Could anyone give the precise reference in the Grundrisse to this concept?
Many thanks.
Chris Burford
London
To extract from Patrick Bond's long post of 20th June:
> One work from the left ANC tradition (which
>I had the privilege to edit), Mzwanele Mayekiso's
>Township Politics: Civic Struggles for a New
>South Africa (New York, Monthly Review, 1996),
>makes a plausible case that many more insur
>You don't have to call yourself a Marxist, wave red flags, talk the
>language of early 20th century Russian political organizing, to be a
>socialist. In fact, it's probably best not to do so. It just turns
>off the people you want to organize, as you know. Mainly it's a
>religious thing for p
The way to unsub. is to send your request to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsub pen-l
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 10:59:57PM -0400, Issam Mansour wrote:
> unsubscribe
>
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsubscribe
There is a relationship of these debates over modes of production, South
Africa, etc. to politics, but it is a highly mediated relationship.
Take, for example, the suggestion that Trotsky's formulation of "uneven and
combined development" is the best way to conceive of South African
development
Regarding the prior and current discussion of Fed policy, the "high dollar,"
etc., please read the attached Jude Wanniski column from today entitled
"Greenspan Undermines the AFL-CIO!!," the title of which alone may perk the
interest of some of you.
http://www.polyconomics.com/
[was: Re: [PEN-L:13810] RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: S. Africa/mode of prod. debate]
At 05:46 PM 6/21/01 -0500, you wrote:
>I have no problem with uneven and combined development paradigm, O'Connor's
>piece in the Race and Class special issue on ecological crisis was
>convincing to
>me, but I have never
At 09:47 PM 6/21/01 +0100, you wrote:
> > it's possible that if Greenspan keeps lowering rates, the U.S.
> > economy will
> > suddenly spurt forward. In that case, he'll have to raise them again to
> > avoid inflation, which has always been his main concern. Isn't this one
> > reason why Uncle Mi
Bread and Roses?? maggie
Jim Devine wrote:
> checking out the British Labour Party on the web, they seem to have dropped
> the red flag as their symbol (replacing it with a red rose -- with thorns?)
> but not the red flag anthem.
>
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jde
< http://www.senate.gov/~finance/hr062001.htm >
You have to click/read the Committee members statements first or else
you'll get a connection failure message. I'm posting because they
invited John Sweeney to speak and his testimony is available.
Ian
I have no problem with uneven and combined development paradigm, O'Connor's
piece in the Race and Class special issue on ecological crisis was convincing to
me, but I have never understood the debates between, e.g., world systems on the
one hand and dependency theory on the other, or underdevelopm
Michael Perelman wrote:
>I don't see biotechnology creating a wave of enthusiasm
>comparable to the Internet.
But, to be fair, you probably wouldn't have seen the wave of
enthusiasm about the Internet either. Not that anyone could, but
betting against things for capital to enthuse about is gen
Almost exactly the same thing happened to indigenous
Californians. While I think you could argue that the
Spanish/Mexican missions were pre-capitalist (?),
Indians in the northern interior had no contact with
them, and seem little affected. Unlike in eastern
states, for example, the horse did not
Thanks to Ian Murray for forwarding the John Lichfield story to pen-l. It
never ceases to amuse me that the theme of shorter working hours
consistently sparks little or no response from progressive economists. For
the record, anyway, here is a note I sent to Charlotte Thorne of the
Industrial Soci
In East Africa, for example, an area of relatively late formal colonization
(turn of last century), the Maasai and other pastoralists were often put forward
by British 'explorers' etc. as a people frozen from an 'ancient' time, i.e.,
unaffected by the 'modern' (capitalist) world. In fact, however,
Michael asked Mark:
> > Isn't this getting pretty personal, Mark?
>
Mark responded:
> No, it's a reflection of exchanges Doug and I have had from time to time. I
> hope that Doug's question will indeed open up a discussion about what is
> relevant, and why. For my part, I'm saying inter alia: Th
Jim Devine wrote:
> >
> >>why is there this slowdown that the Fed
> >>can't help by reducing rates?
