Re: [PEN-L] People's Revolt in Lebanon

[soula avramidis]

This is a falsification of fact. Obviously mr. bazzi comes from Bint Jbail and 
he is a shiite. the poorest in lebanon are the sunnis of the countryside 
especially in akkar and western bekaa. the shiites are better of though still 
poor. tobacco growing allowed southern lebanon a cash crop that allowed the 
bazzi type this cartton like analyis of asocial situation. class formation in 
the lebanon is not so straight forward. with the exception of beirut and mount 
lebanon, the country side is generally poor. the rents from the state are 
shared along sectarian lines. hizbollah and amal are purely sectarian parties 
that have displaced the communist after 1990 aided by iran and syria, recalling 
that imperialism has a social agenda in the near east. That is why it was easy 
for the hariris to rally poor sunnites with them under the pretext that the 
shiites will hog the state rents. so in short the communist party line in 
lebanon is we are with hizbollah as a resistance force but not
 as a shiite sectarian party vying for a share of the loot from the rentier 
state. the ideological vacuum left behind by the collapse of the soviet union 
is huge allowing now for greater disarticulation between social forms of 
bonding and the material conditions by which people earn their living. as one 
trade unioinist says it is difficult to get two workers from different sects 
who suffer from the same living conditions to unite against their patrons. the 
worse is yet to come because the US needs a sunni shiite divide to bomb iran. 
so the near east is as michel chossudovsky once called it a war theatre.


- Original Message 
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 6:01:52 PM
Subject: People's Revolt in Lebanon


Surprisingly good for The Nation. -- Yoshie


People's Revolt in Lebanon

by MOHAMAD BAZZI

[from the January 8, 2007 issue]

Beirut

Ever since Hezbollah and its allies began an open-ended protest
against the US-backed government on December 1, Beirut's gilded
downtown--built for wealthy Lebanese and foreign tourists--has become
more authentically Lebanese. Where Persian Gulf sheiks once ate sushi,
families now sit in abandoned parking lots, having impromptu picnics,
the smell of kebabs cooked over coals wafting through the air. Young
men lounge on plastic chairs, smoking apple-scented water pipes, and
occasionally break out into debke, the Lebanese national dance.

Most protesters are too poor to afford $4 caffe lattes, but men
hawking shots of strong Arabic coffee for 30 cents apiece are doing a
brisk trade. Nearly all businesses are shuttered, but a few
enterprising store owners have figured out how to cater to the crowd.
One hair salon converted itself into a sandwich shop, selling cheese
on bread with a cup of tea for $1. The smiling cashier works behind a
counter filled with L'Oréal hair products.

"I never came to downtown before these protests. I can't afford to
come here. If I ate a sandwich here, I'd be broke for a week," says
Emad Matairek, a 35-year-old carpenter from the dahiyeh, the
Shiite-dominated suburbs of Beirut. "It's well-known that this area
was not built for us."

The protests are being portrayed in much of the Western media as a
sectarian battle, or a coup attempt--engineered by Hezbollah's two
main allies, Syria and Iran--against a US-backed Lebanese government.
Those are indeed factors underlying the complex and dangerous
political dance happening in Beirut. But the biggest motivator driving
many of those camped out in downtown isn't Iran or Syria, or Sunni
versus Shiite. It's the economic inequality that has haunted Lebanese
Shiites for decades. It's a poor and working-class people's revolt.

In Riad Solh Square, amid dozens of white tents erected for Hezbollah
supporters to sleep in, there is a stage with a huge TV screen and
rows of loudspeakers mostly positioned toward the Grand Serail, the
Ottoman-era palace where Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and his Cabinet
are hunkered down. Between the tents and the palace, behind
eight-foot-high coils of barbed wire, there are hundreds of Lebanese
soldiers toting M-16s and sitting atop armored vehicles. Every night
thousands of people gather in front of the stage, within earshot of
the Serail, demanding that Siniora either resign or accept a national
unity government that gives Hezbollah and its allies greater power.

A major theme highlighted by the protesters is that Siniora is backed
by the Bush Administration--and that alliance did little to help
Lebanon during last summer's thirty-four-day war between Israel and
Hezbollah. A few days into the sit-in, Hezbollah hung a large banner
from a building showing Siniora embracing Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice, over a collage of dead Lebanese children
Photoshopped onto his back. It reads, "Condy--Thanks," a reference to
Siniora's meeting with Rice during the war, when US officia

Re: [PEN-L] People's Revolt in Lebanon

[soula avramidis]

surprisingly bad but so little comes out of the region that even this sounds 
good


- Original Message 
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 6:01:52 PM
Subject: People's Revolt in Lebanon


Surprisingly good for The Nation. -- Yoshie

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

[PEN-L] here's a quotation du jour for degustation (2006 vintage)

[soula avramidis]

"In an expanding world economy, where many raw materials are rapidly becoming 
strategic commodities, the poor ‘stand in the way’ of access to these raw 
materials, not unlike the native American ‘Indians’ being a hindrance to the 
settlers’ use of land. For some United States conservatives, placing the poor 
on ‘reservations’ is an option to be seriously considered. Only a decade ago, 
two American authors recommended the establishment of a custodial state in a 
much publicized book: "by custodial state, we have in mind a high-tech and more 
lavish version of the Indian reservation for some substantial minority of the 
nation’s population, while the rest of America tries to go about its business" 
(Herrnstein and Murray, 1994: 526). The MDGs are uncomfortably close to 
combining the consumption-based view of poverty with the idea of establishing 
reservations where the basic needs of the poor are taken care of while the rest 
of the world gets along with its business."
 p18
Reinert, E.S. "Development and Social Goals: Balancing Aid and Development to 
Prevent 'Welfare Colonialism'." UN/DESA, 2006, Working Paper No. 14.



- Original Message 
From: soula avramidis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 12:21:58 PM
Subject: Re: People's Revolt in Lebanon


surprisingly bad but so little comes out of the region that even this sounds 
good


- Original Message 
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 6:01:52 PM
Subject: People's Revolt in Lebanon


Surprisingly good for The Nation. -- Yoshie



__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

[PEN-L] Navajo traditional elders blockade power plant site

[Charles Brown]

Western Shoshone Defense Project P.O. Box 211308 Crescent Valley, NV  89821

775-468-0230 
775-468-0237 (fax) www.wsdp.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Navajo traditional elders blockade power plant site 

By Brenda Norrell 

BURNHAM, NEW MEXICO, USA 

Elderly Navajo women and their children formed a blockade, built a fire and
camped at the site of a proposed power plant on tribal land in northwest
New Mexico. The blockade of traditional Navajos halted site work in a
region that is already toxic with air and water pollution from power
plants, oil and gas wells and scattered radioactive tailings from the Cold
War. 

Now facing the threat of arrest by tribal police at the blockade, Navajo
elderly, including one medicine man, said they are willing to go to jail to
protect their land and way of life. Most of the elderly are already ill
from living in an area where power plants have released 100 tons of coal
combustion waste that is blowing in the wind. 

One of the Navajo elderly resisters is in a wheelchair and another has
severe asthma. For the second night on Wednesday night, Dec. 13, Navajo
resisters camped in the cold at the site. I have said No over and over
again and you keep coming over! said Nenanezah elder Alice Gilmore, who
holds the grazing permit for the area of the proposed Desert Rock Power
Plant.  

The Navajo Nation and Sithe Global LLC plan to build the power plant, which
would be the third power plant in the Farmington/Bloomfield area.
Confronting Sithe and Navajo DPA employees, Gilmore was adamant that she
has not given permission for the power plant on her land. Navajo elders
from Burnham, Sanostee and Nenanezah chapter, all taking a bold action to
fight the tribal government and corporate aggression, joined Gilmore at the
blockade. We're fed up with them, said Sarah J. White, president of the
Doodá Desert Rock Committee. 

The grandmas and the grandpas are being walked over by these monsters and
they?re being denied information. We're standing our ground now. White said
Navajos at the barricade need everything in the way of food, firewood and
supplies. We need everything from A to Z, White said. The blockade was
formed just 10 days after Navajo Nation elected leaders gathered with
representatives from 14 countries and formulated a global ban on uranium
mining on Native lands. 

The power plant blockade also comes as Navajo Nation leaders are fighting
in the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to protect San Francisco
Peaks near Flagstaff, Ariz., from the desecration of snowmaking from
recycled wastewater for tourism. The mountain is sacred to 13 area Indian
tribes. However, both Navajo President Joe Shirley, Jr., and the Navajo
Nation Council support the construction of the Desert Rock Power Plant and
accompanying coalmine, which Navajos say would add more pollution to the
air, land and water, already saturated with disease-causing toxins. 

The Navajo Nation tribal government has attempted to censor the voices of
Navajos speaking out against the Desert Rock power plant in New Mexico and
the use of aquifer water for coal mining by Peabody Coal on the western
side of the Navajo Nation in Arizona. The proposed site of the new Desert
Rock power plant is in the Four Corners Region, targeted since the 1970s as
a national sacrifice area for energy production. It is also the sacred
region of Dinetah, the place of origin of Navajos. However, the air is so
polluted in the region of Dinetah near Bloomfield that persons with asthma
and respiratory diseases find it difficult to breathe. 

Further, Navajos say while they struggle with respiratory diseases, cancer
and the death of their loved ones in this region, many Navajos must also
haul water and live without electricity, since the power plants on Navajo
land primarily provide electricity for non-Indians. 

