Re: Santa Fe-Krugman-Arthur
I had thought that the signifigance of choas and complexity theory is that they establish in a fairly incontestable way the limits on what "pre-non-linear" model (i.e. most of the neoclassical position) can accomplish. If you demonstrate that economic phenomena embody chaotic processes then those phenomena are not amenable to prediction and/or control based on linear models (or perhaps based on any models). A similar sort of argument could be made for adaptive processes found in complexity theory. -Paul Meyer
Re: In Defense of Latin
Computer nerds are bloodless turnips (they are more like engineers than mathematicians) Paul Meyer - a computer professional
RE: [Fwd: Rachel #584: Major Causes of Ill health]
Michael's forwarded post on the relationship between health and class was interesting. There are a couple of excellent references that were missing. 1. Wilkinson, Richard G. Unhealthy Societies: the Afflictions of Inequality. London: Routledge, 1996. 2. The September 1997 issue of the American Journal of Public Health, v87(9) (devoted to social class and health). Jeff Fellows National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Centers for Disease Control and Prevention -- From: michael To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Fwd: Rachel #584: Major Causes of Ill health] Date: Saturday, February 07, 1998 12:21AM -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] <>
Major land-claim victory for Canadian Indians
February 9, 1998 Canada Ruling Signals New Attitude Toward Native Peoples By ANTHONY DePALMA KISPIOX, British Columbia -- In the early time, long ago, an Indian maiden was taken into the sky. When she came back to the land, the man who took her turned into a grizzly bear. Her three brothers searched for her but found the bear first and killed it without realizing that it was their sister's husband. They brought the skin to where the river calls back the salmon every year. The Gitxsan people have been in Kispiox ever since. That, says a Gitxsan elder, Alvin Weget, is the history of his people and their relationship to this breathtaking land of sky-high mountains. It is preserved on a towering cedar totem pole and in stories that Gitxsan elders first told hundreds of years ago. And according to a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada, that story is now legally binding evidence that can be used, along with other histories, to support Gitxsan claims to as much as 22,000 square miles of British Columbia's remote interior. Claims by other Indian groups cover all of the province's nearly 600,000 square miles. By essentially validating Indian claims to land even where no treaties or titles exist, the ruling -- in a case started by the Gitxsan (pronounced GIT-san) and their neighbors, the Wetsuweten (pronounced WET-soo-wet-en) -- may redefine how government deals with Indians across Canada. With other recent actions, including the Canadian government's historic apology to native peoples for 150 years of paternalistic and sometimes racist treatment, the court's ruling seems to reflect a sharp shift in attitudes. It is driven as much by politics and a muscle-flexing court as by statistics indicating that Canada could be sitting on a demographic time bomb. By any measure, the country's 1.3 million indigenous people -- about 5 percent of the population -- are much poorer, sicker and socially troubled than non-natives. They are also, on the whole, much younger, and their population is growing twice as fast. "Nobody can look at the reality facing aboriginal people in Canada and not feel that something has to be done to put things back in balance," said Indian Affairs Minister Jane Stewart. "The status quo is not acceptable." Ms. Stewart said she had a much better relationship than her predecessors with Indian leaders, making compromise possible. She also cited public opinion polls indicating that Canadians think Indians have gotten a raw deal and want something done quickly to help them. But while such attitudes dominate in eastern cities, here in the west, where there are more indigenous people and the impact of land claims and self-government initiatives have immediate impact, things look different. "Supreme Surrender" is the title of a recent article that sums up western attitudes about the Supreme Court ruling in the magazine The Western Report. And Gordon Gibson, a West Coast columnist for The Globe and Mail, called the Dec. 11 decision by a court made up primarily of justices from the eastern provinces of Ontario and Quebec "a breathtaking exercise in amateur social engineering." Mike Scott, an opposition Member of Parliament with the conservative Reform Party from British Columbia, said, "This whole thing is foolish, ill advised and downright irresponsible." He accused the Liberal government of Prime Minister Jean Chretien of taking politically correct positions "without the foggiest notion of what this entails." Like many others here, Scott is worried that the court's decision undermines British Columbia's control over the 95 percent of the province that is publicly owned. The justices basically rejected the province's long-held position that Indian claims to the land were extinguished when British Columbia became a province in 1871. They also fear that uncertainty over who legally controls the land will undermine land-use decisions and threaten British Columbia's important timber and mining industries, which are already under great stress because of Asian economic disruptions. In the six weeks since the ruling, industry leaders say, no logging contracts have been revoked, but there is a ground swell of uncertainty and fear about the impact of the ruling. "What was uncertain before," Scott said, "becomes disastrous now." Already, other native groups across Canada have interrupted treaty negotiations to consider how the ruling affects them. Last weekend, Indian leaders from British Columbia met with federal and provincial leaders and demanded a 60-day moratorium on all timber cutting and mining permits to give them time to apply the court ruling. The Gitsxan here argued that as protectors of the large territory over which they have historically ranged, they should have the right not only to use the land in traditional ways like hunting and fishing, but also to take part in decisions on granting timber licenses and mining concessions and any other way the land is used.
