From nmgoro@gmail.com Mon Dec 31 03:25:16 2007 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.190]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J9Hpb-0003Sy-LW for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 03:25:15 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so4321065rvb.59 for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:25:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.134.15 with SMTP id h15mr6241938rvd.51.1199096747751; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:25:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.29.13 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:25:47 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2fa158550712310225o5e9ac91aya423219ff7f78226@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:25:47 +0100 From: "=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=" To: "The A-List" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline References: Subject: Re: [A-List] Future of Socialism X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:25:16 -0000 RGVhciBZb3NoaWUsIG1heSBJIHRyYW5zbGF0ZSBhbmQgcHVibGlzaCBQcm9mLiBTaW5naMK0cyB0 ZXh0PyBUaGFuayB5b3UKYW5kIGJlc3QgZm9yIDIwMDgKCjIwMDcvMTIvMzAsIFlvc2hpZSBGdXJ1 aGFzaGkgPGNyaXRpY2FsLm1vbnRhZ2VzQGdtYWlsLmNvbT46Cj4gPGh0dHA6Ly9tcnppbmUubW9u dGhseXJldmlldy5vcmcvc2luZ2gyOTEyMDcuaHRtbD4KPiBGdXR1cmUgb2YgU29jaWFsaXNtCj4g YnkgUmFuZGhpciBTaW5naAo+Cj4gLS0KPiBZb3NoaWUKPiA8aHR0cDovL21vbnRhZ2VzLmJsb2dz cG90LmNvbS8+Cj4KCgotLSAKTsOpc3Rvcgo= From nmgoro@gmail.com Mon Dec 31 03:26:10 2007 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.187]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J9HqT-0003TD-St for A-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 03:26:09 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so4321267rvb.59 for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:26:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.226.14 with SMTP id y14mr2091362rvg.164.1199096801033; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:26:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.29.13 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:26:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2fa158550712310226o2466a496tdbfb8f096cb4a01c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:26:41 +0100 From: "=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=" To: "The A-List" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] Oops X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:26:10 -0000 Sorry, msg intended for Yoshie. Best for 2008 for all, anyhow!!!!!!!!!!!!! From critical.montages@gmail.com Mon Dec 31 08:00:39 2007 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.159]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J9M87-00046k-3S for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:00:39 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so2361981fgb.45 for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 07:01:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.84.5 with SMTP id h5mr12338912fgb.27.1199113271835; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 07:01:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.1.3 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 07:01:11 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:01:11 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: "The A-List" In-Reply-To: <2fa158550712310225o5e9ac91aya423219ff7f78226@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <2fa158550712310225o5e9ac91aya423219ff7f78226@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [A-List] Future of Socialism X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:00:39 -0000 Yes, we love to see Prof. Singh's article in Spanish! Let us know when it gets published in Spanish, and also send me a copy of it in Spanish, so I can forward it to him. On Dec 31, 2007 5:25 AM, N=E9stor Gorojovsky wrote: > Dear Yoshie, may I translate and publish Prof. Singh=B4s text? Thank you > and best for 2008 > > 2007/12/30, Yoshie Furuhashi : > > > > > Future of Socialism > > by Randhir Singh > > > > -- > > Yoshie > > > > > > > -- > N=E9stor > --=20 Yoshie From charlesb@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Mon Dec 31 10:50:05 2007 Received: from [71.159.22.21] (helo=gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J9Om5-0004N2-KG for A-List@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:50:05 -0700 Received: from Comm-MTA by gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 12:50:35 -0500 Message-Id: <4778E595.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.1 Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 12:50:30 -0500 From: "Charles Brown" To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] Mich.'s tough times drawing to a close (?) ...but... X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:50:06 -0000 Friday, December 28, 2007 2008 industry outlook Mich.'s tough times drawing to a close But more pain expected before gain Louis Aguilar and Sofia Kosmetatos / The Detroit News Michigan's economy in the past few years has often been described as gripped in a "one-state recession," and while no one predicts a rose garden for the state in 2008, there are at least some signs this may be the last tough year before the state begins a slow rebound in 2009. But not before more pain. As it has since 2000, Michigan will lag -- badly -- behind the national economy, which by itself is expected to be sluggish at best. Locally, tens of thousands of job losses will continue, particularly in the auto industry. Home values may continue to drop, and the number of foreclosures should grow. The impact will be deep and wide, from the declining budgets of state and local governments to the tightening of consumer spending. "But a crisis is a terrible thing to waste," said Patrick Anderson, founder of Lansing's Anderson Economic Group, "and we've been facing crisis in Michigan long enough that we've begun to tackle some of the structural issues to turn around." Detroit's auto industry in particular made great strides this year in addressing structural problems as a result of groundbreaking new labor contracts with the United Auto Workers and other cost-cutting measures. But as University of Michigan economist George Fulton says, recently released data show that, alongside the losses, the state's economy consistently produces large job gains in education and health services. "There must be some vitality in an economy that can continue creating jobs even though it's not keeping pace with the leakage," Fulton said. "If the leaks can be plugged, the state's economy and labor market have the capacity to grow and prosper. And therein lies both our challenge and our opportunity." What's ahead for five key Michigan industries: Economy Next year may be Michigan's final year of big economic pain before the state slowly starts to bounce back, according to five prominent economists. For the eighth straight year, the Great Lakes State will bleed jobs, primarily manufacturing work. As many as 51,000 workers will see their jobs disappear in 2008, according to a forecast by University of Michigan economists Joan Crary, George Fulton and Saul Hymans. The state's unemployment could hit 8.2 percent, a level not seen since 1992. By the bleak Michigan standards set so far this decade, next year's jobs losses in auto manufacturing will be moderate -- about 21,000, the UM economists said. That will trickle down to moderate job losses in other sectors, including construction, professional and business services and trade, transportation and utilities, predicts Comerica Inc. chief economist Dana Johnson. Not all sectors will continue to slide. Education and health services will add 10,000 jobs next year, the UM forecasters believe. The tourism industry should grow as the high price of gasoline and even the slow U.S. economy keep people closer to home for vacation, according to Anderson, who also sees the potential for high-tech auto jobs and work created by research at state universities. The national economy will not slide into recession, the economists contend, which helps what most believe will be Michigan's final year of decline before a soft rebound begins in 2009. Auto industry Next year was supposed to be a new, leaner start for Detroit's auto industry. Instead, grim predictions of dwindling U.S. light vehicles sales are casting a dark cloud over the recent progress made by Detroit's Big Three to improve their competitiveness against lower-cost foreign rivals, including reaping savings from groundbreaking labor contracts brokered this year with the UAW that will shift retiree health care costs to the union, among other cost savings. The struggling housing industry, the squeeze on credit, and high oil prices will challenge automakers in the new year. Most analysts predict U.S. vehicle sales will plunge by 500,000 units or more compared to 2007's estimated level of 16.1 million. Forecasts range from CSM Worldwide's estimate of 15.8 million to Ford Motor Co.'s prediction of 15.2 million, based on calculations for the first six months of next year. If auto sales drop by half a million or more, the impact will be wide and deep, including likely consolidation of automotive suppliers, fewer dealerships and lower state tax revenue. Suppliers tied closely to SUV and truck components, where sales are dropping most steeply, are likely to be hard hit, said David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor. Automakers have laid off nearly 100,000 workers in the last two years, and announced more cuts this fall along with more buyouts. General Motors Corp. will offer buyouts to 5,200 of its 34,000 hourly workers starting in January. Chrysler LLC and Ford Motor Co. workers recently learned they'll be on extended layoff early in the year. Energy However you heat your house or run a vehicle, expect to pay higher prices. Assuming normal weather, a typical Michigan resident can expect his or her heating bill from November to March 2008 to hit about $764, a $15.28 increase from last winter, according to the state's semi-annual Energy Appraisal report by the Michigan Public Service Commission. The mix of higher prices and increased usage could cause natural gas bills to increase by 8 percent this season compared to last winter, according to the energy report. Residential natural gas prices now are 2 percent higher than last winter. Residential heating oil prices are up sharply because of increases in crude oil prices. Crude oil's run to nearly $100 a barrel in the second half of 2007 increased the price of gasoline and many consumer goods, and many analysts think prices will average around $75 a barrel in 2008. But due to geo-political risks and supply, the cost of motor gasoline and diesel will remain volatile, according to the federal Energy Information Administration. Both gasoline and diesel prices are projected to average well over $3 per gallon nationally in 2008, with gasoline prices peaking at more than $3.40 per gallon next spring, the EIA projects. Road and bridge builders are seeking a 9-cent increase in Michigan's 19-cent gas tax. The increase would be phased in at 3 cents a year for three years and is being pitched by the Michigan Infrastructure & Transportation Association to collectively generate $1 billion annually in money for road work. But Gov. Jennifer Granholm opposes raising the state's gas tax. She's expected to sign a bill in January that sets up an Alternative Road Funding Task Force made up of legislative leaders and leaders from manufacturing, tourism and public transportation to look for other ways to pay for infrastructure improvements. Her State of the State address in January will likely spell out ways she will try to strengthen Michigan's economy through alternative energy development. Housing This time last year, there was cautious optimism the housing market, both nationally and locally, might stabilize. Now -- though it hardly seems imaginable -- things could get worse for at least half of 2008 before improving, according to home builders, economists and investors. The impact of the subprime mortgage mess is far from over and that will mean more foreclosures and declining home values, experts contend. The National Association of Home Builders expects the national housing market to pick up in 2009 after hitting bottom in the middle of next year, according to David Seiders, the NAHB's chief economist. In Metro Detroit, which lags behind the national economy, home values may continue to decline for most of next year. In March, the number of adjustable rate mortgages in the United States will peak, with $110 billion resetting to higher monthly payments for homeowners, said Drew Sygit, a certified mortgage and equity planner for Meadow Mortgage in Bloomfield Hills. Locally, that will result in more foreclosures, Sygit said. Other experts share in the low expectations for 2008. More than 90 percent of publicly traded home builders have negative outlooks or are under review for downgrade, Moody's Investors Service said in a recent report. And 33 percent of building materials companies have negative outlooks, according to the report. Before the market bottoms out, local counties and municipalities will likely be forced to slash budgets, which will mean fewer services. In January, local governments learn how much their revenues will drop due to falling property tax assessments, said Patrick Anderson, founder of Lansing's Anderson Economic Group. The one bright spot is rentals, which will continue to go strong, as people ride out the housing storm. Health care Metro-Detroit health care systems will continue their race to attract customers with new hospitals, expansions and renovations in 2008. They will spend millions on projects that cater to patients with pampering atmospheres and the latest technology. Industry experts are keeping a close eye on two new suburban hospitals: St. John Providence Park Hospital in Novi, set to open in the summer, and Henry Ford West Bloomfield Hospital, scheduled to open in Spring 2009. The Novi hospital, for example, will look and feel like a modern hotel, with dual corridors (one for patients and visitors, another for moving materials), large patient rooms with room service, flat screen TVs and pull-out couches for visitors. Despite renovations being made at Detroit hospitals, they stand to lose doctors and patients -- and with them, income -- to the new hospitals. "We'll see changes next year that we haven't seen anything like in the last several years," said Adam Jablonowski, executive director of the Wayne County Medical Society.The addition of two new suburban hospitals comes as Flint-based McLaren Health Care grows in Metro Detroit. In northern Oakland County, McLaren is developing a $600 million health care village it hopes will include a 200- to 300-bed hospital. The industry will also keep a close eye on Beaumont, Grosse Pointe, formerly Bon Secours Hospital, which Beaumont Hospitals bought in 2007. It's the Royal Oak-based health system's first major entry into Wayne County. Across industries, companies will continue to grapple with rising health care costs, even though the rate of increases has slowed. Businesses will focus more next year on more aggressive wellness programs in the workplace and will continue to pass some of the cost increases to employees. You can reach Louis Aguilar at (313) 222-2760 or laguilar@detnews.com. From charlesb@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Mon Dec 31 11:59:36 2007 Received: from [71.159.22.21] (helo=gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J9PrM-0004Sm-QC for A-List@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:59:36 -0700 Received: from Comm-MTA by gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:00:04 -0500 Message-Id: <4778F5DA.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.1 Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:59:54 -0500 From: "Charles Brown" To: ,"PEN-L list" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] Top economist says America could plunge into recession X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:59:37 -0000 I doubt it. As we speak, the Economic Wizards are blowing up new bubbles. = Double Bubble, Toil and Prosperity. CB http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20071224/024472.= html >From The Times December 31, 2007 Top economist says America could plunge into recession Suzy Jagger in New York Losses arising from America=E2=80=99s housing recession could triple over = the=20 next few years and they represent the greatest threat to growth in the=20 United States, one of the world=E2=80=99s leading economists has told The = Times. Robert Shiller, Professor of Economics at Yale University, predicted=20 that there was a very real possibility that the US would be plunged = into=20 a Japan-style slump, with house prices declining for years. Professor Shiller, co-founder of the respected S&P Case/Shiller=20 house-price index, said: =E2=80=9CAmerican real estate values have already = lost=20 around $1 trillion [=C2=A3503 billion]. That could easily increase = threefold=20 over the next few years. This is a much bigger issue than sub-prime. We=20 are talking trillions of dollars=E2=80=99 worth of losses.=E2=80=9D He said that US futures markets had priced in further declines in house=20 prices in the short term, with contracts on the S&P Shiller index=20 pointing to decreases of up to 14 per cent. =E2=80=9COver the next five years, the futures contracts are pointing to = losses=20 of around 35 per cent in some areas, such as Florida, California and = Las=20 Vegas. There is a good chance that this housing recession will go on = for=20 years,=E2=80=9D he said. Professor Shiller, author of Irrational Exuberance, a phrase later used=20 by Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman, said: =E2=80=9CThis= is a=20 classic bubble scenario. A few years ago house prices got very high,=20 pushed up because of investor expectations. Americans have fuelled the=20 myth that prices would never fall, that values could only go up. People=20 believed the story. Now there is a very real chance of a big recession.=E2= =80=9D He pointed out that signs at the beginning of 2007 that had indicated=20 that some states were beginning to experience a recovery in house = prices=20 had proved to be false: =E2=80=9CStates such as Massachusetts had seen = some=20 increases at the beginning of the year. Denver also looked like it had = a=20 different path. Now all states are falling.=E2=80=9D Until two years ago, each of America=E2=80=99s 50 states had experienced = a=20 prolonged housing boom, with properties in some =E2=80=93 such as = Florida,=20 California, Arizona and Nevada =E2=80=93 doubling in price, fuelled by = cheap=20 credit and lax lending practices to borrowers who ordinarily would not=20 have been able to secure a mortgage. Two years ago, the northeastern=20 states of America became the first to slide into a recession after 17=20 successive interest-rate rises between June 2004 and August 2006 hit = the=20 property market. Last week, new numbers from the S&P/Case Shiller index showed that = house=20 prices had declined in October at their fastest rate for more than six=20 years, with homes in Miami losing 12 per cent of their value. ### ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- From cbcox@ilstu.edu Mon Dec 31 16:43:41 2007 Received: from smtp2.ilstu.edu ([138.87.124.35] helo=smtp.ilstu.edu) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J9UIH-0004qQ-D2 for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 16:43:41 -0700 Received: from ilstu.edu (unknown [10.100.1.27]) by smtp.ilstu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C49B56C2D for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:44:12 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <47797ED0.B19E5EA3@ilstu.edu> Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:44:16 -0600 From: Carrol Cox X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: The A-List References: <4778F5DA.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [A-List] Top economist says America could plunge into recession X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:43:42 -0000 Recessions are essential to the health of capitalism --- and they have come quite regularly over the entire history of industrial capitalism. Whether one is coming now or in two years, one _will_ of course come. Such repeated events are of very little political interest (though they often coincide with the switch from Demireps to Republicrats or vice versa). It is worth speculating (as long as one remembers it is pure speculation and not a prediction) on the possibility/likelihood of some recession in (say) the next 20 years turning into that very rare phenomenon, A Depression. (One in the 1870s, another in the 1930s, none since.) A depression, unlike a recession, runs on for a lengthy period of time, with internal ups and downs (up in 1936, down in 1938), and the _upticks_ within a depression can be a time of huge left growth. Recessions, on the other hand, are almost always bad for left politics, for they depress and individualize people;, sending them scurrying for individual survival with no time nor energy for politics. Carrol From shimogamo@attglobal.net Tue Jan 01 02:17:19 2008 Received: from kcout01.prserv.net ([12.154.55.31]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J9dFO-0005Kl-Rj for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:17:19 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout01) with ESMTP id <20080101091751201002ftnje> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Tue, 1 Jan 2008 09:17:52 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <477A0531.8020705@attglobal.net> Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 18:17:37 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] Forecast for 2008 X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 09:17:19 -0000 Clusterfuck Nation by Jim Kunstler Comment on current events by the author of The Long Emergency (Atlantic Monthly Press, 2005) www.kunstler.com (December 31 2007) For the tiny fraction of people who actually pay attention to real events - those, for instance, who know the difference between Narnia and Kandahar - the final hours of 2007 leading into the fog-shrouded abyss of 2008 must induce great racking shudders of nausea. Has there ever been a society so exquisitely rigged for implosion? The whole listing, creaking, reeking edifice stands like one of those obsolete Las Vegas pleasure palaces awaiting a mere pulse of electrons to ignite a thousand explosive charges perfectly placed to blow away the structural supports. The inertia holding everything together that I described in last year's forecast finally melted away at mid-summer and events began spooling out of control. Specifically, the massive tonnage of debt-backed securities circulating through the financial sector stood revealed for the mostly worthless bales of paper they truly are, and the investment community was left suspended in mid-air, grinning unconvincingly, like Wile E Coyote thirteen yards beyond the edge of the mesa, with a sputtering grenade in each hand and an anvil tied to his ankles. The whole second half of 2007 in the ranks of finance was a desperate rear-guard action to stave off the inevitable work-out. The fiasco over at Bear Stearns was instructive. Not long after two of their hedge funds blew up in August, the company announced that the funds had been chartered in the Cayman Islands and were therefore beyond the reach of official US legal machinery - meaning, forget about lawsuits, you losers, chumps, and suckers who bought into our jerry-rigged scams ... submit your complaints to the Tough Noogies desk and begone with you! This dodge might have benefited Bear Stearns in the short term, but in the long term it's hard to see why anybody would ever after cast one red cent in Bear Stearns' direction (in the life of this universe or several like it). The summer's blow-ups were followed by truckloads, boatloads, and helicopter loads of rescue "liquidity" delivered through autumn by the Federal Reserve and other central banks in a continuing effort to allow investment houses, mortgage originators, reinsurance firms, and other companies trafficking in suspect paper to avoid declaring greater losses. Then the foreign sovereign wealth funds jumped in with five billion here, ten billion there, coming away with big chunks of ownership, but of what? Of companies with liabilities in excess of assets? Mostly, these desperation moves worked to paper over virtual bankruptcy through the crucial Christmas holiday, when yearly bonuses are doled out, which spared the boards of directors from having to explain why executives were lined up at the loading docks filling their Lincoln Navigators with stupid dope piles and knots of the shareholders' loot. On the ground out in the heartland, in the anxiety-drenched, over-valued beige subdivisions of California and the ennui-saturated pastel McHousing tracts of Florida (not to mention the pathetic vinyl outlands of Cleveland and Detroit) a mighty keening welled forth as mortgage rates adjusted upward, and loans stopped "performing", and "for sale" signs failed to turn up buyers, and sheriff's deputies showed up with the rolls of yellow foreclosure tape, and actual ownership of the re-poed collateral entered a legal twilight zone somewhere north of the Florida State Teacher's Pension Fund and south of the Norwegian Municipal Councils' investment portfolios. What a mighty goddam mess was left out there by the boyz at the Wall Street genius desks, who engineered a magical system for eliminating risk from the capital markets - only to see it leak back in from a million holes and seams and collapse the greatest bubble ever blown. In the background, the US dollar sank to record lows against the euro and the pound sterling, the price of oil jumped 56 percent across the year just grazing the $100-a-barrel mark, drought punished the American southeast and Australia's grain belt, floods ravaged Texas and England, the polar ice shrank dramatically, but the US escaped any major hurricane action for a second year in a row. Except for the murder of Mrs Bhutto just a few days ago, the international scene was supernaturally quiet. Even Iraq fell into a torpor, variously attributed to utter exhaustion among the warring factions or to the US troop "surge" under general Petreus. Iran got a surprise clean bill-of-health on its nuclear bomb-making activity from America's own investigators, to the consternation of Mr Bush & Company. The non-human denizens of Planet Earth didn't have such a good year. Honeybees, Yangtze river dolphins, and house sparrows took big hits, and Al Gore went up another suit size (as well as winning part of the Nobel Prize for his Powerpoint show). Which brings us finally to the heart of the matter: what's coming down the pike starting tomorrow, January 1 2008? Down and Dirty I shudder to imagine how things will play out now as we turn the corner into 2008. Not to put too fine a point on it, but my little walnut brain can't imagine any scenario in which the US economy doesn't end up on a gurney in history's emergency room. It's not necessary to rehash the particulars of the Greenspan bubble-blowing disaster. The outcome is what concerns us. The web cables have been blazing for months with arguments as to what form the workout will take. There's little disagreement about the fundamentals at the housing end of things. The housing market is in a death spiral. Eventually, the median price of a house will have to fall back to the median income, and it has a very long way to go, perhaps fifty percent. Until that happens, houses will be generally unsellable. At the same time, of course, an anxious finance sector will be offering fewer mortgages and on much more rigorous terms, so there will be far fewer qualified buyers even for distress sales. And the median income itself may soon not be what it has been. The whole equation has changed. As the painful re-pricing process plays out, many owners/sellers will be upside-down and under water in what they owe on the mortgage in relation to the value of the house they occupy. Quite a few may have lost jobs and incomes along the way. Most of these unfortunates would be better off just mailing in the keys and walking away. But in so far as these awful liabilities are peoples' homes, full of all their stuff and their childrens' stuff, not to mention being the repository of all their previously-imagined wealth, as well as their hopes and dreams, walking away is psychologically more easily said than done. Surely in this election year, schemes will be advanced to bail out these poor suckers. But the beneficiaries of such a putative bail out would be far outnumbered by the home-owners still making mortgage payments, plus property taxes jacked up during the recent orgy by greedy public officials, and I don't think this majority would stand for the unfairness of seeing their neighbors simply let off the hook on their obligations. Perhaps the one thing that congress could do is change the insane law that treats foreclosures like some kind of bizzaro capital gain and piles additional huge tax demands on people who can no longer afford to buy their kids a frozen burrito. The issue of what to do about the dispossessed will be so politically red-hot that it could upset the election process - but I get a bit ahead of myself. One thing the public doesn't get about the housing debacle is that it is not just the low point in a regular cycle - it is the end of the suburban phase of US history. We won't be building anymore of it, and those employed in its development will have to find something else to do. Now, unfortunately the whole point of the housing bubble was not really to put X-million people in so many vinyl and chipboard boxes, but rather to ramp up a suburban sprawl-building industry as a replacement for America's dwindling manufacturing economy. This stratagem ran into the implacable force of Peak Oil, which not only puts the schnitz on America's whole Happy Motoring / suburban nexus, but implies a pervasive trend for contraction in everything from the daily distances we can travel to the the very core idea of regular economic growth per se - at least in the way we have understood it through the age of industrial capital. But to return to my point, something like forty percent of all new jobs after the year 2000 were created in the final burst of suburban expansion - everything from the excavators to the framers to the sheet-rockers, and then the providers of granite countertops, the sellers of appliances and furnishings, and cars to service the far-out new subdivisions, and so on. This is the end, therefore, not only of the production "home builders", but perhaps everything from Crate and Barrel to WalMart, too, eventually. By the way, the housing collapse was only one phase of a more generalized real estate debacle, because the commercial side of the business has also begun a nauseating slide into non-performance and equity destruction. In other words, we built way too many strip malls, power centers, and office parks. God knows what will happen to the owners of these white elephants, or the mortgage and lien holders of these things - but as one wag remarked to me some years ago as we both gazed upon a forlorn abandoned strip mall outside of Tulsa, "... we don't need that many evangelical roller rinks ..". What happens out there on the housing market scene will certainly redound in banking and finance and whatever still constitutes the US economy generally. The fears and uncertainties surrounding all credit-backed tradable securities derive first from the millions of troubled home mortgages dangling slowly in the wind. These fears and uncertainties will multiply as defaults commence in commercial real estate, and desperate individuals next enter a wave of credit card default, all of it, too, securitized and sprinkled all over the world. None of this stuff has yet been priced into the public disclosures of the many troubled banks and bank-like companies holding it. Nor does anyone really know how this is affecting the hedge funds, and their staggering leveraged positions in things that are looking more and more like quicksand. I can't imagine that quite a few major banks will not collapse in the first half of 2008. It is hard to escape the conclusion that many hedge funds will also blow up, given the unsoundness of their counter-parties' positions, not to mention the frailty of the bond reinsurers. But the death of more than a few hedge funds could easily unwind the entire global finance system - meaning a period of destructive chaos followed by a set of severely different institutional arrangements, with untold loss of imagined capital wealth along the way and big changes in everyday life. The world has never really been in a situation like this before and it is impossible to say what it might lead to. But there is no doubt that the American public has enjoyed an artificially high standard of living in relation to the value of what we actually produce - fried chicken, hair extensions, and the Flaver Flav Show - so the conclusion is pretty self-evident. Others have said (and I concur) that 2008 will be the year that the issue of Peak Oil not only takes stage in the forefront of American politics, but pushes global warming aside as the most immediate threat to the "modern" way of life. There is every reason to believe that the world has arrived at its all-time oil production peak - and some statisticians would even pin-point the exact moment as July 2006. Since then a few new and crucial story-lines have emerged to allow us to understand what is happening out there on the world oil scene. One story-line is that only "demand destruction" among the world's poorest nations has kept the oil markets functioning "normally" among the OECD nations and the rising Asian players. Even so, oil priced in US dollars more than doubled in 2007. It remains to be seen whether demand destruction in a wobbling US economy - with the suburban builders crippled - will keep oil prices from jumping into the uncharted territory beyond $100 a barrel. But two other forces are in operation now. One is the growing oil export problem, soon to be a crisis. It now appears that exports, in nations with surplus oil to sell, are going down at an even steeper rate than production declines. Why? They are using more of their own oil. The population is growing robustly. The Saudi Arabians are building the world$B!G(Bs largest aluminum smelter and many chemical factories. This takes a lot of oil. Russia, another big exporter, saw its car sales jump by fifty percent in 2007. Mexico is depleting so rapidly, and using so much more of its own oil, that it might be out of the export game altogether in three years. That will be bad news for the US, since Mexico is tied with Saudi Arabia as America's number two leading source of oil imports. Remember, the US now imports close to three-quarters of all the oil we use. The second new factor on the Peak oil scene is "oil nationalism". It is prompting countries like Norway and Russia to husband more of their own resources as the awareness hits that they are past peak and might want to keep their own motors humming further into the future. Oil surplus nations are also trending more toward selling their oil on the basis of long-term contracts with favored customers rather than just auctioning the stuff off on the futures market. This makes oil a much more important element in geopolitical power politics. Note that the US may not enjoy "favored customer" standing among many of these nations. Matt Simmons, the leading investment banker to the oil industry, predicted at a major conference in October that the US is much closer to encountering a problem with chronic spot shortages of oil (and gasoline, of course) than the public realizes, and Simmons says that this supply problem will be extremely disruptive in every imaginable way - economically, politically, and socially. Most of the commentators I take seriously see the price of oil oscillating in 2008 between $80 and $160-a-barrel. Simmons says Americans will keep sucking up the price increases, but they will probably freak out over spot shortages. I have no idea how presidential election politics will play out in 2008. It must be obvious that so many nasty pitfalls lie out there in the months ahead that something's got to shake up the current scripted mummery among the contenders. The current batch of candidates will soon find their story-lines and pre-cooked messages out-of-date as the nation faces crises in finance and energy (at least). Given the uneventful geopolitical scene of the past eighteen months (since the Hezbollah-Israel War and up to the murder of Mrs Bhutto in Pakistan), odds are that the US will have more rather than less trouble from the rest of the world in 2008 - especially if our own financial recklessness trips up the global economy. Back in the early days of George W Bush, even before 9/11, I used to joke with my friends that Bill Clinton would return as the Emperor Bill the First. The joke doesn't seem so funny anymore with Hillary off and running. I never liked the way she muscled her way into a US senate seat - sending the message, in essence, that there was not one genuine New York resident qualified for the job. But there is so much more about her I dislike now, starting with her presumption of dynastic entitlement to the annoyingly phony way she nods her head (like one of those old "drinky-bird" toys) to put across the idea that she is a fabulous "listener". I write this a few days before the Iowa caucuses and then the New Hampshire primary. New York's Mayor Bloomberg is suddenly making noises again about entering the race as an independent. That might lead to a situation as fractured as the one in 1860 that saw a multi-party scuffle send Lincoln into office (or the election of 1912 when Teddy Roosevelt made a credible run on the independent Bull Moose line). At the moment, I'd like to see both John Edwards and Barack Obama roll on. The mere thought of a president Huckabee gives me the chilblains, and the rest of the Republican pack I would not want to have as my county supervisor. In any case, whoever ends up in the oval office will preside over one king-hell of a clusterfuck. In the immortal words of TV's erstwhile "Mr T", I pity da fool who gets elected into this mess. There will be a whole continent full of bankrupt, re-poed, and idle former WalMart shoppers, many of them with half of their skin tattooed and many of that bunch all revved up to "roll heavy and gun up" against the folks who screwed them. Which leads me to my penultimate observation of the moment: 2008 will be the year that celebrity wealth goes into hiding. A land full of people crying into their foreclosure notices will take a dim view of the Donald Trumps and P Diddys luxuriating out there and may come looking for scalps - though in the case of Mr Trump they'll be sorry they woke up the wolverine that lives on his head. Basically, though, I'm not kidding. Conspicuous displays of wealth will be so "out" that Mr Diddy might take to club-hopping in a 1999 Mazda. Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton may have to double-up living in a minuteman missile silo to keep the angry mobs of fans-turned-vengeful-berserkers away. Okay, my final comment. After being chastised endlessly about mis-calling the DOW in 2006 (I said 4000), I have learned my lesson about making numerical predictions for the stock markets. So let's just say there is no fucking way that the DOW, the NASDAQ, and the S & P will not end the year 2008 absolutely on their asses. The charade of permanent prosperity based on getting something for nothing is over. That sound you hear out there is reality knocking on the door. It has been standing out in the cold for a long time and it is not happy with us. http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/clusterfuck_nation/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From shimogamo@attglobal.net Tue Jan 01 19:15:45 2008 Received: from kcout03.prserv.net ([12.154.55.33]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1J9t8z-0007ES-3m for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 19:15:45 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout03) with ESMTP id <2008010202162320300oirike> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Wed, 2 Jan 2008 02:16:24 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <477AF3EA.1010507@attglobal.net> Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:16:10 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] The Kings of England X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 02:15:45 -0000 The unaccountable people who launched the Iraq war have learnt nothing from it. by George Monbiot Published in the Guardian (January 01 2008) If you doubt that Britain needs a written constitution, listen to the strangely unbalanced discussion broadcast by the BBC on Friday. The Today programme asked Lord Guthrie, formerly chief of the defence staff, and Sir Kevin Tebbit, until recently the senior civil servant at the Ministry of Defence, if parliament should decide whether or not this country goes to war. The discussion was a terrifying exposure of the privileges of unaccountable power. It explained as well as anything I have heard how Britain became party to a crime that might have killed a million people. Lord Guthrie argued that parliamentary approval would mean that intelligence had to be shared with MPs; that the other side could not be taken by surprise ("do you want to warn the enemy you are going to do it?"), and that commanders should have "a choice about when to attack and when not to attack". Sir Kevin maintained that "no prime minister would be able to deploy forces without being able to command a parliamentary majority. In that sense the executive is already accountable to parliament." Once the prime minister has his majority, in other words, MPs become redundant. Let me dwell for a moment on what Lord Guthrie said, for he appears to be advocating that we retain the right to commit war crimes. States in dispute with each other, the UN Charter says, must first seek to solve their differences by "peaceful means" (article 33) {1}. If these fail, they should refer the matter to the Security Council (#37), which decides what measures should be taken (#39). Taking the enemy by surprise is a useful tactic in battle, and encounters can be won only if commanders are able to make decisions quickly. But either Lord Guthrie does not understand the difference between a battle and a war - which is unlikely in view of his 44 years of service {2} - or he does not understand the most basic point in international law. Launching a surprise war is forbidden by the charter. It has become fashionable to scoff at these rules and to dismiss those who support them as pedants and prigs, but they are all that stand between us and the greatest crimes in history. The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg ruled that "to initiate a war of aggression ... is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime" {3}. the tribunal's charter placed "planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression" {4} at the top of the list of war crimes. If Britain's most prominent retired general does not understand this, it can only be because he has never been forced to understand it. In September 2002, he argued in the House of Lords that "the time is approaching when we may have to join the United States in operations against Iraq ... Strike soon, and the threat will be less and easier to handle. If the United Nations route fails, I support the second option." {5} No one in the chamber warned him that he was proposing the supreme international crime. In another debate in the Lords, Guthrie argued that it was "unthinkable for British service men and women to be sent to the International Criminal Court", regardless of what they might have done {6}. He demanded a guarantee from the government that this would not be allowed to happen, and proposed that the British armed forces should be allowed to opt out of the European Convention on Human Rights. The grey heads murmured their agreement. Perhaps it is unfair to single out the noble and gallant lord. The exceptionalism of the British establishment is almost universal. According to the government, both the Commons public administration committee and the Lords constitution committee recognise that decision-making should "provide sufficient flexibility for deployments which need to be made without prior parliamentary approval for reasons of urgency or necessary operational secrecy". {7} You cannot keep an operation secret from parliament unless you are also keeping it secret from the UN. Sir Kevin appears to have a general aversion to disclosure. In 2003 the Guardian obtained letters showing that he had prevented the fraud squad at the ministry of defence from investigating allegations of corruption against the arms manufacturer BAE, that he tipped off the chairman of BAE about the contents of a confidential letter the Serious Fraud Office had sent him and that he failed to tell his minister about the fraud office's warnings {8}. In October 2003, under intense cross-examination during the Hutton inquiry into the death of the government scientist David Kelly, he revealed that the decision to name Dr Kelly was made in a "meeting chaired by the Prime Minister". {9} That could have been the end of Blair, but a week later Sir Kevin quietly sent Lord Hutton a written retraction of his evidence {10}. No one bothered to tell parliament or the press; the retraction was made public only when the Hutton report was published, three months later {11}. Blair knew all along, and the secret gave him a crushing advantage {12}. The discussion also reveals that Guthrie and Tebbit appear to have learnt nothing from the disaster in Iraq. They are not alone. Soon before he stepped down last year, Tony Blair wrote an article for the Economist called What I've Learned {13}. He had discovered, he claimed, that his critics were both wrong and dangerous and that his decisions, based on "freedom, democracy, responsibility to others, but also justice and fairness" were difficult but invariably right. He called his article "a very short synopsis of what I have learned". I could think of an even shorter one. We have yet to hear one word of regret or remorse from any of the major architects - Blair, Brown, Straw, Hoon, Campbell and their principal advisers - of Britain's participation in the supreme international crime. The press and parliament appear to have heeded Blair's plea that we all "move on" from Iraq. The British establishment has a unique capacity to move on, and then to repeat its mistakes. What other former empire knows so little of its own atrocities? When people call our unwritten constitution a "gentleman's agreement", they reveal more than they intend. It allows the unelected gentlemen who advise the prime minister to act without reference to the proles. Britain went to war in Iraq because the public and parliament were not allowed to know when the decision was made, what the intelligence reports really said, and what the attorney-general wrote about the legality of an invasion. Had the truth not been suppressed, our armed forces could never have attacked Iraq. Real constitutional reform requires much more than the timid proposals in the green paper on the governance of Britain, which are likely to appear in a new bill in a few weeks' time. Yes, parliament should be allowed to vote on whether to go to war, yes the Royal Prerogative should be rolled back. But the prime minister, his diplomats, civil servants and generals would still decide which wars parliament needs to know about, which crimes could be secretly committed in our name. Real constitutional reform means not only handing power to parliament; it also means confronting the power of the cold, unaccountable people who act as if it is their birthright. www.monbiot.com References: 1. http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/ 2. Lord Guthrie, 24th March 2004. House of Lords debates, Column 731. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldhansrd/vo040324/text/40324-05.htm 3. Marjorie Cohn, professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, 9th November 2004. Aggressive War: Supreme International Crime. http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110904A.shtml 4. The Avalon Project at Yale Law School. Nuremberg Trial Proceedings. Vol 1: Charter of the International Military Tribunal. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/imtconst.htm#art6 5. Lord Guthrie, 24th September 2002. House of Lords debate, Column 896. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldhansrd/vo020924/text/20924-03.htm#20924-03_spnew9 6. Lord Guthrie, 14th July 2005. House of Lords debate, Column 1234. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldhansrd/vo050714/text/50714-08.htm#50714-08_spnew0 7. Home Office, July 2007. The Governance of Britain. Green paper. Para 28, page 19. http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm71/7170/7170.pdf 8. David Leigh and Rob Evans, 13th October 2003. MoD chief in fraud cover-up row. The Guardian. 9. Sir Kevin Tebbit, 13th October 2003. Hearing Transcript, The Hutton Enquiry, para 57. http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/transcripts/hearing-trans47.htm 10. Richard Norton-Taylor and Owen Bowcott, 2nd February 2004. Tebbit's late change put Blair in clear. The Guardian. 11. ibid. 12. John Kampfner, 2004. Blair's Wars. pages 350 and 364. Free Press, London. 13. Tony Blair, 31st May 2007. What I've learned. The Economist. http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9257593 Copyright (c) 2006 Monbiot.com http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/01/01/the-kings-of-england/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From mstainsby@resist.ca Wed Jan 02 04:22:46 2008 Received: from defout.telus.net ([199.185.220.240]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JA1gM-0007s4-Od; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:22:46 -0700 Received: from priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net ([64.180.6.225]) by priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.02 201-2186-121-104-20070414) with ESMTP id <20080102112334.YFIT29066.priv-edtnes28.telusplanet.net@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net>; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 04:23:34 -0700 Received: from [64.180.6.225] (d64-180-6-225.bchsia.telus.net [64.180.6.225]) by priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net (BorderWare MXtreme Infinity Mail Firewall) with ESMTP id D49FLNLR4N; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 04:23:34 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <477B7438.5040908@resist.ca> Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 04:23:36 -0700 From: Macdonald Stainsby User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Radical anti-capitalist environmental discussion." , Redbadbear@yahoogroups.com, The A-List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [A-List] The Bouchard-Taylor Commission's Hijacking of 'Gender Equality' X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:22:47 -0000 Gender, Race, and Religious Freedom The Bouchard-Taylor Commission's Hijacking of 'Gender Equality' by Anna Carastathis The Dominion - http://www.dominionpaper.ca Immigrant rights activists and community members demonstrate during a Montreal stop of the Bouchard-Taylor commission in late November. Photo: CMAQ Last November, the West Coast LEAF (Legal Education and Action Fund) issued a report based on its Women's Equality and Religious Freedom Project (WERF). Some of the overarching questions that the Project explored were “What is the nature of religious discrimination experienced by women of faith? What are the ways in which women balance and navigate the experiences of discrimination and interlocking systems of oppression in their daily lives?” The report also addresses specific areas such as same-sex marriage; polygamy; use of religious arbitration in family law; and immigration law. The full report can be found here. The Taylor-Bouchard Commission on "reasonable accommodation" in Québec has prompted a great deal of commentary on the relationship between gender equality and freedom of religion. For instance, the Conseil du statut de la femme du Québec (CSF) has recommended that the Québec Charter of Rights and Freedoms be amended so that gender equality is given relative priority over the right to religious expression. In light of these developments, the Dominion interviewed Harsha Walia, who authored the report based on Advisory Committee discussions, to get an anti-racist and feminist perspective. The Dominion: Why is religious freedom a feminist issue? Harsha Walia: This is an important issue because the “religious freedom debate” actually has less to do with religion or secularism than it does with race. Particularly in the post 911 climate, religion is a highly politicized, racialized, and publicly constructed identity. For example, invoking a Muslim identity is not about defining the beliefs of a person of Muslim faith; rather, it is a euphemism for Arabs, Middle Easterners, and South Asians (who may not actually be Muslim). In the context of the “War on Terror” this racialized imagery is very important, as there is a need to have an identifiable ‘enemy’ who is supposedly threatening Western values. The use of such language and imagery is rooted in a colonial legacy; therefore fighting patriarchy is intrinsically linked to fighting colonization and racism. This is also an issue for feminists because feminism is currently being, as it historically has been, co-opted by imperial and colonizing forces. Historian Leila Ahmed has written, “Whether in the hands of patriarchal men or feminists, the ideas of western feminism essentially functioned to morally justify the attack on native societies and to support the notion of the comprehensive superiority of Europe.” An increasing number of feminists have expressed concerns regarding various state interventions on behalf of the “disempowered foreign woman”. For example, feminists have questioned the use of “protecting women” as a rationale for the occupation of Afghanistan. Similarly, the discourse surrounding human trafficking taps into notions of victimized Third World women and justifies restrictive border controls. Dominion: What do you think about the discourse of "reasonable accommodation" that has come to dominate public discussions in Québec? HW: It is astounding how many people who identify themselves as pro-feminist are expressing the need to ‘save women from the hijab’ and how there needs to be ‘limits to multiculturalism.’ First, it is hypocritical to talk about Canada’s “over-tolerance” of multiculturalism when the very nature of the debate positions racialized immigrant communities as not ‘belonging’ to Canadian society; as Outsiders” who need to be accommodated. It reveals the shallow self-congratulatory nature of Canadian multiculturalism under which rests a fundamentally white national consciousness. Second, such a debate aims to portray a sense of victimization where Canadian culture is being violated by “Outsiders.” This process of demonization, ‘othering’ and racism that targets particular communities for greater scrutiny has very real consequences in the present day context, being used to sell illegal wars and occupations across the globe, and restricting the rights and civil liberties of migrants within these borders. It is also problematic to talk about secularism in a seemingly neutral way as it ignores the foundations of Christianity within the Canadian state and the violent role that Christianity has played in colonizing and assimilating indigenous peoples for example. It is also ironic that many of those rejecting the “authority” of religion so readily accept the authoritative ideologies of capitalism, consumerism, and liberal secularism, which are far more normalized in Western societies. The most damaging consequence of this debate is that it removes the capacity for women’s agency by reinforcing the idea that being a ‘Muslim feminist’ for example is impossible; forcing women to accept narrower definitions of self, despite occupying multiple locations across citizenship, religion, class, sexuality, and race. Furthermore, discussions of gender inequality ‘within’ certain religions or cultures renders invisible the universal systems of patriarchy that all women contend with, while homogenizing and fossilizing religions in definitive ways. Dominion: In the report, I found your critique of the distinction between polygamy and polyamory compelling. Can you elaborate? HW: One of the major problems with the distinction between polygamy and polyamory is that it relies on and perpetuates racist assumptions. While polyamory is used to define a relationship based on mutual negotiation between “independent people,” polygamy refers to a “cultural practice.” Such a dichotomy reinforces assumptions that women in racialized cultures are being more exploited and less independent than “autonomous women” from dominant white cultures. This is not to suggest that polygamy cannot be critiqued; it is to highlight this double standard and how such differentiations are based on the premise that racialized cultures are inherently more hostile to women. The reality is that the practice of both polygamy and heterosexual polyamory exist within a global context of systemic discrimination against women and girls. The current-day reality is that 99% of polygamous marriages are characterized by men having multiple wives. But it is dangerous to suggest that the roots of polygamy lie in ‘religious culture’ because cultures and religions do not offer homogenous narratives. Various conservative ideologies are on the rise across the globe because that is the socio-political context within which we are operating. Religion can be used to justify polygamy, but if we recognize that the current practice of polygamy is not about a particular religion or culture (which reinforces racism) -- it is, rather, a manifestation of a universal system of patriarchy -- then we can more readily reject those “freedom of religion” arguments that are used to prevent discussion about the effects on women in an anti-racist manner. Dominion: How should feminists be addressing the issue of religious freedom as it intersects with the marginalization of racialized, immigrant, and indigenous women? HW: We must contend with the reality that culturally-imperialist feminisms are being forced upon women across the world and the narrative of women’s rights serves as a crucial tool in the pro-war and anti-immigrant propaganda machine. Such a theft of feminist principles is advancing everything but genuine equality for women. Instead, we must choose a path that is feminist as well as anti-racist, anti-militarist, pro-immigration, queer- and trans-positive, and class-conscious. This includes questioning and challenging the legitimacy given to state-based responses such as prisons as a solution to violence, border controls as a solution to trafficking, child apprehension as a solution to women and child poverty, and militarization as a solution to third world women’s liberation. It is important to avoid falling into the racist traps that infantilize racialized women, while at the same time maintaining a basic commitment to gender and sexual equality that cannot be breached by religious or cultural justifications. We must avoid a culturally imperialist feminism that seeks to impose Western notions of gender equality and ‘sameness’ onto other women. This does not imply that we become culturally relativist and begin to support any unjust practice. Cultural diversity or freedom of religion should not serve as a shield to scrutinize against gender-oppressive practices. Walking this line requires us to pay attention to specific contexts, to listen to those women whose rights we purport to stand for, and to understand that we occupy different relationships of power and privilege. All oppressed women equally deplore sexism and misogyny, but women’s liberation movements must be culturally sensitive and relevant so as to oppose patriarchal elements without attacking or destroying non-white cultures, religions, or identities. Women of colour and indigenous women have consistently pointed out that reducing their oppression to their ‘culture’ represents deeply colonial attitudes. The greater oppression that some women face is directly linked to policies of the state, histories of colonization, the nature of capitalism, and the powerful rise of global conservative ideologies. Most importantly, we must walk alongside those women who are on the front lines of their own struggles and who are agents of their own transformation. They do not need pity or charity, but solidarity and our respect for their leadership and agency. All opinions expressed are of Harsha Walia alone and do not imply endorsement by West Coast LEAF or other participants in the Project. -- Macdonald Stainsby Coordinator, http://oilsandstruth.org -- moderated radical news & discussion list: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht. From ebeer@telecentro.com.ar Wed Jan 02 05:56:45 2008 Received: from maildcarg8.dc-host.net.ar ([200.55.6.138]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JA39J-0007wR-HZ for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 05:56:45 -0700 Received: from maildcarg4.dc-host.net.ar ([200.55.6.135]) by maildcarg8.dc-host.net.ar (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2 (built Dec 2 2004)) with ESMTP id <0JU00055IQ13N0G0@maildcarg8.dc-host.net.ar> for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:12:39 -0300 (ART) Received: from Sempron2600 ([200.125.100.138]) by maildcarg4.dc-host.net.ar (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0JU000K1XPAI4GD0@maildcarg4.dc-host.net.ar> for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:56:43 -0300 (ART) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:57:26 -0300 From: Ezequiel Beer To: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Message-id: <00c001c84d3f$06b012e0$8a647dc8@Sempron2600> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Subject: [A-List] Some Add Coments About 2008 X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:56:46 -0000 The Contra Ofensive on the Keynesianism by the Econometric Neoliberal Framework from the Post War II is showing some ends as the Housing US ubble - thanks of Greenspan/Benmarke MacroEconomic Policies - , the Global Warming and the increasing of losses on the middle class ( Krugman articules quite explain it ) as an increasing of Poverty. This " framework crisis " of the Economics or the Political Economy may push on GeoEconomical or GeoPolitical Analisys as it can study the Whole and their Particularities. As the International Financial Matters push by the Fed and the UE Central Banks add to the Middle East situation and the increasing power of Iran-China-Rusia could give a chance to some periferic countries far from the " WorldWide Investment Currents " have a endogenus economic acumulation run by a state/political hand. Could be the aim of Kirchner in Argentina? