In this article, Rev. Jesse Jackson criticizes the inaction of World Bank President Jim Yong Kim for the organization’s “sustained racially discriminatory practices.” Jackson cites a 2009 GAP report, Racial Discrimination at the World Bank, which identified only four black Americans out of more than 1000 American professionals working at the bank. Jackson gives Kim credit for his efforts in advancing equality for women and other groups, but pinpoints exactly how black professionals are stifled from rising up institutional ranks.
Key Quote: In 2009, the Government Accountability Project identified only four black Americans out of more than 1000 American professionals working at the bank, not counting several thousand foreign nationals. The banks reply essentially was that there are not sufficient qualified black Americans.
In fact, as the banks own internal reports have documented, discrimination is the root of the problem. In 1998, the Team for Racial Equality, consisting of senior officials including the banks current chief counsel, reported that The findings of three earlier World Bank studies send a clear message: race-based discrimination is present in our institution. One of the serious issues that the 1998 report and several subsequent ones identified is the ghettoization (segregation) of blacks in the Africa regional vice presidential unit, housed in a separate building from the World Banks main office.
In 2009, a former senior vice president explained that blacks were placed in the Africa regional section to give them opportunity to prove their competence and win the confidence of management before they were considered for assignments in other areas. This made it difficult for black professionals to gain higher positions and difficult for the bank to retain skilled black professionals who could find greater opportunities elsewhere.
GAP Executive Director Bea Edwards penned this Huffington Post column about media outlets trumpeting an alarm over imminent cyber wars that will purportedly pose a direct threat (from hackers) to American citizens’ information. Edwards argues that these so-called cyber wars are really about “corporate secrets and intellectual property,” arguing that taxpayers shouldn’t be picking up the tab for what is essentially “a greed fight between corporations.”
Key Quote: In this rosy era of globalization, however, it doesn’t matter to me whether corporate secrets about, say, aluminum smelting belong to Alcoa or to a Chinese company. Frankly, for all I know, Alcoa is a Chinese company.
As a matter of fact, Alcoa, although born in the USA, now operates in 30 countries, and in 2012, consummated a joint venture with China Power Investment Corporation to manufacture high-end fabricated aluminum at Alcoa CPI (China) Aluminum Investment Co. Ltd., based in Shanghai. For good measure, U.S. Ambassador to China Gary Locke blessed the union.
So are we, as American taxpayers, to foot the bill for a World War Zero cyber conflict to protect the secrets of Alcoa from the government of China, when Alcoa is a partially Chinese venture? Why would we want to do that for Alcoa — or for other nominally U.S. corporations?
A report from the National Lawyers Guild provides an overview and analysis of the impact of government spying on attorneys. The report includes a description of GAP National Security & Human Rights Director Jesselyn Radack and her legal representation of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Native American artifacts and relics have allegedly been mishandled and lost in Nevada, California and Oregon by the Bureau of Reclamation, according to documents provided by a whistleblower.
Irish officals have passed legislation aimed at encouraging employees to raise genuine concerns about matters of public interest free of any threat of retaliation.
Dylan Blaylock is Communications Director for the Government Accountability Project, the nation’s leading whistleblower protection and advocacy organization.