Re: RE: EPI Paper on U.S. FDI in China
Nathan said: > > So given that the China deal is coming to a vote, does MHL say that in > protest of the fact that the GOP Congress won't let pro-labor legislation > come to a vote, US labor should abstain from lobbying on the China deal in > order to maintain a balanced ideological profile? > > If the China deal should not be a top priority of labor, what legislation > THAT ACTUALLY CAME TO A VOTE would MHL suggest should have taken its place > over the last year? > I just do not think that all politics revolves around particular bills or votes in the Congress. For example, it was good political organizing that led to the Seattle and Washington DC actions. These actions have political impact, or at least, potential impact (if we can successfully continue to build on them). Similarly the Jubilee 2000 actions are not organized around a particular bill but a demand. This demand may well force bills or votes, but we are likely to get better bills or votes if we mobilize militant actions that pressure the system. As for the China issue, I really see this as an elite struggle between and among leaders in China and in the US and the sides are complex. What I do not see it as is a key issue for labor activists. Not every issue is our issue. I would rather demand ratification of all seven core ILO labor standards (the US has only ratified one). That demand takes up the issue of labor standards and demands actions by the US government and forces attention on U.S. capitalism. Our job as left activists is to create a climate which shifte teh political terrain. If we succeed no doubt liberals will shift to the left in their legislative agenda as well. If we try and be liberals then we can expect them to move to the right. So, the issue is how to promote demands that really matter. At the risk of repeating myself way to often, the China question is largely a distraction from the kind of work that radicals should be doing. We are allowing ourselves to be sucked into a debate that at its best does little to radicalize people. The problem is not that liberals are getting excited about the China question; they like US capitalism. But rather that those who claim to want to transform it are making this THEIR issue and thus shaping the political debate in ways that dampens political radicalization. So, if you want a legislative actions: demand ratification of the ILO core labor standards. Beyond that, we must enter every arena and push the demadns as far to the left as is possible. Marty
RE: EPI Paper on U.S. FDI in China
[mbs] If you spend money it's the company that you deal
with, but if you WORK, where the job is and where you is
matter a great deal.
The bit about 'shaming' firms is pretty funny. ("Go
you Gates, and sin no more!") But actually the point is
ingrained in the views of others as well. If you mean
anything, you mean that targeting a firm is prelude to
some legislative action that means some new sort of
regulation of said firm, and others like it. So
what is this regulation to be? I raised this before.
Do we exalt a law against a firm leaving Michigan as
somehow a different thing than a law against a firm
relocating to some other country? What is the practical
difference from the standpoint of, say, Chinese workers?
Presumably an anti-relocation law bothers people because
it sounds anti-foreign and chauvinistic.
===
I'm thinking more along lines of having pretty fine-grained info on the
"sinners" so that activists working along the direct action spectrum have
the goods to engage in public theatre/education; the necessary grassroots
prelude to mobilizing citizen support for legislative change. So yes.
Thats where AFL-CIO etc. policywonks can help continue growing alliances. I
don't know what kind of barriers to exit any legislative package could
design at this stage of the game.
[mbs]So the anti-relocation focus is on
nations with lousy labor standards etc.
Given that at this stage of the game we don't have said exit cost function
available, the focus would still be on the firm taking advantage of lousy
labor standards. Firms usually need some Bank capital to finance the up
front move costs, and as an AFL-CIO organizer told me at the Meany Center
off New Hampshire Ave[I think that was the Beltway exit] "nothing is more
fun during a corporate campaign than scaring the shit out of bankers by
putting a whole bunch of activists outside their doors when they're doin'
something stupid." At said organizing rally one would have lots of handouts
on how to strengthen the ILO so it has some FANGS and TALONS. Again, to
build grassroots momentum.
[mbs][mbs] What is the content of this non-ersatz cosmopolitanism?
What is the concrete form of "respect for workers dignity"?
If it isn't labor standards embodied in international law,
including trade agreements, what in the devil is it?
==
It "should" be in int'l law. Dismantling the WTO takes away Capital's trump
card because it is the only agency that hits States where they live; their
pocket book. Take away that power while simultaneously giving said
enforcement authority to the ILO. Capital could then do all the regional
trade agreements it wants as long as their labor provisions are consistent
with ILO. I realize proving God's existence is easier, but hell, I'm
definitely open to far wiser ideas.
