For a people repressed for years by sanctions, air bombings and remote control wars, seeing soldiers on the grounds is a dream come true. In that sense Iraq is a new Mecca for nationalist, ultra leftist and fundamentalist alike. It is true that 95% of the resistance is local, but it is going to b
Paul's response was very informative. I wonder if the Madrid conference
did anything to increase the respectability of the war. I read that the
socialists just lost in Madrid, supposedly in part because the UN vote
gave legitimacy to the Spanish action Iraq.
-- Michael Perelman
Economics Departm
Michael had asked about the Iraq Donors Conference in Madrid. Apologies
for not being able to reply sooner (and now it is after the event!).
1) Over several months before the Conference the press had widely reported
that non-"coalition" donors were very reluctant to contribute and that even
"coal
In my experience the issue is history - France (and Europe) have long
'lags' by US standards. Even though two places may look similar TODAY,
when I dig deeply enough they were not when the differences emerged.
Mostly the differences are among different regions (not villages). For
example, the "Mi
Dear Andrew,
I hundred per cent agree with you on what is below.
>Finally, an unrelated note. If you want to travel to a country with
>lots of fascinating history, unending ancient structures in various
>stages of ruination and preservation, incredible food and friendly
>people, a country where
Top-down dictatorship of some sort may be the only option in poor &
dependent countries (either IMF-imposed tame democracy or nationalist
one-party dictatorships). On the question of what to do about that, we have
to ask the leftist residents of those countries rather than imposing
answers fro
-
> There you go. It's now legal to speak Kurdish in Turkey, in both its
> dialects. (Does anyone know if it's true that, when spoken, each
> Kurdish dialect is unintelligible to speakers of the other dialect?) I
> should have emphasized more in my last post that while Turkey has made
> gr
. I'm unsure, but the term "Mountain Turks" could simply be
a political designation.
Best,
Andrew Hagen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:09:04 -0700, Macdonald Stainsby wrote:
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Andrew Hagen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
&
I was just in Turkey, albeit only as a tourist. While the people of
Turkey do face political repression in several forms, as in the cases
of some journalists who are arrested, Turkey is not a totalitarian
state. The people of Turkey have a will of their own. They can think
for themselves.
Earlie
Gar wrote:
>Mind you there are other unexpected places we can learn from; for
>example if an armed movement comes to power and genuinely wishes to have
>the people rather than a small elite hold power, they might follow one
>part of the Swiss model, and truly arm the whole populace (excluding
>th
At 04:36 PM 9/4/01 -0400, you wrote:
> Turkey has been a toy of the US imperialism since the beginning of
>the Cold War. With the Truman doctrine and the Marshall Plan, we had embraced
>USA as our saviour and since then have been a satelite of the US in the
>region.
didn't the US have nuclear-ti
Friends,
Let me tell you that it is impossible for mortals like me to keep pace with
the discussions on PEN-L. I was thinking about responding to Michael's
original question but when I looked at the archives, I saw that you had
already produced a ton of e-mails on the subject. I apologize for
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 12:46 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:16705] Re: Re: Re: Michael's Question
> I wrote: > I ask the question: "what happens if the
anarcho-
http://www.mises.org/wardlibrary_detail.asp?control=5264
http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/8269.html
-Original Message-
From: Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 12:48 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:16705] Re: Re: R
> Ian writes:
> >How's the quote go; "democracy is the worst form of government,
except
> >for all the others?" Do you _really_ think I'm a fan of
Churchillian
> >personalities?
>
> no, I don't. I was reacting to the fact that Churchill -- who was
clearly
> an anti-democrat -- gets quoted so of
I wrote: > I ask the question: "what happens if the anarcho-syndicalist
commune across the river democratically decides to build a nuclear power
plant (or to pollute the river)?"...The answer, of course, is that they
wouldn't do it, since they're "properly emancipated." <
Gar wrote:
>Actual th
Ian writes:
>How's the quote go; "democracy is the worst form of government, except
>for all the others?" Do you _really_ think I'm a fan of Churchillian
>personalities?
no, I don't. I was reacting to the fact that Churchill -- who was clearly
an anti-democrat -- gets quoted so often on this iss
> I asked:
> > > Ian, what's your alternative to democracy as the main political
principle?
>
> He answers:
> >Hey, I'm with Churchill on this one.
>
> do you think that Churchill _really _ liked democracy?
=
How's the quote go; "democracy is the worst form of government, except
for all
I asked:
> > Ian, what's your alternative to democracy as the main political principle?
He answers:
>Hey, I'm with Churchill on this one.
do you think that Churchill _really _ liked democracy?
