Re: IMF warns the US

Jurriaan Bendien wrote: The ordinary American worker has exactly zero choice about getting himself a mortgage Not exactly true. Consumption has been sustained in the U.S. over the last couple of years by home equity withdrawals - borrowing against appreciated house values through second mortgages,

Re: IMF warns the US

- Original Message - From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > This is just banale gobbledygook, which is presumably why Charlotte and > Larry are drawing attention to it. The US dollar is not about to "collapse" > at all. Panic-mongering statements such as "the dollar could collapse

Re: IMF warns the US

This is just banale gobbledygook, which is presumably why Charlotte and Larry are drawing attention to it. The US dollar is not about to "collapse" at all. Panic-mongering statements such as "the dollar could collapse at any moment" can be made any day, and without any clear explanation of the argu

Re: IMF: evict Argentinians now

Louis Proyect wrote: On evictions in Argentina. This was from Nestor Gorojovsky, btw. As was probably obvious. -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org

Re: IMF: evict Argentinians now

On evictions in Argentina. Larry Rother´s Brofmans (and many thousands like them) will not be seriously menaced before the last turn of elections, this year, takes place. Same can be said of the jeopardized owners of millions of hectares of land who were so indebted that their situation does no

RE: IMF, USAID, & Afghanistan (by George Monbiot)

>...On January 29, the IMF's assistant director for monetary and >exchange affairs suggested that the country [Afghanistan] should abandon its >currency and adopt the dollar instead. My alternative proposal -- that Argentina should peg its currency to the Afghani -- met with but scant suppor

Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

An irony about Jeffrey Sachs. His Father who just died got an obit in the NYT. He was a union organizer. M.Pugliese - Original Message - From: "Keaney Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:07 AM Subject: [PEN-L:12924] IMF/Dependency theory

Re: Re: Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

ED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:44 AM Subject: [PEN-L:12930] Re: Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America > Pugliese wrote: > >More dumping on Andy Daitsman? > > I don't "dump" on him. His own writing indicts him: &g

Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

At 05:16 PM 6/7/01 +0300, you wrote: >In saying this, I remember the "Chicago boys" whoring for Pinochet, c. 1976. >Was this part of Kissinger's great plan, or a separate initiative? Kissinger's "great plan" is one of self-promotion, which involves protecting and extending the hegemony of the US

Re: Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

>So what is to be done, now that the USSR is no more? If there was >"little that could have been done" then, does it mean nothing doing >now? > >Yoshie What is to be done is not a question that should be posed to individuals. It is a question for a movement. Right now very profound changes are

Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

>Michael Perelman wrote: >>In what way is Petras ultraleft? > >In 1990 Daniel Ortega ran unsuccessfully against Violeta Chamorro under >conditions of total isolation internationally. The USA had just cut a deal >with the USSR to dump Nicaragua. The country had been devastated by over 5 >years of c

Re: Re: Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

Michael Perelman wrote: >In what way is Petras ultraleft? In 1990 Daniel Ortega ran unsuccessfully against Violeta Chamorro under conditions of total isolation internationally. The USA had just cut a deal with the USSR to dump Nicaragua. The country had been devastated by over 5 years of contra w

Re: Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

Pugliese wrote: >More dumping on Andy Daitsman? I don't "dump" on him. His own writing indicts him: "Popular support for Pinochet (which amounts to at least thirty percent of the total population, and perhaps ten to fifteen percent of the working class) comes from two sources. First, the depth o

Re: Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

In what way is Petras ultraleft? On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 11:16:53AM -0400, Louis Proyect wrote: > >ps I take it you are referring to Maurice Zeitlin here. Do you have a direct > >quotation with which we can nail this once and for all? > > Maurice Zeitlin, like James Petras, is a revolutionary in

Re: Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

I don't see anything about Daitsman here. On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 08:21:57AM -0700, Michael Pugliese wrote: > More dumping on Andy Daitsman? > I wrote Van Gosse of Radical History Review, a few weeks ago. He finds this > quite vicious polemicizing. > Michael Pugliese > > - Original Message -

Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

More dumping on Andy Daitsman? I wrote Van Gosse of Radical History Review, a few weeks ago. He finds this quite vicious polemicizing. Michael Pugliese - Original Message - From: "Keaney Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 7:57 AM Subject: [P

Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

>ps I take it you are referring to Maurice Zeitlin here. Do you have a direct >quotation with which we can nail this once and for all? Maurice Zeitlin, like James Petras, is a revolutionary intellectual. His book on the Cuban working class is a model in Marxist scholarship. The professor I am ref

Re: IMF/Dependency theory debate in Latin America

>It was also around this time that Chicago economists were beginning to make >their presence felt in institutions like the World Bank especially, as >older, more institutionalist-minded staffers got replaced. A significant >chunk of the economics profession linked arms with the political vanguard

Re: IMF

You may recall that Bob Mulholland is from Chico. Tim gave him a critical evaluation a few weeks ago. On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 02:48:47PM +0300, Keaney Michael wrote: > Penners > > Further underscoring Mark Jones' recent points about how far things have > changed with the rise of New Labour, tod

RE: IMF

Michael Keaney: >does any of this make sense? I find this sort of concrete detail helpful when it comes to seeing the larger picture. A forensic look at the way the secret state works and how it interfaces with publically-acknowledged discourses of power, is useful. When invited to contemplate

RE: RE: IMF

Here's one optimistic view about Britain entering the eurozone, from longtime Labour Party euronation enthusiast, essayist and rightwinger, Roy Hattersley, in today's Guardian. I did like his phrase that "It is not power, but failure and the prospect of failure, which corrupts." Mark --

RE: RE: IMF

Mori pollster Bob Worcester on Labour's problem with a euro referendum: even Blair probably cannot win it (others seem to think differently, however). Mark http://www.mori.co.uk/ Winners and Sinners Robert M Worcester MORI The price of poker is going up. A year ago I bet that th

RE: RE: IMF

This piece from yesterday's Guardian neatly illustrates the degree of self-inflicted electoral torpor and issue-avoidance in the current British general election: Ian Aitken shows how the traditionally-Tory press are ignoring key issues like Britain's deteriorating payments position. In 1970, by c

RE: IMF

Michael Keaney wrote: > All of this leads me to support Mark's claims > re the switch made by MI5 and the redundancy of the > Sherman/McWhirter/Pincher/Rees-Mogg/Harris clan. Useful stuff. The points are wanted to emphasise are (1) Tebbit's revelations about spook involvement in the current Br

Re: IMF as the "world Fed"?

Apologies for not coming back on this earlier At 22/05/01 07:49 -0700, you wrote: >Chris B. answers: >>Why should that be beneath the dignity of the privileged but progressive >>citizens of the hegemonic capitalist country of the world?! > >It seems like there are more important battles, such a

RE: RE: IMF

I made a mistake in an earlier post, when I said that the British referendum on EC membership was held by Ted Heath's govt in 1974; it was not. Harold Wilson's incoming Labour govt organised the referendum in 1975. Mark

RE: IMF

Michael Keaney wrote: > Brad queries how I can link Simon, Yeo and Burns with MI5. I didn't see Brad's post but it sounds disingenuous. The concerted nature of the campaign to destabilise Wilson's govt simply stares you in the face: MI5 and Special Branch dirty tricks were closely coordinated w

Re: IMF

Brad, come on. I asked Michael K. to cool it, because I thought you had. Nobody benefits from repeatedly going over the same tit for tat stuff. You made your case fairly clearly in your last post, calling for a kinder-gentler IMF. Let me ask a question about that post: Is the role of the IMF to

Re: Re: Re: Re: IMF

> >More importantly, I thought the whole point of the criticisms of the IMF was >precisely this: that it has treated the financial crises of Mexico and Asia >like they were crises of excess demand and exogenous shock for the developed >world in the 70's. Why would the remedy for one be similar to

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: IMF

>Jim Devine wrote: > >> >> There's a big difference between _attacking an individual_ (ad hominem) and >> _attacking an argument_. The rules of Congress may encourage politeness, >> but that's a democracy of the few, of the elite and powerful. We need to >> put said "democracy" into context, w

Economists pursuit of Positional Goods, was Re: IMF

[Surely of some pertinence and lest the biggest threat to academic freedom becomes one's fellow academics and, of course, real world irrelevance...I cut some of "the fat" from the essay, but provided the link for those interested] http://csf.colorado.edu/bcas/sympos/sylie.htm Moral Ambiguity, D