[mbs]To the contrary, all those young people, not to mention
we over-the-hill types, mean zilch without the potential
mobilization of the working class. That mobilization is
necessarily conditioned by the practical importance of
nation-states and their laws as defenders of living
standards against amoral markets.
===
It's precisely because the young 'unz don't see States as "protecting" them
any more [vacuous labor and enviro. laws "here at home"] that they got in
the streets.
Ian
Re: Krugman Watch: Japan
Japanese interest rates were negative for a while. How much more could monetary policy do? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sowing Dragons (fwd)
Brad, Thank you very much the for sending the summary of the bill. I only skimmed through it briefly. I know that Carl Linder with got some provisions put in the bill that makes the retaliation against Europe stronger regarding his banana interests. I also noticed that the bill was concerned about the elimination of corruption. What is the record of United States regarding corruption? Our political campaigns are nothing more than organized bribery. Is it possible for a non-corrupt politicians to get elected to anything higher than the City Council in a small town? How many corrupt leaders has United States propped up around the world? One final question: if the bill is about tariffs why is it so long? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Krugman Watch: Japan
>New York TIMES May 14, 2000 / RECKONINGS / By PAUL KRUGMAN / "Nihon Keizai Shambles"< In this column, PK re-applies his (mildly famous) analysis of the Japanese stagnation. Again, he suggests that the Bank of Japan (BoJ) pump up the Japanese money supply, in hopes of producing inflationary expectations and thus negative expected real interest rates, which should (he thinks) stimulate private-sector borrowing and spending and thus the Japanese economy. Not being an expert on the Japanese economy, this sounds like it might work. I wonder, though: 1) can the Bank of Japan easily increase the money supply? Isn't possible that (at least initially) the banks will raise their excess reserves, while the non-bank public raises its holdings of currency, all due to the fears engendered by about 10 years of stagnation, along with the fragile financial situation of Japan's industrial corporations, banks, and other financial corporations (and the seemingly endless political stalemate)? (We might also see a "liquidity trap" as financial speculators (fearful of rising nominal interest rates) dump risky bonds and stocks and snap up the extra cash to make their portfolios safer. This Keynesian trap is a different liquidity trap than the one PK emphasizes. His is due to the fact that nominal interest rates can't go below zero, since bankers don't want to pay us to borrow. However, I don't see the Keynesian liquidity trap as a very important phenomenon, except in the short run.) 2) If the expected real interest rates fall, will this stimulate spending? will nonfinancial companies want to borrow if they already have a lot of excess capacity, outstanding debts, and pessimistic expectations? (What does the profit rate look like in Japan? A low profit rate discourages corporate borrowing and provides the objective basis for pessimism.) isn't it possible that the market for consumer durables is a mite saturated, so that consumers don't want to borrow? don't cuts in interest rates in the US work most strongly through the demand for housing? has there been over-building in Japan that would discourage borrowing to finance construction? isn't the market for owner-occupied housing pretty small in Japan? How low must interest rates go to stimulate private spending enough? 3) If interest rates fall, it seems like it would mostly stimulate the Japanese economy by driving down the value of the Yen. Is the BoJ willing to accept such a fall? if it stimulates the economy, wouldn't it do so by reducing imports from other countries (whose currencies aren't tied to the Yen) and by increasing exports to those countries? isn't that a bit like a flexible exchange-rate version of "beggar-thy-neighbor" policies? doesn't it simply broadcast recession to the rest of the (non-Yen-hooked) world? Wouldn't it be a good idea to stimulate the rest of the world (outside the US of course), to pull Japan up? (The US is already pulling Japan up, so I exclude it. Of course, this stimulus seems likely to end soon.) It seems possible that if the BoJ followed PK's policy, it would strain and strain and strain like Elvis on his last day (due to issues #1 and #2), finally overcoming the obstacles and then _over-shooting_, raising the money supply and thus aggregate demand _too much_. If the profit rate is indeed low there, it seems like that would simply encourage an inflationary non-recovery. Let's get to PK's actual column: >And that's why the falling Nikkei [stock market index] is such an ominous omen. Mainly it reflects the "Nasdaq effect" -- the worldwide decline in technology exuberance over the last two months. But whereas the United States didn't need that exuberance -- in fact, the decline in tech stocks has made the Fed's job easier, by turning down the flame under our overheated economy -- Japan was counting on technology to