Talk:John Perkins (author)

Aditional Information

Although at the moment everyone's focused on the validity of "Confessions," in order to expand this beyond a tag, further information would be more helpful including: Perkin's biography, current situation. information on the organizations and companies he's founded. etc etc. Since those are things that can be added with hopefully minimal controversy, might be a good idea to start there. Dan 20:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

The Controversy tag

I felt compelled to add the controversy tag because the allegations of Mr. perkins amount to criminal behavior, and most of the attention given to him appear to come from the, ahem, 'alternative media.' I made the edits to the page because to treat the account as established fact seems to circuit the NPOV mission of Wikipedia.

At any rate, I was hoping to draw attention to the page to attract further comment and investigation to the limits that could be done in this forum. 66.167.237.193 23:52, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

It seems that first of all Perkins views should be established (this is a page about him and his accomplishments-certainly his book "confessions of an economic hitman" is an accomplishment). Afterwards, a healthy criticism section should be added whereby we can clarify what critics have leveled against him

Its ludicrous that no one (not even Chase T. Main, the consulting firm that he worked for- or claims to have- have even responded to allegations.

It doesn't have to seem ludicrous. If someone is making an argument with a bunch of cited evidence that is already known individually, ignoring him makes sense if you know you can't make a dent in the evidence. And they have the capability to block him out, as they have for the most part over the last year. A handful of companies just have to make a decision and he isn't covered on the news.

-shrugs-

Though, incidently, the guy who hired him to Chas T. Main went on record about the book and soon after seemingly contradicted his stance.

(Antelope In Search Of Truth 05:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC))

I came looking for more information on the author, but it seems that this article is seriously lacking bth content and a NPOV.RudeBII 18:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

it is very odd to me that almost half this article is wrapped into the controversy section which seems to revolve around a single columnists opinions (mallaby). it appears that the criticism is way overstated, and should be edited down to something more in perspective per wp:npov. i will revisit this soon and make these adjustments unless other critics are cited or other reasoning is offered.Yourmanstan (talk) 00:22, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Controversy edits

I've edited some of the things under the controversy to better reflect Perkins actual views. He is not anti-capitalist or anti-corporation for instance, but anti-globalization, and anti-free trade (which I didn't add), he does say, both in Shapeshifting, and in Confessions that neither capitalism or corporations are inherantly bad, but they are currently being used in harmful ways.

He seems to be against globalization "as it's currently being practiced", not simply globalization.

(Antelope In Search Of Truth 05:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC))

Criticism

I removed the section, written by an editor, on why said editor disagrees with Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. This same material was also posted in the article about the book. While criticism is encouraged in Wikipedia articles, it must be criticism from published sources. --HK 16:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Additional Content Needed

Some additional content here would be very welcome. While I did not enjoy the book, the author makes a number of claims that should be investigated. (I was looking for facts and insight into the world bank/IMF, not an unsubstantined attack on american foreign policy and social conservatives disguised as a personal life story.) I personally can't find any information whatsoever to substantiate any of the authors claims and many don't pass common sense: i.e. big corporations want a poorer customer base? Yet there is a lot of media coverage of this topic without NPOV comment. Does anyone have basic information such as: did John Perkins really work at C. Main? Was he interviewed favorably by the NSA? Did he hold the positions he states in his book? Did the poeple mentioned in the book exist? The whole story seems so fake -- so agenda based: Howard Zinn under cover. I could give it more thought if some basics were established. --Tbbooher 04:51, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

He did actually work at C. Main, and was definitly present in the countries he discusses at the relevant times. My understanding is that big corporations want a poorer customer base because it's a large market. Perkins suggests that the true point is to put these poorer countries under control of corporations, which can then use debt, and economic dependence in order to dictate terms for resources, and workers. Dan 20:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC) cdfg Exactly. IMF/World Bank and its private sector counterparts are not particularly interested in selling things to third world countries. They want them as repositories for cheap labor and cheap raw materials. Keeping them poor insures that they will not develop their own manufacturing base or infrastructure, and therefore will never be self-sufficient. If they were self-sufficient, they would be in a position to object to being used as repositories for cheap labor and cheap raw materials. Under present circumstances, they have nothing to say in the matter. --HK 16:19, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the further summaries of the book, but the question still remains: how do we know any of this is true? You state things axiomatically, but how do _you_ know them. In any case, a "large market" would be a better "large market" if they had more money to buy products and services of large corporations. Now the cheap raw materials argument makes more sense, modern economies tear through raw materials, but I don't see how this monolitic policy of giving loans to build infrastructure allows for the exploitation of raw materials. Prices are determined by the open market and I don't see the primary connection between cheap labor and a countries debt burden. In any case, I'll consider the argument. I still can't see two things: (1) why any corporation would fund/work what could be such a PR nightmare and (2) how it is a better benefit to these corporations to have debt burdens placed on foreign nations than to have third world contries develop into solid trading partners, after all MNC's would like to make profits in these countries too and profits are driven up by productivity not old mercantilest ideas. --Tbbooher 03:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

"I don't see how this monolithic policy of giving loans to build infrastructure allows for the exploitation of raw materials."

