Re: economic advice
Doug And why should the SK or Chinese masses listen to a critique if we've got no idea of what to put in place of the status quo? I would hope that any leftists who lived in China or S. Korea (rather than foreign gringos like yours truly) would listen to organized elements of the opposition and learn from them, using any expertise to develop demands on the state that would increase the standard of living and power of the oppressed. The vision of what should be -- to replace capitalism -- would hopefully develop in tandem. Of course, the process has to be global, but must start local. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Green
the one thing that all anarchists seem to agree with is that centralized government (the state) should be abolished -- as soon as possible. But without a centralized govt, how do people deal with issues that affect us all, e.g., global warming? how do we prevent the neighboring anarchist collective from building nukes? I prefer Marx, whose vision of the withering away of the state (as I understand it) refers to the _subodination_ of the state to the people, so that the _distinction_ between the state and society withers away. That's a long-term goal, one that can't be achieved if one abolishes the state as soon as possible. Abolition of the state NOW simply unleashes the forces of Hobbesian havoc (anarchy in the worst sense of the word) that are present in actually-existing capitalist society. Instead, the state needs to be controlled. Some anarchists would say that delaying the withering away was opportunist or something, allowing a new class of state managers to arise. But abolishing the state right away allows rule by those with the most AK-47s. of course, it ain't bloody likely that the state will be abolished soon -- unless the system melts down. I doubt that an environmental crisis would produce a very attractive anarchy. The IWW (OBU) was great, as a first step in the development of a working-class movement. Politics are needed too. Jim -Original Message- From: Yoshie Furuhashi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue 8/12/2003 7:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Green is there a color which represents democracy? I'd prefer democracy to anarchism (which precludes democracy). Jim Anarchy, to me, means democracy, i.e., collective self-government, the very ideal to which Lenin spoke in _The State and Revolution. Not all those who call themselves anarchists agree with me on this interpretation, though. :- I also like the idea of One Big Union. Would you have freedom from wage slavery? Then come join the Grand Industrial Band! Would you from mis'ry and hunger be free? Come on, do your share, lend a hand! Listen to Utah Phillips sing the Joe Hill song There Is a Power in a Union at http://video.pbs.org:8080/ramgen/joehill/UPThereIsPowerInAUnion.rm?altplay=UPThereIsPowerInAUnion.rm. I like the Black Cat log of the Industrial Workers of the World, too (I have a T-shirt with the logo on it), except that cats rarely go for collective actions. :-0 -- Yoshie * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://solidarity.igc.org/
Green
INTRO: I knew Bob Hunter fairly well in a previous incarnation. Bob co-founded Greenpeace. His column appeared weekly. He wrote often about global warming. It was humorous to see his winter columns about global warming run during some terrible winter storms -- humorous to read the mail responses that called him stupid. As if localized weather indicated a trend. But this kind of trend (below) is noteworthy. I don't see the reactionary types (either left or right) arguing about the enviro stuff at the moment. While I do think the planet is much more powerful than humanity, perhaps we do make some effect. Maybe Ian is right in his prognostication... the next unifying revolutionary force will be green, not red. Everyone is immediately interested. After all... Everyone talks about the weather... Even the 90+% of the North American populace that is already proletarian. Ken. -- Education is a system of imposed ignorance. -- Noam Chomsky --- cut here --- Heat blamed for dozens of deaths across Europe Associated Press Monday, Aug. 11, 2003 Paris About 50 people have died of heat-related illnesses in the Paris region in the past few days, the head of France's emergency physicians' association says. Patrick Pelloux, in an interview Sunday with TF1 television, criticized France's surgeon-general for characterizing the deaths over the previous four days as natural. They dare to talk about natural deaths I absolutely do not agree, he said. Health Ministry spokesman Mathieu Monnet said officials did not have figures on deaths related to the heat that has scorched France and other parts of Europe over the past week. Paris has baked under temperatures at or exceeding 37 degrees. Temperatures across Europe continues relentlessly hot, with Britain sweltering through its hottest day on record Sunday and Alpine glaciers melting. The heat and drought-driven fires across the continent prompted Pope John Paul II to urge people to pray for rain. The French ministry conceded there had been a noticeable increase in hospital visits by the aged. Hospitals in the Paris region have been worst affected most and have increased the number of beds for urgent cases. But the ministry also appeared to play down suggestions of a large number of heat-related deaths, saying emergency services have not witnessed a massive flood of cases. Difficulties encountered are comparable to previous years, it said in a statement. Other experts disagreed. Jean-Louis San Marco, president of the National Health Prevention and Education Institute, said in a newspaper interview that more must be done. We are facing a human drama, carnage the like of which doubtless has never been seen in France, Mr. Marco said in Monday's Le Parisien. Yet the impression given is of radio silence. It makes me want to scream. Elderly people are dying of heat, but indifference is the order of the day because theirs are clandestine, invisible deaths. Yet I assure you these are not natural deaths, as is said, and in many cases are avoidable. The leader of the opposition Socialist Party, Franois Hollande, joined the chorus of criticism, accusing the government of being passive and inert. The government was meeting Monday with the French power giant EDF to assess the consequences on electricity production. Rising river temperatures are affecting power plants that use water and forcing nuclear plants to scale back output. Nicole Fontaine, the government's industry minister, urged people to cut power use, because France most likely will not be able to depend on European neighbours in case of an energy shortage. All of Europe has been hit by the heat wave and the drought, and this limits available energy resources, she said. About 40 people across Europe are officially said to have died in the heat wave that has fanned forest fires, destroyed livestock and set record temperatures in many cities. A record high for overnight temperatures in Paris was set Sunday into Monday, when the fell to only 25.5 degrees, according to Mto France, the national weather service. The previous record was 24, set in 1976. Dominique Escale of Mto France said temperatures throughout France were expected to drop by midweek, but would remain well above average. Forecasters predict a high of 29 degrees Celsius for Thursday in the French capital. In Britain, the heat is also making life just miserable. You can't get any respite from it, Londoner Ranald Davidson said. The British national weather service recorded a reading of 37.9 degrees Celsius at Heathrow Airport, outside a parched and baking London, and 38.1 degrees at Gravesend in southern England. Northern parts of the country were cooler, and torrential rain created problems in North Yorkshire. Germans, too, have had record heat. In the Bavarian city of Roth, the temperature hit nearly 40.6 on Saturday, beating the previous record of 40 degrees, also in Bavaria and set in 1983. Pope John Paul II made his
Re: The Road to Serfdom
Maybe I'm not reading carefully enough, but did you answered Doug's question about what your alternative would be? You say what you would not advise them to do, but that's really not an answer. I'm sure they could come up all by themselves lots of reasons why what their approach has serious problems, but if you can't tell them what they might do instead, they aren't any better off. Thanks, Anders [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/11/03 12:33PM In response to Doug's comments (below): I hope I did not give the idea that I thought there was some simple set of policies that countries could follow that would relatively quickly and painlessly produce development. But that said, if I were advising South Koreans I would certainly not say that development would be advanced by implementing policies that increase so called labor flexibility which means making it easier to layoff workers and use temporary workers. Or that development would be advanced by creating massive special economic zones where foreign owners and workers can have their own housing, where English would be the official language, where foreign companies would be allowed to establish their own for profit schools and hospitals (but Koreans could not although they can use the facilities), where foreign investors would get to avoid many labor and environmental regulations, and so on. But that is what the Korean government is doing. And all because it sees export led growth as the only way forward and critical to that is attracting more and more foreign direct investment. I doubt that you would think that those are good policies. And I also doubt that you would think it helpful for stable development if all the countries in the region intensified their competing with each other to produce the same export goods for the same markets, with labor costs and conditions being sacrificed to win the competition. Wasn't that a part of the underlying cause of the 1997-98 crisis? So, yes, capitalism is not hospitable to development. It appears to becoming increasingly less so. That is not the same as saying that third world countries are not participating more in the international division of labor. They are, but all the indicators certainly suggest that this activity is not leading to what I would imagine you and I would call development. So, doesn't it make sense to be critical of export-led growth strategies even if we recognize the difficulties involved in developing a new strategy. I would think offering that critical perspective in the context of an engagement with on-going struggles of workers in those countries is precisely what we should be doing. Marty Quoting Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Martin Hart-Landsberg wrote: So, my point is that this kind of strategy is not one that we should be endorsing as providing a real framework for general advancement of working class interests. Well yeah, but how? Suppose you were advising the S Korean government - what would you say? Or the Haitian government? Years ago, at a little roundtable on the World Bank organized by Susan George, a bunch of us were gassing on in our usual radical manner when a former official in Manley's finance ministry in Jamaica said, You have no idea what it's like to have to come up with $100 million in hard currency next week. I've never forgotten that. He's right - I had no idea, and still don't. But I think about it a lot. Doug
The smell of TINA spirit
Well, I have used this term Left and leftism, but I don't really like it. For me, left and right essentially refer to a distinction within bourgeois and petty-bourgeois politics, the so-called dries on the one hand who deny the existence of the social question, and the so-called wets on the other hand, who recognise that a social question exists, and that something must be done about it. But this distinction does not refer to any coherent political tradition, but to political policy, and specific political traditions in American culture may contain both wet and dry elements in a specific admixture. The term originates from the aftermath of the French revolution of 1789, acknowledged to have been a bourgeois revolution of some sort, not a proletarian one. In addition, left may connote abandoned and right may connote correct, and some rightwing people are more left than the people who say they are left, whereas some leftists are to the right of the right in particular positions. So the use of the terms Left and Right more often that not implies a lack of political clarity, rather than clarifying things, it refers to the morality of a policy stance. Much better terms are progressive and reactionary because then at least we can debate what progress is and is not, rather than engaging in moral fervour. I have never believed in TINA in my life, because I have been raised and educated in the spirit that there is always an alternative and that there is always a solution, and that if I do not recognise that, this must be because I am being stupid or lazy or recalcitrant or inconstructive. No genuine Marxist can believe in TINA because as I explained on Marxmail and OPE-L before, this conflicts with the Marxian principle that humanity only sets itself such tasks as it can solve, a principle formulated in various ways by Marx in his youth, when he discusses how society recognises problems, but poses them falsely, requiring critical thought to sort it out. I do not deny the existence of pessimism, cynicism, nihilism and so forth, but I insist on discovering the objective material and social roots of these moods. Just as a very simple individualist example, if I eat badly and irregularly, my mood declines and my thoughts are more inclined to be negative, no matter what I do. I am not aware of medical research into the subtleties of this, but this is a material fact. But nor do I see much point in denying the left-right distinction such as it is practically used. Following Marx, the task is always to build a bridge from the old categorisation to a new categorisation. All the answers and solutions are already there, it is just a question of reframing, and the will to reframe, and it is much better to think thematically rather than doctrinally, since our individual theoretical capacity is limited anyhow. I would say that there are large numbers of Americans who are interested in the sorts of things I have concerned myself with in my life, so from my point of view there is a Left, it is just not organised, and people do not understand organisation, what it means, and the overall goals are not clear. A lot of American left-wing political discussion concerns simply a process of validation of experience, that is the real problem. It isn't a constructive, goal-oriented process, in general terms, although there are many exceptions. The real problems of socialist politics are often different from what they think they are, but their own theory prevents them from seeing it. But that doesn't mean there are no solutions or answers. They are there, you just have to see them, critically reframe things so that they are solvable. A New Zealand comrade of mine went to California, at the time of the first Iraq war, and made a video of the street protests. He commented upon the fact, that there were a lot of people protesting in the street, but few organised marches or mass rallys. There was just all these people hanging about on their own, I wondered what the precise meaning of this was. We were interested in that phenomenon at the time, because we were discussing organisation, and what Americans mean by this. I think this is the symptom you talk about. But it is a symptom, not the disease itself. Jurriaan
