental" restrictions that will take the place of open protectionism. They will still be just as protectionist as before, but they'll justify their policies on the basis of Green pseudoscience.

Meanwhile the protectionism that is hurting poor nations the most is not that imposed by the EU or the US. Most poor nations trade very little with those nations. The bulk of their trade is with other poor nations and they impose very high tariffs on each other. The protectionism that is hurting the poor nations the most is that which they have imposed themselves.

The US will continue to pour billions down Third World rat holes without any visible results. Dictators will continue to torture anyone wanting freedom using weapons supplied by America. The Greens will try to use the Summit to pressure the US to adopt the wealth-destroying policies they are promoting elsewhere. And no doubt Bush will compromise and adopt some such policies. He's compromised freedom in virtually every other area so far, so this won't be any different.

What is obvious is that the Green scare mongering is not as effective as it used to be. No one really believes that we are about to run out of any vital natural resource in the next century, perhaps in the next millennium. That's merely scare talk to solicit donations from those who are already true believers in the various Green cults. But at the same time the Greens have also become more sophisticated. They have massive influence in the halls of the United Nations. This isn't because they are right, but because their power agenda fits in with the agenda of the Third World despots that dominate that world body. This alone is a good reason for the US getting out of the UN immediately. I'm still inclined to think the UN should be relocated to some suitable African city like Harare so they can see first hand the results of their policies.

Jim Peron is the executive director of the Institute for Liberal Values, Johannesburg, South Africa and the owner of Aristotle's Books in Auckland, New Zealand. He can be reached at peron@gonet.co.za.