The Navajo blockade comes as Oodham in Sonora, Mexico, challenge a secret
plan by the government of Mexico, with the knowledge of the US EPA, to
create a hazardous waste dump near the sacred site of Quitovac where Oodham
hold ceremonies. The Navajo blockade coincides with an action by Pima on
Gila River tribal land in Arizona to halt expansion of a hazardous
dumpsite. 

At the same time, Yaqui in Sonora, Mexico, gathered to prohibit the use of
banned pesticides in agricultural fields, now resulting in cancer and
deaths. At the proposed new Desert Rock power plant site in New Mexico,
Navajo residents confronted the Diné Power Authority/Sithe Global on Dec.
12, after discovering that water drilling was carried out without the
knowledge and notification of local Navajo residents. 

Members of the Doodá Desert Rock committee gathered to support Gilmore?s
opposition and asked Sithe/DPA to disclose drilling permits that allowed
drilling activity to occur. However, no permits were provided. The
residents refused to leave after the Navajo Nation Police attempted to give
access to DPA/Sithe Global, claiming that permits for the Desert Rock
project are not for 

Re: [PEN-L] Query on Financial Instruments

[Jayson Funke]

Sabri wrote:
"However, all of these are qualitatively similar in the sense that their
"values" are drived from the "values" of some other "assests", if this
is what you mean by qualitative similarity."


What I trying to determine is if there are any new financial instruments
that are truly different in function or form from traditional swaps,
futures, options, bonds, obligations etc that have been around long
before the 1970s. The list you provide below, while impressive in the
way that these traditional instruments have been adopted, adapted and
expanded, are not, as far as I can discern, different in function (how
they mediate risk across time and space, or how they allow a company or
city etc to access debt-free capital etc). Each instrument essentially
applies the same risk management or capital accumulation formula in its
functioning than earlier versions of that instrument.

For example, are knock-out options, which include an expiration date,
truly different in how they function than any other option or does the
difference lie in slight modifications or applications?

While certainly it is fair to say that innovation has occurred at least
in the form of variety within these financial instruments, I am trying
to discern if innovation has truly occurred in creating completely new
financial instruments. I might be nitpicking, so I apologize.

Thanks

Jayson Funke

Graduate School of Geography
Clark University
950 Main Street
Worcester, MA 01610


-Original Message-
From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sabri Oncu
Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 8:37 PM
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Subject: [PEN-L] Query on Financial Instruments

> What, if any, financial instruments developed since the 1970s
> are actually new?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jayson Funke

Here is a short list:

+ Convertible bonds;

+ Exotic options such as knock-out options,  barrier options, look-back
options, Asian options and the list continues;

+ All mortgage-backed securities including the collateralized mortgage
obligations (CMOs), kitchen-sink CMOs (CMOs backed by CMOs possibly
backed by
other CMOs so forth, also known as nuclear waste), so-called whole loans
and
the list continues;

+ All asset-back securities such as home equity loans, credit cards,
mobile
homes and the list continues;

+ All credit derivatives such as credit default swaps, collateralized
debt
obligations, collateralized loan obligations and the list continues;

+ So on, so forth.

If I were to list only those derivatives that I can cite from memory, it
would
have taken me about an hour or so to write all of them down. And there
are many
others I do not even know about such as various types of energy
derivatives.

However, all of these are qualitatively similar in the sense that their
"values" are drived from the "values" of some other "assests", if this
is what
you mean by qualitative similarity.

Best,

Sabri




__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[PEN-L] A modest proposal

[ken hanly]

News sources routinely report US accusations that
Iran meddles in Iraqi affairs. After any such reports
the news media should make use of the emoticon of the
guy rolling on the floor laughing (ROFL). Imagine a
country halfway around the world that together with
its cronies occupy Iraq complaining that a neighbour
with close ties to the Shia in Iraq meddles in Iraqi
affairs.
I notice that when US soldiers are tried for
crimes committed in Iraq the news media generally fail
to notice that they are tried in the US and not in
Iraqi courts.

Cheers Ken Hanly

[PEN-L] Learning Turkish

[Louis Proyect]

http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2006/12/26/learning-turkish/

[PEN-L] Der Spiegel on Iraq Oil

[ken hanly]

Will Iraq's Oil Blessing Become a Curse?
By Joshua Gallu in Berlin

The Iraqi government is considering a new oil law that
could give private oil companies greater control over
its vast reserves. In light of rampant violence and
shaky democratic institutions, many fear the law is
being pushed through hastily by special interests
behind closed doors.

Oil. The world economy's thick elixir yields politics
as murky and combustible as the crude itself. And no
wonder. It brings together some awkward bedfellows:
It's where multinationals meet villagers, where
executives meet environmentalists, where vast wealth
meets deep poverty, where East meets West.


 Oil, of course, can be politically explosive at the
best of times, let alone the worst. So, when the
country with the third largest oil reserves in the
world debates the future of its endowment during a
time of civil war, people sit up and take notice.

The Iraqi government is working on a new hydrocarbons
law that will set the course for the country's oil
sector and determine where its vast revenues will
flow. The consequences for such a law in such a state
are huge. Not only could it determine the future shape
of the Iraqi federation -- as regional governments
battle with Baghdad's central authority over rights to
the riches -- but it could put much of Iraqi oil into
the hands of foreign oil companies.

Political differences could still derail the
legislative process. The Kurdish and Shia populations
want to control their oil-rich territories without
Baghdad's help. Meanwhile Sunni Arabs located in the
oil-poor center of the country want the federal
government to guarantee they're not excluded from the
profits.

That hasn't stopped the Kurdish Regional Government
(KRG), though. The KRG has already signed agreements
of its own with oil companies. But Baghdad has
declared the contracts invalid, and the new draft law
states that Iraq's oil exploration, production and
transport would be handled by the central government
in Baghdad, according to excerpts of the draft
published by Dow Jones Newswires.

Controversial contracts

Nevertheless, the draft law lays the ground work for
private oil companies to take large stakes in Iraq's
oil. The new law would allow the controversial
partnerships known as 'production sharing agreements'
(PSA). Oil companies favor PSAs, because they limit
the risk of cost overruns while giving greater
potential for profit. PSAs tend to be massive legal
agreements, designed to replace a weak or missing
legal framework -- which is helpful for a country like
Iraq that lacks the laws needed to attract investment.

It's also dangerous. It means governments are legally
committing themselves to oil deals that they've
negotiated from a position of weakness. And, the
contracts typically span decades. Companies argue they
need long-term legal security to justify huge
investments in risky countries; the current draft
recommends 15 to 20 years.

Nevertheless, Iraq carries little exploratory risk --
OPEC estimates Iraq sits atop some 115 billion barrels
of reserves and only a small fraction of its oil
fields are in use. By signing oil deals with Iraq, oil
companies could account for those reserves in their
books without setting foot in the country -- that
alone is enough to boost the company's stock. And, by
negotiating deals while Iraq is unstable, companies
could lock in a risk premium that may be much lower
five or ten years from now.

Without drastic improvements in the security
situation, companies are unlikely to begin operations
anytime soon. "The legislation is not a golden
bullet," one industry source told SPIEGEL ONLINE.
Western oil companies are happy to receive Iraqi
officials in their European headquarters, but are not
keen to return the visit. Firms from China, Russia and
India, however, are less intimidated by Iraq's
precarious security situation and actively court
Baghdad on its home turf.

Russia, after all, knows first hand what's at stake.
They negotiated PSAs after the fall of communism, but
the terms turned out to be so disadvantageous that
they've taken to nationalizing the projects in
question. Not unlike Iraq today, Russia then had weak
governance and needed the money.

That's why some fear Iraq is setting its course too
hastily and in too much secrecy. Greg Muttitt of
social and environmental NGO Platform London told
SPIEGEL ONLINE: "I was recently at a meeting of Iraqi
MPs (members of parliament) and asked them how many of
them had seen the law. Out of twenty, only one MP had
seen it."

Last week, the Iraqi Labor Union Leadership suggested
the same. "The Iraqi people refuse to allow the future
of their oil to be decided behind closed doors," their
statement reads. "(T)he occupier seeks and wishes to
secure themselves energy resources at a time when the
Iraqi people are seeking to determine their own future
while still under conditions of occupation."

Many worry instability would only get worse if the
public feels cheated by 

[PEN-L] Gender Pay Gap, Once Narrowing, Is Stuck in Place

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

"Few Cracks in the Glass Ceiling":



December 24, 2006
Gender Pay Gap, Once Narrowing, Is Stuck in Place
By DAVID LEONHARDT

Throughout the 1980s and early '90s, women of all economic levels —
poor, middle class and rich — were steadily gaining ground on their
male counterparts in the work force. By the mid-'90s, women earned
more than 75 cents for every dollar in hourly pay that men did, up
from 65 cents just 15 years earlier.

Largely without notice, however, one big group of women has stopped
making progress: those with a four-year college degree. The gap
between their pay and the pay of male college graduates has actually
widened slightly since the mid-'90s.

For women without a college education, the pay gap with men has
narrowed only slightly over the same span.

These trends suggest that all the recent high-profile achievements —
the first female secretary of state, the first female lead anchor of a
nightly newscast, the first female president of Princeton, and, next
month, the first female speaker of the House — do not reflect what is
happening to most women, researchers say.

A decade ago, it was possible to imagine that men and women with
similar qualifications might one day soon be making nearly identical
salaries. Today, that is far harder to envision.

"Nothing happened to the pay gap from the mid-1950s to the late '70s,"
said Francine D. Blau, an economist at Cornell and a leading
researcher of gender and pay. "Then the '80s stood out as a period of
sharp increases in women's pay. And it's much less impressive after
that."