Re: quote du jour
The quote is from the movie Pumping Iron, a Schwarzendegger classic. See further: http://slate.msn.com/id/2074008/ - Original Message - From: Max B. Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:45 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] quote du jour source, please. max -Original Message- From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Devine, James Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 8:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: quote du jour I was always dreaming about very powerful people, dictators, people like Jesus, being remembered for thousands of years. -- Arnold Schwartzenegger Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: quote du jour
source, please. max -Original Message- From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Devine, James Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 8:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: quote du jour I was always dreaming about very powerful people, dictators, people like Jesus, being remembered for thousands of years. -- Arnold Schwartzenegger Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Green
Yoshie wrote: I'd prefer Red, Black, and Green together (the colors of revolutionary socialism, anarchism, and environmentalism), also the colors of the pan-African Black Liberation Flag. Sounds good to me. I adopt that as my flag. But don't tell anyone I agree with you. I would hate to be labeled. Ken. -- Religion is a belief in a Supreme Being; Science is a belief in a Supreme Generalization. -- Charles H. Fort Wild Talents
Re: imperialism
Devine, James wrote: Finally, I'm confused: Doug, you say that the system isn't one of competition among major powers anymore but also point to dispersed and polycentric power. Where are the centers of power that are competing with the US if not in the core? China? I said that there was little competition for real estate among the imperial powers (or was, until the Bush admin tried to bring back the good old days). Dispersed and polycentric doesn't necessarily mean competitive. China's hardly competing with the U.S. right now, given that so much of its production is by and for U.S. (and other) MNCs. I wrote about all this at some length in a review of Empire: http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Empire.html. Doug
China and market socialism (was Road to Serfdom)
China and market socialism Concerning China in particular, Jim Devine wrote: Rather than discussing market socialism, I think it would be worth pen-l's while to discuss Charlie Andrews' proposal for competing not-for-profit enterprises (in his FROM CAPITALISM TO EQUALITY). The last two chapters of From Capitalism to Equality outline an economy of firms that do not retain profits, nor even aim at them, though the firms must break even. However, they do compete, and the result is technological vigor and all that. These institutions are workable when taking over the U.S. economy. I can't say whether they were relevant to China in the early 1980s, when the drive to dismantle the socialist economy and install a capitalist economy became obvious. See, for example, on-the-ground reports from William Hinton. That said, the problem in China was not a problem of figuring out economic institutions that would overcome imbalance and inefficiency from the Mao era. (Marty) It was not a tragic policy dilemma (need to promote efficiency and economic vigor - only remedy is market socialist measures - market socialism stumbles into capitalism). 1. Any government with a high-priority purpose can figure out institutions to achieve the purpose. No genius is necessary, and the necessary brainpower is available. 2. The preceding period was not the Mao era. On the surface it was the Mao era until 1976. The problem of the era was that the Chinese government did not have a predominant purpose. The socialists could never get the room they needed to develop the economy, because the capitalist factions had enough power to stymie or distort new measures. On the other hand, the leading adherents of capitalism had bad reputations and could not act boldly. 3. The standoff finally broke in favor of the adherents of capitalism. The thing to figure out is whether the socialists could have won the struggle by different political means. Of course there are nuances to this, but I think it comes down to these points, not a tragic policy dilemma (need to promote efficiency and economic vigor - only remedy is market socialist measures - market socialism tends to stumble into capitalism). Charles Andrews Publisher's Web site for From Capitalism to Equality is at http://www.laborrepublic.org
Re: green pensions?
- Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 1:00 PM Subject: [PEN-L] green pensions? from BusinessWeek, Au. 18-25, 2003: The Greening of Pension Plans Cash-strapped U.S. steel (X ) may have hit on a solution for companies scrounging for the dough to pump up pension funds that were recently flattened by the stock market's slide. Just sign over some forests -- or other valuable assets. On Aug. 4, the steelmaker told analysts it was asking for government permission to transfer 170,000 acres of timberland, mostly in Alabama, to its pension funds. The company values the assets at $100 million. But the trees are young so the valuation will grow over time, == So Paul Davidson is wrong and money does grow on trees? :-) Ian
Re: quote du jour
I went to see Terminator 3 tonight, it was kind of circumstantial. But I don't think many people will remember it in ten years time. Spectacular stunts though, and some wickedly funny sets. I got out of the theatre without being eaten. Alternative quotes: 1. I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it through not dying - Woody Allen 2. I don't want to achieve immortality by being inducted into the Hall of Fame. I want to achieve immortality by not dying - Leo Durocher (New York Yankees, Cincinnati Reds, St. Louis Cardinals, and Brooklyn Dodgers) 3. I hold it ever Virtue and cunning were endowments greater Than nobleness and riches. Careless heirs My the two latter darken and expend; But immortality attends the former, Making a man a god. - William Shakespeare, Pericles Prince of Tyre (Cerimon at III, ii) 4. No one could ever meet death for his country without the hope of immortality. - Cicero (Marcus Tullius Cicero), Tusculanarum Disputationum (I, 15) 5. Do you believe in immortality? No, and one life is enough for me - Albert Einstein Jurriaan. - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:10 AM Subject: [PEN-L] quote du jour I was always dreaming about very powerful people, dictators, people like Jesus, being remembered for thousands of years. -- Arnold Schwartzenegger Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Reply to an Observer article by the Italian Refounded CP
A trap set for protesters Michael Hardt Friday February 21, 2003 The Guardian full: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,899852,00.html HARDT: Corresponding in part to the new US anti-Europeanism, there is today in Europe and across the world a growing anti-Americanism. In particular, the coordinated protests last weekend against the war were animated by various kinds of anti-Americanism - and that is inevitable. The US government has left no doubt that it is the author of this war and so protest against the war must, inevitably, be also protest against the United States. REPLY: What is the evidence of this anti-Americanism? Carrying around a picture of George W. Bush with bloody fangs or something? Indeed, this business of anti-Americanism is mainly a preoccupation of the red-baiting left or the reactionary bourgeois press as exemplified by this quote from the Murdoch press last Sunday: Some on the old left see the problem. The issue is not Blair or spin, it's not even Bush, it's tyranny. Veterans like Arnold Wesker and Salman Rushdie and, most trenchantly, Julie Burchill - I'll come back to her - are pro-war. The Wesker-Rushdie line is that Saddam's reign has been so terrible for the people of Iraq that common humanity alone justifies war. Wesker has for a long time advocated the setting up of an International Benign Force - an army that would be sent in to sort out the bad guys. But, failing that, reflex anti-Americanism - or, indeed, anti-Blairism - shouldn't trap anybody into pig-headed pacifism when a brief act of belligerence can free the people. If this is the sort of thing that Hardt is alluding to, he's wasting our time per usual. HARDT: The globalisation protest movements were far superior to the anti-war movements in this regard. They not only recognised the complex and plural nature of the forces that dominate capitalist globalisation today - the dominant nation states, certainly, but also the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organisation, the major corporations, and so forth - but they imagined an alternative, democratic globalisation consisting of plural exchanges across national and regional borders based on equality and freedom. REPLY: But the one thing they did not recognize was that imperialism was the nature of the beast, rather than unregulated capital flows which would be restrained by a Tobin Tax or some other such nonsense. What irks the good professor is that the Starbucks window-breakers have been marginalized in the current phase of the struggle and that brontosaurus-Marxists like the WWP, the British SWP et al are taking the initiative. HARDT: One of the great achievements of the globalisation protest movements, in other words, has been to put an end to thinking of politics as a contest among nations or blocs of nations. Internationalism has been reinvented as a politics of global network connections with a global vision of possible futures. In this context, anti-Europeanism and anti-Americanism no longer make sense. REPLY: global network connections with a global vision of possible futures? Sounds like a Verizon commercial. HARDT: It is unfortunate but inevitable that much of the energies that had been active in the globalisation protests have now at least temporarily been redirected against the war. We need to oppose this war, but we must also look beyond it and avoid being drawn into the trap of its narrow political logic. While opposing the war we must maintain the expansive political vision and open horizons that the globalisation movements have achieved. We can leave to Bush, Chirac, Blair, and Schrder the tired game of anti-Europeanism and anti-Americanism. REPLY: It is unfortunate but inevitable that much of the energies that had been active in the globalisation protests have now at least temporarily been redirected against the war? Get used to it professor, we are living in an epoch of wars, civil wars and revolution. Time to put the Spinoza back on the shelf and reread Lenin--and for some first people, including Hardt based on the evidence, to read him for the first time. -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Best-laid plans
