Re: Fast Track Down, Not Out/Progressive Populist 12/97
> From: john gulick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Max, > > Jim Cullen's response, while I disagree with it, was thoughtful and > to the point. Yours, on the other hand, was shameless parodying and > misrepresentation of my viewpoint. (I don't mind humorous barbs -- in fact I A parody is indeed a misrepresentation, albeit one intended to make a point. Believe me, you weren't the only one, or even the principal one I was thinking of -- only the one with the misfortune to be the most recent poster. > have enjoyed your frequent humorous barbs -- but now you've entered the > slippery territory of out-and-out caricature). > > I'll get back to both of you gents in the next few days when I get a > chance. Suffice it to say for now that I myself have never presented > the U.S. working class as a homogenous bunch of overconsuming and racist > ignoramuses. All I did was question (in perhaps too polemical a form) You didn't but others have in the past, and the fruits of this ignoble tradition remain in evidence, to some extent. > the ethical and political wisdom of an anti-MAI and anti-free trade > strategy which in some ways doesn't sound dramatically different from > the "solutions" being offered by Buchanan or Le Pen in France (save the > overt immigrant-bashing). On this last, if you look more closely at each you ought to find numerous differences in basic principles and details. We've had this argument before on PEN-L so I won't rehash what I and others have said in this regard. Those for whom the shoe fits the best will be the most offended, though they may not choose to cultivate an aloofness which aims to underline the insignificance of my worthless self. Worse things have been said to me about me by once and future friends of mine on this list, among other places, so you need to cultivate a thicker skin and separate personal feelings from political controversy, however bitter the latter may get. I have a friend on another list who tells me about twice a week that liberals are the scum of the earth, the bane of working class, and the grave-diggers of the revolution. Sure. Whatever turns you on. Nobody's going to lose any sleep over this. Regards, Max === 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://tap.epn.org/sawicky Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute other than this writer. ===
Re: General strike in Israel! (fwd)
Noting Sid's posting, I checked backed to the General Strike Website Eric Lee had set up in September. To my surprise it was still functioning. Here is an editorial I found in Globes, billed as Israel's foremost online financial sheet. The compassion for labor evident here probably stems from the blurring of class boundaries and interests to be expected in a state still shaped by ideological nation-building. As for the pending sell-off of various state enterprises, for recent immigrants from Russia it must be deja vu all over again! valis Wednesday, Dec 3, 1997 Sun-Thu at 18:00 (GMT+3) Editorial Voice of Fear By Nahum Baratz To watch the Tel-Aviv sanitation workers' demonstration, or the hastily convened meeting of employees that prompted the Histadrut Chairman to declare "We will close down the State as from tonight", was to realise that, whatever their differences, workers in the various sectors had one thing in common, namely their fear. The sanitation workers fear the advent of private contractors who may in future replace them. Workers in Israel Aircraft Industries, Israel Military Industries etc., fear what rehabilitation plans may mean for their future job security. Employees of banks and other companies fear the transition to private ownership. And overshadowing all these is fear of the change the Ministry of Finance seeks to institute in the pension agreement. The workers are not striking over worse conditions, but over the menace of an uncertain future. The future certainly looks threatening, not just as far as employment and pensions are concerned, but in general. Who can compete against workers from the Far East? Or the Middle East? Where will it all end with those mysterious, computerised instruments, so much smaller and more efficient than even the most diligent workers? What assurance do Israeli workers have that next year, they too will not be replaced by cheap foreign labour? In short, as the workers see it, will anyone give a toss for them in the future? Will anybody even need them? The strike, then, is not against a specific employer, stubbornly refusing a wage increment, but against the State, and against the path along which it is heading. The State, as far as the workers are concerned, has been slipping out of their grasp in recent years, and this is not specifically related to the present government. The workers play no part in the entire process of privatisation, globalisation, exposure to import, the opening up of communication channels, high-tech issuance or the ingress of foreign investors. Not only do they not belong to the group that is profiting from the deal, but they have a feeling they cannot even explain, that they are going to be on the losing end. They are afraid of the future. It is quite natural that their leader is an old-style moustachioed swashbuckler, looking like the good old days, when the Hebrew working man at least laboured under the delusion of being respected. Not by chance, they are confronted today by a legal eagle of a Finance Minister, who swims like a fish in the waters of mammoth transactions, investment and flotation. And he, the minister, also seems to be doing everything he can think of to frighten them, if possible, even more. It was this staggering burden of fear that the workers brought to the strike, today. _ Created by Globes-Sites Database-generated by Dows © Copyright 1997, Globes Publishers Ltd.