save it from stagnation. As good as Japanese technology may be -- and much of it is very good indeed -- the prospect that technology will rescue Japan's economy is now receding. Instead, the country is right back where it started: with an economic malaise that shows no sign of going into spontaneous remission, whose symptoms are mitigated only by deficit spending that cannot continue at these levels. Meanwhile another year has gone by, and the mountain of government debt has gotten 30 trillion yen or so higher. < while these points are good, it is a basic economic mistake to not report the government debt _relative to nominal GDP_ to give us some idea of its relative size while correcting for inflation. PK is here slipping into the sloppy scare-tactics of the US fiscal hawks. (At least he doesn't call it the "national debt" or the "public debt"!) More importantly, to what extent is the Japanese government's debt owed to foreigners and/or denominated in foreign currency? If its not either of these, the debt could buoy the economy the way that US World War 2 debt-ac
Re: Re: Re: Re: Sowing Dragons (fwd)
Title: Re: [PEN-L:18928] Re: Re: Re: Sowing Dragons (fwd) How much of the legislation relates to tariffs? Brad De Long wrote: > > And this is supposed to be an argument that U.S. restrictions on > imports of African textiles are for Africans' own good? > -- Michael Perelman Title: An act to authorize a new trade and investment policy for sub-Sahara Africa, expand trade benefits to the countries in the Caribbean Basin, renew the generalized system of preferences, and reauthorize the trade adjustment assistance programs. Title I: Extension of Certain Trade Benefits to Sub-Saharan Africa - Subtitle A: Trade Policy for Sub-Saharan Africa - African Growth and Opportunity Act - Declares the support of Congress for: (1) encouraging increased trade and investment between the United States and sub-Saharan Africa; (2) reducing tariff and nontariff barriers and other obstacles to sub-Saharan and U.S. trade; (3) negotiating reciprocal and mutually beneficial trade agreements, including the possibility of establishing free trade areas that serve the interests of both the United States and the countries of sub-Saharan Africa; (4) focusing on countries committed to accountable government, economic reform, the eradication of poverty, and the development of political freedom; and (5) establishing a United States-Sub-Saharan African Economic Cooperation Forum. Subtitle B: Extension of Certain Trade Benefits to Sub-Saharan Africa - Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to authorize the President to designate a sub-Saharan African country as a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country eligible to receive duty-free treatment, through September 30, 2006, for any non-import-sensitive article (except for textile luggage) that is the growth, product, or manufacture of such country, if the President determines that such country: (1) has established, or is making continual progress toward establishing, a market-based economy, a democratic society, an open trading system, economic policies to reduce poverty, and a system to combat corruption and bribery; (2) does not engage in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights or provide support for acts of international terrorism; and (3) otherwise satisfies applicable eligibility requirements. (Sec. 111) Directs the President to monitor and review the progress of sub-Saharan countries to determine their current or potential eligibility under the requirements of this Act. Waives the competitive need limitation with respect to eligible beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries. (Sec. 112) Grants duty-free treatment, without any quantitative limitations, to textile and apparel articles (including textile luggage) imported from a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country, if such country: (1) adopts an efficient visa system to guard against unlawful transshipment of such goods and the use of counterfeit documents; and (2) enacts legislation or promulgates regulations that would permit U.S. Customs verification teams to have the access necessary to investigate allegations of transshipment through the country. Directs the President to deny trade benefits under this Act to any exporter that has engaged in transshipment with respect to textile or apparel products from a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country. Directs the Customs Service to monitor, and report annually to Congress, on the effectiveness of certain anti-circumvention systems and on measures taken by sub-Saharan African countries that export textiles or apparel to the United States to prevent circumvention as described in article 5 of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing. Authorizes the President to impose appropriate remedies, including restrictions on or the removal of quota-free and duty-free treatment provided under this Act, in the event that textile and apparel articles from a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country are being imported in such increased quantities as to cause serious damage (or actual threat thereof) to the domestic industry producing like or directly competitive articles. (Sec. 