NY Times, August 10, 2003 U.S. Moved to Undermine Iraqi Military Before War By DOUGLAS JEHL with DEXTER FILKINS WASHINGTON, Aug. 9 The United States military, the Central Intelligence Agency and Iraqi exiles began a broad covert effort inside Iraq at least three months before the war to forge alliances with Iraqi military leaders and persuade commanders not to fight, say people involved in the effort. Even after the war began, the Bush administration received word that top officials of the Iraqi government, most prominently the defense minister, Gen. Sultan Hashem Ahmed al-Tai, might be willing to cooperate to bring the war to a quick end and to ensure a postwar peace, current and former American officials say. General Hashem's ministry was never bombed by the United States during the war, and the Pentagon's decision not to knock Iraqi broadcasting off the air permitted him to appear on television with what some Iraqi exiles have called a veiled signal to troops that they should not fight the invading allies. But Washington's war planners elected not to try to keep him or other Iraqi leaders around after the war to help them keep the peace, a decision some now see as a missed opportunity. General Hashem's fate is not known. Some Iraqi exiles say he was shot, and perhaps killed, by Saddam Hussein's supporters during the war. Other exiles and American officials say he survived the war. Two Iraqi leaders said his family had staged a mock funeral to give the impression that he was dead. Much more than that is uncertain about the murky operation not least, the degree of its success. People behind the effort, including Iraqis who were involved inside the country, said in interviews that they had succeeded in persuading hundreds of Iraqi officers to quit the war and to send their subordinates away. Iraqi military officers confirmed that after Americans and Iraqis made contact with them, they carried out acts of sabotage and helped disband their units as the war began. American officials and two Iraqi exiles who played central roles said the American military spirited out of the country several high-level Iraqi military and intelligence officers who had cooperated with the United States and its allies. But in interviews in Washington, Europe and the Middle East, more than half a dozen people with direct knowledge of the events said the United States might have missed an opportunity that might have stabilized Iraq as the government crumbled. American and Arab officials said that as the war approached, the Bush administration was skeptical of the idea of cutting a lasting deal with high-level Iraqi officials like General Hashem. Washington, in the end, was reluctant to leave any high-ranking officials from the Hussein government in power after the war. Such an agreement, they said, might have required that some officials with ties to Mr. Hussein stay in power for a time, but might have eased the entry of American troops into Baghdad and helped keep Iraq's infrastructure intact. A lot of people in Baghdad saw their interest in not fighting, in adapting, in getting rid of Saddam and moving forward, said Whitley Bruner, a former C.I.A. station chief in Baghdad who is now a private consultant. He is said by people involved in the operation to have helped relay messages from people inside Iraq to the United States government. Senior Arab officials and several United States officials said General Hashem was identified as a potential ally as early as 1995, when he became defense minister. The officials described him as a capable, well-liked infantry officer who had no close connections to Mr. Hussein and his family. From the time he was appointed defense minister, he was always someone who was looked at as being someone you could deal with, said a senior Saudi official, whose government had long urged the United States to promote a coup in Iraq rather than a military invasion as a way of toppling Mr. Hussein's government. Sultan Hashem was seen as someone who was more sensible, who could reach rational conclusions, and was not a Baathist ideologue or Baathist fanatic. A senior Defense Department official refused to comment on any messages passed between the United States and General Hashem. But he said there might have been other reasons that the United States left his ministry intact. In any centralized, controlled society, soldiers will fight to the last order, the official said. If you cut off the head, the arms and legs will keep going, so you want to keep in place the structure that could allow a surrender. full: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/10/international/worldspecial/10IRAQ.html === LA Times, August 10, 2003 Iraq Seen as Terror Target Anti-Western extremists have been infiltrating, officials say, and may look for opportunities to attack symbols of America and its allies. By Alissa J. Rubin , Times Staff Writer BAGHDAD The powerful
Re: Reply to an Observer article by the Italian Refounded CP
- Original Message - From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED] But the February 15th demonstrations were mounted despite the grumbling of Michael Hardt that it was diverting attention from the real movement, namely anti-globalization. = [Oh really? And isn't time for us to ditch the epithet anti-globalization, to beat a dead horse already?] A trap set for protesters Michael Hardt Friday February 21, 2003 The Guardian There is a new anti-Europeanism in Washington. The United States, of course, has a long tradition of ideological conflict with Europe. The old anti-Europeanism generally protested against the overwhelming power of European states, their arrogance, and their imperialist endeavours. Today, however, the relationship is reversed. The new anti-Europeanism is based on the US position of power and it protests instead against European states failing to yield to its power and support its projects. The most immediate issue for Washington is the European lack of support for the US plans for war on Iraq. And Washington's primary strategy in recent weeks is to divide and conquer. On one hand, Defence Secretary Rumsfeld, with his usual brazen condescension, calls those European nations who question the US project, primarily France and Germany, the old Europe, dismissing them as unimportant. The recent Wall Street Journal letter of support for the US war effort, on the other hand, signed by Blair, Berlusconi and Aznar, poses the other side of the divide. In a broader framework, the entire project of US unilateralism, which extends well beyond this coming war with Iraq, is itself necessarily anti-European. The unilateralists in Washington are threatened by the idea that Europe, or any other cluster of states, could compete with its power on equal terms. (The rising value of the euro with respect to the dollar contributes, of course, to the perception of two potentially equal and competing power blocs.) Bush, Rumsfeld and their ilk will not accept the possibility of a bi-polar world. They left that behind with the cold war. Any threats to the uni-polar order must be dismissed or destroyed. Washington's new anti-Europeanism is really an expression of their unilateralist project. Corresponding in part to the new US anti-Europeanism, there is today in Europe and across the world a growing anti-Americanism. In particular, the coordinated protests last weekend against the war were animated by various kinds of anti-Americanism - and that is inevitable. The US government has left no doubt that it is the author of this war and so protest against the war must, inevitably, be also protest against the United States. This anti-Americanism, however, although certainly justifiable, is a trap. The problem is, not only does it tend to create an overly unified and homogeneous view of the United States, obscuring the wide margins of dissent in the nation, but also that, mirroring the new US anti-Europeanism, it tends to reinforce the notion that our political alternatives rest on the major nations and power blocs. It contributes to the impression, for instance, that the leaders of Europe represent our primary political path - the moral, multilateralist alternative to the bellicose, unilateralist Americans. This anti-Americanism of the anti-war movements tends to close down the horizons of our political imagination and limit us to a bi-polar (or worse, nationalist) view of the world. The globalisation protest movements were far superior to the anti-war movements in this regard. They not only recognised the complex and plural nature of the forces that dominate capitalist globalisation today - the dominant nation states, certainly, but also the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organisation, the major corporations, and so forth - but they imagined an alternative, democratic globalisation consisting of plural exchanges across national and regional borders based on equality and freedom. One of the great achievements of the globalisation protest movements, in other words, has been to put an end to thinking of politics as a contest among nations or blocs of nations. Internationalism has been reinvented as a politics of global network connections with a global vision of possible futures. In this context, anti-Europeanism and anti-Americanism no longer make sense. It is unfortunate but inevitable that much of the energies that had been active in the globalisation protests have now at least temporarily been redirected against the war. We need to oppose this war, but we must also look beyond it and avoid being drawn into the trap of its narrow political logic. While opposing the war we must maintain the expansive political vision and open horizons that the globalisation movements have achieved. We can leave to Bush, Chirac, Blair, and Schröder the tired game of anti-Europeanism and anti-Americanism. · Michael Hardt is professor of literature at Duke University,
FSI_WorldWealthReport2003.pdf
http://www.us.cgey.com/DownloadLibrary/files/FSI_WorldWealthReport2003.pdf
anti-globalization movement as a basis for progressive change?
Reformist social democracy is no longer on the agenda The anti-globalisation movement is the basis of a left alternative Fausto Bertinotti Monday August 11, 2003/The Guardian The terrible events in Iraq marked the end of the post-war period - a period marked by the memory of the horrors of the Nazi-fascist war, when the world saw two opposing economic and social blocs pitted against each other and social struggles led to a growth of welfare benefits and the bargaining power of trade unions. The liberal constitutions were born out of the victory over Nazism and fascism. Now we are living in a new phase, in which the space for reform has been closed. As Giorgio Ruffolo (a minister in Italy's former centre-left government) wrote recently: Through globalisation, capitalism has won a historical battle: it has defeated the reform-minded left, both in Europe and America. The consequences are there for everyone to see: reckless flexibility, extreme inequalities and the end of safety nets. The demise of reformism has changed both analyses and prospects, bringing with it the difficulty of even achieving partial results that can be woven into the social fabric and provide cohesion. This is a problem even when there are major social and public-opinion movements. In the past few months large numbers have taken to the streets, part of a worldwide movement against the war. But the war was waged anyway, without any price yet paid by the forces that wanted it. In Italy there has been a major movement around employment issues, including industry-wide strikes and general strikes, but the government still managed to pass dangerous laws such as the Maroni decree (restricting pension rights). There has been a mass mobilisation over unfair dismissal rights. And yet we lost it. In France, after major struggles, the Raffarin government is carrying on its attack on the pension system. In Germany, for the first time in 50 years, IG Metall ended a strike to extend the 35-hour working week to the eastern regions without achieving any result whatsoever. Capitalist globalisation contains deeply regressive elements that are leading to a real crisis of civilisation. The only possible response is not reformism, but rather a radical refoundation of politics as a worldwide process and thus a reconstruction of the agency of change: a redefinition of the working class. The right has won all over the world because it has strategic hegemony. In the US the Bush administration is based on military interventionism, extreme neo-liberalism and religious fundamentalism. War is no longer a one-off or exceptional event, it has become structural and never-ending. The only possibility in the face of rightwing extremism is to provide an alternative: of peace against war and of a new model of society against neo-liberalism. This does not mean either a detailed programme or unity among existing political forces. Nor does it mean defending democracy as it currently exists. Rather, it means starting from the main resource available, which is the movement against capitalist globalisation. The anti-globalisation movement is the first movement that represents a break with the 20th century and its truths and myths. At present it is the main source of politics for an alternative to the global right. When, on February 15, 100 million people took to the streets, the New York Times referred to it as a second world power, a power that in the name of peace opposed those who wanted war. It is no exaggeration to say that everything that has happened in the past few years has had something to do with this movement. It started from observation of the impact of neo-liberalism, going on to trace its origins and create an anti-capitalist culture. It has resisted the progressive destruction of democracy that has led one liberal, Ralf Dahrendorf, to refer to this as an ademocratic century, holding to account those bodies - from the International Monetary Fund to the World Bank - that have deprived people of democracy and sovereignty. It has countered the crisis of democracy with embryonic new democratic institutions. It has challenged the division of political labour among trade unions, parties and cooperatives and shifted the focus of political debate from institutions to social relations, bringing feelings and everyday life back into the realm of politics. It has also tackled the theme of power, in terms not of achieving and keeping it, but of transforming, dissolving and reconstructing power through self-government. And it has challenged the model of a party leading the movement, proposing instead the notion of networks and links among groups, associations, parties and newspapers. The problem now is how to build out of the anti-globalisation movement a real democratic power able to achieve its objectives. Its greatest limitation seems to be the lack of a connection between the great issues of globalisation, war and peace and the intermediate dimension of
Re: The Road to Serfdom
Martin Hart-Landsberg wrote: The difficulty in export-led development certainly should be clear in the case of Mexico. It succeeded over the 1990s in attracting lots of fdi and export growth. But at the cost of hollowing out its domestic industry. Now a bit of wage growth and rising currency and that foreign industry is now deserting Mexico for China. And China's rise which is being celebrated is coming at the expense of export production in Malaysia and Singapore and leading to industrial capital moving from South Korea. So, embracing this strategy is not very helpful. Hi Marty, The question is: helpful to whom? The case of Mexico is often raised when this question comes up, but the overall trend in terms of the flight of capital is from more developed countries to less developed (which, by definition, does not include S.Korea, Malaysia or Singapore). It's bad news for wage earners in developed and semi-developed countries. This includes me, but I find it hard and --- I would say futile --- to begrudge those in China, Kenya, Vanuatau, wherever. Regards, Grant.
