From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb  1 06:17:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu Feb  1 06:17:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] more from Porto Alegre
Message-ID: <000d01c08c40$5e3e2320$777d01d5@mjones>

When Davos Meets Porto Alegre: A Memoir

 By Walden Bello*

 Porto Alegre, Brazil

        "Hemingway said that the rich are
different from you and me.  How can anyone expect
the people in Davos to understand the crisis that
globalization has visited on the lives of people
like those of us here in Porto Alegre?"  That was
going to be my opening line.

        When I arrived at the university studio
for the televised trans-Atlantic debate with
George Soros, the financier, and other
representatives of the global elite gathered in
Davos, Switzerland, a visibly shaken Florian
Rochat of the Swiss delegation was waiting for me.
Swiss are known for being impassive, but Florian
was visibly shaken. "They are arresting protestors
in Davos and other places in Switzerland," he told
me.  "They're killing democracy in our country.
Our friends there are asking you to support them
in calling for the shutting down of the World
Economic Forum."

        That request drove out any lingering
desire to be "nice" in the coming exchange, which
had been billed by its producers as a "Dialogue
between Davos and Porto Alegre."  The ambitious,
one-million dollar plus production involving four
satellite hookups, aimed to explore if there was a
common ground between the annual elite gathering
in Davos and the newly launched World Social Forum
(WSF) in this southern Brazilian city.  Millions
of people globally were waiting for the
transmission.

        Since I had been in Davos last year, the
producers requested that I make the opening
statement for the Porto Alegre side.  I obliged
with the following:  "We would like to begin by
condemning the arrests of peaceful demonstrators
to shield the global elite at Davos from protests.
We would also like to register our consternation
that while we in Porto Alegre have painstakingly
come up with a diverse panel of speakers, you in
Davos have come up with four white males to face
us.  Butr perhaps you are trying to make a
political statement.

        "I was in Davos last year, and believe me,
Davos is not worth a second visit.  I am here in
Porto Alegre this year, and let me say that Porto
Alegre is the future while Davos is the past.
Hemingway wrote that the rich are different from
you and me, and indeed, we live on two different
planets:  Davos, the planet of the superrich,
Porto Alegre, the planet of the poor, the
marginalized, the concerned.  Here in Porto
Alegre, we are discussing how to save the planet.
There in Davos, the global elite is discussing how
to maintain its hegemony over the rest of us.  In
fact, the best gift that the 2000 corporate
executives at Davos can give to the world is for
them to board a spaceship and blast off for outer
space.  The rest of us will definitely be much
better off without them."

        The press termed the next 1-1/2 hours not
as a debate but as an emotional exchange that, as
the Financial Times put it, "sometimes degenerated
into personal insults."  But I and the other
panelists-among them, Oded Grajew of Brazil's
Instituto Ethos, Bernard Cassen of Le Monde
Diplomatique, Diane Matte of Women's Global March,
Njoki Njehu of 50 Years Is Enough, Rafael Alegria
of Via Campesina, Aminata Traole, former Minister
of Culture of Mali, Fred Azcarate of Jobs with
Justice, Trevor Ngbane of South Africa, Francois
Houtart of Belgium, and Hebe de Bonafini of the
Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo-were simply
reflecting the non-conciliatory mood towards the
Davos crowd of most of the 12,000   people who
flocked to Porto Alegre.

        For this constituency, a significant
number of whom watched the debate at a huge
auditorium at the Catholic University,
globalization was a deadly business, and many
undoubtedly shared the feelings of Hebe de
Bonafini when she screamed at Soros across the
Atlantic divide, "Mr. Soros, you are a hypocrite.
How many children's deaths have you been
responsible for?"  That Soros in the course of the
debate made some utterances regarding the need to
control the negative impacts of globalization
hardly endeared him to this crowd, who saw him
mainly as a finance speculator who had made
billions of dollars at the expense of third world
economies.

        The holding of the week-long World Social
Forum was nothing short of a miracle.  Proposed by
the Workers' Party of Brazil (PT) and a coalition
of Brazilian civil society organizations,
supported with significant funding by donors such
as Novib, the Dutch agency, and provided with
strong international support by the French monthly
Le Monde Diplomatique and Attac, the European
anti-globalization alliance, the event was put
together in less than eight months' time.  The
idea of holding an alternative to the annual
retreat of the global corporate elite in Davos
simply took off.  While there were some glitches
here and there, the event was resoundingly
successful, despite the massive challenge of
coordinating 16 plenary sessions, over 400
workshops, and numerous side events.

        A major reason for the WSF's success is
that it had the organizational support of the
government of the city of Porto Alegre and the
government of the state of Rio Grande do Sul, both
of which are controlled by the PT.  Porto Alegre
has, in fact, achieved the reputation of being a
city that is run both efficiently and with
sensitivity to social and environmental
considerations.  The city is said to be at the top
of the quality of life index for Brazil.

        The sharing in Porto Allegre focused not
only on drawing up strategies of resistance to
globalization but also on elaborating alternative
paradigms of economic, ecological, and social
development.  Militant action was not absent, with
Jose Bove, the celebrated French anti-McDonalds'
activist, and the Brazilian MST (Movement of the
Landless), leading the destruction of two hectares
of land planted with transgenic soybean crops by
the biotechnological firm Monsanto.

        Porto Alegre achieved its goal of being a
counterpoint to Davos.  The combination of
celebration, hard discussion, and militant
solidarity that flowed from it contrasted with the
negative images coming out of Davos.  The Swiss
town was the center of Switzerland's biggest
security operation since the Second World War.
The Swiss police pulled out all the stops to
prevent protesters from reaching the Alpine
resort, and fired water cannons and tear gas on
demonstrators in Zurich, arresting many of them.
Even conservative Swiss newspapers condemned the
police operation as a threat to political
liberties in Switzerland.

        Perhaps the outcome of the duel between
Davos and Porto Alegre was best summed up by
George Soros:  "The excessive precautions were a
victory for those who wanted to disrupt Davos.  It
was an overreaction.  It helped to radicalize the
situation."

       On his performance in the televised debate
with Porto Alegre, Soros commented:  "It showed it
is not easy to dialogue.I don't particularly like
to be abused.  My masochism has its limits."
Observed the Financial Times: "Such uncomfortable
experiences seem temporarily to have scrambled his
ability to deliver pithy soundbites."

        But Soros was not alone in flubbing his
lines.  Soon after my opening statement, Bernard
Cassen of Le Monde Diplomatique leaned over and
told me:  "Walden, it wasn't Hemingway who said
the rich are different from you and me.  It was
Scott Fitzgerald."



*Dr. Walden Bello is executive director of the
Bangkok-based Focus on the Global South and
professor of sociology and public administration
at the University of the Philippines.


-------------------


http://www.corpwatch.org/trac/globalization/wef/portoalegre2.html

     This Is What Democracy Looks Like

     Dispatch
     By Kenny Bruno
     Special to Corporate Watch
     January 28, 2001

     "Um outro mundo  possvel."-- Another world is possible.

     Porto Alegre, Brazil -- That's the slogan of the World Social Forum
underway here. Or, as they said in Seattle, "This is what democracy looks
like."

     While thousands chanted that slogan in Seattle, Washington D.C.,
Chiang Mai, Melbourne and Prague, they were being tear gassed,
preemptively arrested, harassed and generally denied
     their rights by an enormous show of state force on behalf of
undemocratic international institutions.

     In Porto Alegre, this is what democracy looks like: During a march of
thousands against neo-liberalism I counted 10 police officers. When 200
Brazilian anarchists broke off from the
     march to throw white paint on a McDonald's, about six police stood
by.

     The next day, an ex-cop explained it this way, "We police were
instructed to form partnerships with the social movements." By comparison
Davos, Switzerland, where the World
     Economic Forum is meeting this week, has become a fortress.

     Porto Alegre is an appropriate setting for the World Social Forum,
while authorities have shut down the roads to Davos, deported activists,
and banned marches. In Porto Alegre, the
     Governor of the State of Rio Grande do Sul, gave the opening speech.
In fact, his government was a major funder of the Forum.

           In Porto Alegre, this is what democracy looks like: Hundreds of
young people are camping nearby -- apparently without ever sleeping --
virtually without police presence.

           This is what democracy looks like: Participatory budgeting. For
12 years, Porto Alegre+s budget has been decided made by hundreds of
well-organized community and worker
           groups.

           This is what democracy looks like: There is no corporate
sponsorship of the World Social Forum. No ads telling us how sustainable
Shell is, or how clean Dow is, or how
           concerned for the poor Philip Morris is. No Nike swooshes. Just
a few banners for the national bank of Brazil, saying "It's better because
it's ours." The most ubiquitous logo
           around is that of the Workers' Party, on flags everywhere.

           In Porto Alegre, this is what democracy looks like: Lots of
meetings and lots of talking. The humid rooms, over-packed with people,
listening for the umpteenth hour to plans to
           stop new free trade agreements and models for local economic
democracy.

           This is what democracy looks like: There are lots of unionized
workers present. The state of Rio Grande do Sul has twice as many union
members as the national average.

           This is what democracy looks like: The entire state of Rio
Grande do Sul has been declared GMO-free, although some Roundup Ready soy
has been smuggled in from
           Argentina, according to one knowledgeable government official
from Brasilia. Two days ago activists traveled with French farmer/activist
Jose Bove four hours out of Porto
           Alegre to tear up a few illegal acres of Monsanto's Roundup
Ready Franken-soy.

     The World Social Forum is the first significant post-Seattle
gathering where the goal is not to disrupt the meetings of undemocratic
institutions, in what has become a series of traveling
     protests. Rather it is a space for activists to think, talk and
imagine another world -- a more just, democratic world.

     The anti-corporate globalization movement has come to "an important
stage in the counter-offensive that began in Seattle," says Walden Bello,
Executive Director of Thailand-based
     Focus on the Global South.

     Naturally, the rhetoric of democracy in Porto Alegre cannot be
transferred everywhere, especially not to the U.S. In the opening
ceremony, during introductions of the 120 countries
     represented by delegates, Cuba received the loudest ovation, while
the U.S. and Israel got a smattering of boos. There is occasionally a
flavor of old-style leftism that sounds irrelevant to
     most U.S. ears.

     And, as one should expect in a gathering as large and diverse as this
one, there are significant differences of opinion on policy and strategy.
For example, some participants are working to
     incorporate social and environmental clauses into the WTO, others
insist there must be no new round of the WTO.

     Nevertheless, the overall feeling here is of fresh air coming into
the debate over globalization, especially compared with the stale rhetoric
in Davos. From Porto Alegre, the concept that a
     gathering of the rich and powerful is the answer for the poor and
dispossessed, that the World Economic Forum has somehow transformed itself
into a global poverty program, seems
     too absurd to bother debunking.

     Yet neither is the Social Forum a poverty program. And that is one of
most refreshing aspects of the gathering. It is not about money. It's not
about growth, "sustainable" or otherwise. It's
     not even really about development -- a concept that has perhaps been
hopelessly perverted by institutions like the World Economic Forum and the
World Bank. Still, economic issues are
     prominent in the discussions here.

     Rather the Forum is about democracy. Not the democracy that comes
from more money and therefore more choices of things to buy, but rather
the democracy of participation in local
     and society-wide economic decisions. This is the democracy that
corporate globalization gazes so harshly on.

     Even the most ardent supporters of the current form of globalization
acknowledge that it is a web of powerful and unaccountable forces. They
say the best we can do as individuals and as
     nations, is to prepare ourselves to flourish in this lightening-fast,
hyper-competitive world, grabbing what we can for ourselves -- mobility,
wealth, markets, computers.

     The folks here would not be interested in this individualistic and
competitive vision of society, even if the powerful institutions
controlling globalization were to reduce the inequities and
     provide a safety net for those left out.

     There are many challenges for the World Social Forum. Midway through
the gathering, participants had not decided where, when and if there will
be another one (it seems likely). Nor
     had they settled on producing a statement or manifesto (it seems
unlikely). Activists must stay alert to the cooptation of our language and
ideas by the World Economic Forum, by the
     WTO and World Bank. We must improve the democratic process within the
Social Forum -- to include more students, more non-Brazilians, more
indigenous people, and others. We
     must make sure to keep the momentum that started with the explosion
in Seattle.

     Seattle was the pivotal moment in the first plank of this complex
movement -- protest and resistance. Porto Alegre will, I believe, come to
be seen as an important step in moving forward
     the second part - innovation and alternatives.

     It is important that many protestors have gone to Davos to continue
to expose the injustice of the World Economic Forum. But I'm glad I came
to Porto Alegre. As Walden Bello, a
     veteran of Davos meetings, says, "Davos is the past. Porto Alegre is
the future."

     And the present is a collective dream of the thousands gathered here:
Um outro mundo  possvel.

     Kenny Bruno is a Corporate Watch Research Associate.

_______________________________________________
stop-imf mailing list
stop-imf at lists.essential.org
http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/stop-imf




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb  1 06:24:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu Feb  1 06:24:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Stephen G. Bunker & Paul S. Ciccantell: The New Historical Materialism
Message-ID: <002601c08c41$6c005d60$777d01d5@mjones>

[from Goldfrank, et al., eds., Ecology and the World-System
Economic Ascent and the Global Environment: World-Systems Theory and the
New Historical Materialism, 1999]

Stephen G. Bunker & Paul S. Ciccantell

INTRODUCTION

The manipulation and reorganization of the relationship between nature and
society is the most complex task confronting any ascendant economy. Gaining
secure, inexpensive access to the huge volume of raw materials building
blocks of capitalist industrial production requires economic, political,
technical, and organizational innovations that restructure both existing
social relationships (e.g., core- periphery relations) and the
characteristics of the nature-society nexus (e.g., what raw materials are
extracted where and by whom). The strategies of states and firms in
ascendant economies to accomplish this task create what we term "generative
sectors": leading economic sectors that are simultaneously key centers of
capital accumulation, bases for a series of linked industries, sources of
technological and organizational innovations that spread to other sectors,
and models for firms and for statefirm relations in other sectors. These
generative sectors in raw materials and transport industries have driven
economic ascent throughout the history of the capitalist world-economy.

Our analysis of economic ascent requires the refraining of world-systems
theory in terms of what we call the new historical materialism. Our
argument is that the distinctive feature of the capitalist world-economy is
the systematic expansion of the exploitation of nature via a division of
labor on an increasingly global scale. This also does not mean that this
was the first time this effort had been undertaken; earlier expanding core
powers and empires had sought to intensify agricultural production and to
expand their raw materials supply systems. The key difference was the
intensification and extension of capitalist extraction around the globe,
beginning in the "long sixteenth century" and sharply increasing in scale
and scope from the mid- eighteenth century onwards, restructuring social
relations and the relationship between society and nature in support of
capital accumulation.

This chapter will first examine the role of generative sectors in the
economic ascent of Holland, Great Britain, the United States, and Japan
using the method we term the new historical materialism. The striking
similarities of these nations processes of economic ascent via these
generative sectors provide the basis for a nomothetic explanation of
economic ascent in which the natural environment and the regularities
governing material characteristics and processes play central roles. The
ascent of each of these nations has restructured the capitalist
world-economy by restructuring the underlying relationship with nature; in
a very tangible sense, economic ascent is both a social and material
process rooted in the global environment.

MATERIAL PROCESSES AND ECONOMIC ASCENT: HISTORICAL STRATEGIES

Within the capitalist world-economy, ascendant national economies require
expanding access to cheap and secure sources of raw materials to sustain
their challenge to established industrial economies. Lowering raw materials
costs is critical to competition in international markets and is
particularly important to the ascendant economy because it is also
extending productive and transport infrastructure faster than the average
of the established economies. Stability of supply is required for operating
plants at full capacity; this is particularly important in the heavy
industries in an ascendant economy because these industries involve higher
than average fixed capital investments and inflexible sunk costs.

Because the states and firms of established industrial economies have often
already succeeded in structuring global raw materials markets to their own
advantage, the state and firms of the ascendant nation have to restructure
these markets in order to compete effectivefy. Such restructuring is likely
to collide with environmental and spatial constraints imposed by the
physical characteristics of the raw materials and the location of their
sources. Previously ascendant, and still dominant, economies will have
organized raw materials markets in such a way as to reduce their own costs
and increase their own security of supply. The established market systems
are therefore likely to accommodate the organization and location of
extraction, processing, and transport to the natural features and locations
of natural resources and their raw material forms. The ascendant economy
must therefore find new ways to accommodate to natural characteristics and
to use these so as to loosen or restructure markets already built around
these natural features.

Historically, ascendant economies have done this via several strategies.
The first strategy is direct conquest of resource-rich peripheries,
followed by wars Of diplomatic actions that impede access by the
established economies. The second strategy is to incorporate new
technologies that effectively change established relations between economy
and environment. These can include new forms or expanded scale of mining,
processing, and transport. The third strategy is to induce host countries
to assume a significant share of the cost of reorganizing world markets,
introducing new technologies, and developing new transport routes.

These three major strategies have evolved historically to allow ascendant
economies to continue their advance. The first strategy has an extremely
long history, predating the emergence of the capitalist world-economy.
Direct imperial conquest of resource rich peripheries and the defense of
these formal and/or de facto annexations by force and/or diplomatic
actions, such as Belgiums conquest of the copper-rich Congo region of
Africa (Packenham 1991), have, however, become increasingly difficult and
expensive to carry out and maintain.

The second strategy has been employed in a number of instances, including
the adoption of James Watts vastly improved steam engine to remove water
from coal mines; Britains relatively early industrialization based on
low-cost coal was an essential element of Britains rise as a hegemonic
core power. Similarly, the rapid expansion of the domestic railroad
transportation infrastructure in the United States in the mid-nineteenth
century linked the United States widely dispersed raw materials and
agriculture-producing peripheries to markets and industrial centers in the
East. This creation of a low-cost transport network was a central part of
the United States rapid industrialization, the key to United States
ascendance in the world-economy.

The third strategy has a similarly long history in the capitalist
world-economy. Raw materials producing nations have long been induced (and
sometimes forced) by ascendant core powers to pay a significant share of
the costs of reorganizing world markets, introducing new technologies, and
developing new transport routes. Imperial core powers, for example, taxed
their colonies to support armies to control indigenous populations and used
corvie labor to construct infrastructure. Even in nonimperial situations,
ascendant core powers have been able to induce raw materials extracting
peripheries to finance the construction of railroads, for example, often
justified in terms of local economic development but mainly benefiting
foreign investors and raw materials consumers. Numerous examples of the
employment of this strategy by Britain occurred in Latin America during the
nineteenth century (Coatsworth 1981; Duncan 1932; Lewis 1983). Similarly,
British and North American rubber buyers and consumers were able to induce
members of the economic elite in the Brazilian Amazon to finance the
expansion of the wild rubber industry in the region to supply the cores
industrial plants in the late nineteenth century (Bunker 1985). This
strategy dramatically reduces both the costs to and risks assumed by the
ascendant core economys firms and state in the raw materials extracting
region.

Because these propositions relate to the location of the extraction,
processing, and ultimate transformation of huge amounts of matter and
energy, they have implications for both the global environment and a large
number of specific local environments, as well as for the economic
activities of human populations. Because a key component of any national
raw material access strategy involves the COnstruction of efficient
transport networks on a global scale, successful strategies to restructure
global raw materials markets also reorganize the global environITient.
Finally, these strategies may bear directly on the benefits and prejudices
to human populations in natural resource exporting societies. Let us now
turn to an examination of four key examples of economic ascent based on
generative sectors that have restructured relations between nature and
society: Holland, Great Britain, the United States, and Japan.

HOLLANDS ECONOMIC ASCENT

Transport is the "circulatory system" of the capitalist world-economy and
the process of capital accumulation; the economic ascent of Holland and
later Great Britain provide particularly dramatic examples of this
phenomenon. Transport industries have in many periods and nations been a
focus of capital accumulation itself, and transport is in all periods the
link that binds extraction, production, consumption, and waste disposal.
The period commonly referred to as the mercantilist era in Europe is better
characterized as the era of transport capitalism, with shipping and
shipbuilding industries at the center of capital accumulation and the
technological, organizational, and institutional innovations that provided
the foundation for the economic ascent of Holland and later Great Britain
to hegemonic positions in the capitalist world-economy (Bunker and
Ciccantell l995a, 1995b).

While trade in high value, low volume luxury goods has been the central
focus of much of the analysis of this period, cursory examination of the
material composition of transmaritime trade during the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries shows that the transport of bulk goods was far
greater than the trade in preciosities (Wallerstein 1982; Nef 1964). While
the greatest profits per voyage were clearly made in the trade in
preciosities, far more boats, and thus boatbuilders, sailors, stevedores,
and other linked industries were involved in the bulk trades. Linkage and
spread effects from boat building and ship repair, as well as ship
provisioning, were far greater in the bulk trade than in the trade of
preciosities.

The location of the Netherlands as an entreptt for exports from and imports
into a vast European hinterland, in combination with the vast and diverse
timber resources available in this hinterland and the early position of the
Dutch as a colony of the Spanish Empire, made the Netherlands a center of
shipbuilding and shipping, particularly for the movement of large volumes
of bulky, low-value raw materials. The grain and wood supplies available in
the Rhine and Baltic regions led to the transformation of these regions
into raw materials peripheries to supply capital accumulation in the
Netherlands.

The characteristics of wood shaped Hollands economic ascent in important
ways. Easily transported down rivers, it is very costly to transport wood
on the open seas. Bulky, rigid, and heavy, it required large ship tonnage
to transport, was difficult to load and unload, and made ships both
top-heavy and rigid, thus making them more likely to break up in heavy
seas. Insurance and labor were both costly and difficult, especially as
shipowners tended to risk only older boats in the trade. The Dutch could
move timber to shipyards without an ocean voyage; even from the Baltic, the
Dutch could sail along the coast, and they developed a cheap, capacious
fiat-bottomed boat, the Fluyt, that could move timber very cheaply. ThIS
advantage meant that it was ultimately far cheaper to build boats in
Holland and sail them to Spain or Portugal than it was to ship timber
overseas. The Dutch used this advantage to develop a highly sophisticated
boat building industry, with craneS, winches, wind-driven sawmills, and
experienced craftsmen that further increased their competitive advantage.
As the Dutch expanded the control of the herring and the grain trades, as
well as the reexport of Mediterranean wines and their own finished
textiles, the different parts of the economy stimulated each other
(Wallerstein 1982).

Wallerstein (1982) and other analysts of Dutch economic ascent have argued
that the textile trade explains Dutch dominance in the Baltic trade, since
rates of return were highest in textiles and because Dutch productivity in
textiles retarded British development in the textile sector. Barbour (1950)
shows that Dutch ships dominated traffic through the sound long before the
textile trade became important, and both Barbour (1950) and Wilson (1973)
place shipping and shipbuilding at the center of a complex mix of entreptt
trade, manufacture, and finance that lifted Amsterdam to economic
preeminence. Wilson argued that shipping and shipbuilding constituted the
major sources of linkages and multipliers as well as the critical source of
raw materials to supply Dutch ascent: There seems an incontestable case
for arguing that the richest society so far in history had been the
creation of sea transport" (Wilson 1973, 329). In short, the critical
comparative advantages underlying Dutch ascent were its geographically
provided control over river routes to the agricultural lands and forests of
Poland and Germany. The shipbuilding and shipping industries based on these
natural conditions became generative sectors that spread technological
innovations in labor-saving machinery, organizational techniques, the
adaptation of windmill technologies to wood sawing, economies of scale in
protoindustrial shipyards, and the development of linked industries of
finance, warehousing, and other industries like textiles that could benefit
from these types of innovations.

Shipbuilding and shipping based on the competitive advantages provided by
Hollands raw materials peripheries provided the foundation upon which
Dutch hegemony was constructed. At the same time, these generative sectors
were restructuring agricultural production systems and the use of timber in
the Rhine and Baltic regions, reshaping these areas into extractive
peripheries that exported raw materials to Holland.

GREAT BRITAINS ECONOMIC ASCENT

Rising economies attempt to foster the construction of global transport
systems in patterns that reduce the costs of the raw materials they
consume. The lower the value to volume ratio of raw materials, the more
critical this cost reduction becomes for economic competitiveness. The
sectors that pushed the development of large-capacity sailing ships with
lower sailor to tonnage ratios were the timber and coal industries.
National economic dominance in the preindustrial and early industrial
period was closely linked to maritime trade in wooden boats, to naval
Security, again in wooden boats, and to wood-fueled metallurgy. In addition
to depending on water for cheap transport of wood, many of the early
technical advances in both wood processing and metallurgy depended on water
power to drive Sawmills and to power the bellows and hammers that increased
fuel efficiency and labor productivity in iron smelting. Agricultural
products also moved more cheaply by water, though the savings were not as
important as in shipbuilding. The importance of water transport meant,
though, that wood and agricultural land near watercourses were highly
prized and that the various entrepreneurs who required timber extraction
for metallurgy, boatbuilding, and a series of other uses competed with each
other and with agriculturalists, as well as with representatives of the
state, for control over and access to wood. Albion (1926) points out that
naval requirements for timber competed with both corn and iron, and Ashton
(1964) described what he termed the tyranny of wood and water in the
development of the iron industry. This conflict over the use of internal
peripheries would persist until the development of techniques for using
coal to smelt iron ore.

In contrast to the Dutch intense focus on the development of cheap
transport, the British specialized in the development of warships that were
used to displace Holland as the economic and political center of the
capitalist world-economy. Britain became increasingly dependent on the
import of bulk goods in foreign ships, and the tremendous value added that
transport created provided the incentives for the Navigation Acts (Davis
1973). These acts were notoriously unsuccessful at limiting the competition
from the more efficient Dutch fleets. It was only through the capture of
thousands of Dutch boats that the British bulk carrying trade became
competitive (Davis 1973). The British maritime industry could only develop
through capture because of its cost disadvantage in relation to the Dutch.

British boatbuilders built for strength and maneuverability, which required
longer lines, sacrificed cargo space, and larger and more complicated
rigging, and thus required more men per ton. This kind of building was
useful for defense and capture, but was not particularly efficient. The
British had the military edge, but not the carrying edge. In this sense,
the struggle was between the locational advantages of the Dutch and the
technical advantages in building and management that they accumulated
through their ability to build many boats, and the bellicose strategies of
the British who were compensating for their locational disadvantage with
state-supported initiatives toward military prowess. Boxer (1965)
attributes Dutch decline to wars, inflation, and the flight of capital into
finance, but their real advantage was perhaps in location, which allowed
them to develop their extraordinary entreptt trade in heavy goods; war with
Britain essentially restricted their trading advantage, and thus there was
far less incentive to sustain the boatbuilding industry.

Weber (1981) and Cipolla (1965) both link the development of the
metallurgical industry to the military requirements of protecting
transport. The dynamic mercantile development of Britain was very much the
source and the result of the timber problem there. Trade drove production
and generated the income needed to stimulate it, as well as stimulating the
need for armaments to protect shipping, limit rival shipping, and keep open
sources of raw materials. Britains military needs were themselves the
result in large measure of continental attempts to limit British trade. The
rapidly developing iron industry had been almost stagnant until the crown
decided to promote domestic production of cannons and the establishment of
smelters (Cipolla 1965). As that industry expanded, so did its consumption
of oak, leading it into conflict with both farmers and the royal navy. The
growing costs of administration, including the support of a navy necessary
for the security of trade, drove the crown to look for new sources of
revenue; a particularly easy one, in the short term, was the sale of trees
from royal forests to the more dynamic industrial interests. Thus the
burning of oak for smelters was a very hot issue during most of the
seventeenth century. The success of the mercantile economy, and its demand
for inputs, stimulated other economies that required the same raw
materials. Access to foreign timber thus became critical for multiple
purposes, especially in dramatic surges of demand such as that occasioned
by the London fire, which Albion (1926) characterizes as warming Finlands
economy. Britain suffered from the limitations of her own supplies and the
distance to other sources.

The adoption of James Watts vastly improved steam engine to remove water
from coal mines in Great Britain during the last 20 years of the eighteenth
century began a shift away from wooden shipbuilding and toward the
development of internal canal and railroad transport and iron industries as
generative sectors. Watts steam engine made vast reserves of deeply buried
coal that had previously been unextractable both technologically and
economically suddenly available on a large scale at low cost to power
Britains industrial revolution. A massive canal building effort to link
internal coal fields to industrial and population centers became a major
focus of capital accumulation in Britain (Mathias 1969, 13435; Rosenberg
and Birdzell 1986, 15051).

Within a few decades, the steam engine was adapted for railroad transport,
simultaneously freeing Britain from increasingly expensive, complex efforts
to build canals to supplement natural watercourses and creating a massive
synergy between railroad transport and the iron and later steel industries
during the nineteenth century. British ironmasters discovered the
sulfur-reducing chemistry required to smelt iron with coal and
progressively reduced coal charges per unit of production, as well as
developing the Bessemer converter in 1856 that made mass production of
steel possible. Further, the British development of the Siemens-Martin open
hearth furnace that increased productivity and the widening of the range of
ores from which steel could be made via the development of the
Gilchrist-Thomas basic process (Isard 1948; Hobsbawm 1968) were also
examples of the role of the coal, iron, and linked transport industries as
generative sectors driving British economic ascent and hegemony. Moreover,
these developments further tied Britains internal raw materials
peripheries to the process of capital accumulation. In the mid-nineteenth
century, the steam engine was also applied to water transport, rejuvenating
Britains shipbuilding and shipping industries on the basis of steamships
that linked the distant parts of the British empire; shipbuilding was a
massive consumer of raw materials that were often transported on steamships
themselves (Mathias 1969; Rosenberg and Birdzell 1986). The combined
impacts of railroads, steamships, and the raw materials industries on which
they depended were to revolutionize industry and finance in Britain
(Hobsbawm 1968), becoming generative sectors that drove Britains economic
ascent.

Britains relatively early industrialization based on low-cost coal was an
essential element of Britains rise as a hegemonic core power. This is the
essence of the role of generative sectors in economic ascent; what might be
termed "virtuous cycles" of linkages between raw materials and transport
industries drove capital accumulation in Britain during its phases of
economic ascent, based on incorporating first internal and later external
peripheries, and during its period of hegemony.

>From the perspective of the raw materials periphery in which inland
transport systems and ports to export raw materials to a core power such as
Great Britain are located, these generative sectors and the transport
networks thus developed have very different impacts. Innis (1956)
demonstrates the relationships between core demand for raw materials, the
transport infrastructure required to satisfy that demand, the financial
instruments and agencies required to finance this infrastructure, and the
forms of governance necessary to assure the payment of debts incurred to
build this transport infrastructure. Innis links Canadas Articles of
Confederation directly to the financing of railroads and rebellions against
the state to regional competition for transport. The notorious, and
eventually abandoned, demand by British capitalists that Latin American
nations guarantee a minimum rate-of-profit for railroads built to move raw
material and agricultural products to exporting ports made similar demands
on these nation-states.

More generally, the nation-state, its control over its own territory, and
its taxation and borrowing powers appear in many instances as a
hegemonically imposed device to assure the huge sunk capital needed to
create the globally built environment that Britain needed to channel
adequate supplies of matter and energy to its rapidly growing industries
(Adams 1982). Nationhood as a desired goal of Spanish colonies in the
Americas was to Britain a hegemonically useful ideology. Canada became more
autonomous from Britain precisely to allow it to assume the costs and
guarantee the loans required to dredge canals, build locks, and construct
railroads to allow the large scale export of raw materials to Britain. The
construction of railroads in India and Afghanistan required and then molded
changes in local states and in the relations between them. In all of these
cases, local social relationships were restructured to permit the
extraction of raw materials to support capital accumulation in Great Britain.

U.S. ECONOMIC ASCENT

 Britains growing reliance on the agricultural and industrial development
of the American colonies, particularly the development of the New England
shipbuilding and shipping industries, laid the foundation for the economic
ascent of the United States. Abundant U.S. timber supplies, numerous river
networks to transport timber to the coast, the transport cost advantages of
processing timber into ships at the rivers mouths rather than shipping to
English shipyards, and the United States status as a British colony gave
U.S. shipbuilding and shipping industries a tremendous competitive
advantage in the world-economy. These industries were generative sectors in
the eighteenth and first half of the nineteenth centunes, transporting bulk
and luxury goods over long distances to Europe, China, and other parts of
the world.

An important difference between New Englands and the earlier case of
Hollands ascents based on shipbuilding was that Hollands hinterland had
been relatively densely settled for centuries, and its societies were
constituted into political units capable of significant defense and
aggression. Thus, bellicose expansion of territory was impossible and wars,
particularly land wars, extremely costly. The United States enjoyed a
hinterland whose earlier occupants had been severely dislocated and were
progressively diminished in number and political strength. Thus, it was
ultimately possible in the United States to combine raw materials sources
and industrial centers within the same sovereign unit. This pattern would
later be replicated via canal and then railroad building, incorporating raw
materials rich regions as internal United States peripheries.

Perhaps even more important in the early phase of United States economic
ascent was that the production of the various bulk goods exported from the
United States did not require huge capital outlays. In the EuropeAsia
trade, for example, the cargo itself might be worth ten times the value of
the boat itself. Such trade was only accessible to highly capitalized
merchants. Returns on exports of wood and cotton cargoes or on shipments of
ice and granite from the United States might return far less but would pay
a return on the shipping itself and were therefore accessible to the
smaller capitals required to build and man a ship. United States ships were
for a long time smaller than European ships, especially in the Far Eastern
trade, again resulting in the reduction of the total capital risked. United
States trade to China started with sea otters from the Northwest; huge
returns from this trade were derived from transport rather than from the
cargo itself. The lack of high-capital barriers to entry and the large
returns available to shipping in many export trades from the United States
meant that the transport business could be more decentralized, both in
terms of location and in terms of ownership.

The other peculiar advantage of topography for the United States was the
number of rivers flowing out of the Appalachians which could be dammed to
produce power. These rivers powered textile and shoe mills, as well as
sawmills. Shipbuilding skills and labor and merchant capital were drawn to
New England by cheap timber and trade opportunities. Shipbuilding
requirements also included a variety of other inputs in addition to timber,
including nails, block and tackle, and sails, demand for which led to the
creation of linkages to ironworking, sail making, and other industries
which supplied these essential inputs to local shipyards. This particularly
favorable coincidence of natural conditions with the leading economic
sectors in the World-economy of the period (shipping and shipbuilding) and
the changing political context of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries
provided the foundation for the early economic ascent of the United States.
However, United States shipbuilding and shipping industries were made
uncompetitive by the large-scale introduction of British steamships that
restored Britains control of ocean transport.

The rapid expansion of a domestic transportation infrastructure in the
United States in the mid-nineteenth century based on the newly developed
technology of railroads served to link the United States widely dispersed
raw materials and agriculture-producing peripheries to markets and
industrial centers in the East (Stover 1961; Chandler 1965; Douglas 1992).
Waterways and later railroads led to the incorporation of a wide range of
domestic raw materials peripheries, including agricultural products and
later coal in Appalachia (Dunaway 1996), copper in Michigan (Leitner 1998)
and later Montana and the Southwest, and iron ore in Michigan and
Minnesota, among many others. The railroad network was also extended to
incorporate Mexican and Canadian raw materials peripheries that supplied a
diverse set of raw materials to the United States (Ciccantell 1995). This
creation of a low-cost transport network was a central part of the United
States rapid industrialization, the key to U.S. ascendance in the
world-economy.

This incorporation of internal, nearby, and increasingly distant raw
materials peripheries to supply United States economic ascent also
transformed social relationships in these peripheries, restructuring them
to provide labor for extraction, while areas previously populated by
indigenous groups or used for fanning and ranching were transformed into
sites of extraction. United States involvement in anticolonial movements
and other interventions to create and maintain raw materials peripheries
and transport systems have provided similar hegemonic benefits; like the
Suez Canal before it, the construction of the Panama Canal and the aborted
negotiations for a canal in Nicaragua involved the creation or
subordination of nation-states. In recent years, the CanadaU.S. Free Trade
Agreement and the North American Free Trade Agreement represent attempts to
reconstruct U.S. hegemony by restructuring U.S. raw materials supply
networks via renewed, lower- cost access to raw materials in Canada and
Mexico (Ciccantell 1997).

JAPANS ECONOMIC ASCENT

Japans ascendance from the periphery to the core of the capitalist world-
economy began during the, Meiji period in the last third of the nineteenth
century. Confronted by powerful economic and geopolitical rivals in the
Pacific region, including the United States, Russia, China, and the
European colonial powers (see McDougall [1993] for a discussion of the
history of this geopolitical rivalry), industrial development became the
basis of Japanese economic and military strategy (see, e.g., Nafziger
1995). Japanese efforts to industrialize and build a strong military paid
early dividends in the form of victories in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894
and the Russo-Japanese War at the beginning of the twentieth century. The
Sino- Japanese War also gained for Japan its first formal and informal
colonies of the modern era, as well as indemnification that helped finance
the expansion of the iron and steel industries in Japan (So and Chiu 1995,
8990).

Much of Japans success was, however, due to its ability to export light
industrial products such as silk and to use the proceeds to import both
ships and steel plates for building military and trading ships (Chida and
Davies 1990). Producing consumer goods for domestic consumption and export,
often by importing technological advances and then improving and adapting
them for new uses, has remained an important engine of the Japanese
economy. However, even these industries are critically dependent on the
availability of raw materials used in their production.

Efforts to deepen industrialization in Japan were undertaken during the
first third of the twentieth century, most notably through expanding the
steel, copper, and shipbuilding industries and through the creation of a
domestic aluminum industry. This industrialization drive rapidly depleted
Japans limited coal, iron ore, and copper reserves. In order to support
the rapid industrialization drive in the years between the First and Second
World Wars, the Japanese state and firms sought to gain access to raw
materials that were being rapidly depleted in Japan via the first strategy
for continuing its ascendance in the world-economy, direct imperial
conquest of neighboring resource-rich areas of China, East Asia, and
Southeast Asia (So and Chiu 1995). However, this raw materials access
strategy brought Japan into direct military conflict with the United
States, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and China. As historian Marshall
(1995, x) has argued, "the United States war with Japan from 1941 to 1945
was primarily a battle for control of Southeast Asias immense mineral and
vegetable wealth." The results of this conflict were the defeat of Japan in
World War II, the dismemberment of Japans empire, and severe economic and
political crises in Japan in the wars aftermath. Japans defeat in World
War II foreclosed this ascendance and development strategy.

The Japanese steel mills, with the assistance of the Japanese state,
devised a model to guarantee long-term secure access to metallurgical coal
and iron ore from Australia, the closest nearby politically available
source of raw materials for what Japanese and American military planners
hoped would prove to be a generative sector for Japans renewed economic
ascent. The Japanese steel mills utilized a new model of long-term
contracts, at first forced upon them by Australia and the United States,
rather than using the wholly-owned foreign direct investment model utilized
by U.S. and European steel firms to gain access to foreign raw materials
sources. This new model accommodated the resource nationalism of host
nations such as Australia, while in the process restructuring worldwide
flows of metallurgical coal from mainly domestic movement from captive
mines to their steel mill owners to transoceanic trade flows governed by
longterm contracts, fundamentally altering the nature and composition of
the world metallurgical coal industry. Metallurgical coal was extracted by
Australian and transnational firms, which assumed the capital cost and
risks of opening up previously unexploited coal deposits, deposits which
had not even been explored for earlier because of the tremendous distances
between these deposits and potential markets. The coal was transported by
Australian state-owned railroads to typically state-owned ports,
transferring the capital and risk burden to the raw materials periphery
local and national governments. At the state-owned ports, the coal was
loaded on Japanese ships for the trip to Japan.

The natural availability of metallurgical coal, United States-led
diplomatic efforts, and the development of long term contracts are only
part of the story; coal had been acquired, but how could millions of tons
be moved to the new coastal steelworks in Japan at low enough cost? Two
other natural characteristics of the Australian continent, the location of
these coal deposits less than 300 kilometers from the eastern coast of
Australia and the characteristics of the Australian coast that permitted
the construction of large-scale ports for ore carriers made it possible for
the Japanese to promote a fundamental restructuring of space and nature via
transport technology. The costs of the rail transport infrastructure were
borne by the state government (Frost 1984, 4953). The port facilities were
typically built and operated by the mining companies themselves (Frost
1984; lEA 1992, 109; Tex Report 1994b, 55255), although some ports were
later built by state governments (lEA 1992, 109).

This transport pattern allowed Japanese steel mills and shipping firms to
take advantage of the tremendous economies of scale available in bulk
shipping to dramatically reduce production costs of steel in Japan by
capturing all of these benefits for themselves. The key elements of
transport as a raw materials access strategy have included research and
development on the construction of larger petroleum tankers and bulk
carriers and the construction of large shipyards capable of building such
large ships. These large ships are owned and operated by Japanese shipping
firms associated with the major industrial groups; these Japanese
industrial groups control ocean shipping of raw materials on an FOB raw
materials exporting port basis so that any reductions in transport costs
caused by technological improvements or changes in world shipping market
conditions are captured by Japanese importers. The construction of
large-scale port and railroad infrastructures in raw materials exporting
regions paid for by extractive region governments and/or raw materials
transnational corporations is based on longterm contracts for raw materials
supply with Japanese importing firms to allow the efficient use of these
large ships.

Additionally, the Japanese government provides subsidies for the
construction of maritime industrial areas in Japanese ports which eliminate
the need for internal transshipment in Japan of raw materials imports
(Bunker and Ciccantell 1 995a). Japans coastline was ideally suited for
this form of linkage and transport- based development (Kosai and Ogino
1984, 6061).

Capturing economies of scale in transport requires the construction of
massive port systems, capable not only of accommodating large boats, but
also of loading them and unloading them quickly enough to prevent incurring
the huge costs of tying up the capital-intensive ships too long in harbor.
The costs of building such ports have enhanced a feature of all constructed
transport systems, that is, that to the extent that exporting and importing
systems must be physically compatible to take advantage of cost-saving
technologies, importers can tie exporters to their markets by fomenting
mutually compatible port systems at both ends of the voyage. These
investments in large-scale ports physically and economically tie raw
materials exporters to only a very small number of potential customers,
almost all of them located in Japan and Western Europe (Sullivan 1981),
because the high capital investment in large-scale ports and mines can only
be repaid by a high rate of capacity utilization. A high rate of capacity
utilization is dependent on the use of large-scale ships in these
large-scale ports. This natural and social restruCturing has converted
Australian, Brazilian, Canadian, and other raw materials rich regions into
raw materials peripheries supplying capital accumulation in Japan.

These economies of scale in raw materials extraction and transport are
tightly linked to economies of scale in steel production itself. Abegglen
and Stalk (1985) argue that these three types of economies of scale,
including the construction of new integrated steel mills in Japan from the
1950s to the I 970s that when built were the largest or almost the largest
in the world, gave Japan a tremendous competitive advantage in the world
steel industry. Because Japan lacked domestic supplies of metallurgical
coal and iron ore, Japanese steel firms were able to search out and help
develop the lowest-cost suppliers in the world which had access to
large-scale ocean shipping potential, resulting in significant raw
materials cost advantages for Japanese steel firms (Abegglen and Stalk
1985, 7378). As American and Japanese development planners foresaw in the
late 1940s, the steel industry has become the linchpin of a number of
linked industries which have complemented one another in a "virtuous cycle"
of economic development based on generative sectors in shipbuilding and
steel, transforming Japan into the worlds second largest economy and the
United States most formidable economic competitor. This pattern of
metallurgical coal supply relationships has also been replicated in a
number of other raw materials peripheries around the world.

While this pattern was well suited to Japanese needs and initially allowed
Japan to resume trade with Australia despite Australian antipathy toward
Japan, this transfer of capital costs and risks to exporting firms and
nations has often proven to be quite deleterious to these firms and
nations interests in the long term (Koerner 1993), even though the
original idea for these long-term contract arrangements came from the
Australians (Priest 1993, 20-25). Similarly, huge investments in railroad
and port facilities have generated limited returns for extractive peripheries.

In summary, the Japanese steel mills and the Japanese government, with
initial support by the existing hegemon, the United States, have succeeded
in restructuring the world metallurgical coal industry and other raw
materials industries to support Japanese industrialization. This
restructuring was a fundamental material and economic pillar of Japans
rise as an industrial power and challenger to U.S. economic hegemony, based
on these transformations of social relations and society-nature relations
in these raw materials peripheries supplying Japanese economic ascent.

CONCLUSION: WORLD-SYSTEMS THEORY, THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT, AND THE FUTURE OF
THE CAPITALIST WORLD-ECONOMY

 A great deal of attention has been devoted (at least since the Club of
Rome report of the 1 970s) to the proposition that the local and
increasingly global environmental destruction and natural resource
depletion underlying the capitalist world- economy are leading to a
systemic collapse. The process of capital accumulation based on the
exploitation of nature has been exceeding the ability of nature to
replenish natural products and absorb waste for at least the last several
decades. Sooner or later, this relationship between the capitalist
world-economy and nature Will destroy the natural bases on which this
social system depends. In a matter of years or decades, this line of
reasoning argues, the capitalist world-economy will either be transformed
into a more ecologically sensitive and humane system or the earths
ecosystem will collapse.

The analysis of economic ascent and recasting of world-systems theory in
terms of the role of material processes lends credence to this line of
argument by highlighting the systematic, expanding dependence of the
capitalist world-economy on the exploitation of nature. As the historical
examples discussed above amply demonstrate, economic ascent and, more
broadly, the process of capital accumulation have entailed a continually
expanding process of the depredation of nature. However, this seemingly
obvious conclusion drastically underestimates the powerful incentives for
innovation and adaptation in the capitalist world-economy and the
fungibility of the relationship between society and nature.

What does this mean? To return to an earlier example, 50 years ago it was
completely uneconomic to move coal more than a few hundred miles to
generate electricity or to produce steel; today, tens of millions of tons
of coal are moved each year from remote, coal-rich peripheries to fuel core
industries. A seemingly incontrovertible characteristic of the relationship
between society and nature, that centers of coal consumption must be
located near the naturally determined locations of coal deposits because of
the huge costs of moving this bulky material, had been annihilated by
innovations in long-distance ocean transport and land reclamation for
industrial use in ocean-accessible coastal areas as part of Japanese
strategies for economic ascent.

Another trenchant example of innovation and fungibility is the current
interest in superconducting materials. While usually discussed in terms of
high-technology applications, perhaps the most important large-scale
application of superconducting materials would be to permit the
long-distance transport of electricity. Innovations over the last 30 years
have sharply increased the distance that electricity can be transported.
The development of commercial superconducting transmission lines would
allow dozens of hydroelectric dams in the Amazon or nuclear power plants in
lightly populated Arctic regions to supply electricity throughout North
America and coal-fired or nuclear power plants in Siberia to supply Japan
and Europe, relocating the environmental costs and consequences of core
capital accumulation to these remote peripheries.