Re: Re: IMF

Duchesne says: >Devine complains DeLong does not answer; well, isn't there a point at >which one should ceased talking to a stalker? this is flame-bait. I have in no way "stalked" Brad. Stalking involves physical presence of some sort. It's also illegal, isn't it? Being willing to argue with

Re: Re: Re: IMF

> > Back in the late 1970s I would have agreed with Keaney that the IMF's > advice to Britain was counterproductive. But the fact that Mitterand > and Carter both tried a "Keynesian" expansionary approach, and that > their policies crashed and burned, has to make you think again. In > retrospect,

Re: Re: Re: Re: IMF

Jim Devine wrote: > > There's a big difference between _attacking an individual_ (ad hominem) and > _attacking an argument_. The rules of Congress may encourage politeness, > but that's a democracy of the few, of the elite and powerful. We need to > put said "democracy" into context, which is wh

Re: Re: Re: Re: IMF

took the time to discuss many issues with all of us. - Original Message - From: "Carrol Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 7:07 AM Subject: [PEN-L:11801] Re: Re: Re: IMF > > > Fred Guy wrote: > > > >

Re: Re: Re: IMF

At 12:37 PM 05/19/2001 +0100, you wrote: >I don't know that I'd bother following this list if Brad weren't on it. No-one has called for kicking him off, that I know of. I, for one, was asking him to be polite. >Not becuase I enjoy the fights, but because he offers an informed and >vigorous res

Re: Re: Re: IMF

At 19/05/01 07:42 -0700, you wrote: >Back in the late 1970s I would have agreed with Keaney that the IMF's >advice to Britain was counterproductive. But the fact that Mitterand and >Carter both tried a "Keynesian" expansionary approach, and that their >policies crashed and burned, has to make

Re: Re: IMF

>In my own way I wish to second Fred Guy. Brad DeLong has no >doubt overplayed the no-argument argument, which most be quite >irritating to someone like Keaney who has put forth serious, well >researched responses... Back in the late 1970s I would have agreed with Keaney that the IMF's advice t

Re: Re: Re: IMF

Fred Guy wrote: > > ... knee-jerk statisim that otherwise dominates the > list. I call it statism rather than Marxism because I know of no other > forum where the policies of Juan Peron, the South Korean government and > state media monopolies (monopolies, not the Beeb) could all get such > sym

Re: IMF

In my own way I wish to second Fred Guy. Brad DeLong has no doubt overplayed the no-argument argument, which most be quite irritating to someone like Keaney who has put forth serious, well researched responses. But look at the position of DeLong trying to cope with relentless attacks coming

Re: Re: IMF

I don't know that I'd bother following this list if Brad weren't on it. Not becuase I enjoy the fights, but because he offers an informed and vigorous response to the knee-jerk statisim that otherwise dominates the list. I call it statism rather than Marxism because I know of no other forum wh

Re: Re: Re: IMF

Jim Devine wrote: > > )[re congress] Further, the scope of the debate is > severely limited, so that fundamental issues are hardly ever addressed > (while people are lambasted for using class struggle rhetoric if they make > obvious points about the regressivity of Bush's tax cuts). So the spee

Re: Re: Re: IMF

Apropos Brad's suggestion that legislative decorum might be a model for PEN-L, this is from the Paul Keating Insults Page . Many of these gems were uttered on the floor of the Australian parliament. Doug On former Labor Prime Minister, Bob Hawke: "No

Re: Re: IMF

Brad wrote: >For the record: Bullshit. Total bullshit. language! Don Roper might kick us off the archive at csf. and: >People like Michael Keaney--people with no social skills whatsoever, who never learned how to behave in any company, polite or not--ruined USENET as a forum. In my view, the--

Re: Re: IMF

I have to leave in a moment, so I don't have time to respond in detail. You are absolutely wrong, Brad. Maybe saying that Michael K. has no social skills may seem to be a tit-for-tat strategy, but it only leads to escalating flame wars. Why do you need to do that? It is absolutely unproductive.

