I strongly agree with Jerry's statement in response to Doug's earlier characterization of the issues in dispute here. And to add to what Bill Rosenberg said in another message, this exchange originated in a discussion of the threat posed by supranational trade agreements like the MAI, NAFTA, etc. To my knowledge, these agreements ARE unprecedented in that their purpose is to enshrine neoliberal values and priorities in "trade" agreements which include sanctions against countries which fail to go along. Sid Shniad > > Doug Henwood wrote: > > > My major objection to the globalization rhetoric is that by positing > > some alleged epochal break in the nature of capitalism, everything has > > changed. Some things have changed, yes, but not everything: unions still > > matter, political parties still matter, state power still matters. > > My major objection to the anti-globalization rhetoric on this list is > that it posits some alleged positions re globalization that those who > refer to globalization do not state or infer. For instance, who on this > list said or inferred that "everything has changed"? Who on this list > said or inferred that unions don't matter? Who on this list said or > inferred that political parties and state power don't matter? > > Jerry >
