[PEN-L:11650] Re:

1997-08-06 Thread William S. Lear

On Wed, August 6, 1997 at 22:45:28 (-0700) Michael Eisenscher writes:
>Houston Police Announce "Zero Tolerance" for Management-Driven UPS Trucks
>
>Houston police officers, members of the Houston Police Patrolmen's Union,
>announced today that they would be on the lookout for UPS trucks driven by
>management personnel and would pull them over for any violations. "Once the
>HPPU member gets the vehicle stopped they are instructed to go into a 'zero
>tolerance' mode and cite each and every violation of the law they find," the
>union said in a statement. 

I'm all for the UPS workers in this one, but does this last part
bother anybody else?


Bill






[PEN-L:11649]

1997-08-06 Thread Michael Eisenscher


Teamsters News Release
Wednesday, August 6, 1997 

  MEDIA UPDATE ON TEAMSTER UPS STRIKE 

These are some developments in the Teamster strike against UPS: 

Postal Workers Support Striking Teamsters by Refusing to Allow Postal
Service to Hire Emergency Workers

Postal workers are standing behind striking Teamsters at United Parcel
Service by refusing a request from the U.S. Postal Service to hire emergency
temporary workers to help handle the increased volume resulting from the
shutdown of UPS. 

"We fully support the Teamsters in their struggle with UPS for good,
full-time jobs for working  families," said Moe Biller, president of the
American Postal Workers Union. "There will be no waiver granted by the APWU
to the Postal Service to increase the use and number of casuals at the
national or local level." 

Under the APWU contract, the union has the right to approve the hiring of
casual -- or temporary -- workers. 

Carey, AFL-CIO Pres. Sweeney Walk Picket Line in Chicago

Teamsters President Ron Carey today was joined at a Chicago UPS picket line
by AFL-CIO  resident John Sweeney and other leaders of America's major
unions. Sweeney said, "The driving issues behind this strike reach directly
into the living rooms and the pocketbooks of every working family in America." 

Fedex Workers Rally at UPS Picket Line

Indianapolis Federal Express workers involved in an ongoing campaign to
organize with the Teamsters Union are joining UPS workers on the picket line
today in Indianapolis at 4:00 p.m. 

"The UPS Teamsters are fighting for us, too, " said Leanna Cochran, a FedEx
worker who's leading the drive to organize the delivery giant in
Indianapolis. "We have to stop big companies from shifting to throwaway jobs
that don't provide decent wages or the security our families need." 

Houston Police Announce "Zero Tolerance" for Management-Driven UPS Trucks

Houston police officers, members of the Houston Police Patrolmen's Union,
announced today that they would be on the lookout for UPS trucks driven by
management personnel and would pull them over for any violations. "Once the
HPPU member gets the vehicle stopped they are instructed to go into a 'zero
tolerance' mode and cite each and every violation of the law they find," the
union said in a statement. 









[PEN-L:11648] RE: Puerto Rico, Democracy and Anti-colonial Struggle

1997-08-06 Thread by way of [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raymond Chase)


 Puerto Rico, Democracy and Anti-Colonialism in a
  Post-Colonial World?
  
  Ted Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 
  
  <>
  <<  I can understand the frustration of statists who are
  frustrated when the democratic process goes against them,
  but if the elected government of Puerto
  Rico decides to sell its telephone company, this is not a
  moral justification for armed terrorism.>>
  <>
 
---
  Ted is absolutely right when he says I am not advocating a
  military response I am just sharing information about the
  nature of anti-colonial dynamics in this wacky post-colonial,
  globalized etc. world. However, it seems to me the moral
  issue is quite different from the way Ted frames it.
  Particularly in these post-cold war times when the victorious
  capitalist consumer culture has even "commodified" Ernesto
  "Che" Guevara ( I saw a nice coffee cup the other day with
  chic red letters "Che!") who probably was the most eloquent
  proponent of military (violent etc.) response by the
  oppressed. 
  
  Poet Adrienne Rich's recent piece rejecting the National Arts
  medal makes a call for re-understanding Marx, indeed
  Lenin's finance capital concept seems quite insightful today,
  maybe deserving of a critical re-reading. Maybe we need to
  think through some of the cliches about democracy in this
  new era? When is democracy truly democratic?
  
  Probably most would agree that the formal process of voting
  is a necessary but not a defining element of a democratic
  system. Most communist, and other capitalists dictatorships
  have had elections. At the very least a democratic process
  would insure that the will of the people is heard and
  implemented and that there is protection of dissenting views.
  Puerto Rico's colonial system does not satisfy these
  principles.
  
  First of all, at a time when the world nations are discussing
  the interdependence of national political and economic
  systems Puerto Rico is still grappling with the 19th century
  issue of colonialism or the lack of democracy (with the
  devolution of Hong King P.R. remains as the last major
  colonial possession). Puerto Ricans have served (been
  drafted) in to the U.S. armed forces in every military conflict
  (war) since 1917 however they have not voting
  representative in Congress. Puerto Rican land is held by
  U.S. armed forces for military outposts, communications
  centers etc. without any local sanction. Despite Puerto Rico's
  constitution prohibition and Puerto Rican cultural values
  abhorrence of the death penalty, federal law imposed it on
  federal-related cases. Puerto Ricans can't choose their
  currency, with whom they trade (unless permission is
  granted by a federal bureaucrat) or decide what kind of
  standards are applied to local, Puerto Rican (in Spanish)
  television and radio communication, environment, or health
  regulations unless a non-Spanish "American" authorizes it.
   To top this off, the process to "define Puerto Rico's
  status" (Young Bill in Congress) does not follow basic
  international law guidelines, including allowing "foreigners"
  (Non-Puerto Ricans residing in the island and whose
  resident status is determined by the U.S. not local
  "democratic" authorities) to vote in deciding the island's
  future but not allowing Puerto Ricans who had to migrate to
  the US. to vote (similar to tactics of settler states to dilute
  indigenous population strength). A significant portion of the
  exiles are in some sense political exiles who experienced
  repression in their own homeland by federal agencies (See
  Ronald Fernandez' "Disenchanted Island  (1996)" 
  particularly Ch 8 on FBI's Cointelpro's campaign against pro-
  independence followers).
   Firstly, the government has a democratic facade that
  hides its colonial reality (unless democracy is the ability of a
  slave to determine where the branding will be placed on
  his/her body) since most polls indicate that Puerto Ricans do
  not want the telephone company to be sold, secondly, the
  local colonial government did not have this sale as part of it
  platform. Thirdly, the sale of this important local resource will
  dismantle a system that has allowed the island to survive in
  face of 

[PEN-L:11647] Re: overblown rhetoric - more clarifications

1997-08-06 Thread Daniel Myers



On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:

> vis a vis that  peculiar instituion.  If we understand fascism as a peculiar
> form of authoritarianism that developed in Italy and germany ca. 1920 that
> definition implies a negative answer to that question.  But if we define
> fascism as corporatist authoritarianism that might take different
> historical-cultural forms, and the Italian & German developments were but
> two such forms, then of course the question "can it happen here" remains not
> only valid but pretty much open.

> As far as the court system is concerned, however, it brought the citizens
> not only civil rights, but also gives them considerable protection against
> corporate power. The corporate oligarchy is very unhappy with that, and they
> have been working very hard to gut the whatever legal protection we have.
> >From the anti-terrorist bill sponsored by Clinton, to the subversion of
> local protective legislation under NAFTA, to the limitations on corporate
> liability, to gag rule, now passed by the state, that extend the libel law
> to corporate products -- that may not be as dramatic as Hitler's suspension
> of the constitution, but it is a slow but sure process of gutting the last
> protection we have against corporate power -- the legal system and the courts.  