Re: IMF

>Brad replies to Michael P.: > >Re: > >>"As if he were a school marm correcting wayward children" > >Michael. Look what I'm dealing with here: > >>... repeated smart-ass intrusions... deigns... self-delusion >>...confirmation of prejudice... disciplinary >>culture of condescension... "brilliant" e

Re: Re: IMF

At 09:44 AM 5/17/01 -0700, you wrote: >>Jim Devine writes: >> >>At 07:59 AM 05/17/2001 -0700, you wrote: I object strongly, however, to repeated smart-ass intrusions by an >>allegedly "brilliant" economist who deigns to spend time with the progressively inclined... Michael K.

Re: IMF

>Jim Devine writes: > >At 07:59 AM 05/17/2001 -0700, you wrote: >>>I object strongly, however, to repeated smart-ass intrusions by an >allegedly >>>"brilliant" economist who deigns to spend time with the progressively >>>inclined... >>> >>>Michael K. >> >>As I said, if you had arguments to make, y

Re: RE: Re: IMF

>Brad DeLongwrote: > >> The IMF loaned Callaghan a lot of money to use for exchange >> rate management and to stretch out what would otherwise have been a >> very sharp, short, nasty period of macroeconomic adjustment. > >As a matter of historical fact, the IMF didn't lend HMG any money at >al

Re: Re: IMF

I have criticized others for personalizing their attacks on Brad. I have not had the time to read all of the posts today regarding the IMF. I did glance at Jim's note. While it was harsh, him did make a point about the the way Brad debates. Brad tends to frame the debate the way he wants, which

Re: Re: IMF

At 07:59 AM 05/17/2001 -0700, you wrote: >>I object strongly, however, to repeated smart-ass intrusions by an allegedly >>"brilliant" economist who deigns to spend time with the progressively >>inclined... >> >>Michael K. > >As I said, if you had arguments to make, you would make them. You clearly

Re: IMF

>I object strongly, however, to repeated smart-ass intrusions by an allegedly >"brilliant" economist who deigns to spend time with the progressively >inclined... > >Michael K. As I said, if you had arguments to make, you would make them. You clearly don't. So why don't you be quiet until you do?

Re: IMF

Thanks, Brad, for not reacting to this. Michael was off-base. Keaney Michael wrote: > >Brad DeLong wrote: > > > >Britain's march to socialism halted in 1976 by IMF! *Snort*. > > > >= > > I replied: > > > >A cocaine habit might explain how it is you would actually believe most of > >what you

RE: Re: IMF

Brad DeLongwrote: > The IMF loaned Callaghan a lot of money to use for exchange > rate management and to stretch out what would otherwise have been a > very sharp, short, nasty period of macroeconomic adjustment. As a matter of historical fact, the IMF didn't lend HMG any money at all. None of t

Re: IMF

> >Most of the critics of Jim Callaghan in the mid-1970s changed their >mind during the five years that followed, for two countries did >attempt to "spend their way" out of recession--the U.S. under >President Carter and Federal Reserve Chair Miller, and France under >President Mitterand. Both att

RE: IMF

Re: Callaghan and MI5. See the book by Stephen Dorrill, an editor of Lobster: A Journal on Para-Politics. Think the title is MI5, came out recently in pb. Much more reliable source than, "Spycatcher, " which, btw, called one of the cambridge Spies a "Trotskyite"! Michael Pugliese P.S. Other side

Re: IMF

>Brad DeLong writes: > >Britain's march to socialism halted in 1976 by IMF! *Snort*. > >= > >A cocaine habit might explain how it is you would actually believe most of >what you contribute here. Naughty, naughty. I take that as an admission that you have no real arguments or evidence, and I

Re: IMF

>Brad DeLong writes: > >The availability of IMF loans gives countries facing financial crises >a *few* more options: Harry Dexter White and John Maynard Keynes >created it for a reason, after all. They were not dumb. > >If you want to know how the international financial system would >function in

Re: Re: Re: IMF, WORLD BANK CRY "UNCLE" ONMOZAMBICAN C

> > Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:53:26 -0800 >> From: Brad DeLong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> I always thought that successful industrial policies were built on >> *subsidizing* exports. I've yet to understand why the hell *taxing* >> Mozambique's exports is going to make anyone (ex