primitive communism
in discussing the movie "The Emerald Forest," Louis writes >After his father recovers from his wounds, he tells Tomme that he wants to take him back with him to the city, but the youth explains that he has been in "the World" too long. He belongs there now. Then the father turns to the chief and asks him to order the boy to return with him. The chief shrugs his shoulders and says that if the boy wanted to return, he would have agreed to do so. Furthermore, he would not be chief any longer if he told members of his tribe to do something that "they did not want to do." This admission gets to the very heart of the difference between "primitive" society and our own. In our society, it is normal for the state, employer, teachers and religious officials to order us around every day of our lives. The high price of civilization is repression.< This feels right to me (given my inadequate knowledge of anthropology, of course). I think that there's a lot of truth to Marx's notions of "primitive communism" (as opposed to our current, class-dominated, society). Groups of people united by family and kinship ties and by the goal of collective survival would tend to have this kind of democracy. However, didn't Marx talk about the limits of primitive communism, too? I wasn't expecting Louis to do so in a movie review, but the issue seems relevant. Is there some way to combine the benefits of advanced technology (indoor plumbing, etc.) with this kind of "primitive democracy"? Further, to what extent are the "primitive communist" societies dominated by patriarchy? I would guess that it depends on which society you're talking about. In some societies, the men don't do much work at all except for occasional fun stuff like hunting (I exagerrate the fun part of course). To what extent do the various "primitive communist" societies relate to each other in a peaceful way? In the real case of the Amazon (as opposed to the movie), to what extent did the "Fierce People" become "fierce" due to European invasion? Enquiring minds want to know. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://clawww.lmu.edu/1997F/ECON/jdevine.html "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
The Cause of the Unemployed (fwd)
marches97-info.eng -- On 17 January 1998, the sociologists Pierre Bourdieu, Frederic Lebaron and Gerard Mauge published in Le Monde the following text, which they are now launching as a petition. The Cause of the Unemployed Those who have become known as 'the excluded' - those excluded provisionally, temporarily, long term or for ever from the market-place of work - are almost always those who have no voice, and who are excluded from collective action. How has it happened then that after several years of isolated and apparently hopeless effort by a minority of activists, a collective action appears at last to have broken through the wall of media and political indifference? At first, came the laughable panic and hardly disguised antipathy of certain media professionals, journalists, trade unionists and the political classes, who saw in these demonstrations by the unemployed only a intolerabe brake to their shopkeepers' interests and their sole monopoly of the right to speak on 'exclusion' and 'the national drama of unemployment'. Confronted by this unwelcome mobilisation, these professional manipulators, these permanent occupiers of the heights of television, saw in it only a 'manipulation of distress', an operation set up for the media, the illegitimacy of a minority, or the illegality of peaceful actions. Then came the spread of the movement and the erruption onto the media and political scene of a small group of organised unemployed: the first victory of the movement of unemployed is the movement itself (which is helping to distract a bewildered population from the National Front) The unemployed movement is at the same time the blue-print of a collective organisation, and a chain reaction of which it is the product and which it itself contributes to producing: from isolation, depression, shame, personal resentment, revenge on scape-goats, to collective mobilization; from resignation, passivity, individualization and silence to gaining the right to speak; from depression to revolt, from the individual unemployed person to the collectivity of the unemployed, from misery to anger. That's how the slogan of the marchers ends up in reality: "Who sows misery, reaps anger". But also, it reminds us of some essential truths of neo-liberal societies, which led to the movement of November-December 1995 and which the powerful apostles of the "Tietmeyer thought" try so hard to disguise. In the first place the undeniable relationship between unemployment rate and profit rate. The two phenomena - the exorbitant consumption of some and the misery of others - not only come together - while some get rich in their sleep, the others become poorer by the day - they are also interdependent: when the stock exchange rejoices, the unemployed suffer, the enrichment of some is linked to the pauperization of the others. Mass unemployment remains in fact the most effective tool in the hands of employers with which to impose the stagnation or lowering of wages, to push up working rythms, to deteriorate working conditions, to increase job insecurity, to impose flexibility, to create new forms of domination in the work place amd to dismantle the legal protection of workers. When the enterprises "size down", with some of the "social schemes" announced flamboyantly in the media, their investment returns rise spectacularly. When the unemployment rate falls in the US, Wall Street is depressed. In France, 1997 has been the year all records were broken on the Paris Stock Exchange. But above all, the movement of the unemployed calls into question the carefully maintained divisions between "good" and "bad" poor, between "excluded" and "unemployed", between unemployed and wage- earners. Even if one cannot equate in a mechanical way unemployment and crime, nobody can ignore today that "urban violence" has its roots in unemployment, generalized social insecurity and mass poverty. The "exemplary" convictions of Strasbourg, the threats to reopen correctional institutions or the suppression of family allowances to parents of trouble-makers, who allegedly have renounced their parental duties, are the hidden face of neoliberal employment policies. When will young unemployed people be obliged to accept any miserable job as Tony Blair proposes, and will the welfare state be replaced by the American styled "security state"? Because it makes us understand that any unemployed person is potentially condemned to long-term unemployed and that the long- term unemployed are potentially excluded, that exclusion from unemployment benefits means to be condemned to assistance, social aid, charity, the movement of the unemployed calls into question the division between "excluded" and "unemployed": when the unemployed are sent to the social aid office, they are deprived of their status as unemployed and they are rejected into exclusion. But above all it makes us understand that any wage-earner may lose their job at any moment, that the g