Re: Global Economy
On Wed, 3 Dec 1997, Richardson_D wrote: > > Looking to the future, it would seem that the Fed could support the > > stock market more or less indefinitely this way, almost regardless of > > what is happening to the U.S. (or even the world) economy. This would > > be why New York price earnings ratios are at historic highs as the > > world economy slides slowly into recession (depression?) and no one is > > particularly concerned. Aside from the U.S. and its rather anemic > > Clinton boom, the only countries that come to mind as doing reasonably > > well are the U.K. and The Netherlands. First, a qualifier: per capita growth from 1989-96 has been stronger in Central Europe and Japan than in the US or UK, and their currencies have appreciated somewhat against the dollar. Old Nazi trick here: the bigger the lie, the easier it is to turn it into the new orthodoxy. Second, I seriously doubt Greenspan is too happy about the Wall Street Bubble or desirous of seeing it expand any further. Lately the Dow has shot back up to 8000, based on nothing more than sheer optimism that the business cycle doesn't exist. Not even the bull market of the Roaring Twenties, when Capital was King and labor unions were illegal, ever got this loopy. Greenspan is an austere central banker, not a punter, and knows a rip-roaring financial asset inflation when he sees one; which puts the Fed into something of a quandary. Raising rates would halt the bubble, but wreck the expansion and cause the whole house of credit cards to fall apart. Lowering rates would defuse the situation but make the bond market unhappy and put the hurt on the US dollar -- which the neo-Victorians in power right now don't want to do. They think that by keeping the dollar strong, they can export deflation onto East Asia and get away with it. They're wrong, and Greenspan on some level knows they're wrong, but is trapped by his own low-inflation orthodoxy, which can explain away the inflation of everything except that of financial assets. What makes the oncoming recession scary for America is that there is a great deal of highly leveraged/asset-based debt in the American credit system today, much of it based on wishful thinking rather than real earnings streams, so you have the potential for a royal banking smash-up. This is less of a problem for Japan and Europe, which already have superlow interest rates and have been bailing out their credit markets for eight years running. Come a recession, they'll just increase the bailout fund from their capacious reserves as global creditors. We can't do that anymore, ergo Wall Street's manic belief in the eternal rise of the market: stock liquidity really is the last card post-Imperial America has left to play. > The puzzling thing about this scenario is the maintenance of U.S. demand > for goods and services. Over the last few years the U.S. Govt. deficit > has declined precipitously and the balance of trade has worsened as > well. Why are we not seeing a dramatic reduction in sales and output? I.e. a recession? Mostly because the US went $1 trillion in hock to its foreign creditors, and internal credit expansion (everything from credit cards to student loans) expanded mightily during the Nineties. Plus, the Rightwing warlords in Congress refused to cut the military in a big way, which helped to stabilize effective demand. But we've been living on borrowed time, no question about it. Let's just hope the EU and Japan finally get serious about re-starting the global economy, and bail us out of this mess. -- Dennis
Re: Fast Track Down, Not Out/Progressive Populist 12/97
> Jim Cullen responds: > > The tone of your criticism is one of the reasons that most American workers > would just as soon export liberals to Myanmar, rather than support their > causes. My editorial appeals to the self-interest of American workers > because they are the ones who can have an impact on United States trade > policy. . . . You see, Jim, that was your problem. There is a certain mindset which holds the consumption needs and habits of, say, the top 75 percent of the U.S. population to be environmentally excessive and aesthetically vulgar. The working class is mostly outside the U.S. (those inside the U.S. often not working) and lives in a world with no legitimate borders, state, or need for such oppressive things as law enforcement. You have to go back to Lin Piao, where the peasants of the periphery would surround and engulf the developed capitalist world and its fat, racist, sell-out worker-aristocrats. Get with the program! (sic) > I suppose at a moral level perhaps it is unworthy of us to couch our > arguments in self-interest, but at a practical level I don't see anything > wrong with an American worker getting involved politically to protect his > or her livelihood. Tsk tsk. Out at the shack, building my next "surprise," Max === 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://tap.epn.org/sawicky Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute other than this writer. ===
Re: FW: LITTLE JESSICA
At 09:47 1/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >I saw a similar message to this one which was subsequently stated to be a >fraud. I believe one should verify such messages before circulation and >I doubt the authenticity of this one. > >Paul ___ Sorry! Sorry! Sorry! I had no idea that it was a hoax. Cheers, ajit sinha > >*** >Paul Zarembka, using OS/2 and supporting RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY >at http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka >*** > > >On Mon, 1 Dec 1997, Ajit Sinha wrote: > >> >Hi ! Everybody, >> > >> >LITTLE JESSICA MYDEK IS SEVEN YEARS OLD AND IS SUFFERING FROM AN >> >ACUTE AND VERY RARE CASE OF CEREBRAL CARCINOMA. THIS CONDITION >> >CAUSES SEVERE MALIGNANT BRAIN TUMORS AND IS A TERMINAL ILLNESS. >> > >> >THE DOCTORS HAVE GIVEN HER SIX MONTHS TO LIVE. AS PART OF HER DYING >> >WISH, SHE WANTED TO START A CHAIN LETTER TO INFORM PEOPLE OF THIS >> >CONDITION AND TO SEND PEOPLE THE MESSAGE TO LIVE LIFE TO THE >> >FULLEST AND ENJOY EVERY MOMENT, A CHANCE THAT SHE WILL NEVER >> >HAVE. FURTHERMORE, THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY AND SEVERAL >> >CORPORATE SPONSORS HAVE AGREED TO DONATE THREE CENTS TOWARD >> >CONTINUING CANCER RESEARCH FOR EVERY NEW PERSON THAT GETS >> >FORWARDED THIS MESSAGE. >> > >> >PLEASE GIVE JESSICA AND ALL CANCER VICTIMS A CHANCE. IF THERE ARE >> >ANY QUESTIONS, SEND THEM TO THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY AT >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> >For every new person you forward this to, the American Cancer >> >Society will donate three cents toward cancer research. Just make >> >the first address [EMAIL PROTECTED], and then list as many friends and >> >colleagues as you can. It's for a good cause, so please don't just >> >delete it. >> > >> >Thank you. >> > >> >JSR >> > >> > >
Re: Fast Track Down, Not Out/Progressive Populist 12/97