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOBMoi9oet8&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsYaaG_Adhg&NR=1 Extracts From Peron: Melodia del Sentimiento by Leonardo Favio From sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca Wed Jan 02 09:29:25 2008 Received: from bay0-omc3-s3.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.203]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JA6T7-00008v-Sq for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:29:25 -0700 Received: from hotmail.com ([207.46.9.243]) by bay0-omc3-s3.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 2 Jan 2008 08:30:11 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 08:30:11 -0800 Message-ID: Received: from 207.46.9.251 by by120fd.bay120.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:30:09 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.29.96.206] X-Originating-Email: [sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca] X-Sender: sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca In-Reply-To: <477B7438.5040908@resist.ca> From: "Jim Yarker" To: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Bcc: Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:30:09 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jan 2008 16:30:11.0055 (UTC) FILETIME=[BEA00FF0:01C84D5C] Subject: Re: [A-List] The Bouchard-Taylor Commission's Hijacking of 'GenderEquality' X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:29:26 -0000 >From: Macdonald Stainsby > >For instance, the Conseil du statut de la femme du Québec (CSF) has >recommended that the Québec Charter of Rights and Freedoms be amended so >that gender equality is given relative priority over the right to religious >expression. What the government-created Québec Council on the Status of Women actually recommended - as unreported at Dominion Papers - is that the Québec Charter of Rights and Freedoms have a clause added to it **analogous to the clause in Article 28 of the *Canadian* Federal Charter of Rights and Freedoms to the effect that the equality of men and women cannot be compromised in the name of freedom of religion.** (http://sisyphe.org/article.php3?id_article=2846) The inclusion of this clause in the Canadian Federal Charter and Constitution was the product of intense lobbying by *English Canadian feminists over 20 years ago.* (The principle is also embedded in the Council of Europe's Resolution 1464 on women and religion- ibid). Unsurprisingly while the clause and the federal Charter more generally always were and still are lauded by English Canada's civil libertarians, the mere notion of including it in the Québec Charter arouses a completely different spin, reflecting another pattern of supremacism present in the Canadian federation from its very début, viz, anglo-protestant supremacism or, "if you don't speak white, it just ain't right." Ditto for the hypocrisy surrounding the attacks on the PQ's proposed Québec citizenship bill, which proposes basic competency in French as a criterion for Québec citizenship. Language competency is a criterion for Canadian citizenship as well, but that's ok, cuz Canada's always right. >HW: It is astounding how many people who identify themselves as >pro-feminist are expressing the need to ‘save women from the hijab’ and how >there needs to be ‘limits to multiculturalism.’ It would be interesting some day to have an enumeration of this astounding number, particularly given the bigoted alacrity and intellectual dishonesty with which the Hérouxville "code of conduct" and some marginal presentations before the commission were explicitly associated with the sovereignist movement on this list (in the same manner as was Doc Mailloux, now part of a drearily familiar pattern). Such a yearning to "save women from the hijab" does not appear in the submissions before the commission made by: the Bloc québécois, the Parti québécois, the Société St-Jean-Baptiste, nor that of the Québec Federation of Women (who went in just the opposite vein actually: http://www.ledevoir.com/2007/12/11/168029.html, and as also unreported in the Dominion Papers), all associated in their historical stances and orientations with the sovereignty movement, unlike the CSF. It isn't the mandate of this commission to explore the "Canadian multiculturalism" model, which is not and never has been the basis of state policy in Québec, but rather Québec's own "intercultural" model. As is generally well-known here if less well-known to cyber-opinionators on the English Canadian left who generously appoint themselves as Québec's conscience, Canadian multiculturalism was conceived in part to combat, contain and it was hoped, banalize to the point of erasure the Québec liberation struggle and awareness of the national oppression of French Canadians. (http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20071203/CPTRIBUNE/712030991/-1/CPTRIBUNE). From bar@idirect.com Wed Jan 02 10:34:28 2008 Received: from nu2.look.ca ([207.136.100.16] helo=nu.look.ca) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JA7U3-0000FF-SU for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:34:28 -0700 Received: from nu.look.ca ([127.0.0.1] helo=webmail.look.ca) by nu.look.ca with smtp (Exim 4.20) id 1JA7Uq-00017J-UO for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:35:16 -0500 Received: from 207.253.112.178 (Look WebMail authenticated user bar@idirect.com) by webmail.look.ca with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 12:35:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <49467.207.253.112.178.1199295316.squirrel@webmail.look.ca> In-Reply-To: <477AF3EA.1010507@attglobal.net> References: <477AF3EA.1010507@attglobal.net> Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 12:35:16 -0500 (EST) From: bar@idirect.com To: "The A-List" User-Agent: Look WebMail/1.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: bar@idirect.com Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on phi.look.ca X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=8.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME, PRIORITY_NO_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Version: 3.0 (built Mon Jun 2 17:21:47 GMT 2003) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Subject: Re: [A-List] The Kings of England X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:34:28 -0000 Sadly, even Monbiot does not call for the only change that could begin to bring democracy and accountabilty to Britain-the removal of the queen and the founding of a republic with a constitution. Tom Paine would be astonished to find that two hundred years after his death Britain and Canada are still monarchies with al that implies and the cover of "constitutional monarchy" is just that a cover for the rule of the aristocratic elites in Britain and the continuing colonialism of Canada. Chris > > The unaccountable people who launched the Iraq war have learnt nothing > from it. > > by George Monbiot > > Published in the Guardian (January 01 2008) > > > If you doubt that Britain needs a written constitution, listen to the > strangely unbalanced discussion broadcast by the BBC on Friday. The > Today programme asked Lord Guthrie, formerly chief of the defence staff, > and Sir Kevin Tebbit, until recently the senior civil servant at the > Ministry of Defence, if parliament should decide whether or not this > country goes to war. The discussion was a terrifying exposure of the > privileges of unaccountable power. It explained as well as anything I > have heard how Britain became party to a crime that might have killed a > million people. > > Lord Guthrie argued that parliamentary approval would mean that > intelligence had to be shared with MPs; that the other side could not be > taken by surprise ("do you want to warn the enemy you are going to do > it?"), and that commanders should have "a choice about when to attack > and when not to attack". Sir Kevin maintained that "no prime minister > would be able to deploy forces without being able to command a > parliamentary majority. In that sense the executive is already > accountable to parliament." Once the prime minister has his majority, in > other words, MPs become redundant. > > Let me dwell for a moment on what Lord Guthrie said, for he appears to > be advocating that we retain the right to commit war crimes. States in > dispute with each other, the UN Charter says, must first seek to solve > their differences by "peaceful means" (article 33) {1}. If these fail, > they should refer the matter to the Security Council (#37), which > decides what measures should be taken (#39). Taking the enemy by > surprise is a useful tactic in battle, and encounters can be won only if > commanders are able to make decisions quickly. But either Lord Guthrie > does not understand the difference between a battle and a war - which is > unlikely in view of his 44 years of service {2} - or he does not > understand the most basic point in international law. Launching a > surprise war is forbidden by the charter. > > It has become fashionable to scoff at these rules and to dismiss those > who support them as pedants and prigs, but they are all that stand > between us and the greatest crimes in history. The International > Military Tribunal at Nuremberg ruled that "to initiate a war of > aggression ... is not only an international crime; it is the supreme > international crime" {3}. the tribunal's charter placed "planning, > preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression" {4} at the top > of the list of war crimes. > > If Britain's most prominent retired general does not understand this, it > can only be because he has never been forced to understand it. In > September 2002, he argued in the House of Lords that "the time is > approaching when we may have to join the United States in operations > against Iraq ... Strike soon, and the threat will be less and easier to > handle. If the United Nations route fails, I support the second option." > {5} No one in the chamber warned him that he was proposing the supreme > international crime. In another debate in the Lords, Guthrie argued that > it was "unthinkable for British service men and women to be sent to the > International Criminal Court", regardless of what they might have done > {6}. He demanded a guarantee from the government that this would not be > allowed to happen, and proposed that the British armed forces should be > allowed to opt out of the European Convention on Human Rights. The grey > heads murmured their agreement. > > Perhaps it is unfair to single out the noble and gallant lord. The > exceptionalism of the British establishment is almost universal. > According to the government, both the Commons public administration > committee and the Lords constitution committee recognise that > decision-making should "provide sufficient flexibility for deployments > which need to be made without prior parliamentary approval for reasons > of urgency or necessary operational secrecy". {7} You cannot keep an > operation secret from parliament unless you are also keeping it secret > from the UN. > > Sir Kevin appears to have a general aversion to disclosure. In 2003 the > Guardian obtained letters showing that he had prevented the fraud squad > at the ministry of defence from investigating allegations of corruption > against the arms manufacturer BAE, that he tipped off the chairman of > BAE about the contents of a confidential letter the Serious Fraud Office > had sent him and that he failed to tell his minister about the fraud > office's warnings {8}. In October 2003, under intense cross-examination > during the Hutton inquiry into the death of the government scientist > David Kelly, he revealed that the decision to name Dr Kelly was made in > a "meeting chaired by the Prime Minister". {9} That could have been the > end of Blair, but a week later Sir Kevin quietly sent Lord Hutton a > written retraction of his evidence {10}. No one bothered to tell > parliament or the press; the retraction was made public only when the > Hutton report was published, three months later {11}. Blair knew all > along, and the secret gave him a crushing advantage {12}. > > The discussion also reveals that Guthrie and Tebbit appear to have > learnt nothing from the disaster in Iraq. They are not alone. Soon > before he stepped down last year, Tony Blair wrote an article for the > Economist called What I've Learned {13}. He had discovered, he claimed, > that his critics were both wrong and dangerous and that his decisions, > based on "freedom, democracy, responsibility to others, but also justice > and fairness" were difficult but invariably right. He called his article > "a very short synopsis of what I have learned". I could think of an even > shorter one. > > We have yet to hear one word of regret or remorse from any of the major > architects - Blair, Brown, Straw, Hoon, Campbell and their principal > advisers - of Britain's participation in the supreme international > crime. The press and parliament appear to have heeded Blair's plea that > we all "move on" from Iraq. The British establishment has a unique > capacity to move on, and then to repeat its mistakes. What other former > empire knows so little of its own atrocities? > > When people call our unwritten constitution a "gentleman's agreement", > they reveal more than they intend. It allows the unelected gentlemen who > advise the prime minister to act without reference to the proles. > Britain went to war in Iraq because the public and parliament were not > allowed to know when the decision was made, what the intelligence > reports really said, and what the attorney-general wrote about the > legality of an invasion. Had the truth not been suppressed, our armed > forces could never have attacked Iraq. > > Real constitutional reform requires much more than the timid proposals > in the green paper on the governance of Britain, which are likely to > appear in a new bill in a few weeks' time. Yes, parliament should be > allowed to vote on whether to go to war, yes the Royal Prerogative > should be rolled back. But the prime minister, his diplomats, civil > servants and generals would still decide which wars parliament needs to > know about, which crimes could be secretly committed in our name. Real > constitutional reform means not only handing power to parliament; it > also means confronting the power of the cold, unaccountable people who > act as if it is their birthright. > > www.monbiot.com > > References: > > 1. http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/ > > 2. Lord Guthrie, 24th March 2004. House of Lords debates, Column 731. > http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldhansrd/vo040324/text/40324-05.htm > > 3. Marjorie Cohn, professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, 9th > November 2004. Aggressive War: Supreme International Crime. > http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110904A.shtml > > 4. The Avalon Project at Yale Law School. Nuremberg Trial Proceedings. > Vol 1: > Charter of the International Military Tribunal. > http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/imtconst.htm#art6 > > 5. Lord Guthrie, 24th September 2002. House of Lor > ds debate, Column 896. > http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldhansrd/vo020924/text/20924-03.htm#20924-03_spnew9 > > 6. Lord Guthrie, 14th July 2005. House of Lords debate, Column 1234. > http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldhansrd/vo050714/text/50714-08.htm#50714-08_spnew0 > > 7. Home Office, July 2007. The Governance of Britain. Green paper. Para > 28, page 19. > http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm71/7170/7170.pdf > > 8. David Leigh and Rob Evans, 13th October 2003. MoD chief in fraud > cover-up row. The Guardian. > > 9. Sir Kevin Tebbit, 13th October 2003. Hearing Transcript, The Hutton > Enquiry, para 57. > http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/transcripts/hearing-trans47.htm > > 10. Richard Norton-Taylor and Owen Bowcott, 2nd February 2004. Tebbit's > late change put Blair in clear. The Guardian. > > 11. ibid. > > 12. John Kampfner, 2004. Blair's Wars. pages 350 and 364. Free Press, > London. > > 13. Tony Blair, 31st May 2007. What I've learned. The Economist. > http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9257593 > > > Copyright (c) 2006 Monbiot.com > > http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/01/01/the-kings-of-england/ > > > http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com > http://www.ashisuto.co.jp > ly From critical.montages@gmail.com Wed Jan 02 13:26:31 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.156]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAAAY-0000U7-WA for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:26:31 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so2841328fgb.45 for ; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:27:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.82.16 with SMTP id f16mr14836029fgb.60.1199305641287; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:27:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 12:27:21 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:27:21 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: A-List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: Subject: [A-List] =?windows-1252?q?What=92s_Your_Consumption_Factor=3F?= X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:26:31 -0000 January 2, 2008 Op-Ed Contributor What's Your Consumption Factor? By JARED DIAMOND Los Angeles TO mathematicians, 32 is an interesting number: it's 2 raised to the fifth power, 2 times 2 times 2 times 2 times 2. To economists, 32 is even more special, because it measures the difference in lifestyles between the first world and the developing world. The average rates at which people consume resources like oil and metals, and produce wastes like plastics and greenhouse gases, are about 32 times higher in North America, Western Europe, Japan and Australia than they are in the developing world. That factor of 32 has big consequences. To understand them, consider our concern with world population. Today, there are more than 6.5 billion people, and that number may grow to around 9 billion within this half-century. Several decades ago, many people considered rising population to be the main challenge facing humanity. Now we realize that it matters only insofar as people consume and produce. If most of the world's 6.5 billion people were in cold storage and not metabolizing or consuming, they would create no resource problem. What really matters is total world consumption, the sum of all local consumptions, which is the product of local population times the local per capita consumption rate. The estimated one billion people who live in developed countries have a relative per capita consumption rate of 32. Most of the world's other 5.5 billion people constitute the developing world, with relative per capita consumption rates below 32, mostly down toward 1. The population especially of the developing world is growing, and some people remain fixated on this. They note that populations of countries like Kenya are growing rapidly, and they say that's a big problem. Yes, it is a problem for Kenya's more than 30 million people, but it's not a burden on the whole world, because Kenyans consume so little. (Their relative per capita rate is 1.) A real problem for the world is that each of us 300 million Americans consumes as much as 32 Kenyans. With 10 times the population, the United States consumes 320 times more resources than Kenya does. People in the third world are aware of this difference in per capita consumption, although most of them couldn't specify that it's by a factor of 32. When they believe their chances of catching up to be hopeless, they sometimes get frustrated and angry, and some become terrorists, or tolerate or support terrorists. Since Sept. 11, 2001, it has become clear that the oceans that once protected the United States no longer do so. There will be more terrorist attacks against us and Europe, and perhaps against Japan and Australia, as long as that factorial difference of 32 in consumption rates persists. People who consume little want to enjoy the high-consumption lifestyle. Governments of developing countries make an increase in living standards a primary goal of national policy. And tens of millions of people in the developing world seek the first-world lifestyle on their own, by emigrating, especially to the United States and Western Europe, Japan and Australia. Each such transfer of a person to a high-consumption country raises world consumption rates, even though most immigrants don't succeed immediately in multiplying their consumption by 32. Among the developing countries that are seeking to increase per capita consumption rates at home, China stands out. It has the world's fastest growing economy, and there are 1.3 billion Chinese, four times the United States population. The world is already running out of resources, and it will do so even sooner if China achieves American-level consumption rates. Already, China is competing with us for oil and metals on world markets. Per capita consumption rates in China are still about 11 times below ours, but let's suppose they rise to our level. Let's also make things easy by imagining that nothing else happens to increase world consumption =97 that is, no other country increases its consumption, all national populations (including China's) remain unchanged and immigration ceases. China's catching up alone would roughly double world consumption rates. Oil consumption would increase by 106 percent, for instance, and world metal consumption by 94 percent. If India as well as China were to catch up, world consumption rates would triple. If the whole developing world were suddenly to catch up, world rates would increase elevenfold. It would be as if the world population ballooned to 72 billion people (retaining present consumption rates). Some optimists claim that we could support a world with nine billion people. But I haven't met anyone crazy enough to claim that we could support 72 billion. Yet we often promise developing countries that if they will only adopt good policies =97 for example, institute honest government and a free-market economy =97 they, too, will be able to enjoy a first-world lifestyle. This promise is impossible, a cruel hoax: we are having difficulty supporting a first-world lifestyle even now for only one billion people. We Americans may think of China's growing consumption as a problem. But the Chinese are only reaching for the consumption rate we already have. To tell them not to try would be futile. The only approach that China and other developing countries will accept is to aim to make consumption rates and living standards more equal around the world. But the world doesn't have enough resources to allow for raising China's consumption rates, let alone those of the rest of the world, to our levels. Does this mean we're headed for disaster? No, we could have a stable outcome in which all countries converge on consumption rates considerably below the current highest levels. Americans might object: there is no way we would sacrifice our living standards for the benefit of people in the rest of the world. Nevertheless, whether we get there willingly or not, we shall soon have lower consumption rates, because our present rates are unsustainable. Real sacrifice wouldn't be required, however, because living standards are not tightly coupled to consumption rates. Much American consumption is wasteful and contributes little or nothing to quality of life. For example, per capita oil consumption in Western Europe is about half of ours, yet Western Europe's standard of living is higher by any reasonable criterion, including life expectancy, health, infant mortality, access to medical care, financial security after retirement, vacation time, quality of public schools and support for the arts. Ask yourself whether Americans' wasteful use of gasoline contributes positively to any of those measures. -- Yoshie From critical.montages@gmail.com Wed Jan 02 13:36:55 2008 Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.134.189]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAAKd-0000VR-LP for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:36:55 -0700 Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id g7so3759874muf.0 for ; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:37:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.74.15 with SMTP id w15mr14851660fga.9.1199305864916; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:31:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 12:31:04 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:31:04 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: A-List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: Subject: [A-List] Oil Hits $100 a Barrel for the First Time X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:36:56 -0000 January 2, 2008 Oil Hits $100 a Barrel for the First Time By JAD MOUAWAD Oil prices reached the symbolic level of $100 a barrel for the first time on Wednesday, a long-awaited milestone in an era of rapidly escalating energy demand. Crude oil futures for February delivery hit $100 on the New York Mercantile Exchange shortly after noon New York time, before falling back slightly. Oil prices, which had fallen to a low of $50 a barrel at the beginning of 2007, have quadrupled since 2003. Futures settled at $99.62, up $3.64 on the day. The rise in oil prices in recent years has been driven by an unprecedented surge in demand from the United States, China and other Asian and Middle Eastern countries. Booming economies have led to more consumption of oil-derived products like gasoline, jet fuel and diesel. Meanwhile, new oil supplies have struggled to catch up. Oil markets have become increasingly volatile and unpredictable, with large swings in 2007 that analysts attributed partly to financial speculation, not just market fundamentals. Political tensions in the Middle East, where more than two-thirds of the world's proven oil reserves are located, have also fueled the rise in prices. Gasoline has lagged the rise in the price of oil. It stands at a nationwide average of $3.05 a gallon for regular grade, according to AAA, the automobile club. That is below the all-time peak in May of $3.23 a gallon, but it is 73 cents higher than at this time a year ago. Some analysts worry that gasoline could hit $4 a gallon by next spring if oil prices remain at high levels. Oil is now within reach of its historic inflation-adjusted high reached in April 1980 in the aftermath of the Iranian revolution when oil prices jumped to the equivalent of $102.81 a barrel in today's money. Unlike the oil shocks of the 1970s and 1980s, which were caused by sudden interruptions in oil supplies from the Middle East, the latest surge is fundamentally different. Prices have risen steadily over several years because of a rise in demand for oil and gasoline in both developed and developing countries. -- Yoshie From shimogamo@attglobal.net Wed Jan 02 16:49:34 2008 Received: from kcout02.prserv.net ([12.154.55.32]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JADL3-0000oZ-Qu for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:49:34 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.13] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout02) with ESMTP id <2008010223501820200r777qe> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Wed, 2 Jan 2008 23:50:19 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <477C232F.9070806@attglobal.net> Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:50:07 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [A-List] Daughter of the West X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 23:49:34 -0000 by Tariq Ali London Review of Books (December 13 2007) Arranged marriages can be a messy business. Designed principally as a means of accumulating wealth, circumventing undesirable flirtations or transcending clandestine love affairs, they often don't work. Where both parties are known to loathe each other, only a rash parent, desensitised by the thought of short-term gain, will continue with the process knowing full well that it will end in misery and possibly violence. That this is equally true in political life became clear in the recent attempt by Washington to tie Benazir Bhutto to Pervez Musharraf. The single, strong parent in this case was a desperate State Department - with John Negroponte as the ghoulish go-between and Gordon Brown as the blushing bridesmaid - fearful that if it did not push this through both parties might soon be too old for recycling. The bride was certainly in a hurry, the groom less so. Brokers from both sides engaged in lengthy negotiations on the size of the dowry. Her broker was and remains Rehman Malik, a former boss of Pakistan's FIA, who has been investigated for corruption by the National Accountability Bureau and who served nearly a year in prison after Benazir's fall, then became one of her business partners and is currently under investigation (with her) by a Spanish court looking into a company called Petroline FZC, which made questionable payments to Iraq under Saddam Hussein. Documents, if genuine, show that she chaired the company. She may have been in a hurry but she did not wish to be seen taking the arm of a uniformed president. He was not prepared to forgive her past. The couple's distaste for each other yielded to a mutual dependence on the United States. Neither party could say 'no', though Musharraf hoped the union could be effected inconspicuously. Fat chance. Both parties made concessions. She agreed that he could take off his uniform after his 're-election' by Parliament, but it had to be before the next general election. (He has now done this, leaving himself dependent on the goodwill of his successor as army chief of staff.) He pushed through a legal ruling - yet another sordid first in the country's history - known as the National Reconciliation Ordinance, which withdrew all cases of corruption pending against politicians accused of looting the national treasury. The ruling was crucial for her since she hoped that the money-laundering and corruption cases pending in three European courts - in Valencia, Geneva and London - would now be dismissed. This doesn't seem to have happened. Many Pakistanis - not just the mutinous and mischievous types who have to be locked up at regular intervals - were repelled, and coverage of 'the deal' in the Pakistan media was universally hostile, except on state television. The 'breakthrough' was loudly trumpeted in the West, however, and a whitewashed Benazir Bhutto was presented on US networks and BBC TV news as the champion of Pakistani democracy - reporters loyally referred to her as 'the former prime minister' rather than the fugitive politician facing corruption charges in several countries. She had returned the favour in advance by expressing sympathy for the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, lunching with the Israeli ambassador to the UN (a litmus test) and pledging to 'wipe out terrorism' in her own country. In 1979 a previous military dictator had bumped off her father with Washington's approval, and perhaps she thought it would be safer to seek permanent shelter underneath the imperial umbrella. HarperCollins had paid her half a million dollars to write a new book. The working title she chose was 'Reconciliation'. As for the general, he had begun his period in office in 1999 by bowing to the spirit of the age and titling himself 'chief executive' rather than 'chief martial law administrator', which had been the norm. Like his predecessors, he promised he would stay in power only for a limited period, pledging in 2003 to resign as army chief of staff in 2004. Like his predecessors, he ignored his pledge. Martial law always begins with the promise of a new order that will sweep away the filth and corruption that marked the old one: in this case it toppled the civilian administrations of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. But 'new orders' are not forward movements, more military detours that further weaken the shaky foundations of a country and its institutions. Within a decade the uniformed ruler will be overtaken by a new upheaval. Dreaming of her glory days in the last century, Benazir wanted a large reception on her return. The general was unhappy. The intelligence agencies (as well as her own security advisers) warned her of the dangers. She had declared war on the terrorists and they had threatened to kill her. But she was adamant. She wanted to demonstrate her popularity to the world and to her political rivals, including those inside her own fiefdom, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP). For a whole month before she boarded the Dubai-Karachi flight, the PPP were busy recruiting volunteers from all over the country to welcome her. Up to 200,000 people lined the streets, but it was a far cry from the million who turned up in Lahore in 1986 when a very different Benazir returned to challenge General Zia ul-Haq. The plan had been to move slowly in the Bhuttomobile from Karachi airport to the tomb of the country's founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, where she would make a speech. It was not to be. As darkness fell, the bombers struck. Who they were and who sent them remains a mystery. She was unhurt, but 130 people died, including some of the policemen guarding her. The wedding reception had led to mayhem. The general, while promising to collaborate with Benazir, was coolly making arrangements to prolong his own stay at President's House. Even before her arrival he had considered taking drastic action to dodge the obstacles that stood in his way, but his generals (and the US Embassy) seemed unconvinced. The bombing of Benazir's cavalcade reopened the debate. Pakistan, if not exactly the erupting volcano portrayed in the Western media, was being shaken by all sorts of explosions. The legal profession, up in arms at Musharraf's recent dismissal of the chief justice, had won a temporary victory, resulting in a fiercely independent Supreme Court. The independent TV networks continued to broadcast reports that challenged official propaganda. Investigative journalism is never popular with governments and the general often contrasted the deference with which he was treated by the US networks and BBC television with the 'unruly' questioning inflicted on him by local journalists: it 'misled the people'. He had become obsessed with the media coverage of the lawyers' revolt. A decline in his popularity increased the paranoia. His advisers were people he had promoted. Generals who had expressed divergent opinions in 'frank and informal get-togethers' had been retired. His political allies were worried that their opportunities to enrich themselves even further would be curtailed if they had to share power with Benazir. What if the Supreme Court were now to declare his re-election by a dying and unrepresentative assembly illegal? To ward off disaster, the ISI had been preparing blackmail flicks: agents secretly filmed some of the Supreme Court judges in flagrante. But so unpopular had Musharraf become that even the sight of judicial venerables in bed might not have done the trick. It might even have increased their support. (In 1968, when a right-wing, pro-military rag in Lahore published an attack on me, it revealed that I 'had attended sex orgies in a French country house organised by [my] friend, the Jew Cohn-Bendit. All the fifty women in the swimming-pool were Jewish.' Alas, this was totally false, but my parents were amazed at the number of people who congratulated them on my virility.) Musharraf decided that blackmail wasn't worth the risk. Only firm action could 'restore order' - that is, save his skin. The usual treatment in these cases is a declaration of martial law. But what if the country is already being governed by the army chief of staff? The solution is simple. Treble the dose. Organise a coup within a coup. That is what Musharraf decided to do. Washington was informed a few weeks in advance, Downing Street somewhat later. Benazir's patrons in the West told her what was about to happen and she, foolishly for a political leader who has just returned to her country, evacuated to Dubai. On 3 November Musharraf, as chief of the army, suspended the 1973 constitution and imposed a state of emergency: all non-government TV channels were taken off the air, the mobile phone networks were jammed, paramilitary units surrounded the Supreme Court. The chief justice convened an emergency bench of judges, who - heroically - declared the new dispensation 'illegal and unconstitutional'. They were unceremoniously removed and put under house arrest. Pakistan's judges have usually been acquiescent. Those who in the past resisted military leaders were soon bullied out of it, so the decision of this chief justice took the country by surprise and won him great admiration. Global media coverage of Pakistan suggests a country of generals, corrupt politicians and bearded lunatics: the struggle to reinstate the chief justice had presented a different picture. Aitzaz Ahsan, a prominent member of the PPP, minister of the interior in Benazir's first government and currently president of the Bar Association, was arrested and placed in solitary confinement. Several thousand political and civil rights activists were picked up. Imran Khan, a fierce and incorruptible opponent of the regime, was arrested, charged with 'state terrorism' - for which the penalty is death or life imprisonment - and taken in handcuffs to a remote high-security prison. Musharraf, Khan argued, had begun yet another shabby chapter in Pakistan's history. Lawyers were arrested all over the country; many were physically attacked by policemen. Humiliate them was the order, and the police obliged. A lawyer, 'Omar', circulated an account of what happened: While I was standing talking to my colleagues, we saw the police go wild on the orders of a superior officer. In riot gear ... brandishing weapons and sticks, about a hundred policemen attacked us ... and seemed intensely happy at doing so. We all ran. Some of us who were not as nimble on their feet as others were caught by the police and beaten mercilessly. We were then locked in police vans used to transport convicted prisoners. Everyone was stunned at this show of brute force but it did not end. The police went on mayhem inside the court premises and court buildings ... Those of us who were arrested were taken to various police stations and put in lockups. At midnight, we were told that we were being shifted to jail. We could not get bail as our fundamental rights were suspended. Sixty lawyers were put into a police van ten feet by four feet wide and five feet in height. We were squashed like sardines. When the van reached the jail, we were told that we could not get [out] until orders of our detention were received by the jail authorities. Our older colleagues started to suffocate, some fainted, others started to panic because of claustrophobia. The police ignored our screams and refused to open the van doors. Finally, after three hours ... we were let out and taken to mosquito-infected barracks where the food given to us smelled like sewage water. Geo, the largest TV network, had long since located its broadcasting facilities in Dubai. It was a strange sensation watching the network in London when the screens were blank in Pakistan. On the very first day of the emergency I saw Hamid Mir, a journalist loathed by the general, reporting from Islamabad and asserting that the US Embassy had given the green light to the coup because it regarded the chief justice as a nuisance and wrongly believed him to be 'a Taliban sympathiser'. Certainly no US spokesperson or State Department adjunct in the Foreign Office criticised the dismissal of the eight Supreme Court judges or their arrest: that was the quid pro quo for Washington's insistence that Musharraf take off his uniform. If he was going to turn civilian he wanted all the other rules twisted in his favour. A newly appointed stooge Supreme Court would soon help him with the rule-bending. As would the authorities in Dubai, who suspended Geo's facilities. In the evening of that first day, and after several delays, a flustered General Musharraf, his hair badly dyed, appeared on TV, trying to look like the sort of leader who wants it understood that the political crisis is to be discussed with gravity and sangfroid. Instead, he came across as a dumbed down dictator fearful for his own political future. His performance as he broadcast to the nation, first in Urdu and then in English, was incoherent. The gist was simple: he had to act because the Supreme Court had 'so demoralised our state agencies that we can't fight the "war on terror"' and the TV networks had become 'totally irresponsible'. 'I have imposed emergency', he said halfway through his diatribe, adding, with a contemptuous gesture: 'You must have seen it on TV'. Was he being sarcastic, given that most channels had been shut down? Who knows? Mohammed Hanif, the sharp-witted head of the BBC's Urdu Service, which monitored the broadcast, confessed himself flummoxed when he wrote up what he heard. He had no doubt that the Urdu version of the speech was the general's own work. Hanif's deconstruction - he quoted the general in Urdu and in English - deserved a broadcast all of its own: Here are some random things he said. And trust me, these things were said quite randomly. Yes, he did say: 'Extremism bahut extreme ho gaya hai [extremism has become too extreme] ... Nobody is scared of us anymore ... Islamabad is full of extremists ... There is a government within government ... Officials are being asked to the courts ... Officials are being insulted by the judiciary.' At one point he appeared wistful when reminiscing about his first three years in power: 'I had total control'. You were almost tempted to ask: 'What happened then, uncle?' But obviously, uncle didn't need any prompting. He launched into his routine about three stages of democracy. He claimed he was about to launch the third and final phase of democracy (the way he said it, he managed to make it sound like the Final Solution). And just when you thought he was about to make his point, he took an abrupt turn and plunged into a deep pool of self-pity. This involved a long-winded anecdote about how the Supreme Court judges would rather attend a colleague's daughter's wedding than just get it over with and decide that he is a constitutional president ... I have heard some dictators' speeches in my life, but nobody has gone so far as to mention someone's daughter's wedding as a reason for imposing martial law on the country. When for the last few minutes of his speech he addressed his audience in the West in English, I suddenly felt a deep sense of humiliation. This part of his speech was scripted. Sentences began and ended. I felt humiliated that my president not only thinks that we are not evolved enough for things like democracy and human rights, but that we can't even handle proper syntax and grammar. The English-language version put the emphasis on the 'war on terror': Napoleon and Abraham Lincoln, he said, would have done what he did to preserve the 'integrity of their country' - the mention of Lincoln was obviously intended for the US market. In Pakistan's military academies the usual soldier-heroes are Napoleon, De Gaulle and Atatürk. What did Benazir, now outmanoeuvred, make of the speech as she watched it on TV in her Dubai sanctuary? Her first response was to say she was shocked, which was slightly disingenuous. Even if she had not been told in advance that an emergency would be declared, it was hardly a secret - for one thing, Condoleezza Rice had made a token public appeal to Musharraf not to take this course. Yet for more than 24 hours she was unable to give a clear response. At one point she even criticised the chief justice for being too provocative. Agitated phone calls from Pakistan persuaded her to return to Karachi. To put her in her place, the authorities kept her plane waiting on the tarmac. When she finally reached the VIP lounge, her PPP colleagues told her that unless she denounced the emergency there would be a split in the party. Outsmarted and abandoned by Musharraf, she couldn't take the risk of losing key figures in her party. She denounced the emergency and its perpetrator, established contact with the beleaguered opposition, and, as if putting on a new lipstick, declared that she would lead the struggle to get rid of the dictator. She now tried to call on the chief justice to express her sympathy but wasn't allowed near his residence. She could have followed the example of her imprisoned colleague Aitzaz Ahsan, but she was envious of him: he had become far too popular in Pakistan. He'd even had the nerve to go to Washington, where he was politely received by society and inspected as a possible substitute should things go badly wrong. Not a single message had flowed from her Blackberry to congratulate him on his victories in the struggle to reinstate the chief justice. Ahsan had advised her against any deal with Musharraf. When generals are against the wall, he is reported to have told her, they resort to desperate and irrational measures. Others who offered similar advice in gentler language were also batted away. She was the PPP's 'chairperson-for-life' and brooked no dissent. The fact that Ahsan was proved right irritated her even more. Any notion of political morality had long ago been dumped. The very idea of a party with a consistent set of beliefs was regarded as ridiculous and outdated. Ahsan was now safe in prison, far from the madding hordes of Western journalists whom she received in style during the few days she spent under house arrest and afterwards. She made a few polite noises about his imprisonment, but nothing more. The go-between from Washington arrived at very short notice. Negroponte spent some time with Musharraf and spoke to Benazir, still insisting that they make up and go through with the deal. She immediately toned down her criticisms, but the general was scathing and said in public that there was no way she could win the elections scheduled for January. No doubt the ISI are going to rig them in style. Had she remained loyal to him she might have lost public support, but he would have made sure she had a substantial presence in the new parliament. Now everything is up for grabs again. The opinion polls show that her old rival, Nawaz Sharif, is well ahead of her. Musharraf's hasty pilgrimage to Mecca was probably an attempt to secure Saudi mediation in case he has to cut a deal with the Sharif brothers - who have been living in exile in Saudi Arabia - and sideline her completely. Both sides deny that a deal was done, but Sharif returned to Pakistan with Saudi blessings and an armour-plated Cadillac as a special gift from the king. Little doubt that Riyadh would rather him than Benazir. With the country still under a state of emergency and the largest media network refusing to sign the oath of allegiance that would allow them back on air, the polls scheduled for January can only be a general's election. It's hardly a secret that the ISI and the civilian bureaucracy will decide who wins and where, and some of the opposition parties are, wisely, considering a boycott. Nawaz Sharif told the press that in the course of a long telephone call he had failed to persuade Benazir to join it and thereby render the process null and void from the start. But now that he is back in the country it's unclear whether he will still go ahead with the boycott or try and negotiate a certain number of seats with the Chaudhrys of Gujrat, who had betrayed him by setting up a faction of the Pakistan Muslim League, the PML-Q, to support Musharraf. Perhaps a shared bout of amnesia will bring them together again. What will Benazir do now? Washington's leverage in Islamabad is limited, which is why they wanted her to be involved in the first place. 'It's always better', the US ambassador half-joked at a reception, 'to have two phone numbers in a capital'. That may be so, but they cannot guarantee her the prime ministership or even a fair election. In his death-cell, her father mulled over similar problems and came to slightly different conclusions. If I Am Assassinated, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's last will and testament, was written in semi-Gramsci mode, but the meaning wasn't lost on his colleagues: I entirely agree that the people of Pakistan will not tolerate foreign hegemony. On the basis of the self-same logic, the people of Pakistan would never agree to an internal hegemony. The two hegemonies complement each other. If our people meekly submit to internal hegemony, a priori, they will have to submit to external hegemony. This is so because the strength and power of external hegemony is far greater than that of internal hegemony. If the people are too terrified to resist the weaker force, it is not possible for them to resist the stronger force. The acceptance of or acquiescence in internal hegemony means submission to external hegemony. After he was hanged in April 1979, the text acquired a semi-sacred status among his supporters. But, when in power, Bhutto père had failed to develop any counter-hegemonic strategy or institutions, other than the 1973 constitution drafted by the veteran civil rights lawyer Mahmud Ali Kasuri (whose son Khurshid was until recently the foreign minister). A personality-driven, autocratic style of governance had neutered the spirit of the party, encouraged careerists and finally paved the way for his enemies. He was the victim of a grave injustice; his death removed all the warts and transformed him into a martyr. More than half the country, mainly the poor, mourned his passing. The tragedy led to the PPP being treated as a family heirloom, which was unhealthy for both party and country. It provided the Bhuttos with a vote-bank and large reserves. But the experience of her father's trial and death radicalised and politicised his daughter. She would have preferred, she told me at the time, to be a diplomat. Her two brothers, Murtaza and Shahnawaz, were in London, having been forbidden to return home by their imprisoned father. The burden of trying to save her father's life fell on Benazir and her mother, Nusrat, and the courage they exhibited won them the silent respect of a frightened majority. They refused to cave in to General Zia's military dictatorship, which apart from anything else was invoking Islam to claw back rights won by women in previous decades. Benazir and Nusrat Bhutto were arrested and released several times. Their health began to suffer. Nusrat was allowed to leave the country to seek medical advice in 1982. Benazir was released a little more than a year later thanks, in part, to US pressure orchestrated by her old Harvard friend Peter Galbraith. She later described the period in her memoir, Daughter of the East (1988); it included photo-captions such as: 'Shortly after President Reagan praised the regime for making "great strides towards democracy", Zia's henchmen gunned down peaceful demonstrators marking Pakistan Independence Day. The police were just as brutal to those protesting at the attack on my jeep in January 1987.' Her tiny Barbican flat in London became the centre of opposition to the dictatorship, and it was here that we often discussed a campaign to take on the generals. Benazir had built up her position by steadfastly and peacefully resisting the military and replying to every slander with a cutting retort. Her brothers had been operating on a different level. They set up an armed group, al-Zulfiqar, whose declared aim was to harass and weaken the regime by targeting 'traitors who had collaborated with Zia'. The principal volunteers were recruited inside Pakistan and in 1980 they were provided with a base in Afghanistan, where the pro-Moscow Communists had taken power three years before. It is a sad story with a fair share of factionalism, show-trials, petty rivalries, fantasies of every sort and death for the group's less fortunate members. In March 1981 Murtaza and Shahnawaz Bhutto were placed on the FIA's most wanted list. They had hijacked a Pakistan International airliner soon after it left Karachi (a power cut had paralysed the X-ray machines, enabling the hijackers to take their weapons on board); it was diverted to Kabul. Here Murtaza took over and demanded the release of political prisoners. A young military officer on board the flight was murdered. The plane refuelled and went on to Damascus, where the Syrian spymaster General Kholi took charge and ensured there were no more deaths. The fact that there were American passengers on the plane was a major consideration for the generals and, for that reason alone, the prisoners in Pakistan were released and flown to Tripoli. This was seen as a victory and welcomed as such by the PPP in Pakistan. For the first time the group began to be taken seriously. A key target inside the country was Maulvi Mushtaq Hussain, the chief justice of the High Court in Lahore, who, in 1978, had sentenced Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to death, and whose behaviour in court had shocked even those who were hostile to the PPP. (Among other charges, he had accused Bhutto of 'pretending to be a Muslim' - his mother was a Hindu convert.) Mushtaq was in a friend's car being driven to his home in Lahore's Model Town area when al-Zulfiqar gunmen opened fire. The judge survived, but his friend and the driver died. The friend was one of the Chaudhrys of Gujrat: Chaudhry Zahoor Elahi, a dodgy businessman who had ostentatiously asked General Zia to make him a present of the 'sacred pen' with which he had signed Bhutto's death warrant. The pen became a family heirloom. Zahoor Elahi may not have been the target but al-Zulfiqar, embarrassed at missing the judge, claimed he was also on their list, which may have been true. It is the next generation of Chaudhrys that currently provides Musharraf with civilian ballast: Zahoor Elahi's son Shujaat organised the split with Nawaz Sharif and created the splinter PML-Q to ease the growing pains of the new regime. He still fixes deals and wanted an emergency imposed much earlier to circumvent the deal with Benazir. He will now mastermind the general's election campaign. His cousin Pervez Elahi is chief minister of the Punjab; his son, in turn, is busy continuing the family tradition by evicting tenants and buying up all the available land on the edge of Lahore. It has not been divulged which member of the family guards the sacred pen. The hijacking meanwhile had annoyed Moscow, and the regime in Afghanistan asked the Bhutto brothers to find another refuge. While in Kabul, they had married two Afghan sisters, Fauzia and Rehana Fasihudin, daughters of a senior official at the Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Together with their wives they now left the country and after a sojourn in Syria and possibly Libya ended up in Europe. The reunion with their sister took place on the French Riviera in 1985, a setting better suited to the lifestyles of all three siblings. The young men feared General Zia's agents. Each had a young daughter. Shahnawaz lived in an apartment in Cannes. He had been in charge of the 'military apparatus' and life in Kabul had exacted a heavier toll on him. He was edgy and nervous. Relations with his wife were stormy and he told his sister that he was preparing to divorce her. 