Re: primitive communism
Jim Devine: >However, didn't Marx talk about the limits of primitive communism, too? I >wasn't expecting Louis to do so in a movie review, but the issue seems >relevant. Is there some way to combine the benefits of advanced technology >(indoor plumbing, etc.) with this kind of "primitive democracy"? Yes, this is the idea of communism, isn't it? Modern technology and common, egalitarian ownership and use. I've said before that my idea of Communism would be based on a world economy run with a version of Lotus 123 on steroids, with a council of elders presiding over the whole shootin' match. The council would include people like Rigobertu Menchu. > >Further, to what extent are the "primitive communist" societies dominated >by patriarchy? I would guess that it depends on which society you're >talking about. In some societies, the men don't do much work at all except >for occasional fun stuff like hunting (I exagerrate the fun part of course). I am no expert on antropology but SWPer Evelyn Reed wrote a book called "Woman's Evoluton: From Matriarchal Clan To Patriarchal Family." The publicity blurb from Pathfinder Press says, "Evelyn Reed takes us on an expedition through prehistory from cannibalism to culture -- and uncovers the world of the ancient matriarchy. Tracing the origins of the 'incest taboo,' blood rites, marriage, and the family, she reveals women's leading and still largely unknown contributions to the development of civilization. By pinpointing the relatively recent factors that led to pervasive discrimination against women as a sex, she offers fresh insights on the struggle against women's oppression and for the liberation of humanity. Reed refutes the myth that 'human nature' is to blame for the wars, greed, and inequalities of class-divided societies." After I am finished with this research project on the American Indian, I might delve into the whole question of Marxism and anthropology. One of Baudrillard's main complaints is that Marxism is based on the "mode of production" paradigm, but this does not really relate to so-called primitive societies. Maurice Godelier, the dean of Marxist anthropology, argues that the potlatch (ceremonial gift-giving) is a form of the "mode of production," but this doesn't quite ring true to me. One of Marxism's big problems is its lack of focus and understanding of societies that depart from the Western European model treated by Marx in v. 1 of Capital. Gunder Frank thinks the "asiatic mode of production" theory is false, as does Jim Blaut, a regular on our fun-loving, zany Spoons lists. If there are problems with the asiatic mode of production, can you imagine what difficulties await us when we try to analyze the bush people of Kalahari? My big problem with Engels on all this is not that he relies on inaccurate data when he cites Lewis Morgan, but that he makes ideological concessions. Do we agree with Engels that the sole yardstick of progress is productivity? Think about the political consequences of this. Nobody would support the reintroduction of slavery from a moral standpoint, but underpinning the moral objections is Marxist political economy. The northern industrialists represented a more "progressive" use of resources. As Eric Foner put it, they stood for "free soil and free labor." What about giving land back to the Indians as they are doing in Canada? Do we put this on the same plane as reintroducing slavery? After all, the mining and timber companies will make more "productive" use of the land. This are the sort of tough theoretical questions that Marxism has to confront. I am convinced that the 18th century notions of progress based on naked productivity have to be dumped, especially in light of the ecological crisis. > >To what extent do the various "primitive communist" societies relate to >each other in a peaceful way? In the real case of the Amazon (as opposed to >the movie), to what extent did the "Fierce People" become "fierce" due to >European invasion? > They fought with each other over hunting territory before the whites came, but I suspect that large scale warmaking was a function of being drawn into the white man's squabbles. French vs English; English vs. American; North vs. South, etc. Louis Proyect
Re: primitive communism
>Is this really going to happen? I find it nearly impossible to believe that >a capitalist government would ever sign over significant amounts of land to >aboriginals, no matter how solid their claim. Am I being too cynical? > >Doug The first step is making the legal case. The next step is direct action to enforce the legal decision. This is what happened in the US after Brown versus Board of Education ruled against segregation. If people hadn't sat-in, marched and boycotted, Jim Crow would still be in effect. One of the reasons I have been writing about these things is that I am trying to alert the left about the issues so they will rally on behalf of Indian claims. There's some guy in NY who's supposed to have a radio show on this week about land-claims... Louis Proyect
Re: primitive communism
Louis Proyect wrote: >The first step is making the legal case. The next step is direct action to >enforce the legal decision. This is what happened in the US after Brown >versus Board of Education ruled against segregation. If people hadn't >sat-in, marched and boycotted, Jim Crow would still be in effect. One of >the reasons I have been writing about these things is that I am trying to >alert the left about the issues so they will rally on behalf of Indian >claims. There's some guy in NY who's supposed to have a radio show on this >week about land-claims... Yeah, that's me. PEN-Ler Jim Craven will be on, 5 PM on Thursday. There's a big difference between ending Jim Crow and redoing property relations. Property relations are the bedrock of the capitalist form. Doug
Re: primitive communism
