In an exclusive interview, John Perkins, the author of the groundbreaking book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man,” delves into his controversial past and sheds light on the hidden mechanisms of economic manipulation and exploitation on a global scale. This interview, originally conducted by Reclama, offers a profound exploration of Perkins’ journey from an “economic hit man” to a whistleblower, his insights into the corporatocracy, and his perspective on creating a sustainable and just world. For readers of johnchen.net seeking a deeper understanding of global economics and US foreign policy, this extended analysis of the John Perkins interview provides critical insights and a call to conscious action.
Perkins’ book, “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man,” has resonated deeply with individuals seeking to understand the often-unseen forces shaping international relations. Peace Corps volunteers, in particular, have cited his work as transformative, reshaping their perspectives on US foreign policy and infrastructure projects in developing nations. This interview further explores these themes, offering a robust examination of Perkins’ claims and their relevance in today’s world.
When asked about the skepticism surrounding his claims, Perkins addresses the core question: “Is this just too fantastic to believe?” He counters this by referencing a detailed investigation by The New York Times, which thoroughly vetted his accounts and substantiated the underlying realities of his narrative. Perkins emphasizes that the events he describes, including the assassinations of presidents Jaime Roldós Aguilera of Ecuador and Omar Torrijos of Panama, are widely acknowledged historical events, particularly in Latin America. While some may question Perkins’ personal involvement, he affirms his presence in these countries during critical periods, a fact verifiable through passport records.
Alt text: John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, speaking about his experiences.
Furthermore, Perkins highlights the reaction of powerful corporations to his revelations. Bechtel Corporation, a company mentioned in his book, threatened legal action, demanding the removal of their name and related content. However, when presented with Perkins’ extensive documentation and files, these corporations backed down, failing to pursue any lawsuit. This corporate response, or lack thereof, further corroborates the veracity of Perkins’ claims, suggesting a tacit acknowledgment of the uncomfortable truths he exposes. As Perkins states, “The evidence is all there; I have no problem at all substantiating it if people really want to dig, like Bechtel did and The New York Times did.” He believes many intuitively sense the existence of such clandestine operations, and his book serves to confirm these suspicions with concrete details and personal testimony.
Shifting the focus to contemporary economic issues, the interview delves into Perkins’ critique of “trinket capitalism” and the pitfalls of unchecked philanthropy. Drawing from his book “Hoodwinked,” Perkins argues that philanthropy, in its current form, is often an inefficient and even ethically questionable approach to rectifying societal problems. He points out the paradox of individuals amassing vast fortunes through practices that harm communities and the environment, only to then donate a fraction of their wealth to address the very issues they helped create. Perkins contends that true social responsibility lies in ethical business practices from the outset: “A person who has accumulated billions of dollars and in doing so has caused others to lose their jobs, closed the doors of small businesses, or ravaged the environment, and then donates a small percentage of his fortune… would have served the world far better by making fewer profits while increasing employment, supporting small businesses, and insisting that his executives practice good environmental stewardship.”
This perspective raises critical questions about the role of universities, particularly business schools, in shaping future economic leaders. Perkins advocates for integrating ethical considerations into business curricula, urging institutions like Wharton, Stanford, and Cornell to emphasize social and environmental responsibility alongside profit maximization. While acknowledging the limitations of his direct influence on academic institutions, Perkins commits to consistently promoting these principles in his lectures and writings. He also recognizes the potential for redemption through philanthropy, commending those who, after accumulating wealth through questionable means, attempt to give back. Perkins sees his own journey as parallel – from an “economic hit man” to an advocate for change – emphasizing the importance of encouraging positive transformation, even after past misdeeds.
Alt text: Book cover of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins.
