You say you do not agree which the proposition that “racism interferes with our 
social solidarity” is intrinsic as opposed to something changeable.  Three 
questions.  First, what is the basis for your assumption that ethnic/racial 
solidarity is practically changeable as opposed to intrinsic?  Second, what is 
the falsification test and/or evidence that would convince you to change your 
mind?  And third, how would your politics change if you changed your mind?

David Shemano

From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Naiman
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 12:00 PM
To: Progressive Economics
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Excellent advice from Eric Foner to Bernie Sanders

I wouldn't argue that diversity doesn't matter. On the contrary, I would freely 
concede that the mobilization of racism has been a key obstacle to anti-poverty 
efforts in the United States. But that doesn't mean that achieving greater 
social solidarity in the United States is impossible, it just means that the 
struggle against racism in the United States is part and parcel of the struggle 
to achieve greater social solidarity. But if you say we can't be like Denmark 
because we're too diverse, that's saying to me that the current degree to which 
racism interferes with our social solidarity is an intrinsic characteristic, 
rather than something that we can change. I think we can change it in two 
important ways: 1) by being less racist 2) by doing a better job of winning 
framing fights so that the current level of racism isn't ruling the discussion. 
Social Security is a great example of an anti-poverty program that seems to be 
able to co-exist with the current level of racism. AFDC was not. So, that 
suggests to me that we should try to do more things that are like Social 
Security (like, expand Social Security, as Sanders and many Democratic 
constituency groups have argued for) - things that are "universal" on their 
face, while doing much more to help people on the bottom.

As for scale, if something like Social Security works, it's not obvious why it 
shouldn't work with twice as many people.






Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org<http://www.justforeignpolicy.org>
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
(202) 448-2898 x1

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Anthony D'Costa 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I would like to hear an argument where scale is unimportant and also an 
argument where lack of diversity doesn't help in a more unified perhaps focused 
decision making. Having lived in Copenhagen for over five years has given me 
insights that I did not have in my uncritical view of Scandinavia before 
getting there.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anthony P. D'Costa, Chair & Professor of Contemporary Indian Studies
Australia India Institute and School of Social & Political Sciences
University of Melbourne, 147-149 Barry Street, Carlton VIC 3053, AUSTRALIA
Ph: +61 3 9035 6161<tel:+61%203%209035%206161>

Visit the Australia India Institute Website 
http://www.aii.unimelb.edu.au/<https://owa.unimelb.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?C=KGdpeyp6YEyjUaiENKoAtx8nOn9uStAIlCVtCNE3uLxqkGIwkWdEYjJXILfPlddrM0Q1713syQQ.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.aii.unimelb.edu.au%2f>
New: After-Development Dynamics (on South Korea)
http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780198729433.do
Forthcoming Book: http://www.tandf.net/books/details/9780415564953/
New Book Series (Dynamics of Asian Development)
http://www.springer.com/series/13342
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



Sent from my iPad

On Oct 23, 2015, at 11:55, Robert Naiman 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
First: I don't think the question should be, "can we be exactly like Denmark." 
Obviously, the answer to that is no. And it should be no. Nobody should try to 
be exactly like anybody else, whether persons or countries. I think the 
question is: can we be more like Denmark, in ways that we'd like? And there I'm 
sure the answer is yes. I think more free basic health care in schools is a 
great example of something wonderful that we can do, that fits well with 
Bernie's demand of expanding "Medicare for all."

Second, it's far from obvious why the size of Denmark's population is 
particularly relevant.

Third, I think the "homogeneous" thing should be interrogated. When people say 
we can't be like northern Europe because they're more homogeneous, aren't they 
saying that we have black people and we're racist so we can't have as much 
social solidarity as they have? Isn't that just the sort of thing that we want 
to explode?

Fourth: if we're not trying to be exactly like Denmark, at least as a 
"transitional program," if you will, then we don't have to have their steeply 
progressive taxation. Not that I'm against it, but we don't have to get to 
Paradise in one jump. We could start by increasing taxes on the top 1% and top 
0.1% of the income distribution. As the New York Times pointed out, that would 
raise a lot of money with which we could do a lot of things to get rid of 
poverty and make the people on the bottom 60% of the income distribution a lot 
better off.







Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org<http://www.justforeignpolicy.org>
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
(202) 448-2898 x1<tel:%28202%29%20448-2898%20x1>

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Anthony D'Costa 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Denmark is certainly an interesting case. Two things we liked were public 
transportation and dental care for kids. All schools in the basement or 
somewhere next to the school had dental facilities for all kids in the school 
based on your yearly appointments. It was mass service like a conveyor belt but 
efficient and effective. Healthcare was universal a real plus but never tested 
the system for serious stuff. That said will Americans be willing to pay 40 
plus % average taxes with marginal rates 70%? And 5 million very homogeneous 
population may have some bearing on policy agenda.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anthony P. D'Costa, Chair & Professor of Contemporary Indian Studies
Australia India Institute and School of Social & Political Sciences
University of Melbourne, 147-149 Barry Street, Carlton VIC 3053, AUSTRALIA
Ph: +61 3 9035 6161<tel:+61%203%209035%206161>

Visit the Australia India Institute Website 
http://www.aii.unimelb.edu.au/<https://owa.unimelb.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?C=KGdpeyp6YEyjUaiENKoAtx8nOn9uStAIlCVtCNE3uLxqkGIwkWdEYjJXILfPlddrM0Q1713syQQ.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.aii.unimelb.edu.au%2f>
New: After-Development Dynamics (on South Korea)
http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780198729433.do
Forthcoming Book: http://www.tandf.net/books/details/9780415564953/
New Book Series (Dynamics of Asian Development)
http://www.springer.com/series/13342
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



Sent from my iPad

On Oct 23, 2015, at 10:06, Robert Naiman 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I'm not sure that I agree with the critique though, as a practical matter, even 
though I think the dialogue is intrinsically very positive, and it's a 
wonderful thing for people like Foner to take advantage of any opportunity to 
talk about US radical history and insist that others do so.

I think talking about Denmark might actually be more relevant to the matter at 
hand than what happened in the US in the 1890s.

It's more relevant, arguably, to talking about health care for all. It's more 
relevant, arguably, to talking about family and medical leave.

Western Europe made a choice after World War II to have capitalism without 
having poverty. The United States made a different choice. We can revisit that 
choice. The fact that Western Europe made that choice and lived to tell the 
tale is a key fact that we should compel people in the US to grapple with.





Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org<http://www.justforeignpolicy.org>
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
(202) 448-2898 x1<tel:%28202%29%20448-2898%20x1>

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Robert Naiman 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I love this. I hope it inspires a thousand more pieces like it.



Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org<http://www.justforeignpolicy.org>
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
(202) 448-2898 x1<tel:%28202%29%20448-2898%20x1>

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Marv Gandall 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
http://www.thenation.com/article/how-bernie-sanders-should-talk-about-democratic-socialism/
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l


_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
____________________________________________________
 
Information contained in this e-mail transmission may be privileged, 
confidential and covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 
U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521.

If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce 
this transmission.

If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify us 
immediately of the error by return email and please delete the message from 
your system.

Pursuant to requirements related to practice before the U. S. Internal Revenue 
Service, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any 
attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes of 
(i) avoiding penalties imposed under the U. S. Internal Revenue Code or (ii) 
promoting, marketing or recommending to another person any tax-related matter.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

Robins Kaplan LLP
http://www.robinskaplan.com 
____________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to