> Of course, I'm not arguing that even if the process of corporate assaul on
> democracy succeeds, we will have the same fascist rule as it existed in
> Germany or Italy.  Again, I understand fascism as corporatist
> authoritarianism that can take many different, culturally determined forms.

> To be sure, I'm not making prediction that this will happen, all I'm saying
> this is lilely to happen if things stay on their present course.
> 

I'll butt into this conversation to support Wojtek's views about
fascism, and the fascist-like realities which many Americans have to
endure.  But the courts are also fascist for many Americans.

"Fascism" was, as Woj says, a culture dependent phenomenon of it's time. 

We can draw certain attributes of fascist societies, and claim, as we
often sloppily do, that because of similar attributes in our own
society(ies), that we are fascist or moving towards fascism. 

The fascisms of the 20's and 30's were part of the aftermath of the first
world war.  The alliances which emerged in that war must have led many
Americans to become disappointed when the war ended.  This is because the
American government, with a political system which was naturally opposed
to the monarchal systems of Europe, nontheless aligned itself with Great
Britain and other monarchies whose systems of government remained
unchanged after the war.  Therefore, I think it's fair to conclude that
American foreign policy during and after the first world war substantially
reflected "balance of power" politics in a world scale instead of
"form-of-government" imperialism. 

If post-war (ww1) world politics had been governed purely by
form-of-government considerations as they were increasingly represented
with paper constitutions, then socialist-communist Russia and Weimar
Germany and other nations with new constitutions could arguably have been
ascribed as "the most free", not the U.S. or Britain.

Desirable attributes of "democracy" and "freedom" were subsequently, I
presume, ascribed to countries like Britain and France, and
anti-democratic attributes were ascribed elsewhere. 

Thus, the words "freedom", "democracy", "dictatorship", "totalitarianism",
"fascism", and the like have since been thrown around like remnants of the
world order during that historical period. 

As has been more or less stated in this discussion thread, the fascist
countries can be said to have been fascist because they were run like
tightly controlled corporations in order to be able to compete
economically and militarily with the major victors of the first world war,
and in the process to avoid experiencing a Russian style turnover.  Thus,
you saw certain types of consolidation (merger) between public and private
power, with a broad range of civil rights taking the back seat since they
did not contribute to the power and profit of the fascist corporate state. 

Civil liberties (as we used to dream about) were not an affordable insular
phenomenon except through the spirit of the corporate state, which, in
character, pursued "justice", or whatever, along international dimensions,
and by state-sanctioned persecution of disfavored minorities, all in a way
which would not ruin the *incentives* of favored citizens and interest
groups to support the fascist powers-that-be.  Freedom of expression,
particularly against the Jewish people for example, was expanded into
"freedom to punish" and freedom to engage in other irrational and even
more extreme actions to which they fell victim.

In the U.S., there is substantial consolidation between the government and
exclusionary private interest groups, ala americana.  Powerful
corporations and government itself are

[PEN-L:11646] Re: William S. Burroughs

1997-08-06 Thread Colin Danby

I wonder if some of these disputes can be narrowed.  
On WB I'm in enthusiastic agreement with Max and Louis 
on the subversive nature of his work and its comic 
intelligence.  One of the things that may have made 
Burroughs and Ginsburg more insightful than say 
Kerouac is that they were gay men, & were willing to 
think through what that meant w/o apology.  
_On the Road_ by contrast has a boy's-adventure 
quality to it that, while not devoid of homoerotic 
qualities, still takes the patriarchal family as a norm 
from which their road trip is a sort of vacation.

Jim C really raises a much broader question of what we 
should ask of artists.  I'd argue that we should be 
grateful if, as with Fela Kuti's work, there is something 
unsettling in what an artist offers.  There's always
been a fine line between rebellion and just copping 
an attitude & it's the latter that gets commodified.

Best, Colin






[PEN-L:11645] Conference of Possible Interest

1997-08-06 Thread Michael Eisenscher

This could turn out to be a very important conference.  It has already
received confirmation of attendance by a large number of major Latin
American labor organizations.  However, conference organizer Ed Rosario has
appealed for help in recruiting qualified conference panel members, workshop
presenters, keynoters, etc.  You help by a) helping with some of
organizational details, b) identifying possible participants, c) doing
outreach to other colleagues and constituencies, d) lining up additional
organizational endorsements.  You may have other ideas of ways you can
contribute, or ideas about others who could be recruited to this effort.  As
is always the case in such efforts, financial contributions are badly needed
to defray the considerable expenses of this project.  If you cannot attend
but can make a contribution (or can do both) those contributions will go
toward scholarships to subsidize those low income participants and foreign
delegates whose attendance depends on financial assistance.  Do whatever
time and energy permit.  Please accept my apology for possible duplications
as this message has been cross-posted for widest possible exposure.  Feel
free to pass it along to lists to which you subscribe that may not have
received it yet.

Thanks,
Michael
==

LETTER OF INVITATION TO 
WESTERN HEMISPHERE WORKERS¹ CONFERENCE

Dear Brothers and Sisters:

This letter is to invite you to join the California Labor Federation
(AFL-CIO), the Bay Area labor movement, California statewide LCLAA, and
countless other unions, environmental and community organizations from
throughout the Americas in building and participating in the Western
Hemisphere Workers¹ Conference Against NAFTA and Privatizations, which will
be held November 14-16, 1997, at the Ramada  Inn Civic Center in San Francisco.

I am attaching a copy of the official conference materials. Please fill out
the endorsement and registration coupon and send it in as soon as possible
to the San Francisco Labor Council. If you who have already endorsed, many
thanks ‹ and please don¹t delay in sending in your registration form and
reserving a room at the Ramada Inn Civic Center. (We are encouraging
everyone from out of town to sta
y at this hotel. You should register by Aug. 15, if possible.)

We would also appreciate receiving a financial contribution to our
conference-building fund ‹ whether or not you are able to attend. The
registration fees will cover only a portion of our overall expenses. We
urgently need financial assistance to cover the cost of renting the
conference hall, reprinting the conference packets, and ensuring proper
translation into four languages of all sessions. Ch
ecks should be made payable to Western Hemisphere Conference.

To date the response to the Conference Call has been overwhelmingly
positive, with endorsements coming in from major national federations and
important unions and organizations across the hemisphere. The list of
endorsers in the brochure gives only a glimpse of the support we have obtained.

We have just received the endorsement of the United Farm Workers of America
(UFW) and the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE).
We are also expecting the endorsement of the International Brotherhood of
Teamsters (IBT) at any moment.

In addition, we have just received the first list of delegates ‹ from Brazil
‹ who will be attending our conference. It reflects the wide spectrum of
unions and viewpoints we are expecting from every country in the hemisphere.
The list includes: Emanuel Melato, president, Autoworkers Union of Campinas;
Edson Soares, president, National Glassworkers Union; Roque Ferreira,
president, National Railwo
rkers Union; Teresa Lajolo, former City Council member, Sao Paulo; Ismael
Cesar, president, National Federation of Public Employees; Luiz Eduardo
Greenhalg, federal deputy, Workers Party; Helio Bicudo, federal deputy,
Workers Party (and president of the OAS Human Rights Commission); Gilmar
Mauro, national coordinator, Movement of Landless Peasants, MST; Plinio de
Arruda Sampaio, national agrarian 
secretary, Workers Party; and Francisco Nogueira, vice president,
Dockworkers Union of Santos.

As outlined in the Conference Call, our objective is to bring together
unionists and activists from all countries and backgrounds to build a common
fightback against the policies of NAFTA and privatizations. First, we wish
to promote an exchange of information about the devastating effects of NAFTA
and the other regional trade agreements on all working and poor people, and
on the trade union movem
ent in particular. We are soliciting country and regional reports from the
unionists and activists building the conference, which can be compiled into
a White Paper on the effects of ³free trade² and privatizations. These
should be sent to the conference organizing committee in advance of the
conference to ensure duplication and translation for the delegates.

