[Marxism] An under accumulation of capital?
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Louis writes: Although I am not that interested in the kind of Talmudic discussions that typify Marxist value theory, I am familiar enough with the topic to have my interest piqued., to then conclude: In Marx’s final years, the foundations of monopoly capital had already been put in place. It was a calculated effort to make sure that investments would always go rewarded through price-fixing, trade secrets, collusion with the state and a hundred other mechanisms that have become popularly known as Government Sachs today. so that one should be content with knowing that prices are determined by what monopoly capitalists fix them to be. The question almost begs itself: Can the moderator objectively explain why, without any Talmudic resort to value -since it doesn't pique his interest-, commodities which prices are subject to the abstract will of the capitalists, do in fact have a price, or in other words, what the price of such commodities is? _ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469226/direct/01/ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] An under accumulation of capital?
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Hi Leonardo, I once wrote a piece lampooning the FROP and the LTV corners of the old Spoons Marxism list. My how the cyber skin and blood flew in those disputes. You should have read some of the posts by Jerry Levy. I suspect your mouth would still be watering. God be with the days as my mother used to say. Alas my post got lost in the great purge that accompanied my last major dispute. From memory my lampoon imagined a room in the Pentagon where a young visibly sweating internee was ordered to monitor the FROP posts. He screams dementedly No, please not that. I will do anything but that!. I don't deserve it. I was building a house! And his supervisor shouts Deserving got nothing to do with it. Shut up you whinger or I will make throw in the LTV as well. regards Gary Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Behind Hillary Clinton’s tough talk on Iran
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == The goal of Hillary Clinton’s rhetoric seems to be to promote conflict and convince Americans Iran is a threat to their security In a visit to Qatar and Saudi Arabia this week, Hillary Clinton said that Iran “is moving toward a military dictatorship,” and continued the Administration’s campaign for tougher sanctions against that country. What could America’s top diplomat hope to accomplish with this kind of inflammatory rhetoric? It seems unlikely that the goal was to support human rights in Iran. Because of the United States’ history in Iran and in the region, it tends to give legitimacy to repression. The more that any opposition can be linked to the United States’ actions, words, or support, the harder time they will have. Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/feb/18/hillary-clinton-iran Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Mithra
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Knowing nothing about Zoroastrianism, the cult of Mithra or its similarities with Christianity, I looked it up in Wikipedia and found some interesting stuff which backs up what Tom said for the most part. But apparently it's in dispute whether the cult around Mithra in ancient Rome grew out of Iranian Zoroastrianism. For those interested, here are the relevant links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraic_Mysteries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithra Paul Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:03:56 -0500 From: Thomas Bias bia...@embarqmail.com Subject: Re: [Marxism] Guy Robinson To: 'Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition' marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Message-ID: 003401cab246$4e5a0e20$ eb0e2a...@com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii It's very likely that there is some historical basis for Jesus Christ as presented in the Gospels. However, the redemption theology of Christianity was borrowed almost unchanged from the Mithra religion, which arose out of Iranian Zoroastrianism and for which we have historical evidence about a century before the traditional birthdate of Jesus. Mithra was a sun god who sacrificed himself to atone for humanity's sins; moreover, his birth was celebrated on 25 December. The Mithra religion was quite popular among middle-class Romans. Additionally, as I saw with my own eyes when I was traveling in Iran, wandering preachers who gather a band of followers and travel like nomads from town to town preaching in the bazaar, are an ongoing tradition in the Middle East. Clearly, this is who John the Baptist was, and he was one of many. I believe, based on what I've seen and read, that the Jesus of the Gospels is a composite of an anti-Roman rebel who was crucified, a wandering darwish, and Mithra. The Middle Eastern tradition of unwritten storytelling only reinforces what I think. Plus, there is clear historical evidence that at the time that Christianity was becoming the accepted established religion of the Roman Empire, the Emperor Constantine sought to merge the followers of Mithra and the followers of Jesus into a single congregation, and did so successfully. Tom Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] An under accumulation of capital?
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Leonardo Kosloff wrote: The question almost begs itself: Can the moderator objectively explain why, without any Talmudic resort to value -since it doesn't pique his interest-, commodities which prices are subject to the abstract will of the capitalists, do in fact have a price, or in other words, what the price of such commodities is? Uh, because of M-C-M` or is it C-M-C`? I have trouble rememembering things nowadays. Or maybe it is M-G-M`, keeping the Mickey Rooney theorem in mind. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] An under accumulation of capital?