>Preference dynamics and transitivity paradoxes indicate the need for
>institutions that accommodate
Actual there are some answers to this that do not require utopian
assumptions about human nature. Basically, there are anarchists who
distinguish between "state" and 'polity'. So the commune up the stream
can't put up a nuclear power plant because it is part of a larger polity
that votes against
Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> >These states did not fall _because_ they were democratic; they fell
> >because the U.S. undermined or attacked them. But those who are all hot
> >for third-world anti-imperialist democracy need to explain how these
> >states might have survived. I
> >I'll be even violent opponents of oppressive governments like US pop
>>culture sometimes.
>>
> >Doug
>
>See the photographs by documentarian, Susan Meiselas, in her book on the
>Sandinista Revolution. Full of FSLN combatents in '78 and '79 with t-shirts
>and baseball caps of U.S. rock stars a
> >"Dr. Arrow, Dr. Arrow, you're wanted in intensive careThe
voters
> >can't agree...Dr. Arrow"
>
> You'll note that in his book _Social Choice and Individual Values_,
Kenneth
> Arrow pointed to similar problems for all other methods of social
> decision-making. It's not just with voting.
I have to run to class, but a quick answer is that we in the US have the
obligation to try to help to create the space for No. 3.
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 01:00:50PM -0400, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> Ok, so the alternatives are: 1) be open and democratic, and the US
> will overthrow you, or 2) be a
I wrote:
> > we should also distrust those who stand "above" society and decide
> which movements from below are revolutionary (and thus okay) and which
> are counterrevolutionary (and thus not good). That decision can only be
> made democratically. And those "above" -- i.e., in positions of po
The accts. of the overthrow of Arbenz in such books as the one by Richard
Immerman, "The CIA in Guatemala, " Univ. of Texas Press and the Kinzer and
Schlesinger book, "Bitter Fruit, " (and an out of print book by a CIA agent
in Iran that helped to overthrow Mossedeq, blanking on his name. Inter
>Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>>These states did not fall _because_ they were democratic; they fell
>>because the U.S. undermined or attacked them. But those who are all hot
>>for third-world anti-imperialist democracy need to explain how these
>>states might have survived. It's easy to say, they should ar
>
> we should also distrust those who stand "above" society and decide
which
> movements from below are revolutionary (and thus okay) and which are
> counterrevolutionary (and thus not good). That decision can only be
made
> democratically. And those "above" -- i.e., in positions of power --
are
Macdonald writes:
> > The problem with anarchism, as I understand it, is that its opposition to
> > the state (centralized authority & power) _per se_ implies an opposition to
> > democracy, since without a state to enforce the rules, you can't have
> > democracy except under utopian conditions.
>
Carrol Cox wrote:
>These states did not fall _because_ they were democratic; they fell
>because the U.S. undermined or attacked them. But those who are all hot
>for third-world anti-imperialist democracy need to explain how these
>states might have survived. It's easy to say, they should arouse t
Jim Devine wrote:
>
>
>
> Of course, even earlier, Guatemala's Arbenz tried to run an open,
> democratic, society while instituting reforms to help the people. It
> provoked US intervention and his overthrow. And as Carrol mentioned, the US
> marines overthrew Bosch's democratic government in
Could it have something to do with the fact
>that in all the cases mentioned, the military were reactionary, and thus
>ready to overthrow the democratically chosen govenrments?
Not the entirety of the Chilean military. Remember that the
constitutionist General Prats that was assasinated to mak
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The problem with anarchism, as I understand it, is that its opposition to
> the state (centralized authority & power) _per se_ implies an opposition to
> democracy, since without a state to enforce the rules, you can't hav
Gar Lipow wrote:
>
> I tend to think that government (socialist or otherwise) will be at
> least as repressive as it's population will tolerate,
This personifies government, ripping it out of the concrete context of
activity in which an actual "government" exists. General remarks about
gove
At 05:59 AM 09/04/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Last point on this: I wonder if Chile et. al. really fell because they
>were not repressive enough?
is it possible that Allende fell because he didn't want to risk a civil war
by arming the workers to defend democracy against Pinochet?
Jim Devine [EMAIL
Gar wrote:
> I tend to think that government (socialist or otherwise) will be at
>least as repressive as it's population will tolerate, and that when
>under attack from outside, a population will tend to tolerate a great
>deal. In short revolutions under attack from a strong outside force will
>
I wrote:
> > It would be even harder if it tried democracy more serious -- i.e.,
> > socialist democracy -- than the current US system.
Macdonald wrote:
>Given all the factors that you correctly outlined as to the Cuban situation in
>the Carribbean beneath America, (etc) it would do us well not
Carrol Cox wrote:
>Do you draw any distinction between the hypothetical situation of a
>revolutionary society in the U.S., EU, or Japan on the one hand, the
>rest of the world on the other hand? Do you want the same answer for
>"What would a Socialist U.S. be like?" and "What would a Socialist
>B
I don't think that anybody ever suggested that repression was sufficient.
