>At 09:02 AM 12/3/97 -0600, William Lear wrote, responding to John Gulick:
>
>>Who is "you"? Could you insert the person's name to whom you are
>>responding? It makes following the thread a bit easier.
>
>Sorry. This is a shortcoming of my mail application.
>
>>>>Not all of the Reform Party positions are compatible with
>>>>progressive populism. But progressive populists ought to work with the
>>>>Reformers on common issues such as opening the ballot to alternative
>>>>parties, campaign finance reform, fair trade laws and encouraging small
>>>>farmers, small businesses and American manufacturing.
>>>
>>>Excuse me, but if the "progressive populist" movement has not enough
>>>moral imagination to oppose free trade agreements and the MAI because
>>>of the destitution these policies/laws/institutions wreak upon workers
>>>and peasants in "developing countries," and instead gets all up in arms
>>>embattled textile firms in the Piedmonts and gracious U.S. "sovereingty,"
>>>then I don't see much difference between "progressive populism" and
>>>Buchanan's crypto-fascism, or other crypto-fascisms in Europe.
>>
>>All this righteous anger might be better directed at someone who
>>actually does not oppose free trade agreements. From the quote you
>>are responding to, "you" mentions "fair trade laws", exactly the
>>opposite (according to my reading of Tom Athanasiou's book) of "free"
>>trade.
>
>I deliberately intended to critique this proponent (i.e. the author
>of the article, who is the same person who issued the e-mail)
>of so-called fair trade, b/c it is my belief that they oppose so-called free
>trade for all the wrong (provincial and yes, protectionist) reasons.
Jim Cullen responds:
The tone of your criticism is one of the reasons that most American workers
would just as soon export liberals to Myanmar, rather than support their
causes. My editorial appeals to the self-interest of American workers
because they are the ones who can have an impact on United States trade
policy. If the United States adopts fair trade rules, which are designed to
improve labor and health policies internationally, that ought to help
workers in the Third World.
I suppose at a moral level perhaps it is unworthy of us to couch our
arguments in self-interest, but at a practical level I don't see anything
wrong with an American worker getting involved politically to protect his
or her livelihood.
To paraphrase the bumper sticker, Think Globally, Act Provincially!
>
>John Gulick
>Ph. D. Candidate
>Sociology Graduate Program
>University of California-Santa Cruz
>(415) 643-8568
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------
THE PROGRESSIVE POPULIST
James M. Cullen, Editor
P.O. Box 150517, Austin, Texas 78715-0517
Phone: 512-447-0455
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home page: http://www.eden.com/~reporter
----------------------------------------