These potential innovations and fungibility represent core powers and
finns efforts to maintain or enhance their positions in the capitalist
world-economy by reshaping the relationship between society and nature,
just as does the emerging traffic in toxic waste exports to Africa to
reduce the costs of disposing of core wastes by transferring the burden to
the periphery (Frey 1998). Free trade agreements like NAFTA and the WTO
that tighten the links of incorporation between raw materials and low-cost
labor peripheries and core powers are another example of restructuring
social relations and reshaping the relationship with nature in support of
core capital accumulation.

High-technology industries, service sectors, and financial machinations are
obviously central components of the capitalist world-economy; what is less
obvious (in what is often mistakenly labeled as a "postindustrial" or
"dematerializing" or "information economy") are the material foundations on
which this world-system is built. The recasting of world-systems theory to
highlight its material and environmental bases via the new historical
materialism provides a framework for understanding the distinctiveness of
the capitalist world-economy in comparison with earlier periods, the
material foundations of core economic ascent and its obverse, the
incorporation of peripheral regions and peoples in support of core capital
accumulation, and the possible future of the capitalist world-economy as we
near the twenty-first century.

REFERENCES

Abegglen, James, and George Stalk. 1985. Kaisha, The Japanese Corporation.
New York:  Basic Books.

Adams, R. 1982. Paradoxical Harvest: Energy and Explanation in British
History 1870  1914. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Albion, R. 1926. Forests and Sea Power: The Timber Problem of the Royal
Navy, 1652  1862. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Ashton, Thomas Southcliffe. 1964. The Industrial Revolution, 17601830. New
York: Ox ford University Press.

Harbour, V. 1950. Capitalism in Amsterdam in the Seventeenth Century.
Baltimore: Johns  Hopkins University Press.

Boxer, C. 1965. The Dutch Seaborne Empire: 1600-1800. New York: Knopf.
Hunker, Stephen G. 1985. Underdeveloping the Amazon. Chicago: University of
Chicago  Press.

Bunker, Stephen G., and Paul Ciccantell. l995a. A Rising Hegemon and Raw
Materials  Access: Japan in the Post-World War II Era. Journal of
World-Systems Research 1(10):  131.

Bunker, Stephen G., and Paul Ciccantell. 1995b. Restructuring Space, Time,
and Competi live Advantage in the World-Economy: Japan and Raw Materials
Transport After World  War II. In A New World Order? Global Transformations
in the Late Twentieth Century  ed. D. Smith and 1. Borocz. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press.

Chandler, Alfred, ed. 1965. The Railroads: The Nations First Big Business.
New York:  Harcourt, Brace and World.

Chida, Tomohei, and Peter Davies. 1990. The Japanese Shipping and
Shipbuilding Indus tries. London: Athlone Press.

Ciccantell, P 1995. Integrating the NAFTA Market: Raw Materials and
Transport Indus tries. Paper presented at the meeting of the Latin American
Studies Association, Wash ington, DC, September 2830.

Ciccantell, P. 1997. NAFTA and the Reconstruction of U.S. Hegemony: The Raw
Materials  Foundations of Economic Competitiveness. Presented at the Annual
Meeting of the In ternational Studies Association, Toronto, Canada, March.

Cipolla, C. 1965. Guns and Sails in the Early Phases of European Expansion,
1400-1700.  New York: Pantheon Books.

Coatsworth, John. 1981. Growth Against Development: The Economic Impact of
Railroads  in Porfirian Mexico. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.

Davis, Ralph 1973. The Rise of the Atlantic Economies. London: Weidenfeld &
Nicolson. Douglas, George. 1992. All Aboard! The Railroad in American Life.
New York: Paragon  House.

Dunaway, Wilma. 1996. The First American Frontier. Transition to Capitalism
in Southern  Appalachia, 1700-1860. Chapel Hill: University of North
Carolina Press. Duncan, J. 1932. Public and Private Operation of Railways
in Brazil. New York: Columbia  University Press.

Frey, Scott. 1998. The Hazardous Waste Stream in the World-System. In Space
and Transport in the World-System, ed. Paul S. Ciccantell and Stephen G.
Bunker, 84103. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Frost, D. 1984. The Revitalisation of Queensland Railways Through Export
Coal Shipments. Journal of Transport History 5(2): 4756.

Hobsbawm, E. 1968. The Age of Industry. New York: Scribners. linus, H.
1956. Essays in Canadian Economic History. Toronto: University of Toronto
Press. International Energy Agency (lEA). 1992. Coal Information. Paris:
International Energy Agency.

Isard, W. 1948. Some Locational Factors in the Iron and Steel Industry
since the Early  Nineteenth Century. Journal of Political Economy 65(3):
20317.

Koerner, Richard. 1993. The Behaviour of Pacific Metallurgical Coal
Markets: The Impact of Japans Acquisition Strategy on Market Price.
Resources Policy (March): 6679.

Kosai, Yutaka, and Yoshitaro Ogino. 1984. The Contemporary Japanese
Economy. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Leitner, Jonathan. 1998. Raw Materials Transport and Regional
Underdevelopment: Upper  Michigans Copper Country. In Space and Transport
in the World-System, ed. Paul S.  Ciccantell and Stephen G. Bunker, 12551.
Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Lewis, Cohn. 1983. British Railways in Argentina 18571 914. London:
Athlone Press.

Marshall, Jonathan. 1995. To Have and Have Not: Southeast Asian Raw
Materials and the  Origins of the Pacific War. Berkeley: University of
California Press.

Mathias, Peter. 1969. The First Industrial Nation: An Economic History of
Britain 1700  1914. New York: Scribners.

McDougall, Walter. 1993. Let the Sea Make a Noise: Four Hundred Years of
Cataclysm,  Conquest, War and Folly in the North Pacific. New York: Avon
Books.

Nafziger, F. Wayne. 1995. Learning from the Japanese: Japans Pre-War
Development and  the Third World. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Nef, J. 1964. The Conquest of the Material World. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.

Packenham, Thomas. 1991. The Scramble for Africa. New York: Random House.

Priest, R. Tyler. 1993. Coal: Australia 1946-1960. University of
Wisconsin-Madison. Unpublished manuscript.

Rosenberg, Nathan, and L.E. Birdzell. 1986. How the West Grew Rich: The
Economic Transformation of the Industrial World. New York: Basic Books.

So, Alvin, and Stephen Chiu. 1995. East Asia and the World Economy.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Stover, John. 1961. American Railroads. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Sullivan, A. 1981. Foreign Coal Ports Expand Capacity. Coal Age (May): 11015.

Tex Report. 1994a. Iron Ore Manual 1993-94. Tokyo: Tex Report Company.

Tex Report. l994b. 1994 Coal Manual. Tokyo: Tex Report Company.

Wallerstein, I. 1982. Dutch Hegemony in the Seventeenth-Century World
Economy. In Dutch Capitalism and World Capitalism, ed. Maurice Aymard,
93146. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Weber, Max. 1981. General Economic History. New York: Free Press.

Wilson, Charles. 1973. Transport as a Factor in the History of Economic
Development. Journal of European Economic History 2(2): 320-37.





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb  1 06:54:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu Feb  1 06:54:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Ancient truths and the New Economy
Message-ID: <000001c08c45$acbeee80$17e9063e@mjones>

Is it too fanciful to compare the US downturn with the recession that hit Japan in
the 1990s? Stephen Roach thinks not
Published: January 31 2001 20:26GMT | Last Updated: January 31 2001 20:30GMT



Is America the next Japan? Of course not, comes the glib reply. Yes, US technology
stocks were overvalued. But its banking system is sound and its labour and product
markets are flexible. Japan's are not. US property markets have not matched the
excesses experienced by Japan in the late 1980s. Nor did corporate America indulge
in the cross-holdings of equities that wreaked such havoc on Japanese business
balance sheets. Japanese-style deflation could never happen in America.

Or could it? While the US economy stands little chance of succumbing to the Japanese
disease, it could well fall victim to a strain of its own. Few would give credence
to such a possibility but therein lies the risk. Steeped in denial, most Americans
treat the popping of the Nasdaq bubble as an isolated event. They remained convinced
that this was solely a financial market problem, with little collateral damage to
the real economy or the broader financial system.

I have my doubts. The real-economy counterpart of the Nasdaq bubble is the
unsustainable surge in spending on information technology. As I see it, Nasdaq hype
represents an ever-deepening cultural acceptance of the permanence of an IT-led New
Economy. Investment in IT averaged 13 per cent in the latter half of the 1990s
before exploding to 23 per cent in 2000.

Blind acceptance of every tantalising twist of the IT product cycle quickly became
the norm in business circles. There was no rhyme or reason to IT budgeting. Need a
new e-mail platform? How about an upgrade to flat-screen monitors? Got to have the
latest bells and whistles on a new operating system or a third-generation personal
digital assistant? Sure - why not?

Dotcom mania was the froth on an exponential surge of IT appliances driven by
largely unprofitable businesses. Excess IT capacity in the telecommunications
industry, e-based media ventures and internet service providers added insult to
injury.

At the same time, most companies were reorganised around "e-business" strategies.
Survival without a big corporate commitment to the IT culture was deemed
inconceivable.

Alas, it all went too far. America's binge on information technology outstripped any
conceivable productivity payback. The overhang has now reached proportions
resembling those hit at the peaks of other capital spending cycles. Total business
fixed investment soared to a record 13.9 per cent of gross domestic product in the
third quarter of 2000.

That is the overhang I fear history will judge most unkindly. It speaks of a New
Economy that has gone to excess, just like Old Economies of the past. And, just as
earlier recessions eliminated capacity overhangs in the industrial economy, this
recession could do the same for the excesses of the information age. That would
bring America's once powerful IT growth dynamic to a screeching halt.

History also warns that for every excess in the real economy, there is usually a
counterpart in the financial system. The explosion of venture capital investment
certainly played a role in driving the IT cycle to excess. According to Venture
Economics, a trade association, venture capital funding averaged more than $65bn in
1999 and 2000 - more than double the previous record of $29bn in 1998.

The excesses of debt financing are also unmistakable. High-yield telecoms debt hit
$80bn in late 1999, double the amount outstanding just two years earlier. And new
issues of investment-grade debt in the telecoms sector surged to $155bn in 2000,
fully 85 per cent above the pace in 1998.

The obvious and important question is this: what happens to this vast reservoir of
debt when the excesses of its collateral - the installed IT base in the real
economy - start to get eliminated? To me, the full extent of the IT fall-out could
ultimately hinge on the stock market and its concomitant wealth effect.

All it would take would be a mere flattening out of equity prices for the wealth
effect - which has boosted real consumption growth by 1 percentage point annually
over the past five years - to go to zero.

With households unable to rely on rising stock prices to pay for their retirement,
they would have to relearn the art of setting aside funds out of current wage
income. To the extent that such a rethink prompts a significant normalisation of the
personal saving rate - it currently stands at minus 0.8 per cent, versus a long-term
average of 8.5 per cent before the most powerful phase of the bull market began in
November 1994 - consumer demand could be sharply depressed for years to come.

None of this was ever in the script of America's New Economy. Nor was Japan, widely
proclaimed as the new global powerhouse in the late 1980s, ever supposed to
disappear into economic oblivion. Yet history is littered with the carcasses of new
eras. As the first recession of the information age begins to unfold, the lessons of
Japan should not be taken lightly. The writer is chief economist at Morgan Stanley
Dean Witter



 from FT.com





From sammler at communards.de  Thu Feb  1 07:04:01 2001
From: sammler at communards.de (Communards)
Date: Thu Feb  1 07:04:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Update info
Message-ID: <PM-CC.20010131154709.1B348.3.D@post.webmailer.de>

Dear GenossInnen, Liebe Comrades,

As usual while we have nothing better to do, we love to inform you about new essays
and news added to http://www.communards.de. So we do now.
Wie ueblich, wenn wir nichts besseres zu tun haben, stehen wir echt drauf, Euch
ueber neue Artikel auf unsere Site zu informieren. Wie auch jetzt.

ENLISTING SOLDIERS IN STRUGGLE AGAINST DU: OPPORTUNITY FOR ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=1&id=980926873

Refugee Act - denying rights
On Monday November 20th the Refugee Act came into force. The main purpose of the act
appears to be to ensure that asylum seekers do not even temporarily attain the most
basic rights of Irish Citizens and that they be kicked out as soon as possible.
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=17&id=980924127

Australia: Steelworkers' Strike: "We have had a gut full"
On Tuesday January 23, 800 steel maintenance workers at BHP's largest steelworks
downed tools and walked off the job for 48 hours, as the fight for job security
intensified. After a decade of job losses and huge profit-making by BHP their anger
boiled over. 
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=4&id=980950281

COSATU welcomes free anti-retroviral Medication
An estimated 5000 babies are born HIV positive a month in South Africa because their
mothers pass the virus on to them at birth.
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=4&id=980927410

Aus der Todeszelle
Zolo Agona Azania braucht unsere Solidarit?t. Jetzt!
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=5&id=980926528

United European Left on the Use of DU
Recent developments in the Balkans, or to be more precise the consequences of NATO
intervention with the use of weapons of mass destruction, in particular depleted
uranium and plutonium munitions, have deeply shocked public opinion.
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=15&id=980950122

Hundreds of DU tiles found in Forest
300 tiles of plutonium where found on Friday 26/1 in forest Kouri, close to
Asvestohori of Thessaloniki. It is also possible that there might be more tiles of
this dangerous materials. 
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=15&id=980949781

Propaganda war of the century continues
Last week in these pages, Peter Mac exposed some of the lies, distortions and
half-truths that make up the new BBC series on the ABC, "War of the Century".
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=12&id=980950460

Alternative Energy Sources
Oil fuels the modern world. No other substance can equal the enormous impact which
the use of oil has had on so many people, so rapidly, in so many ways, and in so
many places around the world.
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=12&id=980927134

Documented: 
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF THE COLLECTIVE RIGHTS OF PEOPLES
http://www.communards.de/cgi-bin/groupnews/viewnews.cgi?category=12&id=980949186

As usual most essays are in English.
We still looking for comrades helping us to get the statements to the site, which is
quite easy and in no means need any skills of HTML knowlegde.

There are more interesting essays and news from the last few days: So do not forget
to surf a bid through the news area.

Steve and Martin


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Visit http://www.communards.de for information of struggles worldwide.
Post your events at http://metaevents.com/Communards/calendrome.cgi
Send information for mailings to list at communards.de
BOYKOTT GMX: http://www.netz-antifa.org




From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Thu Feb  1 07:04:05 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Thu Feb  1 07:04:05 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Fw: CP of Greece, Thessaloniki - hidden Plutonium found in forest !
Message-ID: <01bd01c08bd9$af331ae0$1b02f0d5@EUnet.yu>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: SolidNet 
To: info at solidnet.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:27 PM
Subject: CP of Greece, Thessaloniki - hidden Plutonium found in forest !


SolidNet 
The purpose of the Solid Net ( Solidarity Network ) is to inform on the activities as well as the ideological and political views of different Communist and Workers' Parties on National and International issues.  All articles in the SolidNet are the responsibility of the authors and in no way commit this Web Site. 
mailto:info at solidnet.org , http://www.solidnet.org 
================================================================= 
CP of Greece, Thessaloniki - hidden Plutonium found in forest ! 
--------------------------------------------------------------- 
From: Communist Youth of Greece, Wed, 31 Jan 2001 
mailto:kne-odigitis at ath.forthnet.gr , http://www.forthnet.gr/kne-odigitis/
================================================================= 
* Hundreds of metallic tiles, which contain plutonium where found in forest Kouri, close to Asvestohori of Thessaloniki. 

 300 tiles of plutonium where found on Friday 26/1 in forest Kouri, close to Asvestohori of Thessaloniki. It is also possible that there might be more tiles of this dangerous materials. Mayors, massive organizations and residents of the region demand the better examination of the territory from special groups of research, so that there will be no danger for the residents. The mayor of municipality of Hortiatis, which is located nearby the forest,  mr Xristodoulou, denounced the lack of information by the side of the government regarding the research operation. Scientists have said that touching Plutonium can cause death. Mr Geranios, professor of Nuclear 
Physics in the University  of Athens, in his statements to the press asked for a thorough searching of the whole area by the Greek Committee for Atomic Energy, underlining the possible dangers. It is a real mystery why no one - not even the prefect of Thessaloniki -  was informed about this research operation held on Friday 26/1. There are  suspicions of a possible cover up, since in this region there have been NATO exercises, and operations centres with German and other NATO forces, not only in the time of the bombing. Also, there is a greek camp operating  the last 8 years 
next to the forest Kouri. There are also other suspicions made because of the disclosure that soldiers of KFOR from the German forces are involved with the illegal transportation and trade of Serbian weapons. Also, the possibility of illegal trade of the 3 grams of Plutonium from members of the Ukraine and Bulgarian mafia is also taken in mind. The questions that remain are the following: In what kind of field is Thessaloniki and North Greece being transformed in where hundreds of mercenary troops of NATO pass by every day? Why, is our country chosen as a safe place to transport these materials? 

The international department of KNE 
..................... 
KNE 
Communist Youth of Greece 
11, Kotopouli str - Athens 10432 
tel: +301-5282523 / fax: +301-5241526 
http://www.forthnet.gr/kne-odigitis/ 

*End* 
  

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 4223 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010201/60345186/attachment.txt>

From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Thu Feb  1 07:04:09 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Thu Feb  1 07:04:09 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Fw: [Fwd: Canada 19th Biggest Weapons Contractor for Pentagon]
Message-ID: <027c01c08bde$1a807280$1b02f0d5@EUnet.yu>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: mart <mart156 at home.com>
To: Mrs. Jela Jovanovic <nerajov at EUnet.yu>; <pvoice at telus.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 9:24 PM
Subject: Fw: [Fwd: Canada 19th Biggest Weapons Contractor for Pentagon]


> > > Subject: Canada 19th Biggest Weapons Contractor for Pentagon
> > > > > >
> > > (PLEASE FORWARD, AND FEEL FREE TO REPRODUCE)
> > >
> > > "Canada is a peacekeeping nation." - Popular Canadian myth
> > >
> > > "Canada the 19th Largest Pentagon Contractor, Fiscal Year 2000" - U.S.
> > > War
> > > Dept.
> > >
> > > "Death is our business and business is good."
> > > - Slogan on U.S. helicopter unit headquarters, during Operation
> > > Speedy Express, a particularly brutal period of U.S. mass murder in
> > > Vietnam
> > >
> > > (The following is the first in a series of research articles produced by
> > > the Toronto chapter of Homes not Bombs, which believes Canada Should
> > > Build
> > > Homes, not Blow Them Up. Homes not Bombs is developing a Campaign to
> > > Demilitarize Canada, one major part of which is attempting to expose the
> > > many tentacles in the Canadian arms production and export process. We
> > > encourage research submissions on what's going on in your neck of the
> > > woods
> > > (and there's plenty of it going on across Canada that needs exposure to
> > > the
> > > public light.) If you've got information on the local arms manufacturer
> > > in
> > > your neighbourhood, we'd be pleased to hear about it, share it and, if
> > > possible, work with you to protest and transform it from a merchant of
> > > death to a builder of community).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > There seems no stopping the Big Lie. Canada continues to promote
> > > the big lie of "peacekeeping nation," evidenced lately by glowing
> > > encomiums
> > > to former Secretary of State for External Affairs Lloyd Axworthy, who,
> > > among his many crimes, oversaw millions of dollars in arms shipments to
> > > the
> > > regime in Indonesia, supported Canadian armed enforcement of sanctions
> > > against the Iraqi people, and cheered loudly the bombing of the Balkans.
> > > Axworthy also made several desperate visits to the U.S. to ensure that
> > > American "security concerns" would not interfere with Canada's $5
> > > billion
> > > weapons production industry.
> > > It is hard to square Canada's self-proclaimed reputation as
> > > international good guy, however, with the factual record. And this
> > > week's
> > > news provides yet another piece of the true puzzle of Canadian policy:
> > > that
> > > as far as military production and export are concerned, death is indeed
> > > a
> > > Canadian business, and by all accounts, business is good.
> > > Each year, the U.S. War Dept., known as the Pentagon, releases a
> > > list of its top 100  weapons contractors. For the year 2000, the list
> > > contains most of the usual suspects (most of which have Canadian
> > > subsidiaries), including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, Litton,
> > > General
> > > Dynamics, General Electric and Honeywell.
> > > Making the top 20 for the year 2000 is an entity described as
> > > "Government of Canada." Yes, right there at #19 in the top 100 is the
> > > peacemaking nation Canada, which, through the benign front of the
> > > Canadian
> > > Commercial Corporation (CCC), raked in $676,881,000 in contracts to help
> > > the world's most vicious military power construct even more ingenious
> > > ways
> > > of liquidating whole populations.
> > > It's instructive to visit the website of the friendly CCC
> > > (www.ccc.ca) to see how, exactly, Canada acts as a pimp for arms
> > > manufacturers north of the U.S. border. Essentially, this government
> > > export
> > > sales agency, wholly funded by you and me, is mandated to promote trade
> > > between Canada and whoever is willing to buy our stuff (more than  100
> > > countries, according to the CCC).
> > > Staff at the CCC help with the bidding on contracts for weapons
> > > systems, acting in essence as prime contractor.
> > > "CCC is a security blanket for us and our bankers, and it gives us
> > > credibility with foreign buyers," explains Henriette Martinitz, CEO of
> > > Parry Sound-based Pro-Safe Fire Training Systems Inc. With CCC's
> > > assistance, that company generated multi-million-dollar sales to the
> > > U.S.
> > > Navy and Air Force, helping those institutions do their dirty work
> > > around
> > > the globe.
> > > So, if you've got a big gun, or the key component for the use of
> > > that new weapons system, CCC will use our tax dollars to find a market
> > > for
> > > it. "CCC, as Prime Contractor, will enter into a contract with your U.S.
> > > government buyer and take a legal risk position in the deal. Our
> > > governmental status to sign contracts on behalf of Canadian exporters
> > > puts
> > > the power of Canada behind the export sale-guaranteeing its full and
> > > satisfactory completion." So much for the glory of the free market, eh?
> > > Plus, this service is provided to Canadian weaponsmakers at no charge.
> > > Hell, if you've got cash flow problems, CCC will even provide, at NO
> > > CHARGE, accelerated payment of project invoices.
> > > One of the golden opportunities for Canadian companies now,
> > > according to the CCC, is participation in the Joint Strike Fighter, a
> > > $300
> > > billion program to build the next generation of fighter aircraft.
> > > Missions
> > > to seek out contract opportunities for the fighter jets are also
> > > supported
> > > by the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Industry
> > > Canada, and Technology Partnerships Canada. If you are interested, you
> > > can
> > > contact the key point people on these projects and express your
> > > revulsion
> > > that Canadian tax dollars are being bloodied in such a manner:
> > > Joe Yagminas, Senior Business Development Officer, CCC, 613-995-7706,
> > > JOE at ccc.ca
> > > Jean-Louis Robitalle, Trade Commissioner, Department of Foreign Affairs
> > > and
> > > International Trade (DFAIT), 613-944-9474,
> > > jean-louis.robitaille at dfait-maeci.gc.ca
> > > Les Goodwin, Senior Industrial Development Officer, Industry Canada,
> > > 613-954-3302, goodwin.les at ic.gc.ca
> > > Laurence Otupiri
> > > Senior Investment Manager, Technology Partnerships Canada, 613-941-5607,
> > > Otupiri.Larry at ic.gc.ca
> > >
> > > Nowhere on the CCC site or related sites can one readily find
> > > information on the creation of true nonviolent intervention and peace
> > > building programs, the building of social justice and civil society, or
> > > the
> > > cost-free consultations that the government should be providing for such
> > > initiatives.
> > > Meanwhile, don't let concerns about human rights interfere with
> > > cutting a good deal. If you want to sell to a country with blemishes
> > > like
> > > torture, summary executions, massacres and the like, the CCC lists
> > > Canadian
> > > representatives who can help peddle your wares in a variety of Amnesty
> > > International repeat offenders, including, but not at all limited to,
> > > China, Indonesia, Turkey, Colombia, Guatemala, Mexico, Algeria, Iran,
> > > Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.
> > > In addition to European (NATO) opportunities, the CCC actively
> > > encourages "market opportunities" for weapons firms in East Asia ("the
> > > financial crisis in Asia should cause only a temporary downturn in
> > > defence
> > > [sic] sales in the region"), Latin America (which "presents important
> > > opportunities in the aerospace and defence electronics markets for
> > > Canadian
> > > firms, particularly in countries such as Chile, Argentina, Mexico and
> > > Peru), and, of course, the Middle East, which is "expected to absorb
> > > over
> > > $150 billion in offshore defence purchases" in the near future.
> > > So the next time Molson's Joe Canadian gets up to talk about what
> > > makes us what we are, don't forget about Canada's proud ranking as the
> > > 19th
> > > biggest weapons contractor for the Pentagon in year 2000.
> > >
> > > (Next up: Canada is NOT in the process of deciding whether to be
> > > involved
> > > in Star Wars, because CANADA IS ALREADY INVOLVED, what with contracts at
> > > a
> > > facility called DREO, Defence Research Establishment Ottawa, where
> > > research
> > > is proceeding apace on ways to improve the deadly "National Missile
> > > Defence" program).
> > >
> > > Homes not Bombs is a provincial network of nonviolent activists located
> > > across Ontario. For more information, drop us a line at tasc at web.ca or
> > > write us at PO Box 73620, 509 St. Clair Ave. West, Toronto, ON M6C 1C0.
> > >
> > > Peace!
> > > Matthew Behrens, for HNB-Toronto
> >
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 11658 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010201/29e45ac9/attachment.txt>

From sherrynstan at igc.org  Fri Feb  2 11:23:02 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (sherrynstan at igc.org)
Date: Fri Feb  2 11:23:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins
Message-ID: <Springmail.105.981043101.0.57438300@www.springmail.com>

crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com wrote:
> 
 
>>> sherrynstan at igc.org 01/31/01 10:12AM >>>
"Is Colin Powell an Uncle Tom," one asks me.  He and his comrades have just exploded in a babble of outrage at this imperial arrogance.  "Is he a token?"

"Uncle Tom was a phrase of contempt that Malcolm X used to differentiate the house slave from the field slave," I say.  "Powell has transcended that.  He is no longer just the house slave.  He is now one of the masters.  He is a brilliant bureaucrat.  Hardly a token.

"Many people regard an Uncle Tom to be someone who is witless, a fool who sells out his own people, like Clarence Thomas.  Powell is no fool.  He is ruthless and very, very smart.  Clarence Thomas is an Uncle Tom.  Powell is evil."

(((((((((((

CB: Thomas is a Sambo too. Thomas has significant power, as much as Powell. 

(Actually, in the novel _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, Uncle Tom was not a sellout. That was Sambo. So, technically Thomas and Powell are Sambos, though Uncle Tom is used often as you use it here)

Thanks for the distinction.   BTW, the fucking Dominican armed forces massed on the border yesterday, claiming that Haitian drug traffickers were threatening their sovereignty.  Chiulean generals are making threats.  The successful coup in the US has awakened the fascist, and he is baring his teeth.  Here, the Convergence dropped out of a meeting with Aristide, the jellyfish, and have set some kind of deadline for Feb 6, day before the inauguration.  We think they want to disrupt it, which by Haitian law creates a constitutional crisis.  The saga unfolds.

Cheers all.

Stan



_______________________________________________
Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From gdrouet at brutele.be  Fri Feb  2 11:29:02 2001
From: gdrouet at brutele.be (Georges Drouet)
Date: Fri Feb  2 11:29:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Unfettered competition you said John?
Message-ID: <v03007807b69f89a757f1@[212.68.217.105]>

Here comes an article from Business Week
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/feb2001/nf2001021_692.htm

As you will see, growth have its limits which are very close now: American
economy is slowing down as it never does never since years, Japanese one is
under recession since more than four years and European will be pretty soon
on the same situation. Sharks will go for more meat to satisfy their
appetite, and I'm convinced that the assasination of Kabila is directly
linked to the economic control of Africa by the super powerful companies of
our mad world...

We should win the race and offer the correct alternatives as soon as
possible, before the crash arrives...

----------------------------------------------
Georges Drouet
----------------------------------------------
Visit our site: http://www.simpol.org
______________________________________
ISPO UK                                 info at simpol.org
John Bunzl
P.O. Box 26547
London SE3 7YT
______________________________________
ISPO Belgique         ispo.belgique at simpol.org
Georges Drouet
28, place Morichar
1060 Bruxelles
______________________________________
ISPO  Argentina      ispo.argentina at simpol.org
ISPO  Brazil                  ispo.brazil at simpol.org
ISPO  France                 ispo.france at simpol.org
ISPO  India                    ispo.india at simpol.org
ISPO  Mali                     ispo.mali at simpol.org
ISPO  Pakistan           ispo.pakistan at simpol.org


At GE, Neutron Jack Is Back
                      To keep its profit growth engine humming, CEO Jack
Welch plans to cut
                      at least 75,000 jobs, hoping Web efficiencies will
fill the gap


                      As GE's John F. Welch Jr. heads for retirement, his
legacy as
                      Neutron Jack continues. Back in 1981, a 45-year-old Welch
                      settled into his new job as chief executive of
General Electric Co.
                      by promptly dismantling many of GE's old-line
businesses and
                      hacking away layers of bureaucracy in the big
conglomerate. After
                      four years, he had managed to cut some 100,000 jobs,
a feat that
                      set GE on its now-legendary course of growth and
ever-increasing
                      profits -- and one that earned Welch his infamous
nickname of
                      Neutron Jack. Now, at 65 as he's supposed to be
winding down his career, it looks as if Neutron
                      Jack is roaring back.

                      Wall Street sources and people close to the company
tell BusinessWeek that GE is planning
                      massive job cuts on a scale not seen since the early
days of Welch's tenure. GE may take out at
                      least 75,000 jobs in the next two years --or more
than 15% of the 450,000 people it'll employ once
                      the Honeywell International merger is completed.
Excluded from the estimates are the 28,000 jobs
                      that will go as a result of GE's decision to shut
retailer Montgomery Ward & Co.

                      LION'S SHARE.  To be sure, these cuts are coming at a
time the economy is slowing to a crawl.
                      Analysts say GE may eliminate 5,000 to 10,000 jobs in
appliances, lighting, broadcasting, and
                      plastics. Those divisions are all highly sensitive to
swings in the economy, and they posted marked
                      slowdowns in fourth-quarter sales as car
manufacturers, computer makers, retailers, and other key
                      customers cut way back on orders.

                      But while a limping economy may lend added incentive
for layoffs, most of the planned cuts have
                      little connection to the economy's current
performance, analysts and people close to the company
                      say. Indeed, the lion's share will come from the
upcoming merger with Morristown (N.J.)-based
                      Honeywell and GE's efforts to push mightily into
e-commerce. GE may cut 30,000 to 50,000 jobs
                      -- as much as 42% of Honeywell's base -- in the wake
of the merger, according to analysts who
                      have spoken with GE officials.

                                               Just as important, analysts
say, GE is signaling that it's ready to
                                               make deep structural changes
by migrating reams of administrative
                                               work to the Web, allowing it
to cut entire layers of support jobs and
                                               white-collar positions.
Indeed, GE expects to save $1.6 billion on
                                               so-called "digitization"
this year and eliminate 11,000 jobs. In
                                               coming years, cuts from this
Web migration -- if it goes successfully
                                               and customers embrace it --
could eliminate tens of thousand more
                                               jobs, analysts say.

                      Why now? Analyst Martin A. Sankey of Goldman Sachs
says technology is allowing GE to
                      "radically delayer," just as it did in the early
'80s. "It's a sensitive issue because a lot of people are
                      going to be losing jobs." No division will be spared.
GE Capital Services, the company's finance
                      arm and a consistent source of high double-digit
profit growth, is expected to generate at least a
                      third of this year's $1.6 billion in e-commerce savings.

                      BABY STEPS.  In recent months, GE Capital has begun
aggressively pushing much of its
                      paperwork -- from loan applications to insurance
sales -- to the Web. As a service business,
                      analysts and employees say it's rife with
opportunities to cut jobs. But the same goes for old-line
                      businesses such as appliances. Sankey notes that the
millions of calls that go to the appliance unit's
                      call center cost $5 to $6 apiece to handle. "If you
can route that call to the GE appliance Web site,
                      that interaction is 50 cents," he says. Still, many
of GE's Web efforts are in their infancy, and
                      analysts say it may be several years before the Web
investments pay off.

                      GE says it has no layoff targets, but Welch has
spoken recently of "significant" cuts. With
                      Honeywell, they're likely to be significant indeed.
That company had failed to move ahead with the
                      integration of its large merger with Allied Signal,
say analysts and frustrated Honeywell directors.
                      And there's clear evidence that Honeywell is bloated:
While its average employee generates about
                      $209,000 in revenue, GE employees generate $382,000
apiece. Clearly, Welch sees some big
                      potential for job cuts. GE recently increased the
estimated annual cost savings from the Honeywell
                      merger to $2.5 billion from the original $1.5 billion
it had projected.

                      Still, outside of the Honeywell merger, it might seem
odd that GE, long considered the consummate
                      lean American corporation, now thinks it has at least
75,000 jobs to shave. After all, it just cranked
                      out record earnings in 2000. Even in the anemic
fourth quarter, as some of its industrial
                      competitors struggled, the GE magic was in full
evidence. While sales were flat or down in
                      appliances, broadcasting, industrial products, and
plastics, earnings overall still increased by 16%.

                      But the company is pushing some very aggressive
profit targets for 2001 --recession or no
                      recession. With moderate economic growth, GE projects
earnings will grow 18% to 20%. And even
                      if the economy contracts by 2%, GE says it will still
have double-digit earnings growth, albeit
                      smaller -- about 10%. With such big job cuts on the
way, Welch just may have the formula to keep
                      those earnings chugging.


                      By Pamela L. Moore in New York
                      Edited by Beth Belton

------------------------------------------
Georges Drouet
28, place Morichar  1060 Bruxelles
tel: +32-486 751 668
fax: + 32-2 538 10 82

gdrouet at brutele.be





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 11:46:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 11:46:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky
Message-ID: <000501c08d0a$345d6820$e34a7bd5@mjones>

Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky
(1863-1945)
"The formation of an integrative approach to the biosphere,
as well as the very introduction of this level of organization
of living matter, are due entirely to Vernadsky"
 Andrey Lapo

    Vladimir was born in Petersburg, USSR in 1863. He was formally educated as a
geologist, but had a clear interest in mineralogy and crystallography. Studying the
general laws of chemical processes in the earth's crust, he created the field of
geochemistry. Later he focused on the links  between the earth's crust and the
activities of living organisms, thus creating the field of biogeochemistry. His
studies of cosmic and solar radiation effects on  biogeochemistry led him to
eventually formulate his astounding and revolutionary theory on the biosphere. His
short 1926 book The Biosphere outlined the basis for his new theories. (p. 1)

    His final papers in 1944 outlined his belief and understanding in a new
geological era, which he termed the psychozoic era, in which mankind would emerge as
a powerful earth-changing force, creating a new form of biosphere called the
noosphere. He died shortly after in 1945. (p. 2)


    "Some scientists consider that Vernadsky did for biological space what Darwin
did for biological time. The work of both is necessary to understand biospherics.
Darwin proved the unity of all life throughout the billions of years of time and the
complexity of forms. Vernadsky showed the unity of all life in space, and that it
operated on a daily scale as a cosmic phenomenon and geological force. (p. 5)"


    Vernadsky was the original pioneer of  biospherics, a science before its time.
Much of his work remained unknown to the western scientific community, due to
political and linguistic factors, until very recently. In conjunction with James E.
Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis,   it has presented a new way of looking at the Earth.
(pp. 9-10)  Biosphere 2, constructed 40 years after Vernadsky's death, is a
testament to the power of his theory and his message. It is a direct result of his
ideas and influence.


http://www.columbia.edu/~alt12/Bio/vernadsky.html




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 11:46:04 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 11:46:04 2001
Subject: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins
In-Reply-To: <200102020854.KAA26178@brain.sn.apc.org>
Message-ID: <000801c08d0a$814d73a0$e34a7bd5@mjones>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Bond:

> > Thanks, also, Pat for putting Bunker & Ciccantell my way.
> Interestingly, their 'new
> > historical materialism' ends up sounding a lot like old-old nc theory,
> with their
> > talk about 'fungibility' which sounds an awful lot like substitutability to me.
> > Samuelson would feel right at home. Good stuff, apart from that,but
> they are wrong
> > about oil, coal and energy generally. Is this a general problem with Marxist
> > geographers? Harvey seems to have the same blind spot.
>
> Ah Mark, you tease, you. No, Bunker is a sociologist, but hey,
> discipline boundaries go out the door when we move into histomat,
> right?! Yesterday, David Harvey began his new teaching career as an
> anthropologist at City University of NY, by the way. Geographers, a
> motley crew under the best of conditions, regularly morph into
> whatever they want (e.g., public policy-wonks at Wits), whenever
> conditions dictate.

I've only managed to get hold of one essay which I'm forwarding to debate for
convenience. Can't see much cogent notion of an 'energy theory of value' here but
perhaps I'm missing something.

There is an ongoing debate, as you know, marked by the usual circular reasoning,
about society v. nature etc. It doesn't seem to advance much. On the CrashList there
has been much discussion between value-lovers and Arne Naess supporters. There was a
recent issue of Capital & Class (a journal of which I, with Robin Murray, Sol
Picciotto, John Holloway, Diane Elson and others, were founding editors of, all of
25 years ago) which looked at the issue. Can't remember much of interest in it,
either, altho some folks here might have a different view.  There is a journal most
people here are no doubt familiar with, set up by the O'Connors, called
Capital-Nature-Society, which also seems to go round in circles a lot (sorry for the
sweeping judgments). Probably the only people who avoided circularity was the LM
crowd, but only because once they embraced Julian Simon/Wise Use they smartly
disappeared up their own backsides anyway (sorry, Russell, old lad). Pen-L, as you
rightly point out, is one of the home places of discussions about value, and there
too they have discussed ad infinitum the relative contributions of Labour and Energy
to Value, in the context of windmills, absolute and differential rent, Ricardo etc.

My elderly, simple-minded approach, based on insights of Alfred Sohn-Rethel, not to
speak of K Marx, is to understand the social realm as a logico-historical construct
of the commodity-form. One of the things we are not very good at doing, when
thinking about commodity-production, is to udnerstand that process as a disruption
or dislocation within the real. Cf the Early Marx. This rent or tear in the uniform
surface of the real produces what one can only call black holes, where the laws of
nature become suddenly inverted, an Alice in Wonderland world where black is white,
and where further disruptions of natural process, deepening plunder and exploitation
of ecosystems, appears to the human brain in the phantasmagoric form of 'resources',
'gifts of nature', 'appropriation of natural resources', 'raw materials' etc. In
this longrun outcome of commodity production, ecocide appears and is celebrated as
aform of wealth creation. A close existential connection is established between
private need (which is, of course, always and inescapably, actual a social product,
and the *principal* social product, ie the existence of classes, of large masses of
needy individuals etc) and the rationalisation/legitimation of the total social
process of reproduction. Ie, people get a stake in the system and want more of its
material 'benefits'. Needs are, as Marx said, produced. Marx himself (not to speak
of Engels) was torn between seeing capitalist commodity production as a spreading
plague, and seeing bourgoies civilisation as a high point and a necessary
preparation for a reconciliation of man/nature under the rubric of the
assimilation/sublation of nature to the human project. This fairly obvious
intellectual tensions and conflict within Marx's work is indicative of how hard it
is to think ourselves out of the trap of commodity production and the thought-forms
peeled historically out of the commodity form. Lenin, too, was divided, the same
caesure lurks in all hsi theoretical and philosophical work and is present also in
his politics, which were riven between a meliorist social project, and a highly
contradictory apocalyptic rejection of capitalist society.

Ending capitalist commodity production does seem to entail a radical transfiguration
of our species life and our anthropocentric imperatives, but such a transformation
is no doubt inevitable and necessary for survival. It is not just a matter of
putting politics in command, and of substituting planning for market stochasm. There
will nbeed to be what the great Soviet physicist, mathematician and environmentalist
Nikita Moiseev (discoovere of the nuclear winter scenario), called, basing himself
on Teilhard de Chardin and Vladimir Vernadsky, the need for new "Institutes of
Accord" not only to found a new ethical basis for social life, but a new basis for
society to live within nature, to reseal the rupture within the real out of which
tumbled all the historical societies of commodity production including our own.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 11:46:06 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 11:46:06 2001
Subject: FW: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins
Message-ID: <000701c08d0a$4bbde760$e34a7bd5@mjones>


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-debate at sunsite.wits.ac.za
[mailto:owner-debate at sunsite.wits.ac.za] On Behalf Of Patrick Bond
Sent: 01 February 2001 20:03
To: jones.mark at btconnect.com
Cc: debate at sunsite.wits.ac.za
Subject: Re: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins


Bring it on!

Must admit that I don't know the new lefty formation. Our lead
comrade in Port-au-Prince, who comes to scenes like the 1998
anti-globalisation conference in Edenvale and Dakar 2000 and many
inbetween, is Camille Chalmers (an econ prof at State U, and leader
of the Papda coalition, parallel to SA's Cansa).

Camille was once JB Aristide's chief of staff, and when I laboured a
few months in Aristide's Washington office in 1995, it was precisely
that concept explained below -- critical, defensive, dogged "support"
-- that logically emerged again and again.

Is JB opportunist, confused, naive, egocentric? Yes.

But he was also smart enough to nurture his left flank and encourage
sustained social protest against the IMF, WB and US AID.

Smarter, in other words, than anyone I've met in Pretoria.

(Send congrats to Stan Goff for a compelling riff.)