> >
> >Because it's more of a 19th century slowdown than a post-WW II
> one, with a
> >financial hangover from the burst Nasdaq/tech bubble, and a real sector
> >one from overinvestment in gadgets.
[NYT]
June 21, 2001
Business Leaders Visit Bush at White House
By STEPHEN LABATON
WASHINGTON, June 20 - As the White House defended several recent
private meetings with corporate executives who have important issues
before the government, scores of other executives from the Business
Roundtable ca
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/21/01 03:51PM >>>
Michael Perelman wrote:
>I don't disagree with you about the new economy. I have a section in my
>new book that says pretty much what you say, but the way you said it might
>seem offensive to Doug. I hope not. He is usually a good sport.
That's me,
[was: Re: [PEN-L:13799] Re: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: relevance]
At 04:06 PM 6/21/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Mark Jones wrote:
>
>>why is there this slowdown that the Fed
>>can't help by reducing rates?
>
>Because it's more of a 19th century slowdown than a post-WW II one, with a
>financial hangover fr
Yes, yes, yes. This is important. And I would love to see us address the
degree that resource constraints are binding in the short-run.
Ricardo has been talking about resource constraints in China. Just this
morning, Tim passed on the report about California and global warming and
water. Ener
Mark Jones wrote:
>why is there this slowdown that the Fed
>can't help by reducing rates?
Because it's more of a 19th century slowdown than a post-WW II one,
with a financial hangover from the burst Nasdaq/tech bubble, and a
real sector one from overinvestment in gadgets. It's probably going
The
AGRIBUSINESS EXAMINER
Monitoring Corporate Agribusiness From a Public Interest Perspective
A.V. Krebs Editor\Publisher
Issue #120
June 21, 2001
A MEMORIAL: JOSEPH PETULLA
"He whom you love and lose
is no longer where he was before.
He is now wherever you are."
---
Doug Henwood wrote:
> That's me, Mr Sport! I'm used to Mark, I can take it.
So coming straight to the point, why is there this slowdown that the Fed
can't help by reducing rates?
Mark
Michael Perelman:
>
>
> I don't disagree with you about the new economy. I have a section in my
> new book that says pretty much what you say, but the way you said it might
> seem offensive to Doug. I hope not. He is usually a good sport.
I like to think of any needles I unintentionally insert
Michael Perelman wrote:
>I don't disagree with you about the new economy. I have a section in my
>new book that says pretty much what you say, but the way you said it might
>seem offensive to Doug. I hope not. He is usually a good sport.
That's me, Mr Sport! I'm used to Mark, I can take it.
checking out the British Labour Party on the web, they seem to have dropped
the red flag as their symbol (replacing it with a red rose -- with thorns?)
but not the red flag anthem.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
I don't disagree with you about the new economy. I have a section in my
new book that says pretty much what you say, but the way you said it might
seem offensive to Doug. I hope not. He is usually a good sport.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 08:32:40PM +0100, Mark Jones wrote:
> Michael Perelman wrot
Lenin's Embalmers
Ilya Zbarsky Samuel Hutchinson Barbara Bray (Translator)
Between 1924 and the fall of communism in 1991, hundreds of millions of
visitors paid their respects to the embalmed body of Lenin and, later, that
of Stalin. Professor Ilya Zbarsky - son of Boris Zbarsky who, with profes
http://www.google.com/search?q=red+flag+anthem+Labour+Party
Think so. Either under Kinnock or Blair. Clause 4 went out the door
during Kinnock ouster of the Militant tendency.
And, btw, in a renewal letter from NLR, a few years ago, they said, Robin
Cook, was a subscriber until the time he entered the Blair cabinet...
Michael Pugliese
- Original
Ricardo's not was not one of the worst by a long shot, but I am afraid
that my hand has not been heavy enough. I do appreciate your note. If
others would respond to provocations the way you did, we would not have
any problems. What Brad called the tit-for-tat approach, unfortunately,
is the nor
No, and the Russians haven't taken Lenin's tomb out of Red Square, either.