> Received: from MAILQUEUE by OOI (Mercury 1.21); 9 Feb 98 12:29:52 +800 > Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Received: from galaxy.csuchico.edu by ooi.clark.edu (Mercury 1.21) with ESMTP; > 9 Feb 98 12:29:43 +800 > Received: from host (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by galaxy.csuchico.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA20011; > Mon, 9 Feb 1998 12:24:24 -0800 (PST) > Received: from mailrelay1.cc.columbia.edu >([EMAIL PROTECTED] [128.59.35.143]) > by galaxy.csuchico.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA19911 > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 9 Feb 1998 12:23:55 -0800 (PST) > Received: from audi (audi.ais.columbia.edu [128.59.223.163]) > by mailrelay1.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA15241 > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 9 Feb 1998 15:23:32 -0500 (EST) > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 15:16:42 -0500 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: primitive communism > In-Reply-To: > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN > X-PMFLAGS: 34078848 > > >Yeah, that's me. PEN-Ler Jim Craven will be on, 5 PM on Thursday. > > > >There's a big difference between ending Jim Crow and redoing property > >relations. Property relations are the bedrock of the capitalist form. > > > >Doug > > Nobody has any illusions that capitalism will be abolished in British > Columbia. The real choice is along a spectrum: retain the land for > traditional hunting and fishing usage; allow some commercial exploitation > but respect ecology and pay the tribe fair royalties; allow the > corporations to rape the land and cheat the Indian. Indian > self-determination would tend to operate within the space of the first two > options. But Jim and Paul DeMain will have much more information on this, > I'm sure. > > Louis Proyect > Response: I suspect that the reasons for the decisions of the Canadian Government and Courts (I hold both U.S. and Canadian citizenship) is that the Canadian Government and Courts are a bit more sophisticated in terms of putting the velvet glove over the ugly iron fist of capitalism and a bit more sophisticated (than the U.S. Government and Courts) in terms of understanding that the basic and most sacred principles, laws, rights, privileges, myths, traditions, power relations used to protect, santify, ratify, mystify, reproduce on an expanded scale forms and levels of private property can easily be used to indict and challenge the very same private property protected/mystified/sanctioned by the above-mentioned. For example, among some of the White (descendants of settlers) large- landowners in the West of Canada (and indeed elsewhere) are claims to land backed up with White oral histories, traditons, and traditional names suggesting earliest White inhabitants. As Native Land Claim Activists have shifted their focus from outright occupations--e.g. as with the Mohawks etc--to legal challenges using the most sacred rights, myths, laws and codes of bourgois law and "private property", the bourgeois courts have been caught in the vice of consistent application of their own sacred laws etc, somewhat like the U.S. professing to be the most democratic, moral etc getting caught supporting the most ugly forces of fascism and repression; it is cognitive dissonance time. In the past, the way around the congitive dissonance problem was to declare: 1) Indians don't have the same concepts of laws governing private property, they are communalists, "therefore" nothing of value "to them" was stolen as "their" institutions were not violated; this argument has broken down inasmuch as brougeois institutions not only celebrate/protect/reinforce certain laws, power relations, mechanisms of expropriation etc, they also celebrate--as "eternal", "natural" and "immutable"--certain "principles" and "concepts" of "private property" and therefore it only matters that the laws of capitalism-- held "sacred by the Whites"-- were violated in order to indict--as either not immutable, natural and eternal or as racially applied-- those very same principles, myths, codes, laws, traditions etc. 2); effective ownership and control of private property is established not only through occupation of the land but also "improvements to the land" (Homesteader Laws) and since Indians "live in harmony with nature" but do not really "improve" the land, "therefore", original occupation does not establish clear ownership and control or "title" with the right to sell, selectively utilize etc; 3) Communal lands are not recognized except under restricted conditons and "therefore" Tribal lands must be broken up and individualized (Tribe not a person) for individualized and individual-oriented "private property" rights, laws etc to
FW: primitive communism
From: Doug Henwood [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 09, 1998 3:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: primitive communism Louis Proyect wrote: >The first step is making the legal case. . . . Yeah, that's me. PEN-Ler Jim Craven will be on, 5 PM on Thursday. There's a big difference between ending Jim Crow and redoing property relations. Property relations are the bedrock of the capitalist form. MBS: I think you're understating the political problem. If the land is in public hands, what is involved is a redistribution from many to few, which is not easy in a democracy. Even worse if the land includes resources that in public hands leave the many not much better off, but would make the few relatively wealthy. Where stolen land had passed into rich private hands the case would be easier politically, but I don't know if any consistent legal principle would allow repatriation in the latter case but not in the former. This resembles the black reparations issue in these respects. The moral rightness appears to be completely overwhelmed by political realities.
Re: primitive communism
On Mon, 9 Feb 1998, Doug Henwood wrote, about Louis saying "What about giving land back to the Indians as they are doing in Canada?": > > Is this really going to happen? I find it nearly impossible to believe that > a capitalist government would ever sign over significant amounts of land to > aboriginals, no matter how solid their claim. Am I being too cynical? > Alas, not too cynical. Of course further struggle can change things. Louis is right to note the very important recent Supreme Court decision in Canada upholding Indian title to land. It probably affects the province of B.C. most, because the British colonial and then provincial government here never got around to "negotiating" treaties of any kind over most of B.C., whereas there are scraps of paper covering much of the rest of Canada where it is written the Indians agreed to extinguish their title to the land. The capitalist spokespersons most opposed to land settlements here are almost apoplectic about the Supreme Court ruling, that, in effect, BC has been violating Indian property rights and Canadian law for over 100 years. However, it should also be noted that the Supreme Court laid down very restrictive criteria for claiming title, including uninterupted occupation and use, and stated that acknowledging title does not mean that Canada and B.C.do not also have property rights and jursidiction. As I understand it the Court really said compensation must be paid for expropriating Indian land, and urged negotiations to settle these issues. This is still a huge legal victory, but no land has been given back (except minor adjustments to reserve boundaries, and to the extent that the new Territory of Nunavut composed of parts of the old Northwest and Yukon Territories includes very partial Inuit self-rule over this majority Inuit jurisdiction). An agreement in principle between BC, Canada and the Nisgaa people has been signed to create a Nisgaa territory in the Nass Valley in BC near the Alaska border, but it has not been ratified by B.C. and Canada, and in any case amounts to less than 10% of the original land claim and would subject the proposed Nisgaa jurisdiction to almost all Canadian and BC laws.(If interested, check out the Nisgaa web site). Bill Burgess