Re: Re: IMF, WORLD BANK CRY "UNCLE" ON MOZAMBICAN C

> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:53:26 -0800 > From: Brad DeLong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I always thought that successful industrial policies were built on > *subsidizing* exports. I've yet to understand why the hell *taxing* > Mozambique's exports is going to make anyone (except the

Re: Re: IMF, WORLD BANK CRY "UNCLE" ON MOZAMBICAN CASHEW, SUGAR

On 31 Jan 01, at 9:53, Brad DeLong wrote: > >OK, now that the IMF and the World Bank have > >admitted that they were wrong, will Krugman admit > >that he was wrong? > > > >-b > > > >Robert Naiman > >Senior Policy Analyst > >Center for Economic and Policy Research > > I always thought that succes

Re: IMF, WORLD BANK CRY "UNCLE" ON MOZAMBICANCASHEW, SUGAR

>OK, now that the IMF and the World Bank have >admitted that they were wrong, will Krugman admit >that he was wrong? > >-b > >Robert Naiman >Senior Policy Analyst >Center for Economic and Policy Research I always thought that successful industrial policies were built on *subsidizing* exports. I'

Re: IMF, WORLD BANK CRY "UNCLE" ON MOZAMBICAN CASHEW, SUGAR

At 12:37 PM 1/31/01 -0500, you wrote: >OK, now that the IMF and the World Bank have >admitted that they were wrong, will Krugman admit >that he was wrong? > >-b being a superstar means never having to say you're sorry. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine

Re: IMF succession

At 08:01 03/03/00 -0800, Jim Devine wrote: >Does anyone on pen-l have anything to say about the succession struggle at >the IMF? > >I think that it's interesting that in an era when the US political elites >consider affirmative action -- not to mention quotas -- in hiring to be >totally beyond

[PEN-L:11846] Re: IMF and Orwell

>''In Britain there was a famous nuclear power station which was called >Windscale. There was a big accident there in the 1950s and they renamed it >Sellafield,'' recalled [Andrew] Simms, of Christian Aid. ''You can change the name >but does it alter the toxic content?'' [Inter Press Service]

[PEN-L:11621] Re: Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Patrick Bond wrote: >No, I would say a dramatic debt cancellation with no strings >attached -- qualitatively different than the WB/IMF/Clinton HIPC >schemes (including the $1 bn announced yesterday) -- could be a >profound non-reformist reform, in the spirit of the first 'graf above. I always lo

[PEN-L:11569] Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

On 22 Sep 99, at 8:36, Chris Burford wrote: > It is quite true that the reformatory strategies under consideration are in > themselves inadequate, partial and limited. Like all reforms they have a > dialectical dual aspect - they may help the onward process of change, or > they may restabilise the

[PEN-L:11463] Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

I was away at the time and wanted to give Patrick's post, below, due consideration. I would point out under this thread title that the Economist has just carried a detailed article on this theme. One of the additional points is the intensified in-fighting between some officials of the World Bank

[PEN-L:11409] Re: Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Patrick Bond wrote: >Agreed, Doug, that's exactly the point of this definition of what I >take to be a progressive *nationalism* (namely that the power to >regenerate national sovereignties will only be constituted to a >large extent through radical international and more precisely >anti-wor

[PEN-L:11375] Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Sorry, in a kind of preview of Y2k, most of South Africa was cut off from international emails and browsing from 16-20 September, allegedly due to the hurricane (so all our ISP claim). Here are three replies on the IMF-reform thread, which seem to be largely semantic at this stage... On 17 Sep

[PEN-L:11269] RE: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

>>> Max Sawicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 09/17/99 04:57PM >>> . . . >>> Question: do you think there can be progressive nationalism for the U.S., and if so, what might it look like? (( Charles: Honoring treaties with the Indigenous peoples. CB

[PEN-L:11222] RE: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

. . . c) a "progressive nationalism" (again, a PEN-L phrase) which, in advocating WB/IMF defunding, takes heart and strength and knowledge from the potential unity of the variety of particularistic struggles against local forms of structural adjustment, malevolent "development" projects and Br

[PEN-L:11225] Re: RE: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Max Sawicky wrote: > . . . > Question: do you think there can be progressive nationalism > for the U.S., and if so, what might it look like? I couldn't say exactly what it would be but I know what its enemies would call it: Isolationism. In fact that is what the WSJ always calls any fragment

[PEN-L:11206] Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Patrick Bond wrote: >a "progressive internationalism" (as it was termed on PEN-L a >few years ago) aimed at establishing a world-state What about a progressive internationalism that doesn't focus on creating a world state, but instead focuses on building links among unions, NGOs (the good kind

[PEN-L:11187] Re: IMF to become autonomous?