--jks
>
>At 02:36 PM 6/21/01 -0400, you wrote:
>>BTW, the JCP's [Japanese Communist Party's] daily newspaper is still
>>called Akahata [Red Flag], even though it ceased to be revolutionary a
>>long time ago
>
>has the Bri
At 02:36 PM 6/21/01 -0400, you wrote:
>BTW, the JCP's [Japanese Communist Party's] daily newspaper is still
>called Akahata [Red Flag], even though it ceased to be revolutionary a
>long time ago
has the British Labour Party dropped its "red flag" anthem?
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://
Michael, I appreciate your concern with civility, but you are too heavy
handed in this case. There's nothing personal or ad hominem here; my
exasperation is purely with the level of reasoning and lack of progress in
the argument. And I take it that Ricardo's exasperation with my my naivete
abo
Mark Jones wrote:
> I don't think it's so much a debate about the origins as about the
> destination of capitalism, and also about what kind of politics we should be
> arguing for.
yes, but much of the argument gets off track.
> On the general question of relevance, for some years now you and
Jim says:
>[was: Re: [PEN-L:13751] Re: Re: Angel of History (was Re: Geras vs Laclau)]
>
>Justin writes:
>>You don't have to call yourself a Marxist, wave red flags, talk the
>>language of early 20th century Russian political organizing, to be
>>a socialist. In fact, it's probably best not to d
>We have, therefore, to get used to a period of sharply-reduced corporate
>profitability and lower investment returns and this poses a serious
>challenge for the City. Fund managers will find that generating high
>investment returns will be a lot harder in the next 10 years than in the
>last 10.
>
http://search1.npr.org/search97cgi/s97_cgi
Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
Does anyone know anything about these scientists? Are
their projections credible, or is this a ploy to
justify the building of more dams, relaxation of
environmental regulations, etc., or both?
Tim
Global warming may ruin state water system, scientists
say
San Jose Mercury News - 6/21/01
By Fran
Doyle wrote: >The selected quotes from Pen-lers below the signature on this
reply (source from Jim Devine -Spinoza, and Yoshie Furuhashi - Hobbes) are
representative of the early period in philosophy of "rationalist" rejection
of emotions as appropriate to knowledge production. I would like to
Doug Henwood:
>
>
> Does this endless debate over the origins of capitalism have any
> relevance?
I don't think it's so much a debate about the origins as about the
destination of capitalism, and also about what kind of politics we should be
arguing for. That's why there may be consensus about no
>Louis writes:
>Au contraire. This is a bait:
>
>"If Louis Proyect and others cannot be given the opportunity of
>differentiating themselves from positions they consider liberal or social
>democrat, they might logically be obliged to withdraw from such a list as
>this, whic
It really does not matter who said what at this point. We should be more
concerned about what goes on in the future.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 09:56:05AM -0700, Jim Devine wrote:
> Louis writes:
> Au contraire. This is a bait:
>
> "If Louis Proyect and others cannot be given the oppor
Louis writes:
Au contraire. This is a bait:
"If Louis Proyect and others cannot be given the opportunity of
differentiating themselves from positions they consider liberal or social
democrat, they might logically be obliged to withdraw from such a list as
this, which would
> >>You said it Justin:
> >>> Primarily the social relations of production, i.e., the class
> >>> relations whose structure primarily explains the nature and
> >>> development of the mode of production, the state, and, less
> >>> directly, ideology.
Jim:
> I don't see why the phras
- Original Message -
From: "Lev Trotsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 9:48 AM
Subject: Communique from Salta -- 6-20-01
Communique from the Pagainas Piqueteras del Norte de
Salta (Argentina)
Comrades,
Just time for this one update today.
Almost everybody in this conversation has gone over the top. I am not
singling you out. It troubles me that intelligent people cannot manage to
exchange ideas regarding mutual interests without getting so heated up.