Max, Jim Cullen's response, while I disagree with it, was thoughtful and to the point. Yours, on the other hand, was shameless parodying and misrepresentation of my viewpoint. (I don't mind humorous barbs -- in fact I have enjoyed your frequent humorous barbs -- but now you've entered the slippery territory of out-and-out caricature). I'll get back to both of you gents in the next few days when I get a chance. Suffice it to say for now that I myself have never presented the U.S. working class as a homogenous bunch of overconsuming and racist ignoramuses. All I did was question (in perhaps too polemical a form) the ethical and political wisdom of an anti-MAI and anti-free trade strategy which in some ways doesn't sound dramatically different from the "solutions" being offered by Buchanan or Le Pen in France (save the overt immigrant-bashing). Best, At 03:32 PM 12/3/97 +, Max Sawicky wrote: >> Jim Cullen responds: >> >> The tone of your criticism is one of the reasons that most American workers >> would just as soon export liberals to Myanmar, rather than support their >> causes. My editorial appeals to the self-interest of American workers >> because they are the ones who can have an impact on United States trade >> policy. . . . > >You see, Jim, that was your problem. There is a certain mindset >which holds the consumption needs and habits of, say, the top 75 >percent of the U.S. population to be environmentally excessive and >aesthetically vulgar. The working class is mostly outside the U.S. >(those inside the U.S. often not working) and lives in a world with >no legitimate borders, state, or need for such oppressive things as >law enforcement. You have to go back to Lin Piao, where the peasants >of the periphery would surround and engulf the developed capitalist >world and its fat, racist, sell-out worker-aristocrats. > >Get with the program! (sic) > >> I suppose at a moral level perhaps it is unworthy of us to couch our >> arguments in self-interest, but at a practical level I don't see anything >> wrong with an American worker getting involved politically to protect his >> or her livelihood. > >Tsk tsk. > >Out at the shack, building my next "surprise," > >Max > > > >=== >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://tap.epn.org/sawicky > >Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views >of anyone associated with the Economic Policy >Institute other than this writer. >=== > > John Gulick Ph. D. Candidate Sociology Graduate Program University of California-Santa Cruz (415) 643-8568 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Global Economyboundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BCFFF6.E35C83A0"
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. -- =_NextPart_000_01BCFFF6.E35C83A0 charset="iso-8859-1" > Hi - > The following is a comment I had for Sam Smith, the editor of the > Progressive Review. It complements our recent discussion of global > finance in that it focuses more on the real economy. >=20 > Dave >=20 > -- > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 1997 12:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Progressive Review On-Line #64 >=20 > PROGRESSIVE REVIEW =20 > ON-LINE REPORT #64 > November 25, 1997 >=20 > WAS MARKET RIGGED?=20 >=20 > When the American stock market sagged in October, something odd and > unexplained happened. The Dow dropped 180 points, then there came a > sudden > surge in S&P 500 stock index futures. In fact, points out the New = York > Post' > s John Crudelle, they jumped a huge 35 points ahead of the value of > the > index itself. The question Crudelle asks: "Did people just see > Monday's > sell-off as a buying opportunity and decided to take advantage = through > the > futures markets? Or did something else go on, perhaps Washington > intervention?" >=20 > In fact, in 1989 former Federal Reserve Board member Robert Heller > proposed > just such an intervention, writing in the Wall Street Journal: >=20 > "Instead of flooding the entire economy with liquidity, and thereby > increasing the danger of inflation, the Fed could support the stock > market > directly by buying market averages in the futures market, thus > stabilizing > the market as a whole."=20 >=20 > Even if the scheme works in the short-run there are a number of > important > questions: >=20 > --Is it legal? > --Could it just cover up chronic economic deficiencies that will > appear later? > --And, notes Crudelle, "If Wall Street believes Washington did come = to > its > aid this time and will always come to its aid, then arrogance and = over > confidence will cause investors to continue to pay too much for > equities." >=20 > -- > From: Richardson_D > Sent: Monday, December 01, 1997 11:18 AM > To: 'The Progressive Review' > Subject: RE: Progressive Review On-Line #64 >=20 > Hi Sam - > I think this is an important piece of news to get out-as far as I can > see it was not reported in the Washington Post, for example. While I > have no direct evidence on whether your suppositions are correct I am > morally certain that you are on the right track. As the Heller quote > implies, the Fed did flood the system with credit to stop the market > collapse in 1987. It is easy to believe that buying futures would be > seen as a cheaper and more conservative strategy. In fact it may not > be more conservative: why not just buy the equities (voting shares > only please) and keep them, thereby beginning the socialization of = the > economy? >=20 > Looking to the future, it would seem that the Fed could support the > stock market more or less indefinitely this way, almost regardless of > what is happening to the U.S. (or even the world) economy. This = would > be why New York price earnings ratios are at historic highs as the > world economy slides slowly into recession (depression?) and no one = is > particularly concerned. Aside from the U.S. and its rather anemic > Clinton boom, the only countries that come to mind as doing = reasonably > well are the U.K. and The Netherlands. >=20 > As for the future of the central bank supporting the stock market, we > already have an example of this. The Japanese central bank began > supporting the market sometime in the 1950's, after the protectorate > ended, and continued through the 1980's. This was a tiger by the = tail > situation and by 1989 the bank at least partly threw in the towel. > Since then the Japanese market index has fallen from about 27,000 to > about 17,000 today. The bank was not ready to let the market crash > but the result of its partial support is the current Japanese > recession / depression, now in its 8th year. >=20 > The U.S. market is even worse off than has been reported. According > to Greider's One World the share of equity in profit (I think he = means > returns to capital) has fallen from about 1/3 in the 1960's to about > 15% today. Since earnings are net of interest this leveraging = results > in higher earnings per share AS LONG AS PROFITS KEEP INCREASING. = When > profits begin to fall we get what is charmingly called "reverse > leverage." If, for example, profits were to fall 5% with say 65% = debt > financing as in the 60's the value of the stock should decline by > 5%/(100%-65%)=3D1/7. With 85% debt financing as now a 5% fall in = profit > should result in a decline in the stock of 1/3=3D5%/(100%-85%). > Therefore the Fed will have its hands full in keeping stock prices > from declining. >=20 > This is especially true as the IMF forces deflation on the East Asian > economies, thereby reducing demand for U.S. export
Re: utopias
> Date sent: Tue, 02 Dec 1997 12:37:26 -0500 > Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: Robin Hahnel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject:Re: utopias Hahnel writes: > One great thing about participatory planning is it eliminates the free > rider problem for expressing desires for public goods. Laws? > Enforcement? I'm an economist. Ask lawyers and criminologists about a > desirable system of law enforcement. No private property at all. Not > really any money either. People get effort ratings from their peers at > work that entitle them to consumption rights -- which they can save or > get advancements on (borrow). No money, no private property!? Is this "war-communism" revisited?
