44. Ohmae, Kenichi. “The Rise of the Region State,” Foreign Affairs, Spring 1993, 78.
45. An August 2016 article in The New York Times, stated, “think tanks are seen as independent, but their scholars often push donors’ agendas,
amplifying a culture of corporate influence in Washington.” Providing specific examples of think tanks advancing corporate causes, the article pointed out likely conclusions of some think tank reports were discussed “with donors–or even potential ones–before the research [was] complete” and that donors not only helped shape the final report but “outlined how the resulting scholarship will be used as part of a broader lobbying efforts.”
An accompanying article also pointed out instances of individuals working through think tanks to promote agendas of the corporations. Specifically, their research—involving a review of 75 think tanks—found “an array of researchers who had simultaneously worked as registered lobbyists, members of corporate boards or outside consultants in litigation and regularoty disputes,
with only intermittent disclosure of their dual roles.” As a result, the articles went on to conclude:
Think tanks, which position themselves as “universities without students,” have power in government policy debates because they are seen as researchers independent of moneyed interests. But in the chase for funds, think tanks are pushing agendas important to corporate donors, at times blurring the line between researchers and lobbyists. And they are doing do while reaping the benefits of their tax-exempt status, sometimes without disclosing their connections to corporate interests.
Thousands of pages of internal memos and confidential correspondence between Brookings and other donors–like JPMorgan Chase, the nation’s largest bank; K.K.R., the global investment firm; Microsoft, the software giant; and Hitachi, the Japanese conglomerate–show that financial support often came with assurances from Brookings that it would provide “donation benefits,” including setting up events featuring corporate executives with government officials.
Similar arrangements exist at many think tanks. On issues as varied as military sales to foreign countries, international trade, highway management systems and real estate development, think tanks have frequently become vehicles for
that it would provide “donation benefits,” including setting up events featuring corporate executives with government officials.
Similar arrangements exist at many think tanks. On issues as varied as military sales to foreign countries, international trade, highway management systems and real estatecorporate influence and branding campaigns.
See: Eric Lipton and Brooke Williams. “How Think Tanks Amplify Corporate America’s Influence: Think tanks are seen as independent, but their scholars often push donors’ agenda, amplifying a culture of corporate influence in Washington, op cit; Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/us/politics/think-tanks-research-and- corporate-lobbying.html; and Eric Lipton, Nicholas Confessore and Brooke Williams. “Think Tank Scholar or Corporate Consultant: It Depends on the Day: Acting as independent arbiters to shape government policy, many researchers also have corporate roles that are sometimes undisclosed,” The New York Times, op cit, Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/think-tank-scholars- corporate-consultants.html
46. MacDonald, Forrest. Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution (Lawrence: The University of Kansas, 1985).
47. Ibid, 41
48. Ibid, 10.
49. Ibid, 144.
50. Ibid, 150
51. Ibid, 165; citing Federalist number 10, 59.
52. bid, 166.
53. Ibid, 215; citing The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, ed. Max Farrand, 4 vols (New Haven, Conn. 1937) June 6, 1:136.
54. Ibid, 277; citing Farrand, Records, 3:304.
55. Ibid, 276.
56. Ibid, 278; citing Syrett, Papers of Hamilton, 8:98.
57. Ibid, 280.
58. Ibid, 292.
59. Springborg, Robert. Political Economies of the Middle East & North Africa (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2020), p. 1.
60. Ibid, 96, quoting Isaiah Berlin.
Endnotes - The Arab Dignity Deficit
1. Shibley Telhami, The World Through Arab Eyes: Arab Public Opinion and the Reshaping of the Middle East ( New York: Basic Books, 2013.
2. https://www.arabbarometer.org/
3.https://www.arabbarometer.org/2020/09/public-misgivings-of-private-affairs-trust-in-private-institutions-of-the-arab-world/
4.https://www.amazon.ca/World-Through-Arab-Eyes-Reshaping/dp/0465029833
5. David Pollock, Review of The World Through Arab Eyes: Arab Public Opinion and the Reshaping of the Middle East. Middle East Quarterly, 21, 1 (Winter 2014).
.
.
160