The conversation then turns to the dangers of financialization and speculation within the modern economic model. Perkins criticizes the “financial trinkets” that fueled the global financial crisis, highlighting the commodities market as a prime example of harmful speculation. He points out the irony of futures contracts, initially designed for stability, now contributing to price volatility that devastates Third World farmers. When asked if these financial instruments cause more harm than good and whether they should be eliminated, Perkins responds emphatically, “Yeah! Absolutely.” He advocates for strong regulations, if not outright elimination, of financial instruments that prioritize profit over public good. Perkins recalls a time in early US history when corporate charters were contingent upon demonstrating public interest, suggesting a return to this principle. He argues that businesses, including investment firms, should be chartered only if they serve the public interest, with regulations ensuring fair returns for investors without exploiting wider society.
Perkins extends his critique to the political realm, asserting that “trinket capitalism” extends beyond consumer goods into political elections. He argues that politicians are heavily influenced, if not controlled, by “big money” and the “corporatocracy.” He contends that achieving major national office in the US is nearly impossible without the support of these powerful corporate entities. Even Barack Obama, who initially pledged to reject corporate money, eventually accepted significant corporate funding, illustrating the pervasive influence of the corporatocracy. Perkins points to the subsequent influence of Wall Street, particularly Goldman Sachs, on Obama’s financial policies, and agribusiness giants like Monsanto on agricultural policy, as evidence of this corporate capture of political processes.
Despite this sobering assessment, Perkins emphasizes the power of individual action and conscious consumerism. He believes that “we the people” ultimately hold the control, as corporations depend on consumer spending for survival. He advocates for a “democratic marketplace” where conscious shopping and investment choices can drive corporate behavior. Perkins encourages consumers to communicate directly with corporations, expressing their values through their purchasing decisions and demanding ethical and sustainable practices. He highlights email as a powerful tool for collective action, urging consumers to inform companies like Nike about their refusal to support sweatshops, thereby pushing for fairer labor practices and better working conditions. Perkins asserts that “the way we vote when we shop is just as important as – and perhaps more important than – the votes we give in polls on election day.”
Alt text: People consciously shopping at a green market, choosing sustainable products.
Addressing the feasibility of affordable ethical options, Perkins expresses optimism, pointing to the growth of green markets and vendors committed to environmental and social responsibility. He cites examples like the Chicago Green Festival and Seattle Green Festival, showcasing marketplaces filled with vetted vendors offering sustainable alternatives across various product categories. He emphasizes the importance of supporting these businesses and entrepreneurs who are striving for positive change. While acknowledging that complete perfection may be unattainable, Perkins believes that collective consumer pressure can drive continuous improvement and widespread adoption of ethical practices. He encourages a shift towards conscious consumerism, advocating for reduced consumption and a more conservative lifestyle, alongside supporting responsible businesses.
Perkins expresses cautious optimism about the corporate social responsibility (CSR) movement, seeing it as a potential “cure” for predatory capitalism. He notes that even major corporations now pay “lip service” to the “triple bottom line” – considering financial, social, and ecological impacts. However, he acknowledges the skepticism surrounding the sincerity of these CSR efforts, with many viewing them as mere “lip service.” The core challenge, Perkins recognizes, is the inherent pressure within the current capitalist system for short-term profit maximization. Companies prioritizing social and environmental responsibility risk being undercut by competitors focused solely on profit.
Perkins counters this argument by reiterating the power of consumer demand. He believes that if consumers collectively insist on purchasing only from socially and environmentally responsible companies, those businesses prioritizing ethics will thrive, while those that do not will be driven out of the market. He emphasizes the need for a fundamental shift in consumer messaging, moving away from demanding cheap goods at any cost (e.g., sweatshop labor, environmental destruction) and towards prioritizing ethical production and sustainability. Perkins highlights a positive shift in attitudes, particularly among MBA students, who increasingly express a desire to create and support responsible businesses that contribute to a better world. He draws inspiration from shamanic teachings about “shapeshifting” reality through collective intention and energy, citing examples like the Vietnam War protests, environmental clean-up efforts, and the anti-apartheid movement as evidence of the power of collective action to drive significant change.