'There's never been a divorce in the family. Your marriage wasn't even an arranged one ... You chose to marry Rehana. You must live with it', was Benazir's revealing reply, according to her memoir. And then Shahnawaz was found dead in his apartment. His wife claimed he had taken poison, but according to Benazir nobody in the family believed her story; there had been violence in the room and his papers had been searched. Rehana looked immaculate, which disturbed the family. She was imprisoned for three months under the 'Good Samaritan' law for not having gone to the assistance of a dying person. After her release she settled in the United States. 'Had the CIA killed him as a friendly gesture towards their favourite dictator?' Benazir speculated. She raised other questions too: had the sisters become ISI agents? The truth remains hidden. Not long afterwards Murtaza divorced Fauzia, but kept custody of their three-year-old daughter, Fatima, and moved to Damascus. Here he had plenty of time for reflection and told friends that too many mistakes had been made. In 1986 he met Ghinwa Itaoui, a young teacher who had fled Lebanon after the Israeli invasion of 1982. She calmed him down and took charge of Fatima's education. They were married in 1989 and a son, Zulfiqar, was born the following year. Benazir returned to Pakistan in 1986 and was greeted by large crowds who came out to show their affection for her and to demonstrate their anger with the regime. She campaigned all over the country, but felt increasingly that for some of the more religious-minded a young unmarried woman was not acceptable as a leader. How could she visit Saudi Arabia without a husband? An offer of marriage from the Zardari family was accepted and she married Asif in 1987. She had worried that any husband would find it difficult to deal with the periods of separation her nomadic political life would entail, but Zardari was perfectly capable of occupying himself. A year later General Zia's plane blew up in midair. In the elections that followed the PPP won the largest number of seats. Benazir became prime minister, but was hemmed in by the army on one side and the president, the army's favourite bureaucrat, Ghulam Ishaq Khan, on the other. She told me at the time that she felt powerless. They wouldn't let her do anything. 'Tell the people', was my advice. Tell them why you can't deliver on your promises to provide free education, proper sanitation, clean water and health services to improve the high infant mortality rate. She didn't tell them; in fact she did nothing at all apart from provide employment to some of her supporters. Being in power, it seemed, was satisfaction enough. She went on state visits: met and liked Mrs Thatcher and later, with her new husband in tow, was received politely by the Saudi king. In the meantime there were other plots afoot - the opposition was literally buying off some of her MPs - and in August 1990 her government was removed by presidential decree and Zia's protégés, the Sharif brothers, were back in power. By the time she was re-elected in 1993, she had abandoned all idea of reform, but that she was in a hurry to do something became clear when she appointed her husband minister for investment, making him responsible for all investment offers from home and abroad. It is widely alleged that the couple accumulated $1.5 billion. The high command of the Pakistan People's Party now became a machine for making money, but without any trickle-down mechanism. This period marked the complete degeneration of the party. All that shame-faced party members could say, when I asked, was that 'everybody does it all over the world', thus accepting that the cash nexus was now all that mattered. In foreign policy her legacy was mixed. She refused to sanction an anti-Indian military adventure in Kargil on the Himalayan slopes, but to make up for it, as I wrote in the LRB (15 April 1999), her government backed the Taliban takeover in Kabul - which makes it doubly ironic that Washington and London should be promoting her as a champion of democracy. Murtaza Bhutto had contested the elections from abroad and won a seat in the Sind provincial legislature. He returned home and expressed his unhappiness with his sister's agenda. Family gatherings became tense. Murtaza had his weaknesses, but he wasn't corrupt and he argued in favour of the old party's radical manifesto. He made no secret of the fact that he regarded Zardari as an interloper whose only interest was money. Nusrat Bhutto suggested that Murtaza be made the chief minister of Sind: Benazir's response was to remove her mother as chairperson of the PPP. Any sympathy Murtaza may have felt for his sister turned to loathing. He no longer felt obliged to control his tongue and at every possible opportunity lambasted Zardari and the corrupt regime over which his sister presided. It was difficult to fault him on the facts. The incumbent chief minister of Sind was Abdullah Shah, one of Zardari's creatures. He began to harass Murtaza's supporters. Murtaza decided to confront the organ-grinder himself. He rang Zardari and invited him round for an informal chat sans bodyguards to try and settle the problems within the family. Zardari agreed. As the two men were pacing the garden, Murtaza's retainers appeared and grabbed Zardari. Someone brought out a cut-throat razor and some warm water and Murtaza shaved off half of Zardari's moustache to the delight of the retainers, then told him to get lost. A fuming Zardari, who had probably feared much worse, was compelled to shave off the other half at home. The media, bemused, were informed that the new clean-shaven consort had accepted intelligence advice that the moustache made him too recognisable a target. In which case why did he allow it to sprout again immediately afterwards? Some months later, in September 1996, as Murtaza and his entourage were returning home from a political meeting, they were ambushed, just outside their house, by some seventy armed policemen accompanied by four senior officers. A number of snipers were positioned in surrounding trees. The street lights had been switched off. Murtaza clearly understood what was happening and got out of his car with his hands raised; his bodyguards were instructed not to open fire. The police opened fire instead and seven men were killed, Murtaza among them. The fatal bullet had been fired at close range. The trap had been carefully laid, but as is the way in Pakistan, the crudeness of the operation - false entries in police logbooks, lost evidence, witnesses arrested and intimidated, the provincial PPP governor (regarded as untrustworthy) dispatched to a non-event in Egypt, a policeman killed who they feared might talk - made it obvious that the decision to execute the prime minister's brother had been taken at a very high level. While the ambush was being prepared, the police had sealed off Murtaza's house (from which his father had been lifted by Zia's commandos in 1978). The family inside felt something was wrong. At this point, a remarkably composed Fatima Bhutto, aged 14, decided to ring her aunt at Prime Minister's House. The conversation that followed remains imprinted on her memory and a few years ago she gave me an account of it. It was Zardari who took her call: Fatima: I wish to speak to my aunt, please. Zardari: It's not possible. Fatima: Why? [At this point, Fatima says she heard loud wails and what sounded like fake crying.] Zardari: She's hysterical, can't you hear? Fatima: Why? Zardari: Don't you know? Your father's been shot. Fatima and Ghinwa found out where Murtaza had been taken and rushed out of the house. There was no sign on the street outside that anything had happened: the scene of the killing had been wiped clean of all evidence. There were no traces of blood and no signs of any disturbance. They drove straight to the hospital but it was too late; Murtaza was already dead. Later they learned that he had been left bleeding on the ground for almost an hour before being taken to a hospital where there were no emergency facilities of any kind. When Benazir arrived to attend her brother's funeral in Larkana, angry crowds stoned her limo. She had to retreat. In another unusual display of emotion, local people encouraged Murtaza's widow to attend the actual burial ceremony in defiance of Islamic tradition. According to Fatima, one of Benazir's hangers-on instigated legal proceedings against Ghinwa in a religious court for breaching Islamic law. Nothing was sacred. Anyone who witnessed Murtaza's murder was arrested; one witness died in prison. When Fatima rang Benazir to ask why witnesses were being arrested and not the killers she was told: 'Look, you're very young. You don't understand things.' Perhaps it was for this reason that the kind aunt decided to encourage Fatima's blood-mother, Fauzia, whom she had previously denounced as a murderer in the pay of General Zia, to come to Pakistan and claim custody of Fatima. No mystery as to who paid her fare from California. Fatima and Ghinwa Bhutto resisted and the attempt failed. Benazir then tried a softer approach and insisted that Fatima accompany her to New York, where she was going to address the UN Assembly. Ghinwa Bhutto approached friends in Damascus and had her two children flown out of the country. Fatima later discovered that Fauzia had been seen hobnobbing with Benazir in New York. In November 1996 Benazir was once again removed from power, this time by her own president, Farooq Leghari, a PPP stalwart. He cited corruption, but what had also angered him was the ISI's crude attempt at blackmail - the intelligence agencies had photographed Leghari's daughter meeting a boyfriend and threatened to go public. The week Benazir fell, the chief minister of Sind, Abdullah Shah, hopped on a motorboat and fled Karachi for the Gulf and thence the US. A judicial tribunal had been appointed by Benazir's government to inquire into the circumstances leading to Murtaza's death. Headed by a Supreme Court judge, it took detailed evidence from all parties. Murtaza's lawyers accused Zardari, Abdullah Shah and two senior police officials of conspiracy to murder. Benazir (now out of power) accepted that there had been a conspiracy, but suggested that 'the hidden hand responsible for this was President Farooq Ahmad Leghari': the intention, she said, was to 'kill a Bhutto to get rid of a Bhutto'. Nobody took this seriously. Given all that had happened, it was an incredible suggestion. The tribunal said there was no legally acceptable evidence to link Zardari to the incident, but accepted that 'this was a case of extra-judicial killings by the police' and concluded that such an incident could not have taken place without approval from the highest quarters. Nothing happened. Eleven years later, Fatima Bhutto publicly accused Zardari; she also claimed that many of those involved that day appear to have been rewarded for their actions. In an interview on an independent TV station just before the emergency was imposed, Benazir was asked to explain how it happened that her brother had bled to death outside his home while she was prime minister. She walked out of the studio. A sharp op-ed piece by Fatima in the LA Times on 14 November elicited the following response: 'My niece is angry with me'. Well, yes. Musharraf may have withdrawn the corruption charges, but three other cases are proceeding in Switzerland, Spain and Britain. In July 2003, after an investigation lasting several years, Daniel Devaud, a Geneva magistrate, convicted Mr and Mrs Asif Ali Zardari, in absentia, of money laundering. They had accepted $15 million in bribes from two Swiss companies, SGS and Cotecna. The couple were sentenced to six months in prison and ordered to return $11.9 million to the government of Pakistan. 'I certainly don't have any doubts about the judgments I handed down', Devaud told the BBC. Benazir appealed, thus forcing a new investigation. On 19 September 2005 she appeared in a Geneva court and tried to detach herself from the rest of the family: she hadn't been involved, she said: it was a matter for her husband and her mother (afflicted with Alzheimer's disease). She knew nothing of the accounts. And what of the agreement her agent Jens Schlegelmilch had signed according to which, in case of her and Zardari's death, the assets of Bomer Finance Company would be divvied out equally between the Zardari and Bhutto families? She knew nothing of that either. And the GBP 120,000 diamond necklace in the bank vault paid for by Zardari? It was intended for her, but she had rejected the gift as 'inappropriate'. The case continues. Last month Musharraf told Owen Bennett-Jones of the BBC World Service that his government would not interfere with the proceedings: 'That's up to the Swiss government. Depends on them. It's a case in their courts.' In Britain the legal shenanigans concern the $3.4 million Rockwood estate in Surrey, bought by offshore companies on behalf of Zardari in 1995 and refurbished to his exacting tastes. Zardari denied owning the estate. Then when the court was about to instruct the liquidators to sell it and return the proceeds to the Pakistan government, Zardari came forward and accepted ownership. Last year, Lord Justice Collins ruled that, while he was not making any 'findings of fact', there was a 'reasonable prospect' that the Pakistan government might be able to establish that Rockwood had been bought and furnished with 'the fruits of corruption'. A close friend of Benazir told me that she was genuinely not involved in this one, since Zardari wasn't thinking of spending much time there with her. Daniel Markey, formerly of the State Department and currently senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, explained why Washington had pushed the marriage of convenience: 'A progressive, reform-minded, more cosmopolitan party in government would help the US'. As their finances reveal, the Zardaris are certainly cosmopolitan. What then is at stake in Pakistan as far as Washington is concerned? 'The concern I have', Robert Gates, the US secretary for defense, recently said, 'is that the longer the internal problems continue, the more distracted the Pakistani army and security services will be in terms of the internal situation rather than focusing on the terrorist threat in the frontier area'. But one reason for the internal crisis is Washington's over-reliance on Musharraf and the Pakistani military. It is Washington's support and funding that have given him the confidence to operate as he pleases. But the thoughtless Western military occupation of Afghanistan is obviously crucial, since the instability in Kabul seeps into Peshawar and the tribal areas between the two countries. The state of emergency targeted the judiciary, opposition politicians and the independent media. All three groups were, in different ways, challenging the official line on Afghanistan and the 'war on terror', the disappearance of political prisoners and the widespread use of torture in Pakistani prisons. The issues were being debated on television in a much more open fashion than happens anywhere in the West, where a blanket consensus on Afghanistan drowns all dissent. Musharraf argued that civil society was hampering the 'war on terror'. Hence the emergency. It's nonsense, of course. It's the war in the frontier regions that is creating dissent inside the army. Many do not want to fight. Hence the surrender of dozens of soldiers to Taliban guerrillas. This is the reason many junior officers are taking early retirement. Western pundits blather on about the jihadi finger on the nuclear trigger. This is pure fantasy, reminiscent of a similar campaign almost three decades ago, when the threat wasn't the jihadis who were fighting alongside the West in Afghanistan, but nationalist military radicals. The cover story of Time magazine for 15 June 1979 dealt with Pakistan; a senior Western diplomat was quoted as saying that the big danger was 'that there is another Gaddafi down there, some radical major or colonel in the Pakistani army. We could wake up and find him in Zia's place one morning and, believe me, Pakistan wouldn't be the only place that would be destabilised.' The Pakistan army is half a million strong. Its tentacles are everywhere: land, industry, public utilities and so on. It would require a cataclysmic upheaval (a US invasion and occupation, for example) for this army to feel threatened by a jihadi uprising. Two considerations unite senior officers: the unity of the organisation and keeping politicians at bay. One reason is the fear that they might lose the comforts and privileges they have acquired after decades of rule; but they also have the deep aversion to democracy that is the hallmark of most armies. Unused to accountability within their own ranks, it's difficult for them to accept it in society at large. As southern Afghanistan collapses into chaos, and as corruption and massive inflation takes hold, the Taliban is gaining more and more recruits. The generals who convinced Benazir that control of Kabul via the Taliban would give them 'strategic depth' may have retired, but their successors know that the Afghans will not tolerate a long-term Western occupation. They hope for the return of a whitewashed Taliban. Instead of encouraging a regional solution that includes India, Iran and Russia, the US would prefer to see the Pakistan army as its permanent cop in Kabul. It won't work. In Pakistan itself the long night continues as the cycle restarts: military leadership promising reforms degenerates into tyranny, politicians promising social support to the people degenerate into oligarchs. Given that a better functioning neighbour is unlikely to intervene, Pakistan will oscillate between these two forms of rule for the foreseeable future. The people who feel they have tried everything and failed will return to a state of semi-sleep, unless something unpredictable rouses them again. This is always possible. Postscript (December 31 2007) Six hours before she was executed, Mary, Queen of Scots wrote to her brother-in-law, Henry III of France: '... As for my son, I commend him to you in so far as he deserves, for I cannot answer for him'. The year was 1587. On 30 December 2007, a conclave of feudal potentates gathered in the home of the slain Benazir Bhutto to hear her last will and testament being read out and its contents subsequently announced to the world media. Where Mary was tentative, her modern-day equivalent left no room for doubt. She could certainly answer for her son. A triumvirate consisting of her husband, Asif Zardari (one of the most venal and discredited politicians in the country and still facing corruption charges in three European courts) and two ciphers will run the party till Benazir’s nineteen-year-old son, Bilawal, comes of age. He will then become chairperson-for-life and, no doubt, pass it on to his children. The fact that this is now official does not make it any less grotesque. The Pakistan People’s Party is being treated as a family heirloom, a property to be disposed of at the will of its leader. Nothing more, nothing less. Poor Pakistan. Poor People’s Party supporters. Both deserve better than this disgusting, medieval charade. Benazir’s last decision was in the same autocratic mode as its predecessors, an approach that would cost her - tragically - her own life. Had she heeded the advice of some party leaders and not agreed to the Washington-brokered deal with Pervez Musharraf or, even later, decided to boycott his parliamentary election she might still have been alive. Her last gift to the country does not augur well for its future. _____ Tariq Ali's The Duel: Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power will be published next year. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n24/ali_01_.html http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From shimogamo@attglobal.net Thu Jan 03 04:39:04 2008 Received: from kcout01.prserv.net ([12.154.55.31]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAOPg-0001hB-5l for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 04:39:04 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.13] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout01) with ESMTP id <20080103113952201002ftnce> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Thu, 3 Jan 2008 11:39:54 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <477CC97F.2080908@attglobal.net> Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 20:39:43 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [A-List] Bhutto X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 11:39:04 -0000 A Tragedy Born of Despotism and Anarchy by Tariq Ali The Guardian, Comment Is Free (December 28 2007) Alternet (December 29 2007) Even those of us sharply critical of Benazir Bhutto's behavior and policies - both while she was in office and more recently - are stunned and angered by her death. Indignation and fear stalk the country once again. An odd coexistence of military despotism and anarchy created the conditions leading to her assassination in Rawalpindi yesterday. In the past, military rule was designed to preserve order - and did so for a few years. No longer. Today it creates disorder and promotes lawlessness. How else can one explain the sacking of the chief justice and eight other judges of the country's supreme court for attempting to hold the government's intelligence agencies and the police accountable to courts of law? Their replacements lack the backbone to do anything, let alone conduct a proper inquest into the misdeeds of the agencies to uncover the truth behind the carefully organized killing of a major political leader. How can Pakistan today be anything but a conflagration of despair? It is assumed that the killers were jihadi fanatics. This may well be true, but were they acting on their own? Benazir, according to those close to her, had been tempted to boycott the fake elections, but she lacked the political courage to defy Washington. She had plenty of physical courage, and refused to be cowed by threats from local opponents. She had been addressing an election rally in Liaquat Bagh. This is a popular space named after the country's first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, who was killed by an assassin in 1953. The killer, Said Akbar, was immediately shot dead on the orders of a police officer involved in the plot. Not far from here, there once stood a colonial structure where nationalists were imprisoned. This was Rawalpindi jail. It was here that Benazir's father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was hanged in April 1979. The military tyrant responsible for his judicial murder made sure the site of the tragedy was destroyed as well. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's death poisoned relations between his Pakistan People's party and the army. Party activists, particularly in the province of Sind, were brutally tortured, humiliated and, sometimes, disappeared or killed. Pakistan's turbulent history, a result of continuous military rule and unpopular global alliances, confronts the ruling elite now with serious choices. They appear to have no positive aims. The overwhelming majority of the country disapproves of the government's foreign policy. They are angered by its lack of a serious domestic policy except for further enriching a callous and greedy elite that includes a swollen, parasitic military. Now they watch helplessly as politicians are shot dead in front of them. Benazir had survived the bomb blast yesterday but was felled by bullets fired at her car. The assassins, mindful of their failure in Karachi a month ago, had taken out a double insurance this time. They wanted her dead. It is impossible for even a rigged election to take place now. It will have to be postponed, and the military high command is no doubt contemplating another dose of army rule if the situation gets worse, which could easily happen. What has happened is a multilayered tragedy. It's a tragedy for a country on a road to more disasters. Torrents and foaming cataracts lie ahead. And it is a personal tragedy. The house of Bhutto has lost another member. Father, two sons and now a daughter have all died unnatural deaths. I first met Benazir at her father's house in Karachi when she was a fun-loving teenager, and later at Oxford. She was not a natural politician and had always wanted to be a diplomat, but history and personal tragedy pushed in the other direction. Her father's death transformed her. She had become a new person, determined to take on the military dictator of that time. She had moved to a tiny flat in London, where we would endlessly discuss the future of the country. She would agree that land reforms, mass education programs, a health service and an independent foreign policy were positive constructive aims and crucial if the country was to be saved from the vultures in and out of uniform. Her constituency was the poor, and she was proud of the fact. She changed again after becoming prime minister. In the early days, we would argue and in response to my numerous complaints - all she would say was that the world had changed. She couldn't be on the "wrong side" of history. And so, like many others, she made her peace with Washington. It was this that finally led to the deal with Musharraf and her return home after more than a decade in exile. On a number of occasions she told me that she did not fear death. It was one of the dangers of playing politics in Pakistan. It is difficult to imagine any good coming out of this tragedy, but there is one possibility. Pakistan desperately needs a political party that can speak for the social needs of a bulk of the people. The People's party founded by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was built by the activists of the only popular mass movement the country has known: students, peasants and workers who fought for three months in 1968-69 to topple the country's first military dictator. They saw it as their party, and that feeling persists in some parts of the country to this day, despite everything. Benazir's horrific death should give her colleagues pause for reflection. To be dependent on a person or a family may be necessary at certain times, but it is a structural weakness, not a strength for a political organization. The People's party needs to be refounded as a modern and democratic organization, open to honest debate and discussion, defending social and human rights, uniting the many disparate groups and individuals in Pakistan desperate for any halfway decent alternative, and coming forward with concrete proposals to stabilize occupied and war-torn Afghanistan. This can and should be done. The Bhutto family should not be asked for any more sacrifices. _____ Tariq Ali is a political commentator and editor of the New Left Review. © 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/tariq_ali/index.html http://www.alternet.org/story/71860/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From critical.montages@gmail.com Thu Jan 03 09:43:18 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.158]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JATA6-0002dB-6s for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:43:18 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so3018319fgb.45 for ; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:44:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.28.5 with SMTP id b5mr7054765fgb.76.1199378654884; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:44:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 08:44:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 11:44:14 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: A-List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: Subject: [A-List] Russia Goes Its Own Way + Khamenei: Iran Sees "No Benefit" in Resuming Ties with the United States X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 16:43:19 -0000 Russia, among other key factors, has strengthened Iran's hands immeasurably, which is reflected in Khamenei's new statements. -- Yoshie Russia goes its own way By Ray Takeyh and Nikolas Gvosdev Tuesday, January 1, 2008 If the deadlock in the UN Security Council over the final status of Kosovo signals any future trends, it is that Russia has finally dispensed with any lingering beliefs that it should work with the United States to set the global agenda. One of the legacies that Vladimir Putin bequeaths to his successor is Russia's changed position in the world. Moscow no longer has any interest in making minor modifications to a policy largely predetermined in Washington. And the principal beneficiary of this changed perception may be Iran. Because the revelations in December of the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate have all but eliminated the military option in dealing with Iran's nuclear intransigence, the Bush administration has refocused on exerting diplomatic and economic pressure on the recalcitrant theocracy. It is hoped that an escalating series of Security Council resolutions would press Iran toward the suspension of the critical enrichment component of its nuclear program. The reliance on the Security Council as the principal platform for dealing with Iran is surprisingly acceptable to both Moscow and Tehran. Despite Washington's professions that the Security Council's rebukes reflect international solidarity against Tehran, the Islamic Republic has largely adjusted to the UN process. At first, Iran was concerned about the Iraq precedent, whereby the U.S. employed the UN to isolate and sanction Iraq for much of the 1990s, and then used Baghdad's lack of compliance as the basis of its military intervention. Iran tried hard to prevent the transfer of its nuclear file to the UN, and even suspended its program from 2003 to 2005 in order to forestall that development. Moreover, Russia's acquiescence to America's requests did create tension in its relations with Iran, leading some to conclude that Putin was prepared to jeopardize the strategic and economic ties between the two countries. Russia does share one principal U.S. concern: Moscow has no desire to see Iran possess nuclear weapons. The problem is that Russia has a far narrower definition of the term than the U.S., which sees Iran's entire nuclear infrastructure as constituting a weapons program. So Russia has no difficulty going along with UN measures designed to target a specific Iranian program to produce operational warheads, one which the National Intelligence Estimate says has been inactive since 2003. At the same time, Russia is moving to establish itself as a Middle East power independent of the West, and thus, can ill-afford to antagonize Iran. Tehran has found value in Moscow's clever strategy of endorsing watered-down resolutions while deepening its relations with Iran. On the one hand, Russian diplomats are in active negotiations with their American counterparts for a third UN resolution against Iran. Yet, Moscow is willing to provide fuel for Iran's light-water reactor in Bushehr. The incongruity of providing sensitive nuclear resources to a country that is actively sanctioned for its nuclear malfeasance is not lost on Iran's clerical elite. A similar pattern is continuing in other areas, whereby Russia's complaints about Iran's nuclear activities has not deter it from signing additional commercial contracts with Iran. There are strong economic motives guiding the Russian designs, as Moscow and Tehran together control roughly 20 percent of world's oil reserves and close to half of the world's gas reserves. The two powers could do much to dilute their respective leverage over the global energy markets. Moreover, in addition to atomic power projects, Iran's oil and gas sector offer many opportunities to Russian firms looking for new investments. Keeping Iranian energy from becoming attractive for European consumers, while financing projects that will tie ever-hungrier South Asia and China into even greater dependence on Iran benefits a number of Russian objectives. However, reducing this relationship to economic impulses obscures the equally compelling strategic rationale for improved ties between Moscow and Tehran. Despite its unsavory reputation in the West, Iran has acted responsibly in dealing with Muslim republics and populations of Central Asia. The United States may view Iran as a revolutionary power bent on upending the regional order. But for Russia, Iran is largely a status quo state whose continued cooperation is critical for stability in the Middle East and the projection of Russian influence in that region. The strategic alignment between the two nations only reinforces the economic interests. The Bush administration, which has dedicated so much of its efforts to rebuilding ties with Europe, has utterly failed to bridge the gap with the Russian Federation. Having failed to stop the United States over Kosovo and Iraq, Moscow's stance on Iran demonstrates Russia's return as a major actor. For its part, Tehran has learned to love Russia's strategy of placating the United States with superficial gestures while enhancing its relations with Iran. In the coming months, there will be ample Russian and American pledges of cooperation against Iran's persistent nuclear violations. However, the strategic landscape has changed. And that does not bode well for America's attempt to rein in Iran. Ray Takeyh, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, is the author of "Hidden Iran: Paradox and Power in the Islamic Republic." Nikolas Gvosdev is editor of The National Interest. Khamenei: Wrong Time for Iran-US Ties Thursday January 3, 2008 3:01 PM By NASSER KARIMI Associated Press Writer TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Thursday he was willing to improve relations with the United States but that the moment was not right because it would make his country more vulnerable to U.S. espionage. Khamenei said restoring ties with the U.S. now would ``provide opportunity for security agents to come and go, as well as for espionage.'' ``It has no benefit for Iranian nation,'' state radio quoted him as saying at a student group meeting in the central province of Yazd. It would be an ``opportunity for U.S. infiltration, traffic of their intelligence agents and espionage of Iran.'' Iran last year claimed it uncovered spy rings organized by the U.S. and its Western allies and detained a four Iranian-Americans, who were later released. The arrests prompted the United States to warn its citizens against traveling to Iran, accusing authorities there of a ``disturbing pattern'' of harassment. The United States and Iran have had no diplomatic ties since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, when militants seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. The dispute over Iran's nuclear program and U.S. allegations of Iranian support for armed groups in Iraq have raised tensions. ``I would be the first one to support these relations,'' said Khamenei, who has final say in all state matters. ``But for the time being, it (restoring ties) is harmful and we should not pursue it.'' Washington has refused to hold talks with Iran over the issue of diplomatic ties until Tehran suspends uranium enrichment, a process that can be used to produce fuel for both nuclear energy and weapons. But the two countries have held three rounds of ambassador-level negotiations on security in Iraq, breaking the 27-year diplomatic freeze. Iran says its nuclear program is intended solely for energy production, and Khamenei reiterated Thursday that his country would continue to pursue it to generate some 20,000 megawatts of electricity in the next two decades. Washington's push for a third round of U.N. sanctions against Iran was undermined by the release of a new U.S. intelligence report in December, saying that Tehran suspended development of nuclear weapons development under international pressure in 2003. It was a dramatic turnaround from the previous U.S. stance that Iran restarted the program in 2005. Iran has no interest in US ties now: Khamenei 3 hours ago TEHRAN (AFP) =97 Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Thursday that Iran sees "no benefit" in resuming ties with the United States at the moment but does not rule out a resumption of relations in the future. In his most significant speech on foreign policy in several months, Khamenei also vowed that Iran would not halt sensitive work on its controversial nuclear programme as demanded by the West. "Cutting ties with the United States is one of our basic policies. We have never said that they will be cut for ever," Khamenei told students in a speech in the central city of Yazd. "The conditions of the US government are such now that it is harmful for us to resume relations," he said, describing the United States as a global "danger". "Despite some talkative people's claims, it has no benefit for the Iranian nation. "The day that relations with the United States are beneficial to the Iranian nation, I will be the first one to approve of that," he said. The position of Khamenei as Iran's undisputed number one, which he holds for life, takes him above the fray of day-to-day politics. Such statements on major issues like US relations are made only occasionally and are hugely significant. Tehran and Washington have had no diplomatic links since 1980 when the United States cut relations amid the siege of the US embassy in Tehran by Islamist students that was to last a total of 444 days. Exchanges since then have been marked by acrimony and suspicion, although the two sides held talks on Iraqi security last year in the highest level official contacts for almost three decades. The United States was a major ally of the imperial regime of the last shah of Iran Mohammad Reza Pahlavi -- who was deposed by the Islamic revolution in 1979 -- supplying vast quantities of military equipment. Khamenei said the current US hostility to Iran had not been provoked by firebrand statements by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other officials against Tehran's arch enemy, known here as the "Great Satan". "Its enmity is with the principles of the Iranian nation and it has been there since the beginning of the Islamic revolution," he said. "Resuming relations will create the possibility of US influence (in Iran) and the coming and going of US spies," he said. The massive compound in central Tehran that housed the US embassy is known locally as the "Den of Spies". The two sides remain at loggerheads over the Iranian nuclear programme, with the United States leading Western calls for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment, which Washington fears could be used to make nuclear weapons. "The nation, which is carrying out enrichment by relying on itself, will build the (nuclear) plants too. If the nation had not done enrichment, it would be behind by years," he said. Russia is building and supplying the fuel for Iran's first 1,000 megawatt nuclear power plant in the southern city of Bushehr but Khamenei reaffirmed his desire for Iran to construct and supply atomic power plants independently. "In the next 20 years, we should have at least 20,000 megawatts of nuclear electricity," added Khamenei. He angrily lashed out at moderates inside Iran who had cautiously suggested that the country should consider suspending enrichment to de-escalate the nuclear crisis. "Some people challenge the system and the government over this and, in line with the enemy, seek to create disappointment. The nation should be watchful of such infiltrations." Western powers have offered Iran full negotiations including with the United States on the nuclear standoff if it suspends enrichment. But Tehran has always responded it would only consider talks without preconditions. Iran has always insisted its nuclear programme, revived after Khamenei became supreme leader in 1989, is aimed solely at producing nuclear energy for a growing population whose fossil fuels will eventually run out. The United States has never ruled out military action against Iran but a US intelligence report that said Tehran halted a nuclear weapons programme in 2003 has taken the heat out of the crisis for the moment. -- Yoshie From sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca Thu Jan 03 10:09:27 2008 Received: from bay0-omc3-s14.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.214]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JATZP-0002g2-40 for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:09:27 -0700 Received: from hotmail.com ([207.46.9.232]) by bay0-omc3-s14.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 3 Jan 2008 09:10:20 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 09:10:20 -0800 Message-ID: Received: from 207.46.9.251 by by120fd.bay120.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:10:15 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.29.93.150] X-Originating-Email: [sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca] X-Sender: sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca From: "Jim Yarker" To: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Bcc: Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:10:15 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2008 17:10:20.0490 (UTC) FILETIME=[852C6AA0:01C84E2B] Subject: [A-List] =?iso-8859-1?q?Media_stir_up_storm_over_=92accommodation?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=92?= X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:09:27 -0000 Herouxville. Some experts blame chain ownership Media stir up storm over ’accommodation’ The Quebec town of Herouxville is at the centre of a controversy over its position on the reasonable accommodation of racial, ethnic and religious minorities. The Gazette (Montreal) samedi 3 février 2007 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JEFF HEINRICH, The Gazette - Martin Moreira should feel at home in multi-ethnic Quebec. After all, he grew up here. Son of a Uruguayan and a Bretonne who brought the family over from France when he was 5, Moreira spent his formative years in far-flung Baie Comeau before settling in Montreal as a musician and photographer. But these days, with almost daily coverage in the Quebec media of the "reasonable accommodation" debate, Moreira - like many other "foreigners" who have found their place in the province’s increasingly diverse ethnic mosaic - feels revolted. "It shocks me how simplistically the issues are being presented," said Moreira, 28. "I’m all for reasonable accommodation, because it’s all about dealing with things as they come up, case-by-case. But the way it’s being handled in the media, you get the impression that the way Quebecers feel about it, they’re racist, when in fact they’re quite the opposite," he said. "They don’t feel superior at all. They’re just irritated by some things, like anyone is." Since last fall, those irritants have been getting a steady airing by Quebec’s big media chains : Quebecor Media (TVA, the Journal de Montreal, Canoe.com, and others), Gesca (La Presse, Le Soleil and others), Radio-Canada and TQS. In what experts describe as a veritable media war, each has been trying to trump the other with "revelations" of special treatment for some religious minorities - Jews and Muslims, mostly - by government-funded institutions. Hospitals, CLSCs, the police, schools, sports and recreation facilities and driver-licensing centres - all are on the hook for arrangements they’ve made with minorities to get them to use their services. Among the better-known examples : providing male examiners for Hasidic men when they take their driving test ; offering unisex pre-natal classes for conservative Muslim, Sikh and Hindu women who don’t want men present ; and giving extra paid holidays to Jewish and Muslim daycare workers in public schools. Isolated cases ? Perhaps, but the barrage of coverage has given the opposite impression : of a province under siege by "immigrants" with "unreasonable" demands to have the rules bent to fit their needs, media experts say. "There’s a kind of public psychosis that’s been created, and it’s false," said Universite d’Ottawa communications professor Marc-Francois Bernier, 48, a former political reporter for Quebecor’s Journal de Quebec, the tabloid daily in Quebec City. "The only people who have put this issue on the table are the media," he said. Accommodating minorities "is not something that is in the realm of most people’s experience. They’ve never been affected by it." Fuelling the debate, Quebecor’s outlets published a provocative and much-criticized poll on Quebec "racism" last month. In it, 59 per cent of Quebecers were said to describe themselves as "racist" - even though the term was never defined. And last weekend, a new development : Herouxville. The remote town near Shawinigan made international headlines by publishing a list of "norms" its council said define their way of life and provide a lesson to prospective immigrants : men and women have equal rights, children cannot carry weapons in school, boys and girls are allowed to swim together, and more. The declaration struck a well-worn nerve - at least in the newsrooms of Quebec’s information media. Less clear is the impact it had on the attitudes of the province’s 7.6 million people. Far from provoking a soul-searching by Quebec’s French-speaking majority, the debate over Herouxville and what led up to it may have had a more negative effect : it broke a taboo on openly criticizing "les ethnies" (the ethnics). "What I deplore is how this subject has been so overstated and in such an irresponsible way," said Jean Robillard, a former National Bank PR man who now teaches communications at TELUQ, the distance-learning arm of the Universite de Montreal a Quebec. "This is a completely media-constructed phenomenon," he said. "The way the media have stirred up this debate, Quebecers have been left with the feeling they’re threatened in some way." He and other experts point especially to the misuse of the term "reasonable accommodation" itself. A legal concept derived from U.S. labour law, it was at first a way to make employers cater to employees with special needs - the physically disabled, for example. It has since evolved into a new meaning here : making arrangements with religious minorities so they can keep their traditions in public life. Well-known examples in Canada, legislated by the Supreme Court, include allowing Sikh officers in the RCMP to wear their turbans on the job, or Sikh schoolchildren to wear their ceremonial daggers - hidden and under wraps - to school. In Quebec, the province’s Human Rights Commission has also said Muslim girls have the right to wear the hijab head-covering in class. Most of the examples in the last few months haven’t been "accommodations" at all, but rather, case-by-case deals with select groups allowing them not to conform to standard practices when there is no health or safety risk, experts say. If the media onslaught is having an impact, it’s because Quebecers sense they’re at a crossroads in their history, as 40 years of steady secularization of its institutions are now challenged by religious demands from new immigrant groups, said observer Michel Venne. A former Le Devoir columnist, Venne is founder of the Institut du Nouveau Monde, a Montreal think tank that is holding a province-wide series of forums today on the future of Quebec culture, including what to do with religious minorities. "In the 1960s, we decided as a society that we would be secular - in a way, we privatized religion," Venne said from Rimouski, one of nine cities hosting the forums. "But now, a certain number of groups, mostly stemming from immigration, want their religion to be seen in open society. They want their symbols to be allowed in public. And that’s a shock for Quebecers, and they’re starting to try to find ways to negotiate an understanding." That process isn’t helped by the current frenzy in the media, Venne added. "It’s not healthy - it makes people panic instead of taking the time to discuss things calmly," he said. The Quebecor poll, in particular, he said, "was exploited by the media - it was an orgy." As he sees it, "Quebecor tried to capitalize in a grotesque way on an important and sensitive debate. They pretended to moderate the debate, but in reality all they did was turn it into show business, and that’s where the problem lies." "This is such BS," said Quebecor executive vice-president Luc Lavoie, a former TVA national reporter who is the company’s spokesperson. "The condescending, snobbish crap that comes from anybody else is just that - it’s crap," he said, denying Quebecor is exploiting the story. Reasonable accommodation has been " the topic of the last season - it’s a fact of life, it’s what everyone has been talking about," he said. To others, one thing is clear : there wouldn’t be such a buzz around the issue if news in Quebec wasn’t concentrated in the hands of a few big and diverse companies like Quebecor. And with competing chains ratcheting up the news, it makes one issue seem more dominant than it is in real life, said Jean-Francois Dumas, president of Influence Communication, a Montreal tracking firm. "We call it ’diffuse paternity.’ A few years ago if you came out with a big scoop, you could put it on your front page for two or three days and the rest of the media would follow you and cite you as the source," Dumas said. "But in the last two years or so, there’s been a new tendency," he said. "One outlet comes out with its scoop, its competitor builds on that with revelations of its own, and in the end the story doesn’t belong to anyone anymore but becomes a kind of collective creation." Media convergence just makes it happen more, he said. "The same information evolves through a number of media and gets not only very diffuse but also very confusing. It’s open war now between the different media networks, and with 24-hour news, there’s a snowball effect : a continuous multiplication of explosions of news, and because of that the news can last for months." At some point, though, "the media are going to tire themselves out and there’ll be an appeal for calm - but I’m skeptical it will last. The role of journalists is to inform, but for the media owners, it’s a business - they have to be competitive and deliver the news faster and faster." Bernier, the Universite d’Ottawa professor, agrees. "When the Quebecor machine decided to take the subject (of reasonable accommodation) and decided to bombard us with it on TV, on the Internet, on the radio and in the newspapers, it made people feel there was something urgent to deal with, that there was a big problem to solve - when, in fact, there wasn’t," he said. "Where is the problem in Herouxville ? Only in what they see in the media." It isn’t over yet, he predicted. "The media will always find more examples (of special arrangements for select groups). Out of 7 million people, they’ll find at least one example every day, easily," he said. "After a while, though, it’s got to stop, because it’s no longer news." jheinrich@ thegazette.canwest.com --- I’m tired of media-generated ’controversies’ Media seem determined to whip up their own news by manufacturing issues Josée Legault The Gazette (Montreal) vendredi 19 janvier 2007 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If Richard III were to come back today as a media mogul, the famed Shakespearian tirade would be : A controversy ! A controversy ! My kingdom for a controversy ! The latest one started this Monday with a banger in the Journal de Montreal. According to a Leger Marketing poll, 59 per cent of Quebecers consider themselves to be "racist." Where’s Jan Wong when you need her ? In the following days, the Journal and TVA - both owned by Quebecor - have unveiled other data from the same poll about a mishmash of things : "racism" among cultural communities, reasonable accommodation, perceptions of francophones by non-francophones, and so on. Quebecor wasn’t alone. Other media went wall to wall with reports and panels on related subjects, taking our national sport of existential navel-gazing to new depths. Experts, with reason, pointed out Leger Marketing had used the word "racist" in its questions without defining it. This trivialized the real thing, confusing racism with prejudice or ignorance. It also mixed up what it called racism with the religion-related issue of reasonable accommodation. Unwittingly, the story ended up feeding a distorted, intellectually dishonest and politically-loaded image of Quebec as a racist society. The firm’s president, Jean-Marc Leger, shot back. He said if people perceive prejudice as racism, then what the heck, we just have to "respect their opinion." So racism, real or perceived, has been downgraded to an "opinion." Correct me if I’m wrong, but none of the space this story occupied in the media - including this column - would have been possible without that controversial, slap-in-the-face number of 59 per cent. If there had been a story about a serious comparative sociological study of various forms of prejudice, whether here or elsewhere in Canada, which, by definition, would have given a less sombre, more nuanced, non-controversial portrait of reality, chances are it would have been covered in a more restrained manner. Maybe it’s the political scientist in me, but I wonder why polling firms cannot stick to what they know - voting intentions, consumer habits, etc. - and leave sociology to sociologists ? But this is a larger phenomenon that goes beyond choices by polling firms : Controversy, real or imagined, gets instant attention and media space. A lot of it. There was also a CROP poll last week about which side of the fence are Quebecers on regarding, what else, the controversy created last year by Lucien Bouchard and his group of "lucides." Are we "lucide" or "solidaire ?" In other words : are we more right or left wing ? When the poll said more Quebecers are "solidaires," a controversy ensued. Still, we suspect that reality falls somewhere in the middle. But that would be so non-controversial, so boring, wouldn’t it ? Under the same Bouchardian theme, there was also much talk about "L’illusion tranquille" - you guessed it - a controversial documentary film savaging the Quebec model and equating unions and their leaders with a religion and its high priests. Whether or not one agrees with its right-wing ideological penchant, it boggles the mind that this much attention was devoted to a film whose script was so poor intellectually and so simplistic, that it’s almost embarrassing. But brand the film "controversial," and voila ! - instant glory. About such so-called controversies, to quote a more contemporary character from literature : "Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn." Hey, I’m a columnist, I love what I do and the world of media, but even I can’t take this highly concentrated dose of overblown, repetitive controversies. Some say that the good side is that they at least foster debate. But do they really ? And if they do, what kind of debate is one confined to the media and based on questionable data and premises ? Controversies are not debates. Maybe a polling firm could find out the percentage of Quebecers fed up with so-called controversies and who would prefer real enlightened debates based on real enlightened information. -- From charlesb@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Thu Jan 03 13:25:02 2008 Received: from [71.159.22.21] (helo=gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAWcg-00035P-C6 for A-List@lists.econ.utah.edu; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:25:02 -0700 Received: from Comm-MTA by gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:25:56 -0500 Message-Id: <477CFE78.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.1 Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:25:44 -0500 From: "Charles Brown" To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] Cuban Communist Makes the Case for International Revolution X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 20:25:02 -0000 Latin America at the Crossroads: Cuban Communist Makes the Case for International Revolution by John Riddell Roberto Regalado. Latin America at the Crossroads. Translation = by=20 Peter Gellert. Ocean Press (www.oceanbooks.com.au), 2007, US$17.95;=20 Am=C3=A9rica latina entre siglos. Ocean Press, 2007, US$17.95. Latin America at the CrossroadsThis compact book by Roberto Regalado, a=20 veteran member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba,=20 strongly reaffirms the need for revolution in Latin America and beyond. Regalado, a section chief in the Cuban CP's Department of International=20 Relations, is anything but dogmatic. He is attentive to recent new=20 trends in Latin American economics and politics and respectful toward=20 the diverse currents of socialist opinion. He stresses the importance=20 of the new features of Latin American social struggles: the role of=20 peasants, the landless, indigenous peoples, women, environmentalists,=20 and others. But his careful and unpretentious analysis leads toward a striking=20 conclusion: only a revolutionary seizure of political power by the=20 masses can open the road to social progress south of the Rio Bravo and=20 even within the imperialist countries. full: http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/riddell030108.html=20 From charlesb@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Thu Jan 03 13:50:10 2008 Received: from [71.159.22.21] (helo=gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAX0z-000398-Uc for A-List@lists.econ.utah.edu; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:50:10 -0700 Received: from Comm-MTA by gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:51:04 -0500 Message-Id: <477D0463.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.1 Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:50:58 -0500 From: "Charles Brown" To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] United for Peace and Justice, X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 20:50:10 -0000 Please forward as widely as possible! Dear Friend of United for Peace and Justice, Witness Against Torture, a member group of UFPJ, has been a leading force = in the efforts to shut down the detention center at Guant=C3=A1namo. Now = they are organizing what promises to be an important day of protest on = Friday, January 11, 2008. More information about the plans for activities = in Washington, DC, that day -- as well as what you can do locally -- are = included in the message below. Peace, Leslie Cagan National Coordinator, UFPJ ************************************************** "Immediately close the detention center at Guant=C3=A1namo Bay, Cuba, and = either release its inmates or bring them before an impartial tribunal." ? = United Nations Human Rights Commission CALL TO ACTION We declare January 11, 2008, six years after the first prisoners arrived = at Guantanamo, an International Day of Action to Shut Down Guant=C3=A1namo.