Re: Reply to an Observer article by the Italian Refounded CP
Michael Hardt wrote: It is unfortunate but inevitable that much of the energies that had been active in the globalisation protests have now at least temporarily been redirected against the war. We need to oppose this war, but we must also look beyond it and avoid being drawn into the trap of its narrow political logic. While opposing the war we must maintain the expansive political vision and open horizons that the globalisation movements have achieved. We can leave to Bush, Chirac, Blair, and Schröder the tired game of anti-Europeanism and anti-Americanism. This actually sounds pretty good 100 days after the end of hostilities in Iraq. Solo American imperialism isn't the all-powerful force that Bush (and many of his critics) imagined it to be. U.S. prestige is at 20- or 30-year lows, the Blair government is teetering, and the PNAC countries-to-invade list is badly in need of revision. I'd say the Empire thesis has some life in it yet. Doug
Re: The Road to Serfdom
I wanted to also focus on another part of the Chinese experience, that is the Chinese success in export growth. Interesting, and not really surprisingly given IMF pressures and debt pressures, every East Asian country affected by the economic crisis in 97-98 is more dependent on exports for growth than before the crisis. China over the 90's has become increasingly export oriented as well, with an increasing percentage of exports being produced by foreign capital. This development, as export production in China moves up the technological ladder, is putting new pressures on East Asia and even Mexico. Those who embrace China from the right, like the IMF and World Bank, argue that it is China's market reforms that have attracted so much FDI and allow it to export so well. Those who embrace China from the progressive side say that China retains state direction capacities and national controls and its export growth is a sign of the success of that model. I hear few people raising critiques of export-led growth itself as a strategy. The WTO and FTAA all are designed to intensify integration and thus more trade and thus more export-orientation as well. Should we be building more of our critique on contemporary international developments by focusing on the dangers of export-led growth as a strategy of development. I was surprised when in Cuba to find so many economists there in awe of China's export led growth and eager to try and figure out what to do to replicate it. In other words, it seems that export success has become a critical measure of success even for those on the left. Marty Quoting Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I don't want to get into defending Charlie Andrews' concepts (since I don't agree with them completely). But the idea involves not profit-max but minimization of costs, subject to constraints imposed by the democratically-run government and the system of enterprise governance that Charlie describes. If I were to point to an analogy, it wouldn't be China but to the non-profit foundation sector in the US. Obviously, that sector serves those who donate money, but in Charlie's scheme, that sector is different. Jim -Original Message- From: Martin Hart-Landsberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sat 8/9/2003 1:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The Road to Serfdom Jim, the notion of competing enterprises was precisely at the heart of the Chinese position in the early days of reform. But how do you promote competition, well you need some sort of profit inducement. So, early on the Chinese encouraged firms to operate independently and pursue profits. But, competition also means change and response to market needs. Thus, critical to the entire process is labor market flexibility, or the freedom for management to hire and fire workers. In fact, the Chinese state encouraged foreign investment at each stage of the reform process, including joint ventures pretty early in the process, because it saw foreign capital as setting the basis for capitalist labor relations and encouraging profit maximizing in the state sector. In short, based on my study of the Chinese experience, while there were some in the state that just supported growing marketization for their own gain, there were many in the party that saw the need to overcome problems of imbalance and inefficiency from the Mao era and sought to do so by encouraging competition between firms and this lead step by step to promotion of profits, and the creation of a labor market and ... Marty Quoting Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Rather than discussing market socialism, I think it would be worth pen-l's while to discuss Charlie Andrews' proposal for competing not-for-profit enterprises (in his FROM CAPITALISM TO EQUALITY). Maybe Charlie could be dragooned into participating. Jim
US war against Iraq post-mortem
From MS SLATE's on-line summary of major US newspapers: While the NY [TIMES] reported yesterday that the fall of Baghdad was aided by Iraqi turncoats, the LA [TIMES] cites another reason on Page One this morning: the self-destruction of the Iraqi army. Citing former Iraqi commanders and servicemen, the paper says the military became increasingly fractured, thanks, in part, to erratic orders from Saddam and his son, Qusay. During the final weeks of the war, troops were ordered to reposition their tanks every morning, and each order contradicted the one before. Iraqi soldiers lacked maps, radios and even a game plan for how to fight American troops--the latter because Saddam didn't think the U.S. would make it very far in the war. We were crippled by a lack of imagination, one former Iraqi commander gripes. Someone -- Chris Burford? -- likened Saddam to Stalin, who eventually won due to the efforts of General Winter. But like Saddam, there was a period when the Russian army collapsed, partly due to silly and vicious maneuvers from above (killing generals, etc.) Unfortunately for Saddam, his country was much smaller than the USSR, so that the enemy could capture the capital... Of course, the US seems likely to lose the peace. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: The Road to Serfdom
Martin Hart-Landsberg wrote: I would say the problem is on the other side, that many leftists no longer appreciate the dangers and underlying contradictory dynamics of export-led growth and see it as a strategy that is complementary and consistent with stable growth and improved living and working conditions (and here I mean internationally and not only nationally. Hey, I fully appreciate the dangers - I just don't know what you're posing as an alternative. And to build a first class health industry requires that that industry be directly response to the needs and demands of the Cuban population. That is the only way to ensure real innovation and development. Cuba couldn't have built this health sector without Soviet subsidies, which are no longer an option. That's why I said a small country with little access to external finance is rather lacking in options. Doug
Jargon
I think such stale jargon as a lot of leftists, a lot of marxists, etc. should be eliminated. They are always offensive, and almost always block intelligent discussion. Besides, they suggest a mind rather empty of contents on the part of their user. Carrol
Re: The Road to Serfdom
Quoting Anders Schneiderman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Maybe I'm not reading carefully enough, but did you answered Doug's question about what your alternative would be? You say what you would not advise them to do, but that's really not an answer. I'm sure they could come up all by themselves lots of reasons why what their approach has serious problems, but if you can't tell them what they might do instead, they aren't any better off. Thanks, Anders Well ...I did not interpret Dougs question as asking me for a complete alternative economic program. Perhaps I was wrong in this interpretation. I thought he was posing a more modest question. I had said that export led growth was a strategy that we on the left should not be endorsing, and to connect to my earlier posts, I was troubled by the way that many on the left had joined in the celebration of China which seems to be on the basis of its success as an export led economy. I thought Doug was saying that since there were no simple or clear alternatives why bother mounting such a major critique on export led growth. Related to that he asked what advice would you give workers or policy makers. In my answer I tried to suggest that the shift to export led growth was ongoing. There are real policies designed to promote this strategy that are being proposed and implemented. I gave the example of Korea. But the same could be said of China and other countries. I think these policies are not good, even for the workers of the countries involved, much less for the overall stability of the global system and the cause of working class solidarity. Thus, I would argue against those policies designed to move economies ever more along the lines of export- led growth. In short, my advice would be not to move in that direction and I would try and support that advice by showing the destructive nature and short-lived gains from export-led growth. So, my answer is that there are things to say because we are not in a static situation. As to a more positive position I already tried to offer a basic outline of my thinking using the example of Cuba. I think that the ideal system of production is one that starts with popular needs and has mechanisms for translating those needs into effective demand. And at the same time also has mechanisms for ensuring that the demand is structured mobilize domestic resources, including workers, to produce the goods and services that the population desires. Right now popular needs are not being translated into effective demand in most cases. It is the middle and elite classes whose needs are being promoted and demand satisfied. And with each move to export led growth that problem tends to become worse. Moreover, in the case of most export-led countries, the domestic production is not mobilized to meet domestic demand, even of the elite, but rather global demand. Thus there is not a self-generated process of growth that takes place. Of course export led countries can grow for a time. As their resources are mobilized to meet foreign needs the country earns money which allows the import of the goods and services the middle class and elites want. But one critical problem for this strategy is that the benefits to this strategy are being greatly reduced as more and more countries seek to enter the process and often compete for a position in the transnational production network on the basis of labor and environmental repression and exploitation. Even UNCTAD has shown that there is very little manufacturing value added being created in this process. So, how does one actualize the dynamic I promote. As I mentioned before, one must start with the resources and history of the country in question. In the case of Cuba I mentioned health care. More generally, one has to identify, as much as possible, poles of growth based on the state of unfilled domestic needs and the resource histories of the country in question (which includes the skills of the population from past production and natural resources as well). For example, there are many ways to ensure health care or housing or clothing. A country would choose an approach that fits with its history. You then try to figure out what are effective ways in translating those needs into demand. And how to build as complete a domestically rooted production chain as possible based on resource possibilities. That way as you are meeting basic needs with national resources you are upgrading and innovating. Obviously no country has the resources or skills to fully deliver all the goods and services that people would demand. So, a country has to choose those that it can reasonably support. And then using techniques that involve credit controls and trade and investment controls it needs to start channeling resources into those growth poles to built them up. In each case, say health care, it is unlikely that a country
Living on borrowed time in the United States, or, pay up, or we shoot you
. The accumulated external debt of the world's richest country, the United States of America, is equal to $2.2 trillion. This is almost the exact amount owed by the whole of the developing world, including India, China and Brazil - $2.5 trillion. . In other words, three hundred million people in the US owe as much to the rest of the world, as do five billion people in all of the developing countries. . Or to put it differently, every American citizen owes the rest of the world $7,333 while every citizen of all the developing countries only owes the rest of the world $500. . Moreover, while developing country economies are bled dry through debt service repayments totalling more than $300bn per year, the US must only pay $20bn per year to service an almost equivalent amount of debt. . Americans have been engaged in a consumer binge, which has led to the largest current account deficit in history, a staggering $445 billion or 4% of US GDP. This deficit has been increasing by 50% a year in recent years, and economists predict it will rise to $730bn by 2006. . Given this daily defecit of up to £2bn, plus capital outflow of $2bn, the US in effect has to borrow $4bn from the pool of world savings every day. . The US deficit is financed by a) the thifty savers of East Asia, in particular Japan, China and Singapore; but also b) by surpluses built up by countries like France and Switzerland. . More disturbingly, the US deficit is being financed by the poor through a) capital flight from poor countries and b) the forced holdings of high levels of dollar reserves. . To build up reserves, poor countries are borrowing hard currency from the US at interest rates as high as 18%; and lending this back to the US (in the form of interest on US Treasury Bonds) at 3%. . Asian and African countries are forced, by the financial instability caused by globalisation, to maintain dollar reserves, at 14% and 7% of GDP respectively. The US in contrast holds only about 1.3% of her GDP in reserves. . The cumulative cost for developing countries of holding such high dollar reserves may be as much as 24% of GDP over ten years; which represent a significant drag on growth rates. . Inflows of capital into the US and UK: a) help to lower interest rates and therefore borrowing costs for the people of these countries and b) inflate the value of their currencies by about 20%. This enables rich countries, therefore, to purchase imports from the rest of the world 20% cheaper than they would otherwise have been able to. . If it were not for capital flight, at least 25 African countries would be net creditors, not debtors. . Countries like Argentina find that their governments are borrowing hard currency, only to find it promptly leaves the country (in the form of capital flight) for Wall St., London, Zurich or Madrid - a legitimate process under capital liberalisation. . However the poor in these countries are then saddled with huge public debts. Argentina's total external debt of $150 bn is almost exactly equal to unrecorded capital flight of $130bn. Source: http://www.jubilee2000uk.org/analysis/reports/J+USA7.htm
Re: who's running.