The interview further explores the need for international trade agreements that prioritize fairness and sustainability over the exploitative “free trade” agreements currently in place. Perkins advocates for “real free trade” agreements that genuinely benefit all participating nations, contrasting this with existing agreements that disproportionately favor wealthy countries and multinational corporations at the expense of developing nations and their farmers. He points to the International Coffee Agreement, undermined by the Reagan administration, as an example of a potentially beneficial agreement that was dismantled. Perkins expresses support for regional movements in Latin America aimed at establishing fairer trade practices, citing leaders like Rafael Correa of Ecuador, Evo Morales, and Hugo Chavez as proponents of this shift towards economic sovereignty and regional cooperation. He critiques the US and G8-promoted “free trade” as a “horrible form of exploitation,” advocating for true free trade that promotes equitable development and mutual benefit.
Alt text: South American leaders advocating for regional economic cooperation.
Addressing the controversial figure of Hugo Chavez, Perkins defends him against negative portrayals in corporate media, acknowledging his “wild man” style but highlighting his significant achievements in standing up to the United States. While refraining from commenting on Chavez’s specific impact within Venezuela, Perkins emphasizes his historical significance in challenging US hegemony. He points to the 2002 coup attempt against Chavez as a pivotal moment, where Chavez’s resilience sent a powerful message of defiance throughout Latin America and beyond. Perkins notes that Chavez’s actions inspired a wave of democratically elected leaders in Latin America who were emboldened to pursue more independent and progressive policies. He also mentions the positive impact of Chavez’s social programs on Venezuela’s poor, particularly in areas like education and healthcare. Perkins concludes that Chavez played a major role in world politics by challenging US dominance and fostering a spirit of liberation and self-determination across South America.
Perkins addresses the information gap in mainstream media regarding progressive movements in Latin America. He attributes this lack of coverage to the corporate ownership and advertising revenue dependencies of mainstream media outlets, which are inherently aligned against progressive movements challenging the corporatocracy’s interests. He emphasizes the need for alternative media and grassroots communication to disseminate information about the positive transformations occurring in Latin America. Perkins highlights Rafael Correa’s Ecuador as a prime example of progressive change, citing the country’s new constitution granting rights to nature and its exploration of alternative economic models that value non-market contributions. He contrasts the extensive US media coverage of the BP oil spill with the near-silence surrounding Chevron’s far larger environmental damage in Ecuador, illustrating the media’s selective reporting and bias. Perkins reiterates the importance of independent media and individual efforts to spread awareness of these crucial issues, urging continued efforts to counter corporate media narratives.
In a nuanced discussion about capitalism versus socialism, Perkins suggests that the debate is often semantic. He acknowledges Chavez’s shift from a “third way” approach to embracing “democratic socialism,” but emphasizes the need to move beyond ideological labels and focus on practical solutions. Perkins defines capitalism broadly as “the use of capital,” encompassing various forms of capital beyond just financial assets, including creativity and intellectual contributions. He critiques “predatory capitalism,” characterized by profit maximization at all costs, deregulation, and privatization, as a failed system that has led to unsustainable consumption patterns and vast global inequality. Perkins argues that the current system is unsustainable and potentially leading humanity towards extinction, emphasizing the urgent need for a new economic paradigm. He stresses that the specific label – capitalism, socialism, or any other “ism” – is less important than creating a system that prioritizes justice, sustainability, and the well-being of all people and the planet. Perkins sees some Latin American leaders as moving towards this new system, regardless of the specific terminology used, advocating for a future economic model that ensures a just and peaceful world for all future generations.
Addressing the 2009 coup in Honduras, Perkins confirms that it served the interests of corporations like Dole and Chiquita, who sought to maintain exploitative labor practices and resource extraction. He suggests that President Zelaya’s raising of the minimum wage may have been a trigger for the coup, serving as a signal to other nations contemplating similar policies. Perkins highlights the complex position of the Obama administration, noting Attorney General Eric Holder’s prior legal work for Chiquita and the broader “revolving door” phenomenon where individuals move between government and corporate positions, creating conflicts of interest. He emphasizes the vulnerability of US presidents to the corporatocracy, suggesting that any president who challenges corporate interests risks facing various forms of reprisal, including character assassination. While speculating about Obama’s personal preferences regarding the Honduras coup, Perkins concludes that any US president faces significant constraints in challenging the corporatocracy’s agenda.