Last year, college-educated women between 36 and 45 years old, for
example, earned 74.7 cents in hourly pay for every dollar that men in
the same group did, according to Labor Department data analyzed by the
Economic Policy Institute. A decade earlier, the women earned 75.7
cents.

The reasons for the stagnation are complicated and appear to include
both discrimination and women's own choices. The number of women
staying home with young children has risen recently, according to the
Labor Department; the increase has been sharpest among highly educated
mothers, who might otherwise be earning high salaries. The pace at
which women are flowing into highly paid fields also appears to have
slowed.

Like so much about gender and the workplace, there are at least two
ways to view these trends. One is that women, faced with most of the
burden for taking care of families, are forced to choose jobs that pay
less — or, in the case of stay-at-home mothers, nothing at all.

If the government offered day-care programs similar to those in other
countries or men spent more time caring for family members, women
would have greater opportunity to pursue whatever job they wanted,
according to this view.

The other view is that women consider money a top priority less often
than men do. Many may relish the chance to care for children or
parents and prefer jobs, like those in the nonprofit sector, that
offer more opportunity to influence other people's lives.

Both views, economists note, could have some truth to them.

"Is equality of income what we really want?" asked Claudia Goldin, an
economist at Harvard who has written about the revolution in women's
work over the last generation. "Do we want everyone to have an equal
chance to work 80 hours in their prime reproductive years? Yes, but we
don't expect them to take that chance equally often."

Whatever role their own preferences may play in the pay gap, many
women say they continue to battle subtle forms of lingering prejudice.
Indeed, the pay gap between men and women who have similar
qualifications and work in the same occupation — which economists say
is one of the purest measures of gender equality — has barely budged
since 1990.

Today, the discrimination often comes from bosses who believe they
treat everyone equally, women say, but it can still create a glass
ceiling that keeps them from reaching the best jobs at a company.

"I don't think anyone would ever say I couldn't do the job as well as
a man," said Christine Kwapnoski, a 42-year-old bakery manager at a
Sam's Club in Northern California who will make $63,000 this year,
including overtime. Still, Ms. Kwapnoski said she was paid
significantly less than men in similar jobs, and she has joined a
class-action lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores, which owns Sam's Club.

The lawsuit is part of a spurt of cases in recent years contending
gender discrimination at large companies, including Boeing, Costco,
Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley. Last month, the Supreme Court heard
arguments in a case against Goodyear Tire and Rubber.

At Sam's Club, Ms. Kwapnoski said that when she was a dock supervisor,
she discovered that a man she supervised was making as much as she
was. She was later promoted with no raise, even though men who
received such a promotion did get more mone

Re: [PEN-L] The disappearing Peronist legacy

[Michael Hoover]

On 12/25/06, Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

The government of Juan Perón was one of the most
progressive in Latin American history in the 20th
century

<>

Wouldn't there a difference between Peron's legacy (I am somewhat
skeptical of individual political legacies but will accept here that
such exists) and the Peronista legacy? Moreover, would it not be more
accurate to identify Peronista *legacies*?   Michael Hoover

[PEN-L] A Record 189,924 Deportations, Up 12 Percent from the Year Before

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

December 24, 2006
Immigrants Go From Farms to Jails, and a Climate of Fear Settles In
By NINA BERNSTEIN

ELBA, N.Y. — A cold December rain gusted across fields of cabbage
destined for New York City egg rolls, cole slaw and Christmas goose.
Ankle-deep in mud, six immigrant farmworkers raced to harvest 120,000
pounds before nightfall, knowing that at dawn they could find
immigration agents at their door.

The farmer who stopped to check their progress had lost 28 other
workers in a raid in October, all illegal Mexican immigrants with
false work permits at another farm here in western New York.
Throughout the region, farm hands have simply disappeared by twos and
threes, picked up on a Sunday as they went to church or to the
laundry. Whole families have gone into hiding, like the couple who
spent the night with their child in a plastic calf hutch.

As record-setting enforcement of immigration laws upends old, unspoken
arrangements, a new climate of fear is sweeping through the rural
communities of western and central New York.

"The farmers are just petrified at what's happening to their workers,"
said Maureen Torrey, an 11th-generation grower and a director of the
Federal Reserve Bank's Buffalo branch whose family owns this field and
more than 10,000 acres of vegetable and dairy farms.

And for the first time in years, farmers are also frightened for
themselves. In small towns divided over immigration, they fear that
speaking out — or a disgruntled neighbor's call to the authorities —
could make them targets of the next raid and raise the threat of
criminal prosecution.

Here where agriculture is the mainstay of a depressed economy, the
mainstay of agriculture is largely illegal immigrant labor from
Mexico. Now, more aggressive enforcement has disrupted a system of
official winks, nods and paperwork that for years protected farmers
from "knowingly" hiring the illegal immigrants who make up most of
their work force.

"It serves as a polarizing force in communities," said Mary Jo Dudley,
who directs the Cornell Farmworker Program, which does research. "The
immigrant workers themselves see anyone as a potential enemy. The
growers are nervous about everyone. There's this environment of fear
and mistrust all across the board."

In a recent case that chilled many farmers, federal agents trying to
develop a criminal case detained several longtime Hispanic employees
of a small dairy farm in Clifton Springs, and unsuccessfully pressed
them to give evidence that the owners knew they were here illegally.

Since raids began to increase in early spring, arrests have netted
dozens of Mexican farm workers on their way to milk parlors, apple
orchards and vineyards, and prompted scores more to flee, affecting
hundreds of farms. Some longtime employees with American children were
deported too quickly for goodbyes, or remain out of reach in the
federal detention center in Batavia, N.Y., where immigrants are
tracked by alien registration number, not by name.

Federal officials say events here simply reflect a national commitment
to more intensive enforcement of immigration laws, showcased in raids
in December at Swift & Company meatpacking plants in six states.

The effort led to a record 189,924 deportations nationally during the
fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, up 12 percent from the year before,
officials said, and 2,186 deportations from Buffalo, up 24 percent. It
includes prosecuting employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants,
better cooperation with state and local law enforcement, and new money
from Congress for more agents, more detention beds and quicker
deportations.

In small towns like Sodus, Dresden and Elba, where a welcome sign
declares that the population of 2,369 is "Just Right," some residents
quietly approve of the crackdown. They are unhappy with the growing
year-round presence of Mexicans they consider a drain on public
services, resentful of the political clout of farmers, or concerned
about the porous borders denounced nightly on CNN by Lou Dobbs. Others
are torn, praising Mexican families but worried that some farmers
exploit them.

Farm lenders and lobbyists warn of economic losses that will be
measurable in unharvested crops, hundreds of closed farms and revenues
lost in the wine tourism of the Finger Lakes. On the other side,
supporters of stringent enforcement expect savings in schools and
hospitals, and a boost to low wages as the labor market tightens.

The harvest of fear may be harder to chart, but it is already here. It
can be felt in Sodus, where an October raid left a dozen children
without either parent for days, and in vineyards near Penn Yan, where
a grower of fine cabernet grapes reluctantly permits a worker to sleep
in a car, hidden in the vines that he prunes. Everywhere, rumors fly
about why one place was raided and not another, feeding suspicion and
a fear of speaking out.

For Rodney and Debbie Brown, the dairy farmers 

[PEN-L] Dean Baker in Wall St. Journal

[Eugene Coyle]

In the WSJ, 12/26/06  there is a story about renters gloating over
the pop of the housing bubble.  Dean Baker is quoted and pictured,
among others who chose to rent rather than buy as home prices rose
sharply.

Gene Coyle

Re: [PEN-L] Falun Gong

[Lance Murdoch]

More importantly, where does Falun Gong get its money?  They have a
massive distribution option of their free newspaper, the Epoch Times,
in New York City.  Where do they get the money for this?  Who is
giving it to them?

If I was China and I did not know these answers to these questions, I
would be scared as well.  Or perhaps they do know and that's why
they're scared.

-- Lance

Re: [PEN-L] Query on Financial Instruments

[Sabri Oncu]

Jayson:

> While certainly it is fair to say that innovation has occurred at
> least in the form of variety within these financial instruments,
> I am trying to discern if innovation has truly occurred in creating
> completely new financial instruments. I might be nitpicking, so I
> apologize.

I am not as well read about the history of finance as, for example, Michael
Hudson is, but I can safely say that there is not much new under the sun in the
sense you describe since the Babylonians, if not earlier. A short while I ago
he told me that one of the projects he is working on is about how the early
Near Eastern harrunu contracts were essentially what the Italians "invented" in
their commenda contracts and other legal contractural forms borrowed from the
Near East, along with weights and measures, the practice of charging interest,
etc. I do not know what these contracts are but apparently Michael knows.

Ancient Middle East seems to be where to start from if you have any interest in
this topic.

Best,

Sabri

PS: One of Michael's claims is that finance predates capitalism by a few
millenia and indeed will continue after it. And Gunder (Frank) used to claim
that capitalism as a category was meaningless to understand the world. Whenever
Michael says something like this I always remember Gunder.


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[PEN-L] Saddam Hussein Loses 'Appeal', To Hang Within 30 Days

[Leigh Meyers]

Suggestion: The perfect day to pull US troops out of Iraq… anytime 
within 30 days. Saddam Hussein loses his appeal and is sentenced to hang 
within 30 days.



[December 26 2006] Travus T. Hipp Morning News & Commentary:
It’s ‘Boxing Day’… Canada Aside, Boxing Day Is When Americans Box Up 
Their Unwanted ‘Gifts’ And Return Them… 100 Billion Dollars Worth Of 
Toasters, Ties, And Socks




“All The News You Never Knew You Needed To Know …Until Now.”

