An economic decline is not just the foundation for non-left alternatives, it
is also the potential foundaton for left alternatives.
As long as capitalism is able to provide a degree of prosperity for a
significant part of the working class there is almost no hope of a left
alternative to the left of Nathan and/or Brad. The valid point in Paul's
remarks is that as long as the the US working class as a whole is in
reasonably comfortable economic circumstances radical change is impossible.
While it is true that fascism and right wing regimes may result form
economic declines left alternatives also demand hardship or at least
frustration of the economic demands of tthe working class. Marxists support
reforms only to lessen the oppression of the working class and to make
demands that cannot ultimately be met by the system, and know full well that
when the crunch comes capital will attempt to crush them. This is part and
parcel of class
ass education surely, an education that will hopefully open the eyes of the
US working class to their own situation eventually. The US working
class and
to some extent runnning dogs of US imperialism such as the Chretien govt.
benefit to a degree from US imperialism. If the great imperial power shafts
them rather than shielding them or being able to buy them off workers may
revolt
Cheers, Ken Hanly
----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen E Philion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 1:48 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:9465] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ergonomics, etc.
>
> Yes, but in your reply to Doug's transparently sarcastic remark on
> Candaian innocence, you seem to be taking Doug as an ardent defender of US
> foreign policy...
> Doug's displeasure, if I'm reading it correctly, is with the idea that
> wishing any working class any kind of economic decline is not a very left
> position, since that decline can be as much (if not more) the foundation
> for non-left 'alternatives' to the present state of affairs. Why not
> address yourself to that argument, since it is the main argument Doug
> is making.
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Doug,
> >
> > This is repugnant. You have never heard me defending Canadian
> > policy on this list. Furthermore, if you knew what I have been
> > doing, I have been crossing the country speaking and denouncing
> > Canadian policy in this area.
> >
> > Paul Phillips
> >
> > Date sent: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 13:47:23 -0500
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > From: Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: [PEN-L:9456] Re: Re: Re: ergonomics, etc.
> > Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > >Second, I would ask Doug why we shouldn't hope that the
> > > >American working class doesn't get hammered into poverty,
> > > >disease and death since they have been supporting governments
> > > >and policies that have been prescribing such medicine for the rest
> > > >of the world.
> > >
> > > While Canadians, of course, are pure and innocent.
> > >
> > > Doug
> > >
> >
> >
>