= In Washington, DC, we will hold a permitted demonstration at the National = Mall followed by an orange jumpsuit procession to the Supreme Court. There = will also be solidarity demonstrations in Chicago, Miami, London and = Paris, with more being added every day. We invite you to come to Washington= and participate, or else join or plan an action in your own community. We = also encourage people around the world to wear orange t-shirts, armbands = or other orange clothing on January 11th to mark the date. JOIN US IN WASHINGTON, DC Friday, January 11, 11:00am. (National Mall). http://maps.google.com/maps?f=3Dq&hl=3Den&time=3D&date=3D&ttype=3D&q=3DNati= onal+Mall,+United+States&sll=3D37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=3D51.708931,79.80468= 8&ie=3DUTF8&cd=3D2&geocode=3D0,38.889940,-77.023580&z=3D16&iwloc=3Daddr&om= =3D1=20 The day involves several elements: Demonstration at the National Mall. Witness Against Torture has teamed up with Amnesty International = (http://www.amnestyusa.org/) and the National Religious Campaign Against = Torture (http://www.nrcat.org/) to hold a permitted demonstration on the = National Mall at 11:00am. (Gather at 12th street NW between Madison Dr NW = & Jefferson Drive SW - near the Smithsonian Metro Stop.) http://maps.google= .com/?q=3D12th+street+NW+and+Madison+Dr+NW,+Washington,+DC,+20004,+us&ie=3D= UTF8&z=3D17&iwloc=3Daddr&om=3D1=20 "Prisoners of Guant=C3=A1namo March." A provocative street theater performance involving people wearing = orange jump suits and black hoods. We will march from the National Mall to = the Supreme Court in an orderly silent procession hauntingly evoking the = moral disgrace that is Guant=C3=A1namo. With your help, we will form a = prisoner contingent including as many protesters as there are prisoners. Funeral Ceremony at the Supreme Court.=20 Following the procession to the Supreme Court, we will hold a Funeral = Ceremony to remember the four men who died in custody at Guant=C3=A1namo = and to mourn the death of Habeas Corpus. Like last year, some may choose = to risk arrest. To participate, please consider attending an orientation = meeting (http://www.witnesstorture.org/node/731) on Thursday, 4pm, at St. = Stephen and the Incarnation Church (1525 Newton Street, NW, http://www.sain= tstephensdc.org/directions.html) or come early to the National Mall for an = orientation and rehearsal at 10:00am. (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=3Dq&hl= =3Den&time=3D&date=3D&ttype=3D&q=3DNational+Mall,+United+States&sll=3D37.06= 25,-95.677068&sspn=3D51.708931,79.804688&ie=3DUTF8&cd=3D2&geocode=3D0,38.88= 9940,-77.023580&z=3D16&iwloc=3Daddr&om=3D1) Please let us know in advance = (http://www.witnesstorture.org/jan11_contact) if you are willing to = participate in either the Prisoners Contingent, Nonviolent Direct Action, = or both. Email jan11@witnesstorture.org or call Matt Daloisio at 201-264-44= 24.=20 For up-to-date details as well as information about housing, food, rides = and directions, legal support and much more, please visit our website at = www.WitnessTorture.org. WEAR ORANGE ON JANUARY 11TH! Wherever you are on January 11th, we encourage you to wear orange to raise = public awareness and strengthen the movement to demand an end to torture = and indefinite detention. Consider wearing one of Witness Against = Torture's Orange "Shut Down Guant=C3=A1namo" T-shirts, an ACLU arm band, = or even an orange jump suit. http://www.caebuttons.com/guantanamo.php=20 JOIN THE GROWING NUMBER OF LOCAL VIGILS - ATTEND OR ORGANIZE AN ACTION IN = YOUR COMMUNITY If you can't join us in Washington D.C., please consider attending or = organizing a vigil, march or a public forum in your community. Actions are = currently planned in 30 cities, including New York, Chicago, San Francisco,= Philadelphia, Miami, London, Paris and elsewhere. Visit www.WitnessTorture.org for up-to-date details about solidarity = events, as well as to find ideas for actions, to post to our calendar, or = to download flyers and other resources. WHO WE ARE Two years ago Witness Against Torture drew international attention after = it walked to Guant=C3=A1namo to visit the prisoners. Upon its return, the = group has organized vigils, marches, nonviolent direct actions and = educational events to expose and decry the administration's lawlessness, = build awareness about torture and indefinite detention, and forge human = ties with the prisoners at Guant=C3=A1namo and their families. Some of the organizations endorsing the Jan 11 Day of Action include: Act Against Torture Bill of Rights Defense Committee The Catholic Worker Center for Constitutional Rights CodePink Declaration of Peace International Federation of Human Rights National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance Network of Spiritual Progressives Pax Christi USA Peace Action School of the Americas Watch Torture Abolition and Survivors Coalition United for Peace and Justice US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation Voices For Creative Nonviolence War Resisters League World Can't Wait ...and more. See a full list of endorsers: http://www.witnesstorture.or= g/jan11_endorsers=20 DONATE Please make a contribution to help cover the costs of the January 11th = event. You can donate online (http://www.witnesstorture.org/donate) or = send a check made out to "Witness Against Torture" to Mary House Catholic = Worker, 55 E. Third Street, New York, NY 10003. www.WitnessTorture.org=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Help us continue to do this critical work: Make a donation to UFPJ today = -- http://www.unitedforpeace.org/donate=20 UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE http://www.unitedforpeace.org | 212-868-5545 To subscribe, visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email=20 From shimogamo@attglobal.net Thu Jan 03 17:18:16 2008 Received: from kcout02.prserv.net ([12.154.55.32]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAaGO-0003Vt-Eg for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:18:16 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout02) with ESMTP id <2008010400191020200r77pge> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Fri, 4 Jan 2008 00:19:11 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <477D7B75.7000106@attglobal.net> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 09:19:01 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [A-List] My heart bleeds for Pakistan X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:18:16 -0000 It deserves better than this grotesque feudal charade by Tariq Ali The Independent & The Independent on Sunday Independent.co.uk (December 31 2007) Six hours before she was executed, Mary, Queen of Scots wrote to her brother-in-law, Henry III of France: " ... As for my son, I commend him to you in so far as he deserves, for I cannot answer for him". The year was 1587. On 30 December 2007, a conclave of feudal potentates gathered in the home of the slain Benazir Bhutto to hear her last will and testament being read out and its contents subsequently announced to the world media. Where Mary was tentative, her modern-day equivalent left no room for doubt. She could certainly answer for her son. A triumvirate consisting of her husband, Asif Zardari (one of the most venal and discredited politicians in the country and still facing corruption charges in three European courts) and two ciphers will run the party till Benazir's nineteen-year-old son, Bilawal, comes of age. He will then become chairperson-for-life and, no doubt, pass it on to his children. The fact that this is now official does not make it any less grotesque. The Pakistan People's Party is being treated as a family heirloom, a property to be disposed of at the will of its leader. Nothing more, nothing less. Poor Pakistan. Poor People's Party supporters. Both deserve better than this disgusting, medieval charade. Benazir's last decision was in the same autocratic mode as its predecessors, an approach that would cost her – tragically – her own life. Had she heeded the advice of some party leaders and not agreed to the Washington-brokered deal with Pervez Musharraf or, even later, decided to boycott his parliamentary election she might still have been alive. Her last gift to the country does not augur well for its future. How can Western-backed politicians be taken seriously if they treat their party as a fiefdom and their supporters as serfs, while their courtiers abroad mouth sycophantic niceties concerning the young prince and his future. That most of the PPP inner circle consists of spineless timeservers leading frustrated and melancholy lives is no excuse. All this could be transformed if inner-party democracy was implemented. There is a tiny layer of incorruptible and principled politicians inside the party, but they have been sidelined. Dynastic politics is a sign of weakness, not strength. Benazir was fond of comparing her family to the Kennedys, but chose to ignore that the Democratic Party, despite an addiction to big money, was not the instrument of any one family. The issue of democracy is enormously important in a country that has been governed by the military for over half of its life. Pakistan is not a "failed state" in the sense of the Congo or Rwanda. It is a dysfunctional state and has been in this situation for almost four decades. At the heart of this dysfunctionality is the domination by the army and each period of military rule has made things worse. It is this that has prevented political stability and the emergence of stable institutions. Here the US bears direct responsibility, since it has always regarded the military as the only institution it can do business with and, unfortunately, still does so. This is the rock that has focused choppy waters into a headlong torrent. The military's weaknesses are well known and have been amply documented. But the politicians are not in a position to cast stones. After all, Mr Musharraf did not pioneer the assault on the judiciary so conveniently overlooked by the US Deputy Secretary of State, John Negroponte, and the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband. The first attack on the Supreme Court was mounted by Nawaz Sharif's goons who physically assaulted judges because they were angered by a decision that ran counter to their master's interests when he was prime minister. Some of us had hoped that, with her death, the People's Party might start a new chapter. After all, one of its main leaders, Aitzaz Ahsan, president of the Bar Association, played a heroic role in the popular movement against the dismissal of the chief justice. Mr Ahsan was arrested during the emergency and kept in solitary confinement. He is still under house arrest in Lahore. Had Benazir been capable of thinking beyond family and faction she should have appointed him chairperson pending elections within the party. No such luck. The result almost certainly will be a split in the party sooner rather than later. Mr Zardari was loathed by many activists and held responsible for his wife's downfall. Once emotions have subsided, the horror of the succession will hit the many traditional PPP followers except for its most reactionary segment: bandwagon careerists desperate to make a fortune. All this could have been avoided, but the deadly angel who guided her when she was alive was, alas, not too concerned with democracy. And now he is in effect leader of the party. Meanwhile there is a country in crisis. Having succeeded in saving his own political skin by imposing a state of emergency, Mr Musharraf still lacks legitimacy. Even a rigged election is no longer possible on 8 January despite the stern admonitions of President George Bush and his unconvincing Downing Street adjutant. What is clear is that the official consensus on who killed Benazir is breaking down, except on BBC television. It has now been made public that, when Benazir asked the US for a Karzai-style phalanx of privately contracted former US Marine bodyguards, the suggestion was contemptuously rejected by the Pakistan government, which saw it as a breach of sovereignty. Now both Hillary Clinton and Senator Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, are pinning the convict's badge on Mr Musharraf and not al-Qa'ida for the murder, a sure sign that sections of the US establishment are thinking of dumping the President. Their problem is that, with Benazir dead, the only other alternative for them is General Ashraf Kiyani, head of the army. Nawaz Sharif is seen as a Saudi poodle and hence unreliable, though, given the US-Saudi alliance, poor Mr Sharif is puzzled as to why this should be the case. For his part, he is ready to do Washington's bidding but would prefer the Saudi King rather than Mr Musharraf to be the imperial message-boy. A solution to the crisis is available. This would require Mr Musharraf's replacement by a less contentious figure, an all-party government of unity to prepare the basis for genuine elections within six months, and the reinstatement of the sacked Supreme Court judges to investigate Benazir's murder without fear or favour. It would be a start. _____ by Tariq Ali is Pakistan-born writer, broadcaster and commentator © 2007 Independent News and Media Limited http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3295851.ece http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From tal1@cogeco.ca Fri Jan 04 00:04:00 2008 Received: from smtp.cogeco.net ([216.221.81.25] helo=fep5.cogeco.net) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAgb2-0003zj-KS for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:04:00 -0700 Received: from TonyPC (d150-46-31.home.cgocable.net [24.150.46.31]) by fep5.cogeco.net (Postfix) with SMTP id E077122C1 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 02:04:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: From: "Tony B." To: "A-List" Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 02:04:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 Subject: [A-List] Analysis: US Losing Post-War II Domination Of Middle East X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:04:01 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff To: Stop NATO Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 6:10 PM Subject: [stopnato] Analysis: US Losing Post-War II Domination Of Middle East http://www.hindu.com/2008/01/03/stories/2008010355201000.htm The Hindu January 3, 2008 The race for influence in West Asia Atul Aneja -For the first time after World War II, the United States is struggling to retain its substantial politico-military influence in the region. -[Russia] began military exercises in the Mediterranean, deploying 11 ships including an aircraft carrier with 47 planes on board. The Russian navy is reportedly using the Syrian port of Tartus as a supply base for its ships operating in the Mediterranean. -Given the growing assertion of Saudi Arabia and Iran, as well as the intention of Russia and China to enhance their profile in the region, the release of the NIE report may well mark the beginning of Washington's post-Cold War decline in West Asia. The National Intelligence Estimate's findings on Iran may mark the beginning of Washington's post-Cold War decline in West Asia. The full impact of the observations in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report - produced collectively by Washington's numerous intelligence agencies - on the Iranian nuclear programme is still unfolding. However, it is evident that after the release of the report, according to which Iran has not had a nuclear weapons programme since 2003, power equations in the world's oil heartland are shifting dramatically. Iran, fourth largest producer of oil, and Saudi Arabia, global leader, are rapidly consolidating their political influence in the region. The other countries that are also enhancing their geostrategic profile in West Asia's energy bastion include Russia and China. A fter voting twice against Iran in the International Atomic Energy Agency - apparently at Washington's behest - India also appears to be making a belated attempt at mending fences with Tehran. For the first time after World War II, the United States is struggling to retain its substantial politico-military influence in the region. Iran and Saudi Arabia, along with Iraq and the rest of the Persian Gulf states - Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman - hold the largest reserves of oil in the world. Any change in the international pecking order in this region, therefore, is bound to have a profound impact on the world's economy and politics. The NIE's findings have already unhinged the case for war against Tehran. Its conclusion that Iran ceased its weapons programme in 2003 implies that Tehran does not pose a nuclear threat to anyone in the near future. The findings have also weakened the case for tightening sanctions. The NIE's clean chit appears to have raised by several notches the relatively low-key interaction between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Both countries exercise enormous influence in their constituencies in the region. Saudi Arabia is now widely recognised as the de facto leader of the Arab world. It has taken the lead in trying to resolve the Arab-Israeli dispute. The 22-nation Arab League has already adopted the plan of the Saudi monarch, Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, to resolve the Israel-Palestine dispute. Riyadh also exercises considerable clout because of the key role it can play in the global oil markets. Besides, Saudi Arabia is the birthplace of Islam and two of the holiest shrines revered by Muslims the world over are in the Kingdom. The footprint of Saudi influence is, therefore, seen far and wide. There have been significant changes in the foreign policy of Saudi Arabia, known for long as a faithful U.S. ally, after King Abdullah's accession in 2005. The new monarch adopted a "look east" policy, which became evident when he chose India, Malaysia and China for his first overseas visit. Stepping out of line from the Washington-led peace process on Palestine, King Abdullah engaged both the Fatah and rival Hamas on its home turf in order to persuade them to form a national unity government. He met with some success when the factions agreed in Makkah to accept a political compromise despite Washington's strong opposition to the deal. Despite the setback the initiative suffered when bitter street battles broke out in Gaza and led to the virtual partition of Palestinian territories between the Fatah and Hamas, the Saudi monarch has not given up. Hamas leader Khalid Meshaal recently revisited Saudi Arabia and met King Abdullah. Efforts are being made to revive talks between Hamas and the Fatah, in order to advance the Saudi Arbia-initiated Makkah peace process. Iran, on the other hand, exercises unique influence, especially among the region's Shia population. Its substantial influence in Bahrain, a country with a majority Shia population and Sunni leadership, is well known. Iran is also a player in oil-rich Kuwait. Besides, ties between Iran and the Hizbollah in Lebanon are extremely close. The Hizbollah's profile in Beirut as well as the region rose dramatically after it blunted the Israeli attack on Lebanon in August 2006. Saudi Arabia and Iran began to work closely together after sectarian violence in Iraq inflamed the region. Lebanon became the first nation in which both countries decided to coordinate their activities in order to heal its growing sectarian and religious divide. While the Iranians were well positioned to influence the Shias under the Amal and Hizbollah movements, the Saudis could exercise clout over the wealthy Sunni community, which had made considerable investments in Saudi Arabia and vice versa. The interaction proved fruitful and now helped internal factions narrow down their differences over a consensus candidate for the vacant Lebanese Presidency. Tehran and Riyadh also worked with some success in Iraq, where the Saudi intelligence could exercise its influence over some of the Al Qaeda tribal groups. Iranian influence among Iraqis, especially the Shias and Kurds, is well recognised. Resilience evident The resilience of the Saudi-Iranian relationship became evident soon after the Annapolis conference held on November 27, 2007. Despite the stated American efforts to build an Arab front against Iran at the conference, the events on the following days showed that forces negating Washington's exhortations gained the upper hand. Just after the conference, the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council took the dramatic step of inviting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to its annual summit in Doha. King Abdullah led him by the hand to the conference - a rare gesture of solidarity between the two regional heavyweights. The conference began the very day the NIE report was released. The Saudis wasted no time in taking advantage of its findings. At the conference, Mr. Ahmadinejad spoke of evolving a collective security arrangement with Iran's neighbours. The implication was obvious. On an Arab platform, Iran was saying it wanted to step inside the region with its neighbours, and, implicitly, marginalise the presence of American military forces, which have played a preponderant role in the oil rich region for the past few decades. Besides, the Iranian leader invited Gulf businessmen to invest in his country, in areas that included real estate. Iranian businessmen have made substantial investments in Dubai and reside in the Emirate in large numbers. A nucleus which can carry out investments in Iran, therefore, already has a significant presence in the Gulf, especially Dubai. Keeping up the high momentum in their relationship, King Abdullah and President Ahmadinejad met again in Makkah during the Haj. Commenting on the visit, Iran's ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Mohammad Hosseini, insightfully said: "Iran and Saudi Arabia, as two leading countries in the region and in the Islamic world, shoulder a heavy responsibility. The two countries have reached a mutual understanding not to limit their ties exclusively to bilateral issues." Apart from the growing regional assertion by Saudi Arabia and Iran, Russia has moved in swiftly after the release of the NIE report. Less than 24 hours of its publication, Moscow announced that it was dispatching the first consignment of nuclear fuel for Iran's Bushehr atomic power plant. Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, rejected calls for tougher economic sanctions on Iran in the light of fresh U.S. intelligence data. Besides, the Russians began military exercises in the Mediterranean, deploying 11 ships including an aircraft carrier with 47 planes on board. The Russian navy is reportedly using the Syrian port of Tartus as a supply base for its ships operating in the Mediterranean. China has also made further inroads into Iran after the release of the NIE report. Despite the U.S. insistence on sanctions, the China Petrochemical Corporation on December 10 signed a $2-billion deal with Iran to develop its Yadavaran oilfield. Encouraged by the NIE findings, the Iranians are now seeking Japanese investments to develop their oil sector. India, too, has sought to reengage Iran. Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon visited Tehran in mid-December. He was quoted as saying there that India "is interested in establishing a strategic partnership with Iran in the areas of energy, transport, and security." However, India's non-participation in the recent meetings on the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project and the perception of its growing proximity to the U.S. have not gone down well with Iran. At his meeting with Mr. Menon, Iran Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, in fact, noted that the "low level" of ties between the two great regional countries over the past two years was "lamentable." He added: "We should not let any foreign powers to harm the existing ties between the two countries." Given the growing assertion of Saudi Arabia and Iran, as well as the intention of Russia and China to enhance their profile in the region, the release of the NIE report may well mark the beginning of Washington's post-Cold War decline in West Asia. =========================== Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato To subscribe, send an e-mail to: stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ============================== __________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar MARKETPLACE Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net. Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Visit Your Group Share Photos Put your favorite photos and more online. Yahoo! Groups HD The official Samsung Y! Group for HDTVs and devices. Yahoo! Groups Going Green Share your passion for the planet.. __,_._,___ From tal1@cogeco.ca Fri Jan 04 00:57:53 2008 Received: from smtp.cogeco.net ([216.221.81.25] helo=fep1.cogeco.net) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAhRA-00043B-R4 for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:57:53 -0700 Received: from TonyPC (d150-46-31.home.cgocable.net [24.150.46.31]) by fep1.cogeco.net (Postfix) with SMTP id E79CE1F3C for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 02:58:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: From: "Tony B." To: "The A-List" References: In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 02:58:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [A-List] Russia Goes Its Own Way + Khamenei: Iran Sees "No Benefit"in Resuming Ties with the United States X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:57:53 -0000 "In the coming months, there will be ample Russian and American pledges of cooperation against Iran's persistent nuclear violations." A quibble perhaps, but.....What violations? T. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: "A-List" Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 11:44 AM Subject: [A-List] Russia Goes Its Own Way + Khamenei: Iran Sees "No=20 Benefit"in Resuming Ties with the United States Russia, among other key factors, has strengthened Iran's hands immeasurably, which is reflected in Khamenei's new statements. -- Yoshie Russia goes its own way By Ray Takeyh and Nikolas Gvosdev Tuesday, January 1, 2008 If the deadlock in the UN Security Council over the final status of Kosovo signals any future trends, it is that Russia has finally dispensed with any lingering beliefs that it should work with the United States to set the global agenda. One of the legacies that Vladimir Putin bequeaths to his successor is Russia's changed position in the world. Moscow no longer has any interest in making minor modifications to a policy largely predetermined in Washington. And the principal beneficiary of this changed perception may be Iran. Because the revelations in December of the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate have all but eliminated the military option in dealing with Iran's nuclear intransigence, the Bush administration has refocused on exerting diplomatic and economic pressure on the recalcitrant theocracy. It is hoped that an escalating series of Security Council resolutions would press Iran toward the suspension of the critical enrichment component of its nuclear program. The reliance on the Security Council as the principal platform for dealing with Iran is surprisingly acceptable to both Moscow and Tehran. Despite Washington's professions that the Security Council's rebukes reflect international solidarity against Tehran, the Islamic Republic has largely adjusted to the UN process. At first, Iran was concerned about the Iraq precedent, whereby the U.S. employed the UN to isolate and sanction Iraq for much of the 1990s, and then used Baghdad's lack of compliance as the basis of its military intervention. Iran tried hard to prevent the transfer of its nuclear file to the UN, and even suspended its program from 2003 to 2005 in order to forestall that development. Moreover, Russia's acquiescence to America's requests did create tension in its relations with Iran, leading some to conclude that Putin was prepared to jeopardize the strategic and economic ties between the two countries. Russia does share one principal U.S. concern: Moscow has no desire to see Iran possess nuclear weapons. The problem is that Russia has a far narrower definition of the term than the U.S., which sees Iran's entire nuclear infrastructure as constituting a weapons program. So Russia has no difficulty going along with UN measures designed to target a specific Iranian program to produce operational warheads, one which the National Intelligence Estimate says has been inactive since 2003. At the same time, Russia is moving to establish itself as a Middle East power independent of the West, and thus, can ill-afford to antagonize Iran. Tehran has found value in Moscow's clever strategy of endorsing watered-down resolutions while deepening its relations with Iran. On the one hand, Russian diplomats are in active negotiations with their American counterparts for a third UN resolution against Iran. Yet, Moscow is willing to provide fuel for Iran's light-water reactor in Bushehr. The incongruity of providing sensitive nuclear resources to a country that is actively sanctioned for its nuclear malfeasance is not lost on Iran's clerical elite. A similar pattern is continuing in other areas, whereby Russia's complaints about Iran's nuclear activities has not deter it from signing additional commercial contracts with Iran. There are strong economic motives guiding the Russian designs, as Moscow and Tehran together control roughly 20 percent of world's oil reserves and close to half of the world's gas reserves. The two powers could do much to dilute their respective leverage over the global energy markets. Moreover, in addition to atomic power projects, Iran's oil and gas sector offer many opportunities to Russian firms looking for new investments. Keeping Iranian energy from becoming attractive for European consumers, while financing projects that will tie ever-hungrier South Asia and China into even greater dependence on Iran benefits a number of Russian objectives. However, reducing this relationship to economic impulses obscures the equally compelling strategic rationale for improved ties between Moscow and Tehran. Despite its unsavory reputation in the West, Iran has acted responsibly in dealing with Muslim republics and populations of Central Asia. The United States may view Iran as a revolutionary power bent on upending the regional order. But for Russia, Iran is largely a status quo state whose continued cooperation is critical for stability in the Middle East and the projection of Russian influence in that region. The strategic alignment between the two nations only reinforces the economic interests. The Bush administration, which has dedicated so much of its efforts to rebuilding ties with Europe, has utterly failed to bridge the gap with the Russian Federation. Having failed to stop the United States over Kosovo and Iraq, Moscow's stance on Iran demonstrates Russia's return as a major actor. For its part, Tehran has learned to love Russia's strategy of placating the United States with superficial gestures while enhancing its relations with Iran. In the coming months, there will be ample Russian and American pledges of cooperation against Iran's persistent nuclear violations. However, the strategic landscape has changed. And that does not bode well for America's attempt to rein in Iran. Ray Takeyh, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, is the author of "Hidden Iran: Paradox and Power in the Islamic Republic." Nikolas Gvosdev is editor of The National Interest. Khamenei: Wrong Time for Iran-US Ties Thursday January 3, 2008 3:01 PM By NASSER KARIMI Associated Press Writer TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Thursday he was willing to improve relations with the United States but that the moment was not right because it would make his country more vulnerable to U.S. espionage. Khamenei said restoring ties with the U.S. now would ``provide opportunity for security agents to come and go, as well as for espionage.'' ``It has no benefit for Iranian nation,'' state radio quoted him as saying at a student group meeting in the central province of Yazd. It would be an ``opportunity for U.S. infiltration, traffic of their intelligence agents and espionage of Iran.'' Iran last year claimed it uncovered spy rings organized by the U.S. and its Western allies and detained a four Iranian-Americans, who were later released. The arrests prompted the United States to warn its citizens against traveling to Iran, accusing authorities there of a ``disturbing pattern'' of harassment. The United States and Iran have had no diplomatic ties since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, when militants seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. The dispute over Iran's nuclear program and U.S. allegations of Iranian support for armed groups in Iraq have raised tensions. ``I would be the first one to support these relations,'' said Khamenei, who has final say in all state matters. ``But for the time being, it (restoring ties) is harmful and we should not pursue it.'' Washington has refused to hold talks with Iran over the issue of diplomatic ties until Tehran suspends uranium enrichment, a process that can be used to produce fuel for both nuclear energy and weapons. But the two countries have held three rounds of ambassador-level negotiations on security in Iraq, breaking the 27-year diplomatic freeze. Iran says its nuclear program is intended solely for energy production, and Khamenei reiterated Thursday that his country would continue to pursue it to generate some 20,000 megawatts of electricity in the next two decades. Washington's push for a third round of U.N. sanctions against Iran was undermined by the release of a new U.S. intelligence report in December, saying that Tehran suspended development of nuclear weapons development under international pressure in 2003. It was a dramatic turnaround from the previous U.S. stance that Iran restarted the program in 2005. Iran has no interest in US ties now: Khamenei 3 hours ago TEHRAN (AFP) =97 Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Thursday that Iran sees "no benefit" in resuming ties with the United States at the moment but does not rule out a resumption of relations in the future. In his most significant speech on foreign policy in several months, Khamenei also vowed that Iran would not halt sensitive work on its controversial nuclear programme as demanded by the West. "Cutting ties with the United States is one of our basic policies. We have never said that they will be cut for ever," Khamenei told students in a speech in the central city of Yazd. "The conditions of the US government are such now that it is harmful for us to resume relations," he said, describing the United States as a global "danger". "Despite some talkative people's claims, it has no benefit for the Iranian nation. "The day that relations with the United States are beneficial to the Iranian nation, I will be the first one to approve of that," he said. The position of Khamenei as Iran's undisputed number one, which he holds for life, takes him above the fray of day-to-day politics. Such statements on major issues like US relations are made only occasionally and are hugely significant. Tehran and Washington have had no diplomatic links since 1980 when the United States cut relations amid the siege of the US embassy in Tehran by Islamist students that was to last a total of 444 days. Exchanges since then have been marked by acrimony and suspicion, although the two sides held talks on Iraqi security last year in the highest level official contacts for almost three decades. The United States was a major ally of the imperial regime of the last shah of Iran Mohammad Reza Pahlavi -- who was deposed by the Islamic revolution in 1979 -- supplying vast quantities of military equipment. Khamenei said the current US hostility to Iran had not been provoked by firebrand statements by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other officials against Tehran's arch enemy, known here as the "Great Satan". "Its enmity is with the principles of the Iranian nation and it has been there since the beginning of the Islamic revolution," he said. "Resuming relations will create the possibility of US influence (in Iran) and the coming and going of US spies," he said. The massive compound in central Tehran that housed the US embassy is known locally as the "Den of Spies". The two sides remain at loggerheads over the Iranian nuclear programme, with the United States leading Western calls for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment, which Washington fears could be used to make nuclear weapons. "The nation, which is carrying out enrichment by relying on itself, will build the (nuclear) plants too. If the nation had not done enrichment, it would be behind by years," he said. Russia is building and supplying the fuel for Iran's first 1,000 megawatt nuclear power plant in the southern city of Bushehr but Khamenei reaffirmed his desire for Iran to construct and supply atomic power plants independently. "In the next 20 years, we should have at least 20,000 megawatts of nuclear electricity," added Khamenei. He angrily lashed out at moderates inside Iran who had cautiously suggested that the country should consider suspending enrichment to de-escalate the nuclear crisis. "Some people challenge the system and the government over this and, in line with the enemy, seek to create disappointment. The nation should be watchful of such infiltrations." Western powers have offered Iran full negotiations including with the United States on the nuclear standoff if it suspends enrichment. But Tehran has always responded it would only consider talks without preconditions. Iran has always insisted its nuclear programme, revived after Khamenei became supreme leader in 1989, is aimed solely at producing nuclear energy for a growing population whose fossil fuels will eventually run out. The United States has never ruled out military action against Iran but a US intelligence report that said Tehran halted a nuclear weapons programme in 2003 has taken the heat out of the crisis for the moment. -- Yoshie From shimogamo@attglobal.net Fri Jan 04 02:37:37 2008 Received: from kcout03.prserv.net ([12.154.55.33]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAizh-000491-GI for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 02:37:37 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout03) with ESMTP id <2008010409383420300mopt8e> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Fri, 4 Jan 2008 09:38:35 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <477DFE92.5080506@attglobal.net> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 18:38:26 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] Food, Forests and Fuel X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 09:37:37 -0000 >From False to Real Solutions for the Climate Change by Vandana Shiva Zmag.org (December 13 2007) December 3 - 14 2008 will see more than 10,000 representatives of Government and civil society gather in Bali for a meeting of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. This is the international treaty under which the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated. The Protocol expires in 2012, and Bali is supposed to begin negotiations on a post Kyoto framework. In 2007, no one can deny that man-made climate change is taking place. However, the commitment to mitigate and help the vulnerable to adapt does not match the recognition of the disaster. Mitigation requires material changes in production and consumption patterns. Globalisation has pushed production and consumption worldwide to higher carbon dioxide emissions. WTO rules of trade liberalization are in effect rules that force countries on a high emissions pathway. Similarly, World Bank lending for super highways and thermal power plant, industrial agriculture and corporate retail coerces countries to emit more greenhouse gases. And giant corporations such as Cargill and Walmart carry major responsibility in destroying local, sustainable economies and pushing society after society into dependence on an ecologically destructive global economy. Cargill is an important player in spreading soya cultivation in the Amazon, and palmoil plantations in the rainforest of Indonesia thus increasing emissions both by the burning of forests and destruction of the massive carbon sink in rainforests and peat lands. And Walmart's model of long distance centralized trade is a recipe for increasing the carbon dioxide burden in the atmosphere. The first step in mitigation requires a focus on real actions of real actors. Real actions are actions such as a shift from ecological farming and local food system. Real actors include global agribusiness, the WTO, the World Bank. Real actions involve destruction of rural economies with low emission to urban sprawl designed and planned by builders and construction companies. Real actions involve destruction of sustainable transport systems based on renewable energy and public transport to private automobiles. Real actors pushing this transition to non-sustainability in mobility are the oil companies and automobile corporations. Kyoto totally avoided the material challenge of stopping activities that lead to higher emissions and the political challenge of regulation of the polluters and making the polluters pay in accordance with principles adopted at the Earth Summit in Rio. Instead, Kyoto put in place the mechanism of emissions trading which in effect rewarded the polluters by assigning them rights to the atmosphere and trading in these rights to pollute. Today, the emissions trading market has reached $30 billion and is expected to go up to $1 trillion. Carbon dioxide emissions continue to increase, while profits from "hot air" also increase. I call it "hot air" both because it is literally hot air leading to global warming and because it is metaphorically hot air, based on the fictitious economy of finance which has overtaken the real economy, both in size and in our perception. A casino economy has allowed corporations and their owners to multiply their wealth without limit, and without any relationship to the real world. Yet this hungry money then seeks to own the real resources of people - the land and the forests, the farms and the food, and turn them into cash. Unless we return to the real world, we will not find the solutions that will help mitigate climate change. Another false solution to climate change is the promotion of biofuels based on corn and soya, palmoil and jatropha. Biofuels, fuels from biomass, continue to be the most important energy source for the poor in the world. The ecological biodiverse farm is not just a source of food; it is a source of energy. Energy for cooking the food comes from the inedible biomass like cow dung cakes, stalks of millets and pulses, agro-forestry species on village wood lots. Managed sustainably, village commons have been a source of decentralized energy for centuries. Industrial biofuels are not the fuels of the poor; they are the foods of the poor, transformed into heat, electricity, and transport. Liquid biofuels, in particular ethanol and bio-diesel, are one of the fastest growing sectors of production, driven by the search of alternatives to fossil fuels both to avoid the catastrophe of peak oil and to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. President Bush is trying to pass legislation to require the use of 35 billion gallons of biofuels by 2017. M Alexander of the Sustainable Development Department of FAO has stated: "The gradual move away from oil has begun. Over the next fifteen to twenty years we may see biofuels providing a full 25 per cent of the world's energy needs." Global production of biofuels alone has doubled in the last five years and will likely double again in the next four. Among countries that have enacted a new pro-biofuel policy in recent years are Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Columbia, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Mozambique, the Philippines, Senegal, South Africa, Thailand and Zambia. There are two types of industrial biofuels - ethanol and biodiesel. Ethanol can be produced from products rich in saccharose such as sugarcane and molasses, substances rich in starch such as maize, barley and wheat. Ethanol is blended with petrol. Biodiesel is produced from vegetable only such as palm oil, soya oil, and rapeseed oil. Biodiesel is blended with diesel. Representatives of organizations and social movements from Brazil, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Columbia, Guatemala and the Dominican Republic in a declaration titled "Full Tanks at the Cost of Empty Stomachs", wrote "The current model of production of bio-energy is sustained by the same elements that have always caused the oppression of our people's appropriation of territory, of natural resources, and the labor force". And Fidel Castro in an article titled "Food stuff as Imperial weapon: Biofuels and Global Hunger" has said: More than three billion people are being condemned to a premature death from hunger and thirst. The biofuel sector worldwide has grown rapidly. United states and Brazil have established ethanol industries and the European Union is also fast catching up to explore the potential market. Governments all over the world are encouraging biofuel production with favourable policies. United States is pushing the other third world nations of the world to go in for biofuel production so that their energy needs get met at the expense of plundering others resources. Inevitably this massive increase in the demand for grains is going to come at the expense of the satisfaction of human needs, with poor people priced out of the food market. On February 28, the Brazilian Landless Workers Movement released a statement noting that "the expansion of the production of biofuels aggravates hunger in the world. We cannot maintain our tanks full while stomachs go empty." The diversion of food for fuel has already increased the price of corn and soya. There have been riots in Mexico because of the price rise of tortillas. And this is just the beginning. Imagine the land needed for providing 25% of the oil from food. One tonne of corn produces 413 litres of ethanol. 35 million gallons of ethanol requires 320 million tons of corn. The US produced 280.2 million tons of corn in 2005. As a result of NAFTA, the US made Mexico dependent on US corn, and destroyed the small farms of Mexico. This was in fact the basis of the Zapatista uprising. As a result of corn being diverted to biofuels, prices of corn have increased in Mexico. Industrial biofuels are being promoted as a source of renewable energy and as a means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, there are two ecological reasons why converting crops like soya, corn and palm oil into liquid fuels can actually aggravate climate chaos and the carbon dioxide burden. Firstly, deforestation caused by expanding soya plantations and palm oil plantations is leading to increased carbon dioxide emissions. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that 1.6 billion tons or 25 to thirty per cent of the greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere each year comes from deforestation. By 2022, biofuel plantations could destroy 98% of Indonesia's rainforests. According to Wetlands International, destruction of South East Asia pert lands for palm oil plantations is contributing to eight percent of the global carbon dioxide emissions. According to Delft Hydraulics, every tonne of palm oil results in thirty tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions or ten times as much as petroleum producers. However, this additional burden on the atmosphere is treated as a clean development mechanism in the Kyoto Protocol for reducing emissions. Biofuels are thus contributing to the same global warming that they are supposed to reduce. (World Rainforest Bulletin No 112, November 2006, Page 22) Further, the conversion of biomass to liquid fuel uses more fossil fuels than it substitutes. One gallon of ethanol production requires 28,000 kilocalories. This provides 19,400 kilocalories of energy. Thus the energy efficiency is - 43%. The US will use twenty of its corn to produce five billion gallons of ethanol which will substitute one percent of oil use. If 100% of corn was used, only seven percent of the total oil would be substituted. This is clearly not a solution either to peak oil or climate chaos. (David Pimental at IFG conference on "The Triple Crisis", London, February 23-25 2007) And it is a source of other crisis. 1700 gallons of water are used to produce a gallon of ethanol. Corn uses more nitrogen fertilizer, more insecticides, more herbicides than any other crop. These false solutions will increase the climate crisis while aggravating and deepening inequality, hunger and poverty. Real solutions exist which can mitigate climate change while reducing hunger and poverty. According to the Stern Report, agriculture accounts for fourteen percent emissions, land use (referring largely to deforestation) accounts for eighteen percent, and transport accounts for fourteen percent. The increasing transport of fresh food, which could be grown locally, is part of these fourteen percent emissions. Not all agricultural systems however contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. Industrial chemical agriculture, also called the Green Revolution when introduced in Third World countries, is the major source of three greenhouse gases - carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and methane. Carbon dioxide is emitted from using fossil fuels for machines and pumping of ground water, and the production of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Chemical fertilizers also emit nitrogen oxygen, which is 300 times more lethal than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. And grain fed factory farming is a major source of methane. Studies indicate that a shift from grain fed to predominantly grass fed organic diet could reduce methane emission from livestock by upto fifty percent. Ecological, organic agriculture reduces emissions both by reducing dependence on fossil fuels, chemical fertilizers and intensive feed, as well as absorbing more carbon in the soil. Our studies show an increase of carbon sequestration of up to 200% in biodiverse organic systems. When "ecological and organic" is combined with "direct and local", emissions are further reduced by reducing energy use for "food miles", packaging and refrigeration of food. And local food systems will reduce the pressure to expand agriculture in the rainforests of Brazil and Indonesia. We could, with a timely transition reduce emissions, increase food security and food quality and improve the resilience of rural communities to deal with the impact of climate change. The transition from the industrial globalised food system being imposed by WTO, the World Bank and Global Agribusinesses to ecological and local food systems is both a mitigation and adaption strategy. It protects the poor and it protects the planet. The post-Kyoto framework must include ecological agriculture as a climate solution. http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2007-12/13shiva.cfm http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From shimogamo@attglobal.net Fri Jan 04 19:09:54 2008 Received: from kcout03.prserv.net ([12.154.55.33]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAyTy-0006Wx-MH for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:09:54 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout03) with ESMTP id <2008010502105720300ruu0ie> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:10:58 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <477EE72A.7020807@attglobal.net> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 11:10:50 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] Good and Evil at the Center of the Earth X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 02:09:55 -0000 A Quechua Christmas Carol by Greg Palast http://www.gregpalast.com (December 24 2007) [Quito] I don't know what the hell seized me. In the middle of an hour-long interview with the President of Ecuador, I asked him about his father. I'm not Barbara Walters. It's not the kind of question I ask. He hesitated. Then said, "My father was unemployed". He paused. Then added, "He took a little drugs to the States ... This is called in Spanish a mula [mule]. He passed four years in the states - in a jail." He continued. "I'd never talked about my father before". Apparently he hadn't. His staff stood stone silent, eyes widened. Correa's dad took that frightening chance in the 1960s, a time when his family, like almost all families in Ecuador, was destitute. Ecuador was the original "banana republic" - and the price of bananas had hit the floor. A million desperate Ecuadorans, probably a tenth of the entire adult population, fled to the USA anyway they could. "My mother told us he was working in the States". His father, released from prison, was deported back to Ecuador. Humiliated, poor, broken, his father, I learned later, committed suicide. At the end of our formal interview, through a doorway surrounded by paintings of the pale plutocrats who once ruled this difficult land, he took me into his own Oval Office. I asked him about an odd-looking framed note he had on the wall. It was, he said, from his daughter and her grade school class at Christmas time. He translated for me. "We are writing to remind you that in Ecuador there are a lot of very poor children in the streets and we ask you please to help these children who are cold almost every night". It was kind of corny. And kind of sweet. A smart display for a politician. Or maybe there was something else to it. Correa is one of the first dark-skinned men to win election to this Quechua and mixed-race nation. Certainly, one of the first from the streets. He'd won a surprise victory over the richest man in Ecuador, the owner of the biggest banana plantation. Doctor Correa, I should say, with a PhD in economics earned in Europe. Professor Correa as he is officially called - who, until not long ago, taught at the University of Illinois. And Professor Doctor Correa is one tough character. He told George Bush to take the US military base and stick it where the equatorial sun don't shine. He told the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which held Ecuador's finances by the throat, to go to hell. He ripped up the "agreements" which his predecessors had signed at financial gun point. He told the Miami bond vultures that were charging Ecuador usurious interest, to eat their bonds. He said "We are not going to pay off this debt with the hunger of our people". Food first, interest later. Much later. And he meant it. It was a stunning performance. I'd met two years ago with his predecessor, President Alfredo Palacio, a man of good heart, who told me, looking at the secret IMF agreements I showed him, "We cannot pay this level of debt. If we do, we are DEAD. And if we are dead, how can we pay?" Palacio told me that he would explain this to George Bush and Condoleezza Rice and the World Bank, then headed by Paul Wolfowitz. He was sure they would understand. They didn't. They cut off Ecuador at the knees. But Ecuador didn't fall to the floor. Correa, then Economics Minister, secretly went to Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president, and obtained emergency financing. Ecuador survived. And thrived. But Correa was not done. Elected President, one of his first acts was to establish a fund for the Ecuadoran refugees in America - to give them loans to return to Ecuador with a little cash and lot of dignity. And there were other dragons to slay. He and Palacio kicked US oil giant Occidental Petroleum out of the country. Correa STILL wasn't done. I'd returned from a very wet visit to the rainforest - by canoe to a Cofan Indian village in the Amazon where there was an epidemic of childhood cancers. The indigenous folk related this to the hundreds of open pits of oil sludge left to them by Texaco Oil, now part of Chevron, and its partners. I met the Cofan's chief. His three year old son swam in what appeared to be contaminated water then came out vomiting blood and died. Correa had gone there too, to the rainforest, though probably in something sturdier than a canoe. And President Correa announced that the company that left these filthy pits would pay to clean them up. But it's not just any company he was challenging. Chevron's largest oil tanker was named after a long-serving member of its Board of Directors, the Condoleezza. Our Secretary of State. The Cofan have sued Condi's corporation, demanding the oil company clean up the crap it left in the jungle. The cost would be roughly $12 billion. Correa won't comment on the suit itself, a private legal action. But if there's a verdict in favor of Ecuador's citizens, Correa told me, he will make sure Chevron pays up. Is he kidding? No one has ever made an oil company pay for their slop. Even in the USA, the Exxon Valdez case drags on to its 18th year. Correa is not deterred. He told me he would create an international tribunal to collect, if necessary. In retaliation, he could hold up payments to US companies who sue Ecuador in US courts. This is hard core. No one - NO ONE - has made such a threat to Bush and Big Oil and lived to carry it out. And, in an office tower looking down on Quito, the lawyers for Chevron were not amused. I met with them. "And it's the only case of cancer in the world? How many cases of children with cancer do you have in the States?" Rodrigo Perez, Texaco's top lawyer in Ecuador was chuckling over the legal difficulties the Indians would have in proving their case that Chevron-Texaco caused their kids' deaths. "If there is somebody with cancer there, [the Cofan parents] must prove [the deaths were] caused by crude or by petroleum industry. And, second, they have to prove that it is OUR crude - which is absolutely impossible." He laughed again. You have to see this on film to believe it. The oil company lawyer added, "No one has ever proved scientifically the connection between cancer and crude oil". Really? You could swim in the stuff and you'd be just fine. The Cofan had heard this before. When Chevron's Texaco unit came to their land the the oil men said they could rub the crude oil on their arms and it would cure their ailments. Now Condi's men had told me that crude oil doesn't cause cancer. But maybe they are right. I'm no expert. So I called one. Robert F Kennedy