FW: BLS Daily Reportboundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BCFFF2.781CE7A0"
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. -- =_NextPart_000_01BCFFF2.781CE7A0 charset="iso-8859-1" BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1997 RELEASED TODAY: The proportion of U.S. workers who hold contingent jobs - basically those jobs that are not expected to last - declined slightly in the two years between February 1995 and February 1997. Using three alternative estimates, contingent workers accounted for 1.9 to 4.4 percent of all employment in February 1997; the range was 2.2 to 4.9 percent in February 1995. The analysis in the release is focused on the broadest estimate of contingent workers. During this two-year period, there was little change in the proportions of the employed who had alternative work arrangement - those identified as independent contractors, on-call workers, working for temporary help agencies, and working for contract firms Although still expanding, the U.S. manufacturing sector experienced a modest slowdown in terms of orders and employment during November, according to the latest National Association of Purchasing Management survey. Employment in factories grew again last month, but at a slower pace than in recent months It was the ninth consecutive month that the group's employment index showed job growth. NAPM said that the seven industries that reported job growth in November were petroleum, food, furniture, chemicals, primary metals, transportation and equipment, and industrial and commercial equipment and computers. There was mixed news on the inflation front In November, 15 percent of purchasing executives reported paying higher prices, 13 percent reported paying lower prices, and 72 percent said prices were about unchanged from the prior month (Daily Labor Report, page A-1)_A closely watched gauge of manufacturing cooled in November, reflecting slowdowns in new orders and production that suggested factory activity peaked earlier in the year. The NAPM index has fallen for three of the past four months after reaching a two-and-a-half-year high in July (New York Times, page D2)_Manufacturing growth slowed slightly in November, but showed no sign of Asia's financial crisis New orders for exports accelerated for the month, indicating that overseas business remains strong despite sharp cuts in projected growth in Southeast Asia and Japan (Wall Street Journal, page A2). Spending on new construction edged up 0.1 percent in October as gains in public construction and home building offset declines in commercial construction, the Commerce Department reports (Daily Labor Report, page A-3)_October was the fourth consecutive month without a decline in new construction, reflecting gains in housing and government projects .(Washington Post, page D2). The Wall Street Journal's "Work Week" column (page A1) reports that demand for new workers remains strong for early 1998. The new year looks great for both rank-and-file and executive job-hunting. "Nearly every industry is still trying to find people," says the CEO of Manpower, Inc. Nearly one-fourth of 16,000 businesses Manpower recently surveyed said they planned to seek extra workers in early 1998 - the highest-first quarter projection in the survey's 21-year history_Older workers are being recruited for high-tech jobs, says "Work Week." The Labor Department has given the nonprofit group Green Thumb a $250,000 grant to recruit low-income seniors to fill some of the many high-tech jobs that now go begging The Teresa and H. John Heinz III Foundation finds that one in four working women believes her workplace poses a health threat. In a survey of 1,000 women, the most prevalent concern involved exposure to hazardous material (28 percent), followed by sudden injury (24 percent). Eleven percent expressed concern about repetitive motion injuries (Wall Street Journal, "Work Week," page A1). DUE OUT TOMORROW: State and Metropolitan Area Employment and Unemployment: October 1997 BLS Releases New 1996-2006 Employment Projections -- =_NextPart_000_01BCFFF2.781CE7A0 b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQWAAwAOzQcMAAMADQA1ABYAAwA+AQEggAMADgAAAM0HDAAD AA0AMgAzAAMAWAEBCYABACEzNjc5NUFFREU0NkJEMTExODg4RTAwMjBBRjlDMDMwOAAdBwEE gAEAFQAAAEZXOiBCTFMgRGFpbHkgUmVwb3J0AIcGAQ2ABAACAgACAAEDkAYABBIAABwAAABA ADkA0Fm4uhwAvQEeAHAAAQ0AAABEYWlseSBSZXBvcnQAAgFxAAEgAbz/V2je vCpbFGsWEdGVBgJgjNtgKgAHjWawACnG5iAeADFAAQ0AAABSSUNIQVJEU09OX0QAAwAa 5CMAAExaRnWa/RQ9AwAKAHJjcGcxMjXyMgxgYzEDMAECAFABAUULYG4OEDAzMw8WZj5lD5IB9wKk A2MCAGNoEQrAc2V0AtFwcnFKMgAAKgqhbm8SUCAWMAHQAdA2D6AwNTDONBQhAdAUEDR9B20S8u5m B0AFQAdtfQKDAFAD1PsR/xMLYhPhFFATshqEFNC/BxMV5wcTF2ECkQjmOwlv6jAdX2UOMDUeih+h H1//IGkedCCSHv8izyKNIg8gP/MejxBgMjgoWilxKS8qOf8edCpiKM8snyxdK98qDy3UfjkOUDEk MoEqozKAAoJzqHR5bAeQaAngdAAAYQPwZGN0bAqxAGBkzGp1M/AFEGdoBUIXwh0MAWMJwDTAAzBz bmW+eBjAB7AFsADAAnNzAFBYc2I
Re: immanent critique (was: dialectics)
> Date sent: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 13:34:24 -0800 > Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: James Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject:immanent critique (was: dialectics) > Ricardo writes: >... I would argue there is a difference between the early > and late Marx on the question of liberal rights, and the difference is > simply the late Marx is a lot more cynical about them (approximating Lenin).< > Consequently, his immanent approach takes on a different character. As you > yourself say: "Much of that critique [of capitalism] is `immanent', though > Marx _also_ tries to understand and sketch the laws of motion of > capitalism". "Laws of motion of capitalism" - that's the difference. Marx > no longer confronts capitalism in terms of the universal ideals of justice, > equality, and freedom, but sees capitalism as having certain "objective" > tendencies toward crises, crises which arise of necessity from capitalism; > and are grounded in economics. < Devine responds: > So Marx was so stupid and ignorant that he couldn't walk and chew gum at > the same time? he couldn't simultaneously pose an "immanent critique" of > capitalism (of how capitalism contracts its own official preachings of > freedom, etc.) and try to figure out how the system works? > > I think we should avoid the silly assumption (that is, alas, very common in > academia) that EITHER school X (here, the one that emphasizes Marx's > immanent critique) is right OR school Y (here the one that emphasizes laws > of motion) is right -- but NOT BOTH. > > My perspective is that Marx hoped that his