> From: Chris Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But could you explain the apparent discrepancy between this remark > > Go for the nation-state, man, it is the only hope. > and this remark in your post on Jubilee 2000 > >this movement is about neither a "final" or a > >"short" burst of activity up to

[PEN-L:11097] Re: IMF to become autonomous? Social Structureof Big Biz

At 10:41 15/09/99 -0400, you wrote: > Chris Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 09/14/99 05:36PM >> >b) The marxist analysis is real. Ultimately capital has no country and no >human body. There is a potential space for a world bank to serve this >function even though for a long time to come it will

[PEN-L:10979] Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

>Charles Brown wrote: > >>But doesn't the central committee of the dictatorship of the >>bourgeoisie sit above both the IMF and its member governments, >>really , anyway ? >>"Who" is the IMF ? Doug: >"The IMF is a toy of the United States to pursue its economic policy >offshore." - MIT econ

[PEN-L:10958] Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Yes, one of those honest statements that slips out now and again. To press it a little further, using the old Marxist metphor, the U.S. government -Presidency, including The Treasury, Congress, Judiciary, Military - is still sort of the executive controlled by the Board of Directors (central co

[PEN-L:10970] Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Indeed as I indicated divisions between workers of different countries is a problem. I don't know the full solution to it. But I don't see how making the IMF autonomous is going to help. Or how autonomous means democratic. And I don't see how my position is more "economist" than that of Chris o

[PEN-L:10950] Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Charles Brown wrote: >But doesn't the central committee of the dictatorship of the >bourgeoisie sit above both the IMF and its member governments, >really , anyway ? >"Who" is the IMF ? "The IMF is a toy of the United States to pursue its economic policy offshore." - MIT econ prof Rudi Dornbu

[PEN-L:10938] Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Rod Hay wrote: > Globalisation is a fact that lefties have to deal with. It is futile to > oppose it. Chris is pointing in the right direction but he is point at the > wrong path. Capitalism may have some room for progressive action. There are > still feudal institutional remnants around the worl

[PEN-L:10940] Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

At 11:04 14/09/99 +0530, you wrote: >Rod Hay wrote: > >> Globalisation is a fact that lefties have to deal with. It is futile to >> oppose it. Chris is pointing in the right direction but he is point at the >> wrong path. Capitalism may have some room for progressive action. There are >> still feu

[PEN-L:10941] Re: Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

At 22:31 13/09/99 +, Patrick Bond wrote: >> ... Brown, a declared advocate of the >> reform of international finances, on a key IMF committee. > >That lackey of the City? Keep him OUT of reforming, please, Chris! >Really, this is an elementary responsibility of UK comrades. That really is

[PEN-L:10930] Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

At 10:56 13/09/99 -0400, you wrote: >I can assure you that any proposal for the IMF to become more independent of member governments will be DOA in Washington. That's a personal guarantee. I doubt that IMF officials would dare to embrace such a proposal, but I would be delighted if they did so: we

[PEN-L:10926] Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

> From: Chris Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ... Some Marxists consider an analysis > of the balance of forces essential. Ok, so where is it? What, in all of the chatter about the up-and-coming global state, are you saying about Our Team's capacity to survive it, Chris? > ... Brown, a

[PEN-L:10942] Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Ajit Sinha wrote: > Rod Hay wrote: > > > Globalisation is a fact that lefties have to deal with. It is futile to > > oppose it. Chris is pointing in the right direction but he is point at the > > wrong path. Capitalism may have some room for progressive action. It is t

[PEN-L:10905] Re: IMF to become autonomous?

But doesn't the central committee of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie sit above both the IMF and its member governments, really , anyway ? "Who" is the IMF ? Charles Brown >>> Robert Naiman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 09/13/99 10:56AM >>> I can assure you that any proposal for the IMF to become mo

[PEN-L:10901] Re: IMF to become autonomous?