113) Directs the President to convene annual meetings between U.S. Government officials and officials of the governments of sub-Saharan African countries to foster close economic ties between them. Directs the President to establish a United States-Sub-Saharan African Trade and Economic Cooperation Forum which shall discuss expanding trade and investment relations between the United States and sub-Saharan Africa. (Sec. 114) Directs the President to examine, and report to specified congressional committees, the feasibility of negotiating a free trade agreement with interested sub-Saharan African countries. (Sec. 116) Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) it is in the interest of the United States to take all necessary steps to prevent further spread of infectious disease, particularly HIV-AIDS; and (2) there is critical need for effective incentives to develop new pharmaceuticals, vaccines, and therapies to com
Re: Re: Sowing Dragons (fwd)
In a message dated 00-05-14 00:02:44 EDT, you write: << Ransom, Roger L. and Richard Sutch. 1977. One Kind of Freedom: The Economic Consequences of Emancipation (Cambridge University Press). show that leisure increased immediately after the Civil War, however, that phenomenon was short lived after the Southern planters regrouped. >> Thanks. --jks
Intellectual property update
L.A. TIMES Sunday, May 14, 2000 DNA Device's Heredity Scrutinized by U.S. Scientists insist they invented technique without federal funding, but paper trail suggests they relied on millions in grants. Inquiry will determine if there is need for payback. By PETER G. GOSSELIN and PAUL JACOBS, Times Staff Writers When the history of the just-dawning genetic revolution is finally written, a clunky-looking machine the size of a sidewalk trash can will play a starring role. The automated DNA sequencer is letting researchers quickly crack the biochemical code of life, an achievement that could one day turn incurable diseases into treatable ones. But the machine is at the vortex of a struggle over wealth, fame and, quite possibly, control of the genetic code itself. The sequencer's developers say they invented the device without a penny from the federal government, the usual source of funds for such endeavors. Their act of entrepreneurial wizardry, they say, entitles them to sweeping rights over their invention. But The Times has turned up a paper trail that suggests a quite different story: one in which the developers collected millions in federal funds and failed to provide the government with certain key rights, such as discounts on purchases of the sequencers. Federal officials are now investigating. The difference between these two versions of events could have a big financial impact on the inventors of the sequencer, the machine's manufacturer and the California Institute of Technology, where the device was developed. It could also affect the fortunes of investors who are wagering billions of dollars on claims made by the manufacturer, PE Corp., which has gained widespread recognition in both financial and scientific circles for its pioneering work. Most important of all, the dispute could influence who gains control of the human genetic blueprint and all the medical miracles that it is expected to generate: the public or a few drug and biotech companies. Among the documents examined by The Times: * A series of federal grants to Caltech scientists in the mid-1980s to devise and improve the machine, including a $2.5-million National Science Foundation grant specifically "to automate DNA sequencing." If the grants were used in inventing the device, the government would be due some rights to the results. The developers say they had already invented the machine when the federal money started to flow. * A 1988 licensing agreement in which Caltech gave nearly exclusive authority to use the sequencer technology to a company started by the inventors, something not commonly done at the time when federal funds were involved. PE subsequently purchased the firm and, according to one recent study, captured 92% of the U.S. market for sequencers. The agreement included provisions promising the government the very discounts the law says are due it when federal funds are used. * Letters and memos that show the machine's inventors bickered over its creation in ways that some experts say could jeopardize their government-issued patents. The government is studying whether to challenge the patents. Representatives for Caltech, PE and the researchers credited with the invention all said that no federal funds were used in developing the machine. They also denied there was anything improper about the 1988 licensing agreement and said there were no disagreements between the inventors that threaten their patents. They acknowledged that the developers may have slipped up by filing over-exuberant grant applications, but described any mistakes as innocent. "Based on everything we know at this time, we believe we handled the invention and patenting of the sequencer in an entirely proper manner," said Caltech provost Steven E. Koonin. for the whole story, see http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/updates/lat_dna000514.htm Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~JDevine