[PEN-L:11644] Re: Barbara Ehrenreich

1997-08-06 Thread Ellen R Shaffer

Glad a man said it first.

On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Robert Cherry wrote:

> Max:   I don't know about Hillary Clinton, but Ehrenreich's The Hearts of Men 
> is one of the most insightful books I have read in the last five years.  It 
> argues quite credibly that the fifties -- whether the Beats or Playboy -- 
> began the assault on the idea of the responsible family man, and it was 
> carried thru the New Left.   Whereas the media believe that the decline in 
> marriage rates is because women are make other choices, it may well be that 
> the real reason is that men are fleeing commitment.  Ehrenreich's book goes 
> along way in explaining why the latter has been quite noticeable.
> 
> Robert Cherry  
> 






[PEN-L:11643] Re: Barbara Ehrenreich

1997-08-06 Thread Robert Cherry

Max:   I don't know about Hillary Clinton, but Ehrenreich's The Hearts of Men 
is one of the most insightful books I have read in the last five years.  It 
argues quite credibly that the fifties -- whether the Beats or Playboy -- 
began the assault on the idea of the responsible family man, and it was 
carried thru the New Left.   Whereas the media believe that the decline in 
marriage rates is because women are make other choices, it may well be that 
the real reason is that men are fleeing commitment.  Ehrenreich's book goes 
along way in explaining why the latter has been quite noticeable.

Robert Cherry  






[PEN-L:11642] Express yourself!

1997-08-06 Thread Michael Eisenscher

One way to supporter the Teamsters is to join an "electronic picketline."
You can express an opinion to UPS concerning the contract negotiations and
strike of UPS employees.   Here are two e-mail addresses to which you can
address your views:

Customer Service:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Website
Administrator:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

In solidarity,
Michael



Remember: Solidarity begins with YOU!








[PEN-L:11641] Reuters Wire Copy on UPS Strike

1997-08-06 Thread Michael Eisenscher

Here are three Reuters News stories I pulled off the Web:

-
AFL-CIO says it would aid UPS strikers if asked 
 05:09 p.m Aug 06, 1997 Eastern 

 CHICAGO (Reuter) - AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said Wednesday his union
would
 provide unspecified monetary support to striking United Parcel Service
workers, if asked. 

 Speaking after a Teamsters union rally in Chicago, Sweeney said the AFL-CIO
could provide
 loans or grants to the Teamsters strike fund, which was set to begin paying
out at least $55 a
 week to each striker beginning at the end of next week. 

 ``They haven't made any specific request,'' Sweeney told Reuters. ``But
whatever they need.'' 

 Told that paying 186,000 strikers each $55 per week amounted to more than
$10.2 million a
 week, Sweeney replied that amount ''could be easily raised from (AFL-CIO)
locals in loans
 and grants.'' 

 During the last national election, the AFL-CIO devoted an estimated $30
million for an
 advertising campaign in support of Democratic candidates. 

 A Teamsters spokesman in Washington said the strike that began Monday would
not be
 compromised by the size of the union's strike fund. He also dismissed
reports that the Teamsters
 national strike fund was virtually depleted at about $6 million. 

 In Chicago, Teamsters Local 705 spokesman Paul Waterhouse said the local
had accumulated
 $1 million in supplemental funds for its 11,000 members. Decisions about
how to dole out the
 funds had yet to be determined and would depend on how long the strike was
expected to last. 

 Sweeney spoke forcefully to the striking union members in Chicago and
praised them for
 having ``picked up the gauntlet on behalf of of all American workers and
their families. Their
 struggle is now our struggle.'' 

 Copyright 1997 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication and
redistribution of Reuters content is
 expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters
shall not be liable for any errors or
 delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. 



 New Pressure on UPS, Teamsters to Talk 
 04:14 p.m Aug 06, 1997 Eastern 

 By David Morgan 

 ATLANTA (Reuter) - United Parcel Service and its 185,000 striking workers
came under
 growing pressure to restart stalled labor talks Wednesday as the effects of
the biggest job action
 this decade rippled through the economy. 

 But a day after Labor Secretary Alexis Herman urged UPS Chief Executive
James Kelly and
 Teamster President Ron Carey back to the bargaining table, no new talks had
been scheduled. 

 Thousands of members of the Teamsters union, including drivers, package
sorters and loaders,
 spent a third day on picket lines from Maine to California, while 50,000
non-union workers
 scrambled to keep parts of the huge UPS network running. 

 The union also had backing from 2,000 unionized UPS pilots who have refused
to cross
 Teamster picket lines. 

 With more than 90 percent of UPS deliveries at a standstill, a group
representing the chief
 executives of major retailers, including Sears and Kmart, called on
President Clinton to
 personally encourage both sides to restart talks. 

 Wall Street investors also got their first taste of the strike's direct
impact on businesses. 

 ``The economy, which is enjoying unprecedented sustained growth, could
experience a sudden
 downward spiral if this strike continues for an extended period,'' the
National Retail Federation
 said in a letter to Clinton. 

 Retail sales of $2.5 trillion account for one-third of the nation's
economy. About $50 billion of
 that is from catalog and mail order sales that rely heavily on UPS. 

 But the president has so far ruled out intervening directly, saying there
was no threat to national
 health and safety. He and members of his administration instead have urged
UPS and the
 Teamsters to try to resolve differences over pay and benefits, especially
pensions, and the
 company's growing use of lower-wage part-time workers. 

 UPS controls 80 percent of the U.S. parcel delivery business, normally
handling 12 million
 packages a day. 

 The strike has caused escalating logistical problems and higher shipping
costs for businesses,
 manufacturers and consumers who have relied on UPS deliveries to move their
packages and
 documents. 

 Sport-Haley Inc., for example, a Denver-based sportswear maker, told
investors that a
 prolonged work stoppage could hurt its earnings by driving up shipping
costs. Its stock tumbled
 $2.50 to $13.75 on Nasdaq, a drop of 15 percent. 

 UPS, with annual sales of $22.4 billion, also said in a filing with
securities regulators that the first
 national strike in its 90-year history would hurt earnings and cost it
customers. 

 Meanwhile, behind-the-scenes expectations for renewed talks appeared to be
on the rise, as
 UPS facilities across the country remained idle and Teamste

[PEN-L:11640]

1997-08-06 Thread Michael Eisenscher

More from the Teamster Website:

Teamsters Union
Monday, August 4, 1997

   MEDIA ALERT

"NEUTRAL" EMORY UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC RECEIVES UPS MONEY 



Emory University management professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld who has portrayed
himself to the media as an objective commentator on the Teamster strike at
UPS is director of an organization that receives UPS Foundation money. 

Since 1992 the Center for Leadership and Career Studies at Emory University
has received $1.125 million in grants from the UPS Foundation. 

The ties between the Center and UPS are strong. UPS Chairman and CEO Kent
Nelson was a founding sponsor of the Center and its CEO college. In 1996,
the Center gave Nelson its Legend in Leadership award. 


Teamsters News Release
Tuesday, Aug. 5, 1997, 2 p.m. 

  CAREY CALLS ON UPS TO RESUME NEGOTIATIONS

   TEAMSTERS PRESIDENT ASKS LABOR SECRETARY
   ALEXIS HERMAN TO CONTACT COMPANY

  NOW THAT UPS IS SHUT DOWN,
"THERE'S NOTHING MORE FOR THEM TO WAIT FOR" 



Teamsters President Ron Carey today called on UPS to come back to the
bargaining table to negotiate a contract that provides good jobs for
American workers. 