> From:          "Mark Jones" <jones.mark at btconnect.com>
>
> FEAR AND LOATHING IN HAITI
>
> Stan Goff
>
>
> In Port-au-Prince I spend three days at Hotel Ife.  If I believed in zombiesthat
> favored American obsession about HaitiI will have found them here in the
doddering,
> light-skinned matriarch and her stunned-looking, slow-motion staff.  Like every
> place in the Caribbean, but especially here, there seems to be a perpetual
stalemate
> in the battle with decay.  Water damage stains the ceilings.  The wiring is
> precariously exposed.  A little spider has found a haven in the corner of the
> windowsill, where no dust-rag, no broom ever quite reaches.  Electricity is
> rationed, available only from 5:30 PM to 4:00 AM.  Street noises invade throughout
> the night.  Motorcycles, evangelists with loudspeakers, little brass bands,
roosters
> even here in the comparative affluence of Petionville.  My walls are painted a
> nauseating green.
>
> The street is my refuge.  The inept pretensions of Haitis third-string
bourgeoisie,
> here in the streets at least, are diffused, swallowed up by the frenetic culture
of
> survival that animates these byways, the chaos of the pure market, of truly
> primitive accumulation.  Here is a cornucopia of commodities, fruits, breads,
> cigarettes, plastic shoes, cheap watches, steaming food, sold right on the
sidewalk
> out of bowls and baskets.  Here are trash, skiddish animals foraging in filth, and
a
> wild-west intermixing of foot and vehicle traffic.  No set prices anywhere.  Every
> exchange alternates between belligerence, laughter, feigned pain at an insultan
> appearance of extreme tension to the blan, but this is a game that animates the
> entire culture, this ribbing and debating, these loud voices with the plosive
> cadences.
>
> The streets of Petionville, the most affluent section of the capital, are named
> after heroes of the Revolution for Independence.  But the names are selective;
> Chavannes, Petion, Rigaud, Oge.  Mulattos all.  The only exception is LOverture,
> the ex-slave general who led the first stage of the Revolution, when slavery was
> abolished.  Toussaint LOverture was black.  But like Aristide today, he was a
> conciliator.  He never desired nor demanded independence.  So the color-obsessed
> capital elite rehabilitated him into the good black.
>
> The rest, the mulattos of the Revolution never wanted to throw off the French, the
> blan.  They wanted to replace them and grow rich on the sweat of the former
slaves.
> Indeed, many themselves owned slaves before the Revolution.  To this day they
> contemptuously call the black peasant the gwo zoteey, the big toe.
>
> Conspicuous among the names unlisted among the Petionville streets is Dessalines.
> After the French duped LOverture and sent him to die in a putrid cell, Dessalines
> led the bloody march to independence.
>
> Class memory is long in Haiti, and Dessalines was feared by the privileged
mulattos.
> He had the personal power to mobilize the masses.  In one engagement, at Crete
> Pierrot in 1802, he rallied 900 ex-slave soldiers and civilians to reject
surrender
> and break out of an encirclement of 16,000 French soldiers, a feat of arms
> astounding by any measure in any war in history.
>
> When the mulattos claimed the land based on the ownership of their white fathers,
> after Napoleans legions were vanquished, Dessalines asked them what the former
> slaves who led the Revolution would get.  The mulattos were champing at the bit to
> begin a vigorous and lucrative trade with the French, and other Europeans as well.
>
> Dessalines, who had seen French perfidy and brutality reassert itself at every
> opportunity, shed his shirt to show them the mass of lash scars covering his
> coal-black back, and told them with no equivocation, he was done with the whites.
>
> The mulattos foresaw their anticipated fortunes dwindle to naught.
>
> While Dessalines massacred the French in Cap Haitien, winning infamy among white
> historians, the mulattos plotted.  They assassinated Dessalines in 1806 and
forbade
> his name to be spoken for 40 years.  Their subsequent repression of the mass of
> former rebels was ferocious.  This ferocity was motivated by the one true constant
> of almost 200 years of Haitian ruling class historydread of the masses.
Dessalines
> had to go because he could mobilize the masses.
>
> It would be a mistake, however, to generalize Dessalines confrontation of the
> mulattos into a description of Haitis societal tensions as a color problem.  The
> black grandons of the north are as avaricious and cynical as the whitest
compradeur,
> and just as terrified of popular rebellion.
>
> Haitis struggle is a class struggle, pure if not simple.  Color is just part of
the
> context, the psychology.  Look at the Bush cabinet.
>
> In my walks down these streets named after Dessalines nemeses, I find an internet
> cafi of all things.  Here is a place where I can check email, surf a bit on the
web,
> stay connected with my family who I have deserted yet again.
>
> January 19.  A fellow Haiti-phile has forwarded me an article by email about the
> confirmation hearings of Colin Powell.  The hearings are, of course, a love-fest.
> Powell wears white denial as his personal armorthe almost-Black Knight.  No one
> dares speak the forbiddenMy Lai, Panama, Iraq.  No one can acknowledgeon pain of
> political suicidethat this man is a brilliant hack, a well-groomed ticket puncher
> who will order the annihilation of thousands of innocents, but whose real talent
is
> hiding the bodies.  The obsequious, lily-white Senators ask him about Haiti, this
> almost-a-negro and a West Indian to boot, and he doesnt hesitate.  He puts Haiti
> firmly in its place.
>
> The Administration of George W. Bush, Powell explains, will tentatively accept the
> grotesque capitulation of a wavering Aristide to reschedule the legitimate
elections
> of several of his own party members in response to a US/OAS campaign of demagogy
to
> discredit those elections.  It is a breathtaking betrayal by Aristide.  Powell
calls
> this acquiescent, nay, submissive posture an appropriate road map to get
started,6
> but adds that the Administration can not rule out additional demands.  No careful
> Clintonesque camouflage from this administration.  The colonial relation will be
> naked and unashamed.  U.S. policy, the Secretary of State-designee explains,
always
> has been and always will be to keep Haitians from coming to the United States.
And
> on their knees at home.
>
> My companion for this trip and a friend for the last four years, Harry Numa,
> Secretary of the Pati Popile Nasyonel (PPN)(National Popular Party), is very
focused
> on the upcoming Haitian presidential inauguration of Jean-Bertrand Aristide.  I
have
> copied the post about Colin Powell and shared it with him and other PPN members.
>
> Is Colin Powell an Uncle Tom,6 one asks me.  He and his comrades have just
exploded
> in a babble of outrage at this imperial arrogance.  Is he a token?6
>
> Uncle Tom was a phrase of contempt that Malcolm X used to differentiate the house
> slave from the field slave,6 I say.  Powell has transcended that.  He is no
longer
> just the house slave.  He is now one of the masters.  He is a brilliant
bureaucrat.
> Hardly a token.
>
> Many people regard an Uncle Tom to be someone who is witless, a fool who sells
out
> his own people, like Clarence Thomas.  Powell is no fool.  He is ruthless and
very,
> very smart.  Clarence Thomas is an Uncle Tom.  Powell is evil.6
>
> Heads nod.  This is a distinction easily grasped in Haiti, where foolishness and
> villainy have shared a lot of spotlights.
>
> Aristide is a fool, or an opportunist, or both,6 one explains.  He has this
> tremendous power, and he refuses to use it, even when people threaten him with
> violence.6  They believe Aristide is self-interested, potentially even autocratic.
> He may see himself as a kind of Haitian Pope.  Fanmi Lavalas, his party, is
> organized more like a church than a political formation.  And the church is where
> Aristides roots are.  He remains, however, in many ways, a political naif.  Hes
> never understood the dominant class terror of the people.
>
> They are referring to Aristides tolerance and capitulation before the
> sometimes-violent provocation of something now referred to as the opposition.6
So
> I need to understand clearly why the PPN, this growing, highly conscious left
> political formation, organizing relentlessly among the gwo zoteey, is defending
> Aristide.  And they are.  Critically, but doggedly.
>
> As an American, steeped in the narrow rhetorical strategies of a politics of
> personalityGore, Bush, Buchanan, NaderI am unaccustomed to looking beyond the
> talking head to the social forces that underwrite them.
>
> Even as we are inaugurating our own de facto regimethe idiot prince, Dubya, and
the
> court of his father, the immanence gristhe Haitian opposition6 is swearing
> Aristide will never sit.  February 7th is his inauguration, and they have not only
> denounced it as illegal and illegitimate,6 they have formed their own parallel6
> government.  Some have claimed that extra-Constitutional means6 will be employed
if
> necessary.
>
> Who is the opposition,6 whose latest handle is Convergence Democratique?  Its
> always French.  The name.
>
> The dominant class speaks French, but all Haitians speak Kreyol.  When the
dominant
> class doesnt want the people to know what its up to, it speaks in French.6
>
> Convergence is the latest in a line of opposition6 coalitions.  During their
failed
> attempt to buy the last election, fueled by American dollars from the National
> Endowment for Democracy, the dominant formation was called Espace de Concertacion.
> The name changed, but many of the people are the same.
>
> Convergence is a polyglot.  Pasteur Luc Mesadieu, a Protestant fundamentalist,
> Gerard Pierre Charles, ex-communist turned chief bourgeois idealogue, Serge
Gilles,
> long-time representative for French political interests in Haiti, Evans Paul,
former
> mayor of Port-au-Prince whose party the FNCD Aristide cut out of his cabinet in
> 1991, Victor Benoit, a perennial political lightweight who associates himself with
> every new bourgeois formation he can find, Hubert de Roncerey, Baby Docs Minister
> of Social Affairs who in that capacity acted as slave-trader for the Dominican
cane
> plantations, and fellow Duvalierist, Reynold George, a man once deported from the
> United States for involvement in drug trafficking.
>
> This is whom the free6 press of the United States refers when they cite the
Haitian
> opposition.6
>
> Every faction of the Haitian dominant class, factions who are generally at war
with
> one another, is represented in Convergence.  Their one point of agreement?  They
are
> all opposed to Aristide.
>
> There have been no smoking guns, but when they threatened violence, the level of
> violence escalated.  When they threatened bombs, there were bombs.  Two alleged
> coup-plotting cells have already fled this year to avoid arrest, one to the
> Dominican Republic, the other to Ecuador.  In no case has the United States
> political establishment or the obedient corporate press called for investigations
or
> expressed an iota of outrage.
>
> But on January 9th, a small affiliate of Aristides Fanmi Lavalas party, the Ti
> Komunite Leglis (TKL) had one chapter that made a veiled threat in response to the
> announcement of Convergence that it would launch its parallel government,6 They
> produced a list of collaborators,6 some of whose names were patently ridiculous.
> Fanmi Lavalas is largely, and regrettably, unstructured.  Loose cannons appear
with
> some frequency.  But it was a threat, not terribly specific, with no action taken.
> It was a hotheaded and inappropriate reaction to a very real campaign to reverse
the
> popular will.  Still, the shit storm followed from up North.
>
> Republican Congressmen Benjamin Gillman (NY) and Peter Goss (FL) made headlines
with
> their joint denouncement.  In speaking at the church of St. Jean Bosco, the men
> issuing these threats clearly suggested to Haitians that they were speaking for
Mr.
> Jean-Bertrand Aristide Instead of keeping his promises to President Clinton [to
> reschedule elections of previously elected Senators, and other capitulations], Mr.
> Aristide is condoning by his silence thuggish acts of violence in his name.6  Of
> course, there were no acts.6  But facts have never been obstacles to Republicans.
> And there was deafening silence from Gillman, Goss, and all the rest, when weeks
> earlier Evans Paul called for Haitian drivers to run down Fanmi Lavalas in the
> streets.
>
> Harry Numa:  These attacks on Aristide from Convergence and the right-wing in the
> U.S. will continue regardless of what concessions Aristide makes.  It is not
> Aristide they hate, but his connection to the masses that they fear.  He was
elected
> with 92 percent of the vote.  This is a terrible power as they see it.6  Bingo!
>
> There it is again.  The one true constant.
>
> Harry and many others wish Aristide would use his immense power to respond
> decisively to the attacks, but they fear the worst.  Aristide could very well be
> another Peron.  He began as a nationalist and a populist, but under incessant
> pressure and with more than a little personal ambition, he is being co-opted.  He
> will inevitably shift to the right.  Indeed, Aristide is already offering an olive
> branch to Marc Bazin, former World Bank representative, the U.S. supported
candidate
> against Aristide in 1991, a member of the subsequent coup regimes cabinet, and
the
> darling of the U.S. neoliberal establishment.
>
> Who cares how the Bush Administration will react if he mobilizes the population
> against Convergence?6 asks Numa.  Convergence and the U.S. want him out, whether
he
> does or not because he can.  We have a saying in Haiti.  If you dont say Good
> morning to the devil, he will eat you.  If you do say Good morning to the
devil
> he will eat you.6
>
> Their harsh criticisms of Aristide aside, they defend him not because of some
> personal quality and not based on his program, but because he was chosen by
Haitis
> majority, unlike Dubya, who seized power through a judicial coup detat.  The
> population selected him, and when he betrays them, the population can reject him.
> We are not defending Aristide.  We are defending the peoples right to select
their
> own leaders.  And we are defending our sovereignty.6
>
>  The PPN people I talk to admit that this fight among politicosfocused for the
time
> being against Aristideis really a family feud, a tussle among the bourgeoisiethe
> land-bourgeoisie, the trade-bourgeoisie, the lumpen-bourgeoisiethat has been set
> aside to close ranks against this man who has captured the imagination of the
> ominous many.  Aristide would quite likely cut deals with them all, were it not
for
> their terminal fear of his rapport with the great potentiality.
>
> But the mighty Northern metropole is involved, and its to the hegemon these
> plotters will turn in a pinch.  So its not just an internal matter, not just
Haiti
> inventing itself.
>
> The options are not pretty for Convergence, but the threats are out there.  They
> have said they will not tolerate this illegal6 government of Aristide.  They can
> not afford to look like its all a bluff,6 Harry says.  Haiti is a backward
society,
> and machismo matters.  Reputations and rumors can have the power of bombs and
> bullets.
>
> The Police Nacionale dHaiti (PNH) are not cohesive in their political loyalties.
> If they took sides at all in a fight, they would be fragmented, and many would
side
> with Aristide. Others, aggressively recruited during the U.S. occupation by the
CIA,
> might move against.  But its a wild card.  So a coup might have to be privatized.
> A group of re-armed Fraphists perhaps, with the tacit approval of their old CIA
> handlers.  Of course this kind of putsch is a very risky option.  Alleged
> conspirators of this ilk are already on the international lam.
>
> Assassination of Aristide is also very risky.  Aristides assassination would
ignite
> a conflagration.  The only way this might work is if they could convince the
> Dominicans to intervene.  Post-assassination turbulence creates the fear that this
> instability will spill across the Dominican border, so the Dominicans have their
> pretext to invade.
>
> Bushs National Security Advisor, Condoleeza Rice, a fellow oil-person who shares
> the Bush thirst for Caspian Sea petroleum, and who has promised a Kissinger-like
> realpolitik, says this administration will only intervene with direct military
force
> when there is a clear and compelling interest for the U.S. ruling class.  She
> advocates having our allies shoulder more of the load in the periphery, a question
> of economy of force.  Allies like the Dominicans.
>
> This is consistent with the Powell Doctrine for the U.S. military.  Begin with a
> measurable objective.  Apply overwhelming high-tech force and limit American
> casualties to an absolute minimum.  Gain control over the press, and give
complacent
> America its morality play.
>
> This is no recipe for Haiti.  You could bomb the existing infrastructure into an
ash
> heap and it would leave 75 percent of the country yawning.  The international
press
> can enter Haiti through its porous borders with near impunity.  And the last
> occupation, beginning in 1994, in which I participated, is an indication of what
the
> next would be indeterminate, intimidating no one for more than a moment, and a
risk
> that our own soldiersespecially black soldierswill see more than they ought of
our
> own governments motives and methods.
>
> Haiti is slippery.  Its hard to get hold of.  Sometimes it bites.
>
> If the Dominicans invade, and Aristide is dead,6 says Harry, then the OAS can be
> invited in to relieve them.  The U.S. can then play a role of post-crisis
> benevolence as it restructures Haiti to suit itself.6  This is mass paranoia if it
> is paranoia at all.  This strategy, of course, is one the U.S. has employed again
> and again.  Americans even wrote Haitis Constitution once.
>
> These transparent pretexts for intervention are not for Haitian consumption.  The
> average illiterate peasant knows bullshit when she or he sees it, literally and
> figuratively.  Their experience with both is vast.  These pretexts are for us, the
> blan, the Americans.  We are the real market for political snake oil, for
> rationalization, for Manichean simplicity, for denial.
>
> The vast majority of us watched the theft of our own elections, wrung our hands
for
> a day, and went shopping.  Blan will eat anything.
>
> Thats not to say that the Haitians cant be distracted, bamboozled, manipulated.
A
> fair number of people here still believe in werewolves and witches (instead of
> Scientology and CNN, I suppose).  But their exploitation at the hands of the
> dominant classes is brutally direct, unadorned, and unabashed.  It doesnt take a
> PhD.  And the Haitian collective memory about the foreign policy establishments of
> the United States is crisp and current.
>
> No one here needs the data, the dates, the tortured analyses.  Many are so
confident
> of U.S. official pronouncements that they use them like a compass.  When the U.S.
> Embassy expresses it aims, its like a north-seeking arrowwhich they use to
travel
> directly to the south.  Experience.
>
> Here in Cap Haitien, where I now sit, one can see the mountains folded, layer upon
> receding layer along the northern coast.  No people understand the principle of
> protracted struggle better than Haitians.  Deye mon, gen mon.  Beyond every
> mountain, is a mountain.  Their rebellion has been punished, from home and abroad,
> for 197 years.
>
> Two peasants lead us now on a foot tour of the region around Marmelade.  My age
> catches up with me, and I beg for the mercy of a halt.  If this country were
> flattened out, it would be the size of Texas, I think.  And some 5 or 6 million
> wills are daily forged on these breathless slopes.
>
> Aristide, the conciliator, may go the way of Toussaint LOverture.  Plenty of
people
> here still name their children Dessalines.  New Years Day, 2004, is the
> Revolutionary Bicentennial, and its in peoples headsthe work left undone.
>
> There is a new saying on the street here.  Why should we be afraid of one Bush,
when
> we are 8 million bouches?  Bring it on.  We can take anything.
>
> Ladies and gentlemen, the revolution will not be televised6





From aabdo at webtv.net  Fri Feb  2 11:54:02 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Fri Feb  2 11:54:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Californication of Pemex in the Works
Message-ID: <6303-3A7A4A96-1705@storefull-237.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Hoopla on the way!     Fox and Bush will meet on February 16, and the
official take is already in.....

Mexico's proud, original, and fiercely independent new president will
'hint' that change is underway!      Washington will express some
consternation about the 'new' proposals coming from Mexico, yet will
adapt a 'wait and see attitude'.      There will be 'differences' over
Cuba, the Drug War, immigration, and Plan Colombia.

All this blather, is a coverup for the increased US push for Mexican
privatization of basic industry.     The real partnership will be
between the tiny Mexican elite that will be offered a share in the
coming profit making, and the US business community.      An independent
Fox?      Hardly.

Tony
_______________________________

UPDATE 1-Official sees growing U.S.-Mexico energy links   
01 Feb 2001 23:45  
(Adds amount of planned new megawatts in para 19, byline.) 
By Susan Schneider 

MEXICO CITY, Feb 1 (Reuters) - Mexico's unquenchable thirst for natural
gas and California's paltry power supplies will likely foster increased
energy links across the U.S.-Mexican border in coming years, a Mexican
energy official said. 
Dionisio Perez-Jacome, head of Mexico's Energy Regulating Commission
(CRE), said in an interview that two or three international firms have
expressed interest in building ducts to bring Mexico the natural gas it
cannot supply from home. 

At the same time, a handful of firms are eyeing the construction of new
electricity plants in northwestern Mexico in order to ship energy to
power-starved California, in addition to the two permits already granted
for north-bound energy supplies, he said. 

"There is a lot of interest, many companies have asked us what the
procedure would be to obtain the permits" to export power, said
Perez-Jacome. 
And if the two projects already given the green light do materialize,
Mexico would be poised to send between 500 and 1,000 megawatts to
California within two or three years, he added. 

Perez-Jacome, however, said he could not divulge the names of the firms
interested in new gas pipelines or power generation, saying none had yet
made a formal request for a project permit. 
The rush to Mexico's 2,100 mile (3,300 km) U.S. border comes as
California confronts a power shortage that has already forced rolling
blackouts across the U.S.' most populous state. Mexico is already
supplying about 50 megawatts of power northward, enough to power only
about 50,000 homes. 

The interest in sending natural gas in the opposite direction,
meanwhile, arises from Mexico's inability to meet its domestic needs.
Although Mexico ranks among the world's top 20 nations in gas reserves,
a lack of exploration investment has forced the country to rely
increasingly on U.S. gas imports. 

Mexican state oil monopoly Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex) is moving quickly
to catch up with the gas needs fueled by 6 percent annual growth in
energy demand, said Perez-Jacome. But it is likely that Latin America's
second-largest economy will have to continue imports, he said. 
"Demand is growing more than supply so if the tendency continues the way
it is, we will continue to be net importers of natural gas," he said. 

Energy officials have said Mexico's gas demand will nearly double
between 2000 and 2008 to 8.231 billion cubic feet per day (cfd).
Imports, meanwhile, reached an average of 231.6 million cfd in 2000, a
surge from the 148.9 million cfd average in 1999. 

ELECTRICITY REFORM 
The California power crisis and new U.S. President George W. Bush's
search for solutions have sparked much talk of energy interconnections
in recent weeks. 
Cross-border power links are also likely to figure high on the list of
topics discussed by Bush and Mexican counterpart Vicente Fox at a Feb.
16 meeting at the latter's ranch in central Mexico. It will be Bush's
first foreign trip as president. 

But while Bush and Fox are exchanging ideas on energy cooperation,
Mexico must also sort out electricity issues within its own borders.
Analysts say that without an overhaul of Mexico's state-run electricity
system, the nation may face California-style blackouts within three
years. 

Perez-Jacome said the new government is working fast to draft an
electricity reform package -- listed by Fox as one of his key priorities
-- in order to lure more private investors to energy generation and
other areas. 

"The idea from a regulatory point of view is to have clear, transparent
and efficient rules to attract private investment," said Perez-Jacome,
who added that he expected a proposal to be ready by early March. 

Mexico is widely forecast to need $5 billion a year over the next decade
to expand and modernize its 35,000-megawatt electricity grid, under
mounting strain because of the country's breakneck economic growth. 

Last year, for example, industrial clients endured 41 unplanned power
cuts so Mexico could avoid broader blackouts, and officials said power
reserves fell to record lows. 

A spate of new generators -- some of them built by private companies
under an independent power producer (IPP) scheme -- will add 9,900 new
megawatts by 2004, according to officials. 

But the IPP projects may have outlived their usefulness. To qualify for
financing in the government-run system, for example, private companies
have required Mexican government guarantees, resources that could be
used in other areas, said Perez-Jacome. 

To avoid the need for guarantees and lure much-needed private cash,
Mexico is eyeing a system in which the state-run electricity firm is
split into divisions that would compete with private generators. 
Transmission and dispatch would be independent of generation, but still
under government control, helping to create a market-style system
hosting various players, he said. 

"In a sense, the market rules and the regulation will substitute for the
government guarantees," said Perez-Jacome. And the companies "have told
us that they can and they are willing to invest under the scheme we are
proposing." 

COPYRIGHT:  ? 2000 Reuters Limited












From sherrynstan at igc.org  Fri Feb  2 12:07:02 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (sherrynstan at igc.org)
Date: Fri Feb  2 12:07:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Stan Goff's FEAR AND LOATHING IN HAITI
Message-ID: <Springmail.105.981043309.0.17812700@www.springmail.com>

crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com wrote:
> This is the kind of thing makes me want to unsub. Stan Goff is restoring my faith in
people, which I find very undermining. I hope HarperCollins offers him a big advance
for his book and he accepts it and goes off to Miami and joins the Save Elian for
the USA Committee and smokes big Julietas on a barge with Rupert Murodch, or I'm
gonna get seriously disillusioned with being disillusioned.

This List is predicated on the imminence of terminality. Next to my wife, that is
the most imminent thing there is, I like to believe.

Think about it, Stan.

Mark

Never fear, Mark.  Plenty of terminality here.  Soil's already gone, hills denuded, population has already overshot.  Haitians may have to give us all a course of instruction on how to cope with the great aftermath.  God, I love this place.

Still thinking, with all attendant risks.

Stan

>
> In Port-au-Prince I spend three days at Hotel Ife.


_______________________________________________
Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 12:23:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 12:23:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] economics is a joke, right?
Message-ID: <001201c08c8a$56e68fa0$a17d01d5@mjones>

[this is mainly for Tom]

A mathematician, an accountant and an economist apply for the same job.
The interviewer calls in the mathematician and asks "What do two plus two equal?"
The mathematician replies "Four." The interviewer asks "Four, exactly?" The
mathematician looks at the interviewer incredulously and says "Yes, four, exactly."

Then the interviewer calls in the accountant and asks the same question "What do two
plus two equal?" The accountant says "On average, four - give or take ten percent,
but on average, four."

Then the interviewer calls in the economist and poses the same question "What do two
plus two equal?" The economist gets up, locks the door, closes the shade, sits down
next to the interviewer and says "What do you want it to equal?"

---------------

TOP 10 REASONS TO STUDY ECONOMICS
1. Economists are armed and dangerous: "Watch out for our invisible hands."
2. Economists can supply it on demand.
3. You can talk about money without every having to make any.
4. You get to say "trickle down" with a straight face.
5. Mick Jagger and Arnold Schwarzenegger both studied economics and look how they
turned out.
6. When you are in the unemployment line, at least you will know why you are there.
7. If you rearrange the letters in "ECONOMICS", you get "COMIC NOSE".
8. Although ethics teaches that virtue is its own reward, in economics we get taught
that reward is its own virtue.
9. When you get drunk, you can tell everyone that you are just researching the law
of diminishing marginal utility.
10. When you call 1-900-LUV-ECON and get Kandi Keynes, you will have something to
talk about.

-----------------------------

A true story:
"I heard this from one of my professors. To protect him, no names will be revealed.
This professor was about to get married. He went to the jewelers to get a wedding
ring for his fiancee. The jeweler told him that he can have the inside of the ring
engraved with the name of his fiancee for an additional $20 (remember, this was a
LONG time ago). He said, "But that will reduce the resale value!" The jeweler was
aghast. He said, "How can you say such a thing. You are a butcher!" "No," replied
the professor, "I am an economist"."
told by Tapen Sinha, PhD

-----------------------
Q. What do economists and computers have in common ??
A. You need to punch information into both of them.




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 12:23:04 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 12:23:04 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Michael Perelman: The Natural Instability of Markets
Message-ID: <000601c08c68$dfc9b6c0$a17d01d5@mjones>

[Another important work from the prolific Perelman pen, this time casting an
analytic eye on the inner workings of the markets.

To read more, go to:
 http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base

Mark]


The Natural Instability of Markets: Expectations, Increasing Returns and the
Collapse of Capitalism

by Michael Perelman

	Preliminaries
	The Fragile Foundations of the Triumphant Market
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, capitalism now proudly proclaims its ultimate
triumph.  Formerly socialist states frantically scramble to remake themselves as
market economies.  In the United States, everything left of the political center has
all but disappeared from the national political dialogue.  Markets are supplanting
virtually every kind of service that the state previously supplied.  Public schools,
public prisons, public streets, and even police work are being privatized.
	Even so, I am confident that capitalism's victory will be temporary.  The market
system is so familiar and our institutional memories so short, we tend to forget --
even if we knew in the first place -- that capitalism is, by its very nature, an
inherently unstable system.  Today, even World Bank publications admit that
financial crises have become more frequent and more severe in recent years (see
Caprio and Klingebiel 1997).
	Capital has enjoyed moments of triumph before, but they have always been followed
by a subsequent disaster.  We need to take a step back to recognize just how strange
markets are.  In a market society, individuals generally do not cooperate directly.
Instead, they indirectly coordinate their activities by flashing numbers (prices) to
the rest of society.  That this system worked at all was a source of amazement to
those who watched the market system in its formative years.  Adam Smith's metaphor
of an invisible hand reflected the almost magical appearance of market forces (Smith
1776, IV.ii.9, p. 456).
	Recurrent depressions and recessions taught many of Smith's successors that the
market is not necessarily benign.  Over the past few decades, however, this lesson
has all but completely worn off.  With dangerously few people today aware of the
breadth of the risks associated with a market economy, we are less prepared than
ever to come to grips with a crisis.  We have thoughtlessly dismantled much of the
regulatory system, which is supposed to contain the risks of crises, along with the
welfare system, which was meant to cushion society from the consequences of crises.
	With these conditions in mind, the time has come for an analysis of the causes of
crises within a market society.  This book shows why the force of competition tends
to create instability and depression.  I am not aware of any other contemporary book
that specifically addresses the subject of why markets have an inherent tendency to
fall into crises.
	This book also takes a fresh look at competition.  Nobody before has tried to ask
exactly what competition does.  This book shows why competition is often not very
effective.  Competition takes on a significant force only during times of depression
and recession.  When competition does become strong, it is unselective, destroying
fit and unfit alike, while wreaking havoc on society.
	This book also suggests that within a market society, we can gain some of the
benefits of competition, without adding to the dangers of a depression, by keeping
wages high as a means of putting pressure on business.  In this way, we do not get
the deflationary pressures associated with normal competition.  Environmental
protection serves the same purpose.
	In part, the absence of books that address the consider the natural instability of
markets is understandable.  The capitalist world has not seen a major depression for
more than a half century.  In addition, economists are naturally predisposed to find
order in the economy.  After all, if the economy were absolutely disorderly, they
would have nothing to contribute.  In addition, the training that economists undergo
conditions them to emphasize the tendency of the economy to be stable rather than
any forces that might make for instability.
	Finally, economists are a relatively conservative lot.  To the extent that they
work to justify the status quo, they have strong incentives to portray the economy
as stable.  If a problem arises, then some outside force, typically the government,
is to blame.  As Milton Friedman, perhaps the foremost advocate of laissez-faire of
the twentieth-century United States, once wrote with embarrassing self-satisfaction,
"The fact is that the Great Depression, like most other periods of severe
unemployment, was produced by government mismanagement rather than by inherent
instability of the private economy" (Friedman 1962, p. 38).
	For Friedman, as for most economists today, markets are natural.  Markets have
natural rates of unemployment and and natural rates of interest.  Anything that
interferes with the free functioning of markets is unnatural, if not downright
perverse.  In truth, markets are not natural any more than they are stable.  In this
book, I will make the case that markets would be even more unstable than they are
except for the inertia created by laws and customs that supposedly impede markets.
	Despite the best efforts of economists, most people intuitively realize that the
economy is not stable.  I suspect that few people feel a need for economists to tell
them why the economy is stable.  They are not interested in economists' fixed-point
theorems and the other parts of the mathematical apparatus of economic stability
theory.  Instead, rightly or wrongly, people often look to economists for
predictions that can prepare them for unexpected changes in the economy.  They are
more concerned about the possibility of a reversal in the stock market or a disorder
that might cost them their job.
	In fact, when people learn that I am an economist, more often than not, the first
question they ask me is, "will the stock market go up or down?"  Little, if
anything, in our training as economists equips us to predict the future course of
the economy.  In all modesty, when asked if the stock market will go up or down, I
can confidently answer "yes."  Of course, I am certain that it will go up.  I am
equally sure that it will go down.  I do not know which will happen first.  I do not
know by how much or when it will go down or up, but it will go.
	I am far from alone in my ignorance about the future.  Nobody else has accurate
information about the future.  We can only make educated guesses about what is in
store for us.  Unfortunately, in our educated guesses, most of us, economists
included, overestimate our education and underestimate the degree to which we guess.
	If we have to rely on guess-work, we have a good reason to predict stability.
Suppose that economies crash about once every thirty years.  On any given day, the
economy will stand a chance of less than one in ten thousand of crashing.  If I am
concerned about my reputation for accuracy, if someone asks me if the economy will
crash tomorrow, I would be well advised not to stick my neck out to predict such an
unlikely event.  If I am wrong, I will look foolish.
	If I proclaim that nothing will happen tomorrow, I will probably be proven to be
correct.  If a crash should occur, my reputation will still be relatively
untarnished, since I know that just about all of my colleagues will be wrong as
well.
	Just as geologists know full well that San Francisco will eventually experience an
earthquake, I know that the economy will again suffer another severe depression.
So, now the time has come to discuss why the economy is unstable, as well as the
surprising source of the relative stability that we do enjoy.  In the process, we
will also take note of the analysis of those few economists who have glimpsed the
nature of this instability.  So, buckle up and enjoy the ride.




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 12:23:06 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 12:23:06 2001
Subject: [CrashList] re: Bunker article
Message-ID: <000701c08c68$e7c66440$a17d01d5@mjones>

I want to acknowledge Louis Proyect's kindness in locating this article for us.

Mark



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Fri Feb  2 13:21:01 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri Feb  2 13:21:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky/  Gaia a living
	being ?
Message-ID: <sa7ab49d.025@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

>>> jones.mark at btconnect.com 02/02/01 06:20AM >

    Vernadsky was the original pioneer of  biospherics, a science before its time.
Much of his work remained unknown to the western scientific community, due to
political and linguistic factors, until very recently. In conjunction with James E.
Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis,   it has presented a new way of looking at the Earth.
(pp. 9-10)  Biosphere 2, constructed 40 years after Vernadsky's death, is a
testament to the power of his theory and his message. It is a direct result of his
ideas and influence.

((((((((((((


What is the hypothesis of Gaia ? Stated simply, the idea is that we may have discovered a living being bigger, more ancient, and more complex than anything from our wildest dreams. That being, called Gaia, is the Earth.

((((((((

CB: A lacking in the notion that the earth is a living being is that it doesn't reproduce. Maybe it will reproduce itself in another star system ?





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 14:44:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 14:44:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] FW: The CrashList at egroups
Message-ID: <001b01c08c9c$9d3ecfa0$a17d01d5@mjones>

RE: The CrashList at egroups
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Adams DNET [mailto:KAdams at delta.org]
Sent: 31 January 2001 22:25
To: 'Mark Jones'
Subject: RE: The CrashList at egroups


Mark

You may forward my remarks to the CrashList. Seth and Stajabu (who sometimes
post to the Crash list) have also been on the show. Last year Access
Sacramento did an audience survey and found that Soapbox had an audience of
24,000-25,000 viewers which we have built up over almost seven years on the
air. It is amazing how many people watch our show. Monday night a couple of
my neighbors stopped me and said that their six year old son had seen me on
TV and was it true? All the kids down at the park where I take my dog for a
walk have seen me on the show which is really remarkable since I'm on only
occasionally as host (usually on environmental issues). Sacramento is unique
in how well they do cable access, but I think we on the left have an
opportunity to reach people that we normally don't come in contact with. One
of my hosts has been publishing a quarterly newspaper for several years but
I suspect that it just reaches the 'usual leftist suspects'. One of my
favorite stories about the show happened 2-3 years ago. Every other week we
do a live show with call-ins and I quite often do the call screening myself.
Anyway this one night a woman called up and wanted to argue about most
everything our hosts were saying. Finally after she ranted for a couple of
minutes, I stopped her and asked her why she was watching our show since she
didn't seem to agree with anything we were saying. She replied that we were
the best thing on. Keep in mind that this is prime time on Monday at 8 p.m.
and this wasn't during football season. Even if people disagree with us they
still need the discussion and hopefully the information. So I would like to
encourage others to look into the local possibilities of cable TV.

Keep up the good work,

Ken Adams, Sacramento County Green Party spokesperson and producer of
Sacramento Soapbox

 -----Original Message-----
From: Mark Jones [mailto:jones.mark at btconnect.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:36 AM
To: Ken Adams DNET
Subject: RE: The CrashList at egroups


  Ken, may I forward this to CrashList? In any case, we would like to hear
from you.

  Mark
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Ken Adams DNET [mailto:KAdams at DELTA.org]
    Sent: 31 January 2001 17:19
    To: 'jones118 at lineone.net'
    Subject: RE: The CrashList at egroups


    Mark,

    I would like to be on your official Crash list although the traffic is
heavy and sometimes I have to delete a lot of messages because I just don't
have the time to read them all. That being said the list has provided me
information and links I just would not have found on my own including Prof.
Michael Perleman who I had on my cable access TV show late last year on the
subject of his book, "The Invention of Capitalism". I may need to bring him
back to talk about his new book, "The Natural Instability of Markets"
especially in 'light' of the electrical deregulation fiasco here in
California. Also I liked the portrait of Lenin as someone that enjoyed life
that you sent out yesterday(?).

    Thanks again,

    Ken Adams, Sacramento County Green Party spokesperson and producer of
Sacramento Soapbox

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Mark Jones [mailto:jones.mark at btconnect.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:41 AM
    To: Mark Jones
    Subject: The CrashList at egroups





    There is a dormant mirror site of the CrashList at egroups, and if you
get this
    message it means you are on the dormant list. If this is the ONLY
CrashList message
    you get, it's because you are NOT on the real, live, functional
    CrashList at lists.wwpublish.com.

    If you want to receive CrashList mails, write me at
<jones118 at lineone.net>

    Or visit the CrashList website at
    http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
    and subscribe from there.

    Otherwise, please ignore this email, and I'm sorry to have troubled you.

    WARNING: I'm about to close down this mirror site at Egroups, which is
no longer
    required.

    Mark Jones
    CrashList owner

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 6944 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010202/27df63a1/attachment.txt>

From embark at epud.net  Fri Feb  2 14:44:04 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Fri Feb  2 14:44:04 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Beef and Fish
Message-ID: <004301c08c6c$a56b4080$39a3bdcf@rowan>

>>"As Germany plans to kill 400,000 cattle, my local fish and chip shop tells 
me the price of cod has just jumped 6 pounds per stone, with the drastic 
fishing restrictions.  It is now 42 pounds sterling for one stone, 14 
pounds weight.

I know that types of fish are very regional but two staple sources of 
protein in Britain and Europe have suddenly had to come under unprecedented 
social control.

In both cases this is the result of the development of the means of 
production running into extremely serious ecological obstacles.

This trend looks irreversible.

Chris Burford

London<<

"There is no way round it: to have a fishing industry we need fish," said Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries Commissioner Franz Fischler. (The European Commission wants to cut fishing quotas by up to 74 percent to protect populations close to collapse. )

full article: http://ens.lycos.com/ens/dec2000/2000L-12-01-12.html

tom

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 1490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010202/504a106a/attachment.txt>

From embark at epud.net  Fri Feb  2 14:44:06 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Fri Feb  2 14:44:06 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Re: The New Historical Materialism ....
Message-ID: <003701c08c69$d9ff0f00$39a3bdcf@rowan>

contains this foolishness:

"As the historical examples discussed above amply demonstrate, economic ascent and, more
broadly, the process of capital accumulation have entailed a continually expanding process of the depredation of nature. However, this seemingly obvious conclusion drastically underestimates the powerful incentives for innovation and adaptation in the capitalist world-economy and the
fungibility of the relationship between society and nature."


1) We now have a powerful incentive to adapt to CO2 breathing. All who believe we can, raise your hands.

2) Once again good ol' technological innovation will save us! It always has, it always will. Yayyyyyyyy!
    Chernobyls in the Arctic, hydrodams in Africa. "relocating the environmental costs and consequences of core capital accumulation to these remote peripheries." Yet ....I missed the part where the costs and consequences of global warming can be relocated to poor ol' Africa.  I missed the part where "consequences" were either recognized or brought under control of capitalism. 

3) "fungibility" of the relationship between society and nature?  Did anyone but me miss the proof of this? 

Who is "drastically underestimating" what, here?

The "relationship betweenf society and nature" is reduced to more efficient raw materials extraction in every example. Why? ... because .... These guys don't GET it.

I'll stick with Youngquist, please, Mark.

Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2505 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010202/e3112206/attachment.txt>

From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Fri Feb  2 16:35:01 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri Feb  2 16:35:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] more on 2nd Law
Message-ID: <sa797488.060@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

>From Marxism and sciences

This statement is imprecise. Not a closed system, but an isolated one, to both
matter and energy flows in and out. The confusion, deliberate or not, between
closed and isolated systems led Georgescu-Roegen and his populizer Jeremy Rifkin
to fallacious postulates regarding solar energy and economic growth. See my
paper, "Solar Communism", 1996, Science & Society 60, No.3: 307-331 (heat death
is also discussed).

Haines Brown wrote:

> The Second Law states that any closed system must experience an increase in
> entropy, which means that
> in relation to its initial state, it becomes more homogeneous, diffused, lower
> in free energy and predictable.
>
>




From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Fri Feb  2 17:18:01 2001
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Date: Fri Feb  2 17:18:01 2001
Subject: [Fwd: [CrashList] Re: The New Historical Materialism ....]
Message-ID: <3A7B1C1C.F6586956@ilstu.edu>

the garbage below illustrates why i delete unread
posts in  html formatting

Carrol

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [CrashList] Re: The New
Historical Materialism .... Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 08:13:01 -0800 From:
Embarkadero Reply-To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com To:
crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com This is a multi-part message in MIME
format. --Boundary_(ID_j6aBqZ7jb8u1aIxM5jz+Rg) Content-type: text/plain;
charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable contains
this foolishness: "As the historical examples discussed above amply
demonstrate, economic = ascent and, more broadly, the process of capital
accumulation have entailed a continually = expanding process of the
depredation of nature. However, this seemingly = obvious conclusion
drastically underestimates the powerful incentives = for innovation and
adaptation in the capitalist world-economy and the fungibility of the
relationship between society and nature." 1) We now have a powerful
incentive to adapt to CO2 breathing. All who = believe we can, raise
your hands. 2) Once again good ol' technological innovation will save
us! It always = has, it always will. Yayyyyyyyy! Chernobyls in the
Arctic, hydrodams in Africa. "relocating the = environmental costs and
consequences of core capital accumulation to = these remote
peripheries." Yet ....I missed the part where the costs and =
consequences of global warming can be relocated to poor ol' Africa. I =
missed the part where "consequences" were either recognized or brought =
under control of capitalism.=20 3) "fungibility" of the relationship
between society and nature? Did = anyone but me miss the proof of
this?=20 Who is "drastically underestimating" what, here? The
"relationship betweenf society and nature" is reduced to more =
efficient raw materials extraction in every example. Why? ... because =
.... These guys don't GET it. I'll stick with Youngquist, please, Mark.
Tom --Boundary_(ID_j6aBqZ7jb8u1aIxM5jz+Rg) Content-type: text/html;
charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable  contains
this foolishness: "As the historical examples discussed = above amply=20
demonstrate, economic ascent and, more
broadly, the process of = capital=20 accumulation have entailed a
continually expanding process of the = depredation of=20 nature.
However, this seemingly obvious conclusion drastically =
underestimates=20 the powerful incentives for innovation and adaptation
in the capitalist=20 world-economy and the
fungibility of the relationship between society = and=20 nature." 1) We
now have a powerful = incentive to adapt=20 to CO2 breathing. All who
believe we can, raise your hands. 2) Once again good ol' technological =
innovation=20 will save us! It always has, it always will.
Yayyyyyyyy!    Chernobyls in the = Arctic,=20 hydrodams in Africa.
"relocating the=20 environmental costs and consequences of core capital
accumulation to = these=20 remote peripheries." Yet ....I missed the
part where the costs and = consequences=20 of global warming can be
relocated to poor ol' Africa.  I missed = the part=20 where
"consequences" were either recognized or brought under control of=20
capitalism.

3) "fungibility" = of the=20 relationship between society and nature?
Did anyone but me miss = the proof=20 of this? Who is "drastically
underestimating" = what,=20 here? The "relationship betweenf society and
= nature" is=20 reduced to more efficient raw materials extraction in
every example. = Why? ...=20 because .... These guys don't GET=20
it. I'll stick with Youngquist, please,=20
Mark. Tom--Boundary_(ID_j6aBqZ7jb8u1aIxM5jz+Rg)--
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 4441 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010202/12aea3f7/attachment.txt>

From zapata at sezampro.yu  Fri Feb  2 17:18:03 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Fri Feb  2 17:18:03 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Apel za Davos- Istocna Evropa
Message-ID: <017901c08d63$39ab9a00$d174fac3@andrej>

                     ZA DAVOS

Prolaze roba i kapitali dok je idejama to izgleda zabranjeno. Zabranjeno svim onima koji su hteli u Davosu da manifestuju svoje ideje.Hteli smo da demonstriramo pacifisticki i putem nenasilnih akcija ali izgleda da se neko boji reci i ideja.  
 Davos je pretvoren u bunker a Svajcarska u koncentracioni logor. To se uvek desava kada se diskutuje o politici onih koji sami sebe nazivaju "global leaders".
Krse se osnovna ljudska prava koja su iste evropske institucije deklarisale padajuci u sve vece i vece kontradikcije. 
Odavno se, doduse, zna da je Evropa jedna zajednica ekonomskih lobija a Svajcarska ves masina za pranje njenih prljavih interesa. Nijedna policija sveta nece moci zaustaviti nase ideje i upornu borbu protiv ovog nehumanog sistema koji oblikuje nasu planetu po kriterijumima globalnog trizista, kapitala i njegovih predstavnika.
Ponasanje Svajcarske i uvodjenje policijskih casova za vreme kongresa WEF-a je za svaku osudu kao i hapsenje i maltretiranje demonstranata.
Apelujemo da se sprovedu inicijative tipa sit-in ispred svajcarskih ambasada i konzulata  U Istocnoj Evropi, inicijative koje  se vec odvijaju u mnogim evropskim gradovima ili da se salju mailovi i faxavi protesta protiv totalitaristickih mera koje su bile preduzete od strane svajcarske vlade naravno pod direktivama "global leaders-a".

Jedan aktivista italijanskog pokreta "Nevidljivih" (Tute Bianche)
http://www.ecn.org/agp/index1.html 
golok77 at hotmail.com 

>> NOW FORWARD THIS TO A COMRADE >> NOW FORWARD THIS TO A COMRADE




                         Davos Appeal

Merchandize and capital, they can cross borders. We wanted to demonstrate, to demonstrate in peaceful manner, in form of non-violent actions, but it seems that someone is afraid of our words and our ideas.
Davos has been transformed in military fortress and Switzerland in concentration camp.
Elementary human rights are being violated, by the same institutions who are, not without contradictions, promoting, supposedly, those elementary human rights.
 But it is not a mystery that Europe is just a community of economical lobbies and Switzerland it's laundry service for cleaning dirty interests. There is no police in the world able to stop us, our ideas and our struggle against this inhuman system which shapes our planet upon the model of global market, capital, and it's servants.
Behavior of State of Switzerland - curfews, molesting of demonstrators and their imprisoning- is disgraceful.
We are using this opportunity to make an appeal for starting sit-in demonstrations in front of Swiss Embassies in Eastern Europe, for sending e-mails and fax messages against introduction of totalitarian measures  applied on behalf of Swiss State, obeying directions of "global leaders".
 
One activist of Italian Movement Tute Bianche
 http://www.ecn.org/agp/index1.html 
golok77 at hotmail.com 




>> NOW FORWARD THIS TO A COMRADE >> NOW FORWARD THIS TO A COMRADE




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 5256 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010202/d74e4530/attachment.txt>

From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 17:22:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 17:22:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] more on 2nd Law
In-Reply-To: <sa797488.060@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>
Message-ID: <000001c08d66$964d41c0$4a7f01d5@mjones>

> This statement is imprecise. Not a closed system, but an isolated one, to both
> matter and energy flows in and out. The confusion, deliberate or not, between
> closed and isolated systems led Georgescu-Roegen and his populizer Jeremy Rifkin
> to fallacious postulates regarding solar energy and economic growth. See my
> paper, "Solar Communism", 1996, Science & Society 60, No.3: 307-331 (heat death
> is also discussed).

Is this you who said this, Charles? What fallacious postulates?

mark 



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 17:25:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 17:25:02 2001
Subject: FW: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins
Message-ID: <000301c08d67$092f0c00$4a7f01d5@mjones>

 Patrick Bond wrote:

>Mark wrote:

> > Thanks, also, Pat for putting Bunker & Ciccantell my way.
> Interestingly, their 'new
> > historical materialism' ends up sounding a lot like old-old nc theory,
> with their
> > talk about 'fungibility' which sounds an awful lot like substitutability to me.
> > Samuelson would feel right at home. Good stuff, apart from that,but
> they are wrong
> > about oil, coal and energy generally. Is this a general problem with Marxist
> > geographers? Harvey seems to have the same blind spot.
>
> Ah Mark, you tease, you. No, Bunker is a sociologist, but hey,
> discipline boundaries go out the door when we move into histomat,
> right?! Yesterday, David Harvey began his new teaching career as an
> anthropologist at City University of NY, by the way. Geographers, a
> motley crew under the best of conditions, regularly morph into
> whatever they want (e.g., public policy-wonks at Wits), whenever
> conditions dictate.

I've only managed to get hold of one essay which I'm forwarding to debate for
convenience. Can't see much cogent notion of an 'energy theory of value' here but
perhaps I'm missing something.

There is an ongoing debate, as you know, marked by the usual circular reasoning,
about society v. nature etc. It doesn't seem to advance much. On the CrashList there
has been much discussion between value-lovers and Arne Naess supporters. There was a
recent issue of Capital & Class (a journal of which I, with Robin Murray, Sol
Picciotto, John Holloway, Diane Elson and others, were founding editors of, all of
25 years ago) which looked at the issue. Can't remember much of interest in it,
either, altho some folks here might have a different view.  There is a journal most
people here are no doubt familiar with, set up by the O'Connors, called
Capital-Nature-Society, which also seems to go round in circles a lot (sorry for the
sweeping judgments). Probably the only people who avoided circularity was the LM
crowd, but only because once they embraced Julian Simon/Wise Use they smartly
disappeared up their own backsides anyway (sorry, Russell, old lad). Pen-L, as you
rightly point out, is one of the home places of discussions about value, and there
too they have discussed ad infinitum the relative contributions of Labour and Energy
to Value, in the context of windmills, absolute and differential rent, Ricardo etc.

My elderly, simple-minded approach, based on insights of Alfred Sohn-Rethel, not to
speak of K Marx, is to understand the social realm as a logico-historical construct
of the commodity-form. One of the things we are not very good at doing, when
thinking about commodity-production, is to udnerstand that process as a disruption
or dislocation within the real. Cf the Early Marx. This rent or tear in the uniform
surface of the real produces what one can only call black holes, where the laws of
nature become suddenly inverted, an Alice in Wonderland world where black is white,
and where further disruptions of natural process, deepening plunder and exploitation
of ecosystems, appears to the human brain in the phantasmagoric form of 'resources',
'gifts of nature', 'appropriation of natural resources', 'raw materials' etc. In
this longrun outcome of commodity production, ecocide appears and is celebrated as
aform of wealth creation. A close existential connection is established between
private need (which is, of course, always and inescapably, actual a social product,
and the *principal* social product, ie the existence of classes, of large masses of
needy individuals etc) and the rationalisation/legitimation of the total social
process of reproduction. Ie, people get a stake in the system and want more of its
material 'benefits'. Needs are, as Marx said, produced. Marx himself (not to speak
of Engels) was torn between seeing capitalist commodity production as a spreading
plague, and seeing bourgoies civilisation as a high point and a necessary
preparation for a reconciliation of man/nature under the rubric of the
assimilation/sublation of nature to the human project. This fairly obvious
intellectual tensions and conflict within Marx's work is indicative of how hard it
is to think ourselves out of the trap of commodity production and the thought-forms
peeled historically out of the commodity form. Lenin, too, was divided, the same
caesure lurks in all hsi theoretical and philosophical work and is present also in
his politics, which were riven between a meliorist social project, and a highly
contradictory apocalyptic rejection of capitalist society.