It's pretty simple. The key is giving loans to build UNSUSTAINABLE infrastructure that does not make sense for the people in that country. Instead, the developments are created to support a one-note cash crop that benefits the west. the western countries benefit, because they buy up these exports at cheap prices. these prices are NOT determined by the market but by the creditor governments and NGO's who set monetary policy and exchange rates. that is the essence of underdevelopment.

the failure of these infrastructure developments to actually advance the countries' economies leaves them saddled with debt to the western countries. these western countries use their power as creditors to control a sovereign nation's decisions. now the western creditors are free to 'negotiate' agreements that favor western businesses as an alternative to calling in the debt and bankrupting the country outright. these agreements govern everything from buying staples from american and european businesses rather than local producers to allowing other businesses access to the mineral and agricultural resources to setting pro-west trading policies.

"Prices are determined by the open market and I don't see the primary connection between cheap labor and a countries debt burden."

As I mentioned, the debt relationship eliminates the market as the sole determiner of prices. As the western countries proscribe the economic choices of underdeveloped countries, in many cases driving the majority of local farmers and microbusiness out of business, the newly unemployed have to get a job just to survive. who do they end up working for? the factory or mine that is run by a western company (who probably left the u.s. in search of cheaper labor) or the military police that are paid to secure the work site. they are paid in local currency, not USD, which is worth from 3 to 20 times the amount of the local currency. in other words, the debt burden allows the creditor nations to negotiate access to the debtor nations' labor supply at a very pro-west rate.

"I still can't see two things: (1) why any corporation would fund/work what could be such a PR nightmare..."

It is not a PR nightmare the majority of Americans are oblivious to what is happening. See how easy it was for you to dismiss this 'evidence' as agenda-based? Most of what happens in the world is invisible to Americans; the entertainment media keeps us mystified and ignorant. When our dirty laundry is made visible, we shrug or discredit it. As long as the shelves and gas stations stay fully stocked, most Americans could care less about the circumstances under which our stuff is produced. Most of us don't even think about it--we are wrapped up in our own lives and problems. At best, we might hear of the terrorist reactions to economic and military policies that are invisible to the American public, but those are mostly used by the press to show us that we are safest in our own borders because the rest of the world is chaotic. Occasionally, a Kathie Lee is trotted out to the green party types, but for the most part, it is see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. Thus we can maintain our trust in the system.

"(2) how it is a better benefit to these corporations to have debt burdens placed on foreign nations than to have third world contries develop into solid trading partners, after all MNC's would like to make profits in these countries too and profits are driven up by productivity not old mercantilest ideas."

Are you kidding? Greed, baby. Why partner with the world if you can control it? Why pay a fair price for resources if you can buy them cheap and sell them at a high profit? Especially if you believe that the indigenous people are either beneath you or against you.

MNC's do not want EVERYONE to be partners. Somebody has to actually grow, make, and build the stuff that we consume. Many western companies have decided our labor laws -- osha, child labor, minimum wage, etc. -- make it too expensive to produce items locally while still raking in profits and satisfying their shareholders. By investing some of their revenue into lobbying and installing some of their leaders in key positions of economic, government, and military power, they have managed to turn the third world into a factory for Western goodies. This way, they keep productivity up and expenses down. That is how you drive up profits. Other companies have been forced to adopt this model in order to survive.

But the debt relationship combined with our military superiority and corruptible leadership in third world countries is what makes this whole system possible. Western countries have a history of paying off and propping up pro-west puppets that sell out their countrymen, and bankrupting or killing the leaders who try to stand up for their people.

68.33.144.87 16:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)culturerevo

A couple of points. HK- developing nations are repositories for cheap labor and resources because they are poor, they are not poor because they are repositories for cheap labor and resources. To deny them access to the world markets using their attractive labor and resource supply would deny them their chance to develop and evolve into higher paying/standard of living jobs. Of course, there are many abuses and instances of corruption and greed in the process, but I think your ideas on the cause are backwards. CULTURE REVO- just one point to mention about "It's pretty simple. The key is giving loans to build UNSUSTAINABLE infrastructure that does not make sense for the people in that country." Battling corruption in the World Bank and IMF has come to be more central to their missions, because of examples of leaders stealing money and leaving the countries with unfair debt obligations, and government officials building enormous projects which were not needed. But saying that the purpose of the loan is to control and recolonize developing nations is going too far. I understand conditionalities on loans may be improperly structured or based on a false economic dogma, but giving the process the ulterior motives you ascribe to it, requires a great deal more evidence than you have offerred. Pkmilitia 15:09, 16 August 2007 (UTC)pkmilitia