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: EPI Paper on U.S. FDI in China
MHL: > I guess we have a difference of opinion on what politics is about. The > issue is not short-run "victories" which are really non-victories. Keeping > China out of the WTO will only ensure the status quo. At issue is first > determining what kind of political understanding we want to promote and > then figuring out how to effectively promote it. In re: the last sentence, some people have already figured out what political understanding we want to promote. We want to defend living standards of the working class by strengthening trade unions and by extending the capacity of the State to provide a greater social wage. We think gains of this sort are feasible because we do not see the State as a monolithic, alien instrument, but as something susceptible to political mobilization. Regulating markets is an elementary resort. A market overlapping national borders is no less worthy of regulation than any other. Pushing international trade regimes in this direction is one dimension of this project. Keeping China out of the WTO under present circumstances is a logical step. I would say that short-run victories are the mother's milk of longer-term campaigns. Symbolic victories have real political implications, witness the campaign to get the confederate flag off the S.C. statehouse. MHL: > I think that in this period ideological struggle is very important. Real > politics is finding a way to help people understand the nature of the > system that they live in and move as quickly as possible to embrace > actions to transform that system in appropriate ways. If the problem is > capitalism and the role of the US state and US MNCs, then we need to think > creatively about how to promote that understanding. MBS: I suspect that 'nature of the system' really means portraying the system as implacable and immune to reforms. If not, so much the better. People do not choose social systems by comparing models on a shelf. They grapple with day to day problems and reach conclusions about politics, reforms, and systems. MHL: > Saying that the issue is china and its lack of human rights for workers is > not some how any more or less a lecture than saying that the issue is > capitalism and the actions of US MNCs. The difference is that the first > is just a bad lecture, from which confused politics is bound to come. And > the second well you can guess. Marty The China issue is not a lecture in the sense that it is part of a larger political project. You can find things to criticize in it, but there is a there there. What's the political project underlying "the issue is capitalism and the actions of US MNC's"? One of the inconsistencies in your argument goes to your idea that labor is targeting China, rather than either the US Gov or MNC's. But our trade relations with CHina (the actual target) clearly derive from the policy of the U.S. state, and in other contexts, it is asserted w/o qualification that the policies of the State are dictated by MNC's. cheers, mbs
Re: Re: Re: Sowing Dragons
> Louis Proyect wrote: > > >The more serious question is this: what *can* the Left offer as a > >>developmental model to Vietnam? > >>-- Dennis > >Cuba. > > Would Cuba have survived until 1989 without Soviet subsidies? > Doug In game of what if: How successful might Cuba have been without US embargo and other hostilities? Post-revo leadership, with no political/economics ties to past, was able to consolidate majority support through policies/programs intended to improve status of working class - expropriation of much of pre-revolution elite class property & elimination of private property in system of production. Nationalization of US property indicated development of social revo that would conflict with US interests and transform socio- economic basis of Cuban society, not merely change holders of government posts. Given objective conditions, Soviet assistance strengthened Cuban national control of economy. Soviet's protected Cuba from fluctuations in world market price of sugar & nickel, insured Cuba continual supply of oil, and generally stayed out of Cuban affairs. In process, post-revo Cuba achieved life expectancy, literacy, infant mortality rates among best in world, met basic needs, eradicated general poverty, and reached higher quality-of-life index than Mexico (which had begun to return to US orbit in 1940s) despite lower GNP per-capita figure. Cuban achievements in social and cultural affairs have been outstanding. Cubans attained sense of dignity & purpose in face of behemoth from North. Michael Hoover (who can cite shortcomings of post-revo period as well)
Protest the World Petroleum Congress! (June 11-15, 2000)