The Rest Of The News:

Bush meets with his “WAR” cabinet. Robert Gates back from Iraq after 
meeting with the troops, whose commanders have apparently been coerced 
into supporting the ’surge’ tactic…


U.S. Body Count: *2978*, 5 more than died in the WTC attack, due to our 
continuing illegal prosecution of war on Iraq


A Spanish internalist has been flown to Cuba to treat Fidel Castro

Somalia/Ethiopia: They’ve got their war on! Sitrep.

Nigerian rebels blow up another oil pipeline.

U.N security council passes a weakened Iran sanctions resolution.

-30-

Re: [PEN-L] Falun Gong

[Jim Devine]

On 12/26/06, Lance Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

More importantly, where does Falun Gong get its money?  They have a
massive distribution option of their free newspaper, the Epoch Times,
in New York City.  Where do they get the money for this?  Who is
giving it to them?

If I was China and I did not know these answers to these questions, I
would be scared as well.  Or perhaps they do know and that's why
they're scared.


I'd bet that there's some US religious group that supports them
(likely a right-wing Christian one). The US government likely chips
some money in.

What are Falung Gong's ostensible politics?
--
Jim Devine / "In all recorded history there has not been one economist
who has had to worry about where the next meal would come from." --
Peter Drucker. [With such advertising, my career choice was obvious.]

[PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[Michael Nuwer]

In at least two places Marx identifies the origins of exchange in
communities coming into contact with each other. He reject the notion
that exchange is rooted in some individual propensity to truck, barter,
and exchange. The two passages by Marx that I'm thinking about are
printed below.

Can anyone here point me to anthropological, historical or any other
writings that would lend support to Marx's claim.

Thanks,
Michael Nuwer

it is simply wrong to place exchange at the center of communal society
as the original, constituent element. It originally appears, rather, in
the connection of the different communities with one another, not in the
relations between the different members of a single community.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/grundrisse/ch01.htm#4

the exchange of products springs up at the points where different
families, tribes, communities, come in contact; for, in the beginning of
civilisation, it is not private individuals but families, tribes, &c.,
that meet on an independent footing. Different communities find
different means of production, and different means of subsistence in
their natural environment. Hence, their modes of production, and of
living, and their products are different. It is this spontaneously
developed difference which, when different communities come in contact,
calls forth the mutual exchange of products, and the consequent gradual
conversion of those products into commodities.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch14.htm
[SECTION 4: DIVISION OF LABOUR IN MANUFACTURE, AND DIVISION OF LABOUR IN
SOCIETY]

Re: [PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[Jim Devine]

On 12/26/06, Michael Nuwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

In at least two places Marx identifies the origins of exchange in
communities coming into contact with each other. He reject the notion
that exchange is rooted in some individual propensity to truck, barter,
and exchange. The two passages by Marx that I'm thinking about are
printed below.


FWIW, IMHO Marx was wrong on this one. Equal exchange between distinct
communities does not work unless the property rights of the two
communities are protected. Some sort of sovereign above the
communities is needed. On the other hand, it's quite possible that he
was not referring to _pure_ exchange. That is, it could be exchange
mixed up with threatened robbery and/or war. Most of the original
merchants had armed caravans and sometimes engaged in piracy.

Within communities, I doubt that the individual propensity to truck,
etc. played a role. Barter did not occur, since it was too expensive
to organize (as economics makes clear). It wasn't a matter of exchange
between individuals at all. Goods and services were instead
distributed using community traditions and democratic decisions, along
with centrally-organized top-down command for the larger communities
(e.g., the Inca empire).

There was some "exchange" of the sort that Polanyi talks about, i.e.,
generalized reciprocity. This refers to people helping each other
because others in the group help you (though nothing is expected
directly in exchange). This gives the giver a sense of satisfaction
and of social closeness. It helps build community solidarity.

In addition, there might be some _balanced_ reciprocity, which is more
a matter of "if you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" (informal
exchange). Because it is not formal exchange (with clear property
rights, contracts, etc.), it requires tremendous amounts of consensus
and trust. It can only exist as part of a clear-existing community.
(We see it within the business community in the US, but it is clearly
not the dominant form of exchange.)

Tradition, democracy, and command help organize Polany's command.
--
Jim Devine / "Young people who pretend to be wise to the ways of the
world are mostly just cynics. Cynicism masquerades as wisdom, but it
is the farthest thing from it, because cynics don't learn anything.
Because cynicism is a self-imposed blindness, a rejection of the world
because we are afraid it will hurt us or disappoint us." -- Stephen
Colbert.

Re: [PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[Carrol Cox]

Jim Devine wrote:
>
> On 12/26/06, Michael Nuwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In at least two places Marx identifies the origins of exchange in
> > communities coming into contact with each other. He reject the notion
> > that exchange is rooted in some individual propensity to truck, barter,
> > and exchange. The two passages by Marx that I'm thinking about are
> > printed below.
>
> FWIW, IMHO Marx was wrong on this one. Equal exchange between distinct
> communities does not work unless the property rights of the two
> communities are protected.

"Equal" exchange (in exchange value)must be a late development. But
exchange (prior to any idea of exchange value) would have been between
communities. This is fairly clear in the odyssey.


Some sort of sovereign above the
> communities is needed. On the other hand, it's quite possible that he
> was not referring to _pure_ exchange. That is, it could be exchange
> mixed up with threatened robbery and/or war. Most of the original
> merchants had armed caravans and sometimes engaged in piracy.

I can/t remember the exact passage, but someplace in the odyssey a ship
shows up, and a local simply asks 'captain,' "are you a trader or a
pirate?"

Carrol

Re: [PEN-L] here's a quotation du jour for degustation (2006 vintage)

[David B. Shemano]

Soula Avramidis forwards the following quote:

"For some United States conservatives, placing the poor on ¡reservations¢ is an 
option to be seriously considered. Only a decade ago, two American authors 
recommended the establishment of a custodial state in a much publicized book: 
"by custodial state, we have in mind a high-tech and more lavish version of the 
Indian reservation for some substantial minority of the nation¢s population, 
while the rest of America tries to go about its business" (Herrnstein and 
Murray, 1994: 526)."

Just to be accurate, Herrnstein and Murray were not "recommending" anything, 
they were forecasting what could occur and they were very much against it:

"Question: In what direction does the social welfare system evolve when a 
coalition of the cognitive elite and the affluent continues to accept the main 
tenets of the welfare state, but are becoming increasingly frightened of and 
hostile toward the recipients of help? When the coalition is prepared to spend 
money, but has lost faith that remedial social programs work very well? The 
most likely consequence in our view is that the cognitive elite, with its 
commanding position, will implement an expanded  welfare state for the 
underclass that also keeps it out from underfoot. Our label for this outcome is 
the custodial state.

By the "custodial state," we have in mind a high-tech and more lavish version 
of the Indian reservation for some substantial minority of the nation's 
population, while the rest of America tries to go about its business. In its 
less benign forms, the solutions will become more and more totalitarian. Benign 
or otherwise, "going about its business" in the old sense will not be possible. 
It is difficult to imagine the United States preserving its heritage of 
individualism, equal rights before the law, free people running their own 
lives, once it is accepted that a significant part of the population must be 
made permanent wards of the state.

Extrapolating from current trends, we project that the policies of custodialism 
will be not only tolerated but actively supported by a consensus of the 
cognitive elite. To some extent, we are not even really "projecting" but 
reporting. The main difference between the position of the cognitive elite that 
we portray here and the one that exists today is to some extent nothing more 
than the distinction between tacit and explicit.

In short, Richard Herrnstein and I are worried about the prospective collapse 
of American free institutions as we have known them, not implausibly within our 
own lifetimes  It is an apocalyptic vision. But we think there is much to be 
apocalyptic about."

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.18987,filter.all/pub_detail.asp

David Shemano

Re: [PEN-L] Navajo traditional elders blockade power plant site

[Leigh Meyers]

It's good to see that Brenda Norell found suitable employment after
Indian Country Today "purged" her.

ICT WAS getting a little wild... I mean, a 3 part interview with John
Trudell? One part entitled "Who Killed Annie Mae?" about the
subterfuges, stalkings, and perhaps murders with federal complicty
committed against A.I.M.

Ms. Norell didn't write that one, but *someone* had to go, may as well
be one of the few females on ICT's staff.

I saw the ICT editorial in re Ms. Norell's firing. It was as
incomprehensible, disingenous, as a press conference with Donald Rumsfeld.

It has also disappeared from ICT's 'archive'

There is an editorial in New West News, and the first comment is a
rebuttal by Norell that reads thusly:


<...>
Hello,
Your article is not accurate. I never accused ICT of racism. I accused
them of censorship and gender discrimination in an e-mail to my friends.

Also, I haven't blogged or added to my old website lately. Both have
been there for a while.

I have been busy covering the Border Summit of the Americas for the UN
Observer and International Report, on the Tohono O'odham Nation.

It would be a good thing to check your facts before criticizing other
reporters of not doing so.

Also, I'll give you a scoop. I filed a formal letter of complaint with
ICT management about censorship and gender discrimination just six days
before I was fired. I was fired with no reason stated.

If you'll look at ICT online, you'll see that just today my articles on
the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were posted on ICT's
website. If I was so innacurate, would those appear after I was fired.

I have worked for 23 years covering Indian news, including five years as
a correspondent for Associated Press and seven years freelancing for USA
Today.
<...>


Also, Joe Curley, the Navajo seemingly 'permanent' tribal leader is
under intense pressure regarding his role as middleman in the disputes
and suits in re 'irradiated' indians dating back to the 40s when the
government knowingly let them build their housing using the radioactive
tailings of the federal uranium mining operations, not to mention the
primitive conditions in the mines which were literally the only source
of employment on the reservation at the time.

