Since I have been actively involved in this issue (testimony before Senate Judiciary Committe, House Dems' opposition press conference, dozens of radio call-in programs [esp. urban minority stations], aggressive oped which received a response from the White House's National Economic Council
I mainly agree with you and not Doug on this, and anyway fact sheets and
bulletins and letter writing campaigns are what we have just now. We really
can do something to slow the juggernaut, if only we will. How about this, it
isn't much, but it's a bit. Nathan and I and others who track judici
Nathan ,etc, et al,
It does make a difference which political party one embraces or does not
embrace.
It is just ludicrous to claim one is a socialist or marxist, etc, and
support capitalist/bourgeois
political organizations and candidates, platforms, ideas, etc. (Democrats,
etc.) under
what
Nathan, I was at the center of the controversy. Although his staff supported
us, Tom Hayden refused to do anything. It was the hearings that you got going
that turned the tide. I even had major corporations call me asking what could
be done.
Nathan Newman wrote:
> I appreciate that, although
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Henwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nathan Newman wrote:
>A lot of people rightly condemned the Dems in the Senate who rolled over on
>the Bankruptcy Bill, but where was the discussion on designing the best
>counter-propaganda against the credit card industry?
Nathan Newman wrote:
>A lot of people rightly condemned the Dems in the Senate who rolled over on
>the Bankruptcy Bill, but where was the discussion on designing the best
>counter-propaganda against the credit card industry? Where were discussions
>of sample op-eds that could be developed and fa
Barkley R,
Hi -- long time since hearing from you.
Where have you been -- the CPUSA has been part of the at first unofficial
and then gradually more official 'left' wing of the bosses Democratic
Party
beginning at the time of the second Roosevelt Admin. in 1936 . This all
started
back in th
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-Nathan, while I disagree with your political strategy, your political work
-was the key factor in stopping the California State University system from
-giving away its high-tech infrastructure. Moreover, nobody should in
> By all means, organize the left. I just don't think that will make much
> progress organizing on an e-mail list.
>
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> Chico, CA 95929
>
> Tel. 530-898-5321
> E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Um, Seattle.
Nathan, while I disagree with your political strategy, your political work
was the key factor in stopping the California State University system from
giving away its high-tech infrastructure. Moreover, nobody should insult
you for your politics on this list.
For the life of me, I cannot figure o
By all means, organize the left. I just don't think that will make much
progress organizing on an e-mail list.
Nathan Newman wrote:
>
> Michael, seriously, why is any of this discussion important if there is no
> left organization to do something with the analysis?
--
Michael Perelman
Economi
IL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 6:04 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:9570] Re: Re: Re: Re: Socialism & American Workers (was Re:
ergonomics, etc.)
By all means, organize the left. I just don't think that will make much
progress organizing on an e-mail list.
Nathan Newman wrote:
>
> M
>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 5:25 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:9558] Re: Re: Socialism & American Workers (was Re:
ergonomics, etc.)
> Debating who is and is not sectarian is absolutely unproductive. I would
like
> to hear more about the 1982 downturn compared to
Michael Perelman wrote:
>Debating who is and is not sectarian is absolutely unproductive. I would like
>to hear more about the 1982 downturn compared to today. Remember how Volcker
>was able to turn it around by merely loosening the monetary spigot. Will
>Greenspan's rate cuts cause a turnarou
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Debating who is and is not sectarian is absolutely unproductive. I would
like
>to hear more about the 1982 downturn compared to today. Remember how
Volcker
>was able to turn it around by merely loosening the monetary sp
Debating who is and is not sectarian is absolutely unproductive. I would like
to hear more about the 1982 downturn compared to today. Remember how Volcker
was able to turn it around by merely loosening the monetary spigot. Will
Greenspan's rate cuts cause a turnaround in six months. What about
- Original Message -
From: "Louis Proyect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>As Doug notes, essentially yes.
>
>Even among contemporary explicit Communists, the assertion that no real
>socialist supports the Dems is almost definitionally a sectarian position -
>which of course means that for all Lou
and even China, not to mention lots of other places.
Barkley Rosser
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Henwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 3:12 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:9546] Re: Re: Re: Socialism & American Workers (was Re:
er
>As Doug notes, essentially yes.
>
>Even among contemporary explicit Communists, the assertion that no real
>socialist supports the Dems is almost definitionally a sectarian position -
>which of course means that for all Lou calls for non-sectarianism, he
>continues to promote it.
I believe you h
- Original Message -
From: "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Nathan,
> I've just been calling for forgetting about 2000.
>But, just for the record, was it not the case that the
>CPUSA actually supported voting for Gore?
>Barkley Rosser
As Doug notes, essentially yes.
Ev
J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. wrote:
> I've just been calling for forgetting about 2000.
>But, just for the record, was it not the case that the
>CPUSA actually supported voting for Gore?
I don't know if they ever actually came out and said that, but in the
run-up to the election, the Peoples Weekly
>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 11:25 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:9524] Re: Socialism & American Workers (was Re: ergonomics,
etc.)
> - Original Message -
> From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Meanwhile, we work on reforms while getting out a
> >re
So, Yoshie, you don't think that marxian analysis needs at all to reconsider
household labor, either unpaid housework and child-rearing or marginal
subsistence activity, in the context of feminist and 'third world' critiques?
Even if, e.g., such activity allows wage workers to be paid below subsis
- Original Message -
From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Meanwhile, we work on reforms while getting out a
>revolutionary message at the same time. Otherwise, we end up being
>not so different from Brad, Nathan, & other supporters of the
>Democratic Party, except in our self ima
Yoshie:
>Theorizing is absolutely important, but given the drift of the
>comments on American workers in some recent PEN-l posts, I'm afraid
>that some Marxists are often tempted to *theorize* American workers'
>revolutionary potential *out of the political window* -- unless the
>Second Coming
Lou says:
>Marx and Engels were not always involved in
>party-building. Sometimes, especially during an ebb in the class struggle,
>they would concentrate on theorizing about the state of the movement and
>what to do next.
Theorizing is absolutely important, but given the drift of the
comments
Yoshie:
>That's no reason to give up, unless you agree with Brad, Nathan,
>etc., which you don't.
Give up on what? If you'll recall from the time you were on the Marxism
list, Jose Perez explained that Marx and Engels were not always involved in
party-building. Sometimes, especially during an eb
Lou writes:
>You can't tell workers that they are exploited because of a formula in
>Wage-Labor and Capital. Some people, using the math in a perverse fashion,
>have even argued that workers in the US are more exploited than they are in
>places like Mexico since they produce more surplus value he
Lou says:
>Yoshie:
>>American workers -- even in the midst of neoliberal capitalism's best
>>boom times ever -- were not as comfortable as many PEN-l posters
>>imagine them to be (and now the boom is practically over -- we only
>>wonder how bad & how long the coming recession will be). Therefore
Yoshie:
>American workers -- even in the midst of neoliberal capitalism's best
>boom times ever -- were not as comfortable as many PEN-l posters
>imagine them to be (and now the boom is practically over -- we only
>wonder how bad & how long the coming recession will be). Therefore,
>I conclud
At 3:18 PM -0600 3/25/01, Ken Hanly wrote:
>As long as capitalism is able to provide a degree of prosperity for
>a significant part of the working class there is almost no hope of a
>left alternative to the left of Nathan and/or Brad. The valid point
>in Paul's remarks is that as long as the th
31 matches
Mail list logo