I can assure you that any proposal for the IMF to become more independent of member governments will be DOA in Washington. That's a personal guarantee. I doubt that IMF officials would dare to embrace such a proposal, but I would be delighted if they did so: we'll squash them. -bob -

[PEN-L:10906] Re: IMF to become autonomous?

I don't see how the IMF could be made independent of the USA. The technical constitution may be rewritten, but the practical matter is that the USA would not agree unless it a strong say in who these technical experts were. Without approval no appointment. The issue of world government is much

[PEN-L:10892] Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

At 11:19 12/09/99 -0700, Max wrote: >Most any time that communists have participated in important, >progressive historical events they have reflected the essential >soupcon of pragmatism typified by CB. I would hope it is more than a soupcon. Some Marxists consider an analysis of the balance

[PEN-L:10883] Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Jim Devine wrote: > Buford wrote: > [SNIP]>Firstly there are serious contradictions among the capitalists; US, > >Russian, and those of other countries. This is the sort of thing I had in mind when I suggested that we should be very careful in speaking of splits/divisions/contradictions within

[PEN-L:10882] Re: : IMF to become autonomous?

Actually what Marx was doing was showing that even with fair exchange exploitation could arise. That the system was not necessarily based upon direct theft. Or put another way that even showing that exchanges were fair (equivalent values were being exchanged) was not sufficient to deny exploit

[PEN-L:10880] Re: Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Buford wrote: >>>The International Centre for Monetary and Banking Studies, Geneva, issued a >>>report yesterday calling for the IMF to be made independent of national >>>governments. This is a progressive demand, both in its political >>>significance and in its rationality in meeting the developi

[PEN-L:10858] Re: Re: IMF to become autonomous?

At 09:28 11/09/99 -0700, Jim Devine wrote: >At 10:57 AM 09/11/1999 +0100, you wrote: >> >>The International Centre for Monetary and Banking Studies, Geneva, issued a >>report yesterday calling for the IMF to be made independent of national >>governments. This is a progressive demand, both in its p

[PEN-L:10860] Re: IMF to become autonomous?

Burford proves that Marxism-Leninism and reasonableness are not necessarily inconsistent, notwithstanding LP's evidence to the contrary. Most any time that communists have participated in important, progressive historical events they have reflected the essential soupcon of pragmatism typified by C

[PEN-L:6729] Re: IMF ready to offer financial help, structuralreforms to the

Beware of bourgeoisie bearing gifts. Charles Brown >>> "Michael Hoover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/12/99 05:00PM >>> > The National Post Monday, May 03, 1999 > NATO: UNITED TO SUCCEED > By Javier Solana > Our aims remain clear. The Washington summit wholeheart

[PEN-L:6727] Re: IMF ready to offer financial help, structural reforms to the

> The National Post Monday, May 03, 1999 > NATO: UNITED TO SUCCEED > By Javier Solana > Our aims remain clear. The Washington summit wholeheartedly > confirmed NATO's continuing commitment to them. > But let us be clear -- the aims we set out on April 12 a

[PEN-L:6029] Re: Re: RE: IMF and Yugoslavia, Rwanda

> Wasn't Laura Tyson's dissertation on Yugo? > Michael Perelman can't answer above, but she wrote a monograph on Yugoslavian economic performance in the 1970s and co-wrote one on 1980s performance...she also wrote a book for RAND in the mid-80s on economic adjustment in Eastern Europe...Michael

[PEN-L:5977] Re: IMF and Yugoslavia, Rwanda

I presume you are aware of Michel Chossudovsky's various articles on these subjects, and his book, "The Globalisation of Poverty, Impacts of IMF and World Bank Reforms", Third World Network, Penang and Zed Books, London, 1997. The book has chapters on IMF/World Bank impacts on Rwanda and Yugosl

[PEN-L:6004] Re: IMF and Yugoslavia, Rwanda

Sort of a Query. In conversation at various times I have introduced the probably quite outlandishly extravagant proposition that the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century is the IMF/World Bank. And usually, either surprisingly or not surprisingly, I have gotten at least murmurs of "You coul

  1   2   >