At least they weren't concentration camps[tm, term only applicable to
WWII Germany].

The WSDP and Nevada Downwinders recently won a court battle that shut
down a planned nuclear test in Nevada. It's the first time in history
that a nuclear test has been halted by civilian legal action to the best
of my knowledge.


Charles Brown wrote:

Western Shoshone Defense Project P.O. Box 211308 Crescent Valley, NV  89821

775-468-0230
775-468-0237 (fax) www.wsdp.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Navajo traditional elders blockade power plant site

By Brenda Norrell

Re: [PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[Jim Devine]

On 12/26/06, Michael Nuwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > In at least two places Marx identifies the origins of exchange in
> > communities coming into contact with each other. He reject the notion
> > that exchange is rooted in some individual propensity to truck, barter,
> > and exchange. The two passages by Marx that I'm thinking about are
> > printed below.



Jim Devine wrote:
> FWIW, IMHO Marx was wrong on this one. Equal exchange between distinct
> communities does not work unless the property rights of the two
> communities are protected.


Carrol Cox  wrote:

"Equal" exchange (in exchange value)must be a late development. But
exchange (prior to any idea of exchange value) would have been between
communities. This is fairly clear in the odyssey.


sorry. A better word than "equal" would be "voluntary."
--
Jim Devine / "Young people who pretend to be wise to the ways of the
world are mostly just cynics. Cynicism masquerades as wisdom, but it
is the farthest thing from it, because cynics don't learn anything.
Because cynicism is a self-imposed blindness, a rejection of the world
because we are afraid it will hurt us or disappoint us." -- Stephen
Colbert.

Re: [PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[Michael Perelman]

Smith, Adam. 1762/3-1766. Lectures on Jurisprudence, eds. R. L. Meek, D. D. 
Raphael,
and P. G. Stein (Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1978).
  224: classical disdain for commerce. in the Odessy, Ulysses asked whether he 
was a
merchant or a pirate, says the latter since is was seen as more honorable: 
Odessy ix:
253-5. his son also asked, iii, 72-74; see also Thucydides, I. 5.1-2.



--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
michaelperelman.wordpress.com

[PEN-L] re the criticisms of citgo

[michael a. lebowitz]

www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1921

Yes, Oil From Venezuela
Tuesday, Dec 26, 2006 
Print format

  Send by email



By: Joseph P. Kennedy II - Boston Globe

There's been a lot of controversy lately over 
whether Citizens Energy Corp. should distribute 
-- and the poor should accept -- discount heating 
oil from Venezuela while that country is under 
the leadership of President Hugo Chávez.


But those who have no problem staying warm at 
night should not condemn others for accepting 
Venezuela's oil. Rhetoric means little to an 
elderly woman who has to drag an old cot from her 
basement to sleep by the warmth of the open 
kitchen stove or give up food or medicine to pay her heating bill.


For nearly 30 years, Citizens Energy has provided 
senior citizens and low-income families with 
affordable fuel oil, gas, electricity, 
pharmaceutical drugs, and other basic 
necessities. Citgo Petroleum is a US company 
owned by the people of Venezuela. The oil it 
provides to Citizens Energy, the nonprofit that I 
lead, acts as a safety net for hundreds of thousands.


When our partnership with Citgo was announced 
last year, US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman 
praised the discount program as corporate 
philanthropy. "It's a charitable contribution," 
he said, "and I wish more companies did it." 
Charities like the Baseball Hall of Fame and the 
Muscular Dystrophy Association receive generous 
donations from Citgo, but no one is telling them to decline the gifts.


Meanwhile, oil companies other than Citgo have 
declined to share their record profits with those 
who most struggle to keep pace with rising energy costs.


In spite of the fact that heating oil prices have 
doubled over the past few years, the federal fuel 
assistance program faces a one-third cut this 
year, from $3.1 billion to $2.1 billion. 
Washington earns windfall tax revenues from the 
rising prices of petroleum products, but not a 
cent goes to offset rising energy costs for the 
poor. Nor do the poor benefit from increased 
royalties on gas and oil taken from federal lands 
and waters -- if, in fact, the energy companies pay the government at all.


Criticism of our program isn't about cheap 
heating oil. It's all about Hugo. While 
conservative interests in this country don't like 
him, US businesses don't mind his money and his marketplace.


Otherwise, why would General Motors and Ford sell 
more than 300,000 cars a year in Venezuela? Why 
would Chevron Texaco, Exxon Mobil, Shell, and 
other major corporations -- including Vice 
President Cheney's old firm, Halliburton -- 
invest and earn billions every year off of 
petroleum exploration, production, refining, and 
transportation in the country? Why would US 
insurance companies, banks, telecom firms, 
entertainment conglomerates, and consumer product 
manufacturers flock to our Latin American neighbor?


American consumers certainly don't mind doing 
business with Venezuela. More than 558 million 
barrels of Venezuelan crude and oil products were 
shipped to the United States last year. Just 
one-half of 1 percent of that goes into our 
organization's program, but that's the only portion that draws criticism.


Even though doing business with Venezuela has 
been very good for capitalists, the issue at hand 
is Chávez and his politics of socialism. Before 
we accept the characterizations of him as a 
socialist threat to our way of life, we ought to 
look at our own country -- ironically, a system 
of socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor.


Banks make billions on the gap between federal 
lending rates and what they charge consumers to 
borrow for homes, cars, small businesses, and 
personal needs. The government guarantees their 
deposits, so that if the banks fail, the taxpayer is left holding the bag.


Insurance companies charge consumers with 
premiums that go up and up, yet expect the 
government to cover their losses when they get 
hit -- as we saw in the wake of the Hurricane Katrina disaster.


Student loan corporations, working closely with 
colleges and universities, contribute to 
spiraling higher-education costs with loans guaranteed by the government.


The fact is that many of the bluest of our blue 
chip corporations may actually be wearing a shade 
of Hugo Chávez red beneath their suspenders -- 
with one major difference: They're fine with 
socializing the risks of capitalism, so long as 
they can privatize the profits. As for the poor? 
They're decidedly on their own.


Meanwhile, in Venezuela, the president is 
socializing his nation's oil profits. Poverty has 
dropped by 25 percent. State-sponsored provision 
of basic needs like food and healthcare has expanded.


So, sure, we'll distribute Hugo's oil. Doing so 
is called compassionate capitalism. Right now, 
our country's vulnerable families fend for 
themselves, while the well-to-do can afford to 
throw snowballs at our program from the

Re: [PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[michael a. lebowitz]

At 15:09 26/12/2006, michael wrote:

Smith, Adam. 1762/3-1766. Lectures on Jurisprudence, eds. R. L.
Meek, D. D. Raphael,
and P. G. Stein (Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1978).
  224: classical disdain for commerce. in the Odessy, Ulysses asked
whether he was a
merchant or a pirate, says the latter since is was seen as more
honorable: Odessy ix:
253-5. his son also asked, iii, 72-74; see also Thucydides, I. 5.1-2.


As in Woody Guthrie's 'some men rob you with a fountain pen'
m
Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6

Currently based in Venezuela.
NOTE NEW PHONE NUMBERS
Can be reached at
Residencias Anauco Suites
Departamento 601
Parque Central, Zona Postal 1010, Oficina 1
Caracas, Venezuela
(58-212) 573-6333, 571-1520, 571-3820 (or hotel cell: 0412-200-7540)
fax: (58-212) 573-7724

Re: [PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[paul phillips]

Jim,
I think you are wrong on this.  In my research on the economics of the
Pacific Northwest aboriginals, I found information indicating formal,
inter-community barter/trade.  For instance, I interviewed one elder who
told me his family had traditionally been allotted a cedar area where,
during the summer, they would fall and split the cedar into planks which
were then taken to the village chief for community consumption
(housing).  The village chief's reciprocated with supplying food
(salmon, whale, etc) from that supplied by other families that were
allocated fishing areas, berry areas, etc.  This was not exchange in the
market sense of the word. However, this elder told me that they would
normally cut extra cedar and take it down to  villages in neighbouring
sounds where it would be exchanged for salmon and that this was an
annual event. This was distinct from and additional to inter-village,
inter-house redistribution through potlatches.

Also, the long distance, inter-'tribe' trade in oolichan oil,
obsidian, and many other items, (e.g. salmon from the lower Fraser R.
and the Columbia R for Camas bulbs and meat and furs from the interior)
have long been known.  Indeed, if you look at the first volume of the
Canadian Historical Atlas, you will see maps of trade routes all over
North America where regular exchange was carried out between various
first nations groups that long preceeded the European invasion.  This
has become an issue at law in aboriginal rights claims.  Aboriginals
have a right to resources for subsistance uses but, according to the
Supreme court, also for limited commercial use where a commercial trade
existed historically.

Paul P

Jim Devine wrote:



FWIW, IMHO Marx was wrong on this one. Equal exchange between distinct
communities does not work unless the property rights of the two
communities are protected. Some sort of sovereign above the
communities is needed. On the other hand, it's quite possible that he
was not referring to _pure_ exchange. That is, it could be exchange
mixed up with threatened robbery and/or war. Most of the original
merchants had armed caravans and sometimes engaged in piracy.





--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/06 12:23 
PM

Re: [PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[Julio Huato]

I vaguely remembering reading in Rudolf Bahro's _Die Alternative_ that
Marx was wrong about the notion of trade starting as inter-community
trade.  It was in passing.  Bahro's focus was on drawing a parallel
between the emergence of Asian centralized states at the outset of
civilization and the emergence of actually-existing socialism.