theories would (1) successfully > criticize the system, (2) help us explain its laws of motion, _and_ (3) > give us some guide to political practice (a kind of activity he > participated in quite a lot, to the dismay of liberals). Now it's difficult > _in practice_ to get all three of these in sync, but we have to give Marx > credit for trying. My point is the very simple one that the late Marx gives greater emphasis to the structural tendencies of capitalism than he does to the values and norms of that society. He seeks to show there are certain crises that emerge out of necessity from the "laws of motion" of capitalism, which explains why his analysis of those crises is based in economics, not ethics. > Ricardo continues: >How else do you explain the obsession pen-l has with > crises? Is it not because they are still abiding by Marx's claim that the > critique of capitalism must be a critique of political economy and the rest > is ideology? < Devine: > I don't understand the second question, so focus on the first: pen-l is by > no means a Marxist list, having quite a variety of non-Marxist > perspectives represented, while the Marxists on it often disagree with each > other, so we can't blame Marx for the list's failings and foibles or give > him credit for our successes. > > But Marx and pen-l have good reasons to be "obsessed" with crises (even > though pen-l discusses a lot of other things, apparently not on Ricardo's > list of his obsessions). Crises indicate one the failings of capitalism, > one we can criticize it for. They also indicate pretty clearly the > socialized nature of production, e.g., the interdependence of East Asia and > the US. In some cases, they represent political openings. Note that all > three of the parts of Marx's hoped-for synthesis (see above) play a role > here. (BTW, Ricardo, didn't you cite Habermas? he talks about crisis theory.) The problem with crisis-theory is that it cannot set the boundaries of capitalism beyond which it will no longer be able to function. Why couldn't capitalism function with 40% unemployment? > Ricardo seems to want Marx to stick to the example of his utopian teachers > (Saint-Simon, Owen, Fourier), to preach "the universal ideals of justice, > equality, and freedom" to the people, hoping that they'll meekly follow > their "enlightened" leadership and install these ideals in practice. Marx > lived at the end of a long period when a lot of people -- e.g., Robespierre > -- yelled similar slogans but then turned around and violated their own > slogans in practice. Thus, I can understand Marx's own reluctance to engage > in sloganeering about "universal ideals." Instead of such universal ideals, > Marx's ethical thought centered on the immanent critique, the contradiction > between bougeois theory and practice (again, see Cornell West's book). > > Marx's attitude, if I understand it correctly, was that his "immanent > critique" of capital corresponded to _real contradictions_ within its > operations. He argued that the normal operations of capitalism -- partly > via crises, but also via the concentration and centralization of capital > and more -- would create its own grave-diggers, a proletariat that would > develop the capacity to liberate itself from capitalism's shackles. He saw > the potential for the
Re: Fast Track Down, Not Out/Progressive Populist 12/97
>At 09:02 AM 12/3/97 -0600, William Lear wrote, responding to John Gulick: > >>Who is "you"? Could you insert the person's name to whom you are >>responding? It makes following the thread a bit easier. > >Sorry. This is a shortcoming of my mail application. > Not all of the Reform Party positions are compatible with progressive populism. But progressive populists ought to work with the Reformers on common issues such as opening the ballot to alternative parties, campaign finance reform, fair trade laws and encouraging small farmers, small businesses and American manufacturing. >>> >>>Excuse me, but if the "progressive populist" movement has not enough >>>moral imagination to oppose free trade agreements and the MAI because >>>of the destitution these policies/laws/institutions wreak upon workers >>>and peasants in "developing countries," and instead gets all up in arms >>>embattled textile firms in the Piedmonts and gracious U.S. "sovereingty," >>>then I don't see much difference between "progressive populism" and >>>Buchanan's crypto-fascism, or other crypto-fascisms in Europe. >> >>All this righteous anger might be better directed at someone who >>actually does not oppose free trade agreements. From the quote you >>are responding to, "you" mentions "fair trade laws", exactly the >>opposite (according to my reading of Tom Athanasiou's book) of "free" >>trade. > >I deliberately intended to critique this proponent (i.e. the author >of the article, who is the same person who issued the e-mail) >of so-called fair trade, b/c it is my belief that they oppose so-called free >trade for all the wrong (provincial and yes, protectionist) reasons. Jim Cullen responds: The tone of your criticism is one of the reasons that most American workers would just as soon export liberals to Myanmar, rather than support their causes. My editorial appeals to the self-interest of American workers because they are the ones who can have an impact on United States trade policy. If the United States adopts fair trade rules, which are designed to improve labor and health policies internationally, that ought to help workers in the Third World. I suppose at a moral level perhaps it is unworthy of us to couch our arguments in self-interest, but at a practical level I don't see anything wrong with an American worker getting involved politically to protect his or her livelihood. To paraphrase the bumper sticker, Think Globally, Act Provincially! > >John Gulick >Ph. D. Candidate >Sociology Graduate Program >University of California-Santa Cruz >(415) 643-8568 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] THE PROGRESSIVE POPULIST James M. Cullen, Editor P.O. Box 150517, Austin, Texas 78715-0517 Phone: 512-447-0455 Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home page: http://www.eden.com/~reporter
Re: contingency