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == I think we're missing the point here-- except for Steve Palmer-- and the point is that Heartfield is just wrong. He's wrong in his theoretical interpretation of Marx, and he' wrong in his practical evaluation of the roots of capitalism's current predicament. A definite shift in the C portion of capital does precede the 2007 downturn; there was a definite peak in profitability, and the return on net property plant and equipment in US manufacturing, prior to the MBS debacle. The recovery of capital after the 2001-2003 contraction can be traced to specific alterations in the ratios of exchange between c and v. These same alterations gave rise to the explosion of asset securitization, which became asset stripping, liquidation, and devaluation when profitability declined. - Original Message - From: Gary MacLennan gary.maclenn...@gmail.com Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Guy Robinson
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Well, there's more to Marx's critique of religion that just that of flowers decorating the chains-- there is the historical crique, that human beings alienate there own powers in the attempt to control, explain, sway forces that their level of social development in inadequate to control or explain. Humans create fetishes, endowing those fetishes with the powers of objective forces or conditions-- of nature, climate, fertility, etc. and the festishes then represent the power against and over human beings. Religion is the alienated attempt to comprehend, apprehend the material world. As society moves from direct appropriation of nature through individual activity to the mediated appropriation of nature through the organization of property and the appropriation of social labor, religion moves from an explanation of nature to an ideology of that property. - Original Message - From: Shane Hopkinson chen9692...@yahoo.com Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] China's Statistics
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == From: http://www.upiasia.com/Economics/2010/02/15/chinas_worthless_economic_statistics/6483/?view=print Toronto, ON, Canada, - China is trying hard to project itself as one of the world's greatest economic power with worthless economic statistics is what China's National Bureau of Statistics headed by Ma Jiantang said on January 28. Ma was complaining during the national statistics works conference that provincial officials routinely fudge and inflate numbers to make them look good. The rigged statistics become gospel and economists and analysts all over the world use it to polish China's image. Chinese leaders smilingly acknowledge the attention despite knowing that the statistics are fudged. The margin of error in China's gross domestic product statistics over the past 20 years is at least 15 to 20 percent. It could have been higher, but the NBS corrected some errors though not all. As per the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency's World Factbook, China's 2009 GDP at purchasing power parity is US$8.8 trillion. If the figure is overstated by 20 percent, then the true value should be US$7 trillion. But that still puts China much behind the United States and the European Union but well ahead of Japan. India is behind with US$3.6 trillion. One should however note that China exports 62 percent of its output while India consumes 62 percent of its output internally. Chinese leaders are unmindful of all the faulty statistics. They have acquired airs of greatness around them and anybody that questions them is no longer their friend. The statistics are prepared to support the Communist Party's agenda that includes 10 percent growth in a recession year. Therefore, provincial leaders fudge the numbers to make them look good. Professor Thomas Rawski, a Harvard educated Sinologist, has been following Chinese statistics for the past 30 years. In 2003, he pointed out that China's GDP grew at about half the level of what it was officially stated. Florence Chan, a Hong Kong based journalist holds a similar view. Both have studied the five-layered Chinese statistics preparation process and both have pointed out errors in the statistics. ___ As you read through the article, the hostility to China is palpable.. but the citation from Ma Jiantang is very interesting. The author of the article claims that 62% of China's economic output is exported which is way above any level I've seen-- with most estimates being in the 33%-40% of GDP range. Still, the author makes an interesting point-- that if so much of the economy is export [and FDI] driven, then how can such phenomenal growth be recorded when exports declined, and FDI shrank? All good Keynesians, monetarists, social democrats, neo-liberal neo-conservatives, hedge fund managers, asset-backed security salesmen know the answer to that one. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Edward Herman finds new venue
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == At 5:49 PM -0500 2/20/10, Thomas Bias wrote: I doubt seriously if the United States is planning war on Iran any time soon. Two quick points on this: 1. While the US may not be planning an immediate attack, they've war gamed it about 100 times in the last few years. They've contingency planned it to death, and if it 'needs' to happen, it will, and at that point Jim Jones, Gates, and the whole gang will be ready to turn on a dime. 2. If the occupiers of Palestine go rogue (or ACTS like they went rogue, as they recently did to the British in Dubai), all bets are off. I just don't think the lunatics in charge there will continue playing tiddley-winks while Clinton tries futilely to break up the informal alliance that have bound Iran, Russia, and China. Especially when Clinton and Obama are cheering them along. Of course, none of this matters in relation to what Edward Hermann says. Because his (and Yoshie's) opinion about the campaign US against Iran is more important than anything else that has ever occurred in the history of the world. I haven't read ZNet in a long time - is Michael Albert still hostile and antagonistic towards socialism? Is he still plugging 'Parecon'? Solidarity, Shawn Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] An under accumulation of capital?