Ending capitalist commodity production does seem to entail a radical transfiguration
of our species life and our anthropocentric imperatives, but such a transformation
is no doubt inevitable and necessary for survival. It is not just a matter of
putting politics in command, and of substituting planning for market stochasm. There
will nbeed to be what the great Soviet physicist, mathematician and environmentalist
Nikita Moiseev (discoovere of the nuclear winter scenario), called, basing himself
on Teilhard de Chardin and Vladimir Vernadsky, the need for new "Institutes of
Accord" not only to found a new ethical basis for social life, but a new basis for
society to live within nature, to reseal the rupture within the real out of which
tumbled all the historical societies of commodity production including our own.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  2 17:36:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  2 17:36:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] CHALLENGING CAPITALIST GLOBALIZATION
Message-ID: <000601c08d68$87b9f480$4a7f01d5@mjones>

***** INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY AND ECOLOGY SUMMER SCHOOL, 
JULY 3-14, 2001 


CHALLENGING CAPITALIST GLOBALIZATION: 
TARGETS, OPPORTUNITIES, CONTRADICTIONS 


Visiting Professor: Patrick Bond, University of the Witwatersrand, 
Johannesburg, South Africa 


Course Description: 


Using mainly a critical literature, this course will begin by 
surveying debates regarding the nature of the capitalist-driven 
globalization process said to be central to defining the parameters 
of contemporary international political economy. After then 
identifying differing possible foundational positions on key 
strategic problems, the course will focus on the nature of the 
various resistances -- some as dramatic as the "Battle of Seattle" 
and similar confrontations in Prague, Washington and Quebec City, 
others more modest and localized but no less worthy of attention -- 
that this process has given rise to. The world-wide scope of such 
resistance will be emphasized, highlighting common structural 
processes and political patterns that are evident around the world; 
within this framework, several cross-cutting case studies will serve 
to illustrate the way in which targets are understood, opportunities 
are created, and contradictions emerge. 


Simultaneously, however, careful consideration will have to be given 
to the very specific (and often unique) socio-economic conditions, 
political traditions, discourses, and strategies/tactics that prevail 
in a range of diverse settings. (The geographical areas of North 
America and Southern Africa will provide the main material for study, 
but other instances of resistance -- in South Korea, India and Mexico 
-- will also be explored.) In consequence, serious questions will be 
raised as to whether the sometimes convergent, sometimes divergent 
campaigns associated with opposition to globalization are and/or can 
be sustainable, cumulative and generalizable. Is the phenomenon of 
international resistance truly a "movement" (a "Mobilization for 
Global Justice" as it was termed in Washington last April) or instead 
merely a set of discrete, disconnected and untenable 
issues/organizations which may never achieve a lasting alliance and 
gain sufficient power to make change? 


To answer these questions will require an analysis of the balance of 
forces across a broad front and, in particular, a sensitivity to 
question of the politics of scale. Thus the relative importance of 
local, national, regional, hemispheric and global activities will be 
examined, as will the nature and degree of the interrelationship 
amongst struggles at these different levels. Various contradictions 
said to haunt the new global resistance movement -- the tensions 
between North/South and national/global preoccupations; the relative 
claims of labour-based, identity-based and environmental concerns; 
and of populist, socialist, feminist and green politics -- will also 
be explored, as will a number of concrete case studies of key global 
policy areas. 


The course is grounded in an awareness that both the mounting of 
resistance to the process of "globalization from above" and the 
theorizing of any such resistance represent relatively new 
undertakings amongst political economists. Controversies that are at 
once practical and analytical have arisen in the recent international 
literature about such phenomena; moreover, the dilemmas such 
controversies evoke continue to make the work of alliance-building 
between various forces extremely challenging. This course must 
therefore proceed with precisely the fine balance of modesty and 
boldness that its ambitious agenda, scientific but also profoundly 
political, demands. 


Visiting Professor: 


This course will be led by PATRICK BOND, currently Associate 
Professor at the Graduate School of Public and Development Management 
of the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg. Bond has 
written dozens of articles and a number of books on issues of 
capitalist globalization, notably with respect to the impact of that 
process on southern Africa (his books include "Elite Transition: From 
Apartheid to Neoliberalism in South Africa;" "Uneven Zimbabwe: A 
Study of Finance, Development and Underdevelopment;" "Cities of Gold, 
Townships of Coal: Essays on South Africa's New Urban Crisis;" and 
four forthcoming works, "Sustainable Development in South Africa?;" 
"South Africa: Apartheid and After" [with John S. Saul]; "Zimbabwe's 
Plunge;" and "Threatening Global Apartheid: South Africa's Windows on 
the World Bank, the IMF and International Finance.") He is also 
closely linked to a wide range of initiatives that assist in 
coordinating and analyzing resistance to capitalist globalization (as 
a participant in the Alternative Information and Development Centre 
in Cape Town, the 50 Years is Enough South Council in Washington, and 
the Center for Economic Justice in Albuquerque, for example, and as a 
contributor to a wide range of progressive periodicals) and continues 
to travel extensively in undertaking both scientific and political 
work relevant to the subject-matter of this course. In addition to 
Professor Bond, special guest participants in one or more of the 
sessions in the course will include Canadian authors NAOMI KLEIN and 
LINDA MCQUAIG, whose recent books will be studied. Professor JOHN S. 
SAUL of the Department of Political Science will coordinate the 
course. 


Required Preparatory Reading: 


All participants in this course should read Jeremy Brecher, Tim 
Costello and Brendan Smith, Globalization from Below: The Power of 
Solidarity (South End Press: Boston, 2000) prior to the commencement 
of this course, as well as one additional text (drawn from a list 
prepared by the coordinator and specifically assigned to each 
registered participant), the main arguments of which that participant 
will be expected to present briefly to the seminar sometime in the 
course of our deliberations. A course kit will also be available for 
purchase with key extracts from a range of relevant readings. 


Assignments: 


A grade will be established on the following basis: (1) the extent 
and quality of the student's active participation in the seminars; 
(2) a brief book review of the text assigned for seminar 
presentation, due at the end of the first week of the seminar 
(Friday, July 6); a short paper on an assigned topic, due NOT LATER 
THAN Monday, July 16. 


Format: 


The seminar will meet every weekday morning from 9:30 to 12:30 
between July 3 and July 13; in addition, there will be one or two 
additional sessions held in the afternoon or early evening during the 
two week period and a one-day workshop (which is also to involve 
participants from the wider Toronto community but which students are 
expected to attend) at the end of the course. 


Information and Application: 


Graduate students in York's Faculty of Environmental Studies who wish 
to apply to take this course should contact Ms. Peggy McGrath at 
416-736-2100, ext. 33254/<peggym at yorku.ca>. Similarly, graduate 
students in York's Department of Political Science who wish to apply 
should contact Ms Jlenya Sarra at 416-736-2100, ext. 
88825/<jsarra at yorku.ca>. The number of spaces in this course is 
limited, but some of these spaces have also been set aside for 
interested persons from the wider community, engaged in either 
academic and non-academic pursuits, whom we would encourage to apply; 
any such potential participants should also contact Ms Sarra for 
further information. (Please note that for all participants who are 
not seeking academic credit, the fee for the course is CDN $500.) 
John S. Saul, the host York professor who will coordinate the course, 
may be reached at <johnsaul at yorku.ca>. ***** 




From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Fri Feb  2 19:39:01 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Fri Feb  2 19:39:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Fw: AGAINST THE CRIMINAL SOLANA - messages of solidarity welcomed! [STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
Message-ID: <026a01c08d79$8fc84580$4403f0d5@EUnet.yu>

----- Original Message -----
From: Vladimir Krsljanin <vlada at sps.org.yu>
To: <b-antinato at yahoogroups.com>
Cc: <STOPNATO at listbot.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 12:20 AM
Subject: AGAINST THE CRIMINAL SOLANA - messages of solidarity welcomed!
[STOPNATO.ORG.UK]


> STOP NATO: ?NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
>
> --------------------------- ListBot Sponsor --------------------------
> Dial 800-555-TELL for FREE long-distance calls.
>    Tell your friends -- forward this message!
>
> http://on.linkexchange.com/?ATID=27&AID=2144
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dear friends in struggle,
>
> Every message or gesture of solidarity is welcome.
> If he will really come, Yugoslav patriots are prepared to meet him with
> mass demonstrations. If you can't be on our rally, please send us
> (www at sps.org.yu) messages of your parties/organizations or your personal
> ones. They will be either read at the rally or published in:
> http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website), or
> http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals), or
> http://www.24casa.co.yu/ (the only free daily newspaper in Yugoslavia).
>
> Yours
> Vladimir Krsljanin vlada at sps.org.yu
> Head of International Relations Department
> of the Socialist Party of Serbia
>
>
>
> > Appeal of the Patriotic Alliance of Yugoslavia and of the
>                         Anti-NATO Committee of SPS
> >
> > RAISE YOUR VOICE AGAINST THE  CRIMINAL SOLANA!
> >
> > The second anniversary of the beginning of the NATO aggression against
> > Yugoslavia is approaching.
> >
> > We must not allow these who ordered aggression, who are responsible for
> > crimes against peace and humanity, for genocide, for death of thousands
> > of  civilians, women and children, for humanitarian and environmental
> > catastrophe to rejoice.
> >
> > Javier Solana is one of them. As secretary-general of NATO he ordered
> > aggression to begin on March 24, 1999.
> >
> > And it is exactly him who is readying these days (7th and 8th of
> > February) to come  as a guest of the new Belgrade authorities, and as a
> > member of the delegation of the European Union.
> >
> > That we must not allow because it would represent not only an offence to
> > the people of Yugoslavia, but a civilisational embarrassment for Europe.
> >
> > Solana is sentenced by an appropriate Yugoslav court to 20 years of
> > imprisonment for  crimes against people of Yugoslavia. At the same time,
> > these are the crimes against all the peoples of the Balkans.
> >
> > He is one of most responsible for the use of the uranium, plutonium and
> > other genocidal materials whose consequences are going to be borne not
> > only by the contemporary generations of Europeans, but also their
> > descendants.
> >
> > For that reason, we call upon all the Yugoslav patriots, all the friends
> > at the Balkans, in Europe and the world, all the people of good will  to
> > raise their voice of protest against the attempt to    humiliate
> > Yugoslavia and the Yugoslavs.
> >
> > Gentlemen of the European Union,
> >
> > We appeal to you not to take part in offending and humiliating one
> > European nation that always stood to the defence of European and
> > civilisation values. Do not send us the criminal Javier Solana because
> > he is a symbol of evil not only for the peoples of Balkans, but also for
> > the huge portion of the contemporary humankind.
> >
> > It is upon you to show historical responsibility!
> >                                          PATRIOTIC ALLIANCE OF
YUGOSLAVIA
>                                                 ANTI-NATO COMMITTEE OF SPS
>
> > Belgrade,
> > February 2nd 2001
> >
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, write to STOPNATO-unsubscribe at listbot.com
>




From hliu at mindspring.com  Sat Feb  3 00:01:02 2001
From: hliu at mindspring.com (Henry C.K. Liu)
Date: Sat Feb  3 00:01:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Economics of Debt
Message-ID: <3A7B9012.600F1EE@mindspring.com>

One of the shortcomings of economics is that inadequate attention has
been paid to economics as a behavioral science.  The problem can be
traced to the concept of the economic man who is supposed to act
rationally in his own interest which is generally defined rather
simplistically as financial gain.  Modern economics of course deal with
the problem of human behavior with more sophistication, albeit always
through the back door, and always equating self interest with pricing. A
market economy is coordinated
through the price system based on the principle of declining marginal
utility. Economists construct indifference curves to show a consumer's
preferences. A good whose consumption goes down instead of up when its
price goes down is called a Giffen good.  An inferior good is a good
that you buy less of when your income goes up. A Giffen good must be an
inferior good, but most inferior goods are not Giffen goods. The effect
on consumption of a pure change in price is shown in an
income-compensated demand curve (also known as a Hicksian demand curve
after economist John Hicks). A Marshallian demand curve is based on
marginal utility. Utility is observed only in choices. The problem of
consumption is simply the problem of choosing the bundle of goods that
maximizes your utility, subject to the income constraint--the
requirement that the bundle you choose costs no more than your income.
The so-called Presidential
Elecion Cycle Theory of stock prices held by some investment analysts
suggests that major stock market moves can be predicted based on the
four-year presidential election cycle. The pattern is as follows: stocks
decline soon after a president is elected, as the new leader, incumbent
or not, takes harsh mearsures and unpolular steps necessary to bring
inflation, government spending and deficits under control.  During the
following two years or so after an election, taxes may be raised and the
economy may slip into a recession. At about the mid way of the four year
term, stocks should start to rise in anticipastion of the economic
recevery that the incubent president wants to be roaring at full steam
by
election day.  The cycles is supposed to repeat itself every four years.

The above is a select sample of theories hat makes sense generally only
if they fit specific defining conditions.

The purpose of this post is to suggest that human behavior is complex
beyond the measurment of price and that price alone is not sufficient to
influence market behavior.  Marx dealt with the concept of fetish as a
factor in demand.  Education is another factor.  Economics literature
has never dealt saitisfactoerily with eduction, being unable to clearly
define it as consumption or investment or both. Similarly with health
care and environmeantal preservation.  If it is both, there should be a
limitless supply/demand relationship.  One could not possibly have an
over-educated society or an over clean environment.

With debt, it is quite obvious that debt changes human behavior.  A
little debt reinforces responsibility. The American value system is
built on the notion that home owners with a life long mortgage are
better citizens than renters.  People tend to take better care of their
"homes" if they "own" it, even though 90% of the purchase value is in
debt. On the other hand, it is clear that excessive debt encourages
irresponsibility.  The borrower may develop an irresistable incentive to
walk away from his debt if he perceives that debt to be beyond his
ability to repay, or the cost of the debt exceed its benefits.  The
American bankruptcy regime is designed to give such debtor a fresh start
from debt.  Unlike European predecents, no one in the US can be put in
jail for failing to pay his debt, unless fraud is involved.  In fact,
there is the legal concept of lender liability, based on which a
distressed debtor can sue the lender for damages for lending money
irresponsibly that leads the debtor into financial trouble.  Debt
bascially is unearned money with a promise to repay it with
optimistically estimated earned money in the future, that for example,
the borrower will not become unemployed through no fault of his own.

On the corporate level, debt also alters management behavior. Leverage
increases profit margin on successful business plans.  But debt also
exaggerate losses when business plans fail. And in the US system,
bankruptcy is always a legal if not painless way to refute debt.  The
comfort to the lenders is that equity investors are wiped out first
becuase the lenders' variously collaterized positions.  Banks used to be

the sole intermediaries of debt.  For this reason, a Central Bank is
formed to supervise and provide liquidity tio the banking system.  Thus
central banks came into existence on the asumption that the existence
and health of the banking system is in the national interest.  And to
protect that interest the cnetral bank is allowed to act a lender of
last resort to the nation's banking system with public money, or more
accuracy through the government authority to create fiat money.  Thus
regulation on banks
is a fair quid pro quo social contract.  Bank deregulation without
corresponding raising of the standard for central bank bailout is a
direct breach of this soical contract.  If banks cannot be allowed to
fail, they
should also not be allowwed to deregulate.  More ominous,  the US credit
system has broken through the banking system, the bulk of debts now is
intermediated through the unregulated credit markets through
securitization of debts.  Over this market the government is generally
only an interested bystander, so far quite unwilling to regulate even
derivative trading by banks.
There is ample evident to suggest that the level of interest rate does
not influence the level of debt in an economy.  When interest rate is
high, it often merely reflects the credit unworthiness of the borrower
or the high risk for the lender.  High interest rates in fact creates
more incentive to take higher risk by offering more compensation to the
lender. As the Willaim Zechendorf, the bankrupt real estate tycoon once
said: "I 's rather be alive al 30% interest than be dead at 3%." It is
not clear that debt, unlike equity capital, actually puts money to work
for the highest and best use, or where it is most needed and where it
does the most good.  Debt tends to be most productive at the highest
risk level which destabilizes the economy.  Debt securitization actually
lowers the credit quality systemically by socializing the risk across
the whole system rather than concentrating on the singular defaulter.
Debt also discourages ecnomic democracy, since the poor generally find
it much harder to obtain credit.  There is much truth is the saying that
it is not how much you own, it is how much you owe that measures how
rich you
are. Debt also encourages carelessness with money, since the lender
implies faith in the borrowers ability to repay in the future.  People
tend to be more careful with money hey earned in the past in the form of
savings because they remember how hard they had to work for it.  In
comparison, debt is based on future earnings, which is deemed easier
money by the exisence of the debt itself. The problem with debt is that
it needs to be serviced regularly (except zero coupons which cost more),
and a debt-propelled economy will reach a point where its ability to
service the growing debt is exceeded, unless inflation is ahead of
interest charges. Thus runaway systemic debt always leads to
hyperinflation.  Bankruptcy only relieves the debtor, but not the
economy.  If, as Minsky claims, money is created when credit is
extended, then the erasure of debt destroys money and shrinks the
economy.

But the most fundamental aspect of a debt economy is that it cannot
sustain a slow down, even a soft landing.  If Greenspan were better
versed in debt economics, he would have inderstood that a debt bubble,
unlike the conventional business cycle, cannot survive the slightest
deflation.  His attempt to engineer a soft landing by raising interest
rates only accelerated the debt bubble's burst. His only option was to
prevent the debt bubble from forming by tightening credit quality years
ago, but he chose to rely on the "market" to exercise its discipline.
Instaed of discipline, the market gave him an insatiable apetite for
destructive debt.  Once the bubble is on its way, Greenspan is on top of
the debt tiger that he cannot get off without being devoured by the
beast.  It was not the New economy, it was not the new productivity that
gave the US its decade long boom.  It was debt.  Withoput debt, there
would have been no New Economy, no dot com industry, no structured
finance, no budget surplus and no current account deficit or its flip
side capital account surplus.
The 1990s was the debt decade. Much of the technology was invented prior
to the beginning of the decade and became widely applied through debt in
the form of vendor finance.  The communication revolution was built on
debt that had been accumulated in the last decade.  The greatest
invention
of the 90s was more and more sophisticated debt instruments.

Henry C.K. Liu







From hliu at mindspring.com  Sat Feb  3 00:13:01 2001
From: hliu at mindspring.com (Henry C.K. Liu)
Date: Sat Feb  3 00:13:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Prices and Layoffs
Message-ID: <3A7B92E7.7D6C5AAB@mindspring.com>

It has been for sometime now standard management theory that slow sales
are answered with layoffs to cut cost and to maintain quarterly overall
profit by increasing ahorterm profit margin over diminished sales
volume.
Price reduction is acceptable strategy only for increasing long term
market share, but never for increasing short term profit.  Any manager
who deviates from these theories in practice will not manage for long in
the current corporate culture.

In the modern economy, prices or pricing policy decisions tend to be
system-wide because while retail customers are localized, wholesale
distributors can always buy from the lowest-priced supplier.  Layoffs,
on the other hand, tend to be localized, concentrated on one or a few
problem plants saddled with overcapacity or products with weak market
demand.

Thus we have a system in which corporate well-being works against
systemic well-being.

A useful question can be posed as to whether this conventional downward
spiral trade off is necessary or good economics.

Greenspan has proudly pointed out more than once that the US economy
performs better because American corporations can change its cost
structure more quickly as compared to European and Japanese
counterparts, through its ability to shed workers with lower cost and at
a faster pace, free of restrictions prevalent in social democracies.

Aside from the issue whether it is fair to make workers who had no role
in management decisions to bear the blunt of the result of bad
management decisisons, one can ask whether this regime is in concert
with free enterprise principles.  The layoff workers are passed off the
to the State, or the public sector (to make it sound better), to collect
unemployment benefits which in the US are financed by payments required
by law from employed workers.

The macroeconomic effect of layoffs is to reduce aggregate demand from
both consumers (for products) and producers (for material), while the
government budget is stressed.  This leads to a downward spiral.  There
were indication that the stagflation of the 1980s was in part caused by
the management theory.  The word is that the Fed is currently faced with
a dilemma of lingering fears of unflation amid a sharp slowdown of the
conomy.  December data on manufacrurer prices registered a disturbing
rise while layoffs in ten of thousands were reported very week by major
corporations.  Friday's unemployment figure is privotal in influencing
Fed decision on interest rates.  The bottom line is that the Fed's
"balance of risk" (former called bias) between inflation and recession
may well be a useless coeffieicent, the fact being that a balance of
risk for both inflation and recession is very real.

Suupose a management theory is adopted to favor cutting prices instead
of instant layoffs, there is logic to suppose that this would be a
preferred systemic option.  The organization of labor for production is
the
fundamental asset of a corporation.  It seems illogical to reduce this
asset at the first sign of trouble.   What is needed then is micro
analysis to show that this approach of preserving labor as a fundamental

corporate asset is also good for the individual enterprise.  To do this,
a rethink of social and business accounting definitions and principles
needs to be done, to devise a new tax incentive to make layoffs
unprofitable even in the short term and price cutting profitable for
companies.  This is what Congress should be focusing on in dealing with
the Bush II tax cut proposal and Wall Street analysts should focus on in
evaluing share value.


Henry C.K. Liu







From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Sat Feb  3 02:57:02 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Sat Feb  3 02:57:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a Lie
Message-ID: <01d101c08d70$35ada580$4403f0d5@EUnet.yu>

      The URL for his article is http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bor.htm
      For a printable version, click here.

      www.tenc.net 
      [Emperor's Clothes]

      Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a Lie

      by Jared Israel [revised 1-31-2001]

      Elsewhere we have posted excerpts from a Moscow Press conference given by Genrikh Pavlovich Padva, a lawyer for Pavel Borodin. Mr. Borodin, a Russian diplomat and Secretary of the Russian-Belarus Union, was arrested on January 17th at Kennedy Airport in New York as he stepped off the plane from Moscow. He was on his way to the Bush Inauguration. That is, Mr. Borodin was invited by the U.S. to come to the U.S. on what amounted to an official State visit, and then arrested.

      Washington's story is that FBI agents arrested Borodin because the Swiss police wanted him for questioning regarding kickbacks and subsequent money laundering that allegedly occurred when he was in charge of remodeling the Kremlin. The Swiss issued a warrant and Washington, which, like Justice itself, is blind, had no choice but to comply. That is why Borodin was picked up as soon as he got off the plane. 

      That is unbelievable. 

      Arresting a leader of another country, especially Russia, creates an international incident. If the U.S. government wished to avoid such an incident it had a host of options. Indeed, the Clinton State Department and the incoming Bush administration were both involved in getting Borodin to the U.S. The State Department made sure he did not have a diplomatic visa. 

      In other words, Washington did not simply fail to avoid arresting Borodin. Washington made it happen. 

      The Setup

      The Bush administration invited him. This was done by one Vincent Zenga, a member of what Bush calls his "Inauguration Team." The notion that he was invited by mistake (as Mr. Zenga now claims) is not credible. The Swiss issued an arrest warrant and three days later the "Inauguration Team" issued an invitation. 

      And the State Department knew. How can we be sure? Because Mr. Borodin had requested a diplomatic visa from the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. According to the 'Washington Post' (Jan. 19th), this routine request produced "urgent" consultations between the United States Embassy in Moscow and the State Department. Why the consultations? Why the urgency? Because if the Embassy gave Mr. Borodin a diplomatic visa his diplomatic immunity would have prevented the mob of FBI agents waiting at Kennedy Airport from arresting him. 

      The U.S. Embassy in Moscow was instructed by the State Department to stall, neither to issue Borodin a diplomatic visa nor to urge him to stay away from the U.S. Mr. Borodin didn't want to miss his plane, so he left with a previously issued standard visa. 

      An arrest complaint against Mr. Borodin was approved in Brooklyn Federal Court on the morning of Jan. 17th - that is, after the 'urgent' discussions between Washington and its Moscow Embassy. Alexander Fishkin, a N.Y. lawyer for Mr. Borodin, commented:

        "The warrant for his arrest was issued in Switzerland on January 10. He was sent an invitation to inauguration festivities on January 13. Borodin himself told me he did not know until January 15 whether he would fly to America or not. It took him quite long to get all the approvals for his trip. In the morning of January 17 when he was still in the air an appeal was submitted to the federal court in Brooklyn for the issue of an American warrant for his arrest. The appeal stated the date and time of his arrival and even the number of his foreign passport. The request was immediately satisfied and in the evening the State Secretary was taken into custody," Fishkin said. " ('Interfax Russian News', January 23, 2001)

      If any question remained, President-elect Bush appeared on '20/20' Friday evening, where, with prompting from Ms. Walters, he delivered a lecture to Russia and other emerging colonies about the importance of "raiding out corruption." (1) 

      The Swiss Prefer Extradition to Voluntary Consent

      Mr. Borodin is supposedly wanted by the Swiss authorities for questioning regarding supposed money laundering. But Mr. Borodin's Russian lawyer reports (below) that Swiss officials rejected a Russian offer for Mr. Borodin to meet with them voluntarily. The Swiss admit this is true:

        [Swiss Prosecutor Bertossa said:] "Yes, an offer of that kind did indeed reach us. We analysed it closely and reached the conclusion that the Russian Government had no legal instruments for ensuring that voluntary appearance." (Izvestiya, Moscow, Jan. 26, 2001) 

      What could the Swiss possibly have lost by agreeing to the Russian offer? If Mr. Borodin did not meet with them, they could simply have issued the warrant. Why turn down the offer to have Borodin meet with them and then issue an arrest warrant to force Borodin - to meet with them?

      Arresting Borodin could only increase international tension. Why do it? Unless of course Switzerland and Washington wanted to increase international tension.

      What can Switzerland, that is Washington, hope to achieve by having a slew of FBI agents swoop down on a Russian diplomat on his way to an official U.S. State event? They hope to intimidate the countries of the Former Soviet Union, and in particular they hope to drive a wedge between Russia and Belarus, which is led by the independent (from Washington) President Alexander Lukashenko. Mr. Lukashenko is currently a focus of demonization; originating in Washington, London and Berlin, this demonization has been taken up by the mass media and is being parroted by the usual parrots, including some birds on the Left. Lukashenko is authoritarian; he is crazy; and so on. Yes, Lukashenko is crazy enough to resist Washington's neoliberal economic policies, with the result that working people in Belarus are better off than working people in other parts of the Former Soviet Union. The world needs more crazy leaders like him.

      Some may wonder why we are devoting space to this relatively minor incident. The reason is, it is not a relatively minor incident. It is an arrogant message, delivered by the United States Establishment to the politicians and ordinary people of the Former Soviet Union. The message is as follows: We are the rulers, you the ruled. Since you are incapable of functioning in an honest, democratic fashion, you must learn humility and let us control and guide you. However, those who resist may be arrested, or possibly shot.

      How big-hearted of Washington and Switzerland to guide the backward Soviet people.

      The Senior guide is, of course, Washington. It has the experience. It presently guides millions of people directly or through proxies on every continent (via the KLA in Kosovo, the Djindjic government in Belgrade as well as similar governments in Albania, Bulgaria and so on, the Ugandan and Rwandan armies in Congo, the Colombian death squads as well as the regular Colombia Army, the grisly Islamist secessionists in the Former Soviet Union and similar types in Algeria, Indonesia, etc.). 

      Switzerland is only a Junior guide; it is new to the business of Colonial Guiding. In the past it avoided open involvement, preferring to work behind the scenes, handling money for 'people' like the Nazis and investing profitably in war.

      But then, to paraphrase Mr. John Milton who, like American Justice, was blind, 'They also guide who only stand, and profit.' 

      Pavel Borodin's arrest indicates that new aggressions are planned in the military, political and financial spheres, new attacks on the people of the former Soviet Union. Why is Washington escalating now? Not because the Establishment has a new facade in Washington but because it has a reliable government installed in Belgrade. As always, the precondition for attacking Russia is defeating Yugoslavia. 

      But are the Serbs truly defeated? They have been written off before. Hitler wrote them off, much to his regret. For that matter, the Russians have been written off too. Perhaps history isn't finished. Let's not give up on her, yet.

      --Jared Israel, 1-31-2001

      (Another article on this subject, 'Borodin Arrest Targets Russian-Belarus Union', can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/borodin.htm )

      [For the press conference by Pavel Borodin's Russian lawyer, go to http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bordoc.htm ]

      ***

      Further Reading

      1) The relevant section of Bush's interview with Barbara Walters is posted on Emperor's Clothes. It can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/borodin.htm#2

      If you find emperors-clothes.com useful, we can sure use your help...

      All our expenses are covered by individual donations. Any donation will help with our work. To use our secure server, please click here or go to http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm.

      Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321.

      Or call 617 916-1705. Thanks very much.

      www.tenc.net
      [Emperor's Clothes]
     









-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 14074 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010203/bfdff95a/attachment.txt>

From cburford at gn.apc.org  Sat Feb  3 03:50:02 2001
From: cburford at gn.apc.org (Chris Burford)
Date: Sat Feb  3 03:50:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] more on 2nd Law
In-Reply-To: <sa797488.060@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20010203083739.02ad7f00@pop.gn.apc.org>

At 14:36 01/02/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >From Marxism and sciences
>
>This statement is imprecise. Not a closed system, but an isolated one, to both
>matter and energy flows in and out. The confusion, deliberate or not, between
>closed and isolated systems led Georgescu-Roegen and his populizer Jeremy 
>Rifkin
>to fallacious postulates regarding solar energy and economic growth. See my
>paper, "Solar Communism", 1996, Science & Society 60, No.3: 307-331 (heat 
>death
>is also discussed).
>
>Haines Brown wrote:
>
> > The Second Law states that any closed system must experience an increase in
> > entropy, which means that
> > in relation to its initial state, it becomes more homogeneous, 
> diffused, lower
> > in free energy and predictable.


The idea of a closed system is, as Charles implies, an abstract fiction. 
The debate will probably continue more on the marxism and sciences list, 
but generally I feel that the mechanical character of the "second law" is 
being correctly undermined. I support resistance to any simplistic 
extrapolations to economics.

Chris Burford





From cburford at gn.apc.org  Sat Feb  3 03:50:05 2001
From: cburford at gn.apc.org (Chris Burford)
Date: Sat Feb  3 03:50:05 2001
Subject: [CrashList] earthquakes and the global financial system
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20010203084027.02abb200@pop.gn.apc.org>

Forgive another short post, but I noticed yesterday more evidence on the 
BBC website that a major area of ice in the Western Antactic is melting 
rapidly.

Last night it struck me how much visual news there is about earthquakes in 
various parts of the world. There are a few suggestions that the disasters 
are the responsibilityof stupid less educated people than ourselves who do 
not observe proper expensive building regulations. However the impact of 
the powerful images brought by extemely efficient global news services, 
tends much more to emphasise our common humanity. There is pressure for 
deeper scientific analysis, which shows to millions of people around the 
world, that our planet is in fact continually shifting and unstable, 
balancing as we are on moving tectonic plates, governed by the laws of 
chaos theory.

It also raises the issue of how to insure against such unexpected 
disasters, whether they are earthquakes, or a viral variant which infects 
much of the protein supply of half a continent. This requires serious 
management of reserve funds to the tune of billions of dollars.

The long term ("secular") pressures for the reproduction of human life to 
be brought again under some sort of social control, are extremely strong.

Chris Burford





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb  3 04:47:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat Feb  3 04:47:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Jared on Borodin
Message-ID: <000801c08dc6$2ae3ff40$947c01d5@mjones>

Jared, I think the story about Pavel Borodin is more complicated than this. Your
interest in the matter seems to come down to this: an important Russian diplomat and
public official is arrested. This is prima facie an attack on 'the former Soviet
peoples' themselves  and a sign of renewed American aggression.

If only life was so simple. I guess where you are coming from is the parallels with
the possible fates of former Yugoslav leaders, or, let me rephrase that, leaders of
different ethnic and political and national groupings within the ex-YF. But frankly
I don't think you are doing your cause many favours by attaching it to the fate of
someone as notoriously corrupt and evil as Pavel Borodin, someone that, according to
opinion polls cited yesterday on Johnson's Russia List, many ordinary Russians
*themselves* don't want back. Borodin is a hate-figure for millions of Russians; he
is one of the oligarchs and pro-western modernisers with strong Kremlin links, like
Anatolii Chubais or Boris Berezovsky, who could not appear in a public place: if he
did, the mob would tear him to pieces. So arresting Borodin is one of the few
'unfriendly acts' by Americans which most ordinary Russians would actually be
grateful for.

Before being shunted off to the semi-retirment of his new post as  Secretary of the
Russian-Belarus Union, Borodin was in charge of the Kremlin property administration.
This was the heart of darkness of the Yeltsin programme for plundering Russia and
enriching his oligarch cronies. Trying to save Borodin on the grounds of his alleged
diplomatic status is equivalent say to the attempts which some well-meaning
Americans made to have Hermann Goering saved from the noose on the grounds that he
was a former member of a Govenrment and should have immunity as a result of the
German surrender.It is absurd to argue that criminals can enjoy life with immunity
because they own a piece of paper. But I'll tell you something else about Russian
diplomat passports: these documents occupy a special place in Russian consciousness
even today, because the main beauty of them during the Soviet era was not so much
that you could go *into* any third country with them, but that they allowed you
*out* of the Soviet Union without the (almost impossible to obtain) exit visa. This
made the dip passport such a revered object that any Soviet (now Russian) possessor
of one has an almost preternatural awareness of its importance; if you have one, you
are in a class apart.

This means that Borodin did a thing almost incomprehensible to any Russian,
especially a high-placed bureaucrat, when he chose to travel on an ordinary passport
because he couldn't get a visa for his dip. passport. True, these days a Russian
doesn't need an exit visa from the KGB to leave his homeland. That's the theory. But
in practice, life is not so simple. Highly-placed persons who have fallen from
grace, like Borodin, in particular are aware that coming and going is not so simple.

Not only the Russian people are calm about Borodin's arrest, so too is president
Putin, who so far has not uttered a single word on this incident. Why is that? The
answer is that there is a secret war going on between the Putinites and the
Yeltsinites. It is not a war for the soul of Russia, but it is a fight between 2
groups, one in decline, one ascendant, for access to the stream of plundered wealth
and for new sources of power and privilege. Yeltsin's 2 main oligarch backers,
Gusinsky and Berezovsky, are in trouble. Gusinsky is in a Spanish jail awaiting
extradition to Russia. Berezovsky, now in New York, faces the same fate.

Top bureaucrats and oligarchs do live in fear, surrounded by guards, with travel
plans constantly updated. Chubais himself recently fled Russia for a time. ALL these
people -- the elite of "New Russians" -- depend on being able to flee Russia at a
moment's notice. There were times in Yeltsin's presidency when HE HIMSELF  had his
personal jet warm its engines up, when the going  got specially rough. ALL these
people have based themselves on the export of capital: phenomenal amounts. There are
more than 100 dollar billionairs living in the Moscow region alone. A game has gone
on for more than a decade, in which the West has not only countenanced but
encouraged the export of capital from the ex-SU, perhaps a trillion dollars in all.
This helped impoverish the Soviet people, destroy its industry and turn it into a
helpless appendage of the West, thus ensuring the West's victory in the Cold War.
This flood of money also mightily helped fuel the US boom, for eg by enhancing asset
values then used to leverage into the debt which powered growth. And, best of all,
it made political hostages out of the Russian elite, who are hated by their
impoverished countrymen, and who therefore depend on being allowed by the Western
monetary and political authorities to salt their loot in Swiss banks, or (in
Borodin's case) the Bank of New York, or the Caymans, Cyprus etc. The elites also
depend on being allowed to slip abroad and enjoy their ill-gotten gains in comfort
and security. That is why Borodin's arrest makes them nervous. After all, Borodin
was just one "muzhik" among many others; if they can arrest "our Pasha" they can
arrest anyone. That's the thinking of the oligarchs.

It is odd to argue for the rights of people like Pavel Borodin to rob Russia
undisturbed, and have a constant safe haven abroad. Borodin's actual job was to
dispose of the asset-base of the CPSU. He controlled fabulous power and wealth. He
spent $500 million (!!!) on refurbising Yeltsin's Kremlin apartments. What happened
to that money? He and Berezovsky systematically looted the hard currency earnings of
Aeroflot, the national airline What happened to that, and the literally hundreds of
billions of dollars which disappeared, looted from Soviet Russia?

Putin wants to assert himself against "the Family", ie the Yeltsin clan which put
him there. But it is hard, because they have so much dirt on Putin himself. Before
he can really assert himself, he must complete his crab-like Long March thru the
institutions of the Russian state, getting a steely grip on the KGB, the army, the
regions, and above all, getting a grip on the mass media. Only when he has the media
fully under control, can Putin be sure that the Yeltsinites no longer are capable of
embarrassing him with revelations about the dirt from his own sordid climb to power
over a heap of still-warm bodies.

This is why Putin began his attack on the oligarchs by going after Gusinsky and
Berezovsky, because they were the media-magnates he needed to neutralise first. When
Chubais tried a minicoup of his own recently and tried to grab a piece of the media
pie, he was forced to flee Russia. They all know that he that controls TV controls
the masses.

>From the point of  view of the West, the position is also highly contradictory and
confusing. On the one hand, Bush wants to dish the remnants of the Clinton/Gore
Russia policy, and destroy many enemies in Washington at the same time. Tainting
Gore with his former association with corrupt people like Borodin is one way. On the
other hand, it does not do to make the remaining oligarchs desperate by giving them
the feeling that there are no safe havens left. The West needs to keep its grip on
the collective scrotum of the New Russians. Therefore a complex minuet is being
played out. The West has answered calls to arrest Gusinsky, but none of these folks
has yet actually been sent back to face the music. It must first be made clear to
the Russian elite, to the oligarchs, that these are 'special cases', that it is
merely a little housekeeping, cleaning up the most grotesque and bizarre forms of
highly visible and completely unacceptable corruption of the Yeltsin era. Once that
is done, it will be back to business as usual, ie robbery and plunder of Russian
oil, raw materials etc, but without flamboyant excesses. So it is a question of
training the quislings how to behave. Their children are all at western (mostly
Swiss) finishing schools anyway, learning how to 'go on', how to be part of the
world bourgeoisie: to be polite, charming, discreet, and make highly-publicised
charitable contributions etc, while you plunder the planet and impoverish the
masses. It is all just a matter of time and of the continued absorption and
digestion of the fSU by the western python.

As for Borodin, Gusinsky etc, of course they will be allowed to live out their lives
in quiet obscurity in their villas on the Cote d'Azur, so don't shed too many tears
for them, Jared. It is a mistake to allow these rascals to drape themselves in the
twin flags of 'human rights' and of 'Russian national pride'. To argue that "Pavel
Borodin's arrest indicates that new aggressions are planned in the military,
political and financial spheres, new attacks on the people of the former Soviet
Union" is to ignore the truth that Borodin has been a key player, a key quisling,
who helped the West destroy Russia for more than a decade. The Yeltsin's and
Borodin's were the fifth columnists and shock troops who did the West's job for it.
Why defend them?

And while it is possible that sharply antagonistic contradictions might yet emerge
between Russia, China, India on one hand and Nato/US on the other, that is still not
likely absent a major geopolitical earthquake, and the reason it is not likely is
that the Russian, Chinese, Indian etc elites are fully integrated into the world
bourgeoisies and fully accept US imperial hegemony. The fact that Putin is cynical
enough to throw a few cost-free sops to the Russian masses, like the music but not
words to the Soviet anthem, is only further proof if proof were needed. We should
not allow ourselves to be duped by such obvious games. The oligarchs are playing the
patriot cardbecause (a) it makes them a little less loathsome in the eyes of their
fellow-countrymen and women and (b) because they want a little more wiggle-room in
their dealings with their Western masters, they want to loosen their collars a
little and not be quite so slavihly dependent on Western goodwill. For ten years
they have been marionettes of the CIA and State Dept and they are fed up. This has
made them punchdrunk, this living in constant fear, and may well explain why Borodin
did such an otherwise inexplicable thing as fly to NY *with no dip passport*. He
must have known,  because his own contacts in the Russian Foreign Ministry certainly
told him, that the fact the US had denied him a diplomatic visa could only mean one
thing: he faced  arrest. Perhaps it became clear to Borodin -- perhaps he received
one of those anonymous but well-informed phone calls which are the bane of elite
lives and which tipped him off that Putin had him in his sights, and it was time to
go. Better an American jail than a Russian one, hey?

Mark



Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a Lie

by Jared Israel [revised 1-31-2001]

Elsewhere we have posted excerpts from a Moscow Press conference given by Genrikh
Pavlovich Padva, a lawyer for Pavel Borodin. Mr. Borodin, a Russian diplomat and
Secretary of the Russian-Belarus Union, was arrested on January 17th at Kennedy
Airport in New York as he stepped off the plane from Moscow. He was on his way to
the Bush Inauguration. That is, Mr. Borodin was invited by the U.S. to come to the
U.S. on what amounted to an official State visit, and then arrested.




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb  3 06:55:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat Feb  3 06:55:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] FT Editorial comment: Fed to the rescue - for now
Message-ID: <000c01c08dd8$30c76480$947c01d5@mjones>


 - Feb 02 2001 19:33:57


Confidence is all important. Facts and figures are subordinate. That belief seems to
have taken hold in US financial markets: it may become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

US government bond markets rallied at the end of last year on the expectation of
interest rate cuts. The Russell 3000 index, a broad measure of US equities, rose 5.4
per cent in January; and the Nasdaq composite, comprising technology shares, jumped
18 per cent.

But this confidence is only in the markets. It is not shared in corporate America or
in US households. On Thursday, the National Association of Purchasing Management
survey of US manufacturing fell to its lowest level in nearly 10 years. Tuesday's
consumer confidence figures were at a four-year low. Economic figures and corporate
results have been generally poor. Real gross domestic product in the fourth quarter
grew at an annual rate of only 1.4 per cent, dragged down by a fall in private
investment and consumers' expenditure on durable goods.

The gap between market sentiment and economic figures rests, as so often in the past
decade, on confidence in Alan Greenspan, chairman of the US Federal Reserve.

The market's level reflects a consensus that the Fed can and will solve the current
difficulties. The full percentage point cut in interest rates of the past month is
only a start: with inflation low, there is no constraint on the Fed's power to ease
monetary policy and get the economy motoring again. The market rally is therefore
based on the logic that although the US downturn may be sharp, it will be short.
Economic figures, even consumer and business confidence, are therefore retrospective
indicators. Now the Fed is cutting rates, the prospects for the future are bright.

A wide variety of arguments underpins market confidence in the power of policy to
fine-tune American economic success.


Confidence tricks


First is the psychological effect of interest rate reductions. They are designed to
boost the economy; households and companies believe in their effects; confidence is
rapidly restored; and economic prospects brighten quickly. Second are the more
traditional effects of looser monetary policy, which boosts spending relative to
saving. Third is the powerful and rapid effect on corporate liquidity: lower rates
ease cash flow worries. Fourth, gains in equity and bond valuations increase the net
wealth of US households, which boosts expenditure. Fifth comes President George W.
Bush's tax plan, which will raise consumer spending. And sixth, the rapid growth in
US productivity, which will support economic growth and give the Fed scope to cut
rates more aggressively than before.

Under these circumstances, the recent equity rally would be justified. And if the
Fed continues its "rapid and forceful response of monetary policy" to support
growth, bond markets look, if anything, a little underpriced.


Happy landing


But this happy outcome misses a crucial point. Such a scenario would not be the
"soft landing" the US needs. It would be no landing at all. As the latest research
from Goldman Sachs highlights, "the private sector financial deficit in this
forecast would remain at about 6 per cent of GDP over the next two years.
Furthermore, the current account deficit would remain at close to 4.5 per cent of
GDP." The unsustainable longer-term path of the US economy would continue. The
dangers of a subsequent sustained period of low or negative economic growth would
remain.

An alternative interpretation of recent US events is that the private sector
financial deficit is already unwinding. Falling consumer and business confidence,
lower investment and durable goods purchases would therefore be an early indication
of powerful contractionary forces.

Looser monetary policy would not be able to mitigate these forces easily. Confidence
and expenditure would continue to fall, earnings and equity valuations would suffer,
tax cuts would arrive too late to help and the traditional and powerful effects of
rapid monetary policy easing would take their time, as they always have in the past.

The bright spot in this gloomy scenario would be government bonds. Goldman Sachs
forecasts that interest rates would rapidly fall to 3 per cent, a much steeper fall
than the forward markets expect, significantly boosting the price of US Treasuries.

The confidence in equity markets is based on two premises. First that economic
policy can sort out current economic difficulties. That may be true. Second, that
once the US economy recovers, it can continue growing indefinitely, as it has in the
past decade. That is not true. Short-term success in averting a recession is most
likely to be achieved at the expense of long-term imbalances that cannot be
sustained.




) Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2001.





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb  3 07:26:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat Feb  3 07:26:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] earthquakes and the global financial system
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20010203084027.02abb200@pop.gn.apc.org>
Message-ID: <000d01c08ddc$7843ba80$947c01d5@mjones>

 Chris Burford:
> 
> Forgive another short post, but I noticed yesterday more evidence on the 
> BBC website that a major area of ice in the Western Antactic is melting 
> rapidly.
> 
for more go to:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/spm22-01.pdf



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb  3 07:45:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat Feb  3 07:45:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] A people skating on thin ice
Message-ID: <000001c08ddf$309a0ec0$718a78d5@mjones>

Once it was a thriving fishing port, now it's a ghost town where only the old, the
young and the sick are left. John O'Mahony visits a city whose harrowing decline
reflects a country in crisis

John O'Mahony
Saturday February 3, 2001
The Guardian

Just when it seems that the solitary, snow-bound highway might really lead nowhere,
the ghost town of Oktyabrskiy peers over the permafrost, its skyline a grim,
gap-toothed leer. As we approach, a hammer-and-sickle-encrusted sign by the roadside
announces what was once one of the busiest fishing ports in the Russian far east, a
model soviet enterprise bustling with life.

Stretching away behind, however, Oktyabrskiy's main Lenin Street now looks little
more than a sliver of wasteland, lined on both sides by abandoned apartment blocks,
their sunken windows staring blankly, their facades in the advanced stages of decay.
Dilapidated wooden cottages, stripped to timber skeletons, clutter the moul dering
side-streets. Everywhere, tatty scraps of open ground appear to have been seeded
with trash and twisted metal. And all along the pier, the rotting shells of trawlers
lie entombed in ice.