Re: primitive communism
One of the constant irritants of the North American colonialists was the number of times that captives did not want to leave their native American captors, especially the women. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
British Columbia background
(I just stumbled across this in my incoming mail from a couple of months ago when I first started writing about American Indians. It came from my comrade "Luftmensch" who resides in Canada. It demonstrates that the recent court decision was not just a gift from the ruling class. There was a sharp struggle.) Louis Proyect *** The following statements by Ts'peten political prisoners Wolverine and OJ Pitawanakwat are taken from the December Newsletter of the Free the Wolverine Campaign, Seattle Office. To receive copies of this newsletter, contact: The Seattle Office of the Free Wolverine Campaign, phone: 206-233-7982, email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED], website:
AFL-CIO president's comments at Davos forum
The New York Times February 5, 1998 U.S. Labor Leader Hobnobs in Europe By LOUIS UCHITELLE DAVOS, Switzerland -- The chief executives lunching with John Sweeney, the American labor leader, seemed almost to be seeking his blessing. A Frenchman tried to get him to criticize the French government's plan to shorten the workweek. A Canadian sought his approval of bonuses and profit-sharing for workers, rather than wage increases. And an American tried to get Sweeney's consent to the proposition that Mexican wages will rise. Like a water buffalo at a gathering of elephants, Sweeney, the president of the AFL-CIO, was an unusual sight at the annual World Economic Forum, which ended here Wednesday. This is a gathering of several heads of state and hundreds of top government officials, corporate chiefs, financiers, academics and bankers who network, lobby, make deals and talk over the ills of the global economy. Until recently, union leaders were seldom invited, and this time only six were present, the five others from Europe. Sweeney, who first attended last year, is the only union official ever to come from the United States in the forum's 27 years. Like everyone else, he wandered the crowded halls of the conference center, greeting people like Donald Fites, chairman of Caterpillar Inc., as if that company had never gone through a horrendous, still unresolved union battle. Or he agreed to have a cup of coffee with a chief executive in a hotel coffee shop, a short walk or shuttle-bus ride along the snowy main street of Davos. "In this atmosphere," Sweeney said, "you can chat with chief executives and world leaders so easily in ways that I cannot do back home." His message was short, focused, direct and repeated, like a politician's stump speech. The global economy and free trade are here, a fait accompli, acknowledged by labor, Sweeney said. Job-shifting across borders to lower-wage labor cannot be entirely stopped. Nor can damage to workers from crises like the current one in Asia. But national labor movements must come together to insist on minimum international labor standards and a seat at the table when the International Monetary Fund negotiates bailout agreements that fall hardest on workers. "We will demand coordinated efforts to stimulate growth, to regulate currency and capital speculation, to extend labor and democratic rights as part of the response to the Asian collapse," Sweeney declared. He made this case on Saturday from a podium that he shared with Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Brazil's president, and George Soros, the financier. The audience of several hundred responded with warm applause to the presentations of Cardoso and Soros. Their view generally was that strong economic growth would raise worker incomes. Sweeney, taking a different tack, drew no applause. "I got good feedback later," he said. "People here don't want to publicly applaud labor." House Speaker Newt Gingrich made Sweeney a target in one of his presentations, charging that he was out of date, a throwback to labor movement thinking in the 1930s at a moment when the issues have changed. "He just does not get it," Sweeney said. "We are not opposed to trade agreements, but they have to be done properly, and not leave out workers." Whatever the frictions, the organizers of the World Economic Forum say they will add to the rostrum of labor leaders next year. "I had made an attempt before to invite more labor leaders," said Klaus Schwab, the forum's president. "But unlike business leaders, you did not find many labor leaders who thought globally. And I did not want Davos misused as a forum for national disputes." Schwab is also responding to another concern of the business executives and government officials who are the backbone of these annual conferences. A frequently expressed worry at the forum was the potential for strikes, demonstrations and violence, particularly in Indonesia, as workers react to the damage from the Asian crisis. "I think everyone is very concerned with the second wave of the Asian crisis," Schwab said. "The first was financial and the second is going to be social and political." At a luncheon on Monday given by the labor leaders, the half-dozen executives at Sweeney's table sought his sympathy or at least his informal counsel for their labor problems back home. Roger Cukierman, chairman of the Compagnie Financiere Edmond de Rothschild Banque, in Paris, asked Sweeney if he favored the French plan to cut the workweek to 35 hours from 39, with no cut in pay. Sweeney said he did, to Cukierman's disappointment, but on a softer note, he agreed with the banker that the shorter week would not prompt French employers to hire more workers, which is the goal. Instead, they will probably fill the extra hours on
Democracy Univ. Vol. 2: The Korten/Grossman/Clarke/Zinn video
> >FROM: Justicevision
> >TO: DTI (Democracy Teach-In) and Stop MAI (Multilateral Agreement on
> >Investments) event organizers and others concerned about the growing
> >influence of corporations upon the political process and our lives
> >
> >Welcome to Democracy University-
> >
> >Justicevision has put together a 6-hour videotape that contains four
> >exceptional presentations on and related to Corporate Rule and the MAI.
> >One is of a talk by Tony Clarke, Canadian labor-rights activist and
> >author of a number of books on corporate rule, including "Silent Coup"
> >and a new one entitled "MAI". His talk was given 10/30/97 at the 2nd
> >annual Alliance for Democracy convention, and is 1 hr. 15 mins. with q&a.