Marx didn't have late-20th-century historical info, but Bahro wasn't
Marx -- and, more importantly, Bahro didn't provide references (Marx
did!) but only presumed it was a fact admitted by modern historians.

In the absence of references to follow up on, I remember asking myself
-- Whom should I *believe*?  Marx or Bahro?  Still, I thought the
first part of Bahro's book was in the best traditions of Marxist
thought.

Re: [PEN-L] Query: The origins of trade

[Michael Perelman]

Trade originally began, as I understand it, with luxuries and scarce commodities
that the trading partner could not make domestically; e.g. obsidian.  I thought 
that
most anthropologists accepted that idea.


On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 03:58:35PM -0500, Julio Huato wrote:
> I vaguely remembering reading in Rudolf Bahro's _Die Alternative_ that
> Marx was wrong about the notion of trade starting as inter-community
> trade.  It was in passing.  Bahro's focus was on drawing a parallel
> between the emergence of Asian centralized states at the outset of
> civilization and the emergence of actually-existing socialism.
>
> Marx didn't have late-20th-century historical info, but Bahro wasn't
> Marx -- and, more importantly, Bahro didn't provide references (Marx
> did!) but only presumed it was a fact admitted by modern historians.
>
> In the absence of references to follow up on, I remember asking myself
> -- Whom should I *believe*?  Marx or Bahro?  Still, I thought the
> first part of Bahro's book was in the best traditions of Marxist
> thought.

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
michaelperelman.wordpress.com

[PEN-L] Just Foreign Policy News, December 26, 2006

[Robert Naiman]

don't miss today's NYT article on Bolivia. It manages to capture in
two images what the government is contending with in opposition from
the ancien regime...

Just Foreign Policy News
December 26, 2006
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/newsroom/blog/

U.S. Should Promote Diplomacy, Not War, in Somalia
Ask Congress to push the Bush Administration to support diplomacy in
Somalia, not war.
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/involved/somalia.html

Time to Talk to Iran: Petition
More than 27,400 people have signed the Peace Action/Just Foreign
Policy petition. Please sign/circulate if you have yet to do so.
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/involved/iranpetition.html

Tell Your Representatives: Stop the Money and Bring the Troops Home
Please write/call your Members of Congress if you have not done so
recently. The Congressional recess is also a good time to call the
local office. These phone numbers are given on the representatives'
web pages, which can be found at www.senate.gov and www.house.gov.
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/involved/iraq.html

Just Foreign Policy News daily podcast:
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/podcasts/podcast_howto.html

Summary:
U.S./Top News
Ecuador's bonds plunged on statements from President Correa indicating
willingness to pursue an "Argentine-style" default on the country's
foreign debt, writes Mark Weisbrot on Huffington Post. The purpose of
foreign borrowing is to acquire more resources, which if invested
properly, can provide a real return to the economy that is greater
than the cost of the borrowing, he notes. If a country is simply
borrowing to pay off debt, and looks to be in that situation for the
foreseeable future, it may make sense to default and start over.

Ethiopian warplanes attacked the airport in Somalia's capital Monday
in a major escalation of fighting between the Ethiopian-backed Somali
government and the Islamic Courts movement, the Washington Post
reports. The article soft-pedals some aspects of the role of the Bush
Administration in the fighting, compared to previous reporting in the
Post. It says that the US has "remained on the sidelines," although
last week the Post reported that the US had given a "green light" and
"tacit support" to the Ethiopian invasion. It notes that regional
analysts say US Assistant Secretary of State Jendayi Frazer's claim
that the Somali Islamic movement is now under the control of an
al-Qaeda cell is exaggerated; last week the Post reported that the US
intelligence community, including Director of National Intelligence
John Negroponte, doesn't believe it either.

Juan Cole offers "top ten myths about Iraq," including: the US can
win, Iraq is not in a civil war, the Lancet study is flawed, Iraq is
the central front in the war on terror, Sunni Arab guerrillas will
follow us home if we leave, it's a bad idea to set a timetable for
withdrawal. Of the claim that insurgents would follow us home, he
writes, "People in Ramadi only have one beef with the US. Its troops
are going through their wives' underwear in the course of house
searches every day… If the US withdrew…people in Ramadi will be
happy."

The number of American troops killed in Iraq has now exceeded the
death toll from 9/11, AP reports. The milestone came on Christmas.

Iran
Iran Sunday reacted defiantly to a UN Security Council resolution
imposing sanctions because of the country's nuclear program, the New
York Times reports. The article notes the US claim that since Iran is
an oil exporter it has no need for a civilian nuclear energy program.
However, the following AP article suggests that the claim that Iran
needs to develop alternative energy sources is quite plausible. The
article also notes that Iran's progress in enriching uranium has been
slow.

Iran is suffering a dramatic decline in revenue from oil exports, and
income could virtually disappear by 2015, according to an analysis
published yesterday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, AP reports. The study's author, Roger Stern of Johns
Hopkins, suggests there could be merit to Iran's assertion that it
needs nuclear power for civilian purposes. Stern suggests that if the
US simply waits for a few years, it may find Iran a much more
conciliatory country. And that is good reason to delay any impulse to
take on Iran militarily.

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani on Monday protested the arrest by U.S.
forces of two Iranian envoys who were in Iraq at his invitation, the
Los Angeles Times reports. As the visiting diplomats were invited as
part of the Iraqi government's efforts to calm the country
politically, the incident suggests that the Bush Administration's
claims that the Iraqi government is sovereign are somewhat dubious.

Iraq
Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani rejected a U.S.-backed proposal to isolate
to isolate Muqtada Sadr, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Suspected Iraqi insurgents in Kurdish prisons face the prospect of
routine torture, but no prospect for trial or other procedure to
separate the 

[PEN-L] Somalia: A US proxy war.

[ken hanly]

In Somalia, a reckless U.S. proxy war

By Salim Lone
Tribune Media Services

12/26/06 "IHT" -- -- NAIROBI -- Undeterred by the
horrors and setbacks in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon,
the Bush administration has opened another battlefront
in the Muslim world. With full U.S. backing and
military training, at least 15,000 Ethiopian troops
have entered Somalia in an illegal war of aggression
against the Union of Islamic Courts, which controls
almost the entire south of the country.

As with Iraq in 2003, the United States has cast this
as a war to curtail terrorism, but its real goal is to
obtain a direct foothold in a highly strategic region
by establishing a client regime there. The Horn of
Africa is newly oil-rich, and lies just miles from
Saudi Arabia, overlooking the daily passage of large
numbers of oil tankers and warships through the Red
Sea. General John Abizaid, the current U.S. military
chief of the Iraq war, was in Ethiopia this month, and
President Hu Jintao of China visited Kenya, Sudan and
Ethiopia earlier this year to pursue oil and trade
agreements.

The U.S. instigation of war between Ethiopia and
Somalia, two of world's poorest countries already
struggling with massive humanitarian disasters, is
reckless in the extreme. Unlike in the run-up to Iraq,
independent experts, including from the European
Union, were united in warning that this war could
destabilize the whole region even if America succeeds
in its goal of toppling the Islamic Courts.

An insurgency by Somalis, millions of whom live in
Kenya and Ethiopia, will surely ensue, and attract
thousands of new anti-U.S. militants and terrorists.

With so much of the world convulsed by crisis, little
attention has been paid to this unfolding disaster in
the Horn. The UN Security Council, however, did take
up the issue, and in another craven act which will
further cement its reputation as an anti-Muslim body,
bowed to American and British pressure to authorize a
regional peacekeeping force to enter Somalia to
protect the transitional government, which is fighting
the Islamic Courts.

The new UN resolution states that the world body acted
to "restore peace and stability." But as all major
international news organizations have reported, this
year Somalia finally experienced its first respite
from 16 years of utter lawlessness and terror at the
hands of the marauding warlords who drove out UN
peacekeepers in 1993, when 18 American soldiers were
killed.

Since 1993, there had been no Security Council
interest in sending peacekeepers to Somalia, but as
peace and order took hold, a multilateral force was
suddenly deemed necessary — because it was the Islamic
Courts Union that had brought about this stability.
Astonishingly, the Islamists had succeeded in
defeating the warlords primarily through rallying
people to their side by creating law and order through
the application of Shariah law, which Somalis
universally practice.

The transitional government, on the other hand, is
dominated by the warlords and terrorists who drove out
American forces in 1993. Organized in Kenya by U.S.
regional allies, it is so completely devoid of
internal support that it has turned to Somalia's arch-
enemy, Ethiopia, for assistance.

If this war continues, it will affect the whole
region, do serious harm to U.S. interests and threaten
Kenya, the only island of stability in this corner of
Africa.

Ethiopia is at even greater risk, as a dictatorship
with little popular support and beset also by two
large internal revolts, by the Ogadenis and Oromos. It
is also mired in a conflict with Eritrea, which has
denied it secure access to seaports.

The best antidote to terrorism in Somalia is
stability, which the Islamic Courts have provided. The
Islamists have strong public support, which has grown
in the face of U.S. and Ethiopian interventions. As in
other Muslim-Western conflicts, the world needs to
engage with the Islamists to secure peace.

Copyright © 2006 The International Herald Tribune



Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse and meaningful
commentary. Do not include personal information such
as names, addresses, phone numbers and emails.
Comments falling outside our guidelines – those
including personal attacks and profanity – are not
permitted.
See our complete Comment Policy and use this link to
notify us if you have concerns about a comment. We’ll
promptly review and remove any inappropriate postings.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those who
have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this
article nor is Information ClearingHouse endorsed or
sponsored by the originator.)