Jr, professor of Environmental Law at Pace University, told me that elements of crude oil production - benzene, toluene, and xylene, "are well-known carcinogens". Kennedy told me he's seen Chevron-Texaco's ugly open pits in the Amazon and said that this toxic dumping would mean jail time in the USA. But it wasn't as much what the Chevron-Texaco lawyers said that shook me. It was the way they said it. Childhood cancer answered with a chuckle. The Chevron lawyer, a wealthy guy, Jaime Varela, with a blond bouffant hairdo, in the kind of yellow chinos you'd see on country club links, was beside himself with delight at the impossibility of the legal hurdles the Cofan would face. Especially this one: Chevron had pulled all its assets out of Ecuador. The Indians could win, but they wouldn't get a dime. "What about the chairs in this office?" I asked. Couldn't the Cofan at least get those? "No", they laughed, the chairs were held in the name of the law firm. Well, now they might not be laughing. Correa's threat to use the power of his Presidency to protect the Indians, should they win, is a shocker. No one could have expected that. And Correa, no fool, knows that confronting Chevron means confronting the full power of the Bush Administration. But to this President, it's all about justice, fairness. "You [Americans] wouldn't do this to your own people", he told me. Oh yes we would, I was thinking to myself, remembering Alaska's Natives. Correa's not unique. He's the latest of a new breed in Latin America. Lula, President of Brazil, Evo Morales, the first Indian ever elected President of Bolivia, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. All "Leftists", as the press tells us. But all have something else in common: they are dark-skinned working-class or poor kids who found themselves leaders of nations of dark-skinned people who had forever been ruled by an elite of bouffant blonds. When I was in Venezuela, the leaders of the old order liked to refer to Chavez as, "the monkey". Chavez told me proudly, "I am negro e indio" - Black and Indian, like most Venezuelans. Chavez, as a kid rising in the ranks of the blond-controlled armed forces, undoubtedly had to endure many jeers of "monkey". Now, all over Latin America, the "monkeys" are in charge. And they are unlocking the economic cages. Maybe the mood will drift north. Far above the equator, a nation is ruled by a blond oil company executive. He never made much in oil - but every time he lost his money or his investors' money, his daddy, another oil man, would give him another oil well. And when, as a rich young man out of Philips Andover Academy, the wayward youth tooted a little blow off the bar, daddy took care of that too. Maybe young George got his powder from some guy up from Ecuador. I know this is an incredibly simple story. Indians in white hats with their dead kids and oil millionaires in black hats laughing at kiddy cancer and playing musical chairs with oil assets. But maybe it's just that simple. Maybe in this world there really is Good and Evil. Maybe Santa will sort it out for us, tell us who's been good and who's been bad. Maybe Lawyer Yellow Pants will wake up on Christmas Eve staring at the ghost of Christmas Future and promise to get the oil sludge out of the Cofan's drinking water. Or maybe we'll have to figure it out ourselves. When I met Chief Emergildo, I was reminded of an evening years back, when I was way the hell in the middle of nowhere in the Prince William Sound, Alaska, in the Chugach Native village of Chenega. I was investigating the damage done by Exxon's oil. There was oil sludge all over Chenega's beaches. It was March 1991, and I was in the home of village elder Paul Kompkoff on the island's shore, watching CNN. We stared in silence as "smart" bombs exploded in Baghdad and Basra. Then Paul said to me, in that slow, quiet way he had, "Well, I guess we're all Natives now". Well, maybe we are. But we don't have to be, do we? Maybe we can take some guidance from this tiny nation at the center of the earth. I listened back through my talk with President Correa. And I can assure his daughter that she didn't have to worry that her dad would forget about "the poor children who are cold" on the streets of Quito. Because the Professor Doctor is still one of them. ***** Watch the Palast investigation, Rumble in the Jungle: Big Oil and Little Indians, on {1} BBC Television Newsnight, now on-line via {2} www.GregPalast.com - and Thursday's US broadcast of {3} Democracy Now. For a copy of Palast's prior reports from Venezuela for BBC and Democracy Now, get "{4} The Assassination of Hugo Chavez," on DVD, filmed by award-winning videographer Richard Rowley. {5} Share This Links: {1} BBC Television Newsnight: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/7113903.stm {2} www.GregPalast.com: http://www.GregPalast.com {3} Democracy Now: http://www.democracynow.org {4} The Assassination of Hugo Chavez: http://www.palastinvestigativefund.org {5} Share This: http://www.gregpalast.com/?p=1935&akst_action=share-this http://www.gregpalast.com/a-quechua-christmas-carol/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From mstainsby@resist.ca Fri Jan 04 19:38:10 2008 Received: from defout.telus.net ([199.185.220.240]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JAyvK-0006av-5B; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:38:10 -0700 Received: from priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net ([64.180.8.77]) by priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.02 201-2186-121-104-20070414) with ESMTP id <20080105023924.DVZN1467.priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net>; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 19:39:24 -0700 Received: from [64.180.8.77] (d64-180-8-77.bchsia.telus.net [64.180.8.77]) by priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net (BorderWare MXtreme Infinity Mail Firewall) with ESMTP id C2G7CAGD9E; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 19:39:18 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <477EEDD6.5030303@resist.ca> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:39:18 -0700 From: Macdonald Stainsby User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Radical anti-capitalist environmental discussion." , The A-List , Redbadbear@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] Quebec City to celebrate carnage, genocide & death? X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 02:38:10 -0000 QUEBEC CITY WANTS TO CELEBRATE 400 YEARS ANNIVERSARY OF CARNAGE, GENOCIDE & DEATH OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE. MNN. Jan. 3, 2008. Some people have a twisted view of history. Josee Legault, who writes for the Montreal Gazette, complains that the 2008 New Years celebration in Quebec City was a disappointment. Colonialism is a mental illness. Some can see this. According to Legault, Quebec's major artists were absent. If they were boycotting the event, they showed good sense. For the world to escape the "colonial disease", the most honest and sensitive artists will lead the way. They will break out of the delusion and find the vision needed to affect a cure. Healing is certainly needed here. The illness that pervades colonial society and all of its agencies and institutions is plain to us, the Indigenous Peoples. We've been waiting for the rest of the world to wake up. Legault seems to criticize Le Devoir for saying "the founding of Quebec City was an historical mistake". Right on! What's to celebrate? Theft of our land? Vandalism? Plagues? Genocide? Complete denial of our existence? Establishment of twisted and diseased European social customs on our land? Pollution and destruction of our environment? We would have all been better off if the French and English had stayed home and cured their sicknesses instead of contaminating the rest of the world? When Jacques Cartier arrived at the modern site of Quebec City in 1534, he found a beautiful stand of nut trees. The new arrivals behaved strangely. Cartier kidnapped Donnacona's sons! He must have known this was wrong. When he came back, they chopped down our nut trees to build a fort where they barricaded themselves. Weird! Legault complains that the founder of Quebec City, Samuel de Champlain, "was all but ignored" in the celebrations. Let's take a look at this guy. He was a shameless promoter of colonialism, and a dangerous psychopath. When he first saw the Mohawks he opened fire on them with his new toy, the 'Arquebuse'. He then declared a campaign of genocide to wipe every last one of us out. From 1608 to 1635 he wreaked havoc on every part of Turtle Island that he could reach. In one of his campaigns he wiped out 30 of our villages. This was meant to support the French lie that our territory was "empty". Did Legault expect a re-enactment of this carnage? If so, she's a blood-thirsty vampire! According to Legault ignoring Champlain is "like the United States celebrating the by-centennial of the American Revolution without uttering the name of George Washington". She's right! George Washington is known to our people as the "Ranatakarias" - "destroyer of villages". He ordered General Sullivan into our territory to destroy everything. They torched our longhouses, our barns, our agricultural equipment, thousands of fruit trees, bushels of grain, our corn, our beans and our squash. When the people ran out, they were shot. They brought down over 100,000 of our people to almost nothing. The survivors fled to Fort Niagara. The British were no better!!! They sent General Amherst to finish the genocide with gifts of small pox infested blankets. Let's not kid ourselves, the aim of the American Revolution was to grab our land. The French allied with the Americans. The British made illegal agreements in Paris giving free reign to the "rebel" rabble to escalate the colonial land grab. Let's have truth before reconciliation. Admission and acknowledgement are required before there can be healing! The arrival of the European "found'l'ings" at Quebec City marks the beginning of an era of an apocolypse. An apology is not enough. Colonial society has to admit the devastation to us and our environment that has now been destroyed to the point where survival of the human race is in question. A few days ago the Montreal Gazette complained that the head honcho, Queen Elizabeth II, can't make the Quebec City bash. Are she and her handlers showing some good sense? This mindless nonsense is meant to stoke the colonial delirium and keep the public in a trance so they can keep being manipulated. All it produces on 'St. Jean Baptiste Day' is a bunch of drunken yahoos, driving around with their radios at full blast, their stinking feet hanging out the windows and 'fleur de lis' flags stuck in their gas tank. Who needs that? The 400th anniversary of the colonial disorder should be recognized. We need a full confession, an exorcism, whatever it takes to cure and wake people from this crazy fantasy. Quebecers and Canadians both need to stop being proud of genocidal maniacs. They need to stop celebrating the holocaust that plunked their ancestors on our land while killing most of us. They need to get the "pure laine" cobwebs out of their minds. Then we can examine the real character of our historical relationship. Legault seems to think that "It's a pretty sorry statement that this anniversary cannot be seen and presented for what it is". We agree! She doesn't know our history. It's not Quebec versus Canada or Canada versus Quebec . It's about theft, killing and lies. It's about colonial delusions. The Quebec City celebration committee shouldn't listen to Legault. If they do, they might be temped to bring in a bunch of cabaret "Indians" from some "Indian" village wearing vinyl buckskins dancing to "Yankee Doodle Dandy". That goes for the "Willy Two Willies" and the "plastic medicine men" too. We've seen this kind of nonsense before. Now we have a smart new generation of indigenous youth who would never demean themselves this way. Quebecers, Canadians and all residents of Turtle Island, it is possible to develop immunity to the colonial disease, to see history for what it was. 40 of the 50 U.S. states have indigenous names. So do Saskatchewan , Manitoba , Ontario , Quebec , Nunavut and Nunavik. To promote healing, an appropriate first move would be to restore the Indigenous names to every place on Turtle Island . Quebec already bears an Algonquin name. If you look at the word in French, it sounds like "kiss my ass" [cue, bec]. It's time to take the lies and profanity out of history. In other words, let's kill the ill[ness]! Kahentinetha Horn MNN Mohawk Nation News -- Macdonald Stainsby Coordinator, http://oilsandstruth.org -- moderated radical news & discussion list: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht. From critical.montages@gmail.com Fri Jan 04 22:22:45 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.156]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JB1Ua-0006pZ-DK for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 22:22:45 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so3324694fgb.45 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:22:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.25.17 with SMTP id 17mr17539115fgy.28.1199510562678; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:22:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 21:22:42 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 00:22:42 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: A-List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] Doug Ireland on Obama X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 05:22:45 -0000 Obama casse la baraque Etats-Unis | vendredi, 4 janvier 2008 | par Doug Ireland La campagne pour la pr=E9sidentielle am=E9ricaine entre enfin dans le vif du sujet avec les caucus de l'Iowa, qui ont vu la victoire du beau Barack Obama dans le camp d=E9mocrate. D=E9cryptage d'un dr=F4le de candidat. En cette 7=E8 ann=E9e de guerre en Irak, les =E9lecteurs de l'Iowa ont donn= =E9 une baffe historique =E0 la candidate de l'establishment du parti d=E9mocrate : Hillary Clinton. Hier soir, celle qui a vot=E9 pour cette guerre a subi une cuisante d=E9faite, n'arrivant que troisi=E8me. Il y a quelques mois encore, les pontifes m=E9diatiques d=E9claraient pourtant que la victoire de Hillary La Froide =E9tait =AB in=E9vitable =BB. Et, jeud= i soir, la Reine de Glace a =E9t=E9 d=E9tr=F4n=E9e par le s=E9nateur de l'Ill= inois, Barack Obama, un m=E9tis dont le p=E8re vient du Kenya et la m=E8re du Kansas, au coeur de l'Am=E9rique profonde, et oppos=E9 =E0 la guerre en Ira= k depuis le d=E9but. Dans les 1 800 r=E9unions locales du caucus de l'Iowa, quelque 236 000 personnes ont brav=E9 les vents glaciaux de la plaine pour se rendre aux urnes. Le taux de participation a battu tous les records, multipli=E9 par deux compar=E9 =E0 celui de 2004. Il y avait de la passion dans ce vote. Les femmes ont vot=E9 Obama Le r=E9sultat final est le suivant pour les d=E9mocrates : 38 % pour Barack Obama, 30 % pour John Edwards et 29 % pour Hillary Clinton. Sept =E9lecteurs sur dix ont rejet=E9 la candidature de Hillary. C'est =E9norme ! Selon des sondages effectu=E9s =E0 la sortie des urnes, Obama l'= a m=EAme confortablement battue chez les femmes avec 35 % de votes en sa faveur, contre 23 % pour Clinton. Quant aux autres candidats qui n'ont ramass=E9 que des miettes, =E0 savoir les s=E9nateurs Joe Biden du Delaware (pr=E9sident de la Commission des Affaires Etrang=E8res du S=E9nat) et Christopher Dodd du Connecticut (ancien pr=E9sident du Parti D=E9mocrate), ils ont renonc=E9 =E0 leurs candidatures apr=E8s l'annonce des r=E9sultats.= Le Gouverneur du Nouveau-Mexique, Bill Richardson, un autre m=E9tis n=E9 d'un p=E8re banquier blanc et d'une m=E8re mexicaine, esp=E8re toujours =EAtre nomm=E9 comme candidat =E0 la vice-pr=E9sidence dans le ticket du Parti D=E9mocrate. Et se maintient donc dans la course en d=E9pit de son score d=E9courageant de 2 %. Mais pour combien de temps encore ? Les caisses d'Edwards presque =E0 sec Le fringant John Edwards, ancien s=E9nateur de l'Etat sudiste de Caroline du Nord, ex-candidat =E0 la vice-pr=E9sidence du Parti D=E9mocrate en 2004 et avocat millionnaire, a fait campagne sur le th=E8me de =AB la corruption de Washington caus=E9e par l'avidit=E9 des grandes entreprises =BB. Il b=E9n=E9ficiait du soutien des syndicats de l'Iowa ainsi que d'une bonne organisation politique sur le terrain. En d=E9pit de son message =E0 tendance "populisme-=E9conomique", il a =E9t=E9 devanc=E9 de 6 points par Obama au sein des votants syndiqu=E9s. Edwards est particuli=E8rement fier d'avoir battu Hillary qui avait d=E9pens=E9 20 millions de dollars dans l'Iowa (selon le Los Angeles Times) contre =E0 peine 4 millions pour Edwards. S'il avait beau clamer =E0 l'annonce des r=E9sultats que =AB ce soir le statu quo a perdu et le changement a gagn=E9 =BB, force est de constater que, lui aussi, tout comme Hillary, a =E9t=E9 jug=E9 trop vieux jeu par les votants du caucus. Imm=E9diatement apr=E8s le vote, il a n=E9anmoins annonc=E9 qu'il maintenai= t sa candidature. H=E9las pour lui, sa tr=E9sorerie de campagne est presque =E0 sec. Dans ce contexte, difficile d'imaginer qu'il pourrait l'emporter ailleurs quand on sait que l'Iowa est l'un des Etats o=F9 la base d=E9mocrate compte parmi les plus progressistes et o=F9 Edwards fait campagne depuis quatre ans, jouissant ainsi d'une forte notori=E9t=E9. D=E9j=E0, pour la primaire, essentielle, qui se d=E9roulera dans le New Hampshire la semaine prochaine, il est a la tra=EEne dans les sondages et ce, depuis des mois. Un sondage publi=E9 ce matin aux Etats-Unis donne Obama =E0 39 %, Clinton =E0 34 % et Edwards seulement =E0 17 %. Les discours diaphanes d'Obama D=E9sormais, le concours pour l'investiture du parti d=E9mocrate se r=E9dui= t donc =E0 deux personnes : Hillary et Obama. Dans ses discours =E9l=E9gants, quoique souvent diaphanes, Obama proclame ad nauseam qu'il incarne =AB le changement =BB. Lors de l'un de ses meetings la semaine derni=E8re, le Washington Post a relev=E9 qu'il a r=E9p=E9t=E9 le mot =AB changement =BB 3= 5 fois en une demi-heure ! Face au d=E9sir des =E9lecteurs avides de sang neuf, la peau brune du beau et jeune Obama (45 ans) s'est transform=E9e en un avantage, m=EAme si l'Iowa est un Etat blanc =E0 95 %. Tout comme son =E2ge (il l'a emport=E9 aupr=E8s de 57 % des moins de 29 ans), sa race symbolise le changement qu'il veut incarner. Mais, au fond, Barack Obama est-il si diff=E9rent ? Tout comme Hillary, il =AB b=E9n=E9ficie du soutien d'importants lobbyistes branch=E9s =BB comm= e l'a soulign=E9 The Hill, l'hebdomadaire du Congr=E8s am=E9ricain dans son =E9dition du 28 mars 2007. Dans cet article =E9crit par Mike Williams, directeur des relations gouvernementales =E0 Washington du Cr=E9dit Suisse Securities, The Hill qualifie la liste des lobbyistes faisant campagne pour Obama d'=AB aussi large =BB que celle de Clinton. Dans un autre article en date du 20 d=E9cembre, le m=EAme hebdo r=E9v=E8le = les noms de deux autres lobbyistes de taille oeuvrant pour Obama. Ces derniers sont =E0 la fois r=E9mun=E9r=E9s par le s=E9nateur et par leurs employeurs respectifs. Il s'agit en l'occurrence de Patton Boggs, un cabinet d'avocats dont le site web s'enorgueillit d'=EAtre =AB syst=E9matiquement class=E9 n=B01 des lobbyistes par le National Journal = =BB et du Podesta Group, class=E9 n=B03 des lobbyistes par le Washington Magazine. Ce qui n'est pas rien, quand on sait que tous les clients de ces lobbys, o=F9 Obama compte de nombreux soutiens, sont les multinationales les plus importantes du monde. Faut-il y voir l=E0 la raison pour laquelle dans ses appels =E0 =AB une nouvelle =E8re sans divisions =BB, Obama semble ignorer l'enjeu que repr=E9sente la cupidit=E9 galopante des grandes entreprises ? Dans sa chronique du 24 d=E9cembre 2007, le tr=E8s progressiste chroniqueur du New York Times, Paul Krugman, critiquait d'ailleurs vivement Obama pour avoir attaqu=E9 les comit=E9s d'action politique des syndicats comme des centres =AB d'int=E9r=EAts sp=E9ciaux =BB qui ont =AB trop d'influence =E0 Washington =BB. Tout comme les comit=E9s d'action politique des grandes entreprises r=E9put=E9s pour =EAtre extr=EAmement bien financ=E9s. Krugman notait qu'Obama n'=E9tait pas soutenu par les syndicats, car son message en faveur d'une =AB nouvelle politique =BB d=E9passant =AB les amertumes de= la politique partisane =BB n'avait pas de sens pour les leaders syndicaux. De par leur exp=E9rience en mati=E8re de confrontation avec les grandes entreprises et leurs alli=E9s politiques, ceux-ci savent pertinemment que l'esprit partisan ne dispara=EEtra pas dans un proche avenir. Jesse Jackson critique Obama Les sermons centristes et un peu fades d'Obama, toujours plein de bondieuseries, qui appellent =E0 =AB la fin de la division en sections de notre politique =BB sont m=EAme =E2prement critiqu=E9s par l'un de ses prop= res supporters : Jesse Jackson, le doyen des leaders noirs am=E9ricains et candidat =E0 la pr=E9sidence =E0 deux reprises dans les ann=E9es 80. Interview=E9 par The State, un quotidien de Caroline du Sud le 18 septembre dernier, Jackson accusait Obama =AB de la jouer trop blanc =BB, car il n'avait pas fait d'allusion aux probl=E8mes de justice raciale lors de l'arrestation de six lyc=E9ens noirs =E0 Jena, dans l'Etat sudiste de Louisiane pour tentative de meurtre. Une rixe avait eu lieu lorsque des noirs avaient "os=E9" s'asseoir sous un arbre "r=E9serv=E9" aux blancs. L'injustice flagrante de ces arrestations avait provoqu=E9 des manifestations importantes de la part de toutes les associations de noirs auxquelles s'=E9taient joints des religieux et des leaders progressistes blancs. Obama pr=EAt =E0 bombarder le Pakistan Mais ce sont sur les relations internationales qu'Obama s'est montr=E9, sur le fond, proche de Hillary, partisane d'une politique imp=E9rialiste. Par exemple, le 1er ao=FBt dernier, comme l'a rapport=E9 l'agence Reuters, Obama a menac=E9 de bombarder unilat=E9ralement le Pakistan, si les services de renseignements am=E9ricains y localisaient des cadres d'Al Qaida et que le pr=E9sident Musharraf refusait d'agir. Le discours d'Obama devant le tr=E8s =E9litiste Chicago Council on Global Affairs le 23 avril 2007 =E9tait tout aussi clair. Il y affirmait croire en une Pax Americana globale. Il disait qu'un =AB pr=E9sident am=E9ricain n= e devrait jamais h=E9siter =E0 utiliser la force, m=EAme de mani=E8re unilat=E9rale, pour prot=E9ger nos int=E9r=EAts vitaux quand nous sommes attaqu=E9s ou sous le coup d'une menace imminente. =BB En ayant recours =E0 la notion de =AB menace imminente =BB, Obama adopte la politique d'une guerre de pr=E9vention si ch=E8re =E0 Bush. Et Obama de continuer : =AB je crois toujours que l'Am=E9rique est le dernier et le meilleur espoir de la plan=E8te. Il faut simplement montrer au monde pourquoi. Le pr=E9sident actuel [Bush] occupe la Maison-Blanche, mais pendant ces six derni=E8res ann=E9es le poste de "leader du monde libre" est rest=E9 vacant. Il est temps de l'occuper =BB. Rien d'=E9tonnant donc que ce discours muscl=E9 d'Obama ait =E9t=E9 vivemen= t salu=E9 par le gourou n=E9o-conservateur Robert Kagan dans une chronique publi=E9e le 29 avril 2007 dans le Washington Post et intitul=E9e =AB Obama= , l'interventionniste =BB. Ce m=EAme Kagan est le co-auteur (avec un autre n=E9o-conservateur de taille, William Kristol) du c=E9l=E8bre article =AB Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy =BB (Vers une politique =E9trang=E8re n=E9o-r=E9ganienne, du nom de l'ancien pr=E9sident am=E9ricain) paru en 199= 6 dans la prestigieuse revue Foreign Affairs. On y lisait que l'objectif de Washington devait =EAtre de pr=E9server =AB l'h=E9g=E9monie am=E9ricaine= afin de remplir notre responsabilit=E9 dans le monde =BB. Dans la revue Foreign Affairs de juillet-ao=FBt 2007, Obama lui-m=EAme =E9crivait un article "interventioniste" acclam=E9 par l'hebdo anglais conservateur The Economist qui sp=E9cifiait : =AB il est difficile de ne pas qualifier la politique =E9trang=E8re de Barack Obama de "clintonienne". Le calcul de Monsieur Obama semble =EAtre que sa rh=E9torique visionnaire sera assez puissante pour forcer les =E9lecteurs =E0 consid=E9rer les r=E9compenses psychiques d'une politique =E9trang=E8re omnivore qui fonctionnerait, au lieu de penser aux risques et aux co=FBts d'intervenir =E0 tort. =BB Idem pour l'Iran Comme le notait le quotidien conservateur New York Sun du 26 d=E9cembre 2006 dans un longue article sur la politique =E9trang=E8re du s=E9nateur, = =AB Obama se donne de la peine pour se d=E9marquer de la gauche qui minimise les dangers mena=E7ant l'Am=E9rique =BB. Le quotidien rapporte =E9galement qu'=AB il a tendance =E0 soutenir l'id=E9e d'un bombardement de l'Iran, si d'autres m=E9thodes n'arrivent pas =E0 convaincre T=E9h=E9ran d'abandonner = son programme d'armes nucl=E9aires =BB. Et Obama s'est d=E9lib=E9r=E9ment absen= t=E9 lorsque le S=E9nat a vot=E9 la r=E9solution qualifiant la Garde r=E9publica= ine iranienne d' =AB organisation terroriste =BB. Cette r=E9solution avait =E0 l'=E9poque =E9t=E9 interpr=E9t=E9e par tout le monde ou presque comme un ch= =E8que en blanc pour bombarder l'Iran si Bush voulait le faire. Quid de l'Irak ? Quant a l'Irak, il est vrai qu'Obama s'est oppos=E9 a son invasion en 2002. Il =E9tait en effet =E0 la t=EAte d'une circonscription =E0 moiti=E9 = noire (une population tr=E8s oppos=E9e =E0 la guerre) et =E0 moiti=E9 universitai= re (la c=E9l=E8bre universit=E9 de Chicago, r=E9put=E9e =EAtre un centre d'agi= tation anti-invasion s'y trouve). Plus tard, la position d'Obama s'est r=E9v=E9l=E9e plus ambig=FCe. En juillet 2004, au sujet du vote du S=E9nat = de 2002 sur la guerre, Obama d=E9clarait au New York Times : =AB qu'aurais-je fait ? Je ne sais pas =BB. La m=EAme ann=E9e, il annon=E7ait aussi =E0 la National Public Radio : =AB je ne consid=E8re pas ce vote comme une d=E9cision facile et je n'=E9tais certainement pas en position de voter pour ou contre. Je crois qu'il y a plusieurs points de vue valides sur cette question =BB. Voil=E0 qui ne constitue pas une d=E9claration tonitruante d'un anti-guerre ! En tant que politicien opportuniste, Obama n'a commenc=E9 =E0 clairement exprimer son refus de la guerre en Irak que lorsqu'il a lanc=E9 sa campagne pour la pr=E9sidence. Et encore, c'=E9tait un moyen de se distinguer de Clinton, d'Edwards et de Biden qui ont tous vot=E9 pour. Obama a m=EAme couru apr=E8s les conseils de Colin Powell, l'apologiste pr=E9f=E9r=E9 de Bush lorsqu'il s'=E9tait agi d'envahir l'Irak et le d=E9nonciateur des fantomatiques =AB armes de destruction massives =BB. Powell a, en personne, admis lors de l'=E9mission t=E9l=E9vision "Meet the Press" du 10 juin 2007, qu'il avait conseill=E9 Obama =E0 plusieurs reprises. On peut applaudir la d=E9faite de Hillary et se f=E9liciter qu'une partie de l'Am=E9rique soit assez m=FBre pour enfin accepter un noir comme candidat =E0 la pr=E9sidence. Mais de l=E0 =E0 attendre beaucoup de =AB changements =BB de la part d'Obama s'il devenait =E9ventuellement le locataire de la Maison Blanche, alors l=E0 mes enfants, il ne faut pas exag=E9rer ! Le slogan de sa campagne est =AB A change we can believe in = =BB (Un changement auquel on peut croire). Moi, je n'y crois pas. --=20 Yoshie From the.buffalo.in.the.midst@gmail.com Sat Jan 05 12:20:21 2008 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.187]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBEZB-0008DS-BM for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 12:20:21 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so6442237rvb.59 for ; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 11:20:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.125.5 with SMTP id x5mr4625803wfc.40.1199560824536; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 11:20:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.81.16 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:20:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:20:24 -0800 From: "Leigh Meyers" To: "The A-List" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] From the "belly of the operational beast" X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 19:20:21 -0000 "This status makes Guam one of the world's most insignificant places. In newspapers, websites, blogs, by both Chamorros and non Chamorros, everywhere, you'll find this. Its not really exotic, not really prosperous, not really authentic, not really America, not really Asia, not really the Pacific. Yet at the same time, Guam is one of the world's most important places. It is one of the United States' most important military bases, because of its proximity to Asia and because of its ambiguous political status, the fact that its a colony and not a state or a foreign country." A new member for OOBC (Out of Iraq Bloggers Caucus): http://ooibc.blogspot.com/ NO REST FOR THE AWAKE - MINAGAHET CHAMORRO Blog dedicated to Chamorro issues and usage of the Chamoru language. This blog is meant to inform readers about the issues affecting the Chamorro people, who are the indigenous islanders of Guam, Saipan, Tinian, Luta and Pagan of the Marianas Islands. Feel free to comment on my posts, and if you want, email me and I can sign you up as a member to post on the blog yourself. Pues Haggannaihon ha', ya taitai na'ya, ya Si Yu'us Ma'ase para i finatto-mu. http://minagahet.blogspot.com/ From critical.montages@gmail.com Sat Jan 05 13:54:50 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBG2b-0008O3-Rn for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:54:50 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so3463016fgb.45 for ; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 12:54:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.72.15 with SMTP id u15mr18261581fga.21.1199566493225; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 12:54:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 12:54:53 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 15:54:53 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: A-List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] Left in Crisis X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 20:54:50 -0000 Left in Crisis posted by Yoshie Responses to the Robert Brenner-Sam Gindin debate (7 December 2007), as well as the debate itself, make me think, yet again, that it would be better for leftists to drop the oft-asked question -- "Is capitalism in crisis?" -- and ask different questions. Capitalism as a mode of production will never be in crisis on the global scale. There are always global economic trends, some of which negatively impact profit rates sometimes, but their impacts differ dramatically from one nation to another, depending on their political economies, social structures, and (most importantly) cultural conditions (which alone are subject to leftists' interventions at least to a certain extent even before leftists find themselves in a position to change political economy and social structure on the national level). Capitalism is always changing, but more profound changes happen during some periods than others, changes that amount to transition from one regime of accumulation to another regime, shifting from old national and inter-national political structures functional to the old regime to new national and inter-national ones that better fit the new regime. The emergence of US hegemony, made possible by the Second World War whose outcome ended the age of inter-imperialist wars, was one such shift; the end of the post-WW2 boom was another such shift; the possibility of the end of the dollar hegemony on the horizon today may be another shift. Each transition presents popular classes with political openings. The question is whether popular classes are so organized and motivated to take advantage of them. It is on this crucial question that Brenner and Gindin agree: whether or not capitalism is in crisis, it is certain that leftists, especially leftists in the North, are, in large part due to the undeniable problem of increasing atomization of working people in the North, working people in the USA above all, and in no small part due to the absence of a systemic alternative1 to capitalism that inspires people and commands their allegiance. When people are neither organized nor motivated to take advantage of the openings, the ruling classes will, establishing a new regime of accumulation. Even when and where people are organized and motivated, they are not necessarily organized and motivated by forces and ideas that come from the Marxist tradition.2 "Indeed, for the moment at least, Marx has yielded the historical stage to Mohammed and the Holy Ghost. If God died in the cities of the industrial revolution, he has risen again in the postindustrial cities of the developing world," declares Mike Davis ("Planet of Slums," New Left Review 26, March-April 2004). Recognizing the same phenomenon, Aijaz Ahmad says: The secular world has to be just twice over: in terms of what it has defined for itself, and also to ward off the claim that God would have given better justice. That is to say, the secular world has to have enough justice in it for one not to have to constantly invoke God's justice against the injustices of the profane. ("Islam, Islamism and the West," Socialist Register 2008) But how? In more practical terms than Davis and Ahmad, Randhir Singh clarifies what is to be done: "better negotiate the necessary trade-offs between economic development and social justice, between requirements of productivity or efficiency and environmental sustainability or quality life which is not entirely a matter of material progress or economic growth" ("Future of Socialism," MRZine, 29 December 2007). And yet it is far from self-evident to all, the least of all to the religious, that secular leftists are better at negotiating the aforementioned trade-off -- as well as another trade-off, that between liberty and security -- than those who "invoke God's justice against the injustices of the profane," given the experience of state socialism of the 20th century and still existing governments led by self-identified socialists or other secular leftists. The crisis of the secular Left will thus continue. Recognizing that as the more urgent problem than whether capitalism today is dynamic or stagnant is the first step toward overcoming it. 1 The idea of socialism of the 21st century, struggled over in Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia, is still in its infancy, at present more an alternative to US hegemony and the neoliberal regime of accumulation than an alternative to capitalism as such, and forces that pushed and have kept Hugo Ch=E1vez, Rafael Correa, and Evo Morales in power are composed of contradictory classes and political currents. 2 At least consciously. The Marxist tradition, however, has left indelible marks upon all forces of popular classes, even those that have expressely rejected it: [D]espite the fashion for comparing it with political movements of the far right, Islamism could more accurately be described as "Islamo-Leninism." If Leninism is a secular movement that denies its origins in religion, Islamism is an avowed religious movement that suppresses its debts to secular thinking; eschatological thinking is equally central to both. (John Gray, "Faith in Reason: Secular Fantasies of a Godless Age," Harper's Magazine, January 2008, p. 88) I'd qualify Gray's remark: those who may be properly called "Islamo-Leninists" are those Islamists, such as the Islamists of Iran, Hizballah, and Hamas, who have the capacity to build mass organizations of popular classes for their own national projects inflected with populism and anti-imperialism, not to be confused, for instance, with terrorist cells of Al-Qaeda-type Islamism. -- Yoshie From the.buffalo.in.the.midst@gmail.com Sat Jan 05 14:57:25 2008 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.181]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBH1B-0008TM-DH for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:57:25 -0700 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j32so10595593waf.19 for ; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:57:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.191.2 with SMTP id o2mr2033253wff.132.1199570250233; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:57:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.81.16 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 13:57:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 13:57:30 -0800 From: "Leigh Meyers" To: "The A-List" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] Indigenous being forced off Texas land for Border Wall X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 21:57:25 -0000 Indigenous land owners in Texas plea for immediate intervention, US prepares to seize lands for border wall from Atlantic Free Press - Hard Truths for Hard Times by Margo Tamez via Brenda Norrell Homeland Security has issued a 30-day notice to south Texas land owners, expiring Monday, January 7, 2007, to seize private lands in Texas for the border wall. Lipan Apache issue a call for help. This is a request for immediate intervention on behalf of indigenous land title holders of the rancheria of El Calaboz, La Paloma, and El Ranchito in South Texas. I am writing to you this evening as the indigenous peoples of El Calaboz, La Paloma and El Ranchito rancherias in South Texas express grave fear for their safety, their livelihoods, and being ripped violently apart from our sacred lands held in our communities prior to contact with Spanish settlers and empresarios, and thereafter, in continuity. Elders, such as Eloisa Garcia Tamez, and others in our communities threatened with Eminent Domain, by the Department of Homeland Security and carried out by Secretary Chertoff, have authorized me to request immediate emergency intervention from the International Indian Treaty Council at this time. In Full: http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3188/81/ From shimogamo@attglobal.net Sat Jan 05 16:14:19 2008 Received: from kcout03.prserv.net ([12.154.55.33]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBIDb-00009o-Gu for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 16:14:19 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout03) with ESMTP id <2008010523141820300oiru6e> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Sat, 5 Jan 2008 23:14:19 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <47800F44.5090106@attglobal.net> Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 08:14:12 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] Is A World Wide Famine In The Works? X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:14:19 -0000 by Thomas Riggins Countercurrents.org (December 21 2007) Was it just seven years ago that the new millennium dawned? I remember all the talk about how this new era would give us a chance to escape from all the follies of the 20th century. Well, it didn't take long to realize that all the old follies were still with us, waiting to be repeated. World hunger is one of them. The last century was dotted with mass famines, all of them man made. Surely the UN and the leading nations of the world would not let that sorry record repeat itself? It appears, however, that they will. The UN is doing its part to help prevent famines, but the UN can only do what the leading nations, represented on the Security Council will allow it to do. We must remember that any criticism of the UN is in reality a criticism of the five permanent members of the Security Council. At any rate, the UN has warned us that a famine of Biblical proportions may be on the way. Tuesday's New York Times has the story. "World Food Supply is Shrinking, UN Agency Warns", by Elisabeth Rosenthal (December 18 2007). Here is the gist of it. Jacques Diouf, who runs the UN Food and Agriculture organization has stated that there "is a very serious risk that fewer people will be able to get food" in the coming years. That doesn't sound very good at all. Rosenthal, reporting from Rome, says his reason for announcing this is that because of "an 'unforeseen [?] and unprecedented' shift, the world food supply is dwindling rapidly and food prices are soaring [good old supply and demand] to historic levels". There appears to be only twelve weeks worth of wheat and eight of corn left in storage (based on world wide consumption levels.) to feed the world in case of an emergency. One reason for this is that it is more profitable to grow non food crops than food crops. There has been "a shift away from farming for human consumption to crops for biofuels and cattle feed" [more McDonald's burgers for the First World obese]. And, don't overlook the fact that "the early effects of global warming have decreased crop yields in some crucial places". The leader of the World Food Program, Josette Sheeran, is quoted as saying, "We're concerned that we are facing the perfect storm for the world's hungary". Other experts are equally glum. A major, crop disease or climate change in an important area would put the hungary in "a risky situation". This has already happened in Australia (lack of rain) and In Ukraine (also climate change) with less food being produced. The UN's Diouf thinks the advanced countries will have to come up with new ideas to reflect the new economic and environmental realities. New ideas are in the works, but they may be based on putting people before profits. When has the US done that lately? But not to worry here in the USA. We will be able to ride it out. Ms Sheeran noted that, "In the US, Australia and Europe, there's a very substantial capacity to adapt to the effects on food - with money, technology, research and development. In the developing world, there isn't." It's comforting to know that if disaster strikes it will be the poor of the Third World who die off while we will continue to pollute the atmosphere, destroy the climate, and have all the junk food we need to see us through. _____ Thomas Riggins is the book review editor for Political Affairs and can be reached at pabooks@politicalaffairs.net or at Thomas Riggins Blog. http://www.countercurrents.org/riggins211207.htm ______ World Food Supply Is Shrinking, UN Agency Warns by Elisabeth Rosenthal The New York Times (December 18 2007) ROME - In an "unforeseen and unprecedented" shift, the world food supply is dwindling rapidly and food prices are soaring to historic levels, the United Nations' top food and agriculture official warned Monday. The changes created "a very serious risk that fewer people will be able to get food", particularly in the developing world, said Jacques Diouf, head of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. The agency's food price index rose by more than forty percent this year, compared with nine percent the year before - a rate that was already unacceptable, Mr Diouf said. New figures show that the total cost of food imported by the neediest countries rose 25 percent in the last year, to $107 million. At the same time, reserves of cereals are severely depleted, the agency's records show. World wheat stores declined eleven percent this year, to the lowest level since 1980. That corresponds with twelve weeks of the world's total consumption, much less than the average of eighteen weeks' consumption, in storage during the 2000-2005 period. There are only eight weeks of corn left, down from eleven weeks in the same five-year period. Prices of wheat and oilseeds are at record highs, Mr Diouf said Monday. Wheat prices have risen by $130 a ton, or 52 percent, since a year ago. United States wheat futures broke $10 a bushel for the first time Monday, a psychological milestone. Mr Diouf said the crisis was a result of a confluence of recent supply and demand factors that, he said, were here to stay. On the supply side, the early effects of global warming have decreased crop yields in some crucial places. So has a shift away from farming for human consumption to crops for biofuels and cattle feed. Demand for grain is increasing as the world's population grows and more is diverted to feed cattle as the population of upwardly mobile meat-eaters grows. "We're concerned that we are facing the perfect storm for the world's hungry", said Josette Sheeran, executive director of the World Food Program, in a telephone interview. She said that her agency's food procurement costs had gone up fifty percent in the last five years and that some poor people were being "priced out of the food market". To make matters worse, high oil prices have doubled shipping costs in the last year, putting stress on poor nations that need to import food and the humanitarian agencies that provide it. Climate specialists say the poor's vulnerability will only increase. "If there's a significant change in climate in one of our high production areas, if there is a disease that affects a major crop, we are in a very risky situation", said S Mark Howden of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research organization in Canberra, Australia. Already "unusual weather events", linked to climate change - like drought, floods and storms - have decreased production in important exporting countries like Australia and Ukraine, Mr Diouf said. In southern Australia, a significant reduction in rainfall in the last few years led some farmers to sell their land and move to Tasmania, where water is more reliable, said Mr Howden, one of the authors of a recent series of papers on climate change and the world food supply, published in the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "In the US, Australia and Europe, there's a very substantial capacity to adapt to the effects on food - with money, technology, research and development. In the developing world, there isn't." Ms Sheeran said that on a recent trip to Mali she was told that food stocks were at an all-time low. The World Food Program feeds millions of children in schools and people with HIV and AIDS. Poor nutrition in these groups increases the risk of serious disease and death. Mr Diouf suggested that all countries and international agencies would have to "revisit" agricultural and aid policies they adopted "in a different economic environment". For example, with food and oil prices approaching records, it may not make sense to send food aid to poorer countries, but instead to focus on helping farmers grow food locally. The food organization plans to start a new initiative that will offer farmers in poor countries vouchers that can be redeemed for seeds and fertilizer and will try to help them adapt to climate change. Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/business/worldbusiness/18supply.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From critical.montages@gmail.com Sun Jan 06 02:01:36 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.152]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBRNw-0000lR-AS for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 02:01:36 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so3567555fgb.45 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 01:01:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.74.15 with SMTP id w15mr17865902fga.43.1199610103951; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 01:01:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 01:01:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 04:01:43 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: A-List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: Subject: [A-List] U.S. Considers New Covert Push Within Pakistan X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:01:37 -0000 No wonder that the New York Times no longer wants to say much about human rights violations in Iran and would rather talk about the elegance of Islamically correct fashion there (Nazila Fathi, "Designer's Rainbow Brightens Iranian Women's Look," 2 January 2008, ) instead. The political unconscious of Democratic Iowa caucus voters, especially of Independent PMC ones, is in tune with the changing focus of the empire: Obama, alone among all presidential candidates, emphasized early on the readiness to move more aggressively into Pakistan (a nuclear armed state whose population is more than twice that of Iran), as Doug Ireland reminds us ("Obama casse la baraque," Bakchich, 4 January 2008, ). This, too, will blow back against the empire. -- Yoshie January 6, 2008 U.S. Considers New Covert Push Within Pakistan By STEVEN LEE MYERS, DAVID E. SANGER and ERIC SCHMITT This article is by Steven Lee Myers, David E. Sanger and Eric Schmitt. WASHINGTON =97 President Bush's senior national security advisers are debating whether to expand the authority of the Central Intelligence Agency and the military to conduct far more aggressive covert operations in the tribal areas of Pakistan. The debate is a response to intelligence reports that Al Qaeda and the Taliban are intensifying efforts there to destabilize the Pakistani government, several senior administration officials said. Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and a number of President Bush's top national security advisers met Friday at the White House to discuss the proposal, which is part of a broad reassessment of American strategy after the assassination 10 days ago of the Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto. There was also talk of how to handle the period from now to the Feb. 18 elections, and the aftermath of those elections. Several of the participants in the meeting argued that the threat to the government of President Pervez Musharraf was now so grave that both Mr. Musharraf and Pakistan's new military leadership were likely to give the United States more latitude, officials said. But no decisions were made, said the officials, who declined to speak for attribution because of the highly delicate nature of the discussions. Many of the specific options under discussion are unclear and highly classified. Officials said that the options would probably involve the C.I.A. working with the military's Special Operations forces. The Bush administration has not formally presented any new proposals to Mr. Musharraf, who gave up his military role last month, or to his successor as the army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who the White House thinks will be more sympathetic to the American position than Mr. Musharraf. Early in his career, General Kayani was an aide to Ms. Bhutto while she was prime minister and later led the Pakistani intelligence service. But at the White House and the Pentagon, officials see an opportunity in the changing power structure for the Americans to advocate for the expanded authority in Pakistan, a nuclear-armed country. "After years of focusing on Afghanistan, we think the extremists now see a chance for the big prize =97 creating chaos in Pakistan itself," one senior official said. The new options for expanded covert operations include loosening restrictions on the C.I.A. to strike selected targets in Pakistan, in some cases using intelligence provided by Pakistani sources, officials said. Most counterterrorism operations in Pakistan have been conducted by the C.I.A.; in Afghanistan, where military operations are under way, including some with NATO forces, the military can take the lead. The legal status would not change if the administration decided to act more aggressively. However, if the C.I.A. were given broader authority, it could call for help from the military or deputize some forces of the Special Operations Command to act under the authority of the agency. The United States now has about 50 soldiers in Pakistan. Any expanded operations using C.I.A. operatives or Special Operations forces, like the Navy Seals, would be small and tailored to specific missions, military officials said. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who was on vacation last week and did not attend the White House meeting, said in late December that "Al Qaeda right now seems to have turned its face toward Pakistan and attacks on the Pakistani government and Pakistani people." In the past, the administration has largely stayed out of the tribal areas, in part for fear that exposure of any American-led operations there would so embarrass the Musharraf government that it could further empower his critics, who have declared he was too close to Washington. Even now, officials say, some American diplomats and military officials, as well as outside experts, argue that American-led military operations on the Pakistani side of the border with Afghanistan could result in a tremendous backlash and ultimately do more harm than good. That is particularly true, they say, if Americans were captured or killed in the territory. In part, the White House discussions may be driven by a desire for another effort to capture or kill Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri. Currently, C.I.A. operatives and Special Operations forces have limited authority to conduct counterterrorism missions in Pakistan based on specific intelligence about the whereabouts of those two men, who have eluded the Bush administration for more than six years, or of other members of their terrorist organization, Al Qaeda, hiding in or near the tribal areas. The C.I.A. has launched missiles from Predator aircraft in the tribal areas several times, with varying degrees of success. Intelligence officials said they believed that in January 2006 an airstrike narrowly missed killing Mr. Zawahri, who had attended a dinner in Damadola, a Pakistani village. But that apparently was the last real evidence American officials had about the whereabouts of their chief targets. Critics said more direct American military action would be ineffective, anger the Pakistani Army and increase support for the militants. "I'm not arguing that you leave Al Qaeda and the Taliban unmolested, but I'd be very, very cautious about approaches that could play into hands of enemies and be counterproductive," said Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University. Some American diplomats and military officials have also issued strong warnings against expanded direct American action, officials said. Hasan Askari Rizvi, a leading Pakistani military and political analyst, said raids by American troops would prompt a powerful popular backlash against Mr. Musharraf and the United States. In the wake of the American invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, many Pakistanis suspect that the United States is trying to dominate Pakistan as well, Mr. Rizvi said. Mr. Musharraf =97 who is already widely unpopular =97 would lose even more popular support. "At the moment when Musharraf is extremely unpopular, he will face more crisis," Mr. Rizvi said. "This will weaken Musharraf in a Pakistani context." He said such raids would be seen as an overall vote of no confidence in the Pakistani military, including General Kayani. The meeting on Friday, which was not publicly announced, included Stephen J. Hadley, Mr. Bush's national security adviser; Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and top intelligence officials. Spokesmen for the White House, the C.I.A. and the Pentagon declined to discuss the meeting, citing a policy against doing so. But the session reflected an urgent concern that a new Qaeda haven was solidifying in parts of Pakistan and needed to be countered, one official said. Although some officials and experts have criticized Mr. Musharraf and questioned his ability to take on extremists, Mr. Bush has remained steadfast in his support, and it is unlikely any new measures, including direct American military action inside Pakistan, will be approved without Mr. Musharraf's consent. "He understands clearly the risks of dealing with extremists and terrorists," Mr. Bush said in an interview with Reuters on Thursday. "After all, they've tried to kill him." The Pakistan government has identified a militant leader with links to Al Qaeda, Baitullah Mehsud, who holds sway in tribal areas near the Afghanistan border, as the chief suspect behind the attack on Ms. Bhutto. American officials are not certain about Mr. Mehsud's complicity but say the threat he and other militants pose is a new focus. He is considered, they said, an "Al Qaeda associate." In an interview with foreign journalists on Thursday, Mr. Musharraf warned of the risk any counterterrorism forces =97 American or Pakistani =97 faced in confronting Mr. Mehsud in his native tribal areas. "He is in South Waziristan agency, and let me tell you, getting him in that place means battling against thousands of people, hundreds of people who are his followers, the Mehsud tribe, if you get to him, and it will mean collateral damage," Mr. Musharraf said. The weeks before parliamentary elections =97 which were originally scheduled for Tuesday =97 are seen as critical because of threats by extremists to disrupt the vote. But it seemed unlikely that any additional American effort would be approved and put in place in that time frame. Administration aides said that Pakistani and American officials shared the concern about a resurgent Qaeda, and that American diplomats and senior military officers had been working closely with their Pakistani counterparts to help bolster Pakistan's counterterrorism operations. Shortly after Ms. Bhutto's assassination, Adm. William J. Fallon, who oversees American military operations in Southwest Asia, telephoned his Pakistani counterparts to ensure that counterterrorism and logistics operations remained on track. In early December, Adm. Eric T. Olson, the new leader of the Special Operations Command, paid his second visit to Pakistan in three months to meet with senior Pakistani officers, including Lt. Gen. Muhammad Masood Aslam, commander of the military and paramilitary troops in northwest Pakistan. Admiral Olson also visited the headquarters of the Frontier Corps, a paramilitary force of about 85,000 members recruited from border tribes that the United States is planning to help train and equip. But the Pakistanis are still years away from fielding an effective counterinsurgency force. And some American officials, including Defense Secretary Gates, have said the United States may have to take direct action against militants in the tribal areas. American officials said the crisis surrounding Ms. Bhutto's assassination had not diminished the Pakistani counterterrorism operations, and there were no signs that Mr. Musharraf had pulled out any of his 100,000 forces in the tribal areas and brought them to the cities to help control the urban unrest. Carlotta Gall contributed reporting from Islamabad, and David Rohde from New York. -- Yoshie From tal1@cogeco.ca Sun Jan 06 02:10:50 2008 Received: from smtp2.cogeco.ca ([216.221.81.29] helo=fep7.cogeco.net) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBRWs-0000mJ-Ao for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 02:10:50 -0700 Received: from TonyPC (d150-46-31.home.cgocable.net [24.150.46.31]) by fep7.cogeco.