Subject: Protest the World Petroleum Congress! (June 11-15, 2000) Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 16:08:18 -0400 From: Mike Ewall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: (Recipient list suppressed) >From: End of Oil Action Coalition <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi there, Looking for more regional contacts who may be interested in coming out to Calgary, or even organizing locally. My name is Dan, from the End of Oil Action Coalition. We are organizing a variety of events around the World Petroleum congress, and need the support and solidarity of individuals and communities everywhere to make this a success. If you are interested in learning more or getting involved, please email us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] We have prepared organizers kits to send out to those expressing interest in WPC organizing. Please send us an address or other contact information if you would like one of these! thank you, see you in the streets. Dan End of Oil Action Coalition RESIST GLOBAL OIL! Join us in Calgary, Alberta, Canada June 8-15, 2000 to expose and oppose the Global Oil Machine! The 16th World Petroleum Congress (WPC) is coming to Calgary June 11-15, 2000 and this is a call to all people willing to stand up for peace, justice and a sustainable future to come to Calgary. The World Petroleum Congress is the global showcase of "the powerbrokers and potentates from the world's biggest industry". Over 3000 delegates from over 80 countries are expected to be at the 16th Congress in Calgary. Oil industry executives, technical specialists, government representatives and international media are gathering under the theme of "Petroleum for Global Development: Networking people, business and technology to create value." All over the world, people and the environment are suffering from their creation of 'value'. The WPC meets every three years. The 53 member countries account for 89% of global oil production and 85% of global oil consumption. This Congress will not be business as usual. Join us in Calgary to create a people's agenda for real development: a) Multinational Oil Corporations are perpetrators of genocide and murder. Massive human rights abuses, especially against indigenous peoples, are implicit to the oil industry. b) Climate change is real. Deforestation and global environmental degradation are real. These are unavoidable consequences of oil production and consumption. c) There are alternatives. Oil dependence for energy is not necessary. Corporations and governments have created this situation and the WPC is where they do it. COME TO CALGARY TO EXPOSE AND OPPOSE THE OIL INDUSTRY! JUNE 8-15: CONVERGE ON CALGARY FOR A WEEK OF PROTEST AND DIRECT ACTION: June 8-11: Direct Action Convergence. Four days of community building and action planning June 9-11: Counter-conference "Widening People's Choices For a Sustainable Future" June 11: Mass Demonstration: people's solidarity challenging the opening day of the WPC June 12: Day of Action: Disrupt the WPC: Anyway, Anyhow! June 13-15: Continuing Direct Action. Time to get corporations where they like it least. Creativity encouraged For more information, contact us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1-403-703-9463 http://www.tao.ca/~no_oil/
[fla-left] (Fwd) Baseball Diplomacy Cuba (fwd)
forwarded by Michael Hoover > --- Forwarded message follows --- > Send reply to:"Fredy and Sherry Champagne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Baseball Diplomacy Cuba > Date sent:Thu, 11 May 2000 16:14:45 -0700 > Organization: Veterans For Peace, Chapter 22 > > PRESS RELEASE > > YOUTH BASEBALL TEAM TOURS CUBA FOR SERIES OF GAMES > > Press Release - Baseball Diplomacy - 5/11/2000 > > A youth baseball team from Humboldt County, California has been invited to > play ball in Cuba. The Lost Coast Pirates, at team of > ten-to-twelve-year-old boys, will caravan through Cuba from July 22 through > 29 playing games with three Cuban teams at their hometowns along the tour. > > The invitation was extended to the Pirates through the international > organization Pastors For Peace, ( http://www.ifconews.org/) based in New > York City. The local Veterans for Peace > ( http://www.humboldt.net/~veterans/Chapter22/) of > Garberville, California, will sponsor the team as part of their annual > humanitarian mission to Cuba. > > The Lost Coast Pirates' interest in the mission dates back to 1998, when > the team collected good used baseball equipment and sent it to Cuba with the > Pastors for Peace mission that year. The Pirates included a team photo > and a letter describing the small communities in which they live, in the > remote mountains of the "Lost Coast" of California. They signed off with > the wish that, one day, they might share a game with their counterparts in > Cuba. > > The invitation to accompany Pastors for Peace to play baseball in Cuba was > a joyous surprise to the team, and was met with enthusiastic and unanimous > support by their parents. While the grown-ups work out the logistics, the > boys of the Lost Coast Pirates have only one thing to say: > > "Juguemos a beisbol con nuestros amigos cubanos!" > > "Let's play baseball with our Cuban friends!" > > The team has already met part of the expense for the trip, but additional > support is needed. If you would like to help, send your tax-deductible > donation to: Baseball Diplomacy, p.o. box 84, Whitethorn, CA 95589, or > deposit directly into the Baseball Diplomacy account at the Community Credit > Union of Southern Humboldt, account #9346. > > For more information, visit baseballdiplomacy.org, or call Rob Then at > (707-986-7831). > > Friends and Companeros: Please distribute this press release far and wide, > to all corners of the planet. Forward to all e-mail serve lists.