Carey said that in a scheduled telephone call with Labor Secretary Alexis
Herman this afternoon, he will ask Herman to see if the company is prepared
to resume negotiations. 

"There is nothing more for them to wait for," Carey said. "The strike has
shut them down. Now it's time for them to get serious about a settlement. 

"We are prepared to meet -- anytime, anywhere, with a mediator or without
one -- to negotiate a contract that provides good jobs for working families." 

Carey made the announcement during a picket line news conference with Jesse
Jackson in Burtonsville, Maryland. Jackson said UPS's lower-wage, part-time
job strategy amounts to "work to welfare." He led union members in chanting,
"Full-Time Jobs! Full-Time Jobs!" 

More than 185,000 Teamsters struck UPS at midnight Sunday night after the
company refused for five months to negotiate a contract that makes major
progress on several priority issues. 

UPS made more than a billion dollars in profits last year. Yet more than
half the jobs at UPS are now lower-wage, part-time jobs.  Management's last
proposal demands the right to increase that percentage, while creating only
200 new full-time jobs per year. Teamster members are seeking to create
thousands of new full-time job opportunities by combining existing part-time
positions. 

The union is seeking subcontracting language that would ensure that UPS jobs
grow as the company grows. But management continues to demand the right to
subcontract Teamster work. 

Teamsters want pension improvements, while management is demanding control
over union members' retirement money. Under the company's proposal, UPS --
instead of Teamster members -- could get the benefit of the income from
pension fund investments. 







[PEN-L:11639] beating the Beats some more

1997-08-06 Thread James Devine

Max writes write: >... As for what the Beats didn't talk about, you might
as well indict the entire pre-1972 left for male chauvinism<
 
Max is right. 

But I think we can learn from criticisms of the pre-1972 lefts -- and other
groups, like the Beats -- as a way to avoid making similar mistakes in the
future.

I see no reason to be moralistic about it, though. For example, I see no
reason to condemn Marx as Satan-spawn because it looks like he fathered his
servant Lenchen's illegitimate child (that Engels took responsibility for).
He, like the Beats, were products of his time. 

The key question is whether or not Marx's sins, errors, and omissions are
organic parts of his theory, so that their removal causes the whole edifice
to come crashing down. I think that his theory is actually strengthened by
the removal of sexism or his tendency to make stereotyped references to
various ethnic groups (including Jews), for example. 

I don't know enough about the Beats to say anything similar. 


in pen-l solidarity,

Jim Devine   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"It takes a busload of faith to get by." -- Lou Reed.






[PEN-L:11638] re: "the Beats"

1997-08-06 Thread James Michael Craven

 
From:  James Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject:   [PEN-L:11632] re: "the Beats"
> 
> > Not to beat this into the ground, but Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a book which
> > I believe is titled HEARTS OF MEN, which argues at length that the Beats
> > criticized family institutions (using both theory and practice) in a way
> > that exempts themselves from responsibility of helping raise children,
> > etc., without criticizing the inequalities of power in the usual family. 
> 
> Barbara's a fine lady but invoking her authority on this
> topic  . . . you might as well ask Hillary Clinton.  As for
> what the Beats didn't talk about, you might as well
> indict the entire pre-1972 left for male chauvinism.
> What does that have to do with, say, the merits of
> William Z. Foster?
> 
> I don't recall whatever the criticism of family institutions in 
> the Beats.  I would say any such implied criticism was
> founded on a bigger dilemma, namely the moral and
> spiritual wreckage of society writ large -- the foundation
> for deformation of family relationships.
> 
> It's also a little silly to criticize 1950's gays for failure to
> build nuclear families, since they were barely permitted
> to exist openly as individuals in the first place.
> 
> > I must admit I only glanced at the book, so if anyone has corrections I'd
> > appreciated them.
> 
> Only these few.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Max
> 
> 
> "People say I'm arrogant, but I know better."
> 
>   -- John Sununu
> 
> ===
> Max B. SawickyEconomic Policy Institute
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  1660 L Street, NW
> 202-775-8810 (voice)  Ste. 1200
> 202-775-0819 (fax)Washington, DC  20036
> http://epn.org/sawicky
> 
> Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views
> of anyone associated with the Economic Policy
> Institute other than this writer.
> ===

Response: We see all sorts of retrospectives by the left such as "The 
Real History of the Atom bomb" or the Real History of... But we find 
little retrospective about the "real" left...(Again I do not include 
the Beats). So why is it we can critique everything but ourselves? I 
remember vividly, and was also part of the "left" where males acted 
like "working class heroes" while treating women like shit. All these 
male revolutionaries had so much compassion for Vietnamese, or 
African Americans or whatever, yet the women were relegated to the 
usual "women roles" (Go get the coffee honey, I'm busy doing class 
struggle) and we males often didn't see the glaring contradictions 
between our words/sympathies versus deeds. It is not enough to just 
say well that was then, now is now; often we see the same patterns 
evident in the left today.

Again, even disregarding lifestyles for a moment, what exactly did 
the Beats do/talk about of real substance that really mattered to 
anybody other than someone teaching some esoteric poetry course?
Just as not ideas are equal, so not all contributions/contributors 
are equal. 

My last comment on this issue [I was just writing what I felt] and I 
can hear the cheers, is that these so-called "Beats" represent 
exactly what the neoclassicals attempt to model as all human 
propensities: atomism, selfishness, egoism, narcissism, self-
indulgence, intensely competitive (under unique guises), 
ultra-hedonism, ultra-individualism, ability to cynically calculate 
and "rationally" calculate ends and means, patriarchal, insolated, 
elitist ( often guised)... I think most of them were legends in their 
own minds and in the minds of a few seekers who link being "counter-
culture" or freaky with automatically being revolutionary.

Jim Craven

*---*
*   "Those who take the most from the table,* 
*  James Craventeach contentment.   *
*  Dept of Economics Those for whom the taxes are destined, *
*  Clark College   demand sacrifice.* 
*  1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. Those who eat their fill,  *
*  Vancouver, Wa. 98663speak to the hungry, *
*  (360) 992-2283  of wonderful times to come.  * 
*  Fax: (360) 992-2863Those who lead the country into the abyss,*
*  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   call ruling difficult,   *
*  for ordinary folk." (Bertolt Brecht) * 
* MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION  * 







[PEN-L:11637] Request for Help

1997-08-06 Thread James Michael Craven

I will be leaving on August 19th, at the request of the Tribal 
Council, to work on the Piegan Blackfeet Reservation at Browning 
Montana; the work involves analysis of conditons and options for 
developing some Tribal lands and enterprises as alternatives to the
usual highly volatile and corrupting gambling casinos.

If anyone has done work or has references on the methodologies and 
econometrics involved in the [under]valuation of oil and gas reserves 
and extractions for purposes of [under]valuing royalties due to Indian 
Tribes and Nations (during Reagan/Bush over $5 billion in royalties 
due were not paid), or, work on the billions missing in the BIA Trust 
Fund Accounts, or, work on microcredit, I would really appreciate 
references to such work.

Thanks for any assistance and no this is not another rant.

Jim Craven

*---*
*   "Those who take the most from the table,* 
*  James Craventeach contentment.   *
*  Dept of Economics Those for whom the taxes are destined, *
*  Clark College   demand sacrifice.* 
*  1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. Those who eat their fill,  *
*  Vancouver, Wa. 98663speak to the hungry, *
*  (360) 992-2283  of wonderful times to come.  * 
*  Fax: (360) 992-2863Those who lead the country into the abyss,*
*  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   call ruling difficult,   *
*  for ordinary folk." (Bertolt Brecht) * 
* MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION  * 







[PEN-L:11636] re: "the Beats"

1997-08-06 Thread Max B. Sawicky

> From:  James Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject:   [PEN-L:11632] re: "the Beats"

> Not to beat this into the ground, but Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a book which
> I believe is titled HEARTS OF MEN, which argues at length that the Beats
> criticized family institutions (using both theory and practice) in a way
> that exempts themselves from responsibility of helping raise children,
> etc., without criticizing the inequalities of power in the usual family. 