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 64AB424E1 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 04:10:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <0F3BF4210F164AAA81FC52936F877C0A@TonyPC> From: "Tony B." To: "The A-List" References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 04:10:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [A-List] Left in Crisis X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:10:50 -0000 "...that secular leftists are better at negotiating the aforementioned trade-off -- as well as another trade-off, that between liberty and security..." Again, a brief quibble - or maybe not: As Thomas Jefferson once wrote, "Those who surrender their liberty for th= eir=20 security deserve [and, I would argue, 'receive'] neither." These so-called 'trade-offs' between 'social justice and ecology', 'liber= ty=20 and security' etc, are simply false alternatives and concede through thei= r=20 assumptions the key line of defense. Tony ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: "A-List" Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 3:54 PM Subject: [A-List] Left in Crisis Left in Crisis posted by Yoshie Responses to the Robert Brenner-Sam Gindin debate (7 December 2007), as well as the debate itself, make me think, yet again, that it would be better for leftists to drop the oft-asked question -- "Is capitalism in crisis?" -- and ask different questions. Capitalism as a mode of production will never be in crisis on the global scale. There are always global economic trends, some of which negatively impact profit rates sometimes, but their impacts differ dramatically from one nation to another, depending on their political economies, social structures, and (most importantly) cultural conditions (which alone are subject to leftists' interventions at least to a certain extent even before leftists find themselves in a position to change political economy and social structure on the national level). Capitalism is always changing, but more profound changes happen during some periods than others, changes that amount to transition from one regime of accumulation to another regime, shifting from old national and inter-national political structures functional to the old regime to new national and inter-national ones that better fit the new regime. The emergence of US hegemony, made possible by the Second World War whose outcome ended the age of inter-imperialist wars, was one such shift; the end of the post-WW2 boom was another such shift; the possibility of the end of the dollar hegemony on the horizon today may be another shift. Each transition presents popular classes with political openings. The question is whether popular classes are so organized and motivated to take advantage of them. It is on this crucial question that Brenner and Gindin agree: whether or not capitalism is in crisis, it is certain that leftists, especially leftists in the North, are, in large part due to the undeniable problem of increasing atomization of working people in the North, working people in the USA above all, and in no small part due to the absence of a systemic alternative1 to capitalism that inspires people and commands their allegiance. When people are neither organized nor motivated to take advantage of the openings, the ruling classes will, establishing a new regime of accumulation. Even when and where people are organized and motivated, they are not necessarily organized and motivated by forces and ideas that come from the Marxist tradition.2 "Indeed, for the moment at least, Marx has yielded the historical stage to Mohammed and the Holy Ghost. If God died in the cities of the industrial revolution, he has risen again in the postindustrial cities of the developing world," declares Mike Davis ("Planet of Slums," New Left Review 26, March-April 2004). Recognizing the same phenomenon, Aijaz Ahmad says: The secular world has to be just twice over: in terms of what it has defined for itself, and also to ward off the claim that God would have given better justice. That is to say, the secular world has to have enough justice in it for one not to have to constantly invoke God's justice against the injustices of the profane. ("Islam, Islamism and the West," Socialist Register 2008) But how? In more practical terms than Davis and Ahmad, Randhir Singh clarifies what is to be done: "better negotiate the necessary trade-offs between economic development and social justice, between requirements of productivity or efficiency and environmental sustainability or quality life which is not entirely a matter of material progress or economic growth" ("Future of Socialism," MRZine, 29 December 2007). And yet it is far from self-evident to all, the least of all to the religious, that secular leftists are better at negotiating the aforementioned trade-off -- as well as another trade-off, that between liberty and security -- than those who "invoke God's justice against the injustices of the profane," given the experience of state socialism of the 20th century and still existing governments led by self-identified socialists or other secular leftists. The crisis of the secular Left will thus continue. Recognizing that as the more urgent problem than whether capitalism today is dynamic or stagnant is the first step toward overcoming it. 1 The idea of socialism of the 21st century, struggled over in Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia, is still in its infancy, at present more an alternative to US hegemony and the neoliberal regime of accumulation than an alternative to capitalism as such, and forces that pushed and have kept Hugo Ch=E1vez, Rafael Correa, and Evo Morales in power are composed of contradictory classes and political currents. 2 At least consciously. The Marxist tradition, however, has left indelible marks upon all forces of popular classes, even those that have expressely rejected it: [D]espite the fashion for comparing it with political movements of the far right, Islamism could more accurately be described as "Islamo-Leninism." If Leninism is a secular movement that denies its origins in religion, Islamism is an avowed religious movement that suppresses its debts to secular thinking; eschatological thinking is equally central to both. (John Gray, "Faith in Reason: Secular Fantasies of a Godless Age," Harper's Magazine, January 2008, p. 88) I'd qualify Gray's remark: those who may be properly called "Islamo-Leninists" are those Islamists, such as the Islamists of Iran, Hizballah, and Hamas, who have the capacity to build mass organizations of popular classes for their own national projects inflected with populism and anti-imperialism, not to be confused, for instance, with terrorist cells of Al-Qaeda-type Islamism. -- Yoshie From critical.montages@gmail.com Sun Jan 06 02:28:44 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBRoC-0000my-L5 for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 02:28:44 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so3571266fgb.45 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 01:28:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.90.2 with SMTP id n2mr18819406fgb.66.1199611732226; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 01:28:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 01:28:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 04:28:52 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: "The A-List" In-Reply-To: <0F3BF4210F164AAA81FC52936F877C0A@TonyPC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <0F3BF4210F164AAA81FC52936F877C0A@TonyPC> Subject: Re: [A-List] Left in Crisis X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:28:45 -0000 On Jan 6, 2008 4:10 AM, Tony B. wrote: > "...that secular leftists are better at > negotiating the aforementioned trade-off -- as well as another > trade-off, that between liberty and security..." > > Again, a brief quibble - or maybe not: > > As Thomas Jefferson once wrote, "Those who surrender their liberty for their > security deserve [and, I would argue, 'receive'] neither." > > These so-called 'trade-offs' between 'social justice and ecology', 'liberty > and security' etc, are simply false alternatives and concede through their > assumptions the key line of defense. Opportunity costs, aka trade-offs, will be with us till such time as when we can move beyond the horizon of equal rights, as Marx says in his Critique of the Gotha Programme. -- Yoshie From the.buffalo.in.the.midst@gmail.com Sun Jan 06 06:52:37 2008 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.180]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBVvZ-0001M0-GJ for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 06:52:37 -0700 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j32so11012284waf.19 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:52:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.215.5 with SMTP id n5mr5705930wfg.11.1199627567615; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:52:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.81.16 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 05:52:47 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 05:52:47 -0800 From: "Leigh Meyers" To: "The A-List" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline References: Subject: Re: [A-List] U.S. Considers New Covert Push Within Pakistan X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 13:52:37 -0000 VGhleSBhcmVuJ3QgJ0NvbnNpZGVyaW5nIiwgaXQgaXMgYSBkb25lIGRlYWwuCkl0IElTIE5PVCBj b3ZlcnQsIHRoZSBwbGF5aW5nIGZpZWxkIGp1c3QgY2hhbmdlZCB3aXRoIGEgYml0IG9mIGEKJ2Jh bmcnIGFuZCBhbm90aGVyIGNvdmVyIHN0b3J5IGlzIHJlcXVpcmVkLgoKVGhlIFdhcG8gcmVwb3J0 ZWQgaXQgdGhpcyBiZWZvcmUgdGhlIG5ldyB5ZWFyOgoKVS5TLiBUcm9vcHMgdG8gSGVhZCB0byBQ YWtpc3RhbgoKQmVnaW5uaW5nIGVhcmx5IG5leHQgeWVhciwgVS5TLiBTcGVjaWFsIEZvcmNlcyBh cmUgZXhwZWN0ZWQgdG8gdmFzdGx5CmV4cGFuZCB0aGVpciBwcmVzZW5jZSBpbiBQYWtpc3Rhbiwg YXMgcGFydCBvZiBhbiBlZmZvcnQgdG8gdHJhaW4gYW5kCnN1cHBvcnQgaW5kaWdlbm91cyBjb3Vu dGVyLWluc3VyZ2VuY3kgZm9yY2VzIGFuZCBjbGFuZGVzdGluZQpjb3VudGVydGVycm9yaXNtIHVu aXRzLCBhY2NvcmRpbmcgdG8gZGVmZW5zZSBvZmZpY2lhbHMgaW52b2x2ZWQgd2l0aAp0aGUgcGxh bm5pbmcuCgpUaGVzZSBQYWtpc3Rhbi1jZW50cmljIG9wZXJhdGlvbnMgd2lsbCBtYXJrIGEgc2hp ZnQgZm9yIHRoZSBVLlMuCm1pbGl0YXJ5IGFuZCBmb3IgVS5TLiBQYWtpc3RhbiByZWxhdGlvbnMu IEluIHRoZSBhZnRlcm1hdGggb2YgU2VwdC4KMTEsIHRoZSBVLlMuIHVzZWQgUGFraXN0YW5pIGJh c2VzIHRvIHN0YWdlIG1vdmVtZW50cyBpbnRvIEFmZ2hhbmlzdGFuLgpZZXQgb25jZSB0aGUgVS5T LiBkZXBvc2VkIHRoZSBUYWxpYmFuIGdvdmVybm1lbnQgYW5kIGVzdGFibGlzaGVkIGl0cwptYWlu IG9wZXJhdGluZyBiYXNlIGF0IEJhZ3JhbSwgbm9ydGggb2YgS2FidWwsIFUuUy4gZm9yY2VzIGxl ZnQKUGFraXN0YW4gYWxtb3N0IGVudGlyZWx5LiBTaW5jZSB0aGVuLCBQYWtpc3RhbiBoYXMgcmVz dHJpY3RlZCBVLlMuCmludm9sdmVtZW50IGluIGNyb3NzLWJvcmRlciBtaWxpdGFyeSBvcGVyYXRp b25zIGFzIHdlbGwgYXMKcGFyYW1pbGl0YXJ5IG9wZXJhdGlvbnMgb24gaXRzIHNvaWwuCgpCdXQg dGhlIFBlbnRhZ29uIGhhcyBiZWVuIGZydXN0cmF0ZWQgYnkgdGhlIGluYWJpbGl0eSBvZiBQYWtp c3RhbmkKbmF0aW9uYWwgZm9yY2VzIHRvIGNvbnRyb2wgdGhlIGJvcmRlcnMgb3IgdGhlIGZyb250 aWVyIGFyZWEuIEFuZApQYWtpc3RhbidzIHBvbGl0aWNhbCBpbnN0YWJpbGl0eSBoYXMgaGVpZ2h0 ZW5lZCBVLlMuIGNvbmNlcm4gYWJvdXQKSXNsYW1pYyBleHRyZW1pc3RzIHRoZXJlLgoKQWNjb3Jk aW5nIHRvIFBlbnRhZ29uIHNvdXJjZXMsIHJlYWNoaW5nIGEgZGlmZmVyZW50IGFncmVlbWVudCB3 aXRoClBha2lzdGFuIGJlY2FtZSBhIHByaW9yaXR5IGZvciB0aGUgbmV3IGhlYWQgb2YgdGhlIFUu Uy4gU3BlY2lhbApPcGVyYXRpb25zIENvbW1hbmQsIEFkbS4gRXJpYyBULiBPbHNvbi4gT2xzb24g dmlzaXRlZCBQYWtpc3RhbiBpbgpBdWd1c3QsCgpNb3JlOiBodHRwOi8vYmxvZy53YXNoaW5ndG9u cG9zdC5jb20vZWFybHl3YXJuaW5nLzIwMDcvMTIvbXVzaGFycmFmc193b2VzX2hhdmVfb3BlbmVk X2EuaHRtbAoKT24gSmFuIDYsIDIwMDggMTowMSBBTSwgWW9zaGllIEZ1cnVoYXNoaSA8Y3JpdGlj YWwubW9udGFnZXNAZ21haWwuY29tPiB3cm90ZToKPiBObyB3b25kZXIgdGhhdCB0aGUgTmV3IFlv cmsgVGltZXMgbm8gbG9uZ2VyIHdhbnRzIHRvIHNheSBtdWNoIGFib3V0Cj4gaHVtYW4gcmlnaHRz IHZpb2xhdGlvbnMgaW4gSXJhbiBhbmQgd291bGQgcmF0aGVyIHRhbGsgYWJvdXQgdGhlCj4gZWxl Z2FuY2Ugb2YgSXNsYW1pY2FsbHkgY29ycmVjdCBmYXNoaW9uIHRoZXJlIChOYXppbGEgRmF0aGks Cj4gIkRlc2lnbmVyJ3MgUmFpbmJvdyBCcmlnaHRlbnMgSXJhbmlhbiBXb21lbidzIExvb2ssIiAy IEphbnVhcnkgMjAwOCwKPiA8aHR0cDovL3d3dy5ueXRpbWVzLmNvbS8yMDA4LzAxLzAyL3dvcmxk L21pZGRsZWVhc3QvMDJkZXNpZ25lci5odG1sPz4pCj4gaW5zdGVhZC4gIFRoZSBwb2xpdGljYWwg dW5jb25zY2lvdXMgb2YgRGVtb2NyYXRpYyBJb3dhIGNhdWN1cyB2b3RlcnMsCj4gZXNwZWNpYWxs eSBvZiBJbmRlcGVuZGVudCBQTUMgb25lcywgaXMgaW4gdHVuZSB3aXRoIHRoZSBjaGFuZ2luZyBm b2N1cwo+IG9mIHRoZSBlbXBpcmU6IE9iYW1hLCBhbG9uZSBhbW9uZyBhbGwgcHJlc2lkZW50aWFs IGNhbmRpZGF0ZXMsCj4gZW1waGFzaXplZCBlYXJseSBvbiB0aGUgcmVhZGluZXNzIHRvIG1vdmUg bW9yZSBhZ2dyZXNzaXZlbHkgaW50bwo+IFBha2lzdGFuIChhIG51Y2xlYXIgYXJtZWQgc3RhdGUg d2hvc2UgcG9wdWxhdGlvbiBpcyBtb3JlIHRoYW4gdHdpY2UKPiB0aGF0IG9mIElyYW4pLCBhcyBE b3VnIElyZWxhbmQgcmVtaW5kcyB1cyAoIk9iYW1hIGNhc3NlIGxhIGJhcmFxdWUsIgo+IEJha2No aWNoLCA0IEphbnVhcnkgMjAwOCwKPiA8aHR0cDovL3d3dy5iYWtjaGljaC5pbmZvL2FydGljbGUy Mjc0Lmh0bWw+KS4gIFRoaXMsIHRvbywgd2lsbCBibG93Cj4gYmFjayBhZ2FpbnN0IHRoZSBlbXBp cmUuICAtLSBZb3NoaWUKPgo+IDxodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm55dGltZXMuY29tLzIwMDgvMDEvMDYvd2Fz aGluZ3Rvbi8wNnRlcnJvci5odG1sPgo+IEphbnVhcnkgNiwgMjAwOAo+IFUuUy4gQ29uc2lkZXJz IE5ldyBDb3ZlcnQgUHVzaCBXaXRoaW4gUGFraXN0YW4KPiBCeSBTVEVWRU4gTEVFIE1ZRVJTLCBE QVZJRCBFLiBTQU5HRVIgYW5kIEVSSUMgU0NITUlUVAo+Cj4gVGhpcyBhcnRpY2xlIGlzIGJ5IFN0 ZXZlbiBMZWUgTXllcnMsIERhdmlkIEUuIFNhbmdlciBhbmQgRXJpYyBTY2htaXR0Lgo+Cj4gV0FT SElOR1RPTiDigJQgUHJlc2lkZW50IEJ1c2gncyBzZW5pb3IgbmF0aW9uYWwgc2VjdXJpdHkgYWR2 aXNlcnMgYXJlCj4gZGViYXRpbmcgd2hldGhlciB0byBleHBhbmQgdGhlIGF1dGhvcml0eSBvZiB0 aGUgQ2VudHJhbCBJbnRlbGxpZ2VuY2UKPiBBZ2VuY3kgYW5kIHRoZSBtaWxpdGFyeSB0byBjb25k dWN0IGZhciBtb3JlIGFnZ3Jlc3NpdmUgY292ZXJ0Cj4gb3BlcmF0aW9ucyBpbiB0aGUgdHJpYmFs IGFyZWFzIG9mIFBha2lzdGFuLgo+Cj4gVGhlIGRlYmF0ZSBpcyBhIHJlc3BvbnNlIHRvIGludGVs bGlnZW5jZSByZXBvcnRzIHRoYXQgQWwgUWFlZGEgYW5kIHRoZQo+IFRhbGliYW4gYXJlIGludGVu c2lmeWluZyBlZmZvcnRzIHRoZXJlIHRvIGRlc3RhYmlsaXplIHRoZSBQYWtpc3RhbmkKPiBnb3Zl cm5tZW50LCBzZXZlcmFsIHNlbmlvciBhZG1pbmlzdHJhdGlvbiBvZmZpY2lhbHMgc2FpZC4KPgo+ IFZpY2UgUHJlc2lkZW50IERpY2sgQ2hlbmV5LCBTZWNyZXRhcnkgb2YgU3RhdGUgQ29uZG9sZWV6 emEgUmljZSBhbmQgYQo+IG51bWJlciBvZiBQcmVzaWRlbnQgQnVzaCdzIHRvcCBuYXRpb25hbCBz ZWN1cml0eSBhZHZpc2VycyBtZXQgRnJpZGF5Cj4gYXQgdGhlIFdoaXRlIEhvdXNlIHRvIGRpc2N1 c3MgdGhlIHByb3Bvc2FsLCB3aGljaCBpcyBwYXJ0IG9mIGEgYnJvYWQKPiByZWFzc2Vzc21lbnQg b2YgQW1lcmljYW4gc3RyYXRlZ3kgYWZ0ZXIgdGhlIGFzc2Fzc2luYXRpb24gMTAgZGF5cyBhZ28K PiBvZiB0aGUgUGFraXN0YW5pIG9wcG9zaXRpb24gbGVhZGVyIEJlbmF6aXIgQmh1dHRvLiBUaGVy ZSB3YXMgYWxzbyB0YWxrCj4gb2YgaG93IHRvIGhhbmRsZSB0aGUgcGVyaW9kIGZyb20gbm93IHRv IHRoZSBGZWIuIDE4IGVsZWN0aW9ucywgYW5kIHRoZQo+IGFmdGVybWF0aCBvZiB0aG9zZSBlbGVj dGlvbnMuCj4KPiBTZXZlcmFsIG9mIHRoZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudHMgaW4gdGhlIG1lZXRpbmcgYXJn dWVkIHRoYXQgdGhlIHRocmVhdCB0bwo+IHRoZSBnb3Zlcm5tZW50IG9mIFByZXNpZGVudCBQZXJ2 ZXogTXVzaGFycmFmIHdhcyBub3cgc28gZ3JhdmUgdGhhdAo+IGJvdGggTXIuIE11c2hhcnJhZiBh bmQgUGFraXN0YW4ncyBuZXcgbWlsaXRhcnkgbGVhZGVyc2hpcCB3ZXJlIGxpa2VseQo+IHRvIGdp dmUgdGhlIFVuaXRlZCBTdGF0ZXMgbW9yZSBsYXRpdHVkZSwgb2ZmaWNpYWxzIHNhaWQuIEJ1dCBu bwo+IGRlY2lzaW9ucyB3ZXJlIG1hZGUsIHNhaWQgdGhlIG9mZmljaWFscywgd2hvIGRlY2xpbmVk IHRvIHNwZWFrIGZvcgo+IGF0dHJpYnV0aW9uIGJlY2F1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIGhpZ2hseSBkZWxpY2F0 ZSBuYXR1cmUgb2YgdGhlIGRpc2N1c3Npb25zLgo+Cj4gTWFueSBvZiB0aGUgc3BlY2lmaWMgb3B0 aW9ucyB1bmRlciBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGFyZSB1bmNsZWFyIGFuZCBoaWdobHkKPiBjbGFzc2lmaWVk LiBPZmZpY2lhbHMgc2FpZCB0aGF0IHRoZSBvcHRpb25zIHdvdWxkIHByb2JhYmx5IGludm9sdmUg dGhlCj4gQy5JLkEuIHdvcmtpbmcgd2l0aCB0aGUgbWlsaXRhcnkncyBTcGVjaWFsIE9wZXJhdGlv bnMgZm9yY2VzLgo+Cj4gVGhlIEJ1c2ggYWRtaW5pc3RyYXRpb24gaGFzIG5vdCBmb3JtYWxseSBw cmVzZW50ZWQgYW55IG5ldyBwcm9wb3NhbHMKPiB0byBNci4gTXVzaGFycmFmLCB3aG8gZ2F2ZSB1 cCBoaXMgbWlsaXRhcnkgcm9sZSBsYXN0IG1vbnRoLCBvciB0byBoaXMKPiBzdWNjZXNzb3IgYXMg dGhlIGFybXkgY2hpZWYsIEdlbi4gQXNoZmFxIFBhcnZleiBLYXlhbmksIHdobyB0aGUgV2hpdGUK PiBIb3VzZSB0aGlua3Mgd2lsbCBiZSBtb3JlIHN5bXBhdGhldGljIHRvIHRoZSBBbWVyaWNhbiBw b3NpdGlvbiB0aGFuCj4gTXIuIE11c2hhcnJhZi4gRWFybHkgaW4gaGlzIGNhcmVlciwgR2VuZXJh bCBLYXlhbmkgd2FzIGFuIGFpZGUgdG8gTXMuCj4gQmh1dHRvIHdoaWxlIHNoZSB3YXMgcHJpbWUg bWluaXN0ZXIgYW5kIGxhdGVyIGxlZCB0aGUgUGFraXN0YW5pCj4gaW50ZWxsaWdlbmNlIHNlcnZp Y2UuCj4KPiBCdXQgYXQgdGhlIFdoaXRlIEhvdXNlIGFuZCB0aGUgUGVudGFnb24sIG9mZmljaWFs cyBzZWUgYW4gb3Bwb3J0dW5pdHkKPiBpbiB0aGUgY2hhbmdpbmcgcG93ZXIgc3RydWN0dXJlIGZv ciB0aGUgQW1lcmljYW5zIHRvIGFkdm9jYXRlIGZvciB0aGUKPiBleHBhbmRlZCBhdXRob3JpdHkg aW4gUGFraXN0YW4sIGEgbnVjbGVhci1hcm1lZCBjb3VudHJ5LiAiQWZ0ZXIgeWVhcnMKPiBvZiBm b2N1c2luZyBvbiBBZmdoYW5pc3Rhbiwgd2UgdGhpbmsgdGhlIGV4dHJlbWlzdHMgbm93IHNlZSBh IGNoYW5jZQo+IGZvciB0aGUgYmlnIHByaXplIOKAlCBjcmVhdGluZyBjaGFvcyBpbiBQYWtpc3Rh biBpdHNlbGYsIiBvbmUgc2VuaW9yCj4gb2ZmaWNpYWwgc2FpZC4KPgo+IFRoZSBuZXcgb3B0aW9u cyBmb3IgZXhwYW5kZWQgY292ZXJ0IG9wZXJhdGlvbnMgaW5jbHVkZSBsb29zZW5pbmcKPiByZXN0 cmljdGlvbnMgb24gdGhlIEMuSS5BLiB0byBzdHJpa2Ugc2VsZWN0ZWQgdGFyZ2V0cyBpbiBQYWtp c3RhbiwgaW4KPiBzb21lIGNhc2VzIHVzaW5nIGludGVsbGlnZW5jZSBwcm92aWRlZCBieSBQYWtp c3Rhbmkgc291cmNlcywgb2ZmaWNpYWxzCj4gc2FpZC4gTW9zdCBjb3VudGVydGVycm9yaXNtIG9w ZXJhdGlvbnMgaW4gUGFraXN0YW4gaGF2ZSBiZWVuIGNvbmR1Y3RlZAo+IGJ5IHRoZSBDLkkuQS47 IGluIEFmZ2hhbmlzdGFuLCB3aGVyZSBtaWxpdGFyeSBvcGVyYXRpb25zIGFyZSB1bmRlcgo+IHdh eSwgaW5jbHVkaW5nIHNvbWUgd2l0aCBOQVRPIGZvcmNlcywgdGhlIG1pbGl0YXJ5IGNhbiB0YWtl IHRoZSBsZWFkLgo+Cj4gVGhlIGxlZ2FsIHN0YXR1cyB3b3VsZCBub3QgY2hhbmdlIGlmIHRoZSBh ZG1pbmlzdHJhdGlvbiBkZWNpZGVkIHRvIGFjdAo+IG1vcmUgYWdncmVzc2l2ZWx5LiBIb3dldmVy LCBpZiB0aGUgQy5JLkEuIHdlcmUgZ2l2ZW4gYnJvYWRlcgo+IGF1dGhvcml0eSwgaXQgY291bGQg Y2FsbCBmb3IgaGVscCBmcm9tIHRoZSBtaWxpdGFyeSBvciBkZXB1dGl6ZSBzb21lCj4gZm9yY2Vz IG9mIHRoZSBTcGVjaWFsIE9wZXJhdGlvbnMgQ29tbWFuZCB0byBhY3QgdW5kZXIgdGhlIGF1dGhv cml0eSBvZgo+IHRoZSBhZ2VuY3kuCj4KPiBUaGUgVW5pdGVkIFN0YXRlcyBub3cgaGFzIGFib3V0 IDUwIHNvbGRpZXJzIGluIFBha2lzdGFuLiBBbnkgZXhwYW5kZWQKPiBvcGVyYXRpb25zIHVzaW5n IEMuSS5BLiBvcGVyYXRpdmVzIG9yIFNwZWNpYWwgT3BlcmF0aW9ucyBmb3JjZXMsIGxpa2UKPiB0 aGUgTmF2eSBTZWFscywgd291bGQgYmUgc21hbGwgYW5kIHRhaWxvcmVkIHRvIHNwZWNpZmljIG1p c3Npb25zLAo+IG1pbGl0YXJ5IG9mZmljaWFscyBzYWlkLgo+Cj4gRGVmZW5zZSBTZWNyZXRhcnkg Um9iZXJ0IE0uIEdhdGVzLCB3aG8gd2FzIG9uIHZhY2F0aW9uIGxhc3Qgd2VlayBhbmQKPiBkaWQg bm90IGF0dGVuZCB0aGUgV2hpdGUgSG91c2UgbWVldGluZywgc2FpZCBpbiBsYXRlIERlY2VtYmVy IHRoYXQgIkFsCj4gUWFlZGEgcmlnaHQgbm93IHNlZW1zIHRvIGhhdmUgdHVybmVkIGl0cyBmYWNl IHRvd2FyZCBQYWtpc3RhbiBhbmQKPiBhdHRhY2tzIG9uIHRoZSBQYWtpc3RhbmkgZ292ZXJubWVu dCBhbmQgUGFraXN0YW5pIHBlb3BsZS4iCj4KPiBJbiB0aGUgcGFzdCwgdGhlIGFkbWluaXN0cmF0 aW9uIGhhcyBsYXJnZWx5IHN0YXllZCBvdXQgb2YgdGhlIHRyaWJhbAo+IGFyZWFzLCBpbiBwYXJ0 IGZvciBmZWFyIHRoYXQgZXhwb3N1cmUgb2YgYW55IEFtZXJpY2FuLWxlZCBvcGVyYXRpb25zCj4g dGhlcmUgd291bGQgc28gZW1iYXJyYXNzIHRoZSBNdXNoYXJyYWYgZ292ZXJubWVudCB0aGF0IGl0 IGNvdWxkCj4gZnVydGhlciBlbXBvd2VyIGhpcyBjcml0aWNzLCB3aG8gaGF2ZSBkZWNsYXJlZCBo ZSB3YXMgdG9vIGNsb3NlIHRvCj4gV2FzaGluZ3Rvbi4KPgo+IEV2ZW4gbm93LCBvZmZpY2lhbHMg c2F5LCBzb21lIEFtZXJpY2FuIGRpcGxvbWF0cyBhbmQgbWlsaXRhcnkKPiBvZmZpY2lhbHMsIGFz IHdlbGwgYXMgb3V0c2lkZSBleHBlcnRzLCBhcmd1ZSB0aGF0IEFtZXJpY2FuLWxlZAo+IG1pbGl0 YXJ5IG9wZXJhdGlvbnMgb24gdGhlIFBha2lzdGFuaSBzaWRlIG9mIHRoZSBib3JkZXIgd2l0aAo+ IEFmZ2hhbmlzdGFuIGNvdWxkIHJlc3VsdCBpbiBhIHRyZW1lbmRvdXMgYmFja2xhc2ggYW5kIHVs dGltYXRlbHkgZG8KPiBtb3JlIGhhcm0gdGhhbiBnb29kLiBUaGF0IGlzIHBhcnRpY3VsYXJseSB0 cnVlLCB0aGV5IHNheSwgaWYgQW1lcmljYW5zCj4gd2VyZSBjYXB0dXJlZCBvciBraWxsZWQgaW4g dGhlIHRlcnJpdG9yeS4KPgo+IEluIHBhcnQsIHRoZSBXaGl0ZSBIb3VzZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9ucyBt YXkgYmUgZHJpdmVuIGJ5IGEgZGVzaXJlIGZvcgo+IGFub3RoZXIgZWZmb3J0IHRvIGNhcHR1cmUg b3Iga2lsbCBPc2FtYSBiaW4gTGFkZW4gYW5kIGhpcyBkZXB1dHksCj4gQXltYW4gYWwtWmF3YWhy aS4gQ3VycmVudGx5LCBDLkkuQS4gb3BlcmF0aXZlcyBhbmQgU3BlY2lhbCBPcGVyYXRpb25zCj4g Zm9yY2VzIGhhdmUgbGltaXRlZCBhdXRob3JpdHkgdG8gY29uZHVjdCBjb3VudGVydGVycm9yaXNt IG1pc3Npb25zIGluCj4gUGFraXN0YW4gYmFzZWQgb24gc3BlY2lmaWMgaW50ZWxsaWdlbmNlIGFi b3V0IHRoZSB3aGVyZWFib3V0cyBvZiB0aG9zZQo+IHR3byBtZW4sIHdobyBoYXZlIGVsdWRlZCB0 aGUgQnVzaCBhZG1pbmlzdHJhdGlvbiBmb3IgbW9yZSB0aGFuIHNpeAo+IHllYXJzLCBvciBvZiBv dGhlciBtZW1iZXJzIG9mIHRoZWlyIHRlcnJvcmlzdCBvcmdhbml6YXRpb24sIEFsIFFhZWRhLAo+ IGhpZGluZyBpbiBvciBuZWFyIHRoZSB0cmliYWwgYXJlYXMuCj4KPiBUaGUgQy5JLkEuIGhhcyBs YXVuY2hlZCBtaXNzaWxlcyBmcm9tIFByZWRhdG9yIGFpcmNyYWZ0IGluIHRoZSB0cmliYWwKPiBh cmVhcyBzZXZlcmFsIHRpbWVzLCB3aXRoIHZhcnlpbmcgZGVncmVlcyBvZiBzdWNjZXNzLiBJbnRl bGxpZ2VuY2UKPiBvZmZpY2lhbHMgc2FpZCB0aGV5IGJlbGlldmVkIHRoYXQgaW4gSmFudWFyeSAy MDA2IGFuIGFpcnN0cmlrZQo+IG5hcnJvd2x5IG1pc3NlZCBraWxsaW5nIE1yLiBaYXdhaHJpLCB3 aG8gaGFkIGF0dGVuZGVkIGEgZGlubmVyIGluCj4gRGFtYWRvbGEsIGEgUGFraXN0YW5pIHZpbGxh Z2UuIEJ1dCB0aGF0IGFwcGFyZW50bHkgd2FzIHRoZSBsYXN0IHJlYWwKPiBldmlkZW5jZSBBbWVy aWNhbiBvZmZpY2lhbHMgaGFkIGFib3V0IHRoZSB3aGVyZWFib3V0cyBvZiB0aGVpciBjaGllZgo+ IHRhcmdldHMuCj4KPiBDcml0aWNzIHNhaWQgbW9yZSBkaXJlY3QgQW1lcmljYW4gbWlsaXRhcnkg YWN0aW9uIHdvdWxkIGJlCj4gaW5lZmZlY3RpdmUsIGFuZ2VyIHRoZSBQYWtpc3RhbmkgQXJteSBh bmQgaW5jcmVhc2Ugc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgdGhlCj4gbWlsaXRhbnRzLiAiSSdtIG5vdCBhcmd1aW5n IHRoYXQgeW91IGxlYXZlIEFsIFFhZWRhIGFuZCB0aGUgVGFsaWJhbgo+IHVubW9sZXN0ZWQsIGJ1 dCBJJ2QgYmUgdmVyeSwgdmVyeSBjYXV0aW91cyBhYm91dCBhcHByb2FjaGVzIHRoYXQgY291bGQK PiBwbGF5IGludG8gaGFuZHMgb2YgZW5lbWllcyBhbmQgYmUgY291bnRlcnByb2R1Y3RpdmUsIiBz YWlkIEJydWNlCj4gSG9mZm1hbiwgYSB0ZXJyb3Jpc20gZXhwZXJ0IGF0IEdlb3JnZXRvd24gVW5p dmVyc2l0eS4gU29tZSBBbWVyaWNhbgo+IGRpcGxvbWF0cyBhbmQgbWlsaXRhcnkgb2ZmaWNpYWxz IGhhdmUgYWxzbyBpc3N1ZWQgc3Ryb25nIHdhcm5pbmdzCj4gYWdhaW5zdCBleHBhbmRlZCBkaXJl Y3QgQW1lcmljYW4gYWN0aW9uLCBvZmZpY2lhbHMgc2FpZC4KPgo+IEhhc2FuIEFza2FyaSBSaXp2 aSwgYSBsZWFkaW5nIFBha2lzdGFuaSBtaWxpdGFyeSBhbmQgcG9saXRpY2FsCj4gYW5hbHlzdCwg c2FpZCByYWlkcyBieSBBbWVyaWNhbiB0cm9vcHMgd291bGQgcHJvbXB0IGEgcG93ZXJmdWwgcG9w dWxhcgo+IGJhY2tsYXNoIGFnYWluc3QgTXIuIE11c2hhcnJhZiBhbmQgdGhlIFVuaXRlZCBTdGF0 ZXMuCj4KPiBJbiB0aGUgd2FrZSBvZiB0aGUgQW1lcmljYW4gaW52YXNpb25zIG9mIElyYXEgYW5k IEFmZ2hhbmlzdGFuLCBtYW55Cj4gUGFraXN0YW5pcyBzdXNwZWN0IHRoYXQgdGhlIFVuaXRlZCBT dGF0ZXMgaXMgdHJ5aW5nIHRvIGRvbWluYXRlCj4gUGFraXN0YW4gYXMgd2VsbCwgTXIuIFJpenZp IHNhaWQuIE1yLiBNdXNoYXJyYWYg4oCUIHdobyBpcyBhbHJlYWR5Cj4gd2lkZWx5IHVucG9wdWxh ciDigJQgd291bGQgbG9zZSBldmVuIG1vcmUgcG9wdWxhciBzdXBwb3J0Lgo+Cj4gIkF0IHRoZSBt b21lbnQgd2hlbiBNdXNoYXJyYWYgaXMgZXh0cmVtZWx5IHVucG9wdWxhciwgaGUgd2lsbCBmYWNl Cj4gbW9yZSBjcmlzaXMsIiBNci4gUml6dmkgc2FpZC4gIlRoaXMgd2lsbCB3ZWFrZW4gTXVzaGFy cmFmIGluIGEKPiBQYWtpc3RhbmkgY29udGV4dC4iIEhlIHNhaWQgc3VjaCByYWlkcyB3b3VsZCBi ZSBzZWVuIGFzIGFuIG92ZXJhbGwKPiB2b3RlIG9mIG5vIGNvbmZpZGVuY2UgaW4gdGhlIFBha2lz dGFuaSBtaWxpdGFyeSwgaW5jbHVkaW5nIEdlbmVyYWwKPiBLYXlhbmkuCj4KPiBUaGUgbWVldGlu ZyBvbiBGcmlkYXksIHdoaWNoIHdhcyBub3QgcHVibGljbHkgYW5ub3VuY2VkLCBpbmNsdWRlZAo+ IFN0ZXBoZW4gSi4gSGFkbGV5LCBNci4gQnVzaCdzIG5hdGlvbmFsIHNlY3VyaXR5IGFkdmlzZXI7 IEFkbS4gTWlrZQo+IE11bGxlbiwgY2hhaXJtYW4gb2YgdGhlIEpvaW50IENoaWVmcyBvZiBTdGFm ZjsgYW5kIHRvcCBpbnRlbGxpZ2VuY2UKPiBvZmZpY2lhbHMuCj4KPiBTcG9rZXNtZW4gZm9yIHRo ZSBXaGl0ZSBIb3VzZSwgdGhlIEMuSS5BLiBhbmQgdGhlIFBlbnRhZ29uIGRlY2xpbmVkIHRvCj4g ZGlzY3VzcyB0aGUgbWVldGluZywgY2l0aW5nIGEgcG9saWN5IGFnYWluc3QgZG9pbmcgc28uIEJ1 dCB0aGUgc2Vzc2lvbgo+IHJlZmxlY3RlZCBhbiB1cmdlbnQgY29uY2VybiB0aGF0IGEgbmV3IFFh ZWRhIGhhdmVuIHdhcyBzb2xpZGlmeWluZyBpbgo+IHBhcnRzIG9mIFBha2lzdGFuIGFuZCBuZWVk ZWQgdG8gYmUgY291bnRlcmVkLCBvbmUgb2ZmaWNpYWwgc2FpZC4KPgo+IEFsdGhvdWdoIHNvbWUg b2ZmaWNpYWxzIGFuZCBleHBlcnRzIGhhdmUgY3JpdGljaXplZCBNci4gTXVzaGFycmFmIGFuZAo+ IHF1ZXN0aW9uZWQgaGlzIGFiaWxpdHkgdG8gdGFrZSBvbiBleHRyZW1pc3RzLCBNci4gQnVzaCBo YXMgcmVtYWluZWQKPiBzdGVhZGZhc3QgaW4gaGlzIHN1cHBvcnQsIGFuZCBpdCBpcyB1bmxpa2Vs eSBhbnkgbmV3IG1lYXN1cmVzLAo+IGluY2x1ZGluZyBkaXJlY3QgQW1lcmljYW4gbWlsaXRhcnkg YWN0aW9uIGluc2lkZSBQYWtpc3Rhbiwgd2lsbCBiZQo+IGFwcHJvdmVkIHdpdGhvdXQgTXIuIE11 c2hhcnJhZidzIGNvbnNlbnQuCj4KPiAiSGUgdW5kZXJzdGFuZHMgY2xlYXJseSB0aGUgcmlza3Mg b2YgZGVhbGluZyB3aXRoIGV4dHJlbWlzdHMgYW5kCj4gdGVycm9yaXN0cywiIE1yLiBCdXNoIHNh aWQgaW4gYW4gaW50ZXJ2aWV3IHdpdGggUmV1dGVycyBvbiBUaHVyc2RheS4KPiAiQWZ0ZXIgYWxs LCB0aGV5J3ZlIHRyaWVkIHRvIGtpbGwgaGltLiIKPgo+IFRoZSBQYWtpc3RhbiBnb3Zlcm5tZW50 IGhhcyBpZGVudGlmaWVkIGEgbWlsaXRhbnQgbGVhZGVyIHdpdGggbGlua3MgdG8KPiBBbCBRYWVk YSwgQmFpdHVsbGFoIE1laHN1ZCwgd2hvIGhvbGRzIHN3YXkgaW4gdHJpYmFsIGFyZWFzIG5lYXIg dGhlCj4gQWZnaGFuaXN0YW4gYm9yZGVyLCBhcyB0aGUgY2hpZWYgc3VzcGVjdCBiZWhpbmQgdGhl IGF0dGFjayBvbiBNcy4KPiBCaHV0dG8uIEFtZXJpY2FuIG9mZmljaWFscyBhcmUgbm90IGNlcnRh aW4gYWJvdXQgTXIuIE1laHN1ZCdzCj4gY29tcGxpY2l0eSBidXQgc2F5IHRoZSB0aHJlYXQgaGUg YW5kIG90aGVyIG1pbGl0YW50cyBwb3NlIGlzIGEgbmV3Cj4gZm9jdXMuIEhlIGlzIGNvbnNpZGVy ZWQsIHRoZXkgc2FpZCwgYW4gIkFsIFFhZWRhIGFzc29jaWF0ZS4iCj4KPiBJbiBhbiBpbnRlcnZp ZXcgd2l0aCBmb3JlaWduIGpvdXJuYWxpc3RzIG9uIFRodXJzZGF5LCBNci4gTXVzaGFycmFmCj4g d2FybmVkIG9mIHRoZSByaXNrIGFueSBjb3VudGVydGVycm9yaXNtIGZvcmNlcyDigJQgQW1lcmlj YW4gb3IgUGFraXN0YW5pCj4g4oCUIGZhY2VkIGluIGNvbmZyb250aW5nIE1yLiBNZWhzdWQgaW4g aGlzIG5hdGl2ZSB0cmliYWwgYXJlYXMuCj4KPiAiSGUgaXMgaW4gU291dGggV2F6aXJpc3RhbiBh Z2VuY3ksIGFuZCBsZXQgbWUgdGVsbCB5b3UsIGdldHRpbmcgaGltIGluCj4gdGhhdCBwbGFjZSBt ZWFucyBiYXR0bGluZyBhZ2FpbnN0IHRob3VzYW5kcyBvZiBwZW9wbGUsIGh1bmRyZWRzIG9mCj4g cGVvcGxlIHdobyBhcmUgaGlzIGZvbGxvd2VycywgdGhlIE1laHN1ZCB0cmliZSwgaWYgeW91IGdl dCB0byBoaW0sIGFuZAo+IGl0IHdpbGwgbWVhbiBjb2xsYXRlcmFsIGRhbWFnZSwiIE1yLiBNdXNo YXJyYWYgc2FpZC4KPgo+IFRoZSB3ZWVrcyBiZWZvcmUgcGFybGlhbWVudGFyeSBlbGVjdGlvbnMg 4oCUIHdoaWNoIHdlcmUgb3JpZ2luYWxseQo+IHNjaGVkdWxlZCBmb3IgVHVlc2RheSDigJQgYXJl IHNlZW4gYXMgY3JpdGljYWwgYmVjYXVzZSBvZiB0aHJlYXRzIGJ5Cj4gZXh0cmVtaXN0cyB0byBk aXNydXB0IHRoZSB2b3RlLiBCdXQgaXQgc2VlbWVkIHVubGlrZWx5IHRoYXQgYW55Cj4gYWRkaXRp b25hbCBBbWVyaWNhbiBlZmZvcnQgd291bGQgYmUgYXBwcm92ZWQgYW5kIHB1dCBpbiBwbGFjZSBp biB0aGF0Cj4gdGltZSBmcmFtZS4KPgo+IEFkbWluaXN0cmF0aW9uIGFpZGVzIHNhaWQgdGhhdCBQ YWtpc3RhbmkgYW5kIEFtZXJpY2FuIG9mZmljaWFscyBzaGFyZWQKPiB0aGUgY29uY2VybiBhYm91 dCBhIHJlc3VyZ2VudCBRYWVkYSwgYW5kIHRoYXQgQW1lcmljYW4gZGlwbG9tYXRzIGFuZAo+IHNl bmlvciBtaWxpdGFyeSBvZmZpY2VycyBoYWQgYmVlbiB3b3JraW5nIGNsb3NlbHkgd2l0aCB0aGVp ciBQYWtpc3RhbmkKPiBjb3VudGVycGFydHMgdG8gaGVscCBib2xzdGVyIFBha2lzdGFuJ3MgY291 bnRlcnRlcnJvcmlzbSBvcGVyYXRpb25zLgo+Cj4gU2hvcnRseSBhZnRlciBNcy4gQmh1dHRvJ3Mg YXNzYXNzaW5hdGlvbiwgQWRtLiBXaWxsaWFtIEouIEZhbGxvbiwgd2hvCj4gb3ZlcnNlZXMgQW1l cmljYW4gbWlsaXRhcnkgb3BlcmF0aW9ucyBpbiBTb3V0aHdlc3QgQXNpYSwgdGVsZXBob25lZAo+ IGhpcyBQYWtpc3RhbmkgY291bnRlcnBhcnRzIHRvIGVuc3VyZSB0aGF0IGNvdW50ZXJ0ZXJyb3Jp c20gYW5kCj4gbG9naXN0aWNzIG9wZXJhdGlvbnMgcmVtYWluZWQgb24gdHJhY2suCj4KPiBJbiBl YXJseSBEZWNlbWJlciwgQWRtLiBFcmljIFQuIE9sc29uLCB0aGUgbmV3IGxlYWRlciBvZiB0aGUg U3BlY2lhbAo+IE9wZXJhdGlvbnMgQ29tbWFuZCwgcGFpZCBoaXMgc2Vjb25kIHZpc2l0IHRvIFBh a2lzdGFuIGluIHRocmVlIG1vbnRocwo+IHRvIG1lZXQgd2l0aCBzZW5pb3IgUGFraXN0YW5pIG9m ZmljZXJzLCBpbmNsdWRpbmcgTHQuIEdlbi4gTXVoYW1tYWQKPiBNYXNvb2QgQXNsYW0sIGNvbW1h bmRlciBvZiB0aGUgbWlsaXRhcnkgYW5kIHBhcmFtaWxpdGFyeSB0cm9vcHMgaW4KPiBub3J0aHdl c3QgUGFraXN0YW4uIEFkbWlyYWwgT2xzb24gYWxzbyB2aXNpdGVkIHRoZSBoZWFkcXVhcnRlcnMg b2YgdGhlCj4gRnJvbnRpZXIgQ29ycHMsIGEgcGFyYW1pbGl0YXJ5IGZvcmNlIG9mIGFib3V0IDg1 LDAwMCBtZW1iZXJzIHJlY3J1aXRlZAo+IGZyb20gYm9yZGVyIHRyaWJlcyB0aGF0IHRoZSBVbml0 ZWQgU3RhdGVzIGlzIHBsYW5uaW5nIHRvIGhlbHAgdHJhaW4KPiBhbmQgZXF1aXAuCj4KPiBCdXQg dGhlIFBha2lzdGFuaXMgYXJlIHN0aWxsIHllYXJzIGF3YXkgZnJvbSBmaWVsZGluZyBhbiBlZmZl Y3RpdmUKPiBjb3VudGVyaW5zdXJnZW5jeSBmb3JjZS4gQW5kIHNvbWUgQW1lcmljYW4gb2ZmaWNp YWxzLCBpbmNsdWRpbmcKPiBEZWZlbnNlIFNlY3JldGFyeSBHYXRlcywgaGF2ZSBzYWlkIHRoZSBV bml0ZWQgU3RhdGVzIG1heSBoYXZlIHRvIHRha2UKPiBkaXJlY3QgYWN0aW9uIGFnYWluc3QgbWls aXRhbnRzIGluIHRoZSB0cmliYWwgYXJlYXMuCj4KPiBBbWVyaWNhbiBvZmZpY2lhbHMgc2FpZCB0 aGUgY3Jpc2lzIHN1cnJvdW5kaW5nIE1zLiBCaHV0dG8ncwo+IGFzc2Fzc2luYXRpb24gaGFkIG5v dCBkaW1pbmlzaGVkIHRoZSBQYWtpc3RhbmkgY291bnRlcnRlcnJvcmlzbQo+IG9wZXJhdGlvbnMs IGFuZCB0aGVyZSB3ZXJlIG5vIHNpZ25zIHRoYXQgTXIuIE11c2hhcnJhZiBoYWQgcHVsbGVkIG91 dAo+IGFueSBvZiBoaXMgMTAwLDAwMCBmb3JjZXMgaW4gdGhlIHRyaWJhbCBhcmVhcyBhbmQgYnJv dWdodCB0aGVtIHRvIHRoZQo+IGNpdGllcyB0byBoZWxwIGNvbnRyb2wgdGhlIHVyYmFuIHVucmVz dC4KPgo+IENhcmxvdHRhIEdhbGwgY29udHJpYnV0ZWQgcmVwb3J0aW5nIGZyb20gSXNsYW1hYmFk LCBhbmQgRGF2aWQgUm9oZGUKPiBmcm9tIE5ldyBZb3JrLgo+Cj4gLS0KPiBZb3NoaWUKPiA8aHR0 cDovL21vbnRhZ2VzLmJsb2dzcG90LmNvbS8+Cj4K From shimogamo@attglobal.net Sun Jan 06 07:19:25 2008 Received: from kcout02.prserv.net ([12.154.55.32]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBWLV-0001Nz-MP for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 07:19:25 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout02) with ESMTP id <2008010614192720200r77b1e> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 14:19:30 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <4780E36E.7000404@attglobal.net> Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:19:26 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] What's Your Consumption Factor? X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:19:26 -0000 by Jared Diamond, Op-Ed Contributor The New York Times (January 02 2008) To mathematicians, 32 is an interesting number: it's two raised to the fifth power, two times two times two times two times two. To economists, 32 is even more special, because it measures the difference in lifestyles between the first world and the developing world. The average rates at which people consume resources like oil and metals, and produce wastes like plastics and greenhouse gases, are about 32 times higher in North America, Western Europe, Japan and Australia than they are in the developing world. That factor of 32 has big consequences. To understand them, consider our concern with world population. Today, there are more than 6.5 billion people, and that number may grow to around nine billion within this half-century. Several decades ago, many people considered rising population to be the main challenge facing humanity. Now we realize that it matters only insofar as people consume and produce. If most of the world's 6.5 billion people were in cold storage and not metabolizing or consuming, they would create no resource problem. What really matters is total world consumption, the sum of all local consumptions, which is the product of local population times the local per capita consumption rate. The estimated one billion people who live in developed countries have a relative per capita consumption rate of 32. Most of the world's other 5.5 billion people constitute the developing world, with relative per capita consumption rates below 32, mostly down toward one. The population especially of the developing world is growing, and some people remain fixated on this. They note that populations of countries like Kenya are growing rapidly, and they say that's a big problem. Yes, it is a problem for Kenya's more than thirty million people, but it's not a burden on the whole world, because Kenyans consume so little. (Their relative per capita rate is one.) A real problem for the world is that each of us 300 million Americans consumes as much as 32 Kenyans. With ten times the population, the United States consumes 320 times more resources than Kenya does. People in the third world are aware of this difference in per capita consumption, although most of them couldn't specify that it's by a factor of 32. When they believe their chances of catching up to be hopeless, they sometimes get frustrated and angry, and some become terrorists, or tolerate or support terrorists. Since September 11 2001, it has become clear that the oceans that once protected the United States no longer do so. There will be more terrorist attacks against us and Europe, and perhaps against Japan and Australia, as long as that factorial difference of 32 in consumption rates persists. People who consume little want to enjoy the high-consumption lifestyle. Governments of developing countries make an increase in living standards a primary goal of national policy. And tens of millions of people in the developing world seek the first-world lifestyle on their own, by emigrating, especially to the United States and Western Europe, Japan and Australia. Each such transfer of a person to a high-consumption country raises world consumption rates, even though most immigrants don't succeed immediately in multiplying their consumption by 32. Among the developing countries that are seeking to increase per capita consumption rates at home, China stands out. It has the world's fastest growing economy, and there are 1.3 billion Chinese, four times the United States population. The world is already running out of resources, and it will do so even sooner if China achieves American-level consumption rates. Already, China is competing with us for oil and metals on world markets. Per capita consumption rates in China are still about eleven times below ours, but let's suppose they rise to our level. Let's also make things easy by imagining that nothing else happens to increase world consumption - that is, no other country increases its consumption, all national populations (including China's) remain unchanged and immigration ceases. China's catching up alone would roughly double world consumption rates. Oil consumption would increase by 106 percent, for instance, and world metal consumption by 94 percent. If India as well as China were to catch up, world consumption rates would triple. If the whole developing world were suddenly to catch up, world rates would increase elevenfold. It would be as if the world population ballooned to 72 billion people (retaining present consumption rates). Some optimists claim that we could support a world with nine billion people. But I haven't met anyone crazy enough to claim that we could support 72 billion. Yet we often promise developing countries that if they will only adopt good policies - for example, institute honest government and a free-market economy - they, too, will be able to enjoy a first-world lifestyle. This promise is impossible, a cruel hoax: we are having difficulty supporting a first-world lifestyle even now for only one billion people. We Americans may think of China's growing consumption as a problem. But the Chinese are only reaching for the consumption rate we already have. To tell them not to try would be futile. The only approach that China and other developing countries will accept is to aim to make consumption rates and living standards more equal around the world. But the world doesn't have enough resources to allow for raising China's consumption rates, let alone those of the rest of the world, to our levels. Does this mean we're headed for disaster? No, we could have a stable outcome in which all countries converge on consumption rates considerably below the current highest levels. Americans might object: there is no way we would sacrifice our living standards for the benefit of people in the rest of the world. Nevertheless, whether we get there willingly or not, we shall soon have lower consumption rates, because our present rates are unsustainable. Real sacrifice wouldn't be required, however, because living standards are not tightly coupled to consumption rates. Much American consumption is wasteful and contributes little or nothing to quality of life. For example, per capita oil consumption in Western Europe is about half of ours, yet Western Europe's standard of living is higher by any reasonable criterion, including life expectancy, health, infant mortality, access to medical care, financial security after retirement, vacation time, quality of public schools and support for the arts. Ask yourself whether Americans' wasteful use of gasoline contributes positively to any of those measures. Other aspects of our consumption are wasteful, too. Most of the world's fisheries are still operated non-sustainably, and many have already collapsed or fallen to low yields - even though we know how to manage them in such a way as to preserve the environment and the fish supply. If we were to operate all fisheries sustainably, we could extract fish from the oceans at maximum historical rates and carry on indefinitely. The same is true of forests: we already know how to log them sustainably, and if we did so worldwide, we could extract enough timber to meet the world's wood and paper needs. Yet most forests are managed non-sustainably, with decreasing yields. Just as it is certain that within most of our lifetimes we'll be consuming less than we do now, it is also certain that per capita consumption rates in many developing countries will one day be more nearly equal to ours. These are desirable trends, not horrible prospects. In fact, we already know how to encourage the trends; the main thing lacking has been political will. Fortunately, in the last year there have been encouraging signs. Australia held a recent election in which a large majority of voters reversed the head-in-the-sand political course their government had followed for a decade; the new government immediately supported the Kyoto Protocol on cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Also in the last year, concern about climate change has increased greatly in the United States. Even in China, vigorous arguments about environmental policy are taking place, and public protests recently halted construction of a huge chemical plant near the center of Xiamen. Hence I am cautiously optimistic. The world has serious consumption problems, but we can solve them if we choose to do so. _____ Jared Diamond, a professor of geography at the University of California, Los Angeles, is the author of Collapse (2004) and Guns, Germs and Steel (1999). http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02diamond.html?_r=1&oref=slogin http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From nmgoro@gmail.com Sun Jan 06 07:39:26 2008 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.188]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBWes-0001PV-Ox for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 07:39:26 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so6655081rvb.59 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 06:39:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.192.9 with SMTP id p9mr9973226rvf.103.1199630376993; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 06:39:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.29.13 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 06:39:36 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2fa158550801060639i861dc08ka651b72e5213a124@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:39:36 +0200 From: "=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=" To: "The A-List" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <0F3BF4210F164AAA81FC52936F877C0A@TonyPC> Subject: Re: [A-List] Left in Crisis X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:39:27 -0000 Off goes my hat for Yoshie. 2008/1/6, Yoshie Furuhashi : > On Jan 6, 2008 4:10 AM, Tony B. wrote: > > These so-called 'trade-offs' between 'social justice and ecology', 'liberty > > and security' etc, are simply false alternatives and concede through their > > assumptions the key line of defense. > > Opportunity costs, aka trade-offs, will be with us till such time as > when we can move beyond the horizon of equal rights, as Marx says in > his Critique of the Gotha Programme. From nmgoro@gmail.com Sun Jan 06 07:44:18 2008 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.186]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBWja-0001QJ-6z for A-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 07:44:18 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so6656254rvb.59 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 06:44:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.177.15 with SMTP id z15mr3100491rve.128.1199630667769; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 06:44:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.29.13 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 06:44:27 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2fa158550801060644x72bd16fah9c3c3de0cf6206da@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:44:27 +0200 From: "=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=" To: "The A-List" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] OOPS Fwd: Left in Crisis X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:44:18 -0000 U29ycnksIG1pc3ByZXNzZWQga2V5LiBIZXJlIGdvZXMgY29tcGxldGUgdmVyc2lvbgoKLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0KCk9mZiBnb2VzIG15IGhhdCBmb3Ig WW9zaGllLiBJIGhhdmUgdHJhbnNsYXRlZCB0byBTcGFuaXNoIGFuZApjaXJjdWxhdGVkIGhlciBj b21tZW50cywgYmVjYXVzZSB3ZSBhcmUgaW5kZWVkIHdhaXN0LWRlZXAsIG9yIGRlZXBlcgp5ZXQs IGluIGFuICJlcXVhbCByaWdodHMiIGhpc3RvcmljYWwgc3dhbXAuIFdlIG11c3QgZ28gYmV5b25k IGl0LCBidXQKaW4gb3JkZXIgdG8gdHJhdmVyc2UgaXQgd2UgY2FuJ3QgYnV0IHdhbGsgdGhlIHdh eSBvbmUgd2Fsa3Mgd2l0aGluIGEKc3dhbXAsIGFuZCBhbHNvIGJlIGNhcmVmdWwgbm90IHRvIGJl IHN3YWxsb3dlZCBieSBxdWlja3NhbmRzLgoKT2YgY291cnNlIHdlIHdvdWxkIGZlZWwgYmV0dGVy IGlmIHdlIGNvdWxkIHNpbXBseSBzdGF0ZSB0aGUgVFJVVEhTCnRoYXQgVG9ueSBCLiB3cml0ZXMg b24gaGlzIGNvbW1lbnRhcnksIGJ1dCBhYnN0cmFjdCB0cnV0aHMgbXVzdCBiZWNvbWUKY29uY3Jl dGUsIGhpc3RvcmljYWwsIG1hc3NpdmVseSBhY2NlcHRlZCB0cnV0aHMgdGhyb3VnaCB0aGUKb2gt c28tbWFueS10aW1lcy1leGhhdXN0aW5nIHdhbGsgYWNyb3NzIHRoZSBzd2FtcC4KCjIwMDgvMS82 LCBZb3NoaWUgRnVydWhhc2hpIDxjcml0aWNhbC5tb250YWdlc0BnbWFpbC5jb20+Ogo+IE9uIEph biA2LCAyMDA4IDQ6MTAgQU0sIFRvbnkgQi4gPHRhbDFAY29nZWNvLmNhPiB3cm90ZToKPiA+IFRo ZXNlIHNvLWNhbGxlZCAndHJhZGUtb2ZmcycgYmV0d2VlbiAnc29jaWFsIGp1c3RpY2UgYW5kIGVj b2xvZ3knLCAnbGliZXJ0eQo+ID4gYW5kIHNlY3VyaXR5JyBldGMsIGFyZSBzaW1wbHkgZmFsc2Ug YWx0ZXJuYXRpdmVzIGFuZCBjb25jZWRlIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlaXIKPiA+IGFzc3VtcHRpb25zIHRo ZSBrZXkgbGluZSBvZiBkZWZlbnNlLgo+Cj4gT3Bwb3J0dW5pdHkgY29zdHMsIGFrYSB0cmFkZS1v ZmZzLCB3aWxsIGJlIHdpdGggdXMgdGlsbCBzdWNoIHRpbWUgYXMKPiB3aGVuIHdlIGNhbiBtb3Zl IGJleW9uZCB0aGUgaG9yaXpvbiBvZiBlcXVhbCByaWdodHMsIGFzIE1hcnggc2F5cyBpbgo+IGhp cyBDcml0aXF1ZSBvZiB0aGUgR290aGEgUHJvZ3JhbW1lLgoKCi0tIApOw6lzdG9yCg== From critical.montages@gmail.com Sun Jan 06 11:01:42 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.154]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBZoc-0001h2-B0 for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 11:01:42 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so3644171fgb.45 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 10:01:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.36.11 with SMTP id j11mr19237019fgj.34.1199642511549; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 10:01:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 10:01:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:01:51 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: A-List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] =?windows-1252?q?Hassan_Nasrallah=3A_=AB_Nous_avons_emp?= =?windows-1252?q?=EAch=E9_l=92ex=E9cution_du_plan_am=E9ricain_au_L?= =?windows-1252?q?iban_=BB?= X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 18:01:42 -0000 From: Al Faraby Date: Jan 6, 2008 11:25 AM Subject: [assawra] Nous avons emp=EAch=E9 l'ex=E9cution du plan am=E9ricain= au Liban Comprendre Hassan Nasrallah, secr=E9taire g=E9n=E9ral du Hizbollah : =AB Nous avons emp=EAch=E9 l'ex=E9cution du plan am=E9ricain au Liban =BB Dans une longue interview accord=E9e =E0 la cha=EEne NBN, le secr=E9taire g=E9n=E9ral du Hizbollah a longuement d=E9crit la situation libanaise en la rattachant =E0 la situation r=E9gionale et internationale. Nous traduisons ici une partie de cette interview. Nous avons mis entre parenth=E8ses les explications n=E9cessaires =E0 la compr=E9hension de certains passages, et avons r=E9sum=E9 certains autres. sur Traduction CIREPAL (Centre d'Information sur la R=E9sistance en Palestine) --=20 Yoshie From shimogamo@attglobal.net Sun Jan 06 18:32:13 2008 Received: from kcout03.prserv.net ([12.154.55.33]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBgqa-0002RX-Ta for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 18:32:13 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout03) with ESMTP id <2008010701321920300m63hee> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 01:32:20 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <47818122.8070304@attglobal.net> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 10:32:18 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] The truth everyone knows ... X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 01:32:13 -0000 ... but no one says Is it only OK to talk about limiting population after it's too late? by JMG Gristmill$B!!(B(December 22 2007) Sam Smith, inimitable editor of The Progressive Review, perhaps the world's first progressive blog (if you count its days as a print publication), reports that even he finds it difficult to bring up discussions of population. I have experienced something like what Smith talks about, where even mentioning Bartlett (who has been campaigning against exponential population growth for decades) is enough to get you called nasty names by liberals and "anti-life" by church members. Here's today's series of looks at the issue, with Smith's preface first: Electric Politics recently featured a low keyed discussion of an extremely hot button subject: population growth. The guest was Al Bartlett, professor of physics emeritus at the University of Colorado, who has been working on sustainability issues for decades. It is an issue that we raise from time to time, get a few letters accusing us of being racists or eugenicists and then move on to easier topics. But if what people like Bartlett are saying is true? Then much of we believe about economics and the environment may eventually seem extraordinarily short-sighted or just plain wrong. Nothing we do about the environment, for example, will matter if the world population continues to grow because that presumes an ever larger depletion of the natural resources of the earth. Interestingly, we avoid the issue even more than we did 35 years ago when a national commission issued some important suggestions on dealing with the matter. Some insights follow. AL BARTLETT PODCAST INTERVIEW 1972 ROCKEFELLER COMMISSION REPORT ON U.S. POPULATION - In March of 1970, President Nixon signed a bill establishing the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, known as the Rockefeller Commission, for it chairman, John D Rockefeller 3rd. In 1972, the Commission released, its recommendations, including: * In view of the important role that education can play in developing an understanding of the causes and consequences of population growth and distribution, the Commission recommends enactment of a Population Education Act to assist school systems in establishing well-planned population education programs so that present and future generations will be better prepared to meet the challenges arising from population change. * Recognizing the importance of human sexuality, the Commission recommends that sex education be available to all, and that it be presented in a responsible manner through community organizations, the media, and especially the schools. * The Commission recommends that the Congress and the states approve the proposed Equal Rights Amendment and that federal, state, and local governments undertake positive programs to ensure freedom from discrimination based on sex. * The Commission recommends that (1) states eliminate existing legal inhibitions and restrictions on access to contraceptive information, procedures, and supplies; and (2) states develop statutes affirming the desirability that all persons have ready and practicable access to contraceptive information, procedures, and supplies. * The Commission recommends that states adopt affirmative legislation which will permit minors to receive contraceptive and prophylactic information and services in appropriate settings sensitive to their needs and concerns. * In order to permit freedom of choice, the Commission recommends that all administration restrictions on access to voluntary contraceptive sterilization be eliminated so that the decision be made solely by physician and patient. * With the admonition that abortion not be considered a primary means of fertility control, the Commission recommends that present state laws restricting abortion be liberalized along the lines of the New York statute, such abortion to be performed on request by duly licensed physicians under conditions of medical safety. * The Commission recommends that this nation give the highest priority to research on reproductive biology and to the search for improved methods by which individuals can control their own fertility. * Recognizing that our population cannot grow indefinitely, and appreciating the advantages of moving now toward the stabilization of population, the Commission recommends that the nation welcome and plan for a stabilized population. * The Commission recommends the creation of an Office of Population Growth and Distribution within the Executive Office of the President. * The Commission recommends the immediate addition of personnel with demographic expertise to the staffs of the Council of Economic Advisers, the Domestic Council, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Office of Science and Technology. * In order to provide legislative oversight of population issues, the Commission recommends that Congress assign to a joint committee responsibility for specific review of this area. CHRIS RAPLEY - By avoiding a fraction of the projected population increase, the emissions savings could be significant and would be at a cost, based on UN experience of reproductive health programs, that would be as little as one-thousandth of the technological fixes. The reality is that while the footprint of each individual cannot be reduced to zero, the absence of an individual does do so. ROGER MILLER, SUNY POTSDAM - Loss of biodiversity and natural habitats, depletion of the aquifers, air and water pollution, our eventual inability to grow sufficient food or to generate sufficient energy are all problems cause by a large and rapidly growing human population. Not only is it the primary cause of these problems, but no solution exists to solving these problems as long as the population continues to grow. Populations cannot grow indefinitely in a finite environment. The United States population is currently growing at a one percent annual rate, and the worldwide population is growing at a 1.3% rate per year; rates that are fairly low compared to historic levels. If the world's population continued to grow at 1.3% for approximately 800 years, there would be one person for every one square meter of the earth's surface, and if it could continue growing at this rate for approximately 2200 years, the mass of humanity would equal the mass of the earth. Clearly before this happens we will reach a zero population growth level if we are lucky, and if we are not lucky we will have a period of enormous decrease in the population, whether by famine, disease or some other natural or man-made catastrophe. JIM LYDECKER, GROWTH IS MADNESS - The biggest crisis is overpopulation. Every problem, be it environmental, economic, social or political, is directly or indirectly connected to the 6.8-billion-pound gorilla in the room. We have known this for years but it is one of the issues no one, conservative or liberal, will touch. Instead, the official policy is one of ignorance allowing the human species to breed itself toward a massive die-off ... In just a little more than 130 years, humans have run through more than half the world's reserves of oil and natural gas. Since population growth is contingent on a readily available supply of cheap oil, collapse is inevitable. The slippery slide down the slope of peak oil will be quicker than the trip up. Without cheap oil and natural gas, the green revolution and the ability to feed all us billions will be history. Few industries will be affected as great as agriculture. Two that will be are those medical and pharmaceutical. Thus, a future die-off of biblical proportions will be primarily due to starvation and disease. Throw in mass migrations and social strife and, boy, do we have problems. BRIAN CZECH AND HERMAN E DALY, WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN 2004 - A steady state economy with long human life spans entails low birth and death rates. In our opinion this is preferable, within reason, to a steady state economy with short life spans, high birth rates, and high death rates. The same concept applies to capital and durable goods such as automobiles. We opine that a relatively slow flow of high-quality, long-lasting goods is preferable to a fast flow of low-quality, short-lived goods. Nothing about a steady state economy precludes economic development, where development is defined as a qualitative process. Various sectors may come and go in a steady state economy. For example, organic farms may supplant factory farms, the proportion of bicycles to Humvees may increase, and professional soccer may attract more fans while NASCAR attracts fewer. As long as the physical size of the economy remains constant in the long run, a developing economy is a steady state economy. Nor would any type of cultural stagnation result from a steady state economy. John Stuart Mill, one of the greatest economists and political philosophers in history, emphasized that an economy in which physical growth was no longer the goal would be more conducive to political, ethical, and spiritual improvements A steady state economy means a constant rate of employment ... Economic development continues in a steady state economy so that in the extractive sector, oilfield roughnecks may decrease in number while wind-power facility attendants may increase. In the arts, guitar playing may wax while flute playing wanes. In the sciences, industrial chemists may be replaced by wildlife ecologists ... In a steady state economy, the average amount of money in real dollars earned by workers from the current generation to the next remains constant. "Real dollars" means that inflation has been accounted for. Because income reflects the use of natural resources, stabilized income reflects a stabilized "ecological footprint", which is the area of land required to support a human being ... If the steady state economy is established at a relatively low population level, the potential exists for each worker, and his replacement in the next generation, to earn a high income. This scenario is similar to that of a low-density deer population with plenty of forage per deer. If, on the other hand, the steady state economy is established at a high population level, less income is available for the average worker, as in a high-density deer population with little forage per deer. We think it important that a steady state economy be established at a relatively low population level. This scenario is conducive to incomes high enough to allow retirement savings and social security (in the generic sense), making the economy more politically acceptable and therefore more stable. If the steady state economy is established with-in ecological carrying capacity, each new generation may expect its workers to accumulate retirement savings of the same magnitude as the previous generation. So we think it important to establish a steady state economy as soon as possible. As the population grows, it becomes less likely the steady state economy may be established whereby incomes are high enough to support reasonable periods of retirement. Won't the stock market crash if a steady state economy is established? ... Many people view the stock market as predicated on economic growth, so they wonder if a stock market could even exist in a steady state economy. It certainly could and probably would. In a steady state economy, firms still need to invest in capital - namely, at the same rate at which capital depreciates. Publicly traded stocks provide the social benefit of liquidity to investors and offer an efficient mechanism for the acquisition of investment capital. Stock markets tend to expand and contract in concert (though often with lags) with gross domestic product, the dollar value of newly produced, final goods and services. There are winners and losers in bullish and bearish markets, though the winners tend to be more prominent in the former. The stock market in a steady state economy of stable GDP would be neither bullish nor bearish for extended periods. It, too, would have winners and losers, with perennial losers becoming insolvent and being replaced by more competent firms. But in a steady state economy the stock market would be less of a casino than in the growth economy. Economic growth, on the other hand, is bound to cause an extensive and extended stock market crash because demands for capital eventually will exceed the productive capacity of the earth. Therefore, advocating a steady state economy is appropriate not only for purposes of wildlife conservation but also because it would reduce the volatility of the stock market. There are, of course, alternatives to the stock market for purposes of financing capital investment. For example, capital may be financed by private banks, cooperatives, and governments. In fact, all of these institutions are active financiers throughout the world. The relative prominence of each in a given nation helps to describe that nation's history, ideology, and "political economy", which brings us to our next question - a very big one. Doesn't a steady state economy require a socialist government? More generally put, what kind of government is most conducive to a steady state economy? Might it be, for example, a capitalist democracy, a communist state or a dictatorship? In theory, each is capable of producing or coexisting with a steady state economy, but we do not think any of these is particularly conducive. Each has exhibited far more concern with GDP growth than with other important endeavors, such as poverty alleviation and, of course, wildlife conservation. We think the form of government most conducive to a steady state economy, in the context of twenty-first-century nation states, is a constitutional democracy somewhat more socialized than the current American version. "Socialist democracies", as the term is used in political science, already exist in many nations, most notably such European nations as Sweden, Switzerland and England. Economists more frequently call them "mixed economies". These are democratically operated governments in which the state plays a more prominent role in the economy than the American government plays in its economy. http://peakoil.blogspot.com/2007/12/truth-everyone-knows-but-no-one-says.html http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From shimogamo@attglobal.net Mon Jan 07 06:40:18 2008 Received: from kcout03.prserv.net ([12.154.55.33]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBsDB-0003aN-Qr for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:40:18 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout03) with ESMTP id <2008010713402920300mopise> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:40:30 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <47822BCC.3040003@attglobal.net> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:40:28 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] High-Tech Wasteland X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:40:18 -0000 It's the information age - so why don't we know how to discard a laptop safely? by Elizabeth Grossman Orion magazine (July / August 2004) THE SCENARIO IS FAMILIAR. The day arrives when the computer that was going to be your personal bridge to the twenty-first century has become a dinosaur. The salesperson who touted that machine's efficiency now explains in tones of pity and derision just how far from the cutting edge of technology you are. The only solution is a new computer. And so, in early 2001, when it became clear that my old laptop could not handle most websites and could not be upgraded, it had to go. I tried to find someone who wanted a Macintosh 5300c, but no one was interested in a computer that couldn't surf the web without crashing. Thanks to our appetite for gadgets, convenience, and innovation (and the current system of world commerce that makes them relatively affordable), Americans now own some two billion pieces of consumer electronics. For over two decades, rapid technological advances have doubled the computing capacity of semiconductor chips almost every eighteen months, bringing us faster computers, smaller cell phones, more efficient machinery and appliances, and an increasing demand for new products. With some five million to seven million tons of this stuff becoming obsolete in the US each year, high-tech electronics are now the fastest growing part of the municipal waste stream. For the most part we have been so bedazzled by figuring out how to use the new PC, PDA, TV, DVD player, or cell phone, that until recently we haven't given this waste much thought. FROM MY DESK IN PORTLAND, the tap of a few keys on my laptop sends a message to Hong Kong, retrieves articles filed in Brussels, displays pictures of my nieces in New York, and plays the song of a wood stork recorded in Florida. Traveling with my laptop and cell phone, I have access to a whole world of information and personal communication - a world that, as electricity grids, phone towers, and wireless networks proliferate, exists with diminishing regard for geography. This universe of instant information, conversation, and entertainment is so powerful and absorbing - and its currency so physically ephemeral - that it's hard to remember that the technology that makes it possible has anything to do with the natural world. But this digital wizardry relies on a complex array of materials - metals, elements, plastics, and chemical compounds. Each tidy piece of equipment has a story that begins in mines, refineries, factories, rivers, and aquifers, and ends on pallets and in dumpsters, smelters, and landfills all around the world. Where the garbage goes, where a plume of smoke travels, where waste flows and settles when it is washed downstream, how human communities, wildlife, and the landscape respond to the waste - these are costs that are traditionally left off the industrial balance sheet, and which industry is now just beginning to figure into the cost of doing business. As Jim Puckett, director of Basel Action Network (BAN), a nonprofit environmental advocacy group that tracks the global travels of hazardous waste, has said, "Humans have this funny idea that when you get rid of something, it's gone". The high-tech industry is no exception. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), more than two million tons of high-tech electronics are dumped in US landfills each year, and only about ten percent of discarded personal computers are recycled. The EPA expects at least 200 million televisions to be discarded between 2003 and 2010, 250 million computers to become obsolete in the next five years, and 65,000 tons of used and broken cell phones to accumulate by 2005. And these numbers are for the US alone. What makes this waste so problematic is that compared to the items we're used to recycling, high-tech electronics are a particularly complex kind of trash. Soda cans, bottles, and newspapers are made of one or no more than a few materials. High-tech electronics contain dozens of tightly packed substances, which complicates separation and recycling. Many of the substances are harmful to human and environmental health. The cathode ray tubes (CRTs) in computer and television monitors contain lead, a well-documented neurotoxin, as do printed circuit boards. Mercury, another neurotoxin, is used to light flat-panel display screens. Some batteries and circuit boards contain cadmium, a recognized carcinogen. Polyvinyl chloride, a plastic used to insulate wires, generates dioxins and furans - both persistent organic pollutants - when burned. Brominated flame retardants, some of which have been documented to disrupt thyroid hormone function and act as neurotoxins in animals, are used in plastics that house electronics. Some of these flame retardants have been found in the breast milk of women across the US, and in marine mammals around the globe. Copper, beryllium, barium, zinc, chromium, silver, and nickel are among the other toxic and hazardous substances used in high-tech electronics. These materials do not pose hazards while the equipment is intact, but when it is trashed they become a huge problem. Scientists are just beginning to quantify precisely how the toxic ingredients of high-tech electronics may be leaching into the environment via landfills, unregulated dumping, and crude recycling that can involve open burning of plastics and other materials. But it's clear from studies undertaken around the world that these substances are present in groundwater, accumulating in the marine food web, and traveling as airborne particles. A 2001 EPA report estimated that discarded electronics, or e-waste, account for approximately seventy percent of the heavy metals and forty percent of the lead now found in US landfills. So where does the e-waste go? Where should it go? Despite electronics' toxic contents, the US - unlike a half-dozen or more other countries - has no national legislation regulating e-waste disposal and no national system for electronics recycling. The EPA considers discarded electronics hazardous waste. But unless your state or local government bans specific electronic components (such as CRTs) or the materials they contain - and unless you're dumping over 220 pounds of e-waste a month (a federal violation) - it's perfectly legal to toss it with the rest of your trash. Curbside recycling bins are given the once-over before being pitched into the truck, but no one picks through your trash on its way to the dump. Consumer education and conscience are often the only safeguards against putting small quantities of hazardous waste into the bin. If I'd dumped my old laptop in the trash, it would have been eventually trucked out to a landfill in eastern Oregon. If I took an old Macintosh out of my closet today and shipped it to the manufacturer's designated recycler, it would end up in a shredder in California. But first it would be dismantled, assuming the equipment cannot be reused or refurbished as is. The recycler separates certain components - batteries, CRTs, mercury elements, and some plastics - for special handling and hazardous materials recovery. The remainder, including circuit boards, is shredded, and later melted and smelted to extract the valuable metals, primarily copper and gold, for resale and reuse. However, the way electronics are designed makes their disassembly and materials recycling cumbersome and expensive. This is especially true of older, obsolete equipment now making its way into the waste stream. So despite laws intended to prevent the export of hazardous waste, there's a good chance that had I deposited my computer in a used electronics collection facility, it might have been loaded onto a ship bound for China, following what Jim Puckett of the Basel Action Network calls "the economic path of least resistance". A woman squats over an open flame in a backyard workshop. In the pan she holds over the fire, a plastic and metal circuit board begins to melt into a smoky, noxious stew. With bare hands she plucks out the chips. Another woman wields a hammer and cracks the back of an old monitor to remove the copper yoke. The lead-laden glass is tossed onto a riverside pile. Nearby, a man wearing no protective clothing sluices a pan of acid over a pile of computer chips, releasing a puff of steam. When the chemical vapor clears, a small fleck of gold will emerge. Another worker crouches over a pile of broken ink cartridges, brushing the carbon black out by hand. A child stands on a pile of smashed electronics, eating an apple. At night, thick black dioxin-laden smoke rises from a mountain of burning wires, whose plastic insulation melts to expose the valuable copper within. These images of Guiyu, a southern Chinese city, are from a film called Exporting Harm, produced by BAN and the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, a group that's been watchdogging the computer industry for more than twenty years. Released in 2002, the film shows the city filled with enormous mounds of trashed electronics piled in open heaps: computer parts of all sorts, monitors, keyboards, wires, printers, cartridges, fax machines, and circuit boards - all imported from throughout the developed world for inexpensive, labor-intensive recycling. The city's water has been rendered undrinkable, the soil poisoned, and its river polluted with heavy concentrations of dioxins, as well as lead, barium, chromium, and other heavy metals. Jim Puckett calls this e-waste the "effluent of the affluent". According to Exporting Harm's estimates for early 2002, some fifty to eighty percent of the electronics collected for recycling in the western half of the United States were being exported for cheap dismantling overseas, predominantly in China and Southeast Asia. The film's footage, which includes pictures of equipment ID tags reading "Property of the City of Los Angeles" and "State of California Medical Facility", startled officials from states around the country. No one wants to see their state's name on equipment handled by workers who might earn two dollars a day toiling under hazardous conditions, or to risk the liabilities of improper toxic-waste disposal. Consequently, the past few years have seen a flurry of state e-waste regulation bills. In 2003 alone, more than fifty bills were introduced in more than two dozen states. Meanwhile, in the absence of national legislation, a group of electronics manufacturers, government agencies, and nongovernmental organizations is negotiating the National Product Stewardship Initiative, which would create a nationwide policy for dealing with used and obsolete electronics. For now, a patchwork of different programs addresses e-waste. Some states have banned CRTs from landfills. Others will bar specific hazardous substances from products sold in the state. Some have initiated recycling programs - both ongoing and one-day collection events. Others have created task forces to recommend further action. Meanwhile, electronics manufacturers are carrying on with existing voluntary take-back schemes and developing new ones. Under California's recently passed electronics recycling bill, collections will begin with a fee based on screen size. Iowa began its electronics recycling program with one-day collection events that charged five dollars per item. Over 275 Massachusetts cities and towns now collect electronics for recycling - many at curbside. And community websites often announce upcoming collection events. But that nifty new PC or PDA does not yet come with end-of-life instructions. Large-scale purchasers - corporations, governments, schools, hospitals - are now returning most used equipment to manufacturers. But none of the take-back programs up and running has the capacity to capture the vast amount of e-waste generated by households and small businesses, over ninety percent of which is currently not recycled. Electronic waste - indeed, all trash and recycling in the US - is regulated and financed by local governments and taxpayers. But e-waste is expensive to handle and piling up fast. According to research by a coalition of US nonprofit groups, the cost of collecting and processing this waste from 2006 to 2015 - not counting cleanup of contamination from improperly managed e-waste - will exceed ten billion dollars. Because of these costs, consumer groups, environmental advocates, and local governments have begun to question a basic assumption about handling the waste. "All the parts of a product's lifecycle that involve making money, being profitable, are considered the realm of the private sector", says Sego Jackson, solid-waste planner for Snohomish County, Washington. "But as soon as that product has lost its value, it crosses some magic line where it becomes the government's responsibility. Clearly we need a different kind of system." In the US, that need has spawned the Computer Take Back Campaign, an effort to further involve manufacturers in the recycling of electronics. Launched in 2001 by a coalition of nonprofits that includes the GrassRoots Recycling Network and Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, the campaign is helping communities craft legislation to control the hazards of e-waste, and is working with manufacturers and retailers on collection events. "Our biggest allies in this campaign are local governments", says David Wood, executive director of the GrassRoots Recycling Network. High-tech electronics are resource-intensive to produce, lose value quickly, and are expensive to dispose of - a "dysfunctional" cycle, according to Sego Jackson. He has his own test for what would be functional: "It should be as easy to recycle a computer as it is to buy one". But reaching that goal will require "a fundamental paradigm shift", says Jim Puckett. At the heart of this shift is the idea that end-of-product-life costs and responsibilities - traditionally borne by consumers, taxpayers, government, and the environment - should be shouldered by the manufacturer. This concept, known as Extended Producer Responsibility, is new to Americans but in use across Europe, where it will soon be applied to electronics. The European Union recently passed legislation requiring electronics manufacturers to take back and facilitate the recycling of used products, in a system financed by "advanced recovery" fees attached to the price of new equipment. If revenues from the fees fail to cover the recycling costs, producers have to absorb the difference. The system provides an incentive to design products for easier, cheaper recycling. A companion piece of legislation will require manufacturers to eliminate some hazardous substances from new equipment. Because Europe is a significant market for consumer electronics, US companies, including Dell, HP, and IBM, will be making products to meet EU requirements. And given the industry's global manufacturing and distribution efficiencies, those products will be sold worldwide. To meet the EU regulations, engineers are rushing to find alternatives to lead solder now used in computers, and to eliminate certain flame retardants. And as companies fall under growing pressure to conserve resources and reduce toxics, they are moving away from piecemeal elimination of undesirables and toward redesign. Mercury, for example, is highly toxic and expensive to dispose of. As HP environmental product steward Nathan Moin explains, the company could rework the current design of flat panel display screens to make it easier to remove the mercury lamp now used. But it will be more efficient to design a new lighting device that eliminates mercury altogether. This is an example of what architect William McDonough, coauthor of Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things (2002), describes as going beyond the "less bad approach" of reducing and eliminating individual toxics, to addressing the problem holistically. IMAGINE WHAT IT would be like if upgrading software meant not having to buy a whole new computer, but simply snapping in a new processor. Or if printers and other accessories were universally compatible. Imagine if the price of a new laptop or mobile phone covered the cost of a convenient system to collect old equipment for reuse or recycling. Imagine if that price guaranteed a living wage in safe conditions to those engaged in every step of electronics disassembly, materials recovery, and manufacturing. Imagine if there were no such thing as garbage. The high-tech industry is one of the first that is being pushed to internalize its costs, a move that will have fundamental implications for other industries as well. These changes will not mean that the economy or high-tech innovation will come to a screeching halt. There will still be commerce, education, entertainment, electronic love letters, and wireless calls to far-flung friends and family, but it won't be business as usual. Meanwhile, my old printer, laptop, cell phone, and Zip drive are still in the closet, even though I now know where they should go. As for my old Macintosh 5300C, I believe it ended its useful life in an apartment on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, a neighborhood where I once recycled an old TV by taking it down to the street, where it was immediately carted off by a passer-by who said, "Hey, can I have that?" To learn more: The Basel Action Network, 206/652-5555, www.ban.org; Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, 408/287-6707, www.svtc.org. This article has been abridged for the web.High-Tech Wasteland _____ Elizabeth Grossman is the author of Watershed: The Undamming of America (2002) and Adventuring Along the Lewis and Clark Trail (2003). Her recent book, about the environmental impacts of the high technology industry and its products, was published in 2005 by Island Press. See http://www.hightechtrash.com/ . She lives near the Willamette River in Portland, Oregon. http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/142/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From shimogamo@attglobal.net Mon Jan 07 06:41:16 2008 Received: from kcout03.prserv.net ([12.154.55.33]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBsE8-0003aY-1G for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:41:16 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (p6e4dab.kyotnt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp[218.110.77.171]) by prserv.net (kcout03) with ESMTP id <2008010713412720300mopite> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:41:28 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.110.77.171] Message-ID: <47822C05.2070801@attglobal.net> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:41:25 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] High-Tech Wasteland X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:41:16 -0000 It's the information age - so why don't we know how to discard a laptop safely? by Elizabeth Grossman Orion magazine (July / August 2004) THE SCENARIO IS FAMILIAR. The day arrives when the computer that was going to be your personal bridge to the twenty-first century has become a dinosaur. The salesperson who touted that machine's efficiency now explains in tones of pity and derision just how far from the cutting edge of technology you are. The only solution is a new computer. And so, in early 2001, when it became clear that my old laptop could not handle most websites and could not be upgraded, it had to go. I tried to find someone who wanted a Macintosh 5300c, but no one was interested in a computer that couldn't surf the web without crashing. Thanks to our appetite for gadgets, convenience, and innovation (and the current system of world commerce that makes them relatively affordable), Americans now own some two billion pieces of consumer electronics. For over two decades, rapid technological advances have doubled the computing capacity of semiconductor chips almost every eighteen months, bringing us faster computers, smaller cell phones, more efficient machinery and appliances, and an increasing demand for new products. With some five million to seven million tons of this stuff becoming obsolete in the US each year, high-tech electronics are now the fastest growing part of the municipal waste stream. For the most part we have been so bedazzled by figuring out how to use the new PC, PDA, TV, DVD player, or cell phone, that until recently we haven't given this waste much thought. FROM MY DESK IN PORTLAND, the tap of a few keys on my laptop sends a message to Hong Kong, retrieves articles filed in Brussels, displays pictures of my nieces in New York, and plays the song of a wood stork recorded in Florida. Traveling with my laptop and cell phone, I have access to a whole world of information and personal communication - a world that, as electricity grids, phone towers, and wireless networks proliferate, exists with diminishing regard for geography. This universe of instant information, conversation, and entertainment is so powerful and absorbing - and its currency so physically ephemeral - that it's hard to remember that the technology that makes it possible has anything to do with the natural world. But this digital wizardry relies on a complex array of materials - metals, elements, plastics, and chemical compounds. Each tidy piece of equipment has a story that begins in mines, refineries, factories, rivers, and aquifers, and ends on pallets and in dumpsters, smelters, and landfills all around the world. Where the garbage goes, where a plume of smoke travels, where waste flows and settles when it is washed downstream, how human communities, wildlife, and the landscape respond to the waste - these are costs that are traditionally left off the industrial balance sheet, and which industry is now just beginning to figure into the cost of doing business. As Jim Puckett, director of Basel Action Network (BAN), a nonprofit environmental advocacy group that tracks the global travels of hazardous waste, has said, "Humans have this funny idea that when you get rid of something, it's gone". The high-tech industry is no exception. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), more than two million tons of high-tech electronics are dumped in US landfills each year, and only about ten percent of discarded personal computers are recycled. The EPA expects at least 200 million televisions to be discarded between 2003 and 2010, 250 million computers to become obsolete in the next five years, and 65,000 tons of used and broken cell phones to accumulate by 2005. And these numbers are for the US alone. What makes this waste so problematic is that compared to the items we're used to recycling, high-tech electronics are a particularly complex kind of trash. Soda cans, bottles, and newspapers are made of one or no more than a few materials. High-tech electronics contain dozens of tightly packed substances, which complicates separation and recycling. Many of the substances are harmful to human and environmental health. The cathode ray tubes (CRTs) in computer and television monitors contain lead, a well-documented neurotoxin, as do printed circuit boards. Mercury, another neurotoxin, is used to light flat-panel display screens. Some batteries and circuit boards contain cadmium, a recognized carcinogen. Polyvinyl chloride, a plastic used to insulate wires, generates dioxins and furans - both persistent organic pollutants - when burned. Brominated flame retardants, some of which have been documented to disrupt thyroid hormone function and act as neurotoxins in animals, are used in plastics that house electronics. Some of these flame retardants have been found in the breast milk of women across the US, and in marine mammals around the globe. Copper, beryllium, barium, zinc, chromium, silver, and nickel are among the other toxic and hazardous substances used in high-tech electronics. These materials do not pose hazards while the equipment is intact, but when it is trashed they become a huge problem. Scientists are just beginning to quantify precisely how the toxic ingredients of high-tech electronics may be leaching into the environment via landfills, unregulated dumping, and crude recycling that can involve open burning of plastics and other materials. But it's clear from studies undertaken around the world that these substances are present in groundwater, accumulating in the marine food web, and traveling as airborne particles. A 2001 EPA report estimated that discarded electronics, or e-waste, account for approximately seventy percent of the heavy metals and forty percent of the lead now found in US landfills. So where does the e-waste go? Where should it go? Despite electronics' toxic contents, the US - unlike a half-dozen or more other countries - has no national legislation regulating e-waste disposal and no national system for electronics recycling. The EPA considers discarded electronics hazardous waste. But unless your state or local government bans specific electronic components (such as CRTs) or the materials they contain - and unless you're dumping over 220 pounds of e-waste a month (a federal violation) - it's perfectly legal to toss it with the rest of your trash. Curbside recycling bins are given the once-over before being pitched into the truck, but no one picks through your trash on its way to the dump. Consumer education and conscience are often the only safeguards against putting small quantities of hazardous waste into the bin. If I'd dumped my old laptop in the trash, it would have been eventually trucked out to a landfill in eastern Oregon. If I took an old Macintosh out of my closet today and shipped it to the manufacturer's designated recycler, it would end up in a shredder in California. But first it would be dismantled, assuming the equipment cannot be reused or refurbished as is. The recycler separates certain components - batteries, CRTs, mercury elements, and some plastics - for special handling and hazardous materials recovery. The remainder, including circuit boards, is shredded, and later melted and smelted to extract the valuable metals, primarily copper and gold, for resale and reuse. However, the way electronics are designed makes their disassembly and materials recycling cumbersome and expensive. This is especially true of older, obsolete equipment now making its way into the waste stream. So despite laws intended to prevent the export of hazardous waste, there's a good chance that had I deposited my computer in a used electronics collection facility, it might have been loaded onto a ship bound for China, following what Jim Puckett of the Basel Action Network calls "the economic path of least resistance". A woman squats over an open flame in a backyard workshop. In the pan she holds over the fire, a plastic and metal circuit board begins to melt into a smoky, noxious stew. With bare hands she plucks out the chips. Another woman wields a hammer and cracks the back of an old monitor to remove the copper yoke. The lead-laden glass is tossed onto a riverside pile. Nearby, a man wearing no protective clothing sluices a pan of acid over a pile of computer chips, releasing a puff of steam. When the chemical vapor clears, a small fleck of gold will emerge. Another worker crouches over a pile of broken ink cartridges, brushing the carbon black out by hand. A child stands on a pile of smashed electronics, eating an apple. At night, thick black dioxin-laden smoke rises from a mountain of burning wires, whose plastic insulation melts to expose the valuable copper within. These images of Guiyu, a southern Chinese city, are from a film called Exporting Harm, produced by BAN and the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, a group that's been watchdogging the computer industry for more than twenty years. Released in 2002, the film shows the city filled with enormous mounds of trashed electronics piled in open heaps: computer parts of all sorts, monitors, keyboards, wires, printers, cartridges, fax machines, and circuit boards - all imported from throughout the developed world for inexpensive, labor-intensive recycling. The city's water has been rendered undrinkable, the soil poisoned, and its river polluted with heavy concentrations of dioxins, as well as lead, barium, chromium, and other heavy metals. Jim Puckett calls this e-waste the "effluent of the affluent". According to Exporting Harm's estimates for early 2002, some fifty to eighty percent of the electronics collected for recycling in the western half of the United States were being exported for cheap dismantling overseas, predominantly in China and Southeast Asia. The film's footage, which includes pictures of equipment ID tags reading "Property of the City of Los Angeles" and "State of California Medical Facility", startled officials from states around the country. No one wants to see their state's name on equipment handled by workers who might earn two dollars a day toiling under hazardous conditions, or to risk the liabilities of improper toxic-waste disposal. Consequently, the past few years have seen a flurry of state e-waste regulation bills. In 2003 alone, more than fifty bills were introduced in more than two dozen states. Meanwhile, in the absence of national legislation, a group of electronics manufacturers, government agencies, and nongovernmental organizations is negotiating the National Product Stewardship Initiative, which would create a nationwide policy for dealing with used and obsolete electronics. For now, a patchwork of different programs addresses e-waste. Some states have banned CRTs from landfills. Others will bar specific hazardous substances from products sold in the state. Some have initiated recycling programs - both ongoing and one-day collection events. Others have created task forces to recommend further action. Meanwhile, electronics manufacturers are carrying on with existing voluntary take-back schemes and developing new ones. Under California's recently passed electronics recycling bill, collections will begin with a fee based on screen size. Iowa began its electronics recycling program with one-day collection events that charged five dollars per item. Over 275 Massachusetts cities and towns now collect electronics for recycling - many at curbside. And community websites often announce upcoming collection events. But that nifty new PC or PDA does not yet come with end-of-life instructions. Large-scale purchasers - corporations, governments, schools, hospitals - are now returning most used equipment to manufacturers. But none of the take-back programs up and running has the capacity to capture the vast amount of e-waste generated by households and small businesses, over ninety percent of which is currently not recycled. Electronic waste - indeed, all trash and recycling in the US - is regulated and financed by local governments and taxpayers. But e-waste is expensive to handle and piling up fast. According to research by a coalition of US nonprofit groups, the cost of collecting and processing this waste from 2006 to 2015 - not counting cleanup of contamination from improperly managed e-waste - will exceed ten billion dollars. Because of these costs, consumer groups, environmental advocates, and local governments have begun to question a basic assumption about handling the waste. "All the parts of a product's lifecycle that involve making money, being profitable, are considered the realm of the private sector", says Sego Jackson, solid-waste planner for Snohomish County, Washington. "But as soon as that product has lost its value, it crosses some magic line where it becomes the government's responsibility. Clearly we need a different kind of system." In the US, that need has spawned the Computer Take Back Campaign, an effort to further involve manufacturers in the recycling of electronics. Launched in 2001 by a coalition of nonprofits that includes the GrassRoots Recycling Network and Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, the campaign is helping communities craft legislation to control the hazards of e-waste, and is working with manufacturers and retailers on collection events. "Our biggest allies in this campaign are local governments", says David Wood, executive director of the GrassRoots Recycling Network. High-tech electronics are resource-intensive to produce, lose value quickly, and are expensive to dispose of - a "dysfunctional" cycle, according to Sego Jackson. He has his own test for what would be functional: "It should be as easy to recycle a computer as it is to buy one". But reaching that goal will require "a fundamental paradigm shift", says Jim Puckett. At the heart of this shift is the idea that end-of-product-life costs and responsibilities - traditionally borne by consumers, taxpayers, government, and the environment - should be shouldered by the manufacturer. This concept, known as Extended Producer Responsibility, is new to Americans but in use across Europe, where it will soon be applied to electronics. The European Union recently passed legislation requiring electronics manufacturers to take back and facilitate the recycling of used products, in a system financed by "advanced recovery" fees attached to the price of new equipment. If revenues from the fees fail to cover the recycling costs, producers have to absorb the difference. The system provides an incentive to design products for easier, cheaper recycling. A companion piece of legislation will require manufacturers to eliminate some hazardous substances from new equipment. Because Europe is a significant market for consumer electronics, US companies, including Dell, HP, and IBM, will be making products to meet EU requirements. And given the industry's global manufacturing and distribution efficiencies, those products will be sold worldwide. To meet the EU regulations, engineers are rushing to find alternatives to lead solder now used in computers, and to eliminate certain flame retardants. And as companies fall under growing pressure to conserve resources and reduce toxics, they are moving away from piecemeal elimination of undesirables and toward redesign. Mercury, for example, is highly toxic and expensive to dispose of. As HP environmental product steward Nathan Moin explains, the company could rework the current design of flat panel display screens to make it easier to remove the mercury lamp now used. But it will be more efficient to design a new lighting device that eliminates mercury altogether. This is an example of what architect William McDonough, coauthor of Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things (2002), describes as going beyond the "less bad approach" of reducing and eliminating individual toxics, to addressing the problem holistically. IMAGINE WHAT IT would be like if upgrading software meant not having to buy a whole new computer, but simply snapping in a new processor. Or if printers and other accessories were universally compatible. Imagine if the price of a new laptop or mobile phone covered the cost of a convenient system to collect old equipment for reuse or recycling. Imagine if that price guaranteed a living wage in safe conditions to those engaged in every step of electronics disassembly, materials recovery, and manufacturing. Imagine if there were no such thing as garbage. The high-tech industry is one of the first that is being pushed to internalize its costs, a move that will have fundamental implications for other industries as well. These changes will not mean that the economy or high-tech innovation will come to a screeching halt. There will still be commerce, education, entertainment, electronic love letters, and wireless calls to far-flung friends and family, but it won't be business as usual. Meanwhile, my old printer, laptop, cell phone, and Zip drive are still in the closet, even though I now know where they should go. As for my old Macintosh 5300C, I believe it ended its useful life in an apartment on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, a neighborhood where I once recycled an old TV by taking it down to the street, where it was immediately carted off by a passer-by who said, "Hey, can I have that?" To learn more: The Basel Action Network, 206/652-5555, www.ban.org; Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, 408/287-6707, www.svtc.org. This article has been abridged for the web. _____ Elizabeth Grossman is the author of Watershed: The Undamming of America (2002) and Adventuring Along the Lewis and Clark Trail (2003). Her recent book, about the environmental impacts of the high technology industry and its products, was published in 2005 by Island Press. See http://www.hightechtrash.com/ . She lives near the Willamette River in Portland, Oregon. http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/142/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From critical.montages@gmail.com Mon Jan 07 08:54:55 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBuJT-0003np-0N for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 08:54:55 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so3837145fgb.45 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 07:55:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.53.8 with SMTP id b8mr11490642fga.64.1199721312447; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 07:55:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 07:55:12 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:55:12 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: A-List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] Poland Signals a Shift on U.S. Missile Shield: "We Feel No Threat from Iran" X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:54:55 -0000 Poland -- no longer an American Trojan donkey in Europe? -- Yoshie International Herald Tribune Poland signals a shift on U.S. missile shield By Judy Dempsey Sunday, January 6, 2008 BERLIN: Signaling a tougher position in negotiations with the United States on a European anti-ballistic missile shield, Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski says the new Warsaw government is not prepared to accept U.S. plans to deploy part of the shield in Poland until all costs and risks are considered. "This is an American, not a Polish project," Sikorski said in an interview published in the weekend edition of the daily Gazeta Wyborcza. The previous Polish government had consented in principle to accept parts of the U.S. shield, but no formal agreement has been signed. Now Sikorski is saying that the terms under which the shield would be deployed were unclear and that the new government wanted the risks to be explained, the financial costs to be set out and clarification on how Poland's interests would be defended if the shield were deployed on its territory. "We feel no threat from Iran," Sikorski said, challenging the U.S view that some of the biggest threats facing the security of Europe and the United States are from "rogue states" in the Middle East, including Iran. Still, Sikorski said, "if an important ally such as the United States has a request of such an important nature, we take it very seriously." He added: "It is not only the benefits but the risks of the system that have to be discussed fully. It cannot be that we alone carry the costs." There was no official response from the United States. Bogdan Klich, Poland's new defense minister, is expected to make his first official visit to Washington this month to explain his government's position. NATO, the U.S.-led military alliance, said Sunday that the missile defense issue was essentially a bilateral discussion between Poland, the United States and Russia. "NATO is happy to be a forum for discussion, and it is a useful one," said James Appathurai, a spokesman for the alliance. "But it does not substitute for the bilateral track." Sikorski also said he was worried that the United States could abandon the project after the American presidential election in November. In that case, Poland would nevertheless have to bear political costs, like the deterioration of relations with Russia, if it signed on to the shield prematurely. The deployment of the U.S. missile shield has become such a contentious issue between the United States and Russia - and indeed between Poland and Russia - that President Vladimir Putin of Russia has warned of a new arms race if Washington proceeds with deployment in Poland and the Czech Republic. Having accused Washington of threatening Russia's national security interests, Putin last month suspended his nation's participation in the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty. Under that treaty, one of the last major arms pacts concluded between the former Cold War foes, countries stretching from Canada across Europe to the eastern parts of Russia cut their conventional forces and agreed to on- site inspections and an elaborate system of verification and notifications. It was implemented in 1992. The Kremlin did not say how long it would suspend its participation. But Russian diplomats said it depended on not only what kind of concessions the United States was prepared to make concerning changes to the treaty, but also whether Poland and the Czech Republic would deploy part of the U.S. missile shield. The new approach on missile defense taken by Poland's new center-right coalition government, under Prime Minister Donald Tusk, reflects a different negotiating strategy from the previous nationalist-conservative government led by Jaroslaw Kaczynski. Kaczynski, who was much more pro- American, had in principle agreed to deploy several interceptors on Polish territory without going into detail over the costs, the maintenance and the risks to Poland's security, according to Polish officials. But the former prime minister did little to allay Russia's fears about deploying the missile shield in Poland, or to drum up support in other European Union member states. He left it up to the United States to explain the issue to the Kremlin and to European governments. In contrast, Tusk and Sikorski, while having no illusions about Russia's new self-confidence under Putin, have nevertheless repeatedly said they want to improve relations with Russia. Later this month, Poland and Russia for the first time will hold direct talks in Warsaw over the missile shield. The Russian side will be led by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kisliak. Sikorski, who was defense minister in the Kaczynski government, had been forced to resign early last year after criticizing, among other things, the government's handling of the missile defense negotiations. He later joined Tusk's Civic Platform party and was appointed foreign minister last month. Sikorski, then and now, has insisted that Poland will need additional security protection from the United States, for example in the form of Patriot missiles, if it accepts the interceptors. NATO could also be called upon. Alliance diplomats said Poland would insist on a guarantee from NATO if the missile defense system became part of the alliance's own anti-ballistic missile system. This means that if Poland were threatened with attack or came under attack, the NATO alliance would be obliged to come to its assistance. -- Yoshie From charlesb@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Mon Jan 07 14:20:52 2008 Received: from [71.159.22.21] (helo=gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBzOu-0004St-Mo for A-List@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:20:52 -0700 Received: from Comm-MTA by gwia.ci.detroit.mi.us with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 16:21:07 -0500 Message-Id: <47825168.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.1 Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 16:20:56 -0500 From: "Charles Brown" To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [A-List] IRAQ: Killer of U.S. Soldiers Becomes a Hero X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:20:53 -0000 http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40691 IRAQ: Killer of U.S. Soldiers Becomes a Hero By Ali al-Fadhily and Dahr Jamail* BAGHDAD, Jan 7 (IPS) - The recent killing of two U.S. soldiers by their Iraqi colleague has raised disturbing questions about U.S. military relations with the Iraqis they work with. On Dec. 26, an Iraqi soldier opened fire on U.S. soldiers accompanying him during a joint military patrol in the northern Iraqi city Mosul. He killed the U.S. captain and another sergeant, and wounded three others, including an Iraqi interpreter. Conflicting versions of the killing have arisen. Col. Hazim al-Juboory, uncle of the attacker Kaissar Saady al-Juboory, told IPS that his nephew at first watched the U.S. soldiers beat up an Iraqi woman. When he asked them to stop, they refused, so he opened fire. "Kaissar is a professional soldier who revolted against the Americans when they dragged a woman by her hair in a brutal way," Col. Juboory said. "He is a tribal man, and an Arab with honour who would not accept such behaviour. He killed his captain and sergeant knowing that he would be executed." Others gave IPS a similar account. "I was there when the American captain and his soldiers raided a neighbourhood and started shouting at women to tell them where some men they wanted were," a resident of Mosul, speaking on condition of anonymity, told IPS on phone. "The women told them they did not know, and their men did not do anything wrong, and started crying in fear." The witness said the U.S. captain began to shout at his soldiers and the women, and his men then started to grab the women and pull them by their hair. "The soldier we knew later to be Kaissar shouted at the Americans, 'No, No,' but the captain shouted back at the Iraqi soldier," the witness told IPS. "Then the Iraqi soldier shouted, 'Let go of the women you sons of bitches,' and started shooting at them." The soldier, he said, then ran off. The Association of Muslim Scholars, a Sunni organisation, issued a statement saying the Iraqi soldier had shot the U.S. soldiers after he saw them beat up a pregnant woman. "His blood rose and he asked the occupying soldiers to stop beating the woman," they said in the statement. "Their answer through the translator was: 'We will do what we want. So he opened fire on them." The story was first reported on al-Rafidain satellite channel. That started Iraqis from all over the country talking about "the hero" who sacrificed his life for Iraqi honour. The U.S. and Iraqi military told a different version of the story. An Iraqi general told reporters that Kaissar carried out the attack because he had links to "Sunni Arab insurgent groups." "Soldier Kaissar Saady worked for insurgent groups who pushed him to learn army movements and warn his comrades about them," a captain of the second Iraqi army division told IPS. "There are so many like him in the army and now within the so-called Awakening forces (militias funded by the U.S. military)." One army officer speaking on condition of anonymity described Kaissar's act as heroic. "Those Americans learned their lesson once more." Sheikh Juma' al-Dawar, chief of the major al-Baggara tribe in Iraq, told IPS in Baghdad that "Kaissar is from the al-Juboor tribes in Gayara -- tribes with morals that Americans do not understand." The tribal chief added, "Juboor tribes and all other tribes are proud of Kaissar and what he did by killing the American soldiers. Now he is a hero, with a name that will never be forgotten." Many Iraqis speak in similar vein. "It is another example of Iraqi people's unity despite political conspiracies by the Americans and their tails (collaborators)," Mohammad Nassir, an independent politician in Baghdad told IPS. "Kaissar is loved by all Iraqis who pray for his safety and who are ready to donate anything for his welfare." Col. Juboory said Kaissar who had at first accepted collaboration with the U.S. forces "found the truth too bitter to put up with." The colonel said: "I worked with the Americans because being an army officer is my job and also because I was convinced they would help Iraqis. But 11 months was enough for me to realise that starving to death is more honourable than serving the occupiers. They were mean in every way." Independent sources have since told IPS that Kaissar was captured by a special joint Iraqi-U.S. force, and he is now being held and tortured at the al-Ghizlany military camp in Mosul. Despite a recent decline in the number of occupation forces being killed, 2007 was the deadliest year of the occupation for U.S. troops, with 901 killed, according to the U.S. Department of Defence. (*Ali, our correspondent in Baghdad, works in close collaboration with Dahr Jamail, our U.S.-based specialist writer on Iraq who has reported extensively from Iraq and the Middle East) (END/2008) From the.buffalo.in.the.midst@gmail.com Mon Jan 07 14:32:42 2008 Received: from hs-out-0708.google.com ([64.233.178.242] helo=hs-out-2122.google.com) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JBzaL-0004Th-Sd for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:32:42 -0700 Received: by hs-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id l65so5637825hsc.7 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:33:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.105.14 with SMTP id d14mr767048wfc.67.1199741581315; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:33:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.81.16 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:33:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:33:01 -0800 From: "Leigh Meyers" To: "The A-List" In-Reply-To: <47825168.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <47825168.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Subject: Re: [A-List] IRAQ: Killer of U.S. Soldiers Becomes a Hero X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:32:42 -0000 I read a story early on in the war about soldiers guarding a line-up for propane distribution to civilians. The soldiers refused to fill a woman's tank because of it's apparently dilapidated condition and when she complained a soldier shoved her aside. At that point, a car stopped... two males got out and one of them walked up to the soldier, put a pistol to his head and shot him dead. They escaped into the crowd, and to the best of my knowledge were never apprehended. Tsk, tsk. Leigh On Jan 7, 2008 1:20 PM, Charles Brown wrote: > http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40691 > > IRAQ: Killer of U.S. Soldiers Becomes a Hero > By Ali al-Fadhily and Dahr Jamail* > > BAGHDAD, Jan 7 (IPS) - The recent killing of two U.S. soldiers by their > Iraqi colleague has raised disturbing questions about U.S. military > relations with the Iraqis they work with. > > On Dec. 26, an Iraqi soldier opened fire on U.S. soldiers accompanying > him during a joint military patrol in the northern Iraqi city Mosul. He > killed the U.S. captain and another sergeant, and wounded three others, > including an Iraqi interpreter. > > Conflicting versions of the killing have arisen. Col. Hazim al-Juboory, > uncle of the attacker Kaissar Saady al-Juboory, told IPS that his nephew > at first watched the U.S. soldiers beat up an Iraqi woman. When he asked > them to stop, they refused, so he opened fire. > > "Kaissar is a professional soldier who revolted against the Americans > when they dragged a woman by her hair in a brutal way," Col. Juboory > said. "He is a tribal man, and an Arab with honour who would not accept > such behaviour. He killed his captain and sergeant knowing that he would > be executed." > > Others gave IPS a similar account. "I was there when the American > captain and his soldiers raided a neighbourhood and started shouting at > women to tell them where some men they wanted were," a resident of > Mosul, speaking on condition of anonymity, told IPS on phone. "The women > told them they did not know, and their men did not do anything wrong, > and started crying in fear." > > The witness said the U.S. captain began to shout at his soldiers and > the women, and his men then started to grab the women and pull them by > their hair. > > "The soldier we knew later to be Kaissar shouted at the Americans, 'No, > No,' but the captain shouted back at the Iraqi soldier," the witness > told IPS. "Then the Iraqi soldier shouted, 'Let go of the women you sons > of bitches,' and started shooting at them." The soldier, he said, then > ran off. > > The Association of Muslim Scholars, a Sunni organisation, issued a > statement saying the Iraqi soldier had shot the U.S. soldiers after he > saw them beat up a pregnant woman. > > "His blood rose and he asked the occupying soldiers to stop beating the > woman," they said in the statement. "Their answer through the translator > was: 'We will do what we want. So he opened fire on them." > > The story was first reported on al-Rafidain satellite channel. That > started Iraqis from all over the country talking about "the hero" who > sacrificed his life for Iraqi honour. > > The U.S. and Iraqi military told a different version of the story. > > An Iraqi general told reporters that Kaissar carried out the attack > because he had links to "Sunni Arab insurgent groups." > > "Soldier Kaissar Saady worked for insurgent groups who pushed him to > learn army movements and warn his comrades about them," a captain of the > second Iraqi army division told IPS. "There are so many like him in the > army and now within the so-called Awakening forces (militias funded by > the U.S. military)." > > One army officer speaking on condition of anonymity described Kaissar's > act as heroic. "Those Americans learned their lesson once more." > > Sheikh Juma' al-Dawar, chief of the major al-Baggara tribe in Iraq, > told IPS in Baghdad that "Kaissar is from the al-Juboor tribes in Gayara > -- tribes with morals that Americans do not understand." > > The tribal chief added, "Juboor tribes and all other tribes are proud > of Kaissar and what he did by killing the American soldiers. Now he is a > hero, with a name that will never be forgotten." > > Many Iraqis speak in similar vein. "It is another example of Iraqi > people's unity despite political conspiracies by the Americans and their > tails (collaborators)," Mohammad Nassir, an independent politician in > Baghdad told IPS. "Kaissar is loved by all Iraqis who pray for his > safety and who are ready to donate anything for his welfare." > > Col. Juboory said Kaissar who had at first accepted collaboration with > the U.S. forces "found the truth too bitter to put up with." The colonel > said: "I worked with the Americans because being an army officer is my > job and also because I was convinced they would help Iraqis. But 11 > months was enough for me to realise that starving to death is more > honourable than serving the occupiers. They were mean in every way." > > Independent sources have since told IPS that Kaissar was captured by a > special joint Iraqi-U.S. force, and he is now being held and tortured at > the al-Ghizlany military camp in Mosul. > > Despite a recent decline in the number of occupation forces being > killed, 2007 was the deadliest year of the occupation for U.S. troops, > with 901 killed, according to the U.S. Department of Defence. > > (*Ali, our correspondent in Baghdad, works in close collaboration with > Dahr Jamail, our U.S.-based specialist writer on Iraq who has reported > extensively from Iraq and the Middle East) (END/2008) > > > From sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca Mon Jan 07 17:24:09 2008 Received: from bay0-omc1-s22.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.94]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JC2GH-0004ny-HH for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:24:09 -0700 Received: from hotmail.com ([207.46.9.247]) by bay0-omc1-s22.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 16:24:26 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 16:24:26 -0800 Message-ID: Received: from 207.46.9.251 by by120fd.bay120.