On Thursday, August 07, 2003 8:20 PM I wrote: as is Michael Savage (a blatant racist and a generally idiotic person). Not to be confused in that case with Michael Joseph Savage, the first New Zealand Labour Party Prime Minister in 1935. My comment may be at least partially mistaken. In the latest issue of Revolution, published by the New Zealand Radical Media Collective (no. 21, August-October 2003), my friend Philip Ferguson writes: [The New Zealand] Labour [Party] was founded in 1916 and very quickly began campaigning for the White New Zealand immigration policy which was being developed by the Liberal and Reform parties. Labour MPs urged unions to adopt White New Zealand policies and, in the parliamentary debates over the 1920 Immigration Restriction Act, Labour MP after Labour MP rose to his feet to declare in favour of a White New Zealand and for the rigid restriction of immigration into New Zealand by people whose skin was not white. In those days, it was primarily Asians, especially Chinese, whom the socialist Labour Party wanted to keep out. (p. 12-13). This is an aspect of New Zealand Labourism which I did not study in detail, but Philip has. I do not know the exact position which Michael Joseph Savage took on the issue, which I could verify only by looking at the Parliamentary Hansard. I do know that racist attitudes, policies and institutions as regards Asian immigration existed already at least in the 1860s in New Zealand, and were quite common. James McPherson, a New Zealand worker who, according to Herbert O. Roth's research, wrote to the secretariat of the First International in London to warn British workers not to come to New Zealand, because there was a lot of unemployment and low wages in a recession, also expressed, according to my own research, racist views about the Chinese. This topic was also researched by a another friend of mine, Dr Charles Sedgwick, in his Phd thesis in Sociology at the University of Canterbury. But what I can say in favour of MJ Savage, is that he was certainly not an idiotic person, and cultivated Maori reformers, and that many workingclass people sympathised with him as a sort of benign father of the people. Jurriaan
Re: China
I cannot imagine that I any of my colleague could be trained well enough to go to China and to function as such a high level in such a distant culture. On Sat, Aug 09, 2003 at 12:09:02PM -0700, Eubulides wrote: Why would you be astounded? Ian -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Road to Serfdom
Nice weather we're having this summer, eh? jks Maybe you are having a nice weather there but it is quite hot here in Istanbul. As I see it, we are on our road to fascism. I find it amazing that the Western media is so silent about the recent developments in Turkey. I don't find the topic of (the) market(s) unimportant but you Anglo-Americans can do better if you pay more attention to what is hapenning elsewhere. This may also help this list in that maybe others from other parts of the world would find sharing their experiences with this otherwise Anglo-American list worth the effort. Best and see you when I am back, Sabri PS: Here is an interesting article I just came across: http://www.alternativesjournal.net/tausch.htm What do my economist, and especially econometrician, friends say about it? Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus
Re: China
Marty's note is exactly the sort of a discussion I would have liked to have seen in the earlier discussions about market socialism. Rather than making absolute statements or talking about examples where emotion runs ahead of rationality, he offers an excellent case study. One question I have about the Chinese story: how much was the initial rhetoric about market socialism just a ruse for people who appreciated the opening to get rich quickly? If they were sincere market socialists, then the Chinese example would tend to corroborate my own belief that the incentives of markets are the dominant genes of market socialism and the socialist genes are recessive -- maybe a poor metaphor, but I mean that the market mentality tends to crowd out socialist values under such a scheme. Justin, from our earlier discussions, did not seem to accept my interpretation, but I'm not sure that China vindicates me. Robert McIntyre wrote about market socialism in Bulgaria and East Germany, in which he tried to show that state firms to spun off entrepreneurial businesses to experiment in order to investigate consumer tastes. They did not have profit incentives so there were not exactly market socialism, but they did take advantage of potentially useful properties of markets. One other Chinese question: as in the Russia, much of the successful entrepreneurial (can you use that word to describe the thuggery-corruption infested system that exists today in Russia?) drew upon the outstanding socialist educational system. I'm astounded when I meet Chinese academics to seek a well-trained they are. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
Re: The Road to Serfdom
By this criterion we would need ruthless destruction of many threads. I'd also like to have an example of a thread that went somewhere, as opposed to nowhere. from erewhon, mbs Right. If someone had something to say that has not already been said here, fine, but the discussion the last few times went nowhere.
Fragile
Man o man... Wild scenes inside the gold mine. Thank god for car batteries. I never would have been able to find out anything. (Must keep supply of batteries in house... Must keep supply of batteries in house... Must keep supply of batteries in house...) Seriously, though, this system is as fragile as butterfly wings. Rich beyond belief... and helplessly weak. People were fine, milling around, commenting on never having seen so many stars... but the authorities were absolutely useless. If the mobile phone networks didn't survive, and we didn't have the ability to pool information... it would have been incredibly lonely out there. Ken. -- Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is everything. -- Henri Poincare
Re: The Road to Serfdom
But that is crazy. Not all markets are bad ! Marx did not argue this, nor did any Marxist revolutionary who actually was involved in a successful revolution. If you did argue this, then that would imply capitalism has meant no economic progress at all in any way, which is a ridiculous and undialectical view. I would say that this general dogma or prejudice about markets are bad was responsible for not a few economic disasters in the USSR and China, and it hides what the real issue is precisely about, namely exactly which property relations promote a just and efficient allocation of economic resources in the given context. It is evident that markets or the market is not a homogeneous category, but that a wide range of types of markets is possible, and that what is decisive is the property forms, ownership relations, social class relations and legal framework within which market transactions occur. In this context, Marx's own argument as I understand it is essentially (1) about the generalisation (universalisation) and overextension of markets based on bourgeois private property relations, which acquires an objective, independent, reified dynamic, causing a great deal of harm to human society, as well as developing the productive forces; (2) that a dictatorship of the proletariat would be able to experiment with a variety of property forms, in order to discover methods of resource allocation which fit best with social priorities - an experimentation which cannot occur in bourgeois society except in a very marginal sense; (3) that the historic objective is to supplant market allocation increasingly by direct methods of allocation which are more just, effective and efficient - methods which already anticipated in society as it exists today in many cases. The loss of this discourse in the socialist movement divides radicalism into two camps: sectarian socialists jabbering and blabbering about reform versus revolution without knowing what they are talking about, and applying wrongheaded critiques of social democracy, on the one hand; and Greenies who want to introduce all sorts of alternatives with a deformed view of what markets are, and how they really function in capitalist society, abstracting from the relations of social classes in so doing. If this situation continues, we might as well kiss socialism goodbye. Jurriaan - Original Message - From: andie nachgeborenen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 4:42 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The Road to Serfdom You don't understand. There are two thins Michael has forbidden on pen-l. One is rudeness. The other is discussion of market socialism. Markets are BAD, that is settled, leftist economists don't have to think about that any more -- and on pen-l, they can't talk about it. I am too tired and busy to talk about it anymore anyway. jks
Re: Fragile
I am still trying to figure out what happened. TV is out. Radio is repeating same stuff. CNN site didn't work, last I tried it. CBC.ca is repeating CBC Radio. Anyone outside the zone of collapse with better data? I wrote: but the authorities were absolutely useless. The height of the stupidity, in this region of the collapse, was when some clown named Bruce Campbell (representing Ontario's Independent Market Operators) held a 10 second press conference and said that it may take a couple days -- and then didn't say where it would take a couple days, why it would take a couple days, or what the hell he was talking about. Avril Benoit, on CBC Radio 1, almost gasped when she heard this from a reporter. As did I. Because there was nothing else to explain the blackout or the reason for it taking a couple days. No gas stations, no stores, no bank machines. Should one travel? Should one store water? Aside from being fired as communications stooge for the IMO, I also support any effort by the Campbell Clan to summarily execute him at the next highland games. Ken. -- Most men are within a finger's breadth of being mad. -- Diogenes the Cynic (perhaps aptly so-called)
a double dip?
http://www.levy.org/docs/ppb/ppb73.pdf Public Policy Brief Summary Asset and Debt Deflation in the United States How Far Can Equity Prices Fall? No. 73, 2003 Philip Arestis and Elias Karakitsos In an asset and debt deflation, the process of reducing debt by saving and curtailing spending takes a long time, say the authors. Current imbalances and poor prospects for spending in the private sector affect the balance sheets of the commercial banks. The downward spiral between the banks and the private sector induces a credit crunch that adversely affects the U.S. economy, which is vulnerable to exogenous shocks and lacks the foundations for a new, long-lasting business cycle.
Fragile
If you're a big fan of Philip K. Dick, perhaps you might wish to subject yourself to Weird Scenes Inside the Godmind, I'm not in a position to comment on that. However, if your looking for a good, entertaining, coherent story you'll have to look elsewhere. So if you want some weird scenes, turn up The Doors real loud and listen, you'll likely enjoy the experience much better. http://www.sfsite.com/01a/gm143.htm There's danger on the edge of town, Ride the king's highway. Weird scenes inside the goldmine; ride the king's highway west, baby. Power failure because of the heat ? 13-08-2003 - Krista van Velzen has on behalf of the SP asked the Minister of Economic Affairs for clarification about impending power shortages. She wants to know among other things what measures the Minister wants to take to avoid them. Additionally she asked whether there exists an emergency plan and what th arrangements are there. Since energy production was transferred to the free market, the reserve capacity has reduced. Reserve capacity is stagnant most of the time and commercial enterprises have an interest in investing in it only if the price increases due to electricity shortages. The investments therefore are always made too late. The financial interest is put ahead of the public interest by the commercial enterprises. Now that the generation plants because of the heat must use less cooling water, capacity problems are becoming urgent. If there is a supplying plant which fails, or if electricity consumption increases, the lights go out in parts of the Nethelands. In the American state of California, electricity supply failed for longer periods regularly, after electricity supplies were privatised. There, too, reserve capacity was immediately reduced. The Socialist party warned for months that similar situations could occur in the Netherlands. http://www.sp.nl/db/nieuws/kamernieuwspage.html/1868
unemployment crisis?
