Guide The Conflict between Private Monopoly and Good Citizenship

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The Conflict between Private Monopoly and Good Citizenship file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Conflict between Private Monopoly and Good Citizenship book. Happy reading The Conflict between Private Monopoly and Good Citizenship Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The Conflict between Private Monopoly and Good Citizenship at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Conflict between Private Monopoly and Good Citizenship Pocket Guide.
The Conflict between Private Monopoly and Good Citizenship - Kindle edition by John Graham Brooks. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC.
Table of contents

• 10 reasons why privatisation is bad for you
• Account Options
• German addresses are blocked - leondumoulin.nl
• Citizens' engagement in policymaking and the design of public services
• 2. Second Contrast: Public Goods

The latter is often portrayed as being slow, inefficient, and corrupt. In order to provide security in a more cost-effective manner, advocates of privatization argue that it should be outsourced to the public for-profit sector. In fact there is no hard data proving that privatized security is cheaper. Evidence suggests that PMSCs which receive closed bid contracts are more expensive than the military providing the same services in house. Private security firms make a private profit out of war, and shift the cost of negative externalities to the public.

Because these costs are often non-economic, they are not factored into the final price tag of private security services. Shadow armies are inherently and necessarily opaque in their design, and are therefore a useful tool to carry out illegal operations abroad. Multiple reports of extrajudicial killings by security contractors have come out of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Private military and security companies have used excessive force in numerous conflict situations, a fact most evidently illustrated by the Blackwater massacre in Nisour Square in September Additionally, private security providers have skirted around labor law, notably by paying staff from developing countries lower salaries than their counterparts from developed ones, and by denying their employees health care.

The Canadian International Development Agency is being scrutinized for its involvement with a controversial Afghan private security firm. The security firm has allegedly been involved in corrupt practices and some of its guards were involved in an armed stand-off with Canadian observers. This case illustrates the prevailing lack of transparency in the realm of private security contracts and infrastructure development in conflict zones.

While western governments often lament corruption as an obstacle to progress in Afghanistan, they must address the possibility that their practices are exacerbating this problem. Toronto Star.

Account Options

Raytheon, a major private security firm, is developing surveillance technology that synthesizes data from various social media sites in order to develop an extensive profile of individuals based on their online activities. Though it has not been sold to any clients, the involvement of a security firm — as opposed to a market research company — is raising concerns that Raytheon could be in a position to profit from government surveillance. The program can provide personal details, geographic locations, and even predict the future activities of targets. Political activists have long been subjected to surveillance by government authorities, but in recent years private companies have also monitored activists campaigning for social justice and environmental causes.

Greenpeace, for example, was infamously targeted by McDonalds because of its environmental justice campaigns, and some are concerned that the practice of corporate surveillance may be eroding privacy and human rights. One particularly troubling aspect of this story is the interaction between state authorities, corporations targeted by activist campaigns, and separate firms specializing in surveillance and private-sector security. London Review of Books. Engility Holdings Inc.

Critics, however, have questioned the appropriateness of the sum, which pales in comparison to monetary settlements negotiated with US victims of similar mistreatment. Western powers have increasingly turned to private military and security companies over the last two decades.

Yet, no consensus exists as to appropriate use and how oversight should be organized. The UK government has been particularly inclined to favor the private market, making the state especially dependent on private firms for both its domestic and foreign security. PMSCs are also central for the US government, which lacks political, functional, and social control over these firms.

By contrast, countries such as Germany or Norway have avoided extreme privatization of security and only contract with PMSCs for non-strategic and non-coercive services while maintaining much greater political control. So if and when oversight and regulatory systems are set up, they should recognize this diversity and include the opinion of restrictive governments as well as the main — uncritical - clients. Huffington Post. This article sheds light on the legal consequences of the increasing presence of private military and security companies on battlefields and their direct participation in hostilities.

There is no legal vacuum surrounding the increasing presence of PMSCs on battlefields: states are responsible for the conduct of PMSCs which therefore become subject to international humanitarian law. While media outlets generally focus on the international dimension of PMSCs involved in Iraq or Somalia, one should bear in mind that Western countries increasingly employ such private firms domestically.

Yet, major risks emerge when states try to combine security functions that used to be exclusively public with a profit-oriented business strategy. In the UK, the privatization of the prison system has created intense controversy.

• 10 reasons why privatisation is bad for you | We Own It.
• শ্রেষ্ঠ কবিতা: জসীমুদ্দীন!
• Sylvias Lovers with full annotated (new edition).
• Do you believe in public services for people not profit?.

After being directly involved in the London Olympics security fiasco, the Private Security Company G4S has lost its major contract to administer the prison of Lincolnshire, United Kingdom. The United States and its allies will be gone from Afghanistan and Iraq by , countries they occupied by relying on , private military and security contractors. This will pose new problems of accountability and oversight in the near future.

• The Dawn of the Reformation: Essays in Late Medieval and Early Reformation Thought.
• Is competition always good? | Journal of Antitrust Enforcement | Oxford Academic.
• The conflict between private monopoly and good citizenship;
• Top Authors!
• Managerial Control and Privatization!
• Shop by category?