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == @Gary, can you tell me where these discussions are, or will I have to “water my mouth” for how the whole of Marx was debunked till the end of my days? In the meantime, maybe you can answer: what is the price of a commodity, without referring to value, or more specifically according to your lampooning claims, without referring to labor? @Louis, I wish I could follow along with the jokes, I like jokes, but unfortunately this one just don’t sound really good, maybe try “three Marxists walk into a bar…”? So once again: what is the price of a commodity, without referring to value? I have a pretty objective explanation, but unfortunately it is close to Marx and all his “Talmudic” value coming before the form of realization of the commodity in the market. With your help, however, I should be able to convert myself soon enough to Hilferdingism, where such a form is taken as the content which determines the accumulation of capital, and of course, is only subject to the abstract whim of the capitalist. So, unless you can answer the question (or refer to some literature where this is explained, John Bellamy Foster does not) it kinda makes it look like your evasion reinforces the point that the theory of monopoly capital has this inversion at its core and therefore is destined to move in a world of appearances, which is a criticism beyond its “historical validity”. _ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469227/direct/01/ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Brewing Crisis in the South Atlantic
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Brewing Crisis in the South Atlantic: Oil Exploration in the Malvinas Islands Ignites an Old Dispute By Adam Richmond For Argentineans the long simmering territorial dispute between Britain and Argentina is coming to a head, as a British oil rig travels to what analysts say is a 60 billion barrel reserve of high-grade oil located in a 200 square mile zone surrounding the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands. This would make it one of the largest oil reserves in the world. Argentina had instituted a naval embargo of the islands but has recently permitted the oil rig to land in Port Stanley, capital of the island. The delivery and installation of the oil rig will substantially alter the fundamental economic character of the disputed islands from fishing and sheep-raising to the exploitation of one of the world’s most sought after commodities: petroleum. The exploitative economic character Britain is unilaterally imposing exacerbates the national tensions between Argentina and Britain. This conflict has brought the relationship between the two countries to their sharpest point since the 1982 war over the Islands. The Argentine government of President Christina Kirschner is set to bring the matter before the United Nations Security Council and is mustering its diplomatic resources to bring this matter to a negotiated end. In addition, President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, has correctly demanded that Britain cede the Malvinas: “The British are desperate for oil since their own fields in the North Sea are now being depleted, Chavez said in a televised speech. “When will England stop breaking international law? Return the Malvinas to Argentina! Argentina and Venezuela are both members of Mercosur, the common market covering much of South America. The Anti-Imperialist Character of the Conflict This conflict is not, however, a simple land dispute or even an oil resource dispute. The question of the return of the Malvinas Islands is an explosive national issue for most Argentines, who see the haughty imperial occupation and colonization of their islands as symbolic of their nation’s relationship to western imperialism. Argentina is a country whose national wealth is sapped by the wealthiest financiers of London, Madrid, and New York City. The vast majority of the Argentine people view the continued occupation of the Malvinas Islands by Britain as a fundamental injustice. Argentina attempted to seize the islands in 1982 but was defeated by the British after a short-lived, but bloody re-occupation of the colonial outpost. The conflict resulted in nearly 1,000 deaths with two-thirds of the dead from the Argentine military. The invasion was a military disaster for Argentina and a stunning loss in the fight against imperialism which bolstered the fanatical anticommunism of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Then, too, the conflict was bathed in the waters of the Nicaraguan Revolution, the Grenadian revolution, and the civil war in El Salvador, not to mention the U.S.’ sponsored swath of counter-revolutions in Chile and Argentina. Despite the failure of the Argentine military in 1982, the question still must be answered: What right does Britain have to a colony in the South Atlantic 7,800 miles from London? Britain claims it has the right to defend “self determination” when this seems as a convenient cover for British interests in the expansion of its capital. In keeping with this, the Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands, the local governing body for the 3,000 plus residents of the Falklands, announced on February 5, that it would oppose any Argentine firm exploring for oil in the territory. 