considering the source, this is pretty radical: August 7, 2003/New York Times Despair of the Jobless By BOB HERBERT The folks who put the voodoo back in economics keep telling us that prosperity is just around the corner. For the unemployed, that would mean more jobs. Are there more jobs just around the corner? This alleged economic upturn is not just a jobless recovery, it's a job loss recovery. The hemorrhaging of jobs in the aftermath of the recent mild recession is like nothing the U.S. has seen in more than half a century. Millions continue to look desperately for work, and millions more have given up in despair. The stories have been rolling in for some time about the stresses and misfortunes that are inevitably associated with long-term joblessness: the bankruptcies, foreclosures and evictions, the dreams deferred, the mental difficulties - anxiety, depression - the excessive drinking and abuse of drugs, the family violence. There are few things more miserable than to need a job and be unable to find one. How bad is it? The Economic Policy Institute in Washington reported last week that since the business cycle expansion began in November 2001, payrolls have contracted by 1 million (1.2 million in the private sector), making this the weakest recovery in terms of employment since the [Bureau of Labor Statistics] began tracking monthly data in 1939. John A. Challenger, who runs the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray Christmas, said it is taking an average of 20 weeks for job seekers to find employment, and many are unable to match their previous salary. Employers have all the cards, he said. Not only are they sharpening their salary pencils, but the screening of candidates is probably the toughest it has ever been. The official jobless rate, now 6.2 percent, does not come close to reflecting how grim the employment situation really is. The official rate refers only to those actively seeking work. It does not count the discouraged workers, who have looked for jobs within the last 12 months but have given up because of the lack of offers. Then there are the involuntary part-timers, who would like full-time jobs but cannot find them. And there are people who have had to settle for jobs that pay significantly less than jobs they once held. When you combine the unemployed and the underemployed, you are talking about a percentage of the work force that is in double digits. That's an awful lot of lost purchasing power for a society that needs broad-based wage growth among its consumers to remain economically viable. Most Americans depend on their paychecks to get from one week to the next. If you cut off that paycheck, everything tends to go haywire. Right now there is no plan, no strategy for turning this employment crisis around. There is not even a sense of urgency. At the end of July the Bush administration sent its secretaries of commerce, labor and treasury on a bus tour of Wisconsin and Minnesota to tell workers that better days are coming. But they offered no real remedies, and the president himself went on a monthlong vacation. The simple truth is that the interests of the Bush administration's primary constituency, corporate America, do not coincide with the fundamental interests of workaday Americans. On the business side of this divide, increased profits are realized by showing the door to as many workers as possible, and squeezing the remainder to the bursting point. Productivity (based primarily on improvements in technology) is way up. Hiring, of course, is down. Part-time and temporary workers are in; full-time workers with benefits are out. And then there's the ominous trend of sending higher-skilled jobs overseas to low-wage places like India and China, an upscale reprise of the sweatshop phenomenon that erased so many U.S. manufacturing jobs over the past quarter century. Working Americans need jobs just to survive. But the Bush administration equates the national interest with corporate interests, and in that equation workers can only lose. There are ways to spark the creation of good jobs on a large scale in the U.S. (I will explore some of them in a future column.) But that would require vision, a long-term financial investment and, most important, a commitment at the federal level to the idea that it is truly in the nation's interest to keep as many Americans as possible gainfully employed. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Fragile
- Original Message - From: Kenneth Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am still trying to figure out what happened. TV is out. Radio is repeating same stuff. CNN site didn't work, last I tried it. CBC.ca is repeating CBC Radio. Anyone outside the zone of collapse with better data? === Niagra Mohawk is holding a press conference as I type. Here's the phone #'s etc. Ken and all other Canadians should be able to dial the numbers as if they were in the US. National Grid Press Conference Call, Syracuse NY, 10:30 p.m. Telephone Numbers: . U.S. 877-715-5318 . Outside U.S. 001-973-582-2720 What: National Grid's electricity delivery subsidiary in New York, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, will conduct a press conference at its Syracuse NY office regarding the power outages that affected its service area today. When: Thursday, August 14, 2003-10:30 p.m. Where: Niagara Mohawk auditorium 300 Erie Blvd., West Syracuse, NY Participants: William Edwards, President and Chief Executive Officer, Niagara Mohawk Digital replay will be available for 24 hours by calling: U.S. 877-519-4471 Outside U.S. 001-973-341-3080 Pin Number: 4124370 http://www.niagaramohawk.com/
Re: Fragile
Yeah, I botched Mr. Morrison's lyrics. Shows you how rattled I was. There's danger on the edge of town, Ride the king's highway. Weird scenes inside the goldmine; ride the king's highway west, baby. Lemme tell ya, I was more than ready to ride the highway west, baby. But, then, friends in Windsor were saying they had no power either. And I don't want to keep going past that and live in California if they are going to elect Arnold. Thanks for the input, Jurriaan. Ken. -- If you give this man a ride, Sweet Emily will die. Riders on the storm. -- Jim Morrison
Germany
Return of recession dashes German hopes Stagnant economy defies Schröder's reform efforts · Investment bank's fate in the balance David Gow, industrial editor Friday August 15, 2003 The Guardian Germany sank into recession in the first half of this year, dragging Italy, Holland and most of the rest of mainland Europe with it, official figures showed yesterday. Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and his economics minister, Wolfgang Clement, insisted that the 0.1% contraction in the second quarter after 0.2% in the first showed the economy in stagnation rather than recession. But economists warned that the strength of the euro, which has depressed German exports, falling personal incomes and subdued consumer spending would carry over into next year. Amid forecasts of 4.75 million unemployed next year - a rise of half a million - the federal statistics office said Germany had entered a technical recession for the second time in two years - killing off government forecasts of 0.75% growth this year. Berlin's DIW institute has forecast that the economy will shrink by 0.1% this year before growing 1.3% in 2004, helped by a larger number of working days. Kiel's IfW sees zero growth this year followed by 1.8% in 2004. Mr Schröder, fighting to push through planned economic and social reforms, including ?16.9bn (£12.5bn) of early tax cuts next year, said sentiment pointed to a recovery in the second half. Mr Clement blamed the weak global environment, appreciation of the euro and continuing uncertainty after the war in Iraq for Germany's plight - along with strikes in eastern Germany's manufacturing sector earlier this year. However, we expect a slight recovery in the second half and the beginning of the economic turnaround that we desperately need, he said, pointing to low interest rates and the planned reforms. The social democrat-led government is banking on a pick-up in business confidence to kick-start the economy but several German companies, many of them laying off staff, warned of depressed demand. ThyssenKrupp, the steel group, reported third quarter pre-tax earnings down from ?316m to ?221m, and warned that its target of ?1.5bn full year profits next year would have to be revised if weakness in its core markets persisted. If the weakness continues in the coming months, particularly in our important automobile, construction and engineering markets, we will reconsider our plans ... The economic parameters have consistently deteriorated, said Ekkehard Schulz, the chief executive. Wolfgang Reitzle, the former Jaguar chief and now head of forklift truck maker Linde, said the company was beginning to see good results after reporting a 9.6% fall in first half profits to ?253m. But he warned that the weak economy and strong euro were damaging prospects. Deutsche Telekom said the weak economy - and renewed competition - cut domestic sales 5.5% to ?6.2bn, but it beat forecasts by announcing a net profit of ?256m in the second quarter, compared with a loss of ?2bn last year. The company, which has cut thousands of jobs, bucked the gloomy trend by saying it had cut its debt to ?53bn, reaching its target six months early, and planned to reinstate dividend payments that were suspended last year in 2005. E.On, Germany's largest utility, announced a 19% rise in operating profit to ?2.68bn as it acquired a majority stake in Swedish energy company Graninge. It already owns Powergen in the UK. The recession in Europe's largest economy helped propel the rest of the mainland towards prolonged contraction, held up only during the second quarter by 0.4% growth in Greece. The European commission predicted a rise in activity in the second half, driven by consumer spending.
Re: Isaac Deutscher's anecdote about the readership of Marx's Capital in the ...
Okay, fair enough, I'm playing by your rules. You are correct, Melvin is some kind of socialist, and I should control my temper when posting. However, I am not putting anybody in my killfile, I do not have one, except in the sense that I block mails from certain verbally abusive individuals. I am giving Melvin P., whoever that is, the free choice of reading exactly what I say and responding to that, in which case I discuss it in a rational, sensible manner, or else getting no response at all. I try my best to write clearly and precisely, and if I fail, I try my best to correct it or I stand corrected by somebody else. But I cannot very well discuss with somebody who willfully misrepresents what I say, that is just a dialogue of the deaf, and we learn nothing new from that. Regards Jurriaan - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 4:08 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Isaac Deutscher's anecdote about the readership of Marx's Capital in the ... You are welcome to do what you want, but this sort of personal response does not belong here. Announcing that you are putting someone in your killfile just raises the level of hostility.
Re: Fragile
You are one helluva good man, Euble. I appear to have missed it, or be caught between the replay and conference. I will check it out on replay, though. Many, many thanks. Ken. -- He took a face from the ancient gallery, And he walked on down the hall. -- Jim Morrison
Re: Fragile
Ah, the vaunted efficiency of capitalism. Paul P Quoting Kenneth Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am still trying to figure out what happened. TV is out. Radio is repeating same stuff. CNN site didn't work, last I tried it. CBC.ca is repeating CBC Radio. Anyone outside the zone of collapse with better data? I wrote: but the authorities were absolutely useless. The height of the stupidity, in this region of the collapse, was when some clown named Bruce Campbell (representing Ontario's Independent Market Operators) held a 10 second press conference and said that it may take a couple days -- and then didn't say where it would take a couple days, why it would take a couple days, or what the hell he was talking about. Avril Benoit, on CBC Radio 1, almost gasped when she heard this from a reporter. As did I. Because there was nothing else to explain the blackout or the reason for it taking a couple days. No gas stations, no stores, no bank machines. Should one travel? Should one store water? Aside from being fired as communications stooge for the IMO, I also support any effort by the Campbell Clan to summarily execute him at the next highland games. Ken. -- Most men are within a finger's breadth of being mad. -- Diogenes the Cynic (perhaps aptly so-called) - This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
making Frankfurters
If you put a spaniard in the works do you get a frankfurter? Gene Jurriaan Bendien wrote: a classic book that in some ways summarizes the Frankfurt school viewpoint for me is Orwell's _1984_, where there is total domination and no hope. Well, the domination is not total, because Winston revolts and, for example, has an affair with Julia (the description of the character Julia owes much to Wilhelm Reich's analysis of fascism). In fact, Orwell refers to the hopes Winston feels, in seeking to meet Julia. snip Orwell's story contrasts with Ira Levin's (in my opinion) superior story, which is more attuned to American imagery, called "This Perfect Day", where Chip ends up destroying the machine, because he has understood its functioning, and can put a spaniard in the works, which blows up the entire system that oppresses him. snip
Re: California/whose running . . .morphing
In a message dated 8/7/03 10:31:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My democracy is a life force - praxis. I have pen and will travel. This California thing is exciting and dangerous. I will go to work because electoral democracy means contacting people and creating the next "infrastructure of battle." No matter who I end up working for, and I am not opposed to Larry Flynt, - although Arnold scares the hell out of me, my agenda is working class politics. Here is an opportunity - during an authentic political crisis, to fight to begin shaping a class program. This means food, shelter, clothing, transportation, medical care, educational issues, energy question and how one is to make "ends meet." Arnold S. scares me to death. I love his movies but the American people have to be told why they cannot elect a "Terminator." This is not a Marxist analysis but gut political instinct. From California to the President. I have a very very bad feeling about California. Who is Arnold going to terminate? None of this stuff can be found in a book. Books help shape perspective. I am probably wrong and want to be wrong but this feels like a political juncture in our history. God, I hope we do not look back twenty years from now and day, California was our political Stalingrad. Then again I am probably being to emotional but my freaking bags are packed and I am not going quietly into the night. I have a very bad feeling about this one . . . this "thing" in California. Time to pack them carpet bags boys and girls. Melvin P.