Only occasionally do the last sad remnants of Oktyabrskiy's population stumble into
this desolate scene, some of them sullen teenagers who pass without expression, but
the majority hunched and elderly, the human detritus of an unprecedented decade of
decline: "It's difficult to believe this place was once crammed with people," says
Lidia Ivanovna, the town's current governor, and our guide through the ruins. "All
we have left are the very young, the very old and the sick - the people who couldn't
leave. We're trapped between the tundra on one side and the sea on the other.
Oktyabrskiy has been condemned to a gradual death."

Over the past 10 years, Russia has been haemorrhaging humanity at a rate
unprecedented for a modern, industrialised nation, except during times of famine or
war. At the fall of communism, the population stood at 148.3m, a number that has
been steadily sinking by between 300,000 a year, in 1993, and almost 800,000 in
1999, the most dramatic 12-month slump to date, a net loss of 0.5 % of Russia's
total inhabitants. In an atmosphere of deep pessimism about the country's future,
the traditionally high birth rate has plummeted to 1.3 children per woman, the
lowest in Russia's history. At the same time, the death rate has soared; average
life expectancy for the Russian male is now just 59, some 10-15 years less than in
any western country, while women can expect to live to 72, six to eight years less
than their European sisters. In yet another symptom of the Russian demographic
malaise, this male/female discrepancy is the largest in the world.

Other indicators are equally alarming: infant mortality is on the rise, 15.8 per
1,000 births in 1999 as against 6.9 in the US that year; Russia has become one of
the world's TB hot spots, and Aids is said to threaten an epidemic of sub-Saharan
proportions; meanwhile, migration is depleting the human resources of the far-flung
regions. As the scale of the situation was becoming clear in 1998 and '99, the
Russian Duma included genocide among the charges in an impeachment drive against the
then president Boris Yeltsin, regarded as the architect of the debilitating reforms
widely seen as the catalyst for the population collapse. However, if the projections
of Russia's state statistics department, GosKomStat, are correct, the mammoth scale
of the demographic catastrophe has yet to unfold. By the year 2016, they predict
that Russia will lose another 8-10m, making the total loss for the post-soviet
period more than the combined victims of Stalin's purges.

Even in relatively thriving Moscow, which serves as a magnet for impoverished
migrants from all over the former Soviet Union, there is still foreboding evidence
of demographic subsidence: a precipitous 27% drop in the numbers of pre- and primary
school infants has forced the closure of scores of the city's kindergartens and
junior classes. Just a few hundred kilometres south of the capital, there are
already dwindling villages, each one home to a meagre handful of pensioners.

However, it is at the exposed and vulnerable extremities of the vast Russian
territories that the atrophy of the population has been most acute. Perhaps the most
startling example is Chukotka, a massive chunk of the far east three times the size
of Britain, where the population has withered by a staggering 60%, from 180,000 in
1990 to just 65,000 today, a figure that is expected to slump to just 20,000 within
the next five years, making the region's infrastructure unsustainable. Others
include the Taimyr region in the far north, which enjoys 10 months of arctic winter
and two of "polar night", which has bled more than 20% of its inhabitants and may
now be in considerable danger of being evacuated by central government, and
Kamchatka, an isolated peninsula, and the region where Oktyabrskiy is located.

The final approach into Kamchatka after a nine-hour Aeroflot flight affords a view
that might pass for an aerial vision of the edge of the earth. Its capital,
Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy, is surrounded by a crescent of gently smouldering
volcanoes, just a few of the 800 scattered throughout the peninsula, including
Asia's largest and most lethal, the Klyuchevskaya Sopka. The ground beneath hides a
mesh of grinding fault lines; we had barely stepped from the plane when an
earthquake struck, jolting the ground for a few unnerving seconds.

Since the fall of communism, almost a quarter of the overall population has seeped
away. Unemployment in the grubby, low-lying capital is running at about 30%; 40% of
its people live below Russia's already low poverty line, healthcare is nonexistent
and fuel shortages have meant that until recently, heating and electricity were
routinely shut down for as much as 17 hours a day.

However, as we venture outside Petropavlovsk in the company of a Red Cross
contingent, the situation worsens exponentially. Mountain-locked microclimates send
the temperatures crashing to -30F. For hours, we encounter no other vehicles, just
the occasional group of fishermen trudging through the snow. And then, at the end of
one of the world's bleakest stretches of roadway, a desolate strip of asphalt
separating the heaving lead-coloured waters of the Okhotsk Sea on one side and a
huge frozen lake on the other, we finally encounter Oktyabrskiy.

Perhaps fittingly, governor Lidia Ivanovna begins not with the physical wreckage of
the town, but with a virtual tour of how it once was: "Right here there used to be
two rows of houses." She gestures towards sawn-off foundations in a completely
deserted district known as Basa II. "That was once a small port, where supplies were
delivered before the road was built..."

The decay began, she explains, in the early 90s, with the liquidation of the
fish-processing plant and cannery; in the new, market-driven environment, harsher
even than the merciless natural climate the town had survived for decades, no one
could justify the ballooning costs of transporting canned fish across the vastness
of Russia. Since then almost 60% of the population of 4,500 has evaporated, and the
spirit of the town with them. A heavy-set woman in her 50s who brooks little
sentimentality, Lidia Ivanovna finds herself continually fighting back tears:
"People once lived well in Oktyabrskiy," she says. "People once lived very well..."

By anyone's estimation, however, many of the remaining inhabitants of Oktyabrskiy
now endure an almost bestial existence. One filthy apartment we visited, home of an
alcoholic and his retarded son, was the most sordid imaginable, strewn with vodka
bottles, stinking mattresses and the guts of ancient televisions. Across the
stairwell, we find a woman of Koryak origin in a dark and sooty living room with her
two youngest children, a mischievous boy and pretty moon-faced girl called Veronika,
both suffering from tuberculosis. Ironically, because of spells in the TB hospital
in Petropavlovsk receiving proper nutrition, they look infinitely healthier than the
three emaciated older boys.

Most of these pitiable human beings pray for escape - in any form - from their grimy
purgatory. In the first block we visit, pen sioner Maria Riabchenko shows us round
her two almost entirely bare, unheated rooms. Aged 72 and virtually blind, she has
carefully stacked all of her possessions in one corner, in preparation for a journey
she was almost certainly never going to make: "I want to get out of this prison,"
she hisses. "Many people have already fled but the rest of us would also get out if
we could. I have everything packed. I'd have left long ago, except that I don't have
any money." With tears streaming, she adds, bitterly: "But I can wait. I'm very
patient..." In the next stairwell, we call on Valintin Igulayev, an amiable old man
who arrived in Oktyabrskiy in the 50s, brimming with idealism: "A friend of mine
said one day: 'Let's go to Kamchatka' and I immediately answered, 'Why not?'. I was
up for some romance and adventure." His elderly wife, Lilia, has just been diagnosed
with cancer of the colon; but with their combined pensions totalling about $70 (#45)
a month, she has no hope of getting adequate treatment. Physically shaking and with
tears welling up in her eyes, she explains that her only option is to sit at home
and wait for the tumour to consume her: "The doctor says that I must pay 15,000
roubles for the treatment, but I don't even have 40 roubles for fish in the
market..."

Oktyabrskiy's clean but impossibly spartan hospital, which is forced to rely on the
Red Cross for basic commodities such as soap and washing powder, has almost given up
trying to help the seriously ill. Instead, certain wards serve as a rest home for
the most chronically destitute.

In one upstairs room, Alexei, who has lost all coordination because of the
devastation wrought by alcohol on his nervous system and looks 25 years older than
his actual age of 48, shares a room with Vladimir, whose binge drinking caused a
cerebral haemorrhage that deprived him of the use of one arm and his legs. "We don't
hope to cure them," Oktyabrskiy's head doctor, Nikolai Kuznetsov, tells me, "but if
we let them out now, they wouldn't survive long. The only option is to look after
them here until we find a place for them in the old people's home in Petropavovsk or
until they die..."

Our final stop is Oktyabrskiy's modest, two-storey school, which has seen numbers
fall from 680 students 10 years ago to 240 today. This will sink further as every
one of the children intends to flee the ailing town immediately on graduation:
"Oktyabrskiy is just a long street with the sea on both sides of it," says Oksana, a
forthright 16-year-old who intends to move to Petropavlovsk, "It's boring here.
There are no sports facilities or anything. I want to study psychology and there are
no higher education facilities. And I won't come back - there is no work and nothing
to do." Another 16-year-old, Spartak, hopes to move either to England or Greece: "Of
course I'll miss Oktyabrskiy. It's my home," he says. "But I have to survive and,
for that reason, I have to move. I know that without us, Oktyabrskiy will die, but
what can I do? Not a single one of my friends wants to stay..."

"Russia has been shunted back a century," says Sergei Kaleshnikov of the statistics
committee, GosKomStat. "A contemporary man who is 50 can, according to statistics,
live for another four to 10 years It's almost the same as it was 100 years ago." As
is obvious from the situation in Oktyabrskiy, the primary causes of the demographic
catastrophe are brutally simple: poverty, bad diet, poor living conditions and, in
more industrialised parts of Russia, a polluted environment.

This has been fatally compounded by an almost total implosion of the healthcare
system, even in the more populous cities. The TB hospital in
Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy relies entirely on a 50-year-old fleurography machine, a
hulking piece of apparatus that produces tiny imprints of lungs the size of postage
stamps. In St Petersburg and Moscow, very few hospitals have the resources to
perform what have become routine operations in the west such as heart bypasses; the
leading TB hospital in St Petersburg can only afford to spend about 55p per day on
its patients, much less than is required to cure many of them. Contemporary Russia
is also an ideal breeding ground for infectious diseases such as TB which, incubated
in the labyrinthine prison system, are now raging through the population.

"We are now on the verge of an epidemic," says Tatyana Suprun, one of St
Petersburg's leading TB doctors. "It's a consequence of the way we live now in
Russia, often three generations in a tiny flat. If one person gets sick, everyone
does." Aids too is rumbling beneath the surface, due to a potent combination of
rising intravenous drug use, the post-soviet sexual revolution and an almost total
lack of safe-sex education.

However, the Russian populace is not only being corroded by disease, but also by its
own self-destructive social reflexes. Alcohol consumption in Russia is the highest
in the world, and deaths from alcohol poisoning far outstrips those in any other
country: about 50,000 cases in 1999 as opposed to just 350 in the US, mostly as a
result of a national predilection for binge drinking and the nature of the alcohol
itself: "Since about 1990 there has been no control of alcohol production," says
Viktor Petrovich, head of Petropavlosk's addiction clinic. "This has led to the
availability of very low-grade spirits. People also started to brew their own,
low-quality home brews that led to a lot of poisoning. In some cases, people even
drank technical spirits."

Finally, there is the issue of violent death: the Russian murder rate per capita,
which has doubled since 1990, is the highest in the world, three times more than the
US and four times more than France. And in the atmosphere of social gloom, suicides
are also rising, up by a third from their 1990 levels.

Russia and its long-suffering people have, throughout most of the country's
demographic history, had a complicated, almost intimate relationship with the
mechanics of death. As Catherine Merridale reported in her recent book on the death
culture of Russia, Night of Stone (Granta #25), crude death rates in Russia in the
1870s were far higher than for any European country: 38 deaths per 1,000 members of
the population per year, compared to the corresponding rate in France and England of
just over 22 per 1,000.

If the situation continues to deteriorate today, Russia's accelerating population
decline could become the most important challenge to the country's already unstable
economic and political status in the world: "If this trend does not change in 15 to
20 years," claims Valentin Pokrovsky, of the Russian Academy of Medical Science,
"for each working person, there will be one or two people who cannot work. It will
be very difficult for the country." However, despite an insulating fatalism nurtured
by Russians over centuries, the ultimate toll is a very human and individual one.

The cemetery in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy is probably one of the most beautiful
spots in the city, a sweeping, steep, snow-covered hill framed by the icy peaks of
volcanoes. On one of the most picturesque slopes, a small army of youthful
gravediggers is opening the frozen earth with picks, working simultaneously on three
or four graves at once. All around, small picnic tables are piled with food,
sustenance for the dead on their journey, while ravens, believed by Russians to be
celestial pallbearers, circle hungrily overhead. One funeral (pictured above) is
already in progress, the deceased an unemployed man of 44 who died suddenly from a
heart attack, leaving behind a wife and young daughter. "It was totally unexpected,"
said his brother, "He was so young, still relatively healthy. Life killed him."

As soon as it ends, another gets underway, this time of a 21-year-old man who had
been kicked to death by a group of soldiers: "He was just coming home and they beat
him up. Five or six of them just set upon him," says his father. "They beat him up
and took his clothes. He was just left there lying naked in the snow; people just
walked around him, nobody helped him. They only found him in the morning lying there
dead - he didn't have a chance because of the cold."

Once the body has been laid in the ground, the entire mountainside, as bleak and
depleted a stretch of wilderness as any we have encountered during our journey to
Kamchatka's depopulated margins, seems to fill up with the keening of his mother as
she is led away.


Guardian Unlimited ) Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb  3 09:16:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat Feb  3 09:16:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] more on Kremlin corruption
Message-ID: <000101c08deb$d949d760$718a78d5@mjones>

[Patriotism, according to Samuel Johnson, is the last refuge of the scoundrel, and
there are few more patriotic people than New Russians, who also said 'Example is
more efficacious than precept', something clearly true of the lessons Putin has
learned about democracy and the rule of law from his predecessor. Mark].

Jamestown Foundation Monitor
February 2, 2001

KHAPSIROKOV'S APPOINTMENT: ANOTHER SIGN OF PUTIN'S LINGERING "FAMILY" TIES?
Nazir Khapsirokov, the former "property manager" for the Prosecutor
General's Office, has been named a deputy head of the Kremlin
administration. While his exact duties have not yet been made public,
Khapsirokov will be one of five deputies to Kremlin chief of staff
Aleksandr Voloshin. The new deputy presidential administration chief is
both a shadowy figure and a controversial one. He was removed from the
Prosecutor General's Office last summer. According to Kommersant, the
pretext for this was the suspicion that he had received a US$1 million
bribe in return for quashing a corruption investigation of former Deputy
Prime Minister Vladimir Petrov. Afterwards, Khapsirokov went to work at
Mezhprombank, an institution said to be closely linked to the Kremlin.
Former Prosecutor General Yury Skuratov and former Deputy Prosecutor
General Mikhail Katyshev have both said that Khapsirokov wielded immense
behind-the-scenes power while serving as property manager for the
prosecutor's office. They also said he maintained "good relations" with
President Vladimir Putin and was "friends" with Boris Berezovsky, the
once-powerful oligarch who is now in self-imposed exile, and Pavel Borodin,
the former Kremlin property manager and current Russia-Belarus union state
secretary who was arrested in New York last month on a Swiss warrant.
Khapsirokov is rumored to have played a role in organizing the discrediting
of Skuratov, who had launched both the Mabetex case, involving Borodin, and
the Aeroflot case, involving Berezovsky, among other high-profile
corruption probes. In early 1999, then President Boris Yeltsin suspended
Skuratov after a tape allegedly showing him in bed with two call girls was
shown on state television. In a profile of Khapsirokov published last year,
the weekly newspaper Sobesednik claimed that in 1999 Berezovsky had showed
up at the Prosecutor General's Office with an "armful" of roses for
Khapsirokov the day on which the charges against the tycoon connected to
the Aeroflot case were dropped. Coincidentally, Russian media reported
yesterday that Berezovsky is about to be charged once again in connection
with that case.

Khapsirokov is also said to have played a key role in getting Vladimir
Ustinov appointed to the post of prosecutor general last year. That
appointment caused something of a scandal after various media reported that
Voloshin, possibly in conjunction with Berezovsky, had overruled Putin's
choice for prosecutor general, Dmitry Kozak, and essentially forced Putin
to appoint Ustinov (see the Monitor, May 18, 2000). The newspaper Vedomosti
reported today that Ustinov has since started to annoy Voloshin and members
of his team, who are unhappy with his "excessive zeal" in prosecuting
Vladimir Gusinsky's Media-Most and, more generally, his "excessive
independence." Thus Khapsirokov may have been appointed to serve as a
warning to and a check on Ustinov (Vedomosti, Kommersant, Segodnya,
February 2; Russian agencies, February 1; Sobesednik, December 21, 2000).

It is less clear why the Russian president would sign off on hiring someone
like Khapsirokov as a deputy chief of staff, given the latter's
controversial reputation and purported close links with the Yeltsin-era
inner circle, from which Putin is supposedly trying to distance himself.
Ever since Putin succeeded Boris Yeltsin, some observers have speculated
that members of the Yeltsin-era "Family" had "kompromat" (compromising
material) on the new head of state, and that this accounted for Putin's
reported acquiescence in being overruled in his choice of prosecutor
general, among other things. The Gazeta.ru website, however, dismissed this
explanation yesterday, arguing that Khapsirokov was appointed precisely
because of his questionable reputation, on the theory that a "dirty" enemy
who has received a conditional "royal pardon" is "a more valuable cadre
resource than a relatively clean friend who has initiative." Putin, the
website said, "prefers compromised--and thus deeply devoted--colleagues"
(Gazeta.ru, February 1). It is worth noting here that, contrary to the
expectations of the many observers who have been predicting an imminent
purge of Yeltsin-era officials, including Voloshin, Putin this week issued
a decree effectively subordinating his seven representatives in the federal
districts to the Kremlin chief of staff (see the Monitor, February 1). It
should also be noted that Voloshin himself has a controversial reputation,
having been closely connected to Boris Berezovsky, along with several
alleged pyramid schemes.

All of this is further evidence that Putin, despite his vows to establish a
"dictatorship of the law" and a "strict presidential vertical of power,"
may increasingly be resorting to his predecessor Boris Yeltsin's style of
rule, which was characterized by court intrigue, along with feudalistic
deal-cutting and power-sharing. The most tangible recent sign of this was
last month's passage in the State Duma of a Kremlin-backed bill allowing
sixty-nine of Russia's eighty-nine incumbent regional leaders to seek third
or even fourth terms in office (see the Monitor, January 30). Noting that
Yeltsin once urged the country's regions to take as much sovereignty as
they could swallow, Vlast, Kommersant's weekly magazine, said this week
that Putin's Kremlin, facing a deteriorating Russian economic situation,
has been "forced to revert to Yeltsin's principles in its regional policy"
(Vlast, January 30).




From ssandron at hotmail.com  Sat Feb  3 10:52:01 2001
From: ssandron at hotmail.com (Seth Sandronsky)
Date: Sat Feb  3 10:52:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Little book, big war
Message-ID: <F220DdcTD5uZJorwBpP00003d64@hotmail.com>

Seth:  Though Uncle Tom didn't sellout, his character has been repeatedly 
equated with selling out by many.  They obviously didn't read the novel that 
Lincoln called the little book that started the big (US Civil) war upon 
meeting the author, Harriet Beecher Stowe.

Message: 6
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:40:00 -0500
From: "Charles Brown" <CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Subject: Re: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins
Reply-To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com


=20
>>>sherrynstan at igc.org 01/31/01 10:12AM >>>
"Is Colin Powell an Uncle Tom," one asks me.  He and his comrades have =
just exploded in a babble of outrage at this imperial arrogance.  "Is he a =
token?"

"Uncle Tom was a phrase of contempt that Malcolm X used to differentiate =
the house slave from the field slave," I say.  "Powell has transcended =
that.  He is no longer just the house slave.  He is now one of the =
masters.  He is a brilliant bureaucrat.  Hardly a token.

"Many people regard an Uncle Tom to be someone who is witless, a fool who =
sells out his own people, like Clarence Thomas.  Powell is no fool.  He is =
ruthless and very, very smart.  Clarence Thomas is an Uncle Tom.  Powell =
is evil."

(((((((((((

CB: Thomas is a Sambo too. Thomas has significant power, as much as =
Powell.=20

(Actually, in the novel _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, Uncle Tom was not a sellout. =
That was Sambo. So, technically Thomas and Powell are Sambos, though Uncle =
Tom is used often as you use it here)

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com




From embark at epud.net  Sat Feb  3 11:04:01 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Sat Feb  3 11:04:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Html sabotage
References: <E14OoXm-0002Wo-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <000a01c08dfa$18a23d40$31a3bdcf@rowan>

> the garbage below illustrates why i delete unread
> posts in  html formatting
>
> Carrol

For ONCE I totally agree with Carrol calling one of my posts garbage!

As can plainly be seen, I sent it out plain text and in one form it came
back html copycode.

One can almost never read Jela's stuff because it is indecipherable.

I'm on the case to see if we can fix this.

Tom







From farmelantj at juno.com  Sat Feb  3 11:12:01 2001
From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant)
Date: Sat Feb  3 11:12:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Prices and Layoffs
Message-ID: <20010203.111037.-331277.0.farmelantj@juno.com>

On Sat, 03 Feb 2001 00:11:04 -0500 "Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu at mindspring.com>
writes:
>
>
> Suupose a management theory is adopted to favor cutting prices 
> instead
> of instant layoffs, there is logic to suppose that this would be a
> preferred systemic option.  The organization of labor for production 
> is
> the
> fundamental asset of a corporation.  

As I am sure that Henry is well aware, neoclassical economists
have long taken the view that if only prices and wages could be
made downwards flexible then decreases in aggregate demand
would not necessarily give rise to increasing unemployment.
I think it was Pigou who developed an analysis to show how
a controlled price deflation would make it possible for a
capitalist economy to work though a crisis without experiencing
mass unemployment.  Pigou took it for granted that such a 
price deflation would encompass a drop in money wages
for workers, amongst other things.  One of the arguments that John
Maynard
Keynes gave in support of the use of fiscal and monetary stimulus
for combatting economic downturns was that such policies would
work in part by producing a price inflation which would result in
a drop in real wages, without employers having to go through the
hassle of having to cut money wages.  Thus labor would be made
cheaper but without the social unrest that would no doubt accompany
the direct slashing of money wages.

I am not sure how prices can be made downwardly flexible without
also doing the same for wages.  Right now it easier for companies
to quickly reduce their labor costs by slashing employment rather
than by directly reducing wages.  Presumably, an increased
reliance the use of stock options and profit-sharing for compensating
employees could help to make this more feasible.  However,
it is also the case that these forms of compensation are generally
used in compensating the most privileged workers rather than
workers in general.  And as the recent dotcom collapses have
shown, that stock options only remain attractive to employees
as long as share values continue to rise.  As soon as employees
recognize that their stock options many be expected to increase
in value or that may well prove to be worthless then they will cease
to be of use to employers, who now find that prospective employees
demanding to be compensated up front in the form of a higher
wage or salary. 

Years ago, many economists used to blame the downwards rigidity
of wages on the presence of unions which would be resistant to
the cutting of money wages.  However, economic research indicates
that downwards wage rigidity is as much a feature of nonunion
sectors of the economy as those where unions are still a factor.
Microeconomic analyses have been developed to show why this
is the case.  Most of these analyses seem to focus on the problems
that the direct cutting of wages has on employee retention and
employee morale.  When workers see their paychecks being
reduced, they are more likely to leave, and to become less productive,
or so it is argued.


>It seems illogical to reduce 
> this
> asset at the first sign of trouble.   What is needed then is micro
> analysis to show that this approach of preserving labor as a 
> fundamental
> 
> corporate asset is also good for the individual enterprise.  To do 
> this,
> a rethink of social and business accounting definitions and 
> principles
> needs to be done, to devise a new tax incentive to make layoffs
> unprofitable even in the short term and price cutting profitable for
> companies.  This is what Congress should be focusing on in dealing 
> with
> the Bush II tax cut proposal and Wall Street analysts should focus 
> on in
> evaluing share value.
> 
> 
> Henry C.K. Liu
> 
> 
> 
> 

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.



From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Sat Feb  3 11:19:01 2001
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Date: Sat Feb  3 11:19:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Html sabotage
References: <E14OoXm-0002Wo-00@lists.wwpublish.com> <000a01c08dfa$18a23d40$31a3bdcf@rowan>
Message-ID: <3A7C2F47.D42A27E3@ilstu.edu>


Embarkadero wrote:

> I'm on the case to see if we can fix this.

Thank you. It is fun to agree once in a while. I apologize
for the tone of the original, but html + broken wrist =
rise in temperature. ;-)

Carrol




From northsheep at juno.com  Sat Feb  3 20:28:01 2001
From: northsheep at juno.com (Karl S North)
Date: Sat Feb  3 20:28:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Energy scenarios and Natural Capitalism
Message-ID: <20010203.183716.-422875.1.northsheep@juno.com>

The energy scenarios of the Lovins gang, epitomized in their Energy
surprises for the 21st Century, available at
http://www.rmi.org/images/other/E-EnergySurprises.pdf, contrast sharply
in their optimism with Jay Hanson's at www.dieoff.com . Lovins is
apparently no naive capitalist, so his 'natural capitalism' explicitly
requires large helpings of public policy intervention to achieve his
energy conversion scenario. Although Lovins' arguments appear to benefit
from more holistic engineering design thinking than Hanson's, I find it
hard to believe that accounts for the difference. Has a critique of the
Lovins scenario appeared on this list? Anyone want to give it a shot?

Karl North 
Northland Sheep Dairy
"Mother Nature never farms without animals" - Albert Howard
"Pueblo que canta no morira" - Cuban saying
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 1305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010203/091900dc/attachment.txt>

From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb  3 20:59:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat Feb  3 20:59:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Energy scenarios and Natural Capitalism
In-Reply-To: <20010203.183716.-422875.1.northsheep@juno.com>
Message-ID: <000201c08e4d$f840dbc0$8f8978d5@mjones>

Karl S North wrote:

>Has a critique of the Lovins scenario appeared on this list?

Hanson's pessimism seems to me to be the mirror-inverse of Lovins' optimism. Neither
of them work from any kind of critical analysis or understanding of capitalism as a
historically-specific mode of production. Both sides to that argument are quick to
*reject* the idea that capitalism is *historically* determinate: they both eternise
and naturalise commodity production and market relations. For Jay, this is a source
of ultimate gloom; nothing can change our fate, because "society" is merely an
out-of-control extension of our genes, and we cannot change those, because they are
ultimately in charge. This is Darwinist pessimism with a vengeance.

The Lovins also think that capitalism is inevitable, unavoidable, natural and
eternal. But they think it is a good thing. What they think needs to happen, is MORE
capitalism, more entrepreneurial initiative, more efficiency, more magic of the
markets.

Their idea of benign capitalism is fetchingly enthusiastic, and it is hard not to
get carried away by their gushing narratives, parades of gung-ho technology etc.
Unfortunately for them, once you embed these narratives in the wider facts the
picture ain't so pretty. If you look on the CrashList website, check out Cutler,
Cleveland et al. They show that although energy efficiency may increase through time
(i.e., energy per unit of GDP falls), overall energy consumption INCREASES and the
secular growth of energy consumption is always far more than any nominal savings
through increased efficiency. What's more, it HAS to be like this, because in order
to win those efficiency increases, you have to have more widescale, complex, diverse
and heavily capitalised scientific and technological infrastructures, in other
words, you have to have a more complex, and overall more energy intensive, social
system and productive process. There's lots of the math on the CrashList site and
plenty more around to buttress this argument. Joseph Tainter argues similarly, so do
many others, and there's lots of this on Jay's site too. The history of industrial
capitalism clearly shows the trend towards drastically improved energy efficiencies
but always in the context of absolute increases of energy consumption.

The other lifeboat the Lovins rely on is the paradox that because the USA is so
incredibly wasteful of energy, there's plenty of scope for easy savings. We know
this is true. You could reduce US per capita energy consumption by half or more
without seriously impacting living standards or lifestyles. That's an awful lot of
oil + gas saved. A good depression will save even more. It would be a wrenching
business, politically dangerous, socially destabilising, but it wouldn't be the end
of the world, and it does mean that actually the oil crunch would be postponed for a
few more decades. However, none of that is going to happen, for well known reasons.
It didn't happen after the 1973-79 oilshocks when energy prices rose 4x. The problem
(as the FT said today) with the 'soft landing' scenario is that the Fed and AG have
just got too good at making sure the economy doesn't land at all, so serious and
radical disbalances and disequilibria continue to pile up, and the economy continues
to grow in both financial and material-throughput terms. This is because the USA is
a *capitalist* economy. People ignore these somewhat elementary facts of the case.
As they say, when the finger points at the moon, the idiot looks at the finger. So
all the Lovins' dreams will remain that: idle dreams and speculations. As a matter
of fact, beneath all their hype about 'natural capitalism' is a thinly-disguised
reproach against the capitalists themselves: they could be more efficient, why
aren't they? They could use our RMI ideas, the hypercar etc, why on earth don't
they, whey do they miss these golden opportunities we Lovins' folks put before them?
Of course, the simple answer is that capitalists actually do look for efficiencies
all the time, but just not the kind which the Lovins's are peddling.

This brings me back (a) to Jay and (b) to the End of Oil etc.

On (a), I think that, for reasons I spell out in various articles also lodged on the
CrashList site, and which many others much better qualified than I have argued,
Jay's Darwinian pessimism is based on serious misunderstandings about evolutionary
theory. We are *not* simply the servants of our genes, and evolution is *not* only
about competition, it is also about co-operation.

So therefore there is still hope!

Finally, on the End of Oil, I remain firmly amongst the pessimists and this is based
on my personal experience of working in the oil industry.

Mark





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb  3 21:03:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat Feb  3 21:03:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Jesus wants me for president
Message-ID: <000301c08e4e$a7b19400$8f8978d5@mjones>


After just two weeks in the White House George Bush's 'compassionate conservatism'
has already taken on a deeply religious tone, but has been well received throughout
the US, finds Martin Kettle

Special report: George W Bush's America

Friday February 2, 2001

Never underestimate the importance of organised religion in the United States. This
is a nation of believers, in which 86% consider themselves practising Christians,
seven out of 10 people say that the events described in the Bible are literally true
and 63% of the population says that religion can answer "most or all of today's
problems".
In this respect, the US is very different from Europe and Britain in particular. So,
when George Bush began saying during the election campaign that he foresaw an
important role for "faith-based organisations" in such policy areas as education,
prisons, welfare and social programmes, few Americans dissented. Al Gore, indeed,
agreed with him. The election campaign was full of such talk from both sides.

Nevertheless, it is unlikely that many Americans are yet aware of the full
significance of the role Mr Bush intends these religious organisations to play in
the social policies of the future. Indeed it would not be an exaggeration to say
that Mr Bush foresees a policy revolution with religion at its centre.

To understand what Mr Bush is attempting, it's also important to understand what he
means - and certainly what some of those around him mean - by the phrase
"compassionate conservatism".

Mr Bush's catch phrase was always a neat campaign slogan. But it was - and is - also
an agenda. It's not about finding a middle course between government and the market.
It's not about capitalism with a human face. It's about using government to enable
religion, and more specifically to enable evangelical Christianity, to transform
American society from anarchy into order.

Before this week, Mr Bush's most important utterance on the subject came in a speech
in Indianapolis in July 1999. What leaps out from that speech is its evangelical
tone. At its heart is Mr Bush's commitment to "the transforming power of faith".
Elsewhere in the speech he extolled "the power of religion to protect families and
change lives".

The Indianapolis speech revealed the intellectual debt Mr Bush owes to one man in
particular. Marvin Olasky has been a Mr Bush adviser since 1993. His book
Compassionate Conservatism, in which Mr Bush wrote an enthusiastic preface, was
published last year. It spells out its aims vividly and with great passion.

Compassionate conservatism, Mr Olasky says, is "a full-fledged programme with a
carefully considered philosophy". Its guiding star is that "Christ changes lives"
and it calls for an American president who "will have to speak regularly about the
importance of faith in God to poverty fighting and other social concerns".

This week, as one of his first presidential acts, Mr Bush began to act out the part
that Olasky has scripted for him. After meeting some three dozen religious leaders
and activists at the White House, Mr Bush announced the setting up of a White House
office of faith-based and community initiatives and ordered five key government
departments to set up similar internal agencies to focus their own work with
religious groups.

It is now more than 18 months since the Indianapolis speech, and Mr Bush's approach
to the faith-based agenda has become more subtle and conciliatory in important ways.
Mr Bush has gone out of his way to say that "government will never be replaced by
charities and community groups" and to stress that federal dollars will not go to
"fund the religious activities of any group".

These apparent compromises won a generally respectful reception for Mr Bush's
initiative this week. But the package raises a succession of explosive issues
nevertheless, even if few politicians of either party seem to want to draw attention
to them.

In the first place, Mr Bush's move skates deliberately close to the constitutionally
guaranteed separation of church and state, which the supreme court has repeatedly
upheld. For example, one of Mr Bush's chief lieutenants in this area of policy the
former mayor of Indianapolis, Steve Goldsmith, has argued that government should
support homeless shelters in which participation in daily prayer is a condition of
entry.

Secondly, Mr Bush has yet to ensure that the "faith-based" programmes are run in
compliance with, or at least compatibly with, the rules which apply to government
programmes. Existing organisations must be audited and, unlike many religious
organisations, are covered by anti-discrimination law. No such standards have yet
been drawn up for the organisations Mr Bush hopes to encourage.

Yet perhaps the main problem Mr Bush faces is that the programme has been set up to
achieve something - religious conversion - which he is increasingly forced to deny
for political reasons. Olasky, however, is explicit. In his book he says that
proselytising is desirable. He supports "change by conversion". It is in many
respects the rationale of his philosophy.

"Marvin is an evangelical Christian and Mr Bush is an evangelical Christian,"
commented one activist last year. This week, Mr Bush placed that activist, John
DiIulio, in charge of his new White House initiative. Mr Bush has put religious
faith at the centre of American government and of the contemporary American
experience. Like it or hate it, this somehow seems like a pretty historic
achievement for a man who is in only his second week at the White House.

Guardian




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb  3 22:34:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat Feb  3 22:34:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] FW: New On Dr Ed's Economics Network
Message-ID: <000501c08e5b$49a21120$8f8978d5@mjones>

[apropos of whether or not there'll be a real recession, here's what Deutsche Bank's
Ed Yardeni thinks -- and it is true that the markets have come back a little: is
this a dead-cat bounce, or is Wall St already anticipating the next *upturn* beyond
the present slowdown? If Yardeni and others are right, there will be no real
recession. The loco will keep on accelerating until it falls right off the
energy-depletion cliff...]

Subject: New On Dr Ed's Economics Network


Saturday evening, February 3, 2001

COMMENT: In June 1988, I wrote a Topical Study titled "The Coming Shortage
of Bonds." At the time, the notion was farfetched. Not any more. Indeed,
according to our well-informed friends at Wrightson.com, the 30-year
Treasury bond that will be auctioned on Thursday will be the last long bond
issued by the Treasury until the middle of the next decade. The
Congressional Budget Office now projects budget surpluses totaling $5.6
trillion over the next 10 years. This awesome sum provides lots of room to
cut taxes and increase spending, while still paying off the remaining $2.8
trillion in public debt--which I think may not be such a good idea. Fiscal
policy will be very stimulative this year. So will monetary policy. Indeed,
the Fed has already cut rates by 100 basis points even though the jobless
rate remains at the lowest level since the early 1960s! This is why I've
been saying that the recession is over as far as investors are concerned.

 http://www.yardeni.com




From aabdo at webtv.net  Sun Feb  4 06:47:01 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Sun Feb  4 06:47:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] 'Humanitarian' Doctor From M.D. Anderson to Testify
Message-ID: <23438-3A7D3C2C-608@storefull-232.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Ok, Ok.      I know that this article from the Miami Herald doesn't
identify either the doctor, nor the hospital, where the torture maestro
received his medical treatment.      That is, not directly.      But it
is a save guess that it is Houston's very own, M. D. Anderson.     But
why?

Because this is the favored hospital of the Bush Klan, that's why.
In all their myriad travels around the world on behalf of the government
and the CIA, they never fail to inform their friends about the excellent
quality of medical care available in their home state of Texas.

Workers (servants) get to enter from a parking lot some distance away
from this Grand Palace of Care.     It's a walk past the Ronald McDonald
House, and then an entrance into America's elite cancer treatment
center.      But keeping in the internationalst spirit of neo-liberal
globalization, a sizable chunk of patients are not upper class
Americans.      They are upper class international associates insead!

The in-house media comes on channel, in 5 different languages !     And
the in-house press likes to front page their patron saints, most
especially Barbara and George.      This is a treatment center that
seems especially popular with the Arab Emirate and Saudi sheiks.
But plenty of patients can also be found, from places like Argentina,
India, Mexico and Peru.

I won't go into too much detail, but the facility is considerably more
plush and CLEAN, than that in your neighborhood, Tex.      One could
almost describe the facility as palatial.     Though, fortress-like also
comes to mind, since a homey setting must be kept while the elite get
their care.

In case of a medical problem arising from the use of DU weaponry in your
own little neck of the global woods, think M.D. Anderson, Cancer
Treatment Center.

Tony Abdo

P.S.  Note the $1,500 bail.    Pretty steep for a major drug trafficker
and assassin.      They must have wanted to keep him in, real bad.
But then he is.... a sick man.      It's a case of the FBI's get tough
on crime strategy, now tempered by 'compassionate conservatism'.    
_______________________________
Accused aide of Peru spy master held in Miami
BY MARIKA LYNCH 
mlynch at herald.com  

Peru's second-most-wanted man wasn't difficult to find in South Florida.
V?ctor Alberto Venero Garrido -- a suspected arms dealer accused of
skimming more than $100 million from a government pension fund -- had
opened a $15 million bank account in his own name. 

Venero, an associate of Peruvian spy master Vladimiro Montesinos whose
own scandal brought down the government of President Alberto Fujimori,
was arrested on public corruption and money laundering charges after he
tried to make a withdrawal at a Miami Citibank on Friday.

On Monday, he asked a federal magistrate to let him out on bond because
the stress was aggravating his rare form of lung and colon cancer. Jail
guards ridiculed him when he told them he was bleeding from his rectum
Sunday night, Venero told U.S. Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan. A
hearing will be held Friday, when Venero's Texas doctor will testify
about his condition. He is being held at the Federal Detention Center in
downtown Miami. 

His survival is important, Venero told the judge, because he has
undergone an experimental treatment that can benefit others.

``The research will save other lives,?? Venero said. 
MAINTAINS INNOCENCE
The 47-year-old maintained his innocence Monday, but neither he nor his
Miami lawyers, Walter Reynoso and Scott Srebnick, explained the origins
of his Miami fortune. Venero's Peruvian attorney, Luis Roy Freyre, said
his client has lived in the United States since 1998 when he began
cancer treatment. He told The Herald Venero's money came from his
construction and textile businesses back home.

The controversy surrounding Venero's past touched the country's highest
political official this weekend, when a report surfaced that Venero's
family had given $30,000 to interim President Valent?n Paniagua to
cover costs for his congressional campaign. Paniagua went on national
television Sunday night to deny it and called the allegation by a
onetime Montesinos security guard ``an open and brazen conspiracy,??
the Lima daily El Comercio reported.

SIGNIFICANT ARREST
Apart from that, Venero's arrest is significant because it will aid the
investigation into Montesinos, a top Fujimori advisor who left the
country after a video showed him apparently bribing a congressman, said
Gustavo Gorriti, a Peruvian journalist and author living in exile in
Panama. The U.S. government's help in his capture also was noteworthy,
Gorriti said, because Montesinos is known as a one-time CIA informant.

According to court documents released Monday, the Peruvian government,
which is seeking to extradite Venero, alleges he was Montesinos' most
trusted ``bagman?? or ``strawman.?? Venero allegedly used his
position as the ``de-facto?? head of the country?s military and
police pension fund to pilfer millions he then used to buy apartment
complexes, hotels and buildings, the documents said. He would then sell
the assets back to the fund, at inflated prices.

Venero also helped Montesinos organize a scheme to sell substandard arms
from Belarus and other countries to the Peruvian military at excessive
prices, the documents said. 

$15 MILLION ACCOUNT
The FBI was first alerted to Venero earlier this month when Venero's $15
million account showed up on a routine check of required bank reports,
said Frank Figliuzzi, assistant special agent in charge for the FBI in
Miami.

The Peruvian government officially charged him Jan. 19 and sent out a
request through Interpol for help in locating him three days later. The
FBI then tracked Venero to a house in Southwest Miami-Dade.

Fearing Venero was about to transfer the money to another bank, the
agency froze his assets Friday. The suspected arms dealer found out when
he tried to withdraw millions at 10 that morning. 
He stayed at the downtown bank several hours, trying to figure out how
to get the money, Figliuzzi said. He finally left a few hours later, had
a drink at a hotel bar, then went home. About 11:30 that night, the
agency arrested him at home.

At first, the FBI believed Montesinos might be in tow. But the agency
has no information that the former head of Peru's intelligence agency is
in South Florida, Figliuzzi said.

The FBI does have information, however, that Venero has a handful of
other bank accounts around the country.

``There are many more millions involved in this case, and we are as I
speak becoming aware of more millions elsewhere,?? Figliuzzi said.

This weekend's arrest was not Venero's first in South Florida,
Miami-Dade Police say. Venero has an assault and battery charge stemming
from a domestic violence incident the morning of July 16, documents
show.

He was arrested by Miami Beach Police at the Fontainebleau Hilton, 4441
Collins Ave., in room 1076. Booking records show he was released the
next day on $1,500 bond.

Herald staff writer Elaine de Valle, Herald translator Renato P?rez
and Rui Ferreira of El Nuevo Herald contributed to this report. 
?












From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb  4 07:47:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun Feb  4 07:47:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] "We used 10 times as much energy in the 20th century as in the 1,000 previous years"
Message-ID: <000e01c08ea8$73bba0a0$018a20d9@mjones>

[Anyone who has any doubts at all about the utter unsustainability of modern world
capitalism and the onset of terminal crisis, should read Albert Bartlett's original
article on the meaning of exponential growth, archived at:

http://www.npg.org/reports/bartlett_index.htm

Below is Bartlett's comments on the 209th anniversary of this classic prediction of
the end of Big Oil.

Mark]



"Forgotten Fundamentals of the Energy Crisis"
by Albert A. Bartlett
University of Colorado at Boulder

Background
Around 1969, college and university students developed a major interest in the
environment and, stimulated by this, I began to realize that neither I nor the
students had a good understanding of the implications of steady growth, and in
particular, of the enormous numbers that could be produced by steady growth in
modest periods of time.  On September 19, 1969 I spoke to the students of the
pre-medical honor society on "The Arithmetic of Population Growth."  Fortunately I
kept my notes for the talk, because I was invited to speak to other groups, and I
gave the same talk, appropriately revised and enlarged.   By the end of 1975 I had
given the talk 30 times using different titles, and I was becoming more interested
in the exponential arithmetic of steady growth.  I started writing short numbered
pieces, "The Exponential Function," which were published in The Physics Teacher.
Then the first energy crisis gave a new sense of urgency to the need to help people
to gain a better understanding of the arithmetic of steady growth, and in particular
of the shortening of the life expectancy of a non-renewable resource if one had
steady growth in the rate of consumption of such a resource until the last of the
resource was used.

When I first calculated the Exponential Expiration Time (EET) of U.S. coal for a
particular rate of growth of consumption, using Eq. 6,  I used my new hand-held
electronic calculator, and the result was 44 years.  This was so short that I
suspected I had made an error in entering the problem.  I repeated the calculation a
couple of more times, and got the same  44 years.  This convinced me that my new
calculator was flawed, so I got out tables of logarithms and used pencil and paper
to calculate the result, which was  44  years.  Only then did I begin to realize the
degree to which the lifetime of a non-renewable resource was shortened by having
steady growth in the rate of consumption of the resource, and how misleading it is
for leaders in business and industry to be advocating growth of rates of consumption
and telling people how long the resource will last "at present rates of
consumption."

This led to the first version of this paper which was presented at an energy
conference at the University of Missouri at Rolla in October 1976, where it appears
in the Proceedings of the Conference.  In reading other papers in the Procedings I
came to realize that prominent people in the energy business would sometimes make
statements that struck me as being unrealistic and even outrageous.  Many of these
statements were quoted in the version of the paper that is reprinted here, and this
alerted me to the need to watch the public press for more such statements.
Fortunately ( or unfortunately ) the press and prominent people have provided a
steady stream of statements that are illuminating because they reflect an inability
to do arithmetic and / or to understand the energy situation.

As this is written, I have given my talk on "Arithmetic, Population, and Energy"
over 1260 times in 48 of the 50 States in the 28 years since 1969.   I wish to
acknowledge many constructive and helpful conversations on these topics I have had
throughout the 20 years with my colleagues in the Department of Physics, and in
particular with Professors Robert Ristinen and Jack Kraushaar, who have written a
successful textbook on energy.  (Energy and Problems of a Technical Society,  John
Wiley & Sons, New York City, 2nd Ed. 1993)


Reflections on the "Fundamentals" Paper Twenty Years Later

As I read the 1978 paper in 1998, I am pleased to note that the arithmetic that is
the core of the paper remains unchanged, and I feel that there are only a few points
that need correction or updating.
1)  When I derived my Eq. 6 in the Appendix, I was unaware that this equation for
the Exponential Expiration Time (EET) had been published earlier by R. T. Robiscoe
(his Eq. 4) in an article, "The Effect of Growth Rate on Conservation of a
Resource."  American Journal of Physics, Vol. 41, May 1973, p. 719-720.  I apologize
for not having been aware of this earlier derivation and presentation of this
equation.

2)  III.  The world population was reported in 1975 to be  4  billion people growing
at approximately 1.9 %  per year.  In 1998 it is now a little under  6  billion
people and the growth rate is reported to be around  1.5 %  per year.  The decline
in the rate of growth is certainly good news, but the population growth won't stop
until the growth rate has dropped to zero.

3) VI.  In 1978 I reported that "We are currently importing one-half of the
petroleum we use."  The data now indicate that, except for brief periods, this could
not have been true in 1978.  The basis for my statement was a newspaper clipping
that said that the U.S. had experienced, in 1976,  the first month in its history in
which more oil was imported than was produced domestically.  However, the imported
fraction of the oil consumed in the U.S. has risen, and in early 1995 the news said
that the calendar year 1994 was the first year in our nation's history when we had
to import more oil than we were able to get from our ground ourselves. (Colorado
Daily, February 24, 1995)

4) IX.  The paper reported that by 1973 nuclear reactors (fission) supplied
approximately  4.6 %  of our national electrical power.  By 1998 this had climbed to
approximately 20 %  of our electrical power, but no new nuclear power plants have
been installed in the U.S. since the 1970s.

5)  A table that I wish I had included in the original paper is one that would give
answers to questions such as, "If a non-renewable resource would last, say 50 years
at present rates of consumption, how long would it last if consumption were to grow
say 4 % per year?"  This involves using the formula for the EET in which the
quotient  ( R / r0 )  is the number of years the quantity  R  of the resource would
last at the present rate of consumption,  r0 .  The results of this simple
calculation are shown in Table I.