21st Century Colonialism or 21st Century Socialism The British, French, Dutch, or U.S. governments have no business maintaining colonies in South America, or anywhere else on the globe. The Malvinas are properly Argentine territory, and workers in Britain have no interest in maintaining the old Empire territorial claims that Labor and Tory governments, including those of Thatcher, Blair and Brown, have vigorously defended. In this sense the Falkland Islands are no different than returning Hong Kong to the Peoples Republic of China, India to the Indians, or Ireland to the Irish. What seemingly complicates the matter is that there are virtually no Argentine nationals on the Falklands. The local residents vigorously support continued British control, much like the reactionary Unionists of Northern Ireland. Central America, South America, and the Caribbean are dotted with direct colonial possessions of the United States (Puerto Rico, American Virgin Islands), Britain (British Virgin Islands, etc.), the Netherlands (Curacao, Dutch West Indies), and France (Guadeloupe,
[Marxism] Is Marx Back? A public interview with Leo Panitch...
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Is Marx Back? A public interview with Leo Panitch by Ian Morrison of the Platypus Affiliated Society. The economic crisis, as many commentators and critics are quick to point out, has rekindled interest in – and anxieties over – Marxism. Although many on the Left hope this renewed curiosity marks the beginning of a radical turn, similar revivals of anti-capitalist politics in the 1930s, 1960s, and 1990s failed to achieve the revolutionary transformations they sought. Has Marxism returned as a significant political force? How might this translate into the possibility for a revitalized Left? Will the resurgence of Marxist theory provide opportunities for social change – or merely the opportunity to fail again? Dr. Leo Panitch is Canada Research Chair in Comparative Political Economy and Distinguished Research Professor of Political Science at York University in Toronto, and coeditor of the annual Socialist Register. Presented by Platypus Affiliated Society - Toronto. http://www.socialistproject.ca/leftstreamed/ls39.php Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] A Herman/Peterson fan speaks out
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == A comment under: http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/hp200210.html The fools of this page review the following link to figure out what is the common denominator between Chomsky and a zionist mass murderer pro ‘Jewish state’ , Joe Biden, where make it easy for them to support a CIA asset? http://www.peakoil.org.au/news/index.php?esfandiari.htm This article has created another opportunity for left to identify and isolate the phony ‘anti imperialist’, majority are Zionist Jews, to prevent any unity among the left to stand against Zionism and imperialism. These Zionist Jews have effectively kept Zionism, the main enemy of the present time’ hidden from the public discussion to keep the fools on phony slogan of ‘imperialism’ where they have no fight with. This is their TOOLS to protect the interest of an apartheid entity to create opportunity for Zionist project of WORLD DOMINATION. This article exposes the dishonorable ‘Nobel’ Laureates sign on to Eli Wiesel’s petition for “harsher Iran sanctions and finally for a military attack on Iran where is nothing less than nuclear holocaust. Many of these Jews were involve in WMD of the West and Israel, yet they DARE to ask their puppet, Obama, to destroy Iranians with more than 7000 years of civilization to make it easier for the terrorist state of Israel to dominate the whole region. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Guy Robinson
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On Feb 21, 2010, at 2:28 AM, Shane Hopkinson wrote: The human truth is the God or markets are human products but under alienated social relations we don't experience them that way. We, on this list who have read 'Capital' and so on, may *know* that markets are not *objectively* real (ie they are a product of particular human practices unlike the earth going around the sun) but we still experience them that way because they are part of the objective practices of the capitalist class. The 'illusion' that markets (or gods) exist in the same way that the solar system does is part of the ideology but its not dispensed by intellectual critique. The earth going around the sun is *more* a human product than are markets. Like the monotheists' God it is a human illusion--in fact the earth moves in a complicated spiral around the path traced by the sun in three-dimensional cosmic space. You conceive of the solar system as an armillary sphere, operating like clockwork, which does not itself