Alt text: Protest in Honduras against the 2009 military coup.
Reflecting on the 2008 US presidential election, Perkins clarifies his statement that the “corporatocracy’s candidate” did not win, despite Obama receiving more Wall Street funding than McCain. He explains that the corporatocracy exerts influence across both major political parties, supporting multiple candidates to ensure their interests are served regardless of electoral outcomes. While McCain may have been the corporatocracy’s initial preference, they quickly shifted support to Obama as his popularity grew, ensuring their leverage over both potential presidents. Perkins reiterates the corporatocracy’s pervasive control over the political system, highlighting campaign finance and the threat of reprisal as key mechanisms of influence.
Finally, addressing the role of the Peace Corps, Perkins acknowledges its potential for both positive and negative impacts. While acknowledging that he was screened by the NSA before joining the Peace Corps, and that the institution could be a gateway for future “economic hit men,” he emphasizes the transformative potential of the Peace Corps experience. He credits his Peace Corps service with providing him the grounding to eventually see through the lies of his “economic hit man” role. Perkins advises current and former Peace Corps volunteers to “follow your heart” and “follow your passion,” urging them to resist selling out to corporations and instead commit to using their skills and experiences to serve the public interest and create a sustainable and just world. He encourages pursuing careers that align with their values, whether in writing, art, law, journalism, or any field where they can contribute to positive change.
Perkins addresses the concern that some Peace Corps volunteers may draw misguided conclusions from their service, such as blaming poverty on individual laziness rather than structural inequalities. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the “structural and historical causes” of poverty and inequality. Perkins rejects the notion of laziness among the poor, highlighting their resilience and hard work in the face of immense challenges. He connects this to the immigration debate, arguing that many immigrants are driven to migrate due to economic policies like NAFTA and CAFTA that have destroyed livelihoods in their home countries.
Regarding the failures of development work, particularly in Haiti, Perkins points to a long history of exploitation and external interference. He argues that Haiti has been systematically exploited since colonial times, with both France and the US playing roles in undermining its development. He highlights the removal of Jean-Bertrand Aristide, suggesting CIA involvement and linking it to Aristide’s efforts to raise the minimum wage, which threatened corporate interests in Haiti and across the region. Perkins criticizes some NGOs operating in Haiti, suggesting that they may inadvertently serve the interests of the corporatocracy rather than the Haitian people. He concludes that addressing Haiti’s challenges requires acknowledging the historical context of exploitation and holding powerful nations accountable for their role in perpetuating poverty and instability.
Addressing the Israeli flotilla attack, Perkins expresses concern about Israel’s approach to the Palestinian conflict and its negative impact on Israel’s international standing. While lacking firsthand knowledge of the specific incident, he acknowledges the global outrage and negative press surrounding the event, urging Israel to pursue a more compassionate and just approach towards Palestinians and other Arab populations, both for ethical reasons and for Israel’s long-term security and well-being.
Finally, Perkins recommends diversifying news sources beyond corporate media, suggesting the internet as a valuable resource for accessing alternative perspectives. While avoiding specific endorsements, he encourages readers to explore diverse media outlets, including international sources and independent journalism, to gain a more comprehensive and unbiased understanding of global events. He emphasizes the need to move beyond reliance on mainstream outlets like The New York Times, Fox News, and The Washington Post, which he views as biased towards the corporatocracy.
In conclusion, John Perkins’ interview offers a stark and compelling analysis of economic hit men, the corporatocracy, and the urgent need for systemic change. His journey from insider to whistleblower provides unique insights into the hidden mechanisms of global power and exploitation. Perkins’ message is ultimately one of empowerment and hope, urging individuals to recognize their collective power as consumers and citizens to demand a more just, sustainable, and peaceful world. He sees the current era as a time of revolutionary potential, inviting readers to join the global movement for positive change and contribute to building a better future for all.