I don't think that anybody ever suggested that it should be a major
aspect. Jim's point is that it should be a minor factor.
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 05:59:12AM -0700, Gar Lipow wrote:
> Last point on this: I wonder if Chil
Last point on this: I wonder if Chile et. al. really fell because they
were not repressive enough? Could it have something to do with the fact
that in all the cases mentioned, the military were reactionary, and thus
ready to overthrow the democratically chosen govenrments? (The only
exception to t
I tend to think that government (socialist or otherwise) will be at
least as repressive as it's population will tolerate, and that when
under attack from outside, a population will tend to tolerate a great
deal. In short revolutions under attack from a strong outside force will
tend to be a grea
I agree that mine were blanket statements. I do not hold any of these
countries up as a model of democratic participation. My aim was to list
countries born of revolution that had remained independent while
preserving some measure of freedoms for a significant portion of their
populations.
The de
Re: Cuba, Jim Devine writes:
It would be even harder if it tried democracy more serious -- i.e.,
> socialist democracy -- than the current US system.
>
Given all the factors that you correctly outlined as to the Cuban situation in
the Carribbean beneath America, (etc) it would do us well not t
Nicely put.
Jim Devine wrote:
A party's dictatorship is justified in the
> end only if it uses it to build popular power. Unfortunately, the US and
> other imperialist powers consistently push these parties to make the
> decisions that make the most sense militarily rather than democratically.
-
Andrew wrote:
>The United States, India, Israel, Turkey, and Mexico were able to
>remain both open societies and independent. Each of these successful
>nations embraced capitalism, albeit to different extents. One
>additional item to add to Michael's list would be that the revolution
>is socialist
Michael Perelman wrote:
> > Let me ask a different question: a revolution has broken out in a poor
> economy, without the ability to confront the imperialism powers head on.
> Clandestine operations can do great damage to the society. Less
> committed citizens can be bribed. Misinformation ca
At 07:39 PM 09/03/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Do
>you have any retroactive advice for Juan Bosch or Salvador Allende or
>[memory block: the Panamanian president who died in a plane crash]?
Omar Torrijos (who was replaced by America's Friend, the drug-friendly
tyrant, Manuel Noriega, who was later ov
I don't really have much to contribute. US popular culture is powerful,
perhaps some sort of bandwagon effect, where everyone wants to identify
with what is popular.
On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 09:54:36PM -0400, Doug Henwood wrote:
> Michael Perelman wrote:
>
> >Yes, Doug says that with Cuba, it co
m
-Original Message-
From: Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, September 03, 2001 6:54 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:16643] Re: Re: Re: Michael's Question
>Michael Perelman wrote:
>
>>Just imagine if a power, much, m
Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> Michael Perelman wrote:
>
> >Yes, Doug says that with Cuba, it could only happen because of the USSR.
>
> You didn't answer any of my other questions about a post-liberal
> revolutionary society.
>
Do you draw any distinction between the hypothetical situation of a
r
Michael Perelman wrote:
>Yes, Doug says that with Cuba, it could only happen because of the USSR.
You didn't answer any of my other questions about a post-liberal
revolutionary society.
Doug
Michael Perelman wrote:
>Just imagine if a power, much, much mightier than the US were to
>flood us with media
>that undermined the society. Pumping out TV, Radio, Newspapers, and
>subsidizing and
>arming violent opponents of the government.
Michael, I'm completely opposed to the arming of vi
Yes, Doug says that with Cuba, it could only happen because of the USSR. Castro did
not seem as a threat at first, an only later when he threated expropriations did he
run into serious danger. Even with the Soviet support, think of all the dangers that
he faced. When Jim Devine and I were in Cu
The United States, India, Israel, Turkey, and Mexico were able to
remain both open societies and independent. Each of these successful
nations embraced capitalism, albeit to different extents. One
additional item to add to Michael's list would be that the revolution
is socialist in character. That
Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>
> So you've settled on the inevitability of a "closed society." Could
> you offer some details? Would we be allowed to carry on as critical
> political economy types on PEN-L? Would newspapers publish freely?
> Elections? Parties? Independent unio
Carrol Cox wrote:
>Michael Perelman wrote:
>>
>>
>> Let me ask a different question: a revolution has broken out in a poor
>> economy, without the ability to confront the imperialism powers head on.
>> Clandestine operations can do great damage to the society. Less committed
>> citizens can
Michael Perelman wrote:
>
>
> Let me ask a different question: a revolution has broken out in a poor
> economy, without the ability to confront the imperialism powers head on.
> Clandestine operations can do great damage to the society. Less committed
> citizens can be bribed. Misinformation
57 matches
Mail list logo