Yoshie was on the right track with her masked philosopher approach. The
basic q
Does this endless debate over the origins of capitalism have any
relevance to contemporary politics? I don't think it has to - I'm not
demanding relevance as a precondition for debate. Just curious about
the volume and vehemence of it all. Doug
no, but the concept of hydraulic lock-in
deserve
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/20/01 07:23PM >>>
I don't see any meaningful sense in which this is true. What
'pre-capitalist' m of p or social formation *effectively* or *meaningfully*
EVER confronted capitalist states? I can't think of one. There was no
confrontation of historical equals, there w
>>You said it Justin:
>>> Primarily the social relations of production, i.e., the class
>>> relations whose structure primarily explains the nature and
>>> development of the mode of production, the state, and, less directly,
>>> ideology. This is elementary. Surely you knew this is t
Re: Joe Slovo>
http://www.sacp.org.za/people/slovo/default.htm
http://www.sacp.org.za/docs/history/failed.html
Has Socialism Failed?
By Joe Slovo
South African Communist Party
Contents
Introduction
Ideological
> Oh, never mind, Yoshie, this is hopeless. Instead of a reasonable
> argument that class doesn't account for as much of the variation as
> historical materialists say (though it really depends on the HM--Marx
> put a lot of emphasis on military factors in the rose of feudalism),
> we have the cl
Excellent question. That is why I asked on how we have moved beyond the
old mode of production debates.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 12:06:53PM -0400, Doug Henwood wrote:
> Does this endless debate over the origins of capitalism have any
> relevance to contemporary politics? I don't think it has to
[was: Re: [PEN-L:13751] Re: Re: Angel of History (was Re: Geras vs Laclau)]
Justin writes:
>You don't have to call yourself a Marxist, wave red flags, talk the
>language of early 20th century Russian political organizing, to be a
>socialist. In fact, it's probably best not to do so. It just tur
Oh, never mind, Yoshie, this is hopeless. Instead of a reasonable argument
that class doesn't account for as much of the variation as historical
materialists say (though it really depends on the HM--Marx put a lot of
emphasis on military factors in the rose of feudalism), we have the classic
s
> > >which "social relations"?
>>
>> Social relations of production & reproduction (the latter must be
>> broadly conceived).
>>
>> Yoshie
>That's right, so why waste my time pretending L&M have no right
>calling your position essentialist?? Take heed from what Benjamin
>really says in his The
please cool it.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 12:57:49PM -0300, Ricardo Duchesne wrote:
>
> > >
> > >which "social relations"?
> >
> > Social relations of production & reproduction (the latter must be
> > broadly conceived).
> >
> > Yoshie
> That's right, so why waste my time pretending L&M have no
Does this endless debate over the origins of capitalism have any
relevance to contemporary politics? I don't think it has to - I'm not
demanding relevance as a precondition for debate. Just curious about
the volume and vehemence of it all.
Doug
>You said it Justin:
>> Primarily the social relations of production, i.e., the class
>> relations whose structure primarily explains the nature and
>> development of the mode of production, the state, and, less directly,
>> ideology. This is elementary. Surely you knew this is the his
> >What about fundamental change on this side of the border?
>
>What about it.
>
>>It's not
>>as though Mexicans, South Africans, etc. have a duty to get an
>>international chain of revolutions going but we don't, is it?
>
>No. I mean yes. No, let me take that back. No. Sorry, can't make up my m
> >
> >which "social relations"?
>
> Social relations of production & reproduction (the latter must be
> broadly conceived).
>
> Yoshie
That's right, so why waste my time pretending L&M have no right
calling your position essentialist?? Take heed from what Benjamin
really says in his Theses.
You said it Justin:
> Primarily the social relations of production, i.e., the class
> relations whose structure primarily explains the nature and
> development of the mode of production, the state, and, less directly,
> ideology. This is elementary. Surely you knew this is the historical
>
[Washington Post]
U.S. Satellites Vulnerable To Attacks, Officer Warns
Thursday, June 21, 2001; Page A02
A senior military officer warned yesterday that U.S. military and
commercial satellites are vulnerable to attack and said the United
States must begin creating a system to defend them.
Unles
> OK, but this is an old point, due to Kant, and while true, it is not
> informative about the question of realism. After all, no one pretends
> his account of whatever, given by fallible humans in real time, is
> complete. But that does not mean that there is not a complete account
> that could
> >Nobody is trying to bait you.
>>
>>Yoshie
>
>Au contraire. This is a bait:
>
>"If Louis Proyect and others cannot be given the opportunity of
>differentiating themselves from positions they consider liberal or social
>democrat, they might logically be obliged to withdraw from such a list as
>
Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Please, we are trying to avoid this sort of communication.
