> > What's your point? Let me ask Tavis a question. If > > slavery were in effect in the US, would he support the purchase > > of slave labor, either directly or indirectly? Would he support > > purchasing, products rolling out of, say, German concentration > > camps? Why (not)? Perhaps the answers will clarify the issue > > since as an "internationalist" I think the question I'm dealing > > with are not so different. > > Okay, pen-l prize giveaway: whose law of large number is it that as the > number of posts goes to infinity, the probability of somebody on one side > likening their oponents to Nazi apologists approaches one? And is it a > strong law or a weak law? The winner gets a sub to the new Solidarity > magazine that we're starting up (no name yet). But, of course, you'll > have to remember before I get back home to NY and look it up in the > issue of _Wired_ from some time this fall that I first saw it in.... :) > Incredible! Is this guy for real? Does anyone else think that I am accusing Tavis of Nazi apologia? Does Tavis really think so? Geez. (am I also accusing you of slavery apologia, rendering further discussion useless?). How about answering the question, cutting out the polemics and giving "your opponent" the benefit of the doubt, Tavis. Dan --------------------------- Begin of Replyed Message ------------------------ In message <Pine.3.89.9501042206.A15418-0100000@csa>, You wrote the following: > > > On Wed, 4 Jan 1995, Dan Epstein wrote: > > > > First, I am no "progressive nationalist" so get off your huffy high horse. > > Don't worry, hon, the remark wasn't intended for you. It was a > gratuituous and unsolicited bait to Jim Devine and Bill Mitchell and Paul > Phillips. Jim and Paul have decided not to waste their time with it, I > think sensibly since they'll get plenty of chances to bait me back when > someone supports NAFTA for "progressive" reasons or something. Bill for > whatever selfless reason has responded with some interesting and > thoughtful comments and I hope I'll be able to reply to him in kind. > > > > ... workers who do decide to > > > migrate can only benefit from the option of employment in the factories t > hat > > > produce these toys -- after all, no one is forcing them to work there. > > > > Really? How much choice do they really have? This attitude > > smacks of first world arrogance to me. > > They have relatively little choice. That's part of my point. Take away > their ability to work in export firms and they will have even fewer > choices. If you want to stand proudly behind a drive to push displaced > Chinese peasants into the informal sector, be my guest. > > > > Let's say the same argument can be made for slavery a few > > centuries ago. Were any authoritative organizations of African > > American slaves calling for a boycott? I doubt it. They were > > forbidden by law (as is the right to organize in some countries). > > Of course there were -- escaped slaves. Fine, I'll rephrase the > question: Are there any organizations of Chinese workers in exile asking > for a total boycott of Chinese products (aside from perhaps a few > anti-Communist circles)? > > > > What's your point? Let me ask Tavis a question. If > > slavery were in effect in the US, would he support the purchase > > of slave labor, either directly or indirectly? Would he support > > purchasing, products rolling out of, say, German concentration > > camps? Why (not)? Perhaps the answers will clarify the issue > > since as an "internationalist" I think the question I'm dealing > > with are not so different. > > Okay, pen-l prize giveaway: whose law of large number is it that as the > number of posts goes to infinity, the probability of somebody on one side > likening their oponents to Nazi apologists approaches one? And is it a > strong law or a weak law? The winner gets a sub to the new Solidarity > magazine that we're starting up (no name yet). But, of course, you'll > have to remember before I get back home to NY and look it up in the > issue of _Wired_ from some time this fall that I first saw it in.... :) > > > > To clarify a point, I would be highly supportive of directing my > > purchases towards helping labor in the third world. Given that > > the only real say I have in the political economic system is > > where and how to spend my money, I find it troublesome to > > indirectly have children toiling under often hazardous working > > conditions working under virtual slavery producing cheap products > > for my consumption (and enriching the industrialists). Perhaps I > > am wrong in the tactics I utilize... > > Damn, I was going to insist that you really _wanted_ to see third-world > workers barefoot and starving. :) > > In all seriousness, I know that there are people on Pen-L involved in > such organizations -- maybe the North/South Network, certainly there are > support groups for Latin American unions whose posts crop up on here. I > don't know of anything dealing with CHinese or Thai workers but maybe Kai > Mander does. They need all of our help. I think you'd get further than > you would with a blanket boycott. > > > Yours for the squabble after the revolution, > Tavis > --------------------------- End Message ------------------------