On Tue, 2 Dec 1997, Doug Henwood wrote: > Continuing a discussion from several months ago, the opening of a BLS news > release published today. The full text is on the BLS web site at > http://stats.bls.gov/news.release/conemp.toc.htm. > > I welcome discussion as to what it all means. > > Doug Doug, several months ago I noticed the first business articles suggesting some disenchantment with the contingent workforce. To now, most articles in the business press has suggested that all aspects of the contingent workforce are wholly positive. The critical pieces focused on two problems: the problem of dishonesty and outright theft by contingent workers because they have no commitment to the job and the inability of contingent workers to do as good a job as regular employees and as draining work resources because they need guidance as to how to perform their jobs. Ellen J. Dannin California Western School of Law 225 Cedar Street San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-525-1449 Fax:619-696-
Former Soviet Premier Lends Pizza Hut His Image
By ALESSANDRA STANLEY MOSCOW -- The last leader of the Soviet Union was unable to prevent the collapse of communism. So now he has conspicuously taken his place on the winning side. Mikhail Gorbachev, 66, has shot a commercial endorsement for Pizza Hut. Gorbachev agreed to sit down at a table with his granddaughter in the Moscow outlet of Pizza Hut and pay tribute to capitalism and its greasiest offshoot: American fast food. Gorbachev said he was not exactly sure how much he was being paid, but some reports indicate his fee is close to $1 million. Explaining that he badly needed the money to finance his foundation, a research institute that bears his name, Gorbachev said in an interview Tuesday that he had declined many other offers to endorse products but made an exception for Pizza Hut. "I thought that it is a people's matter -- food," he said. "This is why if my name works for the benefit of consumers, to hell with it -- I can risk it." The script is deferential; indeed, it could be viewed as Gorbachev's ultimate fantasy. He arrives by limousine at a Pizza Hut and some patrons notice him. An older man grumbles, "Because of him, we have economic confusion." A younger man disagrees, saying, "Because of him we have opportunity." Patrons continue to argue, until an older woman pipes up, "Because of him we have things like Pizza Hut." The patrons rise and give a standing ovation to their former leader, holding pizza slices aloft in tribute. Gorbachev responds with a dignified smile. He does not actually eat a slice of pizza, but sips coffee as he watches his granddaughter dig in happily. Though the ad was shot in Moscow last Thursday, there are no plans to broadcast it in Russia. Esteemed in the West as the statesman who ended the Cold War, Gorbachev is extremely unpopular in Russia, where he is blamed for allowing the Soviet Union to fall apart and for not having pushed reform of the command economy far enough. When he ran for the presidency last year -- his first campaign for public office -- he won less than 1 percent of the vote. To put it another way, Gorbachev's endorsement of Pizza Hut could well cause sales in Moscow to drop dramatically. "Here in Russia, it will be understood one way," Gorbachev said of the advertisement, which has already been ridiculed in the Russian press. "In other places, it is nothing unusual. I see my colleagues, former presidents, and your presidents, too, taking part in campaigns." Actually, Gorbachev may be breaking new ground for statesmen. Margaret Thatcher and Helmut Kohl have never made commercials. Even in America, where celebrity endorsements are part of the cultural fabric, no former president has taken quite so bold a step. In 1996, George Bush made an unpaid commercial for the Houston Astros, the baseball team, as a favor to its owner, Drayton McLane. His vice president, Dan Quayle, did a commercial in 1994 for Frito-Lay potato chips and was paid $50,000. Gerald Ford serves on many corporate boards for substantial compensation, but has not made product endorsements. Mostly, those kinds of ads have been picked up by presidential or vice-presidential also-rans, from Bob Dole, who endorsed Dunkin' Donuts, to Geraldine Ferraro, who made an advertisement in 1984 for Diet Pepsi. Since leaving the Kremlin, Gorbachev has marketed himself as a newspaper columnist, memoirist and highly paid speaker and made a cameo appearance in a Wim Wenders art film, improvising a soliloquy on Dostoyevsky. Gorbachev has already made an ad for Apple computers in Germany, but said that by starring in the Pizza Hut commercial he was taking a step he had previously considered "unsuitable" for someone of his standing. He complained that Russian President Boris Yeltsin had stripped him of much of the office space he was allotted after he resigned from office on Dec. 25, 1991, and had deliberately thwarted his fund-raising efforts. "I don't get support from the state," he said. "If you look at the foundations in Germany or France, the state finances them, they find sponsors. Here, we don't have any of that. Sponsors can be found. There were some, but on the next day after meeting with me they were summoned to the presidential headquarters to fix their brains." Executives at Pizza Hut seemed dismayed that Gorbachev had spoken about his coming cameo so soon, and would not disclose when the ad is expected to run or provide a still from the video. But one company executive explained Pizza Hut's interest in attaching Gorbachev's name to its pizza this way: "We are constantly striving to take our advertising to a new edge. And we have a new commercial that the whole world will want to watch." The commercial was created by the BBDO New York advertising agency, which is known for using celebrities -- particularly politicians -- in splashy, big-budget spots. Among the commercials from BBDO are a 1996 spot for Visa with Dole and a 1995 Doritos commercial wi
Re: Fast Track Down, Not Out/Progressive Populist 12/97