move--solely because of your conceptual limitations. The same limitations (unwillingness to envisage complexity) that lead to the illusory God of a monotheist. In contrast, markets are not specifically human products at all--they are a necessary objective feature of social organization for any society, human or not, composed of individual subjectivities interacting through an even minimally complicated division of labor. That is why Marx recognizes the law of value as equivalent to a natural law that cannot be done away with, at least until labor and its divisions have been done away with. Shane Mage Porphyry in his Abstinance from Animal Flesh suggests that there are appropriate offerings to all the Gods, and to the highest the only offering acceptable is silence. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] China's Statistics
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == The critique revolves around purchasing power parity, which is a questionable measure. I do not doubt that China fudges data, however. So do most businesses and governments. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Edward Herman finds new venue
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Two quick points on this: ...They've contingency planned it to death, and if it 'needs' to happen, it will, and at that point Jim Jones, Gates, and the whole gang will be ready to turn on a dime. 2. If the occupiers of Palestine go rogue (or ACTS like they went rogue, as they recently did to the British in Dubai), all bets are off. I have to agree with you and think your points are right on the money. What worries me are two points: (1) The US rulers deciding that Afghanistan is not turning out like Iraq, and therefore feeling desperate to do *something* to change the status quo; or (2) Somehow the bunglers in charge stumble themselves into a war with Iran, by an Israeli attack or just a quick series of unforeseen events putting them into a position where war is chosen or happens. What I have to wonder is how the American people would respond to such a war. When talking with people, I try as much as possible to relate their complaints about gov't -- be they taxes, poor roads, or whatever -- to the fact that we're pissing away money constantly on these wars of occupation. I'm routinely surprised at the warm agreement I get in response. Thus, I get the sense that people are fed up. Who knows what support there would be for a war once the propaganda machine is turned up fully. But I have a suspicion it would not be the wholesale support that we've seen in the past and there is a distinct chance we'd see widespread opposition. There is a *lot* of anger out there in the country. -- Sell a man a fish, he eats for a day; teach a man how to fish, you ruin a wonderful business opportunity. -- Karl Marx, commenting on capitalism. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Edward Herman finds new venue
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On Feb 21, 2010, at 12:30 PM, Intense Red wrote: Two quick points on this: ...They've contingency planned it to death, and if it 'needs' to happen, it will, and at that point Jim Jones, Gates, and the whole gang will be ready to turn on a dime. 2. If the occupiers of Palestine go rogue (or ACTS like they went rogue, as they recently did to the British in Dubai), all bets are off. I have to agree with you and think your points are right on the money. What worries me are two points: (1) The US rulers deciding that Afghanistan is not turning out like Iraq, and therefore feeling desperate to do *something* to change the status quo; or (2) Somehow the bunglers in charge stumble themselves into a war with Iran, by an Israeli attack or just a quick series of unforeseen events putting them into a position where war is chosen or happens. What I have to wonder... And what I have to wonder is why the Revolutionary Guards and their mullahs persist in a spectacularly provocative nuclear option? Are they so unimaginably stupid as to believe that peaceful nuclear power, manifestly uneconomic even for the most advanced societies, is a worthwhile expenditure of resources for a society as poor as Iran (and one with fossil fuel resources up the wazoo to boot), and so chauvinist that, even if they want to waste so much of their suppressed population's wealth on splitting atoms to boil water, they need to do it all themselves when any number of governments and corporations would be happy to give them what they want for much less than it would cost them?Or do they really want the atomic weapons that they profess so loudly are totally contradictory to their dear Islam? What it looks like is that they want to provoke a military attack (their stupidity may, indeed, be unimaginable). We, of course, should do all we can to frustrate their aims--in that as in everything else. Shane Mage This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire, kindling in measures and going out in measures. Herakleitos of Ephesos Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Who cares about Iranian Uranium?