TABLE  I
Lifetimes of non-renewable resources for different rates of growth of consumption.
Except for the left column, all numbers are lifetimes in years.

0 %    10   30  100  300  1000   3000   10,000

1 %    9.5  26   69  139   240    343      462

2 %    9.1  24   55   97   152    206      265

3 %    8.7  21   46   77   115    150      190

4 %    8.4  20   40   64    93    120      150

5 %    8.1  18   36   56    79    100      124

6 %    7.8  17   32   49    69     87      107

7 %    7.6  16   30   44    61     77       94

8 %    7.3  15   28   40    55     69       84

9 %    7.1  15   26   37    50     62       76

10 %   6.9  14   24   34    46     57       69



Example 1.  If a resource would last  300 years at present rates of consumption,
then it would last 49 years if the rate of consumption grew  6 % per year.
Example 2.  If a resource would last  18  years at  5 %  annual growth in the rate
of consumption, then it would last  30 years at present rates of consumption. (0 %
growth)

Example 3.  If a resource would last  55 years at  8 %  annual growth in the rate of
consumption, then it would last  115 years at 3 % annual growth rate.

6)  In the end of Section VIII of the 1978 paper I quoted Hubbert as writing in 1956
that "the peak of production of petroleum"  in the U.S. would be reached between
1966 and 1971.  The peak occurred in 1970.  Hubbert predicted that "On a world scale
[oil production] will probably pass its climax within the order of half a
century...[2006]"  My more recent analysis suggests the year 2004, while Campbell
and Laherrere predict that the world peak will be reached before 2010, (Scientific
American, March 1998, pp. 78-83)  Studies by other geologists predict the peak
within the first decade of the next century.  Hubbert's analysis appears thus far to
be remarkably good.

7)  The "Fundamentals" paper was followed by a paper titled, "Sustained
Availability: A Management Program for Non-Renewable Resources."  American Journal
of Physics, Vol. 54, May 1986, pp. 398-402.  This paper makes use of the fact that
the integral from zero to infinity of a declining exponential curve is finite.
Thus, if one puts production of a non-renewable resource on a declining exponential
curve, one can always find a rate of decline such that the resource will last
forever.  This is called "Sustained Availability," which is somewhat analogous to
"sustained yield" in agriculture.  This paper explores the mathematics of the
options that this plan of action can give to a resource-rich nation that wants to
divide its production of a resource between domestic use and exports.

8)  Many economists reject this sort of analysis which is based on the assumption
that resources are finite.  A colleague in economics read the paper and later told
me that "It is all wrong."  When I asked him to point out the specific errors in the
paper, he shook his head, saying, "It is all wrong."

9)  The original paper dealt more with resources than with population.  I feel that
it is now clear that population growth is the world's most serious problem, and that
the world's most serious population problem is right here in the U.S. The reason for
this is that the average American has something like 30 to 50 times the impact on
world resources as does a person in an underdeveloped country.   (A.A. Bartlett,
Wild Earth, Vol. 7, Fall 1997, pp. 88-90)

We have the jurisdiction and the responsibility needed to permit us to address our
U.S. population problem, yet many prefer to focus their attention on the population
problems in other countries. Before we can tell people in other countries that they
must stop their population growth, we must accept the responsibility for working to
stop population growth in the United States, where about half of our population
growth is the excess of births over deaths and the other half is immigration, legal
plus illegal.  This leads me to offer the following challenge:


Can you think of any problem, on any scale, From microscopic to global, whose
long-term solution is in any demonstrable way, Aided, assisted, or advanced by
having larger populations At the local level, the state level, the national level,
or globally?
Horror Stories
Here are more recent horror stories to add to those that were recounted in the
original paper.

1)  The Rocky Mountain News of October 6, 1993 reported that: Shell Oil Co. said
"... it planned to spend $1.2 billion to develop the largest oil discovery in the
Gulf of Mexico in the past  20  years.  The discovery ... has an estimated ultimate
recovery in excess of 700 million barrels of oil and gas."  The  700 million barrels
of oil sounds like a lot -- until you note that at that time the U.S. consumption
was  16.6  million barrels / day, so that this "largest oil discovery in the Gulf of
Mexico in the past  20  years" would supply the needs of the U.S. for only  42
days!

2)  The headline in the Wall Street Journal for July 18, 1986 proclaimed that "U.S.
Oil Output Tumbled in First Half as Alaska's Production Fell Nearly 8%."   In the
body of the story we read that the chief economist for Chevron Corporation observes
that, "The question we can't answer yet is whether this is a new trend or a quirk."
The answer to his question is that it is neither; it is an old trend!  It is exactly
what one expects as one goes down the right side of the Hubbert Curve.

3)  Another headline on the front page of the Wall Street Journal (April 1, 1997)
said: "Four Decades Later, Oil Field Off Canada is Ready to Produce.  Politics,
Money and Nature Put Vast Deposit on Ice; Now It Will Last  50  Years:  Shot in the
Arm for U.S."  In the body of the story we read that:

The Hibernia field, one of the largest oil discoveries in North American in decades,
should deliver its first oil by year end.  At least  20  more fields may follow,
offering well over one billion barrels of high-quality crude and promising that a
steady flow of oil will be just a quick tanker-run away from the energy-thirsty East
Coast.
Total U.S. oil consumption in  1996  was about 18 million barrels a day.  Do the
long division and one sees that the estimated "one billion barrels of high-quality
crude" will supply the needs of the U.S. for just 56 days!  This should be compared
with the "50 Years" in the headline.
4)  In the Prime Time Monthly Magazine (San Francisco, September 1995) we find an
article, "Horses Need Corn" by the famous radio news broadcaster Paul Harvey.  He
emphasizes the opportunity we have to make ethanol from corn grown in the U.S. and
then to use the ethanol as a fuel for our cars and trucks: "Today, ethanol
production displaces over 43.5 million barrels of imported oil annually, reducing
the U.S. trade balance by $645 million. . .  For as far ahead as we can see, the
only inexhaustible feed for our high horsepower vehicles is corn."

There are two problems with this:

A)  The 43.5 million barrels must be compared with the annual consumption of motor
gasoline in the U.S.  In 1994 we consumed 4.17 billion barrels of motor vehicle
gasoline. (Annual Energy Review, 1994, DOE / EIA 0384(94), p. 159)   The ethanol
production is seen to be approximately  1 %  of the annual consumption of gasoline
by vehicles in the U.S.  So one would have to multiply corn production by a factor
of about  100  just to make the numbers match.  An increase of this magnitude in the
farm acreage devoted to the production of corn for ethanol would have profound
negative dietary consequences.

B)  It takes energy (generally diesel fuel) to plow the ground, to fertilize the
ground, to plant the corn, to take care of the corn, to harvest the corn, and then
more energy is needed to distill the corn to get ethanol.  So it turns out that in
the conventional production of ethanol, the finished gallon of ethanol contains less
energy than was used to produce it !  It's an energy loser!  The net energy of this
"energy source" is negative!

5)   The Clinton administration, in a "Draft Comprehensive National Energy Strategy"
(February 1998)  talks about America's oil as being "abundant," (pg. 4) and it
advocates  "promoting increased domestic oil ... production" (pg. 2) to reverse this
downward trend in U.S. oil production.  The peak of the Hubbert Curve of oil
production in the U.S. was reached in 1970 and we are now well down the right side
of the Curve.  The Draft Strategy calls for "stabilization of domestic oil
production" (pg. 12) which is explained in "Strategy 1" (pg. 12) "By 2005, first
stop and then reverse the decline in domestic oil production."   The Hubbert Curve
rises and falls in a manner like that of a Gaussian Error Curve, and once one is
over the peak, one can put bumps on the downhill side, but except for such "noise,"
the trend  after the peak is always downhill.  A large national effort might reverse
the decline in U.S. oil production for a year or two, but it hardly plausible to
propose to "stabilize" domestic oil production for any extended period of time.  It
almost seems as though the U.S. Department of Energy has not studied the works of
Hubbert, Campbell & Laherrere, Ivanhoe, Edwards, Masters and other prominent
petroleum geologists.






From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb  4 07:47:04 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun Feb  4 07:47:04 2001
Subject: [CrashList] the post-1917 world-system
Message-ID: <000f01c08ea8$7a5032a0$018a20d9@mjones>

THE LEGACY OF THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION

India and the USSR were both developmental states but  India was
incorporated into the capitalist world-market; the Soviet Union was not,
until 1991. The USSR was articulated into the world system as a constitutive
instance, but it was not incorporated into the world-market until near the
end. The post-1917 world-system was founded on a historical dialectic
between the USSR and the capitalist powers. We have to differentiate between
the _accumulation regime_ applying historically, and the world-market, which
is only an epiphenomenon of the accumulation regime. The world-system is
both spatial, structural and temporal in its dimensions. It is an evolving
dynamic entity whose laws are the laws of capitalist accumulation, mediated
through various historical instances. It is not a static entity capable of
functional description or analytic deconstruction. It cannot be reduced in
this way.

These historical instances may appear within the world-system in different
guises. A state can be, and can be represented as, one competitor among
others, even primus inter pares. But the same state can also be hegemonic,
can be a condition of existence for the system, and therefore an
overdetermining instance of it. That is true today of the US. It was true of
the USSR. It was true of Britain 120 years ago. It has never been true of
China, Japan, Germany or India.

The Indian bourgeoisie used its state for its own purposes. There was
historical continuity with the Raj and its client princes. No such
continuity existed after 1917 in Russia even tho' positions in the
bureaucracy were often filled by people who often occupied similar niches
under the autocracy, or came from the same social couche. They became
'Soviet' patriots and however willingly or unwillingly, served a regime
whose raison d'etre was survival against external blockade.

For reasons of self-interest as well as conviction, they identified with
Soviet power. This made the mass psychology  and functionality of Soviet
bureaucracy, party and state elites quite unlike that of any national
bourgeosie, even the Prussians or Japanese.

The Indian ruling class, after 1947 as much as before, was always a chapter
of the world bourgeoisie. India, China, Japan and Germany have all been
developmental states pursuing goals of national development and using
protectionism, mercantilist trade policies and semi-autarkic growth paths to
pursue their national goals. The USA, too, was a protectionist developmental
state before WW1. At that time only the UK was committed to free trade and
had an open economy; it too was forced into imperialist protectionism by
1914. But in all cases the relative autonomy enjoyed by national elites
never took the form of articulating that state's confrontation with world
capitalism. The Indian bureaucracy did not legitimise itself internally by
reference to external enemies in the constant no-war/no-peace continuuum
which defined Soviet existence, uniquely in the history of major states
during the capitalist era. The Soviet regime was not the representative of
world capitalism and bourgeois social hegemony within Russia, but the
principal obstacle to that hegemony. It stood in locum tenens for the Soviet
proletariat as the latter's historical embodiment and negation. The end of
the Cold War was thus a crisis for the Soviet nomenklatura, a large
proportion of which vanished in the Soviet rubble. The incorporation of the
Indian developmental state into the neoliberal world market had no such dire
consequences for the Indian bourgeoisie (the notion that all the
apparatchiks  are now Russian capitalists is factually not supported).

True, the USSR was also a developmental state, articulated into the
world-system in similar contradictory ways to India, Japan etc. The
parallels exist. After Rapallo (1923) inaugurated Lenin's policy of
'peaceful co-existence', the Soviet Union's place within the world-system
was defined for the rest of its history. But the USSR always bore the double
burden of its overdetermining role as a condition of existence of the
world-system.

China between 1949-1976 was the most autarkic state of all, but did not bear
this double burden. China too was trapped in a logic of primary accumulation
whose only possible outcome was eventual incorporation into the world market
as a peer-competitor of other more or less capitalist states. This event is
also evidence that the growth in global productive forces means no national
economic enclaves are feasible, no autonomous development path can work; the
incorporation of Russia and China into the neoliberal world-system has an
objective foundation. There are no longer alternatives.

The only difference between the USSR and other developmental states (where
development always, everywhere took the form of industrialisation and the
creation of bureaucracy and elite interest groups which came to identify
more with their peers in other countries than with their own state) was that
of ORIGIN.

The 20th century world system was not based simply on US imperialism
supplanting the older British hegemony. It was based on an antinomial
dualism: it was 1917 which birthed the present world system. Without October
and the coming into existence of the USSR, US hegemony could only have been
established through a further round of inter-imperialist wars, if at all: as
Lenin foresaw in 1916. Therefore the entire outgrowth of world capitalism,
including the tripling of the world population, since 1917 has resulted from
the the dialectic of relations between the USSR and the USA. The USSR was
not just one developmental state among many others, and sharing most of the
same problems, illusions (of self-sufficiency, of national mission and
exceptionalism etc.). It was also an overdetermining factor which determined
the TOTALITY of the capitalist world-system. Neoliberalism did not achieve
final victory until after 1991 (not after 1976).

This difference explains much in the different fates of the developmental
states since 1991. Between 1990-1996 Chinese GNP increased by 56%. Ex-Soviet
GDP DECLINED by 50 %. The Chinese state had long been incorporated as a
periphery into the world market and was not challenged by the collapse of
the 1917-91 world-system.

Following the collapse of the world-system based on global confrontation
between the USSR and the US, ALL the developmental states have experienced
difficulties or are entering periods of heightened stress. This is also true
of Japan and Germany. They, like India before them and like China soon, have
been forced to abandon the illusions of national development. The fate of
Soviet Russia is therefore also the fate of Germany, Japan etc.

In 1917 the masses erupted into history on the international plane for the
first time, but the October Revolution was recuperated to the contradictory
and ultimately fatal horizon of national development within a world-system.
The collapse of that system after 1917 must also mean that capitalism has
launched onto a new historical trajectory, in which counter-revolution can
never again take the form of national reaction or consolidation of national
elites. This means that the present epoch is exceptionally dangerous for
capitalism: any social or economic crisis must be contained either by terror
and the social destruction of the working class and its capacity for
resistance (Russia; IMF bailouts in S E Asia, 'streuctural adjustment'
programmes etc) and/or by consent bought by forced growth and
pseudo-keynesianism.

A breakdown in the system would not result in inter-imperialist wars but in
the collapse of capitalism as a whole, and either a relapse into utter
barbarism, worse even than Russia today, or the reconstitution of the
world-system as socialism under the political control of the proletariat.

There are no other options, and neoliberalism/globalism can be seen as a
recognition forced on capitalism by events, by the momentum of its own
growth, that the continuation of civilisation requires the reconstituting of
human society in a truly global form. But neoliberalism/globalism can only
conceive of that common human destiny in the most destructive terms, namely
by forced redistribution of wealth and power from the peripheries to the
metropoles, and by allowing the mechanism of supranational accumulation full
play, which can only result in massive immiseration in the peripheries,
which will see the complete loss of their productive assets and potentials
in many cases, as the logic of accumulation drives the system to ever
greater concentrations of production, of power and wealth. Therefore it is
already clear that the system cannot find equilibrium and further global
crises are inevitable.

More: the collapse of the world-system's resource base is already happening
and IMO is the real reason for the apparently capricious and 'inexplicable',
'wilful', 'irrational' desire of the IMF to plunge crisis-stricken economies
deeper into recession: because in fact they cannot  be allowed to resume
their previous growth path. The dangers to the world energy-system and the
viability of the biosphere are just too great.

For an illustration of just how parasitic world-capitalism has now become,
take the case of Caspian oil: 'the oil deal of the 21st century' according
to Forbes Magazine, the saviour of capitalism etc.

Caspian oil was not a secret: its existence has been known since at least
1960. Total Caspian reserves, and I have been studying this, are not likely
to be more than 100 bn barrels, and may be much less. It is 5-10% of world
reserves. That is less than five years' world supply at present demand
levels. Caspian oil will be pumped out at 2-4bn bbls a year when all the
pipelines are open. Bearing in mind that Soviet oil production in 1990 was
8.5 bn bbls a day and is now 3.5 bn, this means (taking into account that
'Caspian oil' is actually former Soviet oil which the west has plundered)
will never even restore oil production in the FSU to its highest historical
levels.

If the Soviet developmental state had not collapsed, world demand for oil
would already be hard to meet. The recent 40% fall in crude prices have to
take this into account: the true cause of cheap oil is (a) crisis in SE
Asia; (b) collapse and barbarism in the FSU; (c) effects on global demand of
anthropogenic global warming.

In order to perpetuate its historical existence, world capitalism is
plundering the last resources of cheap energy, a factor predisposing the
outcome of present crisis processes towards a complete collapse of
civilisation and barbarism.

In 1900, according to Eric Hobsbawm in the Age of Imperialism, 45% of the
world's population lived in industrialising capitalist countries and shared
the same general standard of life. Today the proportion so privileged is
less than 15% and the pools of prosperity will evidently continue to shrink,
relatively and absolutely. This is the main trend: growth in China is a
counter-trend and cannot continue against the main trend. China itself will
collapse and there can be enclaves of metropolitan-bourgeois power, culture
and wealth (Shanghai/Hongkong) but they will not be adequate motors for
national development as a whole, any more than the Japanese metropole can be
the locomotive for sustained regional development within Asia as a whole.
These tectonic dynamics shaping the new accumulation regime are visible and
incontrovertible.

These trends have continued for so long now that they constitute the
inarguable arbiters of ALL long-run secular trends this century. The dynamic
is driven by the concentration of production, centralisation and
concentration of capital and, now, the hypertrophy of capital into huge
uninvestable pools of essentially flight capital, i.e., this is the final
stage of a finance-rentier capital bubble.

The ending of illusions about growth and development has also been a crisis
for that version of socialist emancipation which itself derives strictly
from industrial logics of development and 'economic growth'.

The 20th century world system was characterised by the coalescing of
emancipatory rationales, visions and illusions with a certain model of
national development overseen by mission-driven elites. This required an
inversion of Marxism, its co-option to the historic trajectories of
Enlightenment nation-building, and the subsequent involution of proletarian
parties into engines of social control, construction, production involving
'conveyor-belts' of class power. That is the form our conception of the
'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' has perforce taken, but it was quite clear
to Lenin and the Bolsheviks, to Gramsci, to Mao, and to many other
proletarian leaders and figures, that things did not and do not have to be
this way. The involution of the party form and its collapse into the waiting
arms of pre-existing state-bodies, a highly visible process in Soviet
history, was simply a correlative of the counter-revolutionary process which
absorbed 1917, 1949 and other revolutions, within the global
accumulation-regime. But a World Revolution, which is the only possible
_proletarian_ outcome of any crisis of neoliberal/global capitalist economy,
may produce/entail a quite different 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat', one
whose purpose is to generalise freedom within a process of de-accumulation,
a redistributional regime in other words. The purpose of the DoP would then
be precisely to prevent/forestall the emergence of new instances of
centralised power driving/driven by centralising accumulation dynamics.

If you look at the DoP as Marx/Engels described (which is hardly at all) or
as Lenin visualised it in _State and Revolution_, the sense of this is quite

clear: socialism is a fairly protracted period in which the general level of
personal and social culture is raised. The DoP is a general social process
in which all classes AND INDIVIDUALS participate but in which the
proletariat predominates.

People's War is a highly contradictory prefiguring of this: it entails a
militarised party with a top-down leadership operating a kind of martial
law. But a condition of its existence is mass participation. Under
conditions of possible capitalist restoration and counter-revolution,
Peoples' War, always unstable, is at risk of capsizing into the mass
voluntarism and excesses of the GPCR, or its opposite, the ultramilitarism
of the Shining Path.

But the collapse of the neoliberal/globalist accumulation regime entails the
desturction of the capitalist mode of production, its historical
termination. And after the collapse of accumulation on a world scale, it
will be impossible to restart accumulation on a localised basis. Commodity
exchange and markets will inevitably retreat to earlier forms before
disappearing altogether. In the absence of the threat of capitalist
restoration, the creation of  a truly universal world civilisation can
continue under its own unfettered momentum, constrained only by the problems
of restoration of shattered communities and fragmented, non-viable
ecosystems.

Mark Jones







From cburford at gn.apc.org  Sun Feb  4 10:48:01 2001
From: cburford at gn.apc.org (Chris Burford)
Date: Sun Feb  4 10:48:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Species Crashes
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20010204144558.02d9f9d0@pop.gn.apc.org>

North Atlantic herring stocks have failed to recover despite a 25 year 
fishing ban.

The haul of Peruvian anchovies have plummeted from 11 million tonnes in the 
late 60's to less than 100,000 tonnes today.

These are some of the effects of the intrusion of capitalism into the 
hunter gatherer economy of fishing, on which humankind is dependent for a 
large proportion of its protein.

However a highly significant article in the latest New Scientist (3 Feb), 
discusses the Allee effect, first described by Warder Allee 50 years ago, 
on many other species on land or in the sea, whose numbers may fall 
substantially.

These effects explain why below a certain point, the species may just not 
be able to recover, because a minimum population density is necessary for 
successful reproduction as a result of a number of adaptive mechanisms.

Some scientists suggest that Allee effects are relevant in the populations 
of many species. Essentially this is saying that populations cannot be 
expected simply to recover in a linear way if numbers fall, because of 
complex non-linear systems involving the interaction of individuals of that 
population.

The Allee effect has been little studied up to now because of simplistic 
approaches to population prediction. If they are relevant, and on 
theoretical grounds, IMO they appear to be highly probable, we can expect 
far more population extinctions in the next hundred years, without the most 
carefully coordinated, essentially socialist, management of the land, seas, 
and total environment.

Even so, many more species extinction than at present predicted, could be 
inevitable, with substantial reduction in the bio-diversity of the planet.



Chris Burford

London






From pjarnett at pdqnet.net  Sun Feb  4 13:04:01 2001
From: pjarnett at pdqnet.net (perry arnett)
Date: Sun Feb  4 13:04:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] FW: New On Dr Ed's Economics Network
References: <000501c08e5b$49a21120$8f8978d5@mjones>
Message-ID: <002e01c08ed4$a6927180$0e3a3fd1@perryarn>

ya, right...

and he goes on seling more stocks...

Perry

[in Vegas they call that being a shill]

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Jones <jones.mark at btconnect.com>
To: crl <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 20:33
Subject: [CrashList] FW: New On Dr Ed's Economics Network


>
> [apropos of whether or not there'll be a real recession, here's what
Deutsche Bank's
> Ed Yardeni thinks -- and it is true that the markets have come back a
little: is
> this a dead-cat bounce, or is Wall St already anticipating the next
*upturn* beyond
> the present slowdown? If Yardeni and others are right, there will be no
real
> recession. The loco will keep on accelerating until it falls right off the
> energy-depletion cliff...]
>
> Subject: New On Dr Ed's Economics Network
>
>
> Saturday evening, February 3, 2001
>
> COMMENT: In June 1988, I wrote a Topical Study titled "The Coming Shortage
> of Bonds." At the time, the notion was farfetched. Not any more. Indeed,
> according to our well-informed friends at Wrightson.com, the 30-year
> Treasury bond that will be auctioned on Thursday will be the last long
bond
> issued by the Treasury until the middle of the next decade. The
> Congressional Budget Office now projects budget surpluses totaling $5.6
> trillion over the next 10 years. This awesome sum provides lots of room to
> cut taxes and increase spending, while still paying off the remaining $2.8
> trillion in public debt--which I think may not be such a good idea. Fiscal
> policy will be very stimulative this year. So will monetary policy.
Indeed,
> the Fed has already cut rates by 100 basis points even though the jobless
> rate remains at the lowest level since the early 1960s! This is why I've
> been saying that the recession is over as far as investors are concerned.
>
>  http://www.yardeni.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From pjarnett at pdqnet.net  Sun Feb  4 13:04:04 2001
From: pjarnett at pdqnet.net (perry arnett)
Date: Sun Feb  4 13:04:04 2001
Subject: [CrashList] "We used 10 times as much energy in the 20th century as in the 1,000 previous years"
References: <000e01c08ea8$73bba0a0$018a20d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <002f01c08ed4$a7b76980$0e3a3fd1@perryarn>

Mark,

agreed - I cut my teeth (so to speak) on the NPG stuff and believe that one
cannot really comprehend the severity and the totality of the message of the
decline of Hydrocarbon Man and the consequent dieoff until one has read and
understood the stuff on the NPG site.

thanks for reminding us.

Perry

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Jones <jones.mark at btconnect.com>
To: crl <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>; Debate at Sunsite. Wits. Ac. Za
<debate at sunsite.wits.ac.za>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 05:46
Subject: [CrashList] "We used 10 times as much energy in the 20th century as
in the 1,000 previous years"


>
> [Anyone who has any doubts at all about the utter unsustainability of
modern world
> capitalism and the onset of terminal crisis, should read Albert Bartlett's
original
> article on the meaning of exponential growth, archived at:
>
> http://www.npg.org/reports/bartlett_index.htm
>
> Below is Bartlett's comments on the 209th anniversary of this classic
prediction of
> the end of Big Oil.
>
> Mark]
>





From mstainsby at tao.ca  Sun Feb  4 13:22:01 2001
From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby)
Date: Sun Feb  4 13:22:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] "We used 10 times as much energy in the 20th century as in the 1,000 previous years"
References: <000e01c08ea8$73bba0a0$018a20d9@mjones> <002f01c08ed4$a7b76980$0e3a3fd1@perryarn>
Message-ID: <01b201c08ed8$0d40bb00$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>

> agreed - I cut my teeth (so to speak) on the NPG stuff and believe that one
> cannot really comprehend the severity and the totality of the message of the
> decline of Hydrocarbon Man and the consequent dieoff until one has read and
> understood the stuff on the NPG site.
>
> thanks for reminding us.


Based on this and Mark's post, I looked into the site, and the first link I followed
gave me this:

"In Don't Give Away the Farm: President Bush in Mexico, Grant urges President Bush to
reject Mexico's push to open Mexican-U.S. borders and explains how increased
immigration to the U.S. will exacerbate our overpopulation crisis and hurt American
workers. PDF Format or text version"

These people are pseudo-fascists, and very much racists at any rate. What they could
possibly give of benefit is hard for me to decifer- they cannot be trusted.

Macdonald





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb  4 13:29:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun Feb  4 13:29:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] "We used 10 times as much energy in the 20th century as in the 1,000 previous years"
In-Reply-To: <01b201c08ed8$0d40bb00$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>
Message-ID: <000201c08ed8$61fca000$019120d9@mjones>

>
> These people are pseudo-fascists, and very much racists at any rate. What
> they could
> possibly give of benefit is hard for me to decifer- they cannot be trusted.

You're right, Albert Bartlett is an elite figure and a very ambiguous social
theorist. But so what? Does that make him wrong about exponential growth?

The point is that the people who own everything are way ahead of us.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb  4 14:32:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun Feb  4 14:32:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] On the eve of revolution
Message-ID: <000201c08ee1$1a80ac40$389220d9@mjones>

Minutes of the Bolshevik Central Committee,  October 1917.  

"Resolved . . . Intensive preparations for an armed insurrection...  "

http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base/ccmin1.htm



From pjarnett at pdqnet.net  Sun Feb  4 14:57:01 2001
From: pjarnett at pdqnet.net (perry arnett)
Date: Sun Feb  4 14:57:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] "We used 10 times as much energy in the 20th century as in the 1,000 previous years"
References: <000e01c08ea8$73bba0a0$018a20d9@mjones> <002f01c08ed4$a7b76980$0e3a3fd1@perryarn> <01b201c08ed8$0d40bb00$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>
Message-ID: <002f01c08ee4$48f86560$1e3a3fd1@perryarn>

hopefully, one does not always judge a book by its cover

Perry

----- Original Message -----
From: Macdonald Stainsby <mstainsby at tao.ca>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 11:26
Subject: Re: [CrashList] "We used 10 times as much energy in the 20th
century as in the 1,000 previous years"


>
> > agreed - I cut my teeth (so to speak) on the NPG stuff and believe that
one
> > cannot really comprehend the severity and the totality of the message of
the
> > decline of Hydrocarbon Man and the consequent dieoff until one has read
and
> > understood the stuff on the NPG site.
> >
> > thanks for reminding us.
>
>
> Based on this and Mark's post, I looked into the site, and the first link
I followed
> gave me this:
>
> "In Don't Give Away the Farm: President Bush in Mexico, Grant urges
President Bush to
> reject Mexico's push to open Mexican-U.S. borders and explains how
increased
> immigration to the U.S. will exacerbate our overpopulation crisis and hurt
American
> workers. PDF Format or text version"
>
> These people are pseudo-fascists, and very much racists at any rate. What
they could
> possibly give of benefit is hard for me to decifer- they cannot be
trusted.
>
> Macdonald
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Sun Feb  4 17:37:01 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Sun Feb  4 17:37:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] more on 2nd Law
Message-ID: <sa7d9394.016@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

A biologist on Marxism-and-Sciences . 

Charles

>>> jones.mark at btconnect.com 02/02/01 05:22PM >>>

> This statement is imprecise. Not a closed system, but an isolated one, to both
> matter and energy flows in and out. The confusion, deliberate or not, between
> closed and isolated systems led Georgescu-Roegen and his populizer Jeremy Rifkin
> to fallacious postulates regarding solar energy and economic growth. See my
> paper, "Solar Communism", 1996, Science & Society 60, No.3: 307-331 (heat death
> is also discussed).

Is this you who said this, Charles? What fallacious postulates?

mark 

_______________________________________________
Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From AAlkali at UTNet.UToledo.Edu  Sun Feb  4 18:46:02 2001
From: AAlkali at UTNet.UToledo.Edu (AAlkali at UTNet.UToledo.Edu)
Date: Sun Feb  4 18:46:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] 1990 Malcolm X Conference online
Message-ID: <413CACCE0349D3118C300004AC386834011F2767@msg1.utoledo.edu>

ANNOUNCEMENT: 

OPENING THE ONLINE CONFERENCE ON MALCOLM X
www.murchisoncenter.org/malcolm

Tapes of 1990 Conference and 2001 online discussion
(new session each week for 24 weeks)

Session #1: Malcolm Remembered: 25 Years of Research
and Retrospective Reflection

Speakers include:

Abdul Alkalimat
Imam Talib Abdur Hashid
Augusta Kappber
Betty Shabazz
Amiri Baraka
Gloria Joseph
C. Eric Lincoln
Margaret Burroughs
John Henrik Clarke
Alex Haley



From AlAdisa at aol.com  Sun Feb  4 21:10:03 2001
From: AlAdisa at aol.com (AlAdisa at aol.com)
Date: Sun Feb  4 21:10:03 2001
Subject: [CrashList] 1990 Malcolm X Conference online
Message-ID: <99.103eeae5.27af5abf@aol.com>

The links at the website <http://www.murchisoncenter.org/malcolm/> are 
inoperative.



From pjarnett at pdqnet.net  Sun Feb  4 22:48:02 2001
From: pjarnett at pdqnet.net (perry arnett)
Date: Sun Feb  4 22:48:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Economics of Debt
References: <3A7B9012.600F1EE@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <003901c08f26$196d5a20$213a3fd1@perryarn>

from one who's been there: this is a very clear and accurate statement;
which gets to the heart or the core of why this 'slowdown' is not going away
very quickly....

thanks, Henry!  this is a keeper

Perry

----- Original Message -----
From: Henry C.K. Liu <hliu at mindspring.com>
To: <marxism at lists.panix.com>; <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 21:58
Subject: [CrashList] Economics of Debt


> One of the shortcomings of economics is that inadequate attention has
> been paid to economics as a behavioral science.  The problem can be
> traced to the concept of the economic man who is supposed to act
> rationally in his own interest which is generally defined rather
> simplistically as financial gain.  Modern economics of course deal with
> the problem of human behavior with more sophistication, albeit always
> through the back door, and always equating self interest with pricing. A
> market economy is coordinated
> through the price system based on the principle of declining marginal
> utility. Economists construct indifference curves to show a consumer's
> preferences. A good whose consumption goes down instead of up when its
> price goes down is called a Giffen good.  An inferior good is a good
> that you buy less of when your income goes up. A Giffen good must be an
> inferior good, but most inferior goods are not Giffen goods. The effect
> on consumption of a pure change in price is shown in an
> income-compensated demand curve (also known as a Hicksian demand curve
> after economist John Hicks). A Marshallian demand curve is based on
> marginal utility. Utility is observed only in choices. The problem of
> consumption is simply the problem of choosing the bundle of goods that
> maximizes your utility, subject to the income constraint--the
> requirement that the bundle you choose costs no more than your income.
> The so-called Presidential
> Elecion Cycle Theory of stock prices held by some investment analysts
> suggests that major stock market moves can be predicted based on the
> four-year presidential election cycle. The pattern is as follows: stocks
> decline soon after a president is elected, as the new leader, incumbent
> or not, takes harsh mearsures and unpolular steps necessary to bring
> inflation, government spending and deficits under control.  During the
> following two years or so after an election, taxes may be raised and the
> economy may slip into a recession. At about the mid way of the four year
> term, stocks should start to rise in anticipastion of the economic
> recevery that the incubent president wants to be roaring at full steam
> by
> election day.  The cycles is supposed to repeat itself every four years.
>
> The above is a select sample of theories hat makes sense generally only
> if they fit specific defining conditions.
>
> The purpose of this post is to suggest that human behavior is complex
> beyond the measurment of price and that price alone is not sufficient to
> influence market behavior.  Marx dealt with the concept of fetish as a
> factor in demand.  Education is another factor.  Economics literature
> has never dealt saitisfactoerily with eduction, being unable to clearly
> define it as consumption or investment or both. Similarly with health
> care and environmeantal preservation.  If it is both, there should be a
> limitless supply/demand relationship.  One could not possibly have an
> over-educated society or an over clean environment.
>
> With debt, it is quite obvious that debt changes human behavior.  A
> little debt reinforces responsibility. The American value system is
> built on the notion that home owners with a life long mortgage are
> better citizens than renters.  People tend to take better care of their
> "homes" if they "own" it, even though 90% of the purchase value is in
> debt. On the other hand, it is clear that excessive debt encourages
> irresponsibility.  The borrower may develop an irresistable incentive to
> walk away from his debt if he perceives that debt to be beyond his
> ability to repay, or the cost of the debt exceed its benefits.  The
> American bankruptcy regime is designed to give such debtor a fresh start
> from debt.  Unlike European predecents, no one in the US can be put in
> jail for failing to pay his debt, unless fraud is involved.  In fact,
> there is the legal concept of lender liability, based on which a
> distressed debtor can sue the lender for damages for lending money
> irresponsibly that leads the debtor into financial trouble.  Debt
> bascially is unearned money with a promise to repay it with
> optimistically estimated earned money in the future, that for example,
> the borrower will not become unemployed through no fault of his own.
>
> On the corporate level, debt also alters management behavior. Leverage
> increases profit margin on successful business plans.  But debt also
> exaggerate losses when business plans fail. And in the US system,
> bankruptcy is always a legal if not painless way to refute debt.  The
> comfort to the lenders is that equity investors are wiped out first
> becuase the lenders' variously collaterized positions.  Banks used to be
>
> the sole intermediaries of debt.  For this reason, a Central Bank is
> formed to supervise and provide liquidity tio the banking system.  Thus
> central banks came into existence on the asumption that the existence
> and health of the banking system is in the national interest.  And to
> protect that interest the cnetral bank is allowed to act a lender of
> last resort to the nation's banking system with public money, or more
> accuracy through the government authority to create fiat money.  Thus
> regulation on banks
> is a fair quid pro quo social contract.  Bank deregulation without
> corresponding raising of the standard for central bank bailout is a
> direct breach of this soical contract.  If banks cannot be allowed to
> fail, they
> should also not be allowwed to deregulate.  More ominous,  the US credit
> system has broken through the banking system, the bulk of debts now is
> intermediated through the unregulated credit markets through
> securitization of debts.  Over this market the government is generally
> only an interested bystander, so far quite unwilling to regulate even
> derivative trading by banks.
> There is ample evident to suggest that the level of interest rate does
> not influence the level of debt in an economy.  When interest rate is
> high, it often merely reflects the credit unworthiness of the borrower
> or the high risk for the lender.  High interest rates in fact creates
> more incentive to take higher risk by offering more compensation to the
> lender. As the Willaim Zechendorf, the bankrupt real estate tycoon once
> said: "I 's rather be alive al 30% interest than be dead at 3%." It is
> not clear that debt, unlike equity capital, actually puts money to work
> for the highest and best use, or where it is most needed and where it
> does the most good.  Debt tends to be most productive at the highest
> risk level which destabilizes the economy.  Debt securitization actually
> lowers the credit quality systemically by socializing the risk across
> the whole system rather than concentrating on the singular defaulter.
> Debt also discourages ecnomic democracy, since the poor generally find
> it much harder to obtain credit.  There is much truth is the saying that
> it is not how much you own, it is how much you owe that measures how
> rich you
> are. Debt also encourages carelessness with money, since the lender
> implies faith in the borrowers ability to repay in the future.  People
> tend to be more careful with money hey earned in the past in the form of
> savings because they remember how hard they had to work for it.  In
> comparison, debt is based on future earnings, which is deemed easier
> money by the exisence of the debt itself. The problem with debt is that
> it needs to be serviced regularly (except zero coupons which cost more),
> and a debt-propelled economy will reach a point where its ability to
> service the growing debt is exceeded, unless inflation is ahead of
> interest charges. Thus runaway systemic debt always leads to
> hyperinflation.  Bankruptcy only relieves the debtor, but not the
> economy.  If, as Minsky claims, money is created when credit is
> extended, then the erasure of debt destroys money and shrinks the
> economy.
>
> But the most fundamental aspect of a debt economy is that it cannot
> sustain a slow down, even a soft landing.  If Greenspan were better
> versed in debt economics, he would have inderstood that a debt bubble,
> unlike the conventional business cycle, cannot survive the slightest
> deflation.  His attempt to engineer a soft landing by raising interest
> rates only accelerated the debt bubble's burst. His only option was to
> prevent the debt bubble from forming by tightening credit quality years
> ago, but he chose to rely on the "market" to exercise its discipline.
> Instaed of discipline, the market gave him an insatiable apetite for
> destructive debt.  Once the bubble is on its way, Greenspan is on top of
> the debt tiger that he cannot get off without being devoured by the
> beast.  It was not the New economy, it was not the new productivity that
> gave the US its decade long boom.  It was debt.  Withoput debt, there
> would have been no New Economy, no dot com industry, no structured
> finance, no budget surplus and no current account deficit or its flip
> side capital account surplus.
> The 1990s was the debt decade. Much of the technology was invented prior
> to the beginning of the decade and became widely applied through debt in
> the form of vendor finance.  The communication revolution was built on
> debt that had been accumulated in the last decade.  The greatest
> invention
> of the 90s was more and more sophisticated debt instruments.
>
> Henry C.K. Liu
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base






From mstainsby at tao.ca  Sun Feb  4 23:12:01 2001
From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby)
Date: Sun Feb  4 23:12:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] 1990 Malcolm X Conference online
References: <99.103eeae5.27af5abf@aol.com>
Message-ID: <006a01c08f2a$80518b40$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>

Try again... they worked for me.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <AlAdisa at aol.com>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [CrashList] 1990 Malcolm X Conference online


> The links at the website <http://www.murchisoncenter.org/malcolm/> are 
> inoperative.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
> 




From aabdo at webtv.net  Mon Feb  5 05:33:01 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Mon Feb  5 05:33:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Where 'the patient is the center of every interaction'
Message-ID: <3381-3A7E8159-1132@storefull-231.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

It seems that M.D. Anderson in Houston is not the only medical center
for the elite that can offer special amenities, such as doctors that
will testify at your money laundering trial. ? ? ? There is stiff
competition from Boston. 

It seems that the rich are not as fond of factory medicine for
themselves, as they have been for others. ? ? ? One company offers
a 'patient advocate' at every MD visit. ? It seems that the rich
distrust these factory line supervisors (doctors). ? They even demand
to be treated in a holistic manner!        Apparently, the presence of a
lawyer nearby helps.

According to the Dr. head of *Hotel Recovery*.......
''We all know hospitals are not healthy places for healthy people.
Very few people go to the Four Seasons or the Ritz-Carlton and walk out
with an infection.''

These doctors for the rich are such sweethearts.      I wonder if he
said the same thing to his non- elite patients, before he opened his
'hotel'?      Or, was it..... Go into the hospital and we'll fix you
up......sucker.

Tony Abdo
_______________________________ 

Published on Sunday, February 4, 2001 in the Boston Globe
Health Care Firms Pamper Rich Patients 
by Liz Kowalczyk

?This is not the health care system most of us recognize: Internists
who promise - absolutely guarantee - not to keep you waiting for more
than 15 minutes. 

Specialists who return phone calls within three hours.

A nurse who will arrange your kids' summer camp.

Surgery followed by private car service to the Boston Park Plaza Hotel
or the Ritz-Carlton, where lavish room service and French Provincial
charm aid your recovery.

But a crop of new health care companies that have sprung up in recent
years, several of them started by Boston doctors, say this is precisely
the sort of service many patients want - and will pay for. Counting on
Boston's reputation as a home to some of the world's best hospitals and
physicians, these firms are selling amenities and coordination of care
to wealthy foreigners and Americans who can afford to simply forgo
medical insurance or pay for the extras themselves.

Dr. Andrew Sternlicht, for example, left his anesthesiology practice at
St. Elizabeth's Medical Center in Boston four months ago to start Hotel
Recovery, a company that, as its name suggests, will arrange for
patients who have had day surgery or have been discharged from a
hospital to recuperate in style.
Working long hours in a rented office on the Park Plaza's fourth floor,
Sternlicht's staff has been busy ordering boxes of sterile dressings,
antibiotic ointment, and Craftmatic Adjustable Beds to help elevate
patients recuperating from tummy tucks or knee surgery.

When Hotel Recovery opens for business at the end of March, it will
provide 24-hour assistance from nurses or physician's aides at the Park
Plaza, the Ritz, the Charles, and other high-end hotels, charging
patients fees in the range of $800 to $1,200 per day. (Dark glasses and
scarves will be included for plastic surgery patients.) Assuming there's
even an HMO that would cover such services, Hotel Recovery will not
accept insurance.

Massachusetts General Hospital and other academic medical centers have
long provided special hotel-like floors and services to attract
self-paying patients, particularly those from other countries. But
executives at companies like Hotel Recovery believe the market for
wealthy patients is underserved.

''Hospitals are focused on getting people out earlier and earlier,''
said Sternlicht, who stresses that his company does not provide medical
care. ''We're offering the luxury of years gone by when you could arrive
the night before your surgery and arrange your things and get a little
pampering afterward.''

At Global Health Services, private-duty nurses will change bandages,
arrange child care, and even accompany patients to tropical retreats for
$50 to $100 an hour.

''Boston definitely has some of the best medical care,'' said Karyn
Donga, a nurse who started the business two years ago. ''But
international patients are getting more astute and shopping around in
different cities. They're used to very good service. It's the same
things with domestic patients - a lot of them are willing to go outside
their health plan when they have the resources to get the best.''

One company, WorldClinic, which was started by emergency physician Dr.
Daniel Carlin at the Lahey Clinic in Burlington two years ago,
guarantees immediate access to top doctors anywhere in the world for its
clients, including international companies and individuals who travel on
business, not all of whom are well-off.

Because the companies are independent of any hospital or group of
doctors, they can demand a high level of service or take their lucrative
business to another institution.

Even if most patients will not be able to afford this gold-plated
treatment, some analysts say cash for care has the potential to trickle
down to middle-class employees covered by standard HMOs. There is
growing interest, for example, in ''defined contribution'' insurance
plans, wherein companies give their employees set dollar amounts toward
their medical care. Workers decide where and how to spend it.

''Many employers and health economists think that the underlying cause
of all the problems in health care is the divorce between consumer and
provider,'' said Greg Scandlen, senior fellow in health policy at the
National Center for Policy and Analysis, which has advised President
Bush.

''So what a lot of people are now envisioning are programs that give the
employee cash,'' he said. ''Once you're diagnosed with a condition you
go out and shop for a provider. The question is, `Who is the
customer?? And right now, the customer is not the patient.??

Even so, while employers may be willing to give their employees enough
money to pay for annual physical exams, medically necessary surgery, and
high blood pressure medication, few are going to include enough cash to
cover amenities like post-op luxury hotel recuperation. 

That probably always will be for the richest patients only - and is one
reason the wealthy tend to be in better health and live longer than
average Americans.
It's not that the wealthy have sole access to Boston's best doctors and
nurses, but they may be able to buy more time and attention from them.

Three years ago, Dr. Antoine Kaldany, a nephrologist at New England
Baptist Hospital, formed WorldPath mainly to cater to wealthy patients
from abroad. The company has grown steadily and now has 3,600 clients.
Some are royalty.

The company holds onto its clients' medical records and hires doctors
for them mostly in the Harvard and Yale medical school systems. Unlike
most managed care insurance companies, WorldPath's clients agree to pay
the doctor's full fee - no matter what it is.
WorldPath clients are buying expertise, but they're also buying service.
And they sure do get it.

Physicians agree not to keep them waiting more than 15 minutes. Office
visits can be no shorter than 45 minutes. Doctors are to return phone
calls within a few hours and send summaries of visits to WorldPath
within one week. The company arranges for limos and hotel accommodations
and sends a patient advocate with the client to every doctor's visit.

''If you're getting 100 percent of your fee schedule you might want to
call the patient back right away,'' said WorldPath chief operating
officer Donald Cornuet. ''Because the next time we have a referral for
your specialty you might not get it. It's pretty simple. The more
responsive the doctors are the more patients they see. The patient is
the center of every interaction.''

Health policy specialists say that the rich have always purchased better
service. ''The question is are they taking the services that would have
gone to someone else?'' said Herman ''Dutch'' Leonard, professor of
public management at Harvard's Kennedy School and a board member for the
HMO Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. ''Is the doctor making his HMO patients
sit around and wait?''
Cornuet rejects the criticism. ''People say this is two-tiered
medicine,'' he said, ''when in reality these people are helping
subsidize the low payments from Medicare and Medicaid.''

Doctors who treat WorldPath patients bristle at the suggestion they give
preferential treatment.

So even though Dr. James Rainville talked about stress with one rich
patient whose cousin was costing their business millions, and squeezed
in another who refused to see a female doctor, he says he'd do that for
any patient.

''We don't go out of our way to do anything different,'' said Rainville,
the Baptist's chief of physiatry, physical medicine, and rehabilitation.
''I will ask for favors, like getting them in quickly for an MRI scan,
if they're only in town for a few days. But I'd do that for a person
from Martha's Vineyard.''

Still, there's a high level of pressure from WorldPath for good service,
and some doctors admit that keeps them on their toes.

At Hotel Recovery, Sternlicht believes his service will lead to more
relaxed recovery, better surgical outcomes, and fewer hospital-acquired
germs. ''We all know hospitals are not healthy places for healthy
people,'' he said. ''Very few people go to the Four Seasons or the
Ritz-Carlton and walk out with an infection.''

? Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.












From gcamp at bryant.edu  Mon Feb  5 13:01:01 2001
From: gcamp at bryant.edu (Glen Camp)
Date: Mon Feb  5 13:01:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Exchange from Marxism and Science list
References: <0c8411851101911MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <3A79D4A4.33D9CC71@bryant.edu>

Please unsubscribe me from this list.

TIA

Glen D. Camp (gcamp at bryant.edu)

Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky wrote:

> En relaci?n a [CrashList] Exchange from Marxism and Science lis,
> el 24 Jan 01, a las 14:32, David Schwartzman (via Charles Brown) dijo:
>
> >  Readers might like to look at the chapter of my
> > book "Self-Organization of the Biosphere', especially my attempt to
> > summarize some theses in a dialectical theory with explicit reference to
> > Marxist philosophy of science (Like Levins and Lewontin, I too dedicate
> > my book to Fred Engels, among others including Vernadsky, Lovelock and
> > Margulis). Well that's enough for my first intervention on this list.
>
> Whenever the concept of "self-organization" appears we are risking to develop a
> dialectical theory! I am too short of time to take part of the list this piece
> came from, but if there are many contributors like David there, then it must be
> really interesting. A question to David, that I would ask Charles to pass on:
>
> > Like Levins and Lewontin, I too dedicate
> > my book to Fred Engels, among others including Vernadsky, Lovelock and
> > Margulis
>
> Oh, why not Oparin?
>
> N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
> gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From aabdo at webtv.net  Mon Feb  5 14:22:01 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Mon Feb  5 14:22:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Mexico Economic News
Message-ID: <3382-3A7EFD28-1302@storefull-231.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Mexico's importance to the US is also related to its role as an oil
producing nation...... the 5th largest producer of crude in the world,
according to Reuters.

Tony     
_________________________________
Mexico's Fox to discuss slowing economy with Bush   
03 Feb 2001 22:54  

MEXICO CITY, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Mexican President Vicente Fox said on
Saturday he would discuss the slowing U.S. economy and its impact on
Mexican economic growth when he hosts U.S. President George W. Bush
later this month. 

During a live radio show on Saturday that is part of his promise of open
government, Fox reiterated Mexico's central bank forecast that his new
government would not reach economic growth targets because of dependence
on the U.S. economy, which has begun to slow after a decade of growth. 

"The Gross Domestic Product (GDP), instead of growing at 4.5 percent, as
we had proposed, will probably be closer to 4.0 or 3.8 percent," Fox
said in the radio interview, the first in a series of weekly programs
entitled "Fox live, Fox with you". "But really there won't be a
significant impact," he added. 

Mexico sends about 90 percent of its exports to the United States. 
In between exchanging jibes with a famous comedian, the 58-year-old
Mexican businessman-turned-politician who took office in December, said
issues like migration and the war on drugs would also top the agenda in
his discussions with Bush. 

Fox, the first Mexican president elected from outside the Institutional
Revolutionary Party in over seven decades, holds talks with Bush on Feb.
16 in the American president's first overseas trip since taking office
last month.
_________________________________

Mexico's Pemex international revenues $14.8 billion   
04 Feb 2001 18:13  

MEXICO CITY, Feb 4 (Reuters) - Petroleos Mexicanos, Mexico's state-oil
monopoly, said on Sunday it posted some $14.880 billion in international
sales last year, on average volume of about 1.652 billion barrels of
crude a day. 

The figure is higher than a $13.7 billion revenue estimate made by the
Energy Ministry last September. 

The government company said in a statement that it sold about $9.443
billion worth of Maya crude to markets in Europe, the American continent
the Far East. 

Mexico is the world's No. 5 producer of crude.












From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Mon Feb  5 14:58:01 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Mon Feb  5 14:58:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] more on 2nd Law
Message-ID: <sa7ebff6.057@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

Mark,

Here is a comment from the same biologist in response to my amateur discussion of the 2nd Amendment, ...I mean the 2nd Law ( but not a jurisprudential one) of thermodynamics.

I recall Engels discussing the sun burning out, but I hadn't realized he was not hip to heat death for the whole universe. Engels does discuss Helmholz in notes that are for unpublished book "Dialectics of Nature". (See prior post from me  below which begot the answer  from the pro)

Charles


(((((((((
"Engels however had a hard time accepting the full implications of the 2nd law, because of his belief in the inexhaustibility of motion in the universe. He postulated there must be some mechanism to restore waste heat radiated into space to its original higher quality (low entropy) state (see p.334, 561-563, Collected Works, vol.25, Intl Publ., 1987, the annotated Dialectics of Nature). Hence his and later Marxist (and Leninist) rejection of heat death of the universe. But heat death may be problematic for other reasons; see my paper "Solar Communism", 1996, Science & Society 60, No.3: 307-331. Maybe ultimate heat death in our universe, but not in the multiverse! In any case, ultimate heat death of course in no way preempts the emergence and continued existence of self-organizing systems that export entropy ("disorder") to their environment, while minimizing it within the system. Some even argue that these systems emerge because of, not in spite of the 2nd law (Schneider, Swenson). They certainly obey it." 


Charles Brown wrote:

> Haines,
>
> Below is some justification for my claim that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics was known to Engels , and that it was part of his conception of matter in motion . Evidently, Helmholz was important in developing thermodynamics, and we see Engels centers much discussion in the _Dialectics of Nature_ section below on Helmholz
>
> Charles
>
> ____________
>
>     Charles B: I believe the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics was known to
>     Engels and was part of the basis for his definition of motion as
>     "the mode of existence of matter". So , Engels presumed a
>     posteriori, after not only his experience , but the experience and
>     observation of physical scientists.
>
>

A biologist on Marxism-and-Sciences . 

Charles

>>> jones.mark at btconnect.com 02/02/01 05:22PM >>>

> This statement is imprecise. Not a closed system, but an isolated one, to both
> matter and energy flows in and out. The confusion, deliberate or not, between
> closed and isolated systems led Georgescu-Roegen and his populizer Jeremy Rifkin
> to fallacious postulates regarding solar energy and economic growth. See my
> paper, "Solar Communism", 1996, Science & Society 60, No.3: 307-331 (heat death
> is also discussed).

Is this you who said this, Charles? What fallacious postulates?

mark 

_______________________________________________

Entropy in the Physical Sciences 
Original by Chris Hillman (Last modified by Chris Hillman 2 Feb 2001.) 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thermodynamical notion of entropy was introduced in 1854 by Rudolph Clausius, who built on the work of Carnot. His ideas were later extended and clarified by Helmholtz and others. In the 1870's, Ludwig Boltzmann found a "statistical" definition of entropy which, he claimed, reduced to the earlier notion of Clausius. Around the same time, Josiah Willard Gibbs introduced a slightly different statistical notion of entropy. Here are some pages discussing these ideas: 

The Page of Entropy, by Dave Slaven (Physics, 


((((((((

Engels'
Dialectics of Nature

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. BASIC FORMS OF MOTION
Motion in the most general sense, conceived as the mode of existence, the inherent attribute of matter, comprehends all changes and processes occurring in the universe, from mere change of place right to thinking. The investigation of the nature of motion had, as a matter of course, to start from the lowest, simplest forms of this motion and to learn to grasp these before it could achieve anything in the way of explanation of the higher and more complicated forms. Hence, in the historical evolution of the natural sciences we see how first of all the theory of simplest change of place, the mechanics of heavenly bodies and terrestrial masses, was developed; it was followed by the theory of molecular motion, physics, and immediately afterwards, almost alongside of it and in some places in advance of it, the science of the motion of atoms, chemistry. Only after these different branches of the knowledge of the forms of motion governing non-living nature had attained a high degree of development could the explanation of the processes of motion represented by the life process be successfully tackled. This advanced in proportion with the progress of mechanics, physics, and chemistry. Consequently, while mechanics has for a fairly long time already been able adequately to refer to the effects in the animal body of the bony levers set into motion by muscular contraction and to the laws that prevail also in non-living nature, the physico-chemical establishment of the other phenomena of life is still pretty much at the beginning of its course. Hence, in investigating here the nature of motion, we are compelled to leave the organic forms of motion out of account. We are compelled to restrict ourselves * in accordance with the state of science * to the forms of motion of non-living nature. 
All motion is bound up with some change of place, whether it be change of place of heavenly bodies, terrestrial masses, molecules, atoms, or ether particles. The higher the form of motion, the smaller this change of place. It in no way exhausts the nature of the motion concerned, but it is inseparable from the motion. It, therefore, has to be investigated before anything else. 

The whole of nature accessible to us forms a system, an interconnected totality of bodies, and by bodies we understand here all material existence extending from stars to atoms, indeed right to ether particles, in so far as one grants the existence of the last named. In the fact that these bodies are interconnected is already included that they react on one another, and it is precisely this mutual reaction that constitutes motion. It already becomes evident here that matter is unthinkable without motion. And if, in addition, matter confronts us as something given, equally uncreatable as indestructible, it follows that motion also is as uncreatable as indestructible. It became impossible to reject this conclusion as soon as it was recognised that the universe is a system, an interconnection of bodies. And since this recognition had been reached by philosophy long before it came into effective operation in natural science, it is explicable why philosophy, fully two hundred years before natural science, drew the conclusion of the uncreatability and indestructibility of motion. Even the form in which it did so is still superior to the present day formulation of natural science. Descartes' principle, that the amount of motion present in the universe is always the same, has only the formal defect of applying a finite expression to an infinite magnitude. On the other hand, two expressions of the same law are at present current in natural science: Helmholtz's law of the conservation of force, and the newer, more precise, one of the conservation of energy. Of these, the one, as we shall see, says the exact opposite of the other, and moreover each of them expresses only one side of the relation. 

When two bodies act on each other so that a change of place of one or both of them results, this change of place can consist only in an approach or a separation. They either attract each other or they repel each other. Or, as mechanics expresses it, the forces operating between them are central, acting along the line joining their centres. That this happens, that it is the case throughout the universe without exception, however complicated many movements may appear to be, is nowadays accepted as a matter of course. It would seem nonsensical to us to assume, when two bodies act on each other and their mutual interaction is not opposed by any obstacle or the influence of a third body, that this action should be effected otherwise than along the shortest and most direct path, i.e. along the straight line joining their centres. It is well known, moreover, that Helmholtz (Erhaltung der Kraft [The Conservation of Force], Berlin, 1847, Sections 1 and 2) has provided the mathematical proof that central action and unalterability of the quantity of motion are reciprocally conditioned and that the assumption of other than central actions leads to results in which motion could be either created or destroyed. Hence the basic form of all motion is approximation and separation, contraction and expansion * in short, the old polar opposites of attraction and repulsion. 

It is expressly to be noted that attraction and repulsion are not regarded here as so-called "forces" but as simple forms of motion, just as Kant had already conceived matter as the unity of attraction and repulsion. What is to be understood by the conception of "forces" will be shown in due course. 

All motion consists in the interplay of attraction and repulsion. Motion, however, is only possible when each individual attraction is compensated by a corresponding repulsion somewhere else. Otherwise in time one side would get the preponderance over the other and then motion would finally cease. Hence all attractions and all repulsions in the universe must mutually balance one another. Thus the law of the indestructibility and uncreatibility of motion takes the form that each movement of attraction in the universe must have as its complement an equivalent movement of repulsion and vice versa; or, as ancient philosophy - long before the natural scientific formulation of the law of conservation of force or energy - expressed it: the sum of all attractions in the universe is equal to the sum of all repulsions. 

However it appears that there are still two possibilities for all motion to cease at some time or other, either by repulsion and attraction finally cancelling each other out in actual fact, or by the total repulsion finally taking possession of one part of matter and the total attraction of the other part. For the dialectical conception, these possibilities are excluded from the outset. Dialectics has proved from the results of our experience of nature so far that all polar opposites in general are determined by the mutual action of the two opposite poles on one another, that the separation and opposition of these poles exists only within their unity and inter-connection, and, conversely, that their inter-connection exists only in their separation and their unity only in their opposition. This once established, there can be no question of a final cancelling out of repulsion and attraction, or of a final partition between the one form of motion in one half of matter and the other form in the other half, consequently there can be no question of mutual penetration or of absolute separation of the two poles. It would be equivalent to demanding in the first case that the north and south poles of a magnet should mutually cancel themselves out or, in the second case, that dividing a magnet in the middle between the two poles should produce on one side a north half without a south pole, and on the other side a south half without a north pole. Although, however, the impermissibility of such assumptions follows at once from the dialectical nature of polar opposites, nevertheless, thanks to the prevailing metaphysical mode of thought of natural scientists, the second assumption at least plays a certain part in physical theory. This will be dealt with in its place. 

How does motion present itself in the interaction of attraction and repulsion? We can best investigate this in the separate forms of motion itself. At the end, the general aspect of the matter will show itself. 

Let us take the motion of a planet about its central body. The ordinary school textbook of astronomy follows Newton in explaining the ellipse described as the result of the joint action of two forces, the attraction of the central body and a tangential force driving the planet along the normal to the direction of this attraction. Thus it assumes, besides the form of motion directed centrally, also another direction of motion or so-called "force" perpendicular to the line joining the central points. Thereby it contradicts the above-mentioned basic law according to which all motion in our universe can only take place along the line joining the central points of the bodies acting on one another, or, as one says, is caused only by centrally acting forces. Equally, it introduces into the theory an element of motion which, as we have likewise seen, necessarily leads to the creation and destruction of motion, and therefore presupposes a creator. What had to be done, therefore, was to reduce this mysterious tangential force to a form of motion acting centrally, and this the Kant-Laplace theory of cosmogony accomplished. As is well known, according to this conception the whole solar system arose from a rotating, extremely tenuous, gaseous mass by gradual contraction. The rotational motion is obviously strongest at the equator of this gaseous sphere, and individual gaseous rings separate themselves from the mass and clump themselves together into planets, planetoids, etc., which revolve round the central body in the direction of the original rotation. This rotation itself is usually explained from the motion characteristic of the individual particles of gas. This motion takes place in all directions, hut finally an excess in one particular direction makes itself evident and so causes the rotating motion, which is bound to become stronger and stronger with the progressive contraction of the gaseous sphere. But whatever hypothesis is assumed of the origin of the rotation, it abolishes the tangential force, dissolving it in a special form of the phenomena of centrally acting motion. If the one element of planetary motion, the directly central one, is represented by gravitation, the attraction between the planet and the central body, then the other tangential element appears as a relic, in a derivative or altered form, of the original repulsion of the individual particles of the gaseous sphere. Then the life process of a solar system presents itself as an interplay of attraction and repulsion, in which attraction gradually more and more gets the upper hand owing to repulsion being radiated into space in the form of heat and thus more and more becoming lost to the system. 

One sees at a glance that the form of motion here conceived as repulsion is the same as that which modern physics terms "energy." By the contraction of the system and the resulting detachment of the individual bodies of which it consists to-day, the system has lost "energy," and indeed this loss, according to Helmholtz's well-known calculation, already amounts to 453/454 of the total quantity of motion originally present in the form of repulsion. 

Let us take now a mass in the shape of a body on our earth itself. It is connected with the earth by gravitation, as the earth in turn is with the sun; but unlike the earth it is incapable of a free planetary motion. It can be set in motion only by an impulse from outside, and even then, as soon as the impulse ceases, its movement speedily comes to a standstill, whether by the effect of gravity alone or by the latter in combination with the resistance of the medium in which it moves. This resistance also is in the last resort an effect of gravity, in the absence of which the earth would not have on its surface any resistant medium, any atmosphere. Hence in pure mechanical motion on the earth's surface we are concerned with a situation in which gravitation, attraction, decisively predominates, where therefore the production of the motion shows both phases: first counteracting gravity and then allowing gravity to act * in a word, production of rising and falling. 

Thus we have again mutual action between attraction on the one hand and a form of motion taking place in the opposite direction to it, hence a repelling form of motion, on the other hand. But within the sphere of terrestrial pure mechanics (which deals with masses of given states of aggregation and cohesion taken by it as unalterable) this repelling form of motion does not occur in nature. The physical and chemical conditions under which a lump of rock becomes separated from a mountain top, or a fall of water becomes possible, lie outside our sphere. Therefore, in terrestrial pure mechanics, the repelling, raising motion must be produced artificially: by human force, animal force, water or steam power, etc. And this circumstance, this necessity to combat the natural attraction artificially, causes the mechanicians to adopt the view that attraction, gravitation, or, as they say, the force of gravity, is the most important, indeed the basic, form of motion in nature. 

When, for instance, a weight is raised and communicates motion to other bodies by falling directly or indirectly, then according to the usual view of mechanics it is not the raising of the weight which communicates this motion but the force of gravity. Thus Helmholtz, for instance, makes "the force which is the simplest and the one with which we are best acquainted, viz. gravity, act as the driving force... for instance in grandfather clocks that are actuated by a weight. The weight... cannot comply with the pull of gravity without setting the whole clockwork in motion." But it cannot set the clockwork in motion without itself sinking and it goes on sinking until the string from which it hangs is completely unwound: 

"Then the clock comes to a stop, for the operative capacity of the weight is exhausted for the time being. Its weight is not lost or diminished, it remains attracted to the same extent by the earth, but the capacity of this weight to produce movements has been lost.... We can, however, wind up the clock by the power of the human arm, whereby the weight is once more raised up. As soon as this has happened, it regains its previous operative capacity and can again keep the clock in motion." (Helmholtz, Popular Lectures, German Edition, II. pp. 144 * 5.)
According to Helmholtz, therefore, it is not the active communication of motion, the raising of the weight, that sets the clock into motion, but the passive heaviness of the weight, although this same heaviness is only withdrawn from its passivity by the raising, and once again returns to passivity after the string of the weight has unwound. If then according to the modern conception, as we saw above, energy is only another expression for repulsion, here in the older Helmholtz conception force appears as another expression for the opposite of repulsion, for attraction. For the time being we shall simply put this on record. 
When this process, as far as terrestrial mechanics is concerned, has reached its end, when the heavy mass has first of all been raised and then again let fall through the same height, what becomes of the motion that constituted it? For pure mechanics, it has disappeared. But we know now that it has by no means been destroyed. To a lesser extent it has been conveyed into the air as oscillations of sound waves, to a much greater extent into heat * which has been communicated in part to the resisting atmosphere, in part to the falling body itself, and finally in part to the floor, on which the weight comes to rest. The clock weight has also gradually given up its motion in the form of frictional heat to the separate driving wheels of the clockwork. But, although usually expressed in this way, it is not the falling motion, i.e.. the attraction, that has passed into heat, and therefore into a form of repulsion. On the contrary, as Helmholtz correctly remarks, the attraction, the heaviness, remains what it previously was and, accurately speaking, becomes even greater. Rather it is the repulsion communicated to the raised body by rising that is mechanically destroyed by falling and reappears as heat. The repulsion of masses is transformed into molecular repulsion. 

Heat, as already stated, is a form of repulsion. It sets the molecules of solid bodies into oscillation, thereby loosening the connections of the separate molecules until finally the transition to the liquid state takes place. In the liquid state also, on continued addition of heat, it increases the motion of the molecules until a degree is reached at which the latter split off altogether from the mass and, at a definite velocity determined for each molecule by its chemical constitution, they move away individually in the free state. With a still further addition of heat, this velocity is further increased, and so the molecules are more and more repelled from one another. 

But heat is a form of so-called "energy "; here once again the latter proves to be identical with repulsion. 

In the phenomena of static electricity and magnetism, we have a polar division of attraction and repulsion. Whatever hypothesis may be adopted of the modus operandi of these two forms of motion, in view of the facts no one has any doubt that attraction and repulsion, in so far as they are produced by static electricity or magnetism and are able to develop unhindered, completely compensate one another, as in fact necessarily follows from the very nature of the polar division. Two poles whose activities did not completely compensate each other would indeed not be poles, and also have so far not been discovered in nature. For the time being we will leave galvanism out of account, because in its case the process is determined by chemical reactions, which makes it more complicated. Therefore, let us investigate rather the chemical processes of motion themselves. 

When two parts by weight of hydrogen combine with 15.96 parts by weight of oxygen to form water vapour, an amount of heat of 68,924 heat units is developed during the process. Conversely, if 17.96 parts by weight of water vapour are to be decomposed into 2 parts by weight of hydrogen and 15.96 parts by weight of oxygen, this is only possible on condition that the water vapour has communicated to it an amount of motion equivalent to 68,924 heat units * whether in the form of heat itself or of electrical motion. The same thing holds for all other chemical processes. In the overwhelming majority of cases, motion is given off on combination and must be supplied on decomposition. Here, too, as a rule, repulsion is the active side of the process more endowed with motion or requiring the addition of motion, while attraction is the passive side producing a surplus of motion and giving off motion. On this account, the modern theory also declares that, on the whole, energy is set free on the combination of elements and is bound up on decomposition. And Helmholtz declares: 

"This force (chemical affinity) can be conceived as a force of attraction.... This force of attraction between the atoms of carbon and oxygen performs work quite as much as that exerted on a raised weight by the earth in the form of gravitation.... When carbon and oxygen atoms rush at one another and combine to form carbonic acid, the newly-formed particles of carbonic acid must be in very violent molecular motion, i.e. in heat motion.... When after they have given up their heat to the environment, we still have in the carbonic acid all the carbon, all the oxygen, and in addition the affinity of both continuing to exist just as powerfully as before. But this affinity now expresses itself solely in the fact that the atoms of carbon and oxygen stick fast to one another, and do not allow of their being separated" (Helmholtz, loc. cit., p. 169).
It is just as before: Helmholtz insists that in chemistry as in mechanics force consists only in attraction, and therefore is the exact opposite of what other physicists call energy and which is identical with repulsion. 
Hence we have now no longer the two simple basic forms of attraction and repulsion, but a whole series of sub-forms in which the winding up and running down process of universal motion goes on in opposition to both attraction and repulsion. It is, however, by no means merely in our mind that these manifold forms of appearance are comprehended under the single expression of motion. On the contrary, they themselves prove in action that they are forms of one and the same motion by passing into one another under given conditions. Mechanical motion of masses passes into heat, into electricity, into magnetism; heat and electricity pass into chemical decomposition; chemical combination in turn develops heat and electricity and, by means of the latter, magnetism; and finally, heat and electricity produce once more mechanical movement of masses. Moreover, these changes take place in such a way that a given quantity of motion of one form always has corresponding to it an exactly fixed quantity of another form. Further, it is a matter of indifference which form of motion provides the unit by which the amount of motion is measured, whether it serves for measuring mass motion, heat, so-called electromotive force, or the motion undergoing transformation in chemical processes. 

We base ourselves here on the theory of the "conservation of energy" established by J. R. Mayer [1] in 1842 and afterwards worked out internationally with such brilliant success, and we have now to investigate the fundamental concepts nowadays made use of by this theory. These are the concepts of "force," "energy," and " work." 

It has been shown above that according to the modern view, now fairly generally accepted, energy is the term used for repulsion, while Helmholtz generally uses the word force to express attraction. One could regard this as a mere distinction of form, inasmuch as attraction and repulsion compensate each other in the universe, and accordingly it would appear a matter of indifference which side of the relation is taken as positive and which as negative, just as it is of no importance in itself whether the positive abscissae are counted to the right or the left of a point in a given line. Nevertheless, this is not absolutely so. 

For we are concerned here, first of all, not with the universe, but with phenomena occurring on the earth and conditioned by the exact position of the earth in the solar system, and of the solar system in the universe. At every moment, however, our solar system gives out enormous quantities of motion into space, and motion of a very definite quality, viz. the sun's heat, i.e. repulsion. But our earth itself allows of the existence of life on it only owing to the sun's heat, and it in turn finally radiates into space the sun's heat received, after it has converted a portion of this heat into other forms of motion. Consequently, in the solar system and above all on the earth, attraction already considerably preponderates over repulsion. Without the repulsive motion radiated to us from the sun, all motion on the earth would cease. If to-morrow the sun were to become cold, the attraction on the earth would still, other circumstances remaining the same, be what it is to-day. As before, a stone of 100 kilogrammes, wherever situated, would weigh 100 kilogrammes. But the motion, both of masses and of molecules and atoms, would come to what we would regard as an absolute standstill. Therefore it is clear that for processes occurring on the earth to-day it is by no means a matter of indifference whether attraction or repulsion is conceived as the active side of motion, hence as "force" or "energy." On the contrary, on the earth to-day attraction has already become altogether passive owing to its decisive preponderance over repulsion; we owe all active motion to the supply of repulsion from the sun. Therefore, the modern school * even if it remains unclear about the nature of the relation constituting motion * nevertheless, in point of fact and for terrestrial processes, indeed for the whole solar system, is absolutely right in conceiving energy as repulsion. 

The expression "energy" by no means correctly expresses all the relationships of motion, for it comprehends only one aspect, the action but not the reaction. It still makes it appear as if "energy" was something external to matter, something implanted in it. But in all circumstances it is to be preferred to the expression " force." 

As conceded on all hands (from Hegel to Helmholtz), the notion of force is derived from the activity of the human organism within its environment. We speak of muscular force, of the lifting force of the arm, of the leaping power of the legs, of the digestive force of the stomach and intestinal canal, of the sensory force of the nerves, of the secretory force of the glands, etc. In other words, in order to save having to give the real cause of a change brought about by a function of our organism, we fabricate a fictitious cause, a so-called force corresponding to the change. Then we carry this convenient method over to the external world also, and so invent as many forces as there are diverse phenomena. 

In Hegel's time natural science (with the exception perhaps of heavenly and terrestrial mechanics) was still in this naive state, and Hegel quite correctly attacks the prevailing way of denoting forces (passage to be quoted).[2] Similarly in another passage: 

"It is better (to say) that a magnet has a Soul (as Thales expresses it) than that it has an attracting force; force is a kind of property which is separable from matter and put forward as a predicate * while soul, on the other hand, is its movement, identical with the nature of matter." (Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], I, p. 208.)
To-day we no longer make it so easy for ourselves in regard to forces. Let us listen to Helmholtz: 
"If we are fully acquainted with a natural law, we must also demand that it should operate without exception.... Thus the law confronts us as an objective power, and accordingly we term it a force. For instance, we objectivise the law of the refraction of light as a refractive power of transparent substances, the law of chemical affinities as a force of affinity of the various substances for one another. Thus we speak of the electrical force of contact of metals, of the force of adhesion, capillary force, and so on. These names objectivise laws which in the first place embrace only a limited series of natural processes, the conditions for which are still rather complicated.... Force is only the objectivised law of action.... The abstract idea of force introduced by us only makes the addition that we have not arbitrarily invented this law but that it is a compulsory law of phenomena. Hence our demand to understand the phenomena of nature, i.e. to find out their laws, takes on another form of expression, viz. that we have to seek out the forces which are the causes of the phenomena." (Loc. chit., pp. 189 * 191. Innsbruck lecture of 1869.)
Firstly, it is certainly a peculiar manner of "objectivising" if the purely subjective notion of force is introduced into a natural law that has already been established as independent of our subjectivity and therefore completely objective. At most an Old-Hegelian of the strictest type might permit himself such a thing, but not a Neo-Kantian like Helmholtz. Neither the law, when once established, nor its objectivity, nor that of its action, acquires the slightest new objectivity by our interpolating a force into it; what is added is our subjective assertion that it acts in virtue of some so far entirely unknown force. The secret meaning, however, of this interpolating is seen as soon as Helmholtz gives us examples: refraction of light, chemical affinity, contact electricity, adhesion, capillarity, and confers on the laws that govern these phenomena the "objective" honorary rank of forces. "These names objectivise laws which in the first place embrace only a limited series of natural processes, the conditions for which are still rather complicated." And it is just here that the "objectivising," which is rather subjectivising, gets its meaning; not because we have become fully acquainted with the law, hut just because this is not the case. Just because we are not yet clear about the "rather complicated conditions" of these phenomena, we often resort here to the word force. We express thereby not our scientific knowledge, but our lack of scientific knowledge of the nature of the law and its mode of action. In this sense, as a short expression for a causal connection that has not yet been explained, as a makeshift expression, it may pass for current usage. Anything more than that is bad. With just as much right as Helmholtz explains physical phenomena from so-called refractive force, electrical force of contact, etc., the medieval scholastics explained temperature changes by means of a vis calorifica and a vis frigifaciens and thus saved themselves all further investigation of heat phenomena. 
And even in this sense it is one-sided, for it expresses everything in a one-sided manner. All natural processes are two-sided, they rest on the relation of at least two effective parts, action and reaction. The notion of force, however, owing to its origin from the action of the human organism on the external world, and further because of terrestrial mechanics, implies that only one part is active, effective, the other part being passive, receptive; hence it lays down a not yet demonstrable extension of the difference between the sexes to non-living objects. The reaction of the second part, on which the force works, appears at most as a passive reaction, as a resistance. This mode of conception is permissible in a number of fields even outside pure mechanics, namely where it is a matter of the simple transference of motion and its quantitative calculation. But already in the more complicated physical processes it is no longer adequate, as Helmholtz's own examples prove. The refractive force lies just as much in the light itself as in the transparent bodies. In the case of adhesion and capillarity, it is certain that the "force " is just as much situated in the surface of the solid as in the liquid. In contact electricity, at any rate, it is certain that both metals contribute to it, and " chemical affinity " also is situated, if anywhere, in both the parts entering into combination. But a force which consists of separated forces, an action which does not evoke its reaction, but which exists solely by itself, is no force in the sense of terrestrial mechanics, the only science in which one really knows what is meant by a force. For the basic conditions of terrestrial mechanics are, firstly, refusal to investigate the causes of the impulse, i.e. the nature of the particular force, and, secondly, the view of the one-sidedness of the force, it being everywhere opposed by au identical gravitational force, such that in comparison with any terrestrial distance of fall the earth's radius = (infinity). 

But let us see further how Helmholtz, " objectivises " his " forces " into natural laws. 

In a lecture of 1854 (loc. cit.., p. 119) he examines the "store of working force " originally contained in the nebular sphere from which our solar system was formed. " In point of fact it received an enormously large legacy in this respect, if only in the form of the general force of attraction of all its parts for one another." This indubitably is so. But it is equally indubitable that the whole of this legacy of gravitation is present undiminished in the solar system to-day, apart perhaps from the minute quantity that was lost together with the matter ' We should now call this potential energy. which was flung out, possibly irrevocably, into space. Further, "The chemical forces too must have been already present and ready to act; but as these forces could become effective only on intimate contact of the various kinds of masses, condensation had to take place before they came into play." If, as Hclmholtz does above, we regard these chemical forces as forces of affinity, hence as attraction, then again we are bound to say that the sum-total of these chemical forces of attraction still exists undiminished within the solar system. 

But on the same page Helmholtz gives us the results of his calculations "that perhaps only the 454th part of the original mechanical force exists as such "* that is to say, in the solar system. How is one to make sense of that? The force of attraction, general as well as chemical, is still present unimpaired in the solar system. Helmholtz does not mention any other certain source of force. In any case, according to Helmholtz, these forces have performed tremendous work. But they have neither increased nor diminished on that account. As it is with the clock weight mentioned above, so it is with every molecule in the solar system and with the solar system itself. "Its gravitation is neither lost nor diminished." What happens to carbon and oxygen as previously mentioned holds good for all chemical elements: the total given quantity of each one remains, and "the total force of affinity continues to exist just as powerfully as before." What have we lost then? And what "force" has performed the tremendous work which is 453 times as big as that which, according to his calculation, the solar system is still able to perform? Up to this point Helmholtz has given no answer. But further on he says: 

" Whether a further reserve of force in the shape of heat was present, we do not know." * But, if we may be allowed to mention it, heat is a repulsive "force," it acts therefore against the direction of both gravitation and chemical attraction, being minus if these are put as plus. Hence if, according to Helmholtz, the original store of force is composed of general and chemical attraction, an extra reserve of heat would have to be, not added to that reserve of force, but subtracted from it. Otherwise the sun's heat would have had to strengthen the force of attraction of the earth when it causes water to evaporate in direct opposition to this attraction, and the water vapour to rise; or the heat of an incandescent iron tube through which steam is passed would strengthen the chemical attraction of oxygen and water, whereas it puts it out of action. Or, to make the same thing clear in another form: let us assume that the nebular sphere with radius r, and therefore with volume 4/3(pi)r? has a temperature t. Let us further assume a second nebular sphere of equal mass having at the higher temperature T the larger radius R and volume 4/3(pi)R?. Now it is obvious that in the second nebular sphere the attraction, mechanical as well as physical and chemical, can act with the same force as in the first only when it has shrunk from radius R to radius r, i.e. when it has radiated into world space heat corresponding to the temperature difference T * t. A hotter nebular sphere will therefore condense later than a colder one; consequently the heat, considered from Helmholtz's standpoint as an obstacle to condensation, is no plus but a minus of the " reserve of force." Helmholtz, by pre-supposing the possibility of a quantum of repulsive motion in the form of heat becoming added to the attractive forms of motion and increasing the total of these latter, commits a definite error of calculation. 

Let us now bring the whole of this " reserve of force," possible as well as demonstrable, under the same mathematical sign so that an addition is possible. Since for the time being we cannot reverse the heat and replace its repulsion by the equivalent attraction, we shall have to perform this reversal with the two forms of attraction. Then, instead of the general force of attraction, instead of the chemical affinity, and instead of the heat, which moreover possibly already exists as such at the outset, we have simply to put * the sum of the repulsive motion or so-called energy present in the gaseous sphere at the moment when it becomes independent. And by so doing Helmholtz's calculation will also hold, in which he wants to calculate "the heating that must arise from the assumed initial condensation of the heavenly bodies of our system from nebulously scattered matter." By thus reducing the whole " reserve of force " to heat, repulsion, he also makes it possible to add on the assumed "heat reserve force." The calculation then asserts that 453/454 of all the energy, i.e. repulsion, originally present in the gaseous sphere has been radiated into space in the form of heat, or, to put it accurately, that the sum of all attraction in the present solar system is to the sum of all repulsion, still present in the same, as 453: 1. But then it directly contradicts the text of the lecture to which it is added as proof. 

If then the notion of force, even in the case of a physicist like Helmholtz, gives rise to such confusion of ideas, this is the best proof that it is in general not susceptible of scientific use in all branches of investigation which go beyond the calculations of mechanics. In mechanics the causes of motion are taken as given and their origin is disregarded, only their effects being taken into account. Hence if a cause of motion is termed a force, this does no damage to mechanics as such; but it becomes the custom to transfer this term also to physics, chemistry, and biology, and then confusion is inevitable. We have already seen this and shall frequently see it again. 

For the concept of work, see the next chapter. 

NOTES
1. Helmholtz, in his Pop. Vorlesungen [Popular Lectures], II, p. 113, appears to ascribe a certain share in the natural scientific proof of Descartes' principle of the quantitative immutability of motion to himself as well as to Mayer, Joule, and Colding. "I myself, without knowing anything of Mayer and Codling, and only becoming acquainted with Joule's experiments at the end of my work, proceeded along the same path; I occupied myself especially with searching out all the relations between the various processes of nature that could be deduced from the given mode of consideration, and I published my investigations in 1847 in a little work entitled Uber die Erhaltung der Kraft [On the Conservation of Force]." * But in this work there is to be found nothing new for the position in 1847 beyond the above-mentioned, mathematically very valuable, development that "conservation of force" and central action of the forces active between the various bodies of a system are only two different expressions for the same thing, and further a more accurate formulation of the law that the sum of the live and tensional forces in a given mechanical system is constant. In every other respect, it was already superseded since Mayer's second paper of 1845. Already in 1842 Mayer maintained the "indestructibility of force," and from his new standpoint in 1845 he had much more brilliant things to say about the "relations between the various processes of nature " than Helmholtz had in 1847. 
2. See Appendix II, p. 881.

Back to the Index  |   Read next section
Transcribed in 1998 for MEIA by slr at marx.org 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Marx / Engels 
Archive   
Marxist writers' 
Archives  



From AlAdisa at aol.com  Mon Feb  5 17:10:02 2001
From: AlAdisa at aol.com (AlAdisa at aol.com)
Date: Mon Feb  5 17:10:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] 1990 Malcolm X Conference online
Message-ID: <31.1014f6d5.27b07863@aol.com>

Will do.



From julp at freesurf.ch  Tue Feb  6 09:17:01 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Tue Feb  6 09:17:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Prices and Layoffs
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.06.mjhgkbaa@computer>

Jim already answered and I agree with him but the following has another point of 
view. Even if Jim was wrong, you're left with this problem...

>It has been for sometime now standard management theory that slow sales
>are answered with layoffs to cut cost and to maintain quarterly overall
>profit by increasing ahorterm profit margin over diminished sales
>volume.
>...
>Thus we have a system in which corporate well-being works against
>systemic well-being.

No. Corporate well-beign doesn't concur with systemic well-beign because 
corporations belong to Capital. Here's an example...

>Suupose a management theory is adopted to favor cutting prices instead
>of instant layoffs, there is logic to suppose that this would be a
>preferred systemic option.  The organization of labor for production is
>the fundamental asset of a corporation.

If this is to work systemically and not only for luxury goods which are consumed 
mostly by rentiers and executives, wages would have to be sustained so that lower 
prices would indeed increase demand. This means that profits would have to 
shrink systemically.
Let's assume that Capital accepts to shirnk profits and lower prices for the sake of 
long-term profits... As profitability is not equal for all businesses and sectors, this 
means that some producers will not only see their profits reduced but will simply go 
in the red as the price at which their competitors sell goes under their costs. What 
will happen to those producers? Why would Capital keep these loss-making 
producers with no great future prospects? There will be shutdowns, layoffs, and 
prices will be able to go up again.
You see Henry? As long as Capital continues to obtain that much profits, there will 
be layoffs. The only thing that changes in management theory and accounting 
achieves is to redistribute these layoffs to other businesses. The alternative is 
regulations or unions which take management descisions away from the clutches 
Capital.

You see Mark? I can also be deterministic and sound dramatic. ;-)

Julien




From julp at freesurf.ch  Tue Feb  6 09:18:02 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Tue Feb  6 09:18:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Energy scenarios and Natural Capitalism
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.06.pifqptkp@computer>

Mark,

>If you look on the CrashList website, check out Cutler,
>Cleveland et al. They show that although energy efficiency may increase through 
>time (i.e., energy per unit of GDP falls), overall energy consumption INCREASES 
>and the secular growth of energy consumption is always far more than any 
>nominal savings through increased efficiency.

It's not the first time that you're saying that some piece on your website or 
elsewhere shows something and that after looking I find out that the piece talks 
about something else. Am I really dumb or are they confonting different methods of 
aggregating energy consumption?
As to what they show, what can they show when relying on stuff like "market prices 
reflect the marginal product of input and thus its economic usefulness". I guess that 
this must please some of the orthodox LTV fanatics, but it's dead wrong because it 
ultimately relies on the very notion they are attacking, namely that one can 
substitute one energy source for another (or it may rely on neoclassical modelling 
assuming notably that consumers have no needs and infinite desires so that prices 
of end products reflect utility or it may rely on another even more extraordinary 
assumption: that there is no such thing as scarcity of energy sources).  I don't want 
to devalue their work even if I don't like their economics and if I think that their 
sense/statistics rato is too low. It's important that someone does this, but this 
sounds like exploratory work. They aren't *showing* much. BTW, I'd like to see 
economists do the same work that they're doing. If they did, we wouldn't have to 
rely on such crap as GDP and such. At least, I'd like people to recognize how 
crappy GDP is. It depresses me to see scientists refine measures of energy use 
with such crappy economic instruments.
Incidentally, using the preferred method of Cleveland & co., energy per unit of GDP 
is NOT decreasing ... so I wonder if we read the same paper. They say that not 
because overall energy consumption increases but because more "high quality" 
energy is used.


>What's more, it HAS to be like this, because in order to win those efficiency
>increases, you have to have more widescale, complex, diverse and heavily
>capitalised scientific and technological infrastructures, in other
>words, you have to have a more complex, and overall more energy intensive, 
>social system and productive process. 

This sounds so passe, Mark! Are you really arguing that "bigger is more efficient"? I 
won't even discuss such vulgar positivist slant. Look around you, folks! Even the 
paper you cite refutes that.

>The history of industrial capitalism clearly shows the trend towards drastically 
>improved energy efficiencies but always in the context of absolute increases of 
>energy consumption.

This is true, but isn't it because the energy availability was increasing or even 
apparently infinite but not the other way around as you suggest?
Antother thing Cleveland & co. say is that, with their preferred method and lots of 
statistical voodoo which notably eliminates the influence of increased use of labour 
and capital (!), GDP growth doesn't imply increased energy used but the other 
way around. Interestingly enough, without their bizarre adjustment (which negates 
what is likely to happen as the petroleum depletion hits), they say that there's no 
statistical causality between energy use and GDP.

Julien




From julp at freesurf.ch  Tue Feb  6 11:06:01 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Tue Feb  6 11:06:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Economics of Debt
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.06.thehdkss@computer>

Usually I don't respond to Henry's pieces which have their own merits even if they 
are often shockingly close to the mainstream in their own ways, but since Perry 
called this one "a keeper", I thought I might as well throw in my two cents...

>It is
>not clear that debt, unlike equity capital, actually puts money to work
>for the highest and best use, or where it is most needed and where it
>does the most good.

Equity capital puts money to work for the highest and best use??? Like in those 
dotcoms?
True, many useful businesses are listed on the stock-market but they are paying 
money to their shareholders and not the reverse. With a few exception in times of 
financial bubbles, companies pay way more money to their shareholders than they 
get from selling shares.
It's nice to criticize debt, but don't think that it means that other forms of market 
financing are good. There's only one good way for the wealthy to put their money to 
good use, and that's when money is takes from them against their will.

>Debt tends to be most productive at the highest
>risk level which destabilizes the economy.

So lending money to a corporation is more productive than lending money to 
someone who wants to build a home? Lending money to a dotcom is more 
productive than lending to utilities? Or does Henry mean profitable when he says 
productive?

>The problem with debt is that
>it needs to be serviced regularly (except zero coupons which cost more),
>and a debt-propelled economy will reach a point where its ability to
>service the growing debt is exceeded, unless inflation is ahead of
>interest charges. Thus runaway systemic debt always leads to
>hyperinflation.

1) Is inflation necessarily bad? I don't think so. Does managed inflation to solve 
credit troubles always lead to hyperinflatio? I don't think so. An explanation wouldn't 
hurt, Henry. Here you're only declaring your faith and talking like someone who 
supports the class interests of the rentiers.
2) There are other way to get rid of debt than inflation. One of them is bankruptcy. 
Another is taxing net worth instead of consumption, incomes and profits.

>Bankruptcy only relieves the debtor, but not the
>economy. If, as Minsky claims, money is created when credit is
>extended, then the erasure of debt destroys money and shrinks the
>economy.

Why's that? Bailouts don't relieve the economy but when there's a bankruptcy, the 
lenders and shareholders lose money... What more can we ask? The economy 
can do fine without them. If their losses translates into lack of liquidity, the central 
bank can throw liquidity in the system. What's the downside since aggregate 
liquidity doesn't increase? Money is just paper and electronic data... why is it a 
problem when it is "destroyed"?

>But the most fundamental aspect of a debt economy is that it cannot
>sustain a slow down, even a soft landing.  If Greenspan were better
>versed in debt economics, he would have inderstood that a debt bubble,
>unlike the conventional business cycle, cannot survive the slightest
>deflation.

AFAIK, he wasn't trying to deflate the bubble. Why should he have wanted to do 
that? What concerned him was having the so-called "wealth effect" on the top of 
strong growth. And when the bubble was deflating, what did he do? Was he happy? 
No, he cut rates. He probably would want to curb some excesses as opposed to 
the bubble as a whole, but he knows quite well that he can't target specific prices 
with interest rates and his market fundamentalism forbids him from advocating 
regulations.

>His attempt to engineer a soft landing by raising interest
>rates only accelerated the debt bubble's burst.

The bubble has obviously not burst yet.
And I let me add a wild speculation... weren't most of his actions in the beginning of 
2000 designed to balance the expansionary policy he had before Y2K?


>His only option was to
>prevent the debt bubble from forming by tightening credit quality years
>ago, but he chose to rely on the "market" to exercise its discipline.

I argue that the main cause of the bubble is not monetary policy but 
overaccumulation. Why do you think so much credit was needed to run the 
economy in the first place? Because autonomous financing was lacking. We aren't 
talking about a situation where booming credit caused the economy to overheat... 
We're talking about a situation where, while the bubble was forming, commodity 
prices remained low, unemployment remained fairly high (esp. out of the US), and 
average capacity utilization remained boringly normal (except in the small parts of 
the economy where the bubble struck the hardest like in computers and networks).

>Once the bubble is on its way, Greenspan is on top of
>the debt tiger that he cannot get off without being devoured by the
>beast.  

He can if he's assisted by the government. But he won't. Don't forget who he 
serves. Don't forget who sits on the Fed board and at the head of the Treasury... 
Those people come from the very core of the beast! I mean Chase, Citigroup, 
Goldman, Morgan, etc. Look at their revenues and their profits... Those folks are 
having a hell of a good time. Why would they want this to end?

Julien




From hliu at mindspring.com  Tue Feb  6 11:57:01 2001
From: hliu at mindspring.com (Henry C.K. Liu)
Date: Tue Feb  6 11:57:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Economics of Debt
References: <SAK.2001.02.06.thehdkss@computer>
Message-ID: <3A802C6A.338042F7@mindspring.com>

One of the reasons  that I  hestitate to post on the crash list is precisely the type of
response Julien put forward.  I am thoroughly familiar with his line of argument and do not
disagree with it.  In fact, I have addressed practically all the issues Julien raise in
previous posts in recent years on may other lists.  But on matters of eonomic policy within
the context of the capitalist system, as distinguished from revolutionary analysis, it is
more useful to criticise mainstrream neo-liberal economics for its logical inconsistency
than merely dismissing it as reactionary.  Most of my posts  on economics, which deals with
detailed issues of capitalist economics as it operates in the real world today, have been
written for lists such as Post Keynesian Thought, inhabited by professional and academic
economists.  It is of course necessary to remember that knowing one's enemy is not the same
as agreeing with him.  But short of an armed uprising and gaining control of the machineries
of government, we are at a stage of revolutionary history in which we have little choice
except to operate on enemy soil.  The fact that the basic concept of capitalism is flawed
goes without saying.  The task is to convince capitalists that even in their own terms, the
tenents of capitalism are not what they imagine.   For example, I personally know very well
that capitalism does not allocate capital to the highest and best use even in financial
terms, let along in social terms. I was merely pointing out that debt capitalism is even
more mal-allocative than equity capitalism.  Like many, I have less time than needed for all
my interests or responsibilities.  It is not suffficient for me to be repeating agreements
with like-minded souls.  I post to impart information from which unfaimilar ideas may result
when read by reasonable and thinking individuals.   It is not enough simply to be pure in
spirit.  It is also necessary to be operationally effective.  Revolutionaries are
unwittingly often the biggest obstacle to revolution by their tnedency of sweeping
condemnation.  The socialist camp is in great danger of being co-opted by illusionary
capitalist efficiency.  My posts try to point out that  even in its own terms, capitalism is
not what its propaganda describes.