Barbara's a fine lady but invoking her authority on this
topic  . . . you might as well ask Hillary Clinton.  As for
what the Beats didn't talk about, you might as well
indict the entire pre-1972 left for male chauvinism.
What does that have to do with, say, the merits of
William Z. Foster?

I don't recall whatever the criticism of family institutions in 
the Beats.  I would say any such implied criticism was
founded on a bigger dilemma, namely the moral and
spiritual wreckage of society writ large -- the foundation
for deformation of family relationships.

It's also a little silly to criticize 1950's gays for failure to
build nuclear families, since they were barely permitted
to exist openly as individuals in the first place.

> I must admit I only glanced at the book, so if anyone has corrections I'd
> appreciated them.

Only these few.

Cheers,

Max


"People say I'm arrogant, but I know better."

  -- John Sununu

===
Max B. SawickyEconomic Policy Institute
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  1660 L Street, NW
202-775-8810 (voice)  Ste. 1200
202-775-0819 (fax)Washington, DC  20036
http://epn.org/sawicky

Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views
of anyone associated with the Economic Policy
Institute other than this writer.
===






[PEN-L:11635] Re: "The Beats"

1997-08-06 Thread James Michael Craven

 
Jim,

 > I usually agree with or at least enjoy what you write, but I
> could not let aspects of your blindsiding rant go undisturbed.
> 
> >> Historically, anarchists have done very little for anybody or 
> any just causes; often they have served repressive powers-that-be as 
> wreckers obsessed with their own self-centered concepts and states of 
> "Liberty" >>
> 
> Which anarchists ? Which times ? Which places ? There have been brief
> shining moments in history when revolutionary anarchism has had a
> mass basis to the great service of liberation. Obviously,
> as one person here commented, there's the Spanish Civil War. Revolutionary
> anarchism was the anti-traditionalist and anti-capitalist ideology of
> choice for a large segment of the working class based on their own
> history, not on the outside agitation of dilettante artists or some
> such imaginaries. Not only did they turn convents into latrines, but
> posh hotels into popular cantinas, and instituted workers' control in the
> mines, mills, and factories of a Republican Spain under seige (not that
> they didn't have their own problems ...)
> 
> 
> >> In Germany many of the anarchists were instrumental in wrecking 
> united fronts against fascism and  easily came over to the side of 
> the Nazis and cut their own Faustian Bargains >>
> 
> Whereas the CP and SDP of pre-Nazi Germany had all of their ducks in
> a row, illustrated by their petty feuds over social imperialism and
> fealty to the Comintern ...
> 
> My point here is not to raise the black banner against the red, but just
> to complicate the picture a bit more ...
> 
> John Gulick
> UC-Santa Cruz

John,

Thanks for your note. I wrote my note on RRPE and Beats before I read 
this message but as you can probably see from that note, I do agree 
with what you are saying here. Like any generalization, there are 
obviously notable exceptions and I would not want to depreciate in 
any way the concrete sacrifices and suffering by individual 
anarchists in history and in the present. I also did not mean to 
imply that only anarchists played a role in sabotaging united fronts 
against fascism; we could certainly include CPers, SDPers, rich Jews 
selling out poor Jews, labor aristocrats selling out workers etc--
e.g. in Germany.

But I think on organizational levels (almost an oxymoron--organized 
anarchists) I think the anarchists in general have done a lot of 
talking and critiqueing but have contributed very little to build 
concrete alternatives or even smash anything concretely. I think the 
usual half-life of most anarchist organizations could be measured in 
weeks. In contrast to Max Sawicky's comment about being ML, to note 
that working effectively for progressive causes requires discipline, 
focus, commitment, energy, seriousness etc, is not a call for joining 
some ML organization necessarily, but rather just to note the 
obvious: what it really takes to do anything serious that makes any 
difference to anyone and I do not believe that only the members of ML 
organizations (which one is the true one?) exhibit such qualities.

 Jim Craven

*---*
*   "Those who take the most from the table,* 
*  James Craventeach contentment.   *
*  Dept of Economics Those for whom the taxes are destined, *
*  Clark College   demand sacrifice.* 
*  1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. Those who eat their fill,  *
*  Vancouver, Wa. 98663speak to the hungry, *
*  (360) 992-2283  of wonderful times to come.  * 
*  Fax: (360) 992-2863Those who lead the country into the abyss,*
*  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   call ruling difficult,   *
*  for ordinary folk." (Bertolt Brecht) * 
* MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION  * 







[PEN-L:11634] another obituary -- Fela Kuti

1997-08-06 Thread John Lawrence Gulick

Pen-L'ers,

Amidst all the interpretive differences over the meaning of Burroughs'
life, writings, and death, no one has mentioned the passing of another 
important -- in my mind, much more politically important -- "cultural
worker" -- the self-styled Nigerian musician/dissident, Fela Kuti.
Fela Kuti, despite the bizarre contradicitions of his personal life
(e.g. he married all 30-or-so of his female backup singers in a ceremony
in the late 70's), was a consistently harsh critic of the brutal policies
imposed by the string of neo-colonial (and usually military) kleptocracies
that have long ruled Nigeria. His rhythmic and orchestral compositions,
which were unyielding in their populist satire of Nigeria's comprador
class, were a great achievement of mixing art and politics.

I don't know that much about Nigeria, or even the experience and work of
Fela Kuti, but what little I do know, makes me mourn his passing.

John Gulick
UC-Santa Cruz






[PEN-L:11633] quote of the day

1997-08-06 Thread James Devine

After indicating how swimmingly everything is going in the US economy:
"True, CEOs and blue-collar workers share a sense of insecurity about jobs.
But the former have platinum parachutes, while the latter often have their
pick of new jobs from which to choose."

-- Rudi Dornbusch, "Why This Recovery Won't Fall Off the Track Soon,"
BUSINESS WEEK, August 11, 1997, p. 20. 

He also says that "Median real family income, adjusted with a realistic
measure of inflation, is also at its highest recorded level." Does
"realistic" mean Boskinized?

This all reminds me of a cartoon that was in BUSINESS WEEK within the last
few months. It showed a bunch of happy economists raising their hands.
Above it said: "It is now unanimous. All economists agree that there is no
economic downturn in sight." Below it says: "Warning sign." 
 
in pen-l solidarity,

Jim Devine   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"It takes a busload of faith to get by." -- Lou Reed.






[PEN-L:11632] re: "the Beats"

1997-08-06 Thread James Devine

Not to beat this into the ground, but Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a book which
I believe is titled HEARTS OF MEN, which argues at length that the Beats
criticized family institutions (using both theory and practice) in a way
that exempts themselves from responsibility of helping raise children,
etc., without criticizing the inequalities of power in the usual family. 

I must admit I only glanced at the book, so if anyone has corrections I'd
appreciated them.


in pen-l solidarity,

Jim Devine   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way
and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.






[PEN-L:11631] Re: "The Beats"

1997-08-06 Thread jlgulick

Jim,

I usually agree with or at least enjoy what you write, but I
could not let aspects of your blindsiding rant go undisturbed.