[PEN-L] Why did China and Russia vote to sanction Iran?

[ken hanly]

I don't find this convincing since I doubt that either
China or Russia would believe Bush. But what is the
reason then?

Cheers, Ken Hanly

Why did Russia and China vote to sanction Iran?
By Jorge Hirsch

12/26/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- In the
aftermath of the Dec. 23 United Nations Security
Council unanimous vote imposing sanctions or Iran for
failing to suspend uranium enrichment (see text of
resolution here), one has to wonder: why did Russia
and China go along with it?

Iran's pursuit of uranium enrichment for civilian
nuclear purposes is allowed by the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the IAEA has found no
indication that Iran has diverted any nuclear material
to military purposes. While Russia may prefer for its
own reasons that Iran not enrich uranium, it fully
recognizes that Iran's pursuit is legal under
international law. Furthermore, as Western news media
constantly emphasize, Russia and China have extensive
commercial ties with Iran, hence it is not in their
interest to antagonize Iran. Their support of UNSC1737
doesn't seem to make sense.

The UNSC vote is ominous because it allows Bush to cut
and paste from his March 17th 2003 speech on the
impending Iraq attack, substituting "q" for "n":

The (Iraqi) Iranian regime has used diplomacy as a
ploy to gain time and advantage. It has uniformly
defied Security Council resolutions

[The regime] has a deep hatred of America and our
friends. And it has aided, trained and harbored
terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda. (see
9/11 commission report)

Recognizing the threat to our country, the United
States Congress voted overwhelmingly last year (to
support the use of force against Iraq) to "hold the
current regime in Iran accountable for its threatening
behavior".

America tried to work with the United Nations to
address this threat because we wanted to resolve the
issue peacefully.

For the last four-and-a-half months, the United States
and our allies have worked within the Security Council
to enforce that Council's long-standing demands. Yet,
some permanent members of the Security Council have
publicly announced they will veto any resolution that
compels (the disarmament of Iraq) the denuclearization
of Iran. These governments share our assessment of the
danger, but not our resolve to meet it.

The United Nations Security Council has not lived up
to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours.

Should (Saddam Hussein) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad choose
confrontation, the American people can know that every
measure has been taken to avoid war, and every measure
will be taken to win it.

[T]he only way to reduce the harm and duration of war
is to apply the full force and might of our military,
and we are prepared to do so.

In the case of Iran, this last statement would be
especially ominous, because it would signal that the
US will use nuclear weapons against Iran. Recall that
Bush has explicitly refused to take the option of a US
nuclear strike against Iran off the table.

Many other statements in the March 17th 2003 speech
apply even better to Iran than they did to Iraq.
"Inteligence gathered by this and other governments
leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to
possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons
ever devised" was false, but that Iran is enriching
uranium is true. Saddam could not disarm of weapons it
didn't have, but Iran could bow to Bush's demand and
stop its nuclear enrichment program, hence the
statement that by refusing to do so it would be
"choosing" war is somewhat less farfetched. Iran's
alleged threats against Israel will undoubtedly be
prominently featured in Bush's speeches defending
military action against Iran.

Iran will not stop its enrichment program, certainly
not as a precondition to negotiations. This should be
obvious to Bush, as well as to Russia and China. Hence
one must ask: why is Bush pursuing this approach, and
why are Russia and China, albeit reluctantly,
supporting it?

What are Bush's intentions toward Iran?

If Bush had any intention of reaching a negotiated
agreement with Iran, he had plenty of opportunities to
pursue such options, as recently detailed by Flynt
Leverett (see complete article here) [pdf]. In the
absence of any concession by the US, Iran will not
submit to US demands, and weak sanctions resolutions
do not exert any real pressure on Iran. This has been
clear to many observers including this author for many
months. The only rational explanation to understand
the US push to pass resolutions against Iran, no
matter how weak, is that its purpose is to lay the
ground for planned military action.

If the intention is to attack Iran, it was important
for Bush to have this UNSC resolution ( and the
preceding one of July 31st) approved unanimously, that
makes a demand on Iran that Iran will not meet, to
provide a fig-leaf argument that "the world" demands
action, as UNSC 1441 did in the case of Iraq.

Why did Russia and China support sanctions?

Russia and China could ha

Re: [PEN-L] Why did China and Russia vote to sanction Iran?

[Louis Proyect]

I don't find this convincing since I doubt that either
China or Russia would believe Bush. But what is the
reason then?

Cheers, Ken Hanly

Why did Russia and China vote to sanction Iran?
By Jorge Hirsch


I guess because they hadn't gotten around to reading Samir Amin's
"Beyond US Hegemony" yet.

[PEN-L] In Somalia, a Reckless U.S. Proxy War

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

In Somalia, a reckless U.S. proxy war
Salim Lone
Tribune Media Services
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
NAIROBI

Undeterred by the horrors and setbacks in Iraq, Afghanistan and
Lebanon, the Bush administration has opened another battlefront in the
Muslim world. With full U.S. backing and military training, at least
15,000 Ethiopian troops have entered Somalia in an illegal war of
aggression against the Union of Islamic Courts, which controls almost
the entire south of the country.

As with Iraq in 2003, the United States has cast this as a war to
curtail terrorism, but its real goal is to obtain a direct foothold in
a highly strategic region by establishing a client regime there. The
Horn of Africa is newly oil-rich, and lies just miles from Saudi
Arabia, overlooking the daily passage of large numbers of oil tankers
and warships through the Red Sea. General John Abizaid, the current
U.S. military chief of the Iraq war, was in Ethiopia this month, and
President Hu Jintao of China visited Kenya, Sudan and Ethiopia earlier
this year to pursue oil and trade agreements.

The U.S. instigation of war between Ethiopia and Somalia, two of
world's poorest countries already struggling with massive humanitarian
disasters, is reckless in the extreme. Unlike in the run-up to Iraq,
independent experts, including from the European Union, were united in
warning that this war could destabilize the whole region even if
America succeeds in its goal of toppling the Islamic Courts.

An insurgency by Somalis, millions of whom live in Kenya and Ethiopia,
will surely ensue, and attract thousands of new anti-U.S. militants
and terrorists.

With so much of the world convulsed by crisis, little attention has
been paid to this unfolding disaster in the Horn. The UN Security
Council, however, did take up the issue, and in another craven act
which will further cement its reputation as an anti-Muslim body, bowed
to American and British pressure to authorize a regional peacekeeping
force to enter Somalia to protect the transitional government, which
is fighting the Islamic Courts.

The new UN resolution states that the world body acted to "restore
peace and stability." But as all major international news
organizations have reported, this year Somalia finally experienced its
first respite from 16 years of utter lawlessness and terror at the
hands of the marauding warlords who drove out UN peacekeepers in 1993,
when 18 American soldiers were killed.

Since 1993, there had been no Security Council interest in sending
peacekeepers to Somalia, but as peace and order took hold, a
multilateral force was suddenly deemed necessary — because it was the
Islamic Courts Union that had brought about this stability.
Astonishingly, the Islamists had succeeded in defeating the warlords
primarily through rallying people to their side by creating law and
order through the application of Shariah law, which Somalis
universally practice.

The transitional government, on the other hand, is dominated by the
warlords and terrorists who drove out American forces in 1993.
Organized in Kenya by U.S. regional allies, it is so completely devoid
of internal support that it has turned to Somalia's arch- enemy,
Ethiopia, for assistance.

If this war continues, it will affect the whole region, do serious
harm to U.S. interests and threaten Kenya, the only island of
stability in this corner of Africa.

Ethiopia is at even greater risk, as a dictatorship with little
popular support and beset also by two large internal revolts, by the
Ogadenis and Oromos. It is also mired in a conflict with Eritrea,
which has denied it secure access to seaports.

The best antidote to terrorism in Somalia is stability, which the
Islamic Courts have provided. The Islamists have strong public
support, which has grown in the face of U.S. and Ethiopian
interventions. As in other Muslim-Western conflicts, the world needs
to engage with the Islamists to secure peace.

--
Yoshie

[PEN-L] Hot Spots, Hot Regions, And Hot Zones

[Leigh Meyers]

http://leighm.net/blog/hotzone/

Any requests?

[PEN-L] WSJ Mystery

[Michael Perelman]

Why in the world would the WSJ let Ali Abunimah review Carter's book?

Is the paper becoming more open to critical views?  Hard to believe.


Jimmy Carter's Book:
A Palestinian View
By ALI ABUNIMAH
December 26, 2006; Page A12

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
michaelperelman.wordpress.com

Re: [PEN-L] Why did China and Russia vote to sanction Iran?

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 12/26/06, ken hanly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I don't find this convincing since I doubt that either
China or Russia would believe Bush. But what is the
reason then?

Cheers, Ken Hanly

Why did Russia and China vote to sanction Iran?
By Jorge Hirsch


What Moscow and Beijing did for Iran is basically the same as what
they did for North Korea: to protect their respective national
interests.

Moscow's perception of Russia's national interests is well explained
in the article below*, and Beijing's understanding of its own national
interests isn't too different from that either.

Moscow and Beijing defined sanctions down to protect their national
interests, so that their present and future business relations with
Iran are not subject to international sanctions.

If the Iranian people want to defend themselves from Washington,
building a nuclear weapon isn't the way to go, although it would be
interesting if they built one despite the sanctions, for that would
change the balance of power in the Middle East.  The best defense is
strong economy, national unity, and high oil prices.  While the last
is beyond their control, the first is partly under their control and
the second is wholly up to them.