I just bought the book, haven't read it yet, but I pretty much know the storyline. I wanted to check about the authenticity, as the authors claims seem pretty wild on the face of it, none the least that he should be allowed to publish if the story was true. Like Tbbooher I'd like some of the dirty details concerning veracity, in sum: how do we know this guy is not a phoney? That said, if the world looks like Mr. Perkins says, I doubt the MNC's are interested in the money per se. They are rich enough, they are in the game for power, so the argument about them wanting a wealthier customer base seems off the mark to me. roger.duprat.copenhagen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.243.127.162 (talk) 21:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Perkins, Brown, Castaneda

A quick look at Amazon gives the impression of an author who, like Dan Brown, has finally found his niche, though not as yet to the same degree. His previous books have some three line rave reviews obviously written by Perkins under a variety of names. It seems a pity he wangled his way onto Amy Goodman's show. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of his information is correct; Dan Brown uses a good deal of factual information in his fictions as well. I don't see what one can usefully do with this page given the info available, apart from one thing: say something about the books JP has published previously (which don't seem to have been noticed, but now that he has one that is selling it may be useful to go back a bit). It may be helpful to think of him as a wannabe Carlos Castaneda, particularly since Wikipedia has dealt with Castaneda and that page could be a model for this one if JP turns out to be of abiding interest - in which case there will be some more useful external links sooner or later. I've read some authentic material in this vein (notably The Road to Hell, Michael Maren - for whom there is no page). I'll pass on this one. Abu Amaal 02:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Was he really an EHM?

I don't know if he really was an EHM. His book was published as a work of fiction, although in his Author's Note he says that it's true. I don't know, but everything should be taken with a grain of salt.

• It was written as non-fiction. anyone with eyes and ears can see it is all very true. John celona 17:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

• You create an acronym for one-time use? Landroo 18:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

He's used the term to refer to himself in some interviews, I'd dig them up if there's any interest, but the acronym's fine for what it is. (StarkeRealm (talk) 11:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC))

• "anyone with eyes and ears can see it is all very true."

Maybe you would like it to be truth because of your political views. 190.45.74.50 (talk) 19:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you would like it to Not be truth, because of your political views. Similar allegations from others about the world bank, IMF, and other installations have been around for years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.214.112.217 (talk) 18:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.  :) 178.197.254.3 (talk) 21:00, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Rev. Dr. John M. Perkins

There needs to be a disambiguation page set up (and a new bio page) for Rev. Dr. John M. Perkins, founder of CCDA and the John M. Perkins Foundation for Reconciliation & Development.He's an author and notable speaker as well as a valued figurehead of the Christian Community Development strata. I'll be working on this, but I wanted to discuss it first since I'm rather new. Jadeddissonance 17:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

__---Testing out if the name has been made disambiguous John Perkins, I am guessing yes beforehand.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

---I found it hard to find the Dr Rev. Perkins due to lack of description, so added more description to the dis-ambiguous page. BTW the doctorate are honorary and they need references.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 16:38, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

activist?

This guy is a trained economist and has been so for all his life. But now because of his book its somehow legitimate to use a lable like 'activist'. hes not being an activist anymore than a professor or banker or Norman Schwartzkopf, clinton or anyone else is whos going on a tour to explain their work. kind of a labeling that the world seems to have got used to. FOX news integrated in our own intellectually dishonest minds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nunamiut (talk • contribs) 14:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

A "trained economist"? Umm, no, not if our article is accurate. This is a guy with a Bachelor's degree in business administration. Not the same thing at all! Nandt1 (talk) 15:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

He also does a lot of work with indigenous peoples in Ecuador, which isn't really discussed in the article. 71.198.137.225 (talk) 05:06, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Homosexuality

I removed the part about the alleged homosexuality. It doesn't add anything useful. Robincohen (talk) 09:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Bio

"Perkins was trained early in his career by a beautiful, older woman who was armed with the psychological profile gathered about him by the NSA after many days of pre-employment screening, as one of many "economic hit men" advancing the cause of corporate hegemony."

...why not 'armed with a massive rack" :-D Who wrote this? This is ridiculous! This sentence alone puts me off so much I do not want to read the rest of the article. Get rid of it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.185.199.171 (talk) 00:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Perkins (author). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2006/February/20060202155604atlahtnevel6.165713e-02.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Perkins (author). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100601184853/http://www.economichitman.com/pix/veracitymemo.pdf to http://www.economichitman.com/pix/veracitymemo.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:55, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

A change of heart?

I've been looking for a section of the article where it explains the true motive behind Mr Perkins change of heart to write or talk about his previous filthy jobs with no luck.It would be very helpful and maybe inspirational to the readers of this article to at least get an idea of what he went thru that made a new man out of him .It'd be naive to think people like him just change over night! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.133.192 (talk) 15:32, 25 June 2017 (UTC)