>> Historically, anarchists have done very little for anybody or 
any just causes; often they have served repressive powers-that-be as 
wreckers obsessed with their own self-centered concepts and states of 
"Liberty" >>

Which anarchists ? Which times ? Which places ? There have been brief
shining moments in history when revolutionary anarchism has had a
mass basis to the great service of liberation. Obviously,
as one person here commented, there's the Spanish Civil War. Revolutionary
anarchism was the anti-traditionalist and anti-capitalist ideology of
choice for a large segment of the working class based on their own
history, not on the outside agitation of dilettante artists or some
such imaginaries. Not only did they turn convents into latrines, but
posh hotels into popular cantinas, and instituted workers' control in the
mines, mills, and factories of a Republican Spain under seige (not that
they didn't have their own problems ...)


>> In Germany many of the anarchists were instrumental in wrecking 
united fronts against fascism and  easily came over to the side of 
the Nazis and cut their own Faustian Bargains >>

Whereas the CP and SDP of pre-Nazi Germany had all of their ducks in
a row, illustrated by their petty feuds over social imperialism and
fealty to the Comintern ...

My point here is not to raise the black banner against the red, but just
to complicate the picture a bit more ...

John Gulick
UC-Santa Cruz






[PEN-L:11630] Re: rrpe and the "Beats"

1997-08-06 Thread James Michael Craven

  
> The goal is to make the review more than just a venue for scholarly
> articles, to make it more useful to those who are not professors of
> economics.
>  
> > michael yates
> 
Response: I'm combining my responses on two issues: 1) on the above 
statement, it's about time. Often when I read articles in RRPE I have 
the same feeling I get when I read some of the "Beats"--So what? or 
what do I or the subjects of the piece do with this? Where does it 
take me?

What is the use of taking on the neoclassicals by cranking out 
articles even more reductionistic, linear, technique-fetishistic, 
abstract and esoteric than what the neoclassicals put out. I 
sometimes get the feeling that RRPE represents for some a kind of 
market niche and a way to get "academic respectability" and CV 
notches by making RRPE similar to--and therefore as "respectable" as--
some of the "mainstream" journals while also being "progressive" (Oh 
I am part of the class struggle with my article re-examining Marx's 
theory of value). 

All I can say about these opinions, like my opinion about the "Beats" 
and anarchism in general (with all due and sincere reverence for the 
individual anarchists who have given lives and suffering in struggles 
against various forms of despotism), is to quote Dennis Miller: 
"That's just my opinion; of course I could be wrong."

I think Kerouac's Institute for Disembodied Poetry was correctly 
named: disembodied from real conditions, real people, real concerns, 
real language, real struggles tied-in with the issues being alluded 
to in the poetry. I'm surprised the neoclassicals haven't used some 
of the "Beats", their poetry, lifestyles, elitist aloofness as models 
and "proofs" of some of the core neoclassical "axioms" about human 
nature, human propensities and human behavior.

Again, that's just my opinion and of course, I could be wrong.

  Jim Craven

*---*
*   "Those who take the most from the table,* 
*  James Craventeach contentment.   *
*  Dept of Economics Those for whom the taxes are destined, *
*  Clark College   demand sacrifice.* 
*  1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. Those who eat their fill,  *
*  Vancouver, Wa. 98663speak to the hungry, *
*  (360) 992-2283  of wonderful times to come.  * 
*  Fax: (360) 992-2863Those who lead the country into the abyss,*
*  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   call ruling difficult,   *
*  for ordinary folk." (Bertolt Brecht) * 
* MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION  * 







[PEN-L:11629] Neoliberalism, Privatization: Puerto Rico

1997-08-06 Thread by way of [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raymond Chase)


   Neoliberalism and Latin America:
   Puerto Rico's Workers' Fight Back
   
   Martha's update on Argentina reminded me of Puerto
   Rico's workers recent response to privatization. Last July
   11, tens of thousands of telephone company workers
   converged on the island's capital to protest the local
   colonial government's decision to sell the Puerto Rico
   Telephone Co.
   
   Contrary to the experience of other Latin American
   countries' the island's phone company was bought from
   ITT in 1974 when it became a public corporation. Since
   then, and despite earlier attempts (1990) to sell the public
   enterprise the phone company has become a profitable
   enterprise  More than a million and a half Puerto Ricans
   have phones, Puerto Rico has the highest rate of Internet
   users in Latin America, extensive and modern fiber optic
   lines, cell phones, beepers etc. From 1993 to 1996 profits
   increased 33% for a total of more than a $1 billion dollars. 
   
   However, blinded by the rush toward "free markets" the
   island's colonial government seems to believe that selling
   the island's national resources will aid in leveraging
   statehood for Puerto Rico as well as subsidize the deficit
   of other failed privatization efforts. All major labor
   federations have supported the call of phone workers to
   stop the "sellout" and have promised another national
   strike similar to one that brought the 1990 attempt to sell
   the public corporation process to a halt.
   
   As Puerto Rico prepares to "commemorate" 100 years of
   colonialism in 1998, the phone privatization process has
   also served as a catalyst for the island's nationalist and
   socialist forces that support Puerto Rican independence.
   The major left and nationalist forces have called for a
   national effort to stop the sale. Recently, the Machetero
   Guerrilla Army which since its dramatic attacks during the
   1980s (including the bombing of several U.S. Air Force
   Corsair planes, FBI offices) has not conducted military
   operations, warned that it would retaliate if the sale was
   finalized.

   Victor M. Rodriguez
   Irvine, CA 







[PEN-L:11628] Hong Kong Voice Of Democracy

1997-08-06 Thread Francis T.L. Lau

http://www.democracy.org.hk/

Mission Statement 

Founded on the premise that accurate information is absolutely critical to
monitoring the way of life and the rights of the Hong Kong people after the
transition to Chinese rule, we seek to create a space which chronicles the
activities of the grass-roots democracy movement of Hong Kong and the
political climate in which it operates through the period of transition and
beyond. Given that, at the time of the founding of this organization,
indications are that freedom of the press, whether by self-censorship or by
direct government intervention, is under imminent threat, such an endeavor
seems the only way to continue the free discussion of the performance of
Hong Kong's government in safeguarding the fundamental rights of society.
This site will maintain a porthole through which concerned observers
throughout the world and the people of Hong Kong themselves can view the
significant period in Hong Kong history. 

Francis T.L. Lau
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   
Tel:  (852) 2411 2094
Fax:  (852) 2493 3953

Hong Kong Voice Of Democracy
http://www.democracy.org.hk/
April Fifth Action
http://members.hknet.com/~tllau/default.html







[PEN-L:11627] rrpe

1997-08-06 Thread Michael D Yates

Dear friends,

I am the editor of a special section of the Rev. of Rad. Pol. Economics,
titled "Contemporary documents and commentaries in Political Economy."  I
am looking for short, nontechnical articles to use in this section.  The
section will appear in the Dec. and June issues of the Review (Winter and
summer).  I am responsible for the editing and editor Hazel Gunn and I
decide on whether to use a piece or not (other reviewers might be called
in if the piece is beyond my grasp).  So far we have run pieces on the
economic proposals of the labor party and the new party.  in the dec.
issue, we have three short articles on the meaning and use of economic
indicators such as the cpi and the dow jones average. (written by pen-lers
Dave Ricahrdson and Doug Henwood).

In future issues I would like to continue coverage of the two political
parties, as well as such topics as 1) documents in economic education
(such as the new package developed by the AFL-CIO written by the popular
econ. folks in Amherst); 2) documents developed by labor federations
around the world (by the AFL-CIO and its counterparts in the rest of the
world) which explain their positions on political economy); 3)documents
developed by revolutinary organizations (Cuban Communist Party,
Zapatistas, etc.).  

I would love to get suggestions for other topics and especially I would
like to get articles or commitments to write them.

The goal is to make the review more than just a venue for scholarly
articles, to make it more useful to those who are not professors of
economics.