Re: Martix for price discrimination
Of course there are ways around such laws. That's what they pay me all this money for! But they are not foolproof, and litigation is a cost (a very substantial cost -- they do pay us lots and los of money) ans also a risk. You might lose and get stuck with treble damages. That would be very bad. jks --- Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right. What about airline tickets? There are ways around such laws. On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 02:58:50PM -0700, andie nachgeborenen wrote: Price discrimination is an antitrust violation -- the statute is the Robinson-Patman Act -- that can expose the defendant to treble damages in a civil action, and even if you win you have to pay me, or someone like me, really godawful amounts of money to get you off. (This is in fact largely what I do for a living.) So, the citizen plaintiff is not without recourse! jks --- michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anon. 2003. Is Price Discrimination The Next Big Trend In Commerce? San Jose Mercury News (7 August). The Internet also gives sellers more information about consumers than ever before -- how many products they buy and when, perhaps even how many each can afford. Eventually, two people might get the same pop-up ad for the same Zippo lighter, but one ad pitches them for $15 while another says they're $10. This vision of the Internet is the basis of a new analysis from Andrew Odlyzko, a former Bell Labs mathematician now at the University of Minnesota's Digital Technology Center. Odlyzko expects price discrimination to become more pervasive not only because so much personal data is being collected in online commerce but also as technology, in the name of protecting copyrights, limits what people can do with online content. a few years ago, Coca-Cola Co. experimented with a vending machine that automatically raised prices in hot weather. the economy could suffer if technology helps suppliers engage in price discrimination against producers of important goods and services. http://www.dtc.umn.edu/7/8odlyzko/doc/privacy.economics.pdf -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: Background of David Kay
But if someone shows u what is verifiably a tree and claims that it was there all along the persons background is relevant to determining whether that is true or whether he or she likely had it planted in order to convince u that it was there. Of course a person's interests and background do not prove that they are lying or are twisting the truth but they should surely send up flags as to the probabilities. One can't say that if Kay discovers something it is a plant because of his background but it certainly should generate a degree of scepticism. If the US were much interested in assuring everyone that they were objective, they would not hire him but would use the UN as a cover again. I gather they dont even feel the need to do this. Your idea that there could be some simple uncontrovertible finding of WMD is a highly unlikely scenario. Whatever is found may be planted or even if not planted whatever is uncovered will be given a political spin. It is important to understand who is spinning and how credible they may be. Cheers, Ken Hanly One does not need to know anything whatever about his background -- EVEN IF it has been as the world's comparatively longest record-holder for truth telling, as attested to by the proverbial one-hundred (assuming: not child-molesting) Bishops -- to have the good sense to reconize that avowed optimism (a purported report merely about one's mental state) does not tell anyone anything of substance about whether, at some unstated and presently unknown and also unknowable future time, in some not described place, he will (or won't) find even a not-controversially described widget (e.g., a tree), nor would correspondingly similar conclusory statements of not-disclosed evidence of a cover-up communicate anything whatever of substance about whether there has (or has not) been a cover-up. If, conversely, an otherwise past-lying S.O.B. or (overt or covert) C.I.A. agent, or both, shows me what verifiably is a tree -- or, for that matter, what can be reasonably described, in fact, to be weapons of mass destruction -- those objects would be no less so because of his/her background is of the sort this thread's initiator (and, apparently, Mr. Devine) find interesting as, meanwhile, Mr. Kay's history (including what k hanly implied has not been announced) has been very widely reported, including on . . . [gasp!] . . . FOX- TV.
Re: Fragile
If I like Arnold in particular fictional movies, that doesn't mean automatically I support him as a non-fiction political actor. A fictional movie is essentially a fantasy. But the governorship of California is not a fantasy, it is a real political responsibility for real people living real lives. If I was a Stalinist, or a neo-fascist, or a racist-Hitlerite type of neanderthal Marxist, or a fundamentalist christian, then of course I would argue that either you support Arnold as movie star, person and political candidate, or you oppose Arnold as movie star, person and political candidate, in black-and-white, yes-or-no terms. But I like SOME movies by Arnold and when I consider Arnold as a political candidate for the Governorship of California, I don't give a shit about his moviestar credentials, I look at what he has to offer as a politician, his political experience, his friends, his policies, his supporters and so on, and I look at what workingclass Californian people want, and whether Arnold can really deliver on that. Arnold might attract votes because of the magic of the flesh, or the magic of the movies, but people with any brains look beyond magic at real policies, real political interests, real consequences for their own lives and communities. Personally I would be more inclined to vote for Peter Camejo or somebody like that (I do not know whether there is a Socialist Party in California). But you would never catch me saying that Arnold is an idiot or something like that, he might be a very likeable person, but that is neither here nor there, except if I met him personally - in political affairs, it is what he stands for and what he politically represents, that counts. In Britain, there's a movie star parliamentarian for New Labour, I just forgot her name for a moment. I liked some of her movies, but that doesn't mean that I thereby necessarily support her political views or actions. Similarly, New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark fancies herself as a bit of an artist. But her artistic merits ought to be evaluated quite separately from her political behaviour, except where art is pressed into the service of politics, in which case I look at what political interests or constituency the art represents, and the truth-content of the art. Just because you have a lot of muscle, or just because you have a lot of brains, or a lot of beauty, doesn't mean that you will make a good politician. A good politician accurately represents the immediate and long-term interests of his constituency, and doesn't bullshit about that, but explains it in a principled manner, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to honour his commitment. This is not a simply question of intelligence, strength and beauty, but a question of loyalty to your own constituency and capacity for objectivity. A lack of objectivity means that the politician claims to represent something, but really represents something else. Now, politics is a complex game full of contradictory impulses, but we ought to expect that a politician delivers at least on the basics I have sketched, even if human error occurs. Jurriaan
Re: making Frankfurters
It depends how far away the spaniard is from the Frankfurter. J. - Original Message - From: Eugene Coyle To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 5:46 AM Subject: [PEN-L] making Frankfurters If you put a spaniard in the works do you get a frankfurter?GeneJurriaan Bendien wrote: a classic book that in some ways summarizes the Frankfurt school viewpoint for me is Orwell's _1984_, where there is total domination and no hope. Well, the domination is not total, because Winston revolts and, for example, has an affair with Julia (the description of the character Julia owes much to Wilhelm Reich's analysis of fascism). In fact, Orwell refers to the hopes Winston feels, in seeking to meet Julia. snip Orwell's story contrasts with Ira Levin's (in my opinion) superior story, which is more attuned to American imagery, called "This Perfect Day", where Chip ends up destroying the machine, because he has understood its functioning, and can put a spaniard in the works, which blows up the entire system that oppresses him. snip
yet more socializing of costs at the DoD
[Federal Register: August 7, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 152)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 47149-47200] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07au03-10] [[Page 47149]] --- Part II Department of Defense --- 32 CFR Part 21, et al. DoD Grant and Agreement Regulations; Final Rule [[Page 47150]] --- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary 32 CFR Parts 21, 22, 32, 34, and 37 RIN 0790-AG87 DoD Grant and Agreement Regulations AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD. ACTION: Final rule. --- SUMMARY: The Department of Defense (DoD) is adding a new part to the DoD Grant and Agreement Regulations (DoDGARs) to incorporate policies and procedures for the award and administration of technology investment agreements (TIAs). TIAs are a relatively new class of assistance instruments. DoD Components use TIAs to support or stimulate defense research projects involving for-profit firms, especially commercial firms that do business primarily in the commercial marketplace. The new part therefore gives DoD agreements officers greater flexibility to negotiate award provisions in areas that can present barriers to those commercial firms (e.g., intellectual property, audits, and cost principles). The DoD also is revising several additional parts of the DoDGARs to conform them with the new part. DATES: These final rules are effective on September 8, 2003. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Herbst, (703) 696-0372. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-18927.htm [for full announcement]
Report on Venezuelan Labour (8 August 2003)
Dear Friends, I hope you find the following note of interest and will forward it to relevant lists and individuals. in solidarity, michael Report on Venezuelan Labour: the Process Continues Michael A. Lebowitz 8 August 2003 Nationalise the Banks! Take over enterprises that have shutdown and run them instead by workers! Refuse to pay the external debt and use the funds to create jobs! Reduce the workweek to 36 hours! Create new enterprises under workers control!--- These were some of the demands that emerged from the action programme workshop, which were enthusiastically endorsed by delegates to the first National Congress of the National Union of Workers (UNT) of Venezuela on August 1-2. After years of support for neo-liberalism by the Accion Democratica-dominated Confederation of Venezuelan Workers (CTV) culminated in that organisations involvement in the (quickly-overturned) coup of April 2002 against President Hugo Chavez and in the CTVs subsequent support for the business federation (Fedecamaras) in the general lock-out of last December-January, UNT (UNETE) was founded in April to provide a voice and instrument for working people. This first Congress brought together more than 1300 registered participants representing over 120 unions and 25 regional federations to determine the general outlines of the new federation--- its internal statutes, election mechanisms, code of ethics, basic principles and action programme. The greatest agreement and passion was over the principles and the action plan. From the workshop on principles came the clear call for the transformation of capitalist society into a self-managing society, for a new model of anti-capitalist and autonomous development that emancipates human beings from class exploitation, oppression, discrimination and exclusion'. This declaration for an autonomous, democratic, solidaristic and internationalist, classist, independent, unitary (representing the whole working class) movement with equality for men and women was cheered by all those present at the plenary session. As occurred at a number of points, the chant emerged--- the working class united will never be defeated'! The meaning of many of these principles became clear in the points endorsed for the programme of action. While the participants were unequivocal in their support for many initiatives of the Chavez government (e.g. the literacy programme, the introduction of Cuban doctors into poor neighbourhoods, housing construction, the law suspending lay-offs and the rejection of FTAA), their positions on nationalising the banks, the external debt, and work hours among other aspects went far beyond the current positions of the government. Further, UNTs independence was demonstrated by its strong positions against specific government ministries--- demanding that inspectors of work who are anti-worker be removed by the Ministry of Labour and criticising the Minister of Health and calling for the declaration of a national emergency in health--- and in its call for reforms within the state itself (to create the revolution within the revolution). Where there was less agreement, however, was with respect to internal statutes and electoral procedures. For some, the Statutes were far too like those of the CTV, an organisation infamous for its lack of internal democracy and its corruption. Here, where there was much potential for division over such matters as recall procedures, term limits, asset declarations, proportional representation, distribution of dues etc, an important decision was made--- go back to the base, i.e., send this back to the individual unions for full discussion of the issues. The same decision was made in relation to decisions about the 76 articles of electoral regulations (even though only 6 were questioned)--- back to the base. Since these were matters critical in providing the basis for, among other things, the finance to carry out the struggle, it was decided that a National Assembly of UNT would be convened within two months to resolve these matters. The first national congress of UNT concluded with a declaration condemning the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and its Plan Colombia. Hasta la Victoria Siempre, Ches motto, could be heard here--- as at other points. The Unete congress was an important step in turning away from what the Minister of Labour Maria Cristina Iglesias has called the evil axis of Fedecamaras and CTV. But, it was not a complete success. For one, in the days before the Congress, UNTs temporary 21 member steering committee (or portions of it) decided that the Unitary Confederation of Workers (CUTV), an affiliate of the World Federation of Trade Unions, which had been involved in the creation of UNT from the outset, could not integrate with its regional organisations; as a result, many of its militants stayed away from this congress. Further, a conspicuous absence was that of Ramon Machuca,