At 09:02 AM 12/3/97 -0600, William Lear wrote: >Who is "you"? Could you insert the person's name to whom you are >responding? It makes following the thread a bit easier. Sorry. This is a shortcoming of my mail application. >>>Not all of the Reform Party positions are compatible with >>>progressive populism. But progressive populists ought to work with the >>>Reformers on common issues such as opening the ballot to alternative >>>parties, campaign finance reform, fair trade laws and encouraging small >>>farmers, small businesses and American manufacturing. >> >>Excuse me, but if the "progressive populist" movement has not enough >>moral imagination to oppose free trade agreements and the MAI because >>of the destitution these policies/laws/institutions wreak upon workers >>and peasants in "developing countries," and instead gets all up in arms >>embattled textile firms in the Piedmonts and gracious U.S. "sovereingty," >>then I don't see much difference between "progressive populism" and >>Buchanan's crypto-fascism, or other crypto-fascisms in Europe. > >All this righteous anger might be better directed at someone who >actually does not oppose free trade agreements. From the quote you >are responding to, "you" mentions "fair trade laws", exactly the >opposite (according to my reading of Tom Athanasiou's book) of "free" >trade. I deliberately intended to critique this proponent (i.e. the author of the article, who is the same person who issued the e-mail) of so-called fair trade, b/c it is my belief that they oppose so-called free trade for all the wrong (provincial and yes, protectionist) reasons. John Gulick Ph. D. Candidate Sociology Graduate Program University of California-Santa Cruz (415) 643-8568 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General strike in Israel! (fwd)
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 2 10:47:18 1997 > Date: Tue, 2 Dec 1997 20:28:53 +0200 > Sender: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: Eric Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: General strike in Israel! > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > According to reports this evening, tomorrow morning, 700,000 Israeli > workers begin an unlimited-duration general strike in protest against the > refusal of the Netanyahu government's Finance Minister to engage in serious > negotiations to settle outstanding issues. > > More details to follow tomorrow. > > Eric Lee >
urgent action nicaragua (fwd)
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Task Force on Central America) > Subject: urgent action nicaragua > Content-Length: 5138 > > Dear Friends: > > We have received some disturbing news from the organisation "Mujeres sin > Fronteras" (Women without Borders), and the Comite de Solidaridad > Internacional de Zaragoza (International Solidarity Committee of Zaragoza), > about a fatal work-place accident in a free-trade zone maquila. On > Tuesday, November 18, Oscar Jose Rivas Artola, a 24 year-old worker at the > Taiwanese Nien Hsing International maquila died after being electrocuted > with 380 volts of electricity from a machine in disrepair. > > For two days, he had been telling his supervisor that his machine had not > been working properly. The last time he warned his supervisor, three hours > before the accident, he was met with an obscenity and was forced to > continue using the machine. His co-workers said that when the accident > happened, Oscar Rivas cried out desperately while almost all the machines > stopped working and the intensity of the factory lights diminished. His > co-workers could not take him out of the factory as fast as they wanted to, > because the security guard on duty was nowhere to be found and the doors > were locked; the workers had to break the locks to get out. They managed > to get him to the Carlos Marx hospital where he died a minute later. > > Oscar Rivas left behind two children - a 3 year-old girl and a 4 year-old > boy. His family is going to sue Nien Hsing with the help of legal aid from > a workers' umbrella organisation, the Central Sandinista de Trabajadores > (CST). > > After the accident, Gilberto Wong, the general administrator of Nien Hsing > would only say that the Ministry of Labour would give a press conference. > On November 26, the Minister of Labour announced that the factory had been > fined 10,000 cordobas ($1,500.00 Cdn.) and that the area of the factory > where the electrocution took place would be closed while the area is > inspected and the machinery is put in proper working order. This is clearly > not enough; a band-aid solution at best, say the CST. > > Background Information: > > The Secretary General of the Textile Union Federation of the CST, Pedro > Ortega Mendez, stated that there are 10 to 20 workplace accidents a day in > the free-trade zone (Zona Franca). Additionally, Mao Shelim Ramos Rugama, > and ex-worker from the Zone, stated that there are minors working there > with the full knowledge of their employers. This irregularity has been > documented by the USA T.V. program 'Hard Copy' (Nov. 11, 12, and 13); the > program revealed, among other violations of the Labour Code, that 10 to 14 > year-old children are working in the Zona Franca, and that the majority of > the workers have to take stimulants to meet their work quotas. > > On November 17, the Nicaraguan Minister of Labour, Wilfredo Navarro, > responding to the accusations from that TV program, said that the > violations of the Labour Legal Code are nothing new, that they occur in the > maquilas as they do in any other enterprise. He said: "This is not > Paradise; we are acting against the abuses, we have fined those who > violated the [Labour] Code". But when asked if he considers natural that > a worker has to spend 12 hours standing, she or he is not allowed to sit, > and not allowed to go to the bathroom more than once a day, he answered: > "Well, when the worker came here, he knew what he was getting into, here > there are rules like anywhere else and they have to be respected". > > Three workers have been fired after they were interviewed for the program > Hard Copy: Mao Shelim Ramos Rugama, Julieta Antonia Alonso Lopez, and Jose > Efrain Miranda. > > Sandinista members of the Legislative Assembly have issued a statement > expressing their "profound uneasiness" with the situation in the free-trade > zone, condemning the working conditions that led to the death of Oscar > Rivas. They are calling on "all human rights organisations, churches and > unions at the national and international level to continue monitoring, > denouncing and condemning these violations, nationally and > internationally". > > Recommended Action: > > Please write to the following people in Nicaragua: > > * expressing your outrage at the death of Oscar Rivas, * demanding that a > full investigation be made into violations of the Legal Labour Code in the > Zona Franca and that workers' rights be respected, including the right to > life, > * demanding that Oscar Rivas' family be justly compensated for his death, * > and that a more serious attempt be made by the Ministry of Labour to > address these critical human and labour rights violations. > > Please write to the Canadian Government: > > * informing them of this disturbing incident, * asking that the Canadian > government apply diplomatic pressure on the government of Nicaragua to > ensure that basic human rights are respected in tha
Re: More! More!