> >
> >
> >Also on the video is an A-V presentation on Corporate Global Dominance by
> >Dr. David Korten, author of "When Corporations Rule the World" and
> >"Getting to the 21st Century", given at the founding convention of the
> >Alliance for Democracy, Nov. '96. It is 39 information-packed minutes
> >long.
> >
> >Another included presentation is by Jane Anne Morris (author of the NIMBY
> >Handbook), Michael Ferner, and Peter Kellman, all of POCLAD (Program On
> >Corporations, Law, and Democracy) which is on the theme of "It's not what
> >corporations do wrong, it's what they do." This presentation is also from
> >the AfD founding convention and is 1 hr. 15 mins.
> >
> >The videotape also has a presentation by Richard Grossman (who launched
> >the corporate charter revocation movement) and Ward Morehouse ("Maximum
> >Wage" advocate and publisher of the "Too Much" newsletter), as well as
> >the talks given by Howard Zinn and Molly Ivins at the founding convention
> >of the Alliance for Democracy (about 30 minutes each), and 4 entertaining
> >and informative songs by protest singer- guitarist Tom Neilson.
> >
> >We will be happy to send you all of this on one 6-hour videotape for
> >unrestricted use, if you will send us a donation of $10 (or more) after
> >you receive it. We also ask that you help us maintain our accessible
> >price by doing a little word of mouth advertising for us, so that we can
> >focus on making and sending out videos (traditional advertising would
> >require us to at least double our price). Please post and pass this
> >information to everyone that might be interested (see the Volunteer
> >Incentive Plan in the Footnote below).
> >
> >You may order by phone or email. Please leave your name, address, a phone
> >number for our records, and tell us which tape you are requesting. You
> >can call this tape Democracy University Vol. 2, or simply DU#2, or just
> >the MAI tape. Thank you very much for supporting this effort!
> >
> >Ralph Cole, organizer, Justicevision
> >(213) 747-6345; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >FOOTNOTE:
> >This message would not have reached you had it not been for those that
> >took the time to pass it on to you. I know they would appreciate your
> >thanks and maybe a small donation (perhaps $1 to each to compensate them
> >a little for their time and effort) if you care to show your appreciation
> >in that manner, whether or not you choose to order the video tape. In
> >case I am unable to fill your order promptly for some reason (like I get
> >overwhelmed with orders or something), you should wait until your tape
> >arrives. (Although I am always appreciative of donations, if my name is
> >included it is merely as a place holder to start off the list, and should
> >be considered as such.) REMINDER: your $10 pledged donation for the
> >videotape itself is to be sent to Justicevision AFTER we send you the
> >videotape in the mail (to avoid misunderstandings we prefer that you do
> >not pay in advance). Thank you gifts to the following list are optional;
> >they are separate from the pledge and can only be in addition to it,
> >since they do not help to pay the cost of making the 6-hour Democracy
> >University videotape and sending to you.
> >
> >The five volunteers (or organizations) last responsible for passing this
> >information to you are:
> >
> >1. Ralph Cole, Justicevision
> >1425 W.12th St. #262
> >Los Angeles, CA, USA 90015 (place holder only-see preceding paragraph)
> >
> >2. Ralph Cole, Justicevision
> >1425 W.12th St. #262
> >Los Angeles, CA, USA 90015 (place holder only-see preceding paragraph)
> >
> >3. Ralph Cole, Justicevision
> >1425 W.12th St. #262
> >Los Angeles, CA, USA 90015 (place holder only-see preceding paragraph)
> >
> >4. Ralph Cole, Justicevision
> >1425 W.12th St. #262
> >Los Angeles, CA, USA 90015 (place holder only-see preceding paragraph)
> >
> >5. Ralph Cole, Justicevision
> >1425 W.12th St. #262
> >Los Angeles, CA, USA 90015 (place holder only-see preceding paragraph)
> >
> >VOLUNTEER INCENTIVE PLAN:
> >
> >I devised this plan in the hope that it will enable me to focus on
> >making tapes instead of on getting orders. My thinking is that the same
> >thing that motivates people to donate for a tape they have already
> >
Re: primitive communism
At 14:39 9/02/98 -0500, you wrote: >Louis Proyect wrote: > >>What about giving land back to >>the Indians as they are doing in Canada? > > >Is this really going to happen? I find it nearly impossible to believe that >a capitalist government would ever sign over significant amounts of land to >aboriginals, no matter how solid their claim. Am I being too cynical? > >Doug Yes, and no. In Bolivia, it is happening too, in the interstices of some complicated interests/actors. One key player is USAID, which has invested millions in enviro. studies, and now wants to see a "park" (with Guarani peopel's in control) put together as justification for the monies spent (your tax dollars!). Right thing to do; wrong reasons, but what the hell? Tom Kruse / Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-42) 48242 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Santa Fe-Krugman-Arthur
I think that this thread is about sewed up, but one final remark in response to Doug Henwood's remarks about the "dehumanization" implied by "interacting particle systems" models. This was the dialectical model of socio-economic transformation of Marx and Engels as drawn from Hegel. In particular Engels, drawing on Hegel, gave as an example of "quantity become quality" the melting and freezing and boiling and condensation of water. These are now known as "phase transitions" and they are studied in statistical mechanics via interacting particle systems models. If they are dehumanizing then so were Engels and Hegel (and maybe they were). Barkley Rosser - Rosser Jr, John Barkley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Teachers Against MAI (fwd)
> Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 20:18:01 -0500 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: Marita Moll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Letter to Canadian Teachers re: MAI > > > > WHAT THE HECK IS A MAI AND HOW DOES IT CONCERN ME? > > > A message to Canadas teachers > > From: Jan Eastman, President > Canadian Teachers Federation > > > In the next couple of months, the Federal government intends to sign > what is perhaps the most important trade agreement ever considered by > this country, one that may affect many aspects of your life. Yet, most > Canadians know nothing about it. > > For two years, the federal government has been involved in > behind-closed-door negotiations to develop a global investment treaty > called the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI). It is primarily > designed to make it possible for transnational corporations to move > their investments and operations anywhere in the world, unfettered by > government intervention and regulation. > > The Canadian Teachers Federation has written to all Members of > Parliament asking that they convince International Trade Minister Sergio > Marchi to provide for Parliamentary Committee hearings to allow for full > public debate on the potential impact on Canadian society of a MAI and, > in particular, to ensure that Canada does not further limit its capacity > to create and maintain a framework to achieve key social and economic > policies including: > > * Maintenance of Medicare and not-for-profit public and social services, > including education. > > * Our right to review foreign takeovers and new foreign investments with > a view to providing jobs and economic activities in Canada. > > * Support for Canadian-based businesses that invest in our communities. > > * Support for Canadian cultural industries. > > * The need to counterbalance rights of investors with obligations to > maintain and create jobs, to respect workers rights and to protect > the environment. > > * The need to protect the governments ability to act in the public > interest. > > Despite assurance by Minister Marchi that teacher concerns will be > considered, the MAI, in its present form, remains a seriously flawed > document. Massive government cutbacks have left public schools exposed > to commercialization and privatized services. For example, some boards > and schools have developed guidelines to regulate the involvement of > big business in education. > > Under the MAI as presently written, such rules could be challenged as > unfair investment restrictions. As well, the purchase of educational > materials and services could not be limited to domestic companies. > > Further, foreign investors promoting charter schools could demand the > same access to public financing as public schools. > > Consequently, a Canadian Teachers Federation brief to the government of > Canada states that a MAI should not be signed unless it contains > guarantees that not-for-profit public and social services, especially > education and Medicare, as well as labour standards and the environment > will be fully protected. > > The MAI is still being negotiated. It is still not a reality. At the > end of the negotiations process, the politicians, our elected M.P.s will > make the decision to sign or not to sign. A full public debate is > essential. Major changes are essential. Your help is needed. > > What can I do? > > Talk to your provincial and territorial MLAs on an urgent basis since > the timeline for the conclusion of negotiations is May 1998. > > Write to the Premier of your province as well as your education > minister asking them to take a strong stand against the MAI in its > current form and encouraging them to specifically list their > reservations to ensure, in particular, that the ability of > provincial/territorial governments to provide public education, health > and other social services not be compromised by provisions that would > facilitate privatization initiatives in these sectors. > > Participate in public information meetings on the MAI with federal > M.P.s being asked to speak to the issues. > > Encourage your municipal council to adopt resolutions related to the > MAI and to sponsor public information meetings. > > > Canadian Teachers' Federation > 110 Argyle Ave. > Ottawa, Ontario K2P 1B4 > http://www.ctf-fce.ca
"Takings"
As an addendum to previous remarks, the ultra-rightist "property rights" arguments are being examined for some dialectical turnabout by some of the Tribes. Where the "property rightists" argue that any social legislation that abridges, modifies, eliminates the effective, full and discretionary use of private property is a "taking" for which there must be compensation and/or the "taking" may be un-Constitutional, some of the Tribes are using some of the same arguments to establish title and compensation. For example, among the five Tribes controlling the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (Yakima, Umatilla, Nez Pierce, Warm Springs and Grand Round) the argument has been/is being made that any action by developers/power companies that destroys the fish stocks is not only a "taking" but a violation of treaties guaranteeing 50% of fish caught because 50% of nothing is nothing and is therefore a Treaty Violation (litigated under a whole host of statutes/case law beyond those attached with property issues. Ever since the Boldt decision and others like it, the big developers and their pimps in Congress and the White House have feared the legal challenges (many of the Tribes must be assisted in litigation under Federal Law which somewhat equalizes their ability to litigate with the developers et al) far more than sporadic and isolated occupations (which nonetheless also provide important instruments for consciousness raising etc). Although the capitalists have never had a problem with naked hypocrisy and disparate treatment of different groups, there is a point at which, given private property is exposed, indicted, challenged and compromised by the very same "sacred" laws and principles and myths and power relations used to protect it and in the course of things then, those "sacred" laws and principles etc are in turn exposed, indicted, challenged and compromised by the very same private property being protected, santified, ratified and expanded by them. It is all very dialectical and more and more Indian activists are understanding this as they link the struggles for Indian Rights/Sovereignty with struggles against the "system"(as opposed to individuals from any racial/ethnic/linguistic/religious group) that built wealth for so few on the backs and misery of so many--Indian and non-Indian alike. Jim Craven *---* * "Concern for man[sic] himself and his * * James Cravenfate must always form the chief * * Dept of Economics interest of all technical endeavors, * * Clark College concern for the great unsolved * * 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. problems of the organization of labor* * Vancouver, Wa. 98663 and the distribution of goods--in order* * [EMAIL PROTECTED] that the creations of our mind shall be* * (360) 992-2283 (Office) a blessing and not a curse to mankind. * * (360) 992-2863 (Fax) Never forget this in the midst of your * * diagrams and equations."(Albert Einstein)* * MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