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == At 1:26 PM -0500 2/21/10, Shane Mage wrote: And what I have to wonder is why the Revolutionary Guards and their mullahs persist in a spectacularly provocative nuclear option? Iran's freedom to operate finds its outer limit wherever China and Russia refuse to protect them before the NY Times's 'International Community'. So the stakes of the Israeli government's provocation against Iran transcend the bigger-dick flame war that has taken shape between them. And really: who's surprised that lunatics Ahmadinedjad and Avgidor Lieberman - abetted by goons like Putin and Clinton - are in a pissing contest that could provoke a world war? That is what they're there for, after all. I think certain segments of the ruling class is starting to see war as the only way out of the mess they've created (can they nuke derivatives?). Nothing, aside from a mass world uprising that dwarfs the movement that opposed the war on Iraq, has the ability to stop it. After several years, I think that people - like Clinton and Obama - have started coming around to the view that making war with Iran a fait accompli - cutting off a global movement at the knees - may be the ONLY way to stop that from happening. The foundation for this view has already been put down, thanks in part to the Tweetin' Greenies against whom Yoshie and others have been railing for many, many years. Come to think of it, Obama could kind of 'use' a _real_ war, couldn't he? You know: one with maps and weapons and CNN, live at the Pentagon with Judy Miller embedded in your heart? Rahm would see to it that such a crisis would yield wonderful opportunities, no doubt. So could Europe, really. Especially as their little Dubais in the skies turn to liquid shit. An attack on Iran - particularly centered on Baluchistan - is an indirect attack upon China, since it forecloses upon their access to cheap oil. You can even find the actual battle plans at Global Security.org's website: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran.htm The 'International Community's' escalation against Pakistan points to the same end - strangling China - and has recently taken the form of this heavily propagandized operation in Afganistan with an objective of pushing 'Taliban fighers' into Pakistan. Combine that with weapons sales to Taiwan, Google's antics, and the Tibet stuff and it looks like the makings of something a bit more strategic afoot than Ahmadinejad's prattling. Solidarity, Shawn Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] China's Statistics
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Not completely Michael. For example: According to Ma, data submitted by the provinces in the first half of 2009 exceeded the national GDP figure calculated by NSB by 1.4 trillion yuan (US$204 billion), which is 10 percent of total GDP. The error was 19 percent in 2004. The issue of regional composites being way above the national figures has been kicking around for several years. I don't think Ma's complaints are based on purchasing power parity. - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman mich...@ecst.csuchico.edu To: David Schanoes sartes...@earthlink.net Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 12:17 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] China's Statistics == Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == The critique revolves around purchasing power parity, which is a questionable measure. I do not doubt that China fudges data, however. So do most businesses and governments. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/sartesian%40earthlink.net Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] WSWS: Obama’s preventive war and th e end of Nuremberg
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == This WSWS article Obama’s preventive war and the end of Nuremberg by Richard Hoffman, can be accessed with this link: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/feb2010/nure-f20.shtml As the article is about 12 pages long, clicking on the PRINT tab at the top of the the article, allows for a text display that allows for easier reading which can then be printed for further study. Here are several paragraphs of introduction: Obama’s preventive war and the end of Nuremberg By Richard Hoffman 20 February 2010 US President Barack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize speech in Oslo last December was widely seen as a glorification of militarism, rather than a promotion of peace. In several analyses, the World Socialist Web Site reviewed the speech, in the context of the continuation and escalation by the Obama administration of the aggressive militarist foreign policy of the Bush regime. The speech marked a turning point in world affairs. Obama specifically embraced the illegal doctrine of “preventive” war in the use of American military power. In this respect, to the extent that his presidency supposedly represented the liberal alternative to the foreign policy of the Bush regime, it is now absolutely clear that, within the American political establishment, there is unequivocal bi-partisan repudiation of the Nuremberg principles, which outlawed, and made criminal, the planning and launching of aggressive war. This article proposes to review the meaning of the Obama speech in the context of the history and development of international law. ... Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Unconventional Wisdom: An Interview With Doug Henwood
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://theactivist.org/blog/unconventional-wisdom-an-interview-with-doug-henwood Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Take yourself a little bit more seriously
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Of continuing importance, whether or note Lenin's theory of imperialism is still valid, is the conduct of the Comintern, Lenin's repdicament on Levi's expulsion and the whole problem of Russian/Comintern relations and just how much this affected the habits, thought and actions of the Comintern that resulted in its corruption. I don't know what Pierre Broue thinks or thought but such are the issues that we should address as much as what may well be an outdated theory of imperialism. Hope this message clipped that which it was responding to - haven't seemed to be able to grasp that technique. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