*
Gulf Times (Qatar)
September 8, 2006
Moscow will benefit from nuclear crisis
By Oxford Analytica

Russia's position in the stand-off with Iran will continue to gain
importance as the possibility increases that sanctions will be imposed
on Tehran. Moscow is unlikely to behave proactively, seeking to strike
a delicate balance between the international community and Iran in
order to emerge as a mediator in the event that the crisis escalates.

ATTEMPTS by Western diplomats to convince Moscow of the threat posed
by a nuclear Iran have been largely unsuccessful. This is because the
Kremlin considers the danger to be less dramatic for Russia than the
United States, Western Europe and Israel.

Russian mainstream politicians and military strategists believe that
the crisis over Iran is the result of Washington's ill-conceived
policies: consistent and strong support for Israel; military invasion
of Iraq; and an archaic and inflexible policy towards Iran, predicated
on the proclaimed desire to overthrow the country's Islamic regime.

Russian analysts also argue that Washington is more critical of Iran
for its record of religious extremism and lack of democracy than it is
of other states in the region where such phenomena are even more
apparent.

In the light of this assessment, Russia is reluctant to lend the
United States and its close allies unequivocal support in overcoming
this "self-inflicted trouble". At the same time, Russia's co-operation
with Iran on the construction of a nuclear reactor at Bushehr, its
arms sales and attempts to co-ordinate gas sales policies provide
sufficient incentives for Moscow not to jeopardise its bilateral
relations with Tehran.

The Kremlin is aware of Tehran's tactical goal of splitting the UN
Security Council (UNSC) and capitalising on disagreements between the
negotiating parties.

Russian leaders were annoyed when, late last year, Iran rejected the
idea of a Moscow-proposed joint venture on uranium enrichment. In
response, Russia toughened its approach as it became convinced that
Tehran would not scrap its uranium enrichment capacity.

In July, following Iran's announcement that it would delay until late
August its response to the proposal by the permanent five UNSC members
plus Germany, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov endorsed the idea
of returning the nuclear dossier to the Security Council. The
subsequent passage of Resolution 1696, demanding that Tehran suspend
uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities before August 31, was
undertaken with Russia's support.

Russia has a three-step approach with regard to Iran's nuclear future,
which reflects its priorities:

* Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons. President Vladimir Putin has
been unambiguous on this point, whatever his tactical calculations.

* Even if Iran is in the process of acquiring nuclear weapons, force
must not be used against it. The military establishment has stipulated
this position, suggesting that, strategically, a (presumably US-led)
military offensive against Iran would leave Russia worse off than a
nuclear-armed Iran.

* Russia should prevent the UN Security Council from ruling that
Iran's transgressions are serious enough to warrant the use of force
in accordance with Article 42 of the UN Charter. Both Lavrov and the
Russian Ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, have consistently
defended this point in all public statements.

Moscow is likely to benefit from the unfolding crisis with Iran;
however, the extent to which it does so will depend on the course of
events:

* The best scenario for Russia would be if Iran were to agree to
suspend enrichment as a result of negotiations in which Russia had
played an important role and, ideally, had obtained concessions on
other issues, such as Russia's WTO 

Re: [PEN-L] WSJ Mystery

[Marvin Gandall]

Michael Perelman wrote:



Why in the world would the WSJ let Ali Abunimah review Carter's book?

Is the paper becoming more open to critical views?  Hard to believe.


Jimmy Carter's Book:
A Palestinian View
By ALI ABUNIMAH
December 26, 2006; Page A12

=
Not to worry. The paper made sure to publish a companion piece by Michael
Oren criticizing the book. Actually, Oren's op-ed was less a criticism - it
didn't deal with any of the issues raised in Carter's book - so much as a
review of how sympathetic US leaders since the Puritans have purportedly
been to the Jews and Israel, suggesting Carter is out of step with
traditional American values. Still, the fact that the Journal saw fit to run
Abunimah's excellent op-ed seems to be another small straw in the wind that
the US ruling class recognizes it has a foreign policy interest in creating
a little more distance between itself and Israel - or at least creating the
perception of such in Mideast and world opinion.

Re: [PEN-L] here's a quotation du jour for degustation (2006 vintage)

[raghu]

On 12/26/06, David B. Shemano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


In short, Richard Herrnstein and I are worried about the prospective
collapse of American free institutions as we have known them, not
implausibly within our own lifetimes  It is an apocalyptic vision. But we
think there is much to be apocalyptic about."



http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.18987,filter.all/pub_detail.asp




David,
I happen to recall a recent query from you about the existence of a
"Cognitive Elite". I assume that you borrowed that phrase from Charles
Murray in the article you linked above.

Do you think this quote below is an accurate version of twentieth century
history? (This is not a rhetorical question - I am simply curious to know.)
-raghu.

---quote
The cognitive elite refers to people in the top percentiles of cognitive
ability who, over the course of the American twentieth century, have been
part of a vast but nearly invisible migration.

At the beginning of the century, the great majority of people in the top 5
or 10 percent of the intelligence distribution were not college educated,
often not even high-school educated, and they lived their lives scattered
almost indistinguishably among the rest of the population.
..

As the century progressed, the historical mix of intellectual abilities at
all levels of American society thinned as intelligence rose to the top. The
upper end of the cognitive ability distribution has been increasingly
channeled into higher education, especially the top colleges and
professional schools, thence into high-IQ occupations and senior managerial
positions. The upshot is that the scattered brightest of the early twentieth
century have congregated, forming a new class.

Re: [PEN-L] here's a quotation du jour for degustation (2006 vintage)

[Leigh Meyers]

raghu wrote:

As the century progressed, the historical mix of intellectual
abilities at all levels of American society thinned as intelligence
rose to the top. The upper end of the cognitive ability distribution
has been increasingly channeled into higher education, especially the
top colleges and professional schools, thence into high-IQ occupations
and senior managerial positions. The upshot is that the scattered
brightest of the early twentieth century have congregated, forming a
new class.

.

If they were *really* that cognitive they would reject the "channeled"
education.

Maybe they're just partially cognitive, and the ability is limited or
circumscribed by their ability to "sell out"...

Leigh

Re: [PEN-L] Saddam Hussein Loses 'Appeal', To Hang Within 30 Days

[soula avramidis]

the way in which liberal intellectuals fell victim to the demonisisng of saddam 
hussein in and about an area they know little of by pathetic bourgeois moral 
standards makes them inadvertant criminals against humanity. and if some think 
this is the end of the story, let them just sit back and watch the news in the 
next ten years. america is winning this war, thanks in part to the tacit 
partcipation and ignorance of its liberal intellectual that mix maorality with 
politics williy nilly


- Original Message 
From: Leigh Meyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:42:48 PM
Subject: Saddam Hussein Loses 'Appeal', To Hang Within 30 Days


Suggestion: The perfect day to pull US troops out of Iraq… anytime 
within 30 days. Saddam Hussein loses his appeal and is sentenced to hang 
within 30 days.


[December 26 2006] Travus T. Hipp Morning News & Commentary:
It’s ‘Boxing Day’… Canada Aside, Boxing Day Is When Americans Box Up 
Their Unwanted ‘Gifts’ And Return Them… 100 Billion Dollars Worth Of 
Toasters, Ties, And Socks



“All The News You Never Knew You Needed To Know …Until Now.”

The Rest Of The News:

Bush meets with his “WAR” cabinet. Robert Gates back from Iraq after 
meeting with the troops, whose commanders have apparently been coerced 
into supporting the ’surge’ tactic…

U.S. Body Count: *2978*, 5 more than died in the WTC attack, due to our 
continuing illegal prosecution of war on Iraq

A Spanish internalist has been flown to Cuba to treat Fidel Castro

Somalia/Ethiopia: They’ve got their war on! Sitrep.

Nigerian rebels blow up another oil pipeline.

U.N security council passes a weakened Iran sanctions resolution.

-30-

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

[PEN-L] Learning Turkish

[Sabri Oncu]

As I did not have to worry about learning Turkish as much as Louis did, since I
was born into that language, let me tell you this:

The Turkish we speak since the birth of the republic is an ever changing
language: I was not able to fully understand newspaper articles from the 1940s
when I was in my 20s and I doubt that someone in his 20s in these days can
fully understand such articles from the 1970s any better than I did 20 years
ago.

Here is an excellent book on the last 300 years of the Ottomans:

The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922 by Donald Quataert

http://www.amazon.com/Ottoman-1700-1922-Approaches-European-History/dp/0521547822

I tell you this much:

I am NOT TURKISH. I am OSMANLI (that is, OTTOMAN, as you know it).

Best,

Sabri


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: [PEN-L] Learning Turkish

[soula avramidis]

The last time i heard the phrase Learning Turkish was in Anakra one or two 
years back, where a pretty solid english marxist scholar met the man of his 
life who happened to be a turk at a late dinner party, after which he said I 
want to learn turkish I wish i could speak turkish.


- Original Message 
From: Sabri Oncu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: PEN-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 9:09:34 AM
Subject: Learning Turkish


As I did not have to worry about learning Turkish as much as Louis did, since I
was born into that language, let me tell you this:

The Turkish we speak since the birth of the republic is an ever changing
language: I was not able to fully understand newspaper articles from the 1940s
when I was in my 20s and I doubt that someone in his 20s in these days can
fully understand such articles from the 1970s any better than I did 20 years
ago.

Here is an excellent book on the last 300 years of the Ottomans:

The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922 by Donald Quataert

http://www.amazon.com/Ottoman-1700-1922-Approaches-European-History/dp/0521547822

I tell you this much:

I am NOT TURKISH. I am OSMANLI (that is, OTTOMAN, as you know it).

Best,

Sabri


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com