Thomas Kruse wrote:
>>Mies van der Rohe is credited with having said "Less is more."
>
>To which one of the pomo upstarts (Micael Graves?) retroted "Less is more is
>a bore".
Actually I think it was Robert Venturi, who learned from Las Vegas ("Las
Vegas is almost all right"). Ironically, of course. Venturi is a font of
aphorisms - another that sticks in my mind from 22 years ago is "Our
buildings must learn to live with the cigarette machine." And then there
was the prominent but nonfunctioning antenna on the roof of an old folks
home he designed, intended as a symbol of the fact that geezers watch a lot
of TV.
Doug
Re: contingency
>From the BLS release it looks like contingency means a worker thinks the situation will end w/in a year. The release says the proportion of "alternative work arrangement" workers (contractors, temps, on-call, workers provided by contract agencies) in the tota workforce has remained the same (about 10%), but they now seem to see this as a permanent state. jd
Re: More! More!
>>Mies van der Rohe is credited with having said "Less is more." > >To which one of the pomo upstarts (Micael Graves?) retroted "Less is more is >a bore". But who could possibly be more post modern than the architect who designed the 1926 Rosa and Karl Liebknecht Monument and went on, in 1933, to submit a neo-classical competition entry for the Reichsbank described by Kenneth Frampton as displaying "an impassive monumentality, which aside from the neutrality of its skin, intended nothing save the idealization of bureaucratic authority." The 1923 quote I cited earlier sounds to me like an "affirmative" flip side of Foucault. BTW, the discussion of 'utopias' is incomplete without an appreciation (and critique) of the emergence and dissemination of architectural utopias. Regards, Tom Walker ^^^ knoW Ware Communications Vancouver, B.C., CANADA [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 688-8296 ^^^ The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
Re: Fast Track Down, Not Out/Progressive Populist 12/97
On Tue, December 2, 1997 at 22:43:23 (+) john gulick writes: >At 07:09 PM 12/2/97 -0600, you wrote: Who is "you"? Could you insert the person's name to whom you are responding? It makes following the thread a bit easier. >>Not all of the Reform Party positions are compatible with >>progressive populism. But progressive populists ought to work with the >>Reformers on common issues such as opening the ballot to alternative >>parties, campaign finance reform, fair trade laws and encouraging small >>farmers, small businesses and American manufacturing. > >Excuse me, but if the "progressive populist" movement has not enough >moral imagination to oppose free trade agreements and the MAI because >of the destitution these policies/laws/institutions wreak upon workers >and peasants in "developing countries," and instead gets all up in arms >embattled textile firms in the Piedmonts and gracious U.S. "sovereingty," >then I don't see much difference between "progressive populism" and >Buchanan's crypto-fascism, or other crypto-fascisms in Europe. All this righteous anger might be better directed at someone who actually does not oppose free trade agreements. From the quote you are responding to, "you" mentions "fair trade laws", exactly the opposite (according to my reading of Tom Athanasiou's book) of "free" trade. Bill
Re: More! More!
>Mies van der Rohe is credited with having said "Less is more." To which one of the pomo upstarts (Micael Graves?) retroted "Less is more is a bore". Tom Kruse / Casilla 5869 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-42) 48242 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fast Track Down, Not Out/Progressive Populist 12/97
Raged John Gulick: > Excuse me, but if the "progressive populist" movement has not enough > moral imagination to oppose free trade agreements and the MAI because > of the destitution these policies/laws/institutions wreak upon workers > and peasants in "developing countries," and instead gets all up in arms [re] > embattled textile firms in the Piedmonts and gracious U.S. "sovereignty," > then I don't see much difference between "progressive populism" and > Buchanan's crypto-fascism, or other crypto-fascisms in Europe. [] Hear, hear! This is why I repeat, in apparent futility, that the populisms of left and right have to be joined together if they're not to be checkmated separately by the sort of fatcat scum who floated Buchanan. Buchanan's seemingly gratuitous racism is really the very core of his presentation, and the message to the donut shop is "Let workers of decidely inferior races and cultures do the starving; only _our_ Lilliputian lives matter. Why, in India they don't even have traffic lights!" The recent "utopias" thread was interesting, but it did not approach the required heresy of admitting that American workers will move only for the most selfish and immediate of reasons. Utopia? Isn't that the Cowboys' new backfield guy? Dislocations and sufferings of biblical proportions await the American working class unless it very soon drops the TV remote, that fraudulent electronic scepter of power, and manages to locate itself within the larger human and planetary stories. Idaho march, anyone? Yet? valis
lingua franca on free trade
The Dec/Jan issue of lingua franca has an excellent, thorough article by my friend Eyal Press discussing about a dozen different academic economists' views on free trade. Very nice introduction to the landscape on this issue. The c9nclusion has to be soft-pedaled in the extreme given the audience but it's still a very worthwhile piece. Starts with Greider and Krugman and moves to a host of other figures. best, Thad Thad Williamson National Center for Economic and Security Alternatives (Washington)/ Union Theological Seminary (New York) 212-531-1935 http://www.northcarolina.com/thad
More! More!
Michael Eisenscher wrote, >I spent part of the day looking for the entirety of that quote from Gompers, >but did not find it. . . Mies van der Rohe is credited with having said "Less is more." Here's a slightly expanded text: "The office building is a house of work . . . of organization, of clarity, of economy. Bright, wide workrooms, easy to oversee, undivided except as the undertaking is divided. The maximum effect with the minimum expenditure of means. The materials are concrete, iron, glass." Regards, Tom Walker ^^^ knoW Ware Communications Vancouver, B.C., CANADA [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 688-8296 ^^^ The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