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:24:24 GMT X-Originating-IP: [69.157.145.127] X-Originating-Email: [sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca] X-Sender: sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca From: "Jim Yarker" To: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Bcc: Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:24:24 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2008 00:24:26.0096 (UTC) FILETIME=[D3377F00:01C8518C] Subject: [A-List] Re-Accommodating the Acadians X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:24:09 -0000 http://www.histori.ca/ "When Memory Fails" Le Devoir, Friday, August 27, 1999 (Excerpt of an article from the August edition of Action nationale) This year, the city of Moncton, in Acadia, will host the Summit of francophone countries. One must rejoice to have the Acadians host this important event, because justice is being served. Indeed, few people so richly deserve their place in history. Victims of cruel genocide in the mid-18th century, the Acadian people were able to get back on their feet and fight for their right to exist despite unheard-of hardships. [...] But the city of Moncton, New Brunswick, owes its name to the British officer Robert Monckton, who was active in Acadia from 1755 to 1758 and in the Quebec City region during the siege of that city by Wolfe in 1759. The act of naming the city after this soldier raises serious social, political, and ethical problems. As a soldier in Acadia and the Quebec City area, Monckton committed terrible acts of great cruelty which are the equivalent of genocide, crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity in the sense that we recognize and label them today. --- "Acadian Genocide" Le Devoir, Friday, August 27, 1999 In the July 28, 1755 council session, the Lieutenant Governor of Nova Scotia, Charles Lawrence decided to deport the Acadians. The minutes of the meeting stipulate: "After mature consideration it was unanimously agreed, that, to prevent as much as possible their attempting to return and molest the settlers that may be set down on their lands, it would be most proper to send them to be distributed amongst the several colonies on the continent, and that a sufficient number of vessels should be hired with all possible expedition for that purpose." Three days later, on the 31st, Lawrence sent his instructions to Colonel Robert Monckton. "In the mean time, it will be necessary to keep this measure as secret as possible, as well to prevent their attempting to escape, as to carry off their cattle; and the better to effect this you will endeavour to fall upon some stratagem to get the men, both young and old (especially the heads of families) into your power and detain them till the transports shall arrive, so as that they may be ready to be shipped off; for when this is done it is not much to be feared that the women and children will attempt to go away and carry off the cattle. But least they should, it will not only be very proper to secure all their Shallops, Boats, Canoes and every other vessel you can lay your hands upon; But also to send out parties to all suspected roads and places from time to time, that they may be thereby intercepted. As their whole stock of Cattle and Corn is forfeited to the Crown by their rebellion, and must be secured & apply'd towards a reimbursement of the expense the government will be at in transporting them out of the Country, care must be had that nobody make any bargain for purchasing them under any colour or pretence whatever; if they do the sale will be void, for the inhabitants have now (since the order in Council) no property in them, nor will they be allowed to carry away the least thing but their ready money and household furniture." ---- DECLARATION AT THE GRAND PRE CHURCH Quoted by John Winslow Acadia; Sketches of a Journey. P.52 / Journal of Colonial Winslow, published in 1883 and 1885 in volumes III and IV of the Nova Scotia Historical Society's collections "Gentlemen, I have received from His Excellency Governor Lawrence the King's commission which I have in my hand and by whose orders you are conveyed together to manifest to you His Majesty's final resolution to the French inhabitants of this his province of Nova Scotia who for almost half a century have had more indulgence granted them than any of his subjects in any part of his Dominions. What you have made of them you yourself best know." --- http://www.toplumpostasi.net/index.php/cat/12/col/85/art/1364/PageName/Dunya Britain's forgotten genocide in the land of Évangéline Alkan CHAGLAR alkanchaglar@gmail.com Yazarýn tüm yazýlarýný görüntüle 7 Þubat 2007, Çarþamba Yorum Yaz Yazdýr Arkadaþýna Gönder 252 years ago Britain committed one of the most sinister crimes against humanity. This is not the better documented African Slave Trade, Boer War concentration camps or even the dire treatment of Aboriginal Australians, but the lesser known ethnic cleansing and genocide of the Acadians. It is a crime Britain wishes to forget and conceal even to this very day. Perhaps hidden to avoid detection by Anglo Saxon adventurers along the rugged littoral of Nova Scotia live small pockets of communities of repatriated Acadians; the Acadians are descendants of the first Europeans to inhabit Atlantic Canada, which includes the three provinces of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. Originally French settlers, the Acadians had within a century after their arrival developed into a distinct community with their own culture, while intermarrying with the native Mic’maq with whom they developed amicable relations. By the early 18th century, Britain and France fought bitterly over Atlantic Canada, with the region exchanging hands time and time again, but in the end coming under British control. The Acadians who had developed a sense of neutrality amid the chaos of a long fought conflict between British red-coats and the French soldat found their loyalty questioned by both nations. However, in the end their neutrality, which John Mack Faragher’s defines in his book “A Great and noble scheme, the tragic story of the expulsion of the French Acadians” as “their intimate and cooperative connection to the Mic’maq,” and their “attachment to place, local practice and newly developed traditions” was not enough to save them from destruction. Briefly after having been appointed the Governor of the new British colony of Nova Scotia (replacing defeated Acadia), General Charles Lawrence, wrote to London about the Acadians: "As they possess the best and largest tracts of land in this Province, it cannot be settled with any effect while they remain in this situation ... “It would be much better ... that they were away". General Lawrence who seemed to have their plans prepared carefully wrote to the British Secretary of State revealing his intentions: "I will propose to them the Oath of Allegiance a last time, if they refuse we will have a pretext for their expulsion: If they accept I will refuse them the Oath ... In both cases I shall deposit them." Director of Acadian studies at Moncton University, James Laxer lends credence to this by quoting a letter sent on July 18 1755 to the Board of Trade, which explained how the Acadians had “since earnestly desired to be admitted to take the oath, but were refused.” Describing the consequent upheaval and exile of the Acadians, in his book: ‘The Acadians, A people’s story of exile and triumph,’ historian Dean Jobb recounts how the Acadians were forcibly rooted from their homes. “Columns of smoke and flame rose skyward as homes and barns were put to the torch. “Cattle were slaughtered or confiscated. “Their only crime had been to insist on the right to live in peace as England and France rushed headlong into another war.” Describing events during “le Grand dérangement", (Great Upheaval), Jobb described how families were torn apart as children were taken from their parents to become servants. Around 15,000 Acadians out of a population of 18,000 were deported in 1755 with around half dying on ship wrecks or in poverty on British ships. Providing the Acadians with a trap proposal, British military leader Charles Lawrence knew he was leading them to their obliteration. The rapacity for control over the natural resources of Atlantic Canada and the growing need to reap the benefits of the New World was the motivation behind the forced expulsion of the Acadians. Later British generals with their oblique principles of democracy driven by avarice, convinced themselves that the Acadians were a security risk, and therefore a consequence of war. The agony of the Acadians in exile after “le Grand dérangement", is reflected in the poem Évangéline, A Tale of Acadie by American poet Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Longfellow describes the betrothal of an Acadian girl named Evangeline to her lover, Gabriel and their forced separation after the expulsion of Acadians. Spending a lifetime of poverty on the road, Évangéline finds work as a nurse finding Gabriel who is impoverished and weakened by disease, before he dies in her arms. Apology and reconciliation Despite the harrowing events that make human hearts ache with emotion, even now there remains a prevailing psyche among many that the Acadians brought on this tragedy themselves. Alarmingly, the attitude is not only confined to the average Nova Scotian lumberjack but spills into the palaces of the British Haut Monde and in the corridors of power where elected parliamentarians sit. When seeking an apology, Acadian Canadian MP Stephane Bergeron’s bill was defeated by Anglophone Liberals whose opposition was based upon not facts but an invisible emotional cord of British loyalty stretching all the way from Ottawa to London. Their meticulous efforts to conceal this past crime, blocked the bill and the consequent apology it would have sought from Westminster, while also freezing the process of reconciliation. Those in power will try to justify opposition to a British apology by suggesting, “but this transpired 252 years ago…. therefore it is not so important today.” A feeble argument, if the issue in question was ‘history’ then Acadian Canadian today would not be fighting for equality in their status as citizens or reduced to a small minority living in pocket communities. Past actions have consequences beyond a few years. The current status of the Acadian minority in Canada today as in other parts of the globe reflect the 252 years of suffering in re-adjusting oneself and re-building ones life. Until recently many still faced overt discrimination. If past wrongs are not addressed then how can those whose misery today was founded in 1755 move on and reconcile with their neighbours? A paradigm that re-appears again and again in the thought-process of sceptics, people will typically enquire as if seeking to trivialize the Acadian tragedy, “Well…what about all the other injustices committed in history?” To which I ask, Well…what about them? Is there a queuing system for seeking an apology for past injustices? Are injustices weighed against those who fall under a ‘priority list’ ? Apologies may be mere words to some, but they can act as a foundation that is requisite to the process of reconciliation in a modern society. Historical injustices represented by centuries of suffering of a people are not history as they are easily transferred to one’s standing in that society today. Past acts have far-reaching consequences dividing people, and fuelling resentment and distrust, especially if those enjoying the fruits of power are still benefiting from their callous actions yesterday. From sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca Mon Jan 07 17:27:29 2008 Received: from bay0-omc1-s6.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.78]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JC2JV-0004oJ-6k for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:27:29 -0700 Received: from hotmail.com ([207.46.9.241]) by bay0-omc1-s6.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 16:27:45 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 16:27:45 -0800 Message-ID: Received: from 207.46.9.251 by by120fd.bay120.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:27:41 GMT X-Originating-IP: [69.157.145.127] X-Originating-Email: [sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca] X-Sender: sjy_estrien@sympatico.ca From: "Jim Yarker" To: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Bcc: Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:27:41 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2008 00:27:45.0839 (UTC) FILETIME=[4A45DBF0:01C8518D] Subject: [A-List] =?iso-8859-1?q?Lesson-Giver_Initiatives_in_Accommodation?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_=3A_R=E8glement_17?= X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:27:29 -0000 http://archeion-aao.fis.utoronto.ca/ArcheionVirtualExhibit/education1.html The Ruling 17 crisis, 1912-1927 In 1912, the Ontario government put forward Ruling 17, forbidding the use of French as a language of instruction in Ontario schools. Franco-Ontarians regarded the ruling as the culmination of an assimilation policy extending as far back as the 1860s. The Association canadienne-française d'éducation d'Ontario (ACFÉO, later named the Association canadienne-française de l'Ontario in 1969), on behalf of francophones across Canada, initiated a 15-year battle, pitting two distinct visions of the country against one another. This first document (original in English) captured the spirit of the claim of Ontario French-Canadians, calling for "British Fair Play." At this time Ontario's francophone community was not demanding unilingual French schools. Some of the most heated battles took place in Ottawa, including episodes at the Guigues School in 1916, the controversial dismissal of the Desloges sisters for refusing to obey Ruling 17, and protests at the Brébeuf School. The debate extended to Kent and Essex counties, especially between 1916 and 1917, as Bishop Fallon of London and Dr. Gustave Lacasse, a brilliant speaker nicknamed "The Lion of the Peninsula" debated the "eternal question." Conflict also arose at Pembroke in 1923 regarding a young teacher, Jeanne Lajoie, and her independent school. Tolerance and diplomacy, 1927-1964 Ruling 17 was amended in 1927 following the recommendations of the Merchant-Scott-Côté Report. The royal commission, having visited bilingual schools throughout Ontario, concluded that the key to successful learning was instruction in the mother tongue of the student. It was a victory on paper only, though, since the teaching of academic subjects other than French was still conducted in English. Nevertheless, open conflicts gave way to diplomacy and internal mediation, notably among school trustees, councilors and within the provincial government. In 1934, the ACFÉO adopted a report presented by abbot Stéphane Côté, a priest from Chelmsford, which emphasized the poor results of the "new education system". In 1946, twelve years after the 1934 study, an ACFÉO brief presented to the Royal Commission on Education in Ontario, the Hope Report found that the situation of Franco-Ontarians had improved, without "being perfect," strengthened by those in favor of a bilingual system. By 1953, the new president of the ACFÉO, Gaston Vincent, in a speech entitled "Perspectives for the Future," delivered during the annual Congress. In that speech, Gauthier expressed his satisfaction, but not delight, with the status quo: "On the topic of our education system, are we not inclined to feelings of euphoria, do we not feel a sense of passive satisfaction given the results of produced over the last quarter of a century? If everything seems to be going well, could things not go better?" Reorganization of the Department of Education, 1965 After Robert Gauthier's retirement from the Ministry of Education in 1964, subsequent ministerial reorganizations were a matter of contention for ACFÉO president, Roger N. Séguin. The position of Director of French Education was simply abolished. ACFÉO president and the general secretary, Roger Charbonneau, took a collaborative approach in working with Franco-Ontarian civil servants, such as Roland Bériault (1912-1983). In areas affecting the Franco-Ontarian minority, fundamental questions on the management of the system remained. The question of decentralization and restructuring of French schools, and attainment of French secondary schools, promised a greater role for Franco-Ontarians in the management of their schools. Unlike 1912, the ACFÉO was no longer isolated, and the provincial government of John Robart's expressed a willingness to proceed with reforms. Secondary schools and the management of education, 1966-1988 Under the chairmanship of Roland Bériault, the Committee on French language schools in Ontario (1967-1969) established parameters for Bills 140 and 141, thereby concluding a process of consultation with the Franco-Ontarian community. This process culminated in the the 19th Special General Conference on secondary schools held in Ottawa, February, 1967. This annotated draft of the brief on secondary schools was produced during the conference, with the final document presented to education minister William Davis, March 20th, 1967. The official position of the ACFÉO represented a compromise between the Association, its affiliates and the community. In effect, it was a strategic renouncement, trading a publicly funded Catholic and separate secondary school system, (which arrived in 1984 with Bill 30, the "achievement") for a system of public secondary schools. The traditional association between language and faith was put aside, albeit with the assurance that religion would be taught in the public schools. Bills 140 and 141, establishing primary and secondary French language schools in Ontario, did not resolve all controversies. Secondary school councils still had the power to determine the need for French language education, and in various instances blocked the creation of French secondary schools. A new crisis, "Schools of resistance," temporarily emerged. Though the ACFÉO had set aside education to fight other battles, it once again took up this part of its earlier mandate. With school conflicts in Sturgeon Falls (1971), the government passed Bills 180 and 181. But the new legislation came in for criticism, namely that the powers of decision within school councils was still not given to francophones. When new school crises occurred in Cornwall (1973) and Windsor-Essex (1975), the issue of school management by Franco-Ontarians was again raised.The Ottawa-Carleton chapter of the ACFO has been trying to obtain a homogenous French school council since 1975. At the ACFO's 28th Annual Conference, held at Cornwall in August 1977, the association confirmed its support for the Ottawa-Carleton chapter. With the emergence of school crises at Elliot Lake and Windsor less than a year after the election of the Parti Québécois, the ACFO decided to step up the pressure, addressing its concerns directly to Premier William Davis. The letter to Premier Davis, which asked for offical status for French in Ontario and a school system for francophones controlled by them, went on to warn that should the provincial government not take a leadership role on these questions, there could be dire consequences for the country as a whole. The letter went on to say that, while willing to work in collaberation with the provincial government, failure to respond to the ACFO's demands would result in its denouncement of the government. Under the weight of the Penetanguishene school crisis (1978-1982), various lawsuits (Court of Appeal in 1984, Supreme Court of Ontario in 1986) and Article 23 in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the provincial government passed Bill 75 in 1986, giving francophones the right to manage their own schools, though certain aspects such as budget and transportation were jointly managed. The province also promised the creation of French language school councils in Ottawa-Carleton and Toronto. Two years later, Bill 109 was passed into law, resulting in the creation of the Conseil scolaire de langue française d'Ottawa-Carleton in 1988. But with the defeat of the NDP government of Bob Rae in 199[5], further developements in the management of education were halted. In January of 1998 all French schools in Ontario became managed exclusively by francophones, from kindergarden to the end of high school Post-secondary education With the 1960s, the ACFO took the position that French college and university programs should complement the Franco-Ontarian education system. The fight for management of education required all the attention of the ACFO during the 1970s and the first half of the 1980s. In 1985, the Churchill Report (Conseil de l'éducation franco-ontarienne) and the Carrier Report (University of Ottawa) established a direct link between the availability of French language educational programs and the participation of Franco-Ontarians in post-secondary education. The ACFO did not ask that the colleges and universities fall under the French Language Services Act (1986), but instead lobbied to obtain homogenous French institutions. With this report entitled « Y a du français dans l'air » and « It's Time for French! », the ACFO updated and publicized its position on French post-secondary education in Ontario. Developed at its 1988 annual meeting, the report outlined the development of a French language post-secondary education program as a priority for the ACFO. The report outlined the disparities disparaging between English and French post-secondary education programmes. It went on to demand the creation of a French language university in Ontario. In collaboration with other organizations, the ACFO continued to pressure both the provincial and federal governments. On January 12, 1989, an agreement was signed for the creation of the first French community college, to be located in Eastern Ontario. In 1990, the Cité collégiale opened in a temporary location, but by in 1995 had its own campus. The Collège Boréal ,originally in Sudbury and now in five other cities of Northern Ontario, and the Collège des Grands Lacs (Toronto) followed. But the question of a Franco-Ontarian university remained. In 1990, the ACFO made public a study titled "L'université de langue française: des ressources à exploiter". In 1995, the ACFO and other organizations joined forces to form the Alliance for a Franco-Ontarian University. .... From shimogamo@attglobal.net Mon Jan 07 17:40:46 2008 Received: from kcout02.prserv.net ([12.154.55.32]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JC2WL-0004os-Pc for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:40:46 -0700 Received: from [60.254.248.124] (em60-254-248-124.pool.emnet.ne.jp[60.254.248.124]) by prserv.net (kcout02) with ESMTP id <2008010800405720200r77g2e> (Authid: jpinet.totten3); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 00:40:58 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [60.254.248.124] Message-ID: <4782BF29.8050200@attglobal.net> Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 09:09:13 +0900 From: Bill Totten User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: a-list , ugly New World , World City Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [A-List] Renewing Husbandry X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:40:46 -0000 The time of mechanization in agriculture is fast coming to an end. But can we recover what's been lost? by Wendell Berry Orion magazine (September / October 2005) I REMEMBER WELL A SUMMER MORNING in about 1950 when my father sent a hired man with a McCormick High Gear Number 9 mowing machine and a team of mules to the field I was mowing with our nearly new Farmall A. That memory is a landmark in my mind and my history. I had been born into the way of farming represented by the mule team, and I loved it. I knew irresistibly that the mules were good ones. They were stepping along beautifully at a rate of speed in fact only a little slower than mine. But now I saw them suddenly from the vantage point of the tractor, and I remember how fiercely I resented their slowness. I saw them as "in my way". This is not an exceptional or a remarkably dramatic bit of history. I recite it to confirm that the industrialization of agriculture is a part of my familiar experience. I don't have the privilege of looking at it as an outsider. We were mowing that morning, the teamster with his mules and I with the tractor, in the field behind the barn on my father's home place, where he and before him his father had been born, and where his father had died in February of 1946. The old way of farming was intact in my grandfather's mind until the day he died at eighty-two. He had worked mules all his life, understood them thoroughly, and loved the good ones passionately. He knew tractors only from a distance, he had seen only a few of them, and he rejected them out of hand because he thought, correctly, that they compacted the soil. Even so, four years after his death his grandson's sudden resentment of the "slow" mule team foretold what history would bear out: the tractor would stay and the mules would go. Year after year, agriculture would be adapted more and more to the technology and the processes of industry and to the rule of industrial economics. This transformation occurred with astonishing speed because, by the measures it set for itself, it was wonderfully successful. It "saved labor", it conferred the prestige of modernity, and it was highly productive. During the fourteen years after 1950 I was much away from home, though I never entirely departed from farming or at least from thoughts of farming, and my affection for my homeland remained strong. In 1964 my family and I returned to Kentucky and settled on a hillside farm in my native community, where we have continued to live. Perhaps because I was a returned traveler intending to stay, I now saw the place more clearly than before. I saw it critically, too, for it was evident at once that the human life of the place, the life of the farms and the farming community, was in decline. The old self-sufficient way of farming was passing away. The economic prosperity that had visited the farmers briefly during World War II and for a few years afterward had ended. The little towns that once had been social and economic centers, thronged with country people on Saturdays and Saturday nights, were losing out to the bigger towns and the cities. The rural neighborhoods, once held together by common memories, common work, and the sharing of help, had begun to dissolve. There were no longer local markets for chickens or eggs or cream. The spring lamb industry, once a staple of the region, was gone. The tractors and other mechanical devices certainly were saving the labor of the farmers and farmhands who had moved away, but those who had stayed were working harder and longer than ever. THE EFFECTS OF THE PROCESS OF INDUSTRIALIZATION have become so apparent, so numerous, so favorable to the agribusiness corporations, and so unfavorable to everything else, that by now the questions troubling me and a few others in the 1960s and 1970s are being asked everywhere. It has become increasingly clear that the way we farm affects the local community, and that the economy of the local community affects the way we farm; that the way we farm affects the health and integrity of the local ecosystem, and that the farm is intricately dependent, even economically, upon the health of the local ecosystem. We can no longer pretend that agriculture is a sort of economic machine with interchangeable parts, the same everywhere, determined by "market forces" and independent of everything else. We are not farming in a specialist capsule or a professionalist department; we are farming in the world, in a webwork of dependences and influences probably more intricate than we will ever understand. It has become clear, in short, that we have been running our fundamental economic enterprise by the wrong rules. We were wrong to assume that agriculture could be adequately defined by reductionist science and determinist economics. It is no longer possible to deny that context exists and is an issue. If you can keep the context narrow enough (and the accounting period short enough), then the industrial criteria of labor saving and high productivity seem to work well. But the old rules of ecological coherence and of community life have remained in effect. The costs of ignoring them have accumulated, until now the boundaries of our reductive and mechanical explanations have collapsed. Their collapse reveals, plainly enough for all to see, the ecological and social damages they were meant to conceal. It will seem paradoxical to some that the national and global corporate economies have narrowed the context for thinking about agriculture, but it is merely the truth. Those large economies, in their understanding and in their accounting, have excluded any concern for the land and the people. Now, in the midst of so much unnecessary human and ecological destruction, we are facing the necessity of a new start in agriculture. THE TRACTOR'S ARRIVAL HAD SIGNALED, among other things, agriculture's shift from an almost exclusive dependence on free solar energy to a total dependence on costly fossil fuel. But in 1950, like most people at that time, I was years away from the first inkling of the limits of the supply of cheap fuel. We had entered an era of limitlessness, or the illusion thereof, and this in itself is a sort of wonder. My grandfather lived a life of limits, both suffered and strictly observed, in a world of limits. I learned much of that world from him and others, and then I changed; I entered the world of labor-saving machines and of limitless cheap fossil fuel. It would take me years of reading, thought, and experience to learn again that in this world limits are not only inescapable but indispensable. Mechanical farming makes it easy to think mechanically about the land and its creatures. It makes it easy to think mechanically even about oneself, and the tirelessness of tractors brought a new depth of weariness into human experience, at a cost to health and family life that has not been fully accounted. Once one's farm and one's thoughts have been sufficiently mechanized, industrial agriculture's focus on production, as opposed to maintenance or stewardship, becomes merely logical. And here the trouble completes itself. The almost exclusive emphasis on production permits the way of working to be determined not by the nature and character of the farm in its ecosystem and in its human community, but rather by the national or the global economy and the available or affordable technology. The farm and all concerns not immediately associated with production have in effect disappeared from sight. The farmer too in effect has vanished. He is no longer working as an independent and loyal agent of his place, his family, and his community, but instead as the agent of an economy that is fundamentally adverse to him and to all that he ought to stand for. THE WORD "HUSBANDRY" IS THE NAME of a connection. In its original sense, it is the name of the work of a domestic man, a man who has accepted a bondage to the household. To husband is to use with care, to keep, to save, to make last, to conserve. Old usage tells us that there is a husbandry also of the land, of the soil, of the domestic plants and animals - obviously because of the importance of these things to the household. And there have been times, one of which is now, when some people have tried to practice a proper human husbandry of the nondomestic creatures, in recognition of the dependence of our households and domestic life upon the wild world. Husbandry is the name of all the practices that sustain life by connecting us conservingly to our places and our world; it is the art of keeping tied all the strands in the living network that sustains us. Most and perhaps all of industrial agriculture's manifest failures appear to be the result of an attempt to make the land produce without husbandry. The attempt to remake agriculture as a science and an industry has excluded from it the age-old husbandry which was central and essential to it. This effort had its initial and probably its most radical success in separating farming from the economy of subsistence. Through World War II, farm life in my region (and, I think, nearly everywhere) rested solidly upon the garden, dairy, poultry flock, and meat animals that fed the farm's family. Especially in hard times farm families, and their farms, survived by means of their subsistence economy. The industrial program, on the contrary, suggested that it was "uneconomic" for a farm family to produce its own food; the effort and the land would be better applied to commercial production. The result is utterly strange in human experience: farm families that buy everything they eat at the store. An intention to replace husbandry with science was made explicit in the renaming of disciplines in the colleges of agriculture. "Soil husbandry" became "soil science", and "animal husbandry" became "animal science". This change is worth lingering over because of what it tells us about our susceptibility to poppycock. Purporting to increase the sophistication of the humble art of farming, this change in fact brutally oversimplifies it. "Soil science", as practiced by soil scientists, and even more as it has been handed down to farmers, has tended to treat the soil as a lifeless matrix in which "soil chemistry" takes place and "nutrients" are "made available". And this, in turn, has made farming increasingly shallow - literally so - in its understanding of the soil. The modern farm is understood as a surface on which various mechanical operations are performed, and to which various chemicals are applied. The undersurface reality of organisms and roots is mostly ignored. "Soil husbandry" is a different kind of study, involving a different kind of mind. Soil husbandry leads, in the words of Sir Albert Howard, to understanding "health in soil, plant, animal, and man as one great subject". We apply the word "health" only to living creatures, and to soil husbandry a healthy soil is a wilderness, mostly unstudied and unknown, but teemingly alive. The soil is at once a living community of creatures and their habitat. The farm's husband, its family, its crops and animals, all are members of the soil community; all belong to the character and identity of the place. To rate the farm family merely as "labor" and its domestic plants and animals merely as "production" is thus an oversimplification, both radical and destructive. "Science" is too simple a word to name the complex of relationships and connections that compose a healthy farm - a farm that is a full membership of the soil community. The husbandry of mere humans, of course, cannot be complex enough either. But husbandry always has understood that what is husbanded is ultimately a mystery. A farmer, as one of his farmer correspondents once wrote to Liberty Hyde Bailey, is "a dispenser of the 'Mysteries of God'". The mothering instinct of animals, for example, is a mystery that husbandry must use and trust mostly without understanding. The husband, unlike the "manager" or the would-be objective scientist, belongs inherently to the complexity and the mystery that is to be husbanded, and so the husbanding mind is both careful and humble. Husbandry originates precautionary sayings like "Don't put all your eggs into one basket" and "Don't count your chickens before they hatch". It does not boast of technological feats that will "feed the world". Husbandry, which is not replaceable by science, nevertheless uses science, and corrects it too. It is the more comprehensive discipline. To reduce husbandry to science, in practice, is to transform agricultural "wastes" into pollutants, and to subtract perennials and grazing animals from the rotation of crops. Without husbandry, the agriculture of science and industry has served too well the purpose of the industrial economy in reducing the number of landowners and the self-employed. It has transformed the United States from a country of many owners to a country of many employees. Without husbandry, "soil science" too easily ignores the community of creatures that live in and from, that make and are made by, the soil. Similarly, "animal science" without husbandry forgets, almost as a requirement, the sympathy by which we recognize ourselves as fellow creatures of the animals. It forgets that animals are so called because we once believed them to be endowed with souls. Animal science has led us away from that belief or any such belief in the sanctity of animals. It has led us instead to the animal factory which, like the concentration camp, is a vision of Hell. Animal husbandry, on the contrary, comes from and again leads to the psalmist's vision of good grass, good water, and the husbandry of God. Agriculture must mediate between nature and the human community, with ties and obligations in both directions. To farm well requires an elaborate courtesy toward all creatures, animate and inanimate. It is sympathy that most appropriately enlarges the context of human work. Contexts become wrong by being too small - "too small, that is, to contain the scientist or the farmer or the farm family or the local ecosystem or the local community" - and this is crucial. "Out of context", as Wes Jackson has said, "the best minds do the worst damage". OUR RECENT FOCUS UPON PRODUCTIVITY, genetic and technological uniformity, and global trade - all supported by supposedly limitless supplies of fuel, water, and soil - has obscured the necessity for local adaptation. But our circumstances are changing rapidly now, and this requirement will be forced upon us again by terrorism and other kinds of political violence, by chemical pollution, by increasing energy costs, by depleted soils, aquifers, and streams, and by the spread of exotic weeds, pests, and diseases. We are going to have to return to the old questions about local nature, local carrying capacities, and local needs. And we are going to have to resume the breeding of plants and animals to fit the region and the farm. The same obsessions and extravagances that have caused us to ignore the issue of local adaptation have caused us to ignore the issue of form. These two issues are so closely related that it is difficult to talk about one without talking about the other. During the half century and more of our neglect of local adaptation, we have subjected our farms to a radical oversimplification of form. The diversified and reasonably self-sufficient farms of my region and of many other regions have been conglomerated into larger farms with larger fields, increasingly specialized, and subjected increasingly to the strict, unnatural linearity of the production line. But the first requirement of a form is that it must be comprehensive; it must not leave out something that essentially belongs within it. The form of the farm must answer to the farmer's feeling for the place, its creatures, and its work. It is a never-ending effort of fitting together many diverse things. It must incorporate the lifecycle and the fertility cycles of animals. It must bring crops and livestock into balance and mutual support. It must be a pattern on the ground and in the mind. It must be at once ecological, agricultural, economic, familial, and neighborly. Soon the majority of the world's people will be living in cities. We are now obliged to think of so many people demanding the means of life from the land, to which they will no longer have a practical connection, and of which they will have little knowledge. We are obliged also to think of the consequences of any attempt to meet this demand by large-scale, expensive, petroleum-dependent technological schemes that will ignore local conditions and local needs. The problem of renewing husbandry, and the need to promote a general awareness of everybody's agricultural responsibilities, thus becomes urgent. How can we restore a competent husbandry to the minds of the world's producers and consumers? This effort is already in progress on many farms and in many urban consumer groups scattered across our country and the world. But we must recognize too that this effort needs an authorizing focus and force that would grant it a new legitimacy, intellectual rigor, scientific respectability, and responsible teaching. There are many reasons to hope that this might be supplied by our colleges of agriculture. The effort of husbandry is partly scientific but it is entirely cultural; and a cultural initiative can exist only by becoming personal. It will become increasingly clear, I believe, that agricultural scientists will need to work as indwelling members of agricultural communities or of consumer communities. It is not irrational to propose that a significant number of these scientists should be farmers, and so subject their scientific work, and that of their colleagues, to the influence of a farmer's practical circumstances. Along with the rest of us, they will need to accept all the imperatives of husbandry as the context of their work. We cannot keep things from falling apart in our society if they do not cohere in our minds and in our lives. _____ This article has been abridged for the web. Wendell Berry's poems, essays, and works of fiction have won him numerous honors and a wide following. His latest collection of poems is titled Given (Shoemaker & Hoard, 2005). His essay in this issue is drawn from The Way of Ignorance, to be published by Shoemaker & Hoard in November 2005 and used here by permission. He lives and farms in his native Kentucky. For more information about Wendell Berry, his articles, and his books see http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/mag/contributor/54/ The Orion Society, 187 Main Street, Great Barrington, Massachusetts 01230 413-528-4422 / Toll Free 888-909-6568 / http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/160/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From tal1@cogeco.ca Mon Jan 07 20:51:26 2008 Received: from smtp.cogeco.net ([216.221.81.25] helo=fep5.cogeco.net) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JC5Us-00056r-QN for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:51:26 -0700 Received: from TonyPC (d150-46-31.home.cgocable.net [24.150.46.31]) by fep5.cogeco.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 201EE1348 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:51:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1DABD9FAC22B4C74BC095F9735381692@TonyPC> From: "Tony B." To: "A-List" Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:51:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 Subject: [A-List] SCO: Russia, Iran Consolidate Strategic Ties X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 03:51:27 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff To: Stop NATO Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 11:30 PM Subject: [stopnato] SCO: Russia, Iran Consolidate Strategic Ties http://www.hindu.com/2008/01/07/stories/2008010762321000.htm The Hindu January 7, 2008 Russia-Iran ties on the upswing Vladimir Radyuhin Vladimir Putin has seized the opportunity offered by the changing landscape around Iran to upgrade bilateral relations across the board -Russia has strongly supported Iran's membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Addressing a New Year press conference in Moscow, Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov revealed that the SCO will "soon" end its moratorium on expansion and consider admission of new members. He made it clear that Iran, which has an observer status in the SCO, would be a prime candidate for full membership. He said Iran's involvement in the SCO was essential for "effective solution of problems." -Mr. Putin must have offered Dr. Singh his frank reading of the situation: the U.S. overreach in Iraq offers a unique chance for making strategic gains in the region by forging closer ties with Iran. Has India chosen to play up to the U.S. and miss the chance? Consolidation of strategic ties between Russia and Iran was one of the most significant events in 2007. A breakthrough came when Vadimir Putin visited Tehran in October to become the first Russian leader since Joseph Stalin to set foot on Iranian soil. Mr. Putin is reported to have told Iranian Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei that Russia was ready to "expand ties without limitations" with Iran. This offer closely resonated with a proposal to form a strategi c alliance against common enemies that the Ayatollah made to the then Russian Security Council Secretary, Igor Ivanov, when he visited Tehran in February 2007. It took Moscow eight months to respond because it insisted on synchronising the all-round expansion and deepening of Russian-Iranian ties with Iran's steps to answer the outstanding questions on its nuclear programme. Mr. Putin did not avail himself of a long-standing invitation to visit Tehran till after Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) agreed in August on a "work plan" to clarify Tehran's past centrifuge development work. A few weeks after Mr. Putin's historic visit, Iran handed over to the IAEA details on its P-2 centrifuge work, prompting IAEA Director Mohamed El Baradei to say Iran was making "good progress" towards resolving the outstanding questions. On December 3, the U.S. released a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report that cleared Iran of the charge of pursuing a nuclear weapons programme. Significantly, the report which signalled Washington's retreat from the military option, had been kept under wraps for over a year. On the same day, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad became the first Iranian leader to attend the Gulf Cooperation Council summit in Doha. The next day, Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili was in Moscow to meet Mr. Putin. Mr. Jalili told the Russian President that the Iranian leadership was committed to building "long-term, strategic and future-oriented" relations with Russia. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said after the meeting that the Iranian envoy had pledged to answer all outstanding questions of the IAEA "in the nearest time possible." On December 13, Russia and Iran reached an agreement on a timetable for the completion of the Bushehr nuclear plant, which had been dogged by repeated delays and a row over payment. On December 16, Russia shipped the first consignment of uranium fuel to Bushehr. On December 17, the Al Qaeda leader - number two - Ayman Al Zawahiri denounced Iran in a video for backing off from its support to Iraqi Shia attacks on U.S. troops. In the last days of 2007, a second batch of fuel rods was delivered to the Iranian plant. By the end of February, the reactor will be fully stocked with fuel needed to start it up. Russian officials said this could happen before the end of 2008. The sequence of events shows that Mr. Putin seized the opportunity offered by the changing landscape around Iran and worked towards consolidating the changes. Russia moved to upgrade bilateral relations with Iran across the board. Iranian reports said the two countries were discussing 130 economic projects worth over $100 billion and aimed at boosting bilateral trade from the current $2 billion to $200 billion in the next 10 years. Energy will account for much of the planned growth in ties. Russia and Iran hold between them about 20 per cent of the global oil reserves and 42 per cent of natural gas. Russian oil and gas companies are already involved in Iranian hydrocarbon projects, and the Russian-Iranian trade commission at its meeting in Moscow on December 13 discussed plans to set up a joint gas venture to explore deposits in the Persian Gulf and Central Asia. The JV could undertake, according to Russian energy officials, the construction of the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline. Energy axis An energy axis between Russia and Iran could eventually lead to the establishment of a gas OPEC lobbied by Tehran and favourably viewed by Moscow. This will have a profound impact on strategic equations in the region. Russia is keen on directing Iran's gas exports to Asia and keeping the European market for itself. Energy underpins an emerging strategic triangle comprising Russia, Iran and China. The latter has signed multibillion-dollar energy deals to buy Iranian oil and liquefied natural gas and may also be at the receiving end of proposed gas pipelines from Iran. If the IPI project comes through, it can be extended to China; otherwise a Turkmenistan-China gas pipeline scheduled to be built before the end of 2008 can be connected to Iran (this will merely require reversing current gas flows from Turkmenistan to Iran via an existing pipeline between the two countries). Russia has agreed to strengthen Iran's military muscle. Following his talks in Tehran last month, head of the Russian Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation (FSMTC) Mikhail Dmitriyev said defence ties between the two countries "reinforce stability in the region." Russia has also encouraged Iran's deeper involvement in multilateral arrangements in the region. Moscow and Tehran see eye to eye on many regional issues. Both are opposed to U.S. plans to build oil and gas pipelines on the Caspian Sea bed bypassing Russia and Iran, and both want the sustainable energy security in Central Asia and the Caspian to be the prerogative of the region's nations. The Caspian Summit in Tehran on October 15-16, which provided a convenient pretext for Mr. Putin's visit to Iran, supported Iran's initiative to set up an economic cooperation organisation of the Caspian nations. The new body will hold its first meeting in the Russian city of Astrakhan on the Caspian Sea later this year. In a major boost for Tehran, the Caspian states ruled out the use of their territories for attack against Iran. Russia has strongly supported Iran's membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Addressing a New Year press conference in Moscow, Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov revealed that the SCO will "soon" end its moratorium on expansion and consider admission of new members. He made it clear that Iran, which has an observer status in the SCO, would be a prime candidate for full membership. He said Iran's involvement in the SCO was essential for "effective solution of problems." Mr. Putin's offer of strategic partnership with Iran has a rider: it must renounce the nuclear weapons option. Following a new round of infighting in the Iranian leadership, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani, a moderate close to Ayatollah Khamenei, was replaced by a former member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Saeed Jalili, a hard-line ally of President Ahmadinejad. However, Tehran's continued cooperation with IAEA indicated that moderates have gained the upper hand, at least for now. Strategic tie-up with Russia is too tempting an option for Iran to turn down. With Russia's help, it can advance its cherished goal of achieving regional supremacy and extending its strategic reach to Central Asia and beyond. At the same time, Iran wants to keep the nuclear option open. Moscow has firmly linked further defence and nuclear energy cooperation with Iran to progress in its interaction with IAEA. On December 23, Iranian Defence Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar announced that Russia would supply Iran deadly S-300 anti-missile systems, which will dramatically increase its ability to repulse air or missile attacks by the U.S. or Israel. Russian defence sources confirmed the report but the country's top weapons export authority, FSMTC, issued a denial. However, it did not deny the deal as such but said: "The delivery of S-300 air defence missiles . is not on the agenda and is not being discussed with the Iranian side at this moment." Once again, Moscow is dangling the carrot. It remains to be seen if Mr. Putin's preferred successor, Dmitry Medvedev, will display the same diplomatic skills as Mr. Putin has done in dealing with Iran. Russia's strategic rapprochement with Iran stands out in stark contrast with New Delhi's stagnant relations with Tehran. This may be a further indication that New Delhi is drifting away from Moscow. India has developed cold feet on the IPI project and the State Bank of India has banned letters of credit for Iranian firms in support of U.S.' unilateral sanctions on Iran. Iran figured prominently in Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's discussions with Mr. Putin during their summit in Moscow last November, according to Indian officials. Considering the fact that Russia has a vital stake in getting India on board on Iran, Mr. Putin must have offered Dr. Singh his frank reading of the situation: the U.S. overreach in Iraq offers a unique chance for making strategic gains in the region by forging closer ties with Iran. Has India chosen to play up to the U.S. and miss the chance? =========================== Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato To subscribe, send an e-mail to: stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ============================== __________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar MARKETPLACE Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net. Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 1New Members Visit Your Group Drive Traffic Sponsored Search can help increase your site traffic. Cat Groups on Yahoo! Groups Share pictures & stories about cats. Yahoo! Groups Be a Better Planet Share with others Help the Planet.. __,_._,___ From tal1@cogeco.ca Mon Jan 07 20:57:15 2008 Received: from smtp.cogeco.net ([216.221.81.25] helo=fep1.cogeco.net) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JC5aV-00057H-Lc for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:57:15 -0700 Received: from TonyPC (d150-46-31.home.cgocable.net [24.150.46.31]) by fep1.cogeco.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 72EE81050 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:57:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <824CFE4E7A114890BB8129CC5BE27743@TonyPC> From: "Tony B." To: "A-List" Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:57:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [A-List] Commentary: EU's Repeat Of Munich Betrayal To Open Pandora's Box X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 03:57:16 -0000 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Rick Rozoff To: Stop NATO Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 11:34 AM Subject: [stopnato] Commentary: EU's Repeat Of Munich Betrayal To Open=20 Pandora's Box http://www.cbw.cz/phprs/2008010731.html Czech Business Weekly January 7, 2008 Historical parallels show EU's Kosovo policy is insane By: Ji=F8=ED Han=E1k -[T]he KLA, supposedly the Kosovo Albanians' liberation army, was as recently as 1998 listed on the U.S.'s list of terrorist organizations. Only thanks to the magic wand of the U.S. State Department, then headed by Madeleine Albright, did the terrorists and narco-barons change into respectable freedom fighters. The new year begins under the sign of the infamy that the U.S. and the European Union are committing against Serbia by supporting independence for the Serbian province of Kosovo. In this context, I cannot help but reach for a historical comparison. When, in October 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain defended the Munich Agreement with Hitler as offering "peace in our time", Winston Churchill said, "The nation had to choose between shame and war. We have chosen shame. We shall get the war as well." To paraphrase - Washington and the EU have chosen between a restless Balkans and dishonesty. They have chosen dishonesty and will have troubles with more than the Balkans. But let us leave Serbia aside, injured and demeaned as it is. In its current state of mind, it is imaginable that Serbia will turn its back on the EU and the West and will seek a safe harbor in Moscow. The idea that Serbia may permit Russia to establish a base on its territory is not as fantastic as it may seem. Desperate states do desperate things. When discussing Kosovo's independence, we cannot apply a nation's right to self-determination. The Albanian nation already has its state. The Kosovo Albanians are thus merely a minority in Serbia, as the Czech Germans were in pre-war Czechoslovakia. But there are further points. If the Euro-Atlantic alliance grants independence to the Albanians in Kosovo, will it be able to consistently deny it to Albanians in the Republic of Macedonia, where they form a high percentage minority? And what about Republika Srpska in Bosnia-Herzegovina? Would it not have the right to disentangle itself from the (nonfunctioning) Bosnian double state and declare its own independence as well? I am almost certain that an independent Kosovo and an independent Republika Srpska in Bosnia would fuse with their "mother" states in the foreseeable future, resulting in an entirely new map of the region. These matters are but a trifle, however, compared to the whole extent of what may come spilling out of the Pandora's box of Kosovo's independence. If the Albanian minority in Serbia can become independent, why not the Hungarian minority in Slovakia? And in Romania? And what about Chechnya? And the Turks in Cyprus? And what about the 40-million strong Kurdish nation, with its own language and culture? Only because fate cast them into a cursedly sensitive area-one by the way that has billions of barrels of oil? And look at the icing on the cake: the KLA, supposedly the Kosovo Albanians' liberation army, was as recently as 1998 listed on the U.S.'s list of terrorist organizations. Only thanks to the magic wand of the U.S. State Department, then headed by Madeleine Albright, did the terrorists and narco-barons change into respectable freedom fighters. I cannot judge how much a role was played by the charm of KLA political leader Hashim Tha=E7i (also known as "the Snake"). What is certain is the fact that we will be witnesses to a unique event: With the declaration of an independent Kosovo, the narco-mafia will gain its own state. The states of the EU will probably recognize Kosovo's independence; only Cyprus is holding out. In the case of Slovakia or Romania, the approval will be either hypocritical or suicidal. For the Czech Republic, it will be a living example of forgetting one's own history. I am sorry that, as a convinced backer of the EU, I have to say that in the case of Kosovo, the EU has apparently gone insane. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato To subscribe, send an e-mail to: stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D __________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.=20 http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=3Dshopping __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar MARKETPLACE Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, B= S,=20 MS degree - College-Finder.net. Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch forma= t=20 to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activi= ty 1New Members Visit Your Group Real Food Group on Yahoo! Groups What does real food mean to you? Green Groups on Yahoo! Groups share your passion for the planet. Dog Fanatics on Yahoo! Groups Find people who are crazy about dogs.. __,_._,___=20 From tal1@cogeco.ca Mon Jan 07 20:59:23 2008 Received: from smtp2.cogeco.ca ([216.221.81.29] helo=fep3.cogeco.net) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JC5cZ-00057m-1y for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:59:23 -0700 Received: from TonyPC (d150-46-31.home.cgocable.net [24.150.46.31]) by fep3.cogeco.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 1F9D7C05 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:59:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3EA2E27952A0494580F7B72962A45816@TonyPC> From: "Tony B." To: "A-List" Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:59:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 Subject: [A-List] Prague: Left Youth Collect 150, 000 Signatures Against US Missile Radar X-BeenThere: a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: The A-List List-Id: The A-List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 03:59:23 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff To: Stop NATO Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 9:51 PM Subject: [stopnato] Prague: Left Youth Collect 150,000 Signatures Against US Missile Radar http://www.praguemonitor.com/en/245/czech_national_news/16696/ Czech News Agency January 7, 2008 Young Communists collect 150,000 signatures against U.S. radar Prague - The Czech Communist Youth Association (KSM) has collected almost 150,000 signatures for a petition against the planned stationing of a U.S. radar station in the Czech Republic, KSM chairman Milan Krajca told CTK Friday. Krajca said the KSM wanted to submit the petition sheets to the Chamber of Deputies in mid-January when its first session this year would start. The KSM activists have repeatedly submitted the petition to the lower house of the Czech parliament. Last June, they had 111,000 signatures on it. Petitions against the plan and for the calling of a referendum on it have been staged by other organisations, too. The United States wants to build a radar base in the Czech Republic and a base with ten defence missiles in Poland, both to be elements of the missile shield. Negotiations with the USA on the project are underway. The shield is reportedly to protect a big part of Europe and the United States against missiles that "rogue" countries like Iran might launch. According to public opinion polls, a majority of Czechs are opposed to the radar base, and the same is true of Poles who do not want the missile base. =========================== Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato To subscribe, send an e-mail to: stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ============================== __________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar MARKETPLACE Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net. Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 1New Members Visit Your Group Sitebuilder Build a web site quickly & easily with Sitebuilder. Yahoo! Groups Going Green Share your passion for the planet. Endurance Zone on Yahoo! Groups Communities about higher endurance.. __,_._,___ From critical.montages@gmail.com Mon Jan 07 21:03:56 2008 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.153]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JC5gx-00057x-T9 for a-list@lists.econ.utah.edu; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:03:56 -0700 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so3939542fgb.45 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:04:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.86.12 with SMTP id j12mr228541fgb.68.1199765057468; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:04:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.95.1 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:04:17 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 23:04:17 -0500 From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" To: "The A-List" In-Reply-To: <3EA2E27952A0494580F7B72962A45816@TonyPC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <3EA2E27952A0494580F7B72962A45816@TonyPC> Subject: Re: [A-List] Prague: Left Youth Collect 150, 000 Signatures Against US Missile Radar X-BeenThere: a-list@li