Chicago Tribune. The use of unmanned aerial systems has dramatically increased over the last decade, and especially under the Obama administration. While the use of lethal unmanned drones itself raises great concerns about the future of warfare, a recent report has shown that drone operations are becoming heavily dependent on the use of private contractors. PMSCs are hired for tasks related to logistics and maintenance, vehicle and sensor operation, weapons systems maintenance, and video and imagery analysis.

This is especially important as, in addition to direct strikes, drones are used to feed data to troops for special operations missions and gather information for intelligence. During the last decade, the US has increased security measures for its diplomats abroad, often contracting private security companies. This contributed to an unclear security strategy in Libya, which may have led to the death of Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi.

However, more robust private security remains a dangerous alternative. As US troops will soon be out of Iraq and Afghanistan, foreign military presence will remain part of the reality of these two countries through private military and security companies. In fact, the Pentagon employs approximately , private contractors in 20 countries around the world. Not only are those mercenaries less accountable and prone to misconduct than regular military forces, but they will perpetuate conflict dynamics outside of the view of Western publics and democratic control.

In the past years, Western governments have increasingly relied on private military contractors in Somalia. New York Times. The South African PMSC Sterling Corporate Services , which the semi-autonomous Somali region of Puntland contracted to train a paramilitary maritime force to fight pirates in the Horn of Africa, has been sharply criticized by the UN for its systematic violations of UN arms embargoes and potential implication in cases of human rights violations. Independent Online. In the London Olympics, the UK plans to mobilize thousands of troops and private security forces, install surveillance cameras, and fund surveillance drones.

These efforts prioritize the interests of corporate sponsors, including McDonalds, British Petroleum, and Dow Chemical.

On July 28, , Londoners plan to gather and protest against the corporate atmosphere surrounding the upcoming Olympic games. The Nation. There will be as many as 48, security forces in London during the Summer Olympics.

These forces will be armed with surface-to-air missiles, sonic weapons, surveillance drones, attack dogs, an eleven-mile electric fence, facial-recognition CCTV systems, and other high-tech security apparatuses. EU Observer. There has been little public awareness about this contract, and critics are worried about the lack of public consultation in the matter. But critics who have analyzed the potential contract argue that the contract privatizes some core elements of policing, which distances police from the public citizens they are supposed to serve.

Private security companies are selling their services to downtown businesses in preparation for the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida. The city expects 50, visitors, and police expect 15, protestors. Private military companies working in the area argue that protests can be like hurricanes, and both require insurance for those exposed. But fueling a private security machine that advertises fear is not the best way to deal with protestors.

Tampa Bay Times. Cash-starved state governments are laying off public workers and selling off public assets, including correctional facilities with prisoners inside while private security companies, like Corrections Corporations of America CCA and G4S are profiting immensely from them. This article examines the role of private security companies in Pakistan, a nuclear-armed nation trying to secure its regional position against India and Afghanistan. It has become dependent on US money, and has transformed into a quasi-police state backed by private military companies.

Threats of death have deterred journalists in Pakistan from reporting on this troubling collusion. G4S is a private military and security company PMSC that employs senior politicians and diplomats to lobby for contracts with the UK government. The UK outsources 1 billion dollars a year to G4S for work in the public sphere, such as guarding prisons, escorting refugees, and general policing. In addition to expanding private prisons, UK has contracted private security companies to expand private police functions and take over asylum-seeker housing.

But research shows that private prisons, detention centers, and asylum market services are not cheaper than public ones. This al Jazeera article describes Stratfor as an amateur intelligence firm, made up of low to mid-level intelligence analysts who were not good enough for the CIA.

But Stratfor was invaluable for the US government to continue its overextended military actions abroad. Local activists in South Yorkshire petitioned their city council against G4S takeover of asylum-seeker housing. In , there were complaints and 48 claims of assault against G4S related to its work in housing and immigration. Asylum seekers who were familiar with G4S prison security guards compared the privatization of humanitarian housing to the creation of more detention facilities.

2. Second Contrast: Public Goods

Endless war has taken its toll on US soldiers. Rates of suicide, crime, drug abuse, desertion, and sexual violence have increased on US military bases. To address the problem, the US has corporatized its war machine. Private military and security contractors are hired to replace citizen armies with low morale.

Drones are greeted as if they were the sleekest iPhones on the market. Corporate participation sidelines the US public from engagement in military affairs, while the US continues to overextend its influence, and all of this for a few alleged insurgents, scattered around the globe. The United States and other western countries have attracted attention in recent years for their increasing reliance on private security firms. The demand for private security has brought about an expansion in the private security industry, most notably in western countries.

However, as Chinese firms become more economically involved in unstable regions, a private security industry is emerging in China. As China becomes more economically involved with the global south, some worry that the potentially dangerous operations of private security firms may cause it to become militarily involved as well.

• Bestselling Series;
• The Conflict Between Private Monopoly and Good Citizenship (Paperback).
• Modern Feminist Theory: An Introduction (Philosophy Insights).

Corporate investors are treating post-earthquake Haiti like a Monopoly game, played with US taxpayer dollars.