You can communicate your ideas and proposals to me or to pen-l if you
think a general discussion would be useful.

michael yates

p.s. articles are usually 1000-3000 words long. emphssis is on simplicity
and clarity.






[PEN-L:11626] Fwd: FW: Bill Gates

1997-08-06 Thread MScoleman

Another bill gates joke.  maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]


>Subject:  FW: Bill Gates
>
>
When Bill Gates became the proud father of a baby
daughter earlier this year, a group of Usenet lurkers
compiled the following list of similarities bewteen a
typical Microsoft software release and the heir to
Bill's fortune.

1. Neither can stand on its own two feet without a lot
of third party support.

2. Both barf all over themselves regularly.

3. Regardless of the problem, calling Microsoft Tech
Support won't help.

4. As they mature, we prey that they will be better
than that which precede them.

5. At first release they're relatively compact, but
they seem to grow and grow and grow with each
passing year.

6. Although announced with great fanfare, pretty
much anyone could have produced one.

7. They arrive in shaky condition with inadequate
documentation.

8. No matter what, it takes several months between
the announcement and the actual release.

9. Bill gets the credit, but someone else did most of
the work.

10. For at least the next year, they'll suck.

-
Forwarded message:
From:   [EMAIL PROTECTED] (MRS STEPHANIE B MCAULIFFE)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 97-08-06 03:52:05 EDT

...


<< Start of Forwarded message via Prodigy Mail >>

From:Nancy S. Foss
Subject: "Carla Woodcock": FW: Bill Gates
Date:08/04
Time:01:56 PM

Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23])
13:49:02 EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],

[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],

[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 13:39:19 -0400
Subject: "Carla Woodcock": FW: Bill Gates
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-43
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nancy S. Foss)

Subject:  FW: Bill Gates


>>>When Bill Gates became the proud father of a baby
>>>daughter earlier this year, a group of Usenet lurkers
>>>compiled the following list of similarities bewteen a
>>>typical Microsoft software release and the heir to
>>>Bill's fortune.
>>>
>>>1. Neither can stand on its own two feet without a lot
>>>of third party support.
>>>
>>>2. Both barf all over themselves regularly.
>>>
>>>3. Regardless of the problem, calling Microsoft Tech
>>>Support won't help.
>>>
>>>4. As they mature, we prey that they will be better
>>>than that which precede them.
>>>
>>>5. At first release they're relatively compact, but
>>>they seem to grow and grow and grow with each
>>>passing year.
>>>
>>>6. Although announced with great fanfare, pretty
>>>much anyone could have produced one.
>>>
>>>7. They arrive in shaky condition with inadequate
>>>documentation.
>>>
>>>8. No matter what, it takes several months between
>>>the announcement and the actual release.
>>>
>>>9. Bill gets the credit, but someone else did most of
>>>the work.
>>>
>>>10. For at least the next year, they'll suck.









<< End of Forwarded message >>


Stephanie McAuliffe


TO: TXTG44A
TO: TXTG44E







[PEN-L:11625] Re: William S. Burroughs

1997-08-06 Thread mreview

Louis: I heard Burroughs speak at a rally in Grant Park, Chicago during the
1968 Democratic Convention, after the first police violence broke out. He
was brilliant and penetrating. See the issue of Esquire in late 68 on the
convention for more from the old reptillian reprobate. Ethan Young
 At 09:09 AM 8/5/97 -0700, you wrote:
>William S. Burroughs' death has been on my mind. Long before I was a
>Marxist, I was a youthful member of the beat generation. In 1960 I read
>Jack Kerouac's On the Road and a year or so later I read Burroughs' Naked
>Lunch. These two works deepened my outsider identity. It was the 1960s
>radicalization that transformed my outsider status into one of
>revolutionary as I became conscious of the social and economic forces that
>were arrayed against me and the working class.
>
>On the Road and Naked Lunch are two dialectically opposed works that add
>up to a penetrating critique of the Eisenhower era. On the Road emphasized
>the sunny, Whitmanesque, positive aspects of America where the open road,
>truck-stops, jazz clubs and automats serve as proof of the wonders of this
>country as long as you look in the right places. After reading On the Road
>I dedicated myself to a search for these right places.
>
>Naked Lunch offered a completely different view of the world. It was a
>cold-turkey nightmare of urban decay, sexual perdition and self-loathing.
>When I read Naked Lunch I was attuned to the essential clarity of
>Burroughs' vision. Yes, this also was America. From that moment on, I was
>always sensitive to the Kerouac-esque and Burroughs-esque dual nature of
>American society. What America certainly was not was the television lies
>of "Leave it to Beaver" or "Life With Father."
>
>Burroughs' literary landscape was inhabited by grotesque mechanical
>objects that took on a terrifying life of their own. Surgical instruments,
>suppositories, diesel engines, radios, etc. were transformed into ghoulish
>objects capable of torture and death. They grew arms and legs and stalked
>about the miserable apartments that the Naked Lunch characters--such as
>they were--inhabited.
>
>Oddly enough, there is a certain affinity between Naked Lunch and the
>gothic novels of Stephen King. King's novels' central device is to take
>inanimate objects and invest them with ghastly qualities, such as the
>homicidal car Christine. Certainly one can imagine the influence of
>Burroughs on King. As a English major at the University of Maine, he was
>taught by instructors who consciously identified with the beat movement.
>Occasionally you will see epigraphs to the chapters of his novels that are
>drawn from this outsider literature.
>
>Burroughs' relationship to the left was non-existent. As the ultimate
>misanthrope, it is difficult to imagine him speaking from the platform of
>a peace rally like Allen Ginsburg. It is also impossible to imagine him as
>a reactionary like Kerouac in his dying, alcoholic latter years. 
>
>What Burroughs did articulate was a savage hatred for the destruction
>industrial society wrought on the United States. There is a powerful video
>that I saw once that simply consists of William S. Burroughs sitting on a
>chair ruminating on Thanksgiving. It is a jeremiad against the destruction
>of the Indians, buffaloes and forests in the name of Progress. The New
>York Times obituary concludes in this vein: 
>
>"To the end of his life, Mr. Burroughs remained pessimistic about the
>future for mankind. In 'Ghost of a Chance,' he lamented the destruction of
>rain forests and creatures and wrote: 'All going, to make way for more and
>more devalued human stock, with less and less of the wild spark, the
>priceless ingredient--energy into matter. A vast mudslide of soulless
>sludge.'"
>
>Louis Proyect
>
>
>
>
>
>
>






[PEN-L:11624] Re: "The Beats"

1997-08-06 Thread Max B. Sawicky

> From:  "James Michael Craven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject:   [PEN-L:11616] "The Beats"

James,

> At the risk of alienating even more people and in response to the 

No risk there; if you're beat you're already alienated.

> euologies on Burroughs and previously on Ginsburg, my personal 
> opinion is that the so-called "Beats", revealed themselves through 
> their writings and lifestyles to be largely: self-indulgent, 
> pretentious, arrogant, narcissistic, petit-bourgeois, phillistine,
> ultra-individualistic, superifcial, elitist...

Self-indulgent:  no more than the rest of us.
Pretentious:  I don't see that; they were more reclusive than not.
Arrogant:  never saw a trace of this; more self-effacing
Narcissistic:  in the sense of self-involved, yes, like most artists
Petit-bourgeois:  this covers a broad area.  The beats were not in
hot pursuit of money, a leading p-b pastime; certainly not p-b
in terms of morality; more communal than individualistic, I
would say.  It's hard to imagine a Beat with a house, mortgage,
   and kids, much running a business (unless it's a book/record
   store or a coffee house).
Philistine:  not sure what this means; the Beats were a reaction
   against mass culture, and elitist in this sense
Individualistic:  not quite; covered this above.
Superficial:  not at all to my way of thinking
Elitist:  not really.  a better accusation could be romanticizing
   the lumpen-proletariat, a subtle type of elitism in the sense of
   reverse snobbery

> Historically, anarchists have done very little for anybody or 
> any just causes; often they have served repressive powers-that-be as 
> wreckers obsessed with their own self-centered concepts and states of 
> "Liberty". Sure some of the poets have used metaphors and symbology 

Don't disagree in general, though there are different sorts of
anarchists, as MIKEY notes.  The problem here is not so much
beat but art and the whole art is a weapon debate, which can
simply be resolved as, 'sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't.'