>
>On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 10:00:07AM -0400, Julio Huato wrote:
> > Louis makes assertions of fact as if he really knew:
> >
> > >>The SACP and the Mexican CP are [!]
> > >>basically reformist outfit
>Nobody is trying to bait you.
>
>Yoshie
Au contraire. This is a bait:
"If Louis Proyect and others cannot be given the opportunity of
differentiating themselves from positions they consider liberal or social
democrat, they might logically be obliged to withdraw from such a list as
this, whic
You don't have to call yourself a Marxist, wave red flags, talk the language
of early 20th century Russian political organizing, to be a socialist. In
fact, it's probably best not to do so. It just turns off the people you want
to organize, as you know. Mainly it's a religious thing for people
>I have no objections to being baited, provoked or whatever.
Nobody is trying to bait you. What's been going on are theoretical
disagreements, which may or may not have political implications.
Folks can have very different theories and yet come to the same
practical political conclusions on m
> > Marx doesn't talk about "the identity of the working class," "the
>> identity of a mode of production," The idea is to examine phenomena as
>> (historically evolved & evolving) ensembles of social relations
>
>which "social relations"?
Social relations of production & reproduction (the la
Jim Devine:
>means by a "communist party" doesn't it?) If Louis is so sensitive that he
>can't respond to a comment that says he's wrong on a highly specific
>empirical issue, he should leave the list. But I don't think he is that
>sensitive. Julio's comment in no way can be described as an ins
>I agree that Marxism has collapsed as an organizing principle, and
>is not likely to come back. But the questions raised here are not
>about the principles around which _we_ should organize, but about
>those arouns which _society_ is organized, that is, around the truth
>of historical materia
Primarily the social relations of production, i.e., the class relations
whose structure primarily explains the nature and development of the mode of
production, the state, and, less directly, ideology. This is elementary.
Surely you knew this is the historical materialist view? L&M attack it
(
[was: Re: [PEN-L:13739] Re: Re: Re: Calling an end to S. Africa thread?]
I see nothing wrong with Julio's assertion. He didn't say that Louis was a
bad person or had bad intentions or anything like that. He didn't
_characterize_ Louis' opinions at all. All he did was make an assertion of
_fact
>
>You're right this will go nowhere unless we explain their respective
>positions. I was afraid to be locked-in elaborating the little I know. If
>I recall Laclau's point is that there are different, even conflicting
>ways to 'see' a soccer ball, no one view being all-inclusive or
>capable of
Would somebody explain to me how this discussion is going beyond the old
Indian mode of production debate?
Assume that that southern US in the early 19th C. were a separate country.
Being basically a slave economy, it would not seem like a capitalist
economy -- looking at the US by itself. From
At 11:45 AM 06/21/2001 +0300, you wrote:
>A minor, but interesting, story of the Blair ascendancy has been the eclipse
>of and utter loss of credibility by Robin Cook. Prior to entering the
>government as Foreign Secretary in 1997, Cook's reputation was fairly solid
>among Labour leftwingers as so
>
> Marx doesn't talk about "the identity of the working class," "the
> identity of a mode of production," The idea is to examine phenomena as
> (historically evolved & evolving) ensembles of social relations
which "social relations"?
> Lou complains of
>reformism of the SACP, the Mexican CP, FARC, & a host of other
>outfits in the periphery, but in this they are merely following the
>trend that happened much, much earlier in the core.
I must demur. The trend in question was the Comintern of the Popular Front
era which pr
Mark:
> I'm still having problems with how an agriculture which has sustained
> itself for several millennia can be called ultimately unsustainable,
> but I suspect I haven't been paying close enough attention to your
> argument and I'm wondering if you can repeat the salient bits
You and Michae
See, "Carr, Barry. Marxism & communism in twentieth-century Mexico /
Barry Carr.
Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press, c1992.
M. Pugliese, the "intellectual author" of the killings of Rosa and Karl and
Julius and Ethel...so say some folks ;-)
- Original Message -
From: "Louis Proyect
I agree that Marxism has collapsed as an organizing principle, and is not
likely to come back. But the questions raised here are not about the
principles around which _we_ should organize, but about those arouns which
_society_ is organized, that is, around the truth of historical materialism.