Re: What is to be done in Argentina
All Argentina needs is a few latter-day Lenins who can write a What is to be Done updated for the current struggle. do you think that writing a book can have that big an effect? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
The US/China Axis
[This headline is a little more alarmist than the article. Depending on timing, this delay mechanism could turn out to be a good thing, delaying the deflationary shock to China until it could bear the full weight of adjustment the US needs. Although of course it also go the other way; the delay could makes things worse.] [But what's interesting to me is that this way of conceiving the process suggests both the mechanism by which US current account adjustment is being put off and a time limit to it. It suggests that it was possible to put off US current account adjustment for as long as China and Japan were in deflation. Now China at least has reached the point where it's not. When it reaches a reasonable inflation rate, it will stop propping up its currency by buying US bonds and accept appreciation, and the US current account deficit rachet down a major notch. And a similar time delay mechanism would operate vis a vis Japan. The European component has already kicked in, but is a lesser contributor to adjustment because of the lesser trade.] Financial Times; Jul 31, 2003 COMMENT: The Fed is in a dangerous game with China By Chen Zhao The Federal Reserve is taking no half measures in its efforts to stimulate economic recovery in the US. To ward off the spectre of deflation, it is prepared to generate inflation and reflate the asset bubble. China is a silent but active partner in the Fed's pump-priming. It would not be possible for US Treasury bond yields to be at current levels were China not a willing and able supplier of savings to the US. Combined annual purchases of Treasury securities from China and Hong Kong have reached $290bn - more than those by any other creditor nation. Both China and the US are having fun at this game. The flow of Chinese savings has enabled Americans to borrow more and spend more. Long- term bond yields are still very low, in spite of the recent bond market shake-out. The refinancing boom continues. The collapse in borrowing costs is reviving capital spending. China is glad to see Americans going on another shopping spree. Its factories are cranking up production at an unprecedented pace and capacity is tightening. China's exports to the US jumped 35 per cent in the first quarter compared with the first quarter of last year and the trend is accelerating. The US's bilateral trade deficit with China has reached $110bn, bigger than with any other country. In effect, China is trading goods for US paper. The rapid accumulation of Chinese reserves means the Chinese are buying dollars to keep their own currency steady. This has allowed US interest rates to remain low, which in turn has encouraged American consumers to buy more Chinese goods. This game of trading goods for paper creates a hyper-stimulative environment for both countries' economies - which authorities on both sides of the Pacific want. The Chinese and US currencies are falling against the euro, money supply in both economies is going up and interest rates are low. All of these are powerful stimulants for economic growth and share prices. So far there are no signs that the Chinese are about to change course. Despite intensifying calls to revalue the currency, the authorities recently increased the value added tax rebate for exporters. The rebate amounts to a de facto devaluation aimed at providing pre-emptive protection against a growing number of anti-dumping investigations of Chinese exports. This action suggests that it is naive to think the central bank will soon allow the currency to float upwards. Nevertheless, trading goods for paper works only up to a point. While the game serves the purposes of Chinese and US policymakers alike, it also creates enormous economic and financial distortions that are both self-limiting and self-defeating. With a collapse in interest rates fuelling consumer spending, it is conceivable that the US current account deficit will explode upwards. There is no magic number the current account deficit must reach to signal an impending crisis - but there has never been a nation that has been able to increase its reliance on foreign savings without eventually hitting a brick wall. In the meantime, China will accumulate inflationary pressure. Its economy has been booming for some time and foreign exchange intervention has further fuelled money and credit expansion. China has already climbed out of deflation, with its consumer price index rising at an annualised rate of 1 per cent. Granted, this is a very low inflation rate. Still, with soaring money supply, surging exports, expanding reserves, strengthening consumer spending and fast growth in property investment, inflation will keep rising. When will the party come to an end? When the Chinese have had enough. That will happen when inflation in China approaches 3-4 per cent - which it could do within the next six months or so. At that point, the central bank will be forced to revalue the currency. Another potentially
Re: Green
I wrote: I think it's useful to avoid mushing concepts together that way. Ken: I don't see that as mushing. I see it as evolving language. I don't think we should go with the linguistic flow. Instead, we should try to use language as clearly as possible (by being clear about our own definitions, for ourselves and for others). (NB: I am not saying that there exists a single hard-and-fast definition that's true for any given word.) god, I wish I were. Los Angeles and mediocre Catholic academia are not good places for activism. Nor do the responsibilities of fatherhood encourage activism (at least with my kid). Brother, I know. I meant no offense. none was taken. Jim
Re: Fragile
Fame is a fickle food Upon a shifting plate, Whose table once a Guest, but not The second time, is set. Whose crumbs the crows inspect, And with ironic caw Flap past it to the Farmer's corn; Men eat of it and die. - Emily Dickinson - Original Message - From: Kenneth Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 5:10 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Fragile Yeah, I botched Mr. Morrison's lyrics. Shows you how rattled I was. There's danger on the edge of town, Ride the king's highway. Weird scenes inside the goldmine; ride the king's highway west, baby. Lemme tell ya, I was more than ready to ride the highway west, baby. But, then, friends in Windsor were saying they had no power either. And I don't want to keep going past that and live in California if they are going to elect Arnold. Thanks for the input, Jurriaan. Ken. -- If you give this man a ride, Sweet Emily will die. Riders on the storm. -- Jim Morrison
Re: What is to be done in Argentina
Doug Henwood wrote: When I interviewed Naomi Klein, who spent most of the past year in Argentina, she said that there were so many sectarian Trot parties trying to tell the spontaneous mass assemblies what to do that they turned lots of people off from politics. Instead of following the vanguard into revolution, the masses went home. Yeah, but Naomi Klein has little to offer Argentina herself. In a Nation Magazine article, she criticizes sectarian Trotskyist formations but she also says that autonomism is a problem as well: Rather than challenge sectarian efforts at co-optation head-on, many of the assemblies and unemployed unions turned inward and declared themselves autonomous. While the parties' plans verged on scripture, some autonomists turned not having a plan into its own religion: So wary were they of co-optation any proposal to move from protest to policy was immediately suspect. full: http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030526s=klein I think that Argentina does need a socialist revolution. It is too bad that this is not part of her vocabulary. In the final analysis, the global justice movement not only does not address the question of state power in a particular country, it is ideologically hostile to that sort of project. I would recommend the astute James Petras for a balance sheet on Argentina: While the unemployed workers movement initially proved promising in pressuring for jobs and funding for local projects, it soon confronted a series of serious problems. First the movement appealed to only a fraction of the unemployed workers less than 10% of the 4 million. Secondly while the MTDs were quite militant, their demands continued to focus on the 150 peso a month public works contracts there was little political depth or political-class consciousness beyond the leaders and their immediate followers. The assumption of many of the leftist-anarchist and Marxists was that the crises itself would radicalize the workers, or that the radical tactics of street blockages would automatically create a radical outlook. Particularly harmful in this regard were a small group of university students who propagated theories of spontaneous transformations based on not seeking political or state power but retaining local allegiances around small scale projects. Their guru, a British professor devoid of any experience with Argentine popular movements, provided an intellectual gloss to the practices of his local student followers. In practice, the deep structural problems persisted and the new Duhalde government soon initiated a major effort to pacify the rebellious townships of unemployed workers, providing over 2 million job contracts for 6 months, distributed by his loyal point men and women in the barrios. This move undercut the drawing power of the radical leaders of the MTD to extend their organizations and provided the Peronist party the organizational links to the poor and unemployed for future elections, particularly since the movement leaders rejected electoral politics and neglected any sort of political education. Over time most of the initial followers of the anarchist, spontaneist and no-power grouplets abandoned them for the Peronist-controlled unemployment committees. full: http://www.rebelion.org/petras/english/030604petras.pdf -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
FOMC minutes
http://www.federalreserve.gov/fomc/minutes/20030625.htm Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee June 24-25, 2003 A meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee was held in the offices of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C., starting on Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 2:30 p.m. and continuing on Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. == Fed Considered Bigger Rate Cut In Late June But Impact Was Feared By John M. Berry Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, August 15, 2003; Page E01 Some Federal Reserve officials wanted to lower a key short-term interest rate by half a percentage point when they met in late June because of continued economic weakness and concerns about falling inflation, according to minutes of the meeting released yesterday. But the central bank's policymaking group chose to cut the rate by a quarter-point instead, in part because of concerns that the larger cut would send the wrong message about their view of the economy and their intentions for future action. Many financial market participants were disappointed by the Fed's decision because they had come to expect a half-point cut in the central bank's target for overnight rates because of the public statements made before the meeting by a number of Fed officials. The degree of disagreement among the officials at the meeting was unusual. Not only were members of the Federal Open Market Committee, the central bank's top policymaking group, divided over the size of the cut, one member wanted no cut at all, according to minutes. Given the strong desire among Fed policymakers for consensus, only one official, Robert T. Parry, president of the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank, voted to dissent, the minutes show. Parry wanted the larger cut as insurance against continued sluggishness in economic activity and further declines in inflation measures to undesirably low rates, the minutes said. The minutes do not otherwise identify by name which officials argued for which actions. But they do say that the committee member who would have preferred no cut agreed to go along with a quarter-point reduction. The committee's action at the June meeting reduced the Fed's already extremely low 1.25 percent target to 1 percent, and the group left it unchanged when they met again Tuesday. The officials were considering a half-point cut in June because there was still no solid evidence then that relatively weak U.S. economic growth was picking up, and there was concern that the nation's low inflation rate could fall further than they thought was safe. Some commented that a good case could be made for a half-percentage point easing, the minutes said. But the committee members arguing for the smaller reduction felt that at 1.25 percent the target was already so low that it was helping stimulate economic activity, and some in the group said they saw some preliminary signs of better growth. That group also noted that large federal income tax cuts enacted earlier in the year were to become effective in July and would further stimulate the economy. Some of those arguing for the quarter-point cut also felt that the larger reduction might be misinterpreted by the market in at least two ways. First, a half-point cut might be seen as an indication of more concern among policymakers about the economic outlook than was in fact the case, the minutes said. In addition, it could have been taken as a signal that the committee would not cut rates again anytime soon, a judgment that the group was not ready to make, the minutes added. As Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan disclosed in congressional testimony last month, there was also an extended discussion of steps the Fed could take to stimulate the economy even if the target for overnight rates was at or close to zero. Such a situation, though regarded as a remote possibility, could arise if the inflation rate fell to zero, or if broad measures of prices of goods and services began to decline, a condition known as deflation. Lowering the overnight rate target close to zero could have adverse repercussions on the functioning of some sectors of the money market, but the committee agreed that would not stop them from reducing rates to that point if economic conditions required it, the minutes said. There was no description of such adverse repercussions, but Greenspan has acknowledged that money market mutual funds might have to shut down if overnight rates were close to zero. The committee reached no decision on what additional steps might be taken to stimulate the economy in such circumstances, but they discussed a number of options that could be used, the minutes said. Again, no details were provided, but Greenspan and several other officials have said such actions might include purchasing longer-term government securities from the public to pump more money into the banking system. One reason bond prices have fallen and longer-term