Re: primitive communism
>Yeah, that's me. PEN-Ler Jim Craven will be on, 5 PM on Thursday. > >There's a big difference between ending Jim Crow and redoing property >relations. Property relations are the bedrock of the capitalist form. > >Doug Nobody has any illusions that capitalism will be abolished in British Columbia. The real choice is along a spectrum: retain the land for traditional hunting and fishing usage; allow some commercial exploitation but respect ecology and pay the tribe fair royalties; allow the corporations to rape the land and cheat the Indian. Indian self-determination would tend to operate within the space of the first two options. But Jim and Paul DeMain will have much more information on this, I'm sure. Louis Proyect
A propos, Bill Gates
A propos, Bill Gates, vous avez vu ? Allez, une bonne nouvelle dans cet océan de consternation. Ce mercredi, à Bruxelles, que je croyais définitivement être le pays des couilles molles ... une dizaine de joyeux lurons ont entarté Bill Gates, vlan ! Deux grosses tartes à la crème sur son pif. J'ai eu de quoi rire pour deux jours... 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: primitive communism
Louis Proyect wrote: >What about giving land back to >the Indians as they are doing in Canada? Is this really going to happen? I find it nearly impossible to believe that a capitalist government would ever sign over significant amounts of land to aboriginals, no matter how solid their claim. Am I being too cynical? Doug
RE: [Fwd: Rachel #584: Major Causes of Ill health]
Also, check this week's Nation magazine for reviews of 3 new books on the social basis of epidemics and disease. Of particular interest is "Epidemics and History" by Sheldon Watts, of whom the reviewer states: "He shows how disease was deliberately exploited as a tool for systematic genocide from Asia to Africa to the New World. Additionally, Watts explains how not just the science and history of epidemics but how they were interpreted by elites--and how this interpretation resulted in very material consequences for those they ruled and conquered." Louis Proyect At 09:52 AM 2/9/98 -0500, you wrote: >Michael's forwarded post on the relationship between health and class >was interesting. There are a couple of excellent references that were >missing. > >1. Wilkinson, Richard G. Unhealthy Societies: the Afflictions of >Inequality. London: Routledge, 1996. > >2. The September 1997 issue of the American Journal of Public Health, >v87(9) (devoted to social class and health). > >Jeff Fellows >National Center for Injury Prevention and Control >Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > -- >From: michael >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: [Fwd: Rachel #584: Major Causes of Ill health] >Date: Saturday, February 07, 1998 12:21AM > > > > -- >Michael Perelman >Economics Department >California State University >Chico, CA 95929 > >Tel. 916-898-5321 >E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ><> > >
BLS Daily Report
> BLS DAILY REPORT, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1998 > > RELEASED TODAY: Employment rose substantially in January, and the > unemployment rate remained at 4.7 percent. Nonfarm payroll employment > grew by 358,000, with large gains occurring in construction and > manufacturing . > > New claims filed with state agencies for unemployment insurance > increased by 3,000 to a seasonally adjusted 303,000 in the week ended > Jan. 31 .(Daily Labor Report, page D-1; Wall Street Journal, page > A2). > > U.S. companies announce the elimination of 72,193 jobs in January, > according to a report by Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc., an > outplacement firm that tracks workforce reductions .The total was a > 66 percent increase from the figure of January 1997 .(Daily Labor > Report, page A-5). > > New orders for manufactured goods dropped in December for the first > time since May, falling a seasonally adjusted 2.5 percent, the Census > Bureau reports .(Daily Labor Report, page D-3)_The drop in > factory orders was the largest in more than five years, as demand for > aircraft faltered. A 63 percent decline in aircraft orders, that was > linked to the Asian financial turmoil, was the sharpest fall since > Census began tracking the industry in 1958. Excluding the volatile > transportation sector, however, factory orders rose 1.2 percent > (Washington Post, page G4; Wall Street Journal, page A2). > > Major chain stores reported broadly favorable sales results for > January, signaling that U.S. consumers are still spending at a good > clip, analysts say .(Daily Labor Report, page A-6)_Post-holiday > clearance promotions by specialty clothing stores helped overall > retail sales rise 5.9 percent last month, far higher than the 3.5 > percent gains widely expected. But analysts said January sales > results were not necessarily a telling barometer of how the year would > go .(New York Times, page C2; Wall Street Journal, page A2). > > Japan's economy is stagnant and its future direction unclear, the > government's Economic Planning Agency said in its monthly economic > report. The agency had used the work "stalled" to describe the > economy since November, but the director of the EPA's Economic > Research Bureau said that word was no longer suitable. He added, > however, that he did not think the economy would fall into a downward > spiral .(Washington Post, page G1). > > DUE OUT MONDAY: International Comparisons of Hourly Compensation > Costs for Production Workers in Manufacturing, Updated Data for 1996 > application/ms-tnef
Re: Santa Fe-Krugman-Arthur
In a message dated 98-02-08 17:28:24 EST, you write: << has a lot in common with a whole lot of neoclassicals and even some radicals, is the impulse to view society as something that can or should be thought of as something that can be represented using the same kinds of models used to represent the physical world. As the Santa Fe statement puts it: >> Two responses: 1) The value, as I see it, in what chaos/complexity theorist do is that the stand they subvert (even if unintentionally) that impulse because their work the whole project of "controlling" or "predicting" much more problematic. 2) If the models work, they work. If they don't, who cares.