Exhuming History: Taylor, Parenti & Delong (was something about American Looneyism)
> > >>> Michael Hoover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/12/00 05:48PM >>btw: > >Michael Parenti has noted that policy of containing spread of > >slavery was promptly reversed following death of President Zachary > >Taylor (southern slaveowner opposed to extension of slavery and > >secession) death. Parenti's article "The Strange Death of President > >Zachary Taylor" (*New Political Science*, Vol. 20, #2: June 1998) > >raises questions about official cause of death (severe indigestion > >from eating too many iced cherries with milk after sitting too long > >in sun, or something like that), looks askance at mainstream > >historians' parroting of official line despite insufficient evidence, > >and critiques conclusion drawn from 1991 exhumation that Taylor was > >not poisoned. > > > >CB: Soon someone will denigrate Parenti as a conspiracy theorist. > >Coup d'etats may be more common in U.S. history than legends of > >American democracy have it. > >CB > > I'll denigrate Parenti for being unwilling to look at evidence--they > did dig the guy up, after all, out of historical curiosity... > Brad DeLong Beautiful Charles! I had included similar comment at end of my post but decided to erase it to see if anyone would make that charge (even as I had hunch that you might comment as you did). Actually, Parenti was subjected to allegation - and not by mainstream historians but by reviewers & editor of *Radical History* journal who rejected his essay for concluding possible altered history had Taylor lived (which Parenti does not conclude) despite being impressed by his forensic critique. re. Brad Delong comment... Have you read Parenti article or are you playing role of what C. Wright Mills called 'crackpot realist?' Gotta love your appeal to ubiquitous - and 'neutral' - 'They'... Taylor was 'dug up' via court order initiated at request of writer Clara Rising who was researching book on Taylor. As for Parenti not looking at evidence, well, footnotes in his piece include following: 'Results of Exhumation of Zachary Taylor," released by the Office of the Coroner, Jefferson County, KY (Septemr 1991) 'Final Diagnosis: Taylor, Zachary," no date, signed by George Nichols, attached to a brief statement entitled 'Post Mortem Examination of the Body of Taylor, Zachary ME-91-514,' no date, location, letterhead or author Report on colorimetric spectrophotometry tests done on Taylor's hair and nails, filed on 29 June 1991 by Michael Ward, forensic scientist, KY Dept. of Health Services, Divison of Laboratory Services, Frankfurt, KY Data with handwritten title 'U of L scanning electron microscope EDAX,' no date, from Beverly Giammara and David Birch, Analytical Electron Microscope Laboratory, University of Louisville (no final report released) Letter to George Nichols from Drs. Frank Dyer & Larry Robinson, Oakridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN Telephone interviews (conducted by Peggy Noton): Dr. Richard Greathouse (county coroner in Louisville), Dr. Vincent Guinn (forensic consultant, University of Maryland), Dr. Richard Bisbing (senior research microscopist, McCone Laboratory, Chicago), Dr. Frank Dyer (identified above), Clara Rising Of course, if you're really interested in any of this, see above citation included with previous post, you can read article yourself. Michael Hoover
Re: Re: Re: Sowing Dragons (fwd)
Franz Neumann, Behemoth Alfred Soh-Rethel: Class Structure of German Fascism ostensibly both about Germany in the 1930s, actually about planning in conditoons of autarky/containment on the basis of fordist inddustry. Mark Jones http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList - Original Message - From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2000 2:22 AM Subject: [PEN-L:18916] Re: Re: Sowing Dragons (fwd) > Schumpeter? > > Jim Devine wrote: > > > > > [*] Has anyone ever noticed the similarity between the development of the > > USSR and that of the Ford Motor Company (or similar "entrepreneurial" > > corporations)? It starts with the radical idiosyncrasies of the Great > > Leader (Stalin, Henry Ford, Sr.), who is then replaced by nameless > > bureaucratic suits who normalize the regime. > > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
an exchange on oil
Jay Hanson's energyresources list (http://www.egroups.com/group/energyresources ) has turned into a good site for tracking the fate of big oil, mainly because of the presence there of authoritative voices like Colin Campbell and Jean Laherrere, 2 oil geologists who last year singlehandedly persuaded the International Energy Authority to adopt a new, more realistic and somewhat pessimistic assumption about the size of global reserves. This exchange about new Caspian finds may be of interest: > I'd be interested to know what Listers think about reports of > possible large new Caspian offshore oil deposits. the Caspian basin > has seen reports ranging from the Wall Street's Journal's surely > wildly overoptimistic forecatse of 190bn bbls of recoverable oil, to > suggestions by I think Colin Campbell and others that reserves may > total 19bn bbls; until recently the consensus > seemed to be that the Caspian was at best another North Sea, not > another Persian Gulf. Is this another false dawn? > > Mark Jones > http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList Press reports, which seem now to reflect a certain authority, speak of a major discovery in Kashagan East, rumoured to be larger than Teghiz which has about 8 Gb. It is too early to know for sure. The prospect is very large, but only parts of it may have adequate reservoirs, and the extent of the criticial salt seal is not sure. My current estimate gives the Caspoian offshore 23 Gb (billion barrels), which I think is ample cover for the present discovery, but we must await appraisal drilling to be sure. To give a sense of proportion, 12 Gb would supply the world for six months. The Caspian was of course one of the earliest known oil provinces, but the offshore was not explored by the Soviets. How soon this new oil will reach western markets remains uncertain, but it is by all means a promising development best regards Colin Campbell - Mark Jones http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
