What I said is that I don't care. Drop it. Don't bother the list with
old hat. I would rather than you engage in constructive dialogue.
On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 11:53:54AM -0700, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
> Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I don't care now about who did what when
Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I don't care now about who did what when. The list was going quite well
> until you revived this vituperation. It must cease immediately.
Michael,
since you are blaming me for the vituperation, you obviously do care who did
what when. And you are
I appreciate the reply, Doug, though I don't think it's fair as to what I have
already written. Unfortunately because you ignore that I have to repeat myself.
>
>
>
> It's clear from these repeated characterizations that you know
> nothing about the movement, except maybe what you've pi
I don't care now about who did what when. The list was going quite well
until you revived this vituperation. It must cease immediately.
On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 02:13:40AM -0700, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
> Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I do not want to have to keep monitoring
Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
> henwood referred to those who characterize the anti sweatshop movement as
> protectionist as bourgeois hacks--to this you do not object!
Hmm, the first version of this was labeled "offlist," as was this
response, initially. But since turned out not to be, neither will
I do not want to have to keep monitoring this thread. It is a bad time
for me. This sort of sarcasm has no please here. Please stop!!!
On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 11:55:19AM -0700, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>
> Ah so someone like Kabeer is a bourgeois hack like Friedman? Hmm. What do you
> think s
Henwood wrote:
Student anti-sweatshop activists are opposed to
> protectionism and to boycotts.
Well they may not recognize as protectionist what other trade unionists do.
Moreover, the students don't seem to have yet put this to a vote or put it in
writing. They haven't formally repudiate
Stephen E Philion wrote:
>If I read the last series of posts a few weeks back from the USAS mtg.
>correcdtly,
>one thing stood out re: strategy, namely the intent to work on sweatshop
>struggles that unions are currently engaged in, be they in the States or
>abroad. In your schema, the US unions
Stephen E Philion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> If I read the last series of posts a few weeks back from the USAS mtg.
> correcdtly,
> one thing stood out re: strategy, namely the intent to work on
sweatshop
> struggles that unions are currently engaged in, be they in the States or
> abroad. In
Please, one of the no-no's on the list is demanding that someone answers
another's "challenge/question, etc.".
On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 08:20:08AM -0700, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
> Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > Liza Featherstone & I have both decided that it's best not to respond
>
If I read the last series of posts a few weeks back from the USAS mtg.
correcdtly,
one thing stood out re: strategy, namely the intent to work on sweatshop
struggles that unions are currently engaged in, be they in the States or
abroad. In your schema, the US unions and/or college based anti-swea
Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Liza Featherstone & I have both decided that it's best not to respond
> to Rakesh's posts, which seem motivated more by personal hostility
> than genuine political content. Please don't mistake our silence for
> assent.
>
> Doug
My posts can't be mot
12 matches
Mail list logo