Sorry, I should have been clearer. The Mexican CP dissolved itself into a
Eurocommunist formation in 1982 called the Unified Socialist Party (PSUM).
If anything, this outfit was even more reformist than the CP itself. The
PSUM then merged with other left reformist forces in 1987 and became the
Mex
>Geras, I might add, has changed his views since that debate. On
>two occasions, at a conference and as an invited speaker at York,
>I noted that in his presentation he seemed to be trying to get away
>from the idea of a 'single principle underlying the differences'. I
>asked, in a roundabout way
Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Does anybody know of a single source for these kinds of
>statistics on a country-by-country basis? Basically, I am looking for wage
>earners share of GDP or National Income, whichever is more useful (if they
>are not in fact the same thing.)
Yes. Look them up
Louis makes assertions of fact as if he really knew:
>>The SACP and the Mexican CP are [!]
>>basically reformist outfits and if fundamental change comes to those
>>countries, it will linked to forces to the left like the Zapatista
>>movement or the constellation of left intellectuals and trade un
>What about fundamental change on this side of the border?
What about it.
>It's not
>as though Mexicans, South Africans, etc. have a duty to get an
>international chain of revolutions going but we don't, is it?
No. I mean yes. No, let me take that back. No. Sorry, can't make up my mind.
>
Lou says
>The SACP and the Mexican CP are
>basically reformist outfits and if fundamental change comes to those
>countries, it will linked to forces to the left like the Zapatista
>movement or the constellation of left intellectuals and trade unionists
>Patrick Bond is involved with.
What about
Justin:
> I haven't read the debate for a long time, and I can't recall the
> details. But I did read the _whole_ debate, and L&M's book, too, quite
> carefully. However, this isn't going anywhere unless someone starts
> posting arguments rather that confessio fidei about which arguments
> they l
Chris Burford:
> >CLASS RELATIONS WERE IDENTICAL TO MEXICO, ETC
>
>
> remains improbable both in theory and empirical fact. This does not
> necessarily flow from combined and uneven development. Rather the reverse.
Actually I supplied historical and economic data on Mexico and South
Africa. You c
Greetings Economists,
The selected quotes from Pen-lers below the signature on
this reply (source from Jim Devine -Spinoza, and Yoshie Furuhashi - Hobbes)
are representative of the early period in philosophy of "rationalist"
rejection of emotions as appropriate to knowledge production. I would li
Pat Bond posted:
>Political Implications.
> Ultimately, it is less the definitional roots of the
>concept, and more its political implications and
>contemporary intellectual applications, for which uneven
>development is known. Leon Trotsky's theory of combined and
>uneven development -
I have been looking at Ghana recently. it is a typical
story of dependent state creation. it grew at an
average yearly rate of 4 percent since structural
adjustment in 1983 but per capita income is still
below the Nkrumah days levels. in 2000 it experienced
a slump at one percent. savings dropped
Sir David Spedding, The old school spy who brought MI6 in from the cold
By Jimmy Burns
Financial Times, June 14 2001
Sir David Spedding, the former head of MI6, the secret
intelligence service, who died on Wednesday, played a key
role in ensuring that his country's spying community was not
made
Doug Henwood wrote:
I just saw the odious Texas Senator Phil Gramm on TV, in a q&a with
Alan Greenspan, complaining about European financial regulation.
Though he was complaining about the constraints on U.S. banks'
European operations imposed by EU regulations, Gramm phrased it as
the EU for
Penners
A minor, but interesting, story of the Blair ascendancy has been the eclipse
of and utter loss of credibility by Robin Cook. Prior to entering the
government as Foreign Secretary in 1997, Cook's reputation was fairly solid
among Labour leftwingers as someone who had consistently champione
Private funding for schools but not hospitals yet
The Queen's Speech: Health and Education
By Richard Garner, Education Editor and Michael
Durham, Health Correspondent
The Independent, 21 June 2001
A concerted drive towards private
takeovers of state schools will be
outlined in the Educ
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