> to decry various forms of oppression but generally from detached, 
> self-centered and elitist lofty heights of "culture" detached from 
> concrete struggles and sacrifices of their subjects--oppressed people 
> who generally will never read nor "truly understand" their esoteric 
> poetry and literature.

This sounds like English professors, not at all like the beats.
 
> In Germany many of the anarchists were instrumental in wrecking 
> united fronts against fascism and  easily came over to the side of 
> the Nazis and cut their own Faustian Bargains; the S.A. in particular 
> was full of them. More often than not when they called for personal 
> liberty, they meant for themselves personally rather than a 

This is unfair in respect of the beats, whose brand of
anarchism was more communal and especially anti-
violence.  Ginsberg and of course Leroi Jones/Amiri
Baraka have been quite active politically.  Baraka is
a full-blown M-L but never severed his ties with the
Beats.

> generalized condition which must be fought for with organization, 
> discipline, focus, sacrifice, determination, compromise to build 
> unity, humility, etc.--all qualities and capabilities that anarchists 
> and libertarians (one version of anarchism) are not generally known 
> to exhibit. 

Here you're basically knocking them for not being M-L 
revolutionaries, which is true but has no bearing on the
value of their art.

> Of course there were some exceptions, but generally the Beats wrote 
> for themselves or narrow circles of the faithful sycophants who fawned 
> all over them, gave narcissistic/theatrical readings of their crap in 
> cloistured "coffee houses"...

Beat literature was always been circulated on a relatively low-
cost basis, though more recently it has been commercialized
to some extent.  Coffee houses were always open places, in my 
experience, and public reading is a communal act not unlike
declaiming from a soap box against the yoke of Capital.  Moreover,
poetry readings tend to be democratic -- unlettered, unpublished
authors are typically able to participate.

Jim D. mentioned male chauvinism.  Burroughs had a
mysogenistic streak but I recall no animosity towards
women in Ginsberg, Corso, or Ferlinghetti.  Bukowski
and Neal Cassidy are another matter, but I would
characterize them more as glorifying the pastime of
promiscuous screwing than objectifying women in
particular.  They would not expect women to be any
more faithful than they were.

Bottom line:  all of these guys (plus Diane Di Prima, among
others) are still worth reading and will inspire some young
people to incline towards the left.

Cheers,

MBS


"People say I'm arrogant, but I know better."

  -- John Sununu

===
Max B. SawickyEconomic Policy Institute
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  1660 L Street, NW
202-775-8810 (voice)  Ste. 1200
202-775

[PEN-L:11623] Re: overblown rhetoric - more clarifications

1997-08-06 Thread Wojtek Sokolowski

Jim:
Thanks for your response which turns this exchange into a quite interesting
debate.  While I belive that we do come from the same political and
philosophical camp, we also differ on at least two points -- which I
elaborate below.  

First, I think you misinterpret my position on the role of the government
and related institutions vis a vis institutionalised racial/ethnic
seggregation (or apartheid - let's call a spade a spade).  It is my
impression that you tend to view the behaviour of these institutions in a
"psychologistic" (pardon the lack of a better terminology) fashion -- that
is, behaviour resulting from "psychological" processes taking place within
the actors' minds: tastes, preferences, reasons, calculations, emotions,
etc.  Moreover, you seem to attribute such an understanding to my arguments. 

That can be illustrated by your argument where you cite Plessy v. Fergusson
to contradict my position that the courts were not as benign on race
relations as my postings seem to imply.  That indeed would be the case, if I
argued that the Plessy decision was motivated primarily by the Supremes'
personal tastes, convictions and kindred psychological states.  The point
is, however, that this is NOT the interpretation I assume and, I belive, I
stated that in my previous postings (granted, you can also find imprecise,
or over-blown, over-generalized statements in my postings, but this is more
like a live debate than presenting carefully formulated position papers,
therefore iterations of statements, queries, and clarifications are a part
of normal dialectical process known as debating).

My own interpretation implies "situational logic" -- that treats behaviour
as resulting from another behaviour (rather than psychological processes
within the actors' minds) or more generally, "situations."  The Plessy case
you cite is a perfect example to support that.  As you know, Plessy came as
a reaction to seggregation laws enacted in Louisiana & other Southern states
-- that required the provision of separate facilities for Blacks.  To my
knowledge, these laws received considerable popular support in the South,
but were opposed by business, especially the railroad industry --because
law-mandated seggregation imposed on them the additional burden of providing
extra "separate but equal" cars when trains were passing through the
affected territories.  The case would have never reached the Supreme Court,
if the railroads had not supported the plaintiff.  That, I guess, falls in
line with the "price logic" outlined by Milton Friedman, but there is more
into it.

The High Cout had a choice of siding either with Plessy & the railroad
industry  that supported him, or with the racist sentiments that were
running high during the Reconstruction era.  The court chose the latter
against the logic of capitalist "efficiency" -- which, BTW, supports my
position expressed in my previous posting that business can't always have
what it wants in courts.  I am not an expert on the US history, but it looks
to me that the political turf battles between the parties and branches of
the government that developed during the Reconstruction period prevailed
this time over the logic of capitalist accumulation.  

This is precisely what I call "situationism."  The key players make their
decisions on the "here and now" considerations in reaction to what the other
players did or might do -- high or low motives are ascribed to their actions
later, when the dust settles.  The abolition of slavery by Lincoln can be
viewed in a psychologistic fashion, as an expression of his abhorrence to
this peculiar institution (which, to my knowledge, can be documented), but
that looks pretty much like ex post facto rationalisation.  A situationist
interpretion would cite the expediency for the war effort as the main
reason.  In the same vein, the US war on Nazi Germany was hardly an
exprerssion of moral opposition to the Holocaust, or even Naziism -- as many
key figures in American oligarchy wholeheartedly supported Hitler (Henry
Ford reportedly sent him a birthday present every year) -- it was a
strategic move in imperial politics of world domination. The gambit paid
off, and bourgeois historians could take a high moral ground and ascribe
lofty motives (which, curiously, did not prevent the US from refusing to
accept Jewish refugees during the war) for the US entry to WWII.

>From that standpoint, it matters little whether the opposition to slavery
that came from the federal government (sometimes the congress, sometimes the
executive, sometimes both) was motivated by "good intentions" -- a more
realistic view is that it probably was not.  What matters, from my
standpoint, is that -- whatever its motives -- this oppostion had a peculiar
effect on the American society, especially in the South: by destroying the
formal institutions of racism, it drove racism "underground" to semi-formal
and informal instituions, like churches, clubs, associations -- where it
surv

[PEN-L:11622] Re: "The Beats"

1997-08-06 Thread MIKEY

Friends,

I think that Jim Craven's attack on the "Beats" is a little overboard.  It's 
hard to see how a radical person could not be moved by allen ginsburg's 
"America" or "kaddish" and many others.  I'm not excusing the way they lived or 
some of their more outrageous acts of sexism, etc.  But still a person can gain 
something from the writing without endorsing anything else.  

also, jim's view of anarchists is a little too strong in my view.  During the 
spanish civil war, the anarchists converted churches into latrines.  they can't 
be all bad!

in solidarity,

michael yates