Henry C.K. Liu


Julien Pierrehumbert wrote:

> Usually I don't respond to Henry's pieces which have their own merits even if they
> are often shockingly close to the mainstream in their own ways, but since Perry
> called this one "a keeper", I thought I might as well throw in my two cents...
>
> >It is
> >not clear that debt, unlike equity capital, actually puts money to work
> >for the highest and best use, or where it is most needed and where it
> >does the most good.
>
> Equity capital puts money to work for the highest and best use??? Like in those
> dotcoms?
> True, many useful businesses are listed on the stock-market but they are paying
> money to their shareholders and not the reverse. With a few exception in times of
> financial bubbles, companies pay way more money to their shareholders than they
> get from selling shares.
> It's nice to criticize debt, but don't think that it means that other forms of market
> financing are good. There's only one good way for the wealthy to put their money to
> good use, and that's when money is takes from them against their will.
>
> >Debt tends to be most productive at the highest
> >risk level which destabilizes the economy.
>
> So lending money to a corporation is more productive than lending money to
> someone who wants to build a home? Lending money to a dotcom is more
> productive than lending to utilities? Or does Henry mean profitable when he says
> productive?
>
> >The problem with debt is that
> >it needs to be serviced regularly (except zero coupons which cost more),
> >and a debt-propelled economy will reach a point where its ability to
> >service the growing debt is exceeded, unless inflation is ahead of
> >interest charges. Thus runaway systemic debt always leads to
> >hyperinflation.
>
> 1) Is inflation necessarily bad? I don't think so. Does managed inflation to solve
> credit troubles always lead to hyperinflatio? I don't think so. An explanation wouldn't
> hurt, Henry. Here you're only declaring your faith and talking like someone who
> supports the class interests of the rentiers.
> 2) There are other way to get rid of debt than inflation. One of them is bankruptcy.
> Another is taxing net worth instead of consumption, incomes and profits.
>
> >Bankruptcy only relieves the debtor, but not the
> >economy. If, as Minsky claims, money is created when credit is
> >extended, then the erasure of debt destroys money and shrinks the
> >economy.
>
> Why's that? Bailouts don't relieve the economy but when there's a bankruptcy, the
> lenders and shareholders lose money... What more can we ask? The economy
> can do fine without them. If their losses translates into lack of liquidity, the central
> bank can throw liquidity in the system. What's the downside since aggregate
> liquidity doesn't increase? Money is just paper and electronic data... why is it a
> problem when it is "destroyed"?
>
> >But the most fundamental aspect of a debt economy is that it cannot
> >sustain a slow down, even a soft landing.  If Greenspan were better
> >versed in debt economics, he would have inderstood that a debt bubble,
> >unlike the conventional business cycle, cannot survive the slightest
> >deflation.
>
> AFAIK, he wasn't trying to deflate the bubble. Why should he have wanted to do
> that? What concerned him was having the so-called "wealth effect" on the top of
> strong growth. And when the bubble was deflating, what did he do? Was he happy?
> No, he cut rates. He probably would want to curb some excesses as opposed to
> the bubble as a whole, but he knows quite well that he can't target specific prices
> with interest rates and his market fundamentalism forbids him from advocating
> regulations.
>
> >His attempt to engineer a soft landing by raising interest
> >rates only accelerated the debt bubble's burst.
>
> The bubble has obviously not burst yet.
> And I let me add a wild speculation... weren't most of his actions in the beginning of
> 2000 designed to balance the expansionary policy he had before Y2K?
>
> >His only option was to
> >prevent the debt bubble from forming by tightening credit quality years
> >ago, but he chose to rely on the "market" to exercise its discipline.
>
> I argue that the main cause of the bubble is not monetary policy but
> overaccumulation. Why do you think so much credit was needed to run the
> economy in the first place? Because autonomous financing was lacking. We aren't
> talking about a situation where booming credit caused the economy to overheat...
> We're talking about a situation where, while the bubble was forming, commodity
> prices remained low, unemployment remained fairly high (esp. out of the US), and
> average capacity utilization remained boringly normal (except in the small parts of
> the economy where the bubble struck the hardest like in computers and networks).
>
> >Once the bubble is on its way, Greenspan is on top of
> >the debt tiger that he cannot get off without being devoured by the
> >beast.
>
> He can if he's assisted by the government. But he won't. Don't forget who he
> serves. Don't forget who sits on the Fed board and at the head of the Treasury...
> Those people come from the very core of the beast! I mean Chase, Citigroup,
> Goldman, Morgan, etc. Look at their revenues and their profits... Those folks are
> having a hell of a good time. Why would they want this to end?
>
> Julien
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Tue Feb  6 12:01:02 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Tue Feb  6 12:01:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] EU employees working harder
Message-ID: <sa7fe7fa.050@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

THE IRISH TIMES
IRELAND SECTION
Saturday, February 3, 2001

EU employees working
harder - survey

By Padraig Yeates, Industry and Employment Correspondent
Employees in the EU are working harder and in more stressful
conditions than ever before, according to a major new survey by the
Dublin based European Foundation.

Although new, more flexible work practices are often heralded as
making the workplace more attractive, the survey shows that 19 per
cent of the 21,500 workers interviewed said the flexibility they are
subject to actually conflicts with family and social commitments.

The report was compiled last year and is the third of its type. It
shows a continuing decline in working conditions across the EU over
the past decade. The previous surveys were conducted in 1990 and
1995. National breakdowns of figures will not be available for some
weeks but Ireland is expected to reflect overall trends.

Mr Pascal Paoli, research manager at the European Foundation for the
Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, was involved in all
three surveys.

He says it had been assumed in the past that the switch from a
predominantly industrial society to one where employment was mainly
in the services and post-industrial sectors would lead to a natural
improvement in working conditions.

However, this was not happening, he said, and some of the extra
stresses were caused by efforts to improve conditions, such as the
shortening of the working week. "We have to reintroduce the quality
of working conditions onto the political agenda. Governments are
beginning at EU level to address the quality as well as the quantity
of jobs being produced."

Besides a shorter working week, he identified reductions in staffing
levels, reorientation of work practices around customer or client
needs, and new forms of work organisation as the main factors in
deteriorating conditions.

More flexible working was not in itself good, or bad, but lack of
predictability in rosters or workloads were causing serious problems -
 "especially for women, who often have a double workload in the home".

The survey covers 1,500 workers in each EU memberstate except
Luxembourg, where only 500 workers were interviewed. The survey found
that, in general, workers believed their health and safety are less
at risk now than previously.

But the survey found the incidence of physical complaints has risen
or remained constant. For instance, 33 per cent of respondents
suffered from backache (30 per cent in 1995); 23 per cent suffered
 from overall fatigue (20 per cent in 1995) and 28 per cent suffered
 from stress (the same as in 1995).

The proportion of workers exposed to physical hazards is slowly
rising. Some 29 per cent were exposed to intense noise (27 per cent
in 1990 and 28 per cent in 1995); 47 per cent to painful and/or
tiring positions at work (43 per cent in 1990 and 45 per cent in
1995), and 37 per cent were required to handle heavy loads (31 per
cent in 1990 and 33 per cent in 1995).

The incidence of repetitive work remains widespread at 57 per cent in
2000, the same proportion as 1995, while intensity of work has
increased. Some 56 per cent of interviewees said they worked at high
speed in 2000, compared with 48 per cent in 1990 and 54 per cent in
1995.

Women still tend to be lower paid than men. This may be linked to the
emerging trend since 1995 of a link between the growth in temporary
work and fixed-term contracts, and poor working conditions.

? 2001 ireland.com






From julp at freesurf.ch  Tue Feb  6 13:08:02 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Tue Feb  6 13:08:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Economics of Debt
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.06.tijtkaik@computer>

>One of the reasons  that I  hestitate to post on the crash list is precisely the type of
>response Julien put forward.  I am thoroughly familiar with his line of argument and 
>do not disagree with it.  In fact, I have addressed practically all the issues Julien 
>raise in previous posts in recent years on may other lists.

I learned last summer that you weren't what you seemed to be (from Mark I guess), 
so my response wasn't personal but about what you argued.
Note that I wasn't systematically playing the I'm-more-revolutionary-than-you game 
even if I assumed that role in one of the posts (I can also do roleplaying, didn't you 
notice the irony at the end?). F.ex. what I said about Greenspan policy objectives 
(inflation and not the level of the stock market or M2) is very much in line with the 
mainstream. So you see, I don't want to be "pure in spirit" or something. While on 
this list, I attacked marxist positions and posted anti-immigration arguments not to 
mention even more foul stuff.
IMHO, you're often going too close to mainstream positions when doing that kind of 
internal criticism. When I lurked there, there were people on PKT arguing much 
more sensible positions without beign revolutationaries and while holding 
academic positions. F.ex., what's the point in saying that equity investment is 
optimally allocated when you don't think it is? Even the serious mainstream (as 
opposed to the propaganda machine) recognises it.
Also, with due respect, your argument that as long as there's no armed uprising we 
have to bow to the mainstream is a red herring. Organisations like ATTAC have 
been successful in challenging the establishment's propaganda and even to some 
extent in getting things done without adpoting such a low profile. There is a world 
between the RAF and Wall Street!
BTW, if you fear responses such as mine, why not inserting a tiny disclaimer or 
something?

>Revolutionaries are
>unwittingly often the biggest obstacle to revolution by their tnedency of sweeping
>condemnation.  

I don't claim to be a revolutionary and didn't intend to condemn you.

Now that this is out of the way, I don't mean to steal your valuable time but if you fell 
like losing some time why not explaining some of the reasoning behind what your 
posted (like I asked in my previous post)? F.ex., why is equity financing superior to 
debt financing?

Julien




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Tue Feb  6 15:50:02 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Tue Feb  6 15:50:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] What economists are saying
Message-ID: <sa801da7.023@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

What economists are saying

By Heather Witham

Besides reading The Economist, one way to determine thoughts of mainstream capitalist economists is to attend the annual American Economics Association (AEA) convention. This year, approximately 8,000 economists descended upon the streets of New Orleans Jan. 4-7 to discuss all facets of the economy from many points of view. 

The main perspective, however, was represented in the sessions sponsored by the AEA itself. 

Comparing them over the past three years is telling. In 1999, six sessions were devoted to the Asian crises, five to how great the U.S. economy was and two to wage and income inequality (foreign and domestic). 

Last year, two sessions tackled the Asian financial crisis, two discussed crises in general (including the "near crash of 1998") and one focused on income inequality in foreign countries.

This year things were different. Six revisited financial crises and vulnerabilities, especially lessons learned from Asia. Six pondered economic growth, such as determinants of economic growth, the new economy and forecasting. One thing is clear: mainstream economists are looking for answers and not just to explain the past, but to predict our uncertain future.

In his AEA presidential address, Dale Jorgenson noted that two views on the current economy exist. One is that growth can be explained in the same way that the crisis in the 1970s was explained. Major, but temporary, changes in production result in major changes to growth. In the 1970s, the cost of raw materials (i.e., oil) increased, causing a slowdown. Starting in the 1990s, this was "mirrored," according to this first view, in that technological changes (i.e., the cost of semiconductors) decreased, causing rapid growth. In either situation, nothing fundamental about the economy changed.

The other view on the current economy, and the one Jorgenson appears to espouse, is that this is, indeed, a "new" economy that has fundamentally changed permanently. Forecasting tools have been inadequate and the economy does not follow any textbook models. 

Jorgenson's own analysis of the situation, however, still relies upon old economic tools that dehumanize all inputs to production. This is typical of establishment economists, who spend their energy manipulating abstract economic formulas rather than considering the real consequences of policies.

Jorgenson questions the sustainability of the growth, in any case, and echoes others who wonder if the stock market is overvalued. He believes that information technology prices will continue to decline, leading to further growth, but he's hesitant to say this would be for an indefinite amount of time. And Jorgenson calls for more research on how the new economy is causing wage inequality in America.

Jorgenson and other members of the AEA ilk represent what is called "orthodox" economics: the neoclassical, accepted, mainstream theory of economics that espouses a free market, capitalist economy. The contrasting viewpoints are generally termed "heterodox" and were present at the AEA convention as well. 

Two of the main alternative groups were the Association for Evolutionary Economics (AFEE) and the Union of Radical Political Economists (URPE), the latter composed of both Marxists and non-Marxists. The AFEE and non-Marxist URPE members argued with mainstream economic theory and called for reforms. The Marxist URPE members tended to emphasize Marxist theory only.

Generally missing from the conference, and most obviously from the Marxist URPE sessions, was a Marxist response to the current economic situation. Establishment economists believe that such things as a major political event, a significant change in the weather or a change in oil prices cause crises. But these only appear to be the cause. By focusing on these factors, said economists ignore the fundamental nature of capitalist production, the exploitation of labor and imperialism, which are the root causes of crises. The Marxists could continue this analysis by noting that there may be many "new" things about the economy (e.g., information technology), but exploitation is still done in fundamentally the same, old-fashioned way.

A valid question follows from this discussion: Why should we even care what the academic economists are saying among themselves in a few hotels? The orthodox economic ideas are like a contagion that seeps into the economic policies of our cities, states and nation as a whole. 

Many of these economists are the very ones that we see in The New York Times and that advise policymakers in Washington, DC. If we fail to question, and even understand, what the current economic thought is, we are powerless to fight it. As a great economic teacher once said, "Know thy enemy."


* Heather Witham is a member of 

the Communist Party's Economic Commission.




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Tue Feb  6 16:07:03 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Tue Feb  6 16:07:03 2001
Subject: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins
In-Reply-To: <000801c08d0a$814d73a0$e34a7bd5@mjones>
References: <200102020854.KAA26178@brain.sn.apc.org>
Message-ID: <045391406210621MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a RE: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of , 
el 2 Feb 01, a las 11:23, Mark Jones dijo:

> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Patrick Bond:
> 
> >  Geographers, a
> > motley crew under the best of conditions, regularly morph into
> > whatever they want (e.g., public policy-wonks at Wits), whenever
> > conditions dictate.

Well, economists regularly morph into whatever capital needs them to.

In my own country, we have a Minister of Defense, a Minister of Foreign 
Relations, and of course a Minister of Economy who are economists. The author 
of the educational plan that the government is trying to enforce on us is an 
economist, and the plans were drafted by a crew of economists at the World 
Bank. And so on.

In fact, this is what happens with organic intellectuals as a rule. Since what 
matters is their political line, not their technical specialization, they 
always serve Capital wherever they are called on duty.



N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From pbond at wn.apc.org  Wed Feb  7 11:44:01 2001
From: pbond at wn.apc.org (Patrick Bond)
Date: Wed Feb  7 11:44:01 2001
Subject: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins
In-Reply-To: <045391406210621MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>
References: <000801c08d0a$814d73a0$e34a7bd5@mjones>
Message-ID: <200102071642.SAA16420@brain.sn.apc.org>

> From:          "Gorojovsky" <Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar>
> Date:          Tue, 6 Feb 2001 17:13:31 -0300
> In my own country, we have a Minister of Defense, a Minister of Foreign 
> Relations, and of course a Minister of Economy who are economists. The author 
> of the educational plan that the government is trying to enforce on us is an 
> economist, and the plans were drafted by a crew of economists at the World 
> Bank. And so on.
> In fact, this is what happens with organic intellectuals as a rule. Since what 
> matters is their political line, not their technical specialization, they 
> always serve Capital wherever they are called on duty.

Worse, in 1984, during your first neolib crisis, you had a top 
assistant to the finance minister who had just finished her PhD at 
Johns Hopkins under David Harvey (can't remember her name...)



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Wed Feb  7 16:15:02 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Wed Feb  7 16:15:02 2001
Subject: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins
In-Reply-To: <200102071642.SAA16420@brain.sn.apc.org>
References: <045391406210621MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <01c1e2809210721MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a RE: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of , 
el 7 Feb 01, a las 18:45, Patrick Bond dijo:

> 
> Worse, in 1984, during your first neolib crisis, you had a top 
> assistant to the finance minister who had just finished her PhD at 
> Johns Hopkins under David Harvey (can't remember her name...)
> 

Deborah Giorgi? With D.H? 

Ah, yes, we do always have a lot of "Marxists" who once in power are the most 
rigid defenders of the imperialists. In the current team of the M. of Economy 
there are a lot, including one who headed the Communist Youth Federation at the 
School of Economics in Buenos Aires. Those are our communists...

Sigh, again,

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From gcamp at bryant.edu  Wed Feb  7 17:21:02 2001
From: gcamp at bryant.edu (Glen Camp)
Date: Wed Feb  7 17:21:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] 'Humanitarian' Doctor From M.D. Anderson to Testify
References: <23438-3A7D3C2C-608@storefull-232.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <3A81C9E0.BA93C27F@bryant.edu>

    How do I unsubscribe from this list, please!!
    Does anyone know?

    TIA

    Glen Camp

Tony Abdo wrote:

> Ok, Ok.      I know that this article from the Miami Herald doesn't
> identify either the doctor, nor the hospital, where the torture maestro
> received his medical treatment.      That is, not directly.      But it
> is a save guess that it is Houston's very own, M. D. Anderson.     But
> why?
>
> Because this is the favored hospital of the Bush Klan, that's why.
> In all their myriad travels around the world on behalf of the government
> and the CIA, they never fail to inform their friends about the excellent
> quality of medical care available in their home state of Texas.
>
> Workers (servants) get to enter from a parking lot some distance away
> from this Grand Palace of Care.     It's a walk past the Ronald McDonald
> House, and then an entrance into America's elite cancer treatment
> center.      But keeping in the internationalst spirit of neo-liberal
> globalization, a sizable chunk of patients are not upper class
> Americans.      They are upper class international associates insead!
>
> The in-house media comes on channel, in 5 different languages !     And
> the in-house press likes to front page their patron saints, most
> especially Barbara and George.      This is a treatment center that
> seems especially popular with the Arab Emirate and Saudi sheiks.
> But plenty of patients can also be found, from places like Argentina,
> India, Mexico and Peru.
>
> I won't go into too much detail, but the facility is considerably more
> plush and CLEAN, than that in your neighborhood, Tex.      One could
> almost describe the facility as palatial.     Though, fortress-like also
> comes to mind, since a homey setting must be kept while the elite get
> their care.
>
> In case of a medical problem arising from the use of DU weaponry in your
> own little neck of the global woods, think M.D. Anderson, Cancer
> Treatment Center.
>
> Tony Abdo
>
> P.S.  Note the $1,500 bail.    Pretty steep for a major drug trafficker
> and assassin.      They must have wanted to keep him in, real bad.
> But then he is.... a sick man.      It's a case of the FBI's get tough
> on crime strategy, now tempered by 'compassionate conservatism'.
> _______________________________
> Accused aide of Peru spy master held in Miami
> BY MARIKA LYNCH
> mlynch at herald.com
>
> Peru's second-most-wanted man wasn't difficult to find in South Florida.
> V?ctor Alberto Venero Garrido -- a suspected arms dealer accused of
> skimming more than $100 million from a government pension fund -- had
> opened a $15 million bank account in his own name.
>
> Venero, an associate of Peruvian spy master Vladimiro Montesinos whose
> own scandal brought down the government of President Alberto Fujimori,
> was arrested on public corruption and money laundering charges after he
> tried to make a withdrawal at a Miami Citibank on Friday.
>
> On Monday, he asked a federal magistrate to let him out on bond because
> the stress was aggravating his rare form of lung and colon cancer. Jail
> guards ridiculed him when he told them he was bleeding from his rectum
> Sunday night, Venero told U.S. Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan. A
> hearing will be held Friday, when Venero's Texas doctor will testify
> about his condition. He is being held at the Federal Detention Center in
> downtown Miami.
>
> His survival is important, Venero told the judge, because he has
> undergone an experimental treatment that can benefit others.
>
> ``The research will save other lives,?? Venero said.
> MAINTAINS INNOCENCE
> The 47-year-old maintained his innocence Monday, but neither he nor his
> Miami lawyers, Walter Reynoso and Scott Srebnick, explained the origins
> of his Miami fortune. Venero's Peruvian attorney, Luis Roy Freyre, said
> his client has lived in the United States since 1998 when he began
> cancer treatment. He told The Herald Venero's money came from his
> construction and textile businesses back home.
>
> The controversy surrounding Venero's past touched the country's highest
> political official this weekend, when a report surfaced that Venero's
> family had given $30,000 to interim President Valent?n Paniagua to
> cover costs for his congressional campaign. Paniagua went on national
> television Sunday night to deny it and called the allegation by a
> onetime Montesinos security guard ``an open and brazen conspiracy,??
> the Lima daily El Comercio reported.
>
> SIGNIFICANT ARREST
> Apart from that, Venero's arrest is significant because it will aid the
> investigation into Montesinos, a top Fujimori advisor who left the
> country after a video showed him apparently bribing a congressman, said
> Gustavo Gorriti, a Peruvian journalist and author living in exile in
> Panama. The U.S. government's help in his capture also was noteworthy,
> Gorriti said, because Montesinos is known as a one-time CIA informant.
>
> According to court documents released Monday, the Peruvian government,
> which is seeking to extradite Venero, alleges he was Montesinos' most
> trusted ``bagman?? or ``strawman.?? Venero allegedly used his
> position as the ``de-facto?? head of the country?s military and
> police pension fund to pilfer millions he then used to buy apartment
> complexes, hotels and buildings, the documents said. He would then sell
> the assets back to the fund, at inflated prices.
>
> Venero also helped Montesinos organize a scheme to sell substandard arms
> from Belarus and other countries to the Peruvian military at excessive
> prices, the documents said.
>
> $15 MILLION ACCOUNT
> The FBI was first alerted to Venero earlier this month when Venero's $15
> million account showed up on a routine check of required bank reports,
> said Frank Figliuzzi, assistant special agent in charge for the FBI in
> Miami.
>
> The Peruvian government officially charged him Jan. 19 and sent out a
> request through Interpol for help in locating him three days later. The
> FBI then tracked Venero to a house in Southwest Miami-Dade.
>
> Fearing Venero was about to transfer the money to another bank, the
> agency froze his assets Friday. The suspected arms dealer found out when
> he tried to withdraw millions at 10 that morning.
> He stayed at the downtown bank several hours, trying to figure out how
> to get the money, Figliuzzi said. He finally left a few hours later, had
> a drink at a hotel bar, then went home. About 11:30 that night, the
> agency arrested him at home.
>
> At first, the FBI believed Montesinos might be in tow. But the agency
> has no information that the former head of Peru's intelligence agency is
> in South Florida, Figliuzzi said.
>
> The FBI does have information, however, that Venero has a handful of
> other bank accounts around the country.
>
> ``There are many more millions involved in this case, and we are as I
> speak becoming aware of more millions elsewhere,?? Figliuzzi said.
>
> This weekend's arrest was not Venero's first in South Florida,
> Miami-Dade Police say. Venero has an assault and battery charge stemming
> from a domestic violence incident the morning of July 16, documents
> show.
>
> He was arrested by Miami Beach Police at the Fontainebleau Hilton, 4441
> Collins Ave., in room 1076. Booking records show he was released the
> next day on $1,500 bond.
>
> Herald staff writer Elaine de Valle, Herald translator Renato P?rez
> and Rui Ferreira of El Nuevo Herald contributed to this report.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crashlist website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From cburford at gn.apc.org  Wed Feb  7 18:56:01 2001
From: cburford at gn.apc.org (Chris Burford)
Date: Wed Feb  7 18:56:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Chips up for fish
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20010207231725.056fee60@pop.gn.apc.org>

Tonight BBC2 Moneyprogramme ran a well-informed crisis report on the 
economics of capitalist fishing.

Cod used to be plentiful off NewFoundland, Canada, Iceland and in the North 
Sea.

In the late 80's cod disappeared from New Foundland although Canada had had 
the largest cod processing industry in the world. The factories are 
deserted. 35,000 lost jobs. The fish stocks have not recovered. Fishing is 
still banned. Scientists estimate it may be 4 or 5 decades before stocks 
might recover to their abundant peak.

In Europe the North Sea is now being stripped of fish. The minimum quantum 
of cod required there for a sustainable population is 150 thousand. The 
current stock is less than half that. What are caught are mainly young 
fish. (A cod must be 4 or 5 before it can breed.)

The European Union has just imposed further big cuts in quotas of 40%. They 
have imposed a fishing ban  for 3 months on 1/4 of the North Sea. The 
result is that all boat will have to go further,  within a few days to fish 
out, what fish are left in the areas where fishing is still permitted.

It is not just cod. 40% of all North Sea fish species are beyond the 
recoverable limits.

Most scientists say that a ban is necessary for at least a whole year. 
Politicians will not countenance that because they cannot defend that 
position to the electorate. It seems inevitable that the fishing areas 
around the North Sea will be impoverished like New Foundland.

However Iceland is exporting fish, even by air.

25 years ago the Icelanders won the Cod War against England with the help 
of NATO [Which wanted its air bases against the Soviet Union and with the 
consistent sympathy of public opinion in England for the Icelanders cause - 
according to little publicised opinion polls] Iceland established a 200 
mile fishing zone around its shores.

Here started an experiment in national capitalism, tough, but serving the 
community of Iceland.

The system depends on close social regulation with patrol boats spending 
more time, not just banning fishing but inspecting catches. They board 
boats and if they find that more than 1/4 of the catch is undersized they 
ban fishing in that area for at least 2 weeks. Meanwhile the boat can and 
*must* land all its catch.

Compare the laissez faire EU capitalist industry exploiting the North Sea. 
This is done on a simple quota system. This means that it is in the 
interests of the boats to throw overboard all the dead young fish. They 
continue fishing until they can strip out the full quota of adequate sized 
fish. This accelerates the death of young fish before they reach breeding age.

With a fishing boat costing perhaps one million pounds (two million 
dollars?) the laws of capitalism are vital here.

The Icelandic system is also capitalist and accelerates the concentration 
of the industry. One further mechanism of this is that in Iceland boats 
that have brought in more than their quota, can buy quotas of other boats, 
that then go out of business.

The Icelandic industry is concentrated in fewer hands than before, and 
there are fewer people working on it. But 70% of Iceland's exports are 
still fish, and the country has sustained its population, on this economic 
base, unlike a territory like Shetland which will become depopulated.

It seems virtually inevitable that the North Sea will become as barren as 
the seas around New Foundland, because the EU capitalist system is too 
laissez faire, and too underregulated.

As far as the evolutionary war of survival is concerned in fish production, 
the national capitalist solution of Iceland will survive, and grow 
comparatively richer. Fish and chips in England will be Icelandic, and a 
luxury.

The community interests that prevent EU politicians of any country 
challenging their electorates with an outright ban, could only be partially 
channeled in a progressive direction by means of the national capitalist 
perspective of Iceland, in which 200 mile fishing areas are specifically 
linked with adjacent land.

By comparison the more abstract competition of capitalism in the EU fishing 
industry, finds local expression only in voter pressure groups that will 
seek compensation by keeping people who formally gained their livelihood in 
the fishing industry, on welfare benefits for a generation.

Chris Burford

London








From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Wed Feb  7 19:23:02 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Wed Feb  7 19:23:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Fw: THOUSANDS PROTEST JAVIER SOLANA'S BELGRADE VISIT!
Message-ID: <008201c09165$21119a20$1c02f0d5@EUnet.yu>

----- Original Message -----
From: <JaredI at aol.com>
To: <JaredI at aol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 11:39 PM
Subject: THOUSANDS PROTEST JAVIER SOLANA'S BELGRADE VISIT!


> The URL for his article is http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/dem.htm
> www.tenc.net
> [Emperor's Clothes]
>
> Don't entertain him - arrest him!
> Javier Solana's Belgrade Visit is an Outrage!  [2-7-2001]
>
> Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Jared Israel (editor, Emperor's Clothes) and
Nico
> Varkevisser (President, Global Reflexion)
>
> Today several thousand Yugoslavs of varying political beliefs passionately
> protested against Javier Solana's visit to Belgrade. This protest, loud
and
> spirited, was held in the center of Belgrade, on Knez Milosh Street,
outside
> the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It represents a most important act of
> defiance, held in the face of widespread violence and intimidation
following
> the U.S-backed coup in Belgrade, Oct. 5th.
>
> Javier Solana was head of NATO during and after NATO?s 78 day bombing
> campaign. He was convicted of mass murder by a Yugoslav court and
sentenced,
> in absentia, to 20 years hard labor. The court that made that decision
still
> has jurisdiction under Kostunica, who insists that he stands for the rule
of
> law.
>
> Yet today Solana is in Belgrade. And the Kostunica/Djindjic regime is not
> arresting him.
>
> Now, all the media lies that were used as a pretext to bomb Yugoslavia ?
from
> the lies about mass graves to the lies about the phony Racak massacre -
have
> been refuted by NATO?s own data as well as by official organizations such
as
> the FBI, Europol, the OSCE, the UNHCR and Finish Forensic experts. And yet
it
> is now, mocking Yugoslav justice, that the new Belgrade regime, backed by
> NATO and the International Monetary Fund, invites Solana to Belgrade. Not
to
> arrest him, but to meet with him and to celebrate, while at the same time
> they are hunting down those who resisted NATO and indicting them for NATO
?s
> crimes.
>
> Solana is a criminal. He is guilty of:
>
> Crimes against humanity ? Javier Solana was head of NATO when, in
violation
> of its charter and all international law, it launched the bombing war
against
> Yugoslavia, including the use of nuclear-sheathed weapons. It was Solana
who
> was responsible for the destruction of the homes and lives of Kosovo
> residents of all nationalities. It was Solana?s NATO that has put 25
million
> people in the Balkans at risk by bombing the area with low level nuclear
> weapons. Solana?s NATO oversaw the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of
> Yugoslavs from Kosovo after the bombing.
>
> Crimes against the truth - Solana was not only an organizer he was a
direct
> apologist for the war and the subsequent violent expulsions from Kosovo.
For
> example, after NATO bombed a group of returning Albanian refugees in the
town
> of Korisa, Solana went on TV declaring that the Serbs were at fault for
the
> deaths although in fact the killing was done by NATO bombs.
>
>
> This truly insane argument was invoked recently by Carla Del Ponte of the
> kangaroo-court War Crimes Tribunal, who accused Milosevich of being
> responsible for the deaths of 16 people when NATO bombed Serbian
television.
> Following Del Ponte?s lead, the Belgrade government has threatened to
indict
> Dragoljub Milanovic, director of Serbian TV at that time, for the NATO
> bombing. Thus the Kostunica/Djindjic government invites Javier Solana, a
> convicted war criminal, to be wined and dined in Belgrade while trying to
> jail Yugoslav leaders for the bombs that NATO dropped.
>
> Many Yugoslavs voted for Vojislav Kostunica because they saw in him a hope
of
> peace with justice. But where is the justice when murderers are
entertained
> and the innocent are accused of their crimes? Now, when the horrors of
NATO?s
> use of depleted uranium are coming out, it is incumbent on those who
> supported this regime to join with all others in Yugoslavia and around the
> world to condemn the real criminals: Solana, Clinton, Blair, Schroeder,
> Chretien and all other NATO heads of state and heads of government and
their
> Yugoslav political puppets.
>
> - February 7, 2001
>
> Further Reading
>
> 1) On NATO's carefully orchestrated campaign to turn neighbor against
> neighbor before and during the bombing of Kosovo in 1999, see 'Why
Albanians
> Fled Kosovo During NATO Bombing' at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/keys.htm
>
> 2) On NATO's involvement in expelling hundreds of thousands from Kosovo
after
> the bombing, see         'Driven from Kosovo: Jewish Leader Blames NATO -
> Interview With Cedda Prlincevic' at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/ceda.htm
>
> 3) On NATO's conscious effort to punish Yugoslavia by creating
environmental
> disasters, see 'NATO Willfully Triggered Environmental Catastrophe In
> Yugoslavia' by Michel Chossudovsky at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/chuss/willful.htm and
'Chemical/Nuclear
> Warfare in Bosnia: Eyewitness To Hell' at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/tika/hell.htm
>
> 4) On NATO's attempt to replace international law with the rule of NATO,
see
> 'Humanitarian War: Making the Crime Fit the Punishment' by Diana Johnstone
at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/Johnstone/crime.htm and 'Mocking
> Tradition and Practice - NATO's War & World Security' by Raju Thomas at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/security.htm
>
> 5) On the effort by distinguished Western lawyers to bring NATO to
justice,
> see 'Report: Meeting with Carla del Ponte on NATO Crimes of War' by
Michael
> Mandel at http://emperors-clothes.com/news/mandel.htm
>
> 6) On efforts to intimidate anti-NATO dissent in Yugoslavia, see "These
> Djindjic People are Brownshirts," at
> http://www.emperors-clothes.com/interviews/djindjic.htm
>
> and "Report on the Dec. 23 Elections" by the British Helsinki Human Rights
> Group at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/srbele.htm
>
> ***
>
> Yugoslav Journalists' Fund
>
> Emperor's Clothes is trying to assist a few families of Yugoslav
journalists.
> These journalists are among the many journalists who have literally been
> thrown out of work when thugs took over all TV and radio stations and
> newspapers during and after the Oct. 5th coup. These attacks are part of
the
> terror in 'democratic' Serbia. We are providing some financial help; we
need
> to provide more.
>
> It's really a privilege to be able to help these brave men and women who
are
> trying to report 'the other side' within Yugoslavia and, through Emperor's
> Clothes and other media, to the outside world.
>
> Meanwhile, our own operating costs have increased. (For instance, monthly
> fees for the superb news media search engine Lexis have more than
doubled.)
>
> If you can make a contribution either to our general expenses or
specifically
> to help the Journalists' Fund, please do. Any amount will help. To use our
> secure server, please go to
> http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm#donate. (If you use the secure
> server and wish your contribution to go to the Journalists' Fund, please
send
> us a note at emperors1000 at aol.com
>
> Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA
> 02461-0321.
>
> Or call 617 916-1705 from 9-5, Eastern U.S. time and ask for Bob. Thanks
very
> much!
>
> www.tenc.net
> [Emperor's Clothes]
>
>




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Wed Feb  7 20:09:02 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Wed Feb  7 20:09:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] (Fwd) RV: El trueque hace la felicidad. Un articulo de Mafalda
Message-ID: <05ea63548000821MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

Cdes. and friends,

I am forwarding a very instructive article on the current economic conditions 
in Argentina. The author (she or he is hiding behind a pseudonym, can't guess 
why) exposes Cavallo's lies and mystifications, and also gives additional info 
on the extent that has been achieved by barter in our country.


------- Forwarded message follows -------
From:           	"SIASRL" <siasrl at arnet.com.ar>
Subject:        	RV: El trueque hace la felicidad. Un articulo de MafaldaResiste
Date sent:      	Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:19:58 -0300

De: NAC&POP <nacypop at ciudad.com.ar>
Fecha: Martes, 06 de Febrero de 2001 03:21 a.m.
Asunto: El trueque hace la felicidad. Un articulo de MafaldaResiste

El trueque hace la felicidad.

"Para tener raz?n, es mejor tener el apoyo de los hechos, que el de
la alta intelectualidad".
(John K. Galbraith)

"La convertibilidad es eterna", Cavallo (13-01-2001, Noticias). 

?Qu? es la convertibilidad?

"Convertibilidad significa libre elecci?n de la moneda con la que =
llevamos adelante nuestras transacciones. Si los argentinos cobran sus =
sueldos en pesos y quieren transformarlos en d?lares, o en euros, o en =
cualquier otra moneda, pueden hacerlo sin costos y sin restricciones. Si =
quieren guardar sus ahorros en esas otras monedas, o quieren endeudarse, =
o quieren prestar dinero o firmar contratos en esas otras monedas, lo =
puede hacer porque, por ley, el peso argentino es convertible. Es decir, =
el peso no es una moneda de la que no se puede salir. En ese sentido, la =
convertibilidad va a ser eterna en la Argentina, porque es una suerte de =
propiedad de la moneda que los argentinos conquistaron cuando, en la =
?poca de la hiperinflaci?n, virtualmente repudiaron el austral y =
empezaron a manejarse con d?lares" (Cavallo, Noticias, 13-01-2001).

?Claro! CON - VER - TI -BI - LI - DAD; de CON - VER - TIR. Transformar =
una cosa en otra;  A en B; plata en bienes; pesos en d?lares. En =
sentido econ?mico,  se refiere con convertible que no pierde valor una =
cosa al con - ver - tir -se en otra. En la Argentina desde abril 1991, =
sin?nimo de ?Magia! ?Nuestra moneda vale ahora tanto como la de =
EE.UU.! Moneda fuerte; la Argentina tiene peso. La moneda argentina =
adquiri? esa "suerte de propiedad"; soberana conquista de los =
argentinos, segn Cavallo. ?Cul es la condici?n sine qua non =
para que la moneda nacional pueda usufructuar esa "suerte de propiedad"? =
Que para existir un peso, no s?lo tiene que primero existir un =
d?lar, sino que dicho d?lar, adem?s, tiene que estar en poder de =
nuestro Banco Central. Esto implica que cualquier persona con pesos en =
su poder puede ir al Banco Central y exigir que se lo conviertan, en =
d?lares. Ahora s?... puede el glorioso peso desplegar a pleno sus =
eternas propiedades y los argentinos podemos laurearnos con nuestras =
conquistas.

Porque una cosa es CON - VER - TI -BI - LI - DAD; y otra cosa es LEY de =
CON - VER - TI -BI - LI - DAD. Cavallo parece que no sabe la diferencia:

"La convertibilidad, insisto, es una propiedad de la moneda que no va a =
poder abandonarse nunca: si se intentara, ser?a absolutamente =
impopular, la gente no lo va a admitir. Todas las buenas monedas del =
mundo - el d?lar, el euro, el yen, el d?lar canadiense o el =
australiano, todas, son convertibles" (Cavallo, Noticias, 13-01-2001)
Insiste con que la convertibilidad es una "suerte" de propiedad de la =
moneda, ejemplificando con las buenas monedas del mundo que son =
convertibles. Justamente es al rev?s: la buenas monedas son =
convertibles porque no precisan de una LEY de convertibilidad. Son =
convertibles porque son pasibles de con-ver-tir-se, transformarse, en =
otras monedas o en bienes sin sufrir p?rdida de valor de importancia. =
Pero en esos pa?ses no existe una ley que obligue a sus bancos =
centrales a convertir la moneda que emiten en otra moneda de otro =
pa?s. Tampoco est?n obligados a limitar la emisi?n de su moneda a =
la cantidad de moneda de otro pa?s que tienen en su poder. En ese =
sentido, estas monedas que menciona Cavallo, todas, son =
IN-CON-VER-TI-BLES!!!

Est? claro que en econom?a cuando se habla de que un pa?s tiene =
moneda convertible, no se est? refiriendo a que esa moneda es pasible =
de convertirse en otra, sino en que existe una LEY DE CONVERTIBILIDAD. 
Cavallo afirma que la convertibilidad es "eterna";...pero su argumento =
es que intentar abandonar esa "suerte de propiedad" ser?a =
tremendamente impopular: "la gente no lo va a admitir". Hoy por hoy, =
parece que es as?. Pero queda claro que salir s?lo depende de que la =
gente lo admita. Si es cierto que la gente no admite salir de la =
convertibilidad, una raz?n esencial es que mucha gente no debe =
entender qu? es "la convertibilidad", si el economista "?xito" de la =
Argentina la explica tan mal. Parece no saber siquiera distinguir entre =
"cambiar una moneda por otra" - que a?n en plena hiperinflaci?n era =
esto posible - con la ley que obliga al Banco Central a cambiar pesos =
por d?lares. O no sabe, o hace un elemental juego con la palabra =
"convertibilidad" para confundir.

La ley de convertibilidad es, b?sicamente, una forma de reducir la =
cantidad de dinero en la econom?a argentina. En toda la historia =
econ?mica, una manera de reducir la inflaci?n era disminuir la =
cantidad de dinero, subir la tasa de inter?s a nivel exorbitantes, y =
generar recesi?n y desocupaci?n. En el extremo, sin dinero no puede =
haber inflaci?n. La diferencia desde la ley de convertibilidad es que =
esa cantidad de dinero en circulaci?n no depende como antes de la =
decisi?n del gobierno nacional, sino de cu?ntos d?lares tiene el =
Banco Central. Antes, esas decisiones pod?an revocarse por la =
presi?n de los efectos de la recesi?n sobre grupos sociales que =
exig?an alg?n apoyo estatal. Ahora no, porque el gobierno no puede =
emitir d?lares.
Pero la Argentina no s?lo tiene ley de convertibilidad, sino que la =
tiene en relaci?n al d?lar: a la econom?a m?s poderosa del =
mundo, la m?s competitiva. Eso le permite a EE.UU. producir m?s a =
menor costo, y vender a menor precio. Por la ley de convertibilidad, la =
econom?a argentina est?, subrepticiamente, dolarizada: es decir, =
todos sus precios y salarios est?n definidos en t?rminos de =
d?lares, no de pesos. Por eso, la Argentina es un pa?s caro a nivel =
mundial; por eso, "sale tan barato viajar". Pero por eso, tambi?n, a =
la mayor parte de las empresas se les hace dif?cil sobrevivir. Sus =
precios (en t?rminos de d?lares) son muy caros para exportar y para =
competir con las importaciones; sus costos (en t?rminos de d?lares) =
son muy elevados (tarifas p?blicas, salarios, servicios, etc.). As?, =
las empresas cierran y despiden empleados.

Fuerte restricci?n monetaria + precios en la moneda m?s cara del =
mundo; eso es la Ley de Convertibilidad y el "1 a 1". Sin devaluar, con =
la "propiedad" de la moneda atada al d?lar, el ?nico resultado =
posible es m?s recesi?n, con bajas de salarios y precios en =
d?lares. Ese es un pron?stico de Mafaldaresiste!: en la Argentina, =
los precios y salarios, en general, disminuir?n en t?rmino de =
d?lares. ?C?mo vienen haci?ndolo!

*- "El sueldo  promedio de los 3,4 millones de trabajadores que se =
desempe?an  en relaci?n de dependencia de la Capital y el Gran =
Buenos Aires es de 672,50 pesos mensuales, pero casi el 55% gana menos =
de 500 pesos. Y apenas el 13,6% cobra m?s de 1.000 pesos. Los datos =
(INDEC) muestran que, en relaci?n a 6 a?os atr?s, en t?rminos =
reales, el sueldo de bolsillo promedio de los asalariados porte?os y =
del conurbano se redujo el 5,4%. Esto a pesar de que la econom?a, en =
ese lapso, creci? 10%. (......) 13 de cada 100 trabajadores gana lo =
suficiente para cubrir el costo de una canasta familiar b?sica, =
valuada por FIDE en $1.025." (Clar?n 26-01-2001).

*-  "Precios: "Otra vez deflaci?n: En el 2000, el costo de vida baj? =
un 0,7%" (...) En 1999 fue 1,8%, las m?s fuerte desde 1934, en plena =
crisis del '30. (...) Indumentaria tiene ocho a?os de reducci?n =
continua. (m?s del 25% sumadas). De los rubros que el INDEC mide =
mensualmente para estudiar el comportamiento de los precios, el 80% =
arrojaron resultados negativos en el 2000...Alimentos y bebidas baja del =
1,5%...equipamientos del hogar -2,2%...Esparcimiento, -3,1%" (Clar?n =
05-01-2001).

Es decir, bajan en pesos y en d?lares. El pron?stico de =
?Mafaldaresiste! es que bajar?n en d?lares. Si hay convertibilidad =
y "1 a 1", lo har? tambi?n en pesos. Pero si hubiese una =
devaluaci?n, lo har?n en d?lares pero no necesariamente en pesos. =
Justamente: devaluar es la forma instant?nea y autom?tica que las =
econom?as con monedas sin "esa suerte de propiedad" de la =
convertibilidad, utilizan para protegerse de la econom?as m?s =
poderosas. Al devaluar, los precios y salarios instant?neamente =
pierden valor en t?rminos de d?lares. Por eso: en la Argentina los =
precios y salarios, en d?lares, continuar?n bajando. Ser? por =
recesi?n, si no se quiere devaluar. La otra opci?n es sumarse al =
entusiasta Cavallo y no resignarse a que la econom?a argentina sea =
menos productiva que la econom?a norteamericana... Porque este es el =
colmo de los comentarios de Cavallo: en medio de una econom?a que =
retrocede y tiende a la desaparici?n, mantener los elementos b?sicos =
que generan esta destrucci?n y pretender solucionar esta tendencia con =
la arenga de que podemos ser m?s poderosos que la econom?a m?s =
poderosa. Antes de la fe, se requieren las condiciones objetivas.

?Pero, le puede importar tanto a una persona que ni siquiera tiene =
ingresos suficientes para comprar una canasta familiar b?sica (es =
decir, m?s del 80% del pa?s) saber que esa cantidad de dinero =
insuficiente tiene la "suerte de propiedad" de ser convertible? ?No =
puede interesarle aunque sea s?lo escuchar la posibilidad de una =
devaluaci?n si la misma le permite llegar a completar la canasta =
familiar b?sica? Para Cavallo, claro que no. Despu?s de desechar la =
devaluaci?n, responde por qu? a Brasil le fue bien con su =
devaluaci?n:

"Brasil tiene una moneda inconvertible y los brasile?os no pueden =
guardar el valor de sus ahorros ni cobrar sus sueldos en d?lares." =
(Noticias, 13-01-2001).

?Por qu? Brasil tiene una moneda "inconvertible", si vemos c?mo =
llegan turistas brasile?os a nuestro pa?s con d?lares que =
consiguieron "convirtiendo" sus reales? Por que NO TIENE LEY DE =
CONVERTIBILIDAD. La moneda de Brasil es tan convertible y tan =
inconvertible como "todas las buenas monedas del mundo - el d?lar, el =
euro, el yen, el d?lar canadiense o el australiano". Entonces, la =
ventaja de la ley de convertibilidad, como acaba de decir Cavallo, en =
realidad no es para quien gana poco, sino para quien gana MUCHO... =
porque le permite que esa cantidad ahorrada sea mucha en d?lares. =
Ahora s?, ?Primer Mundo!

En t?rminos de d?lares, a nivel mundial, todos ganamos mucho =
respectivamente a nuestra actividad laboral. Pero en relaci?n a los =
precios en d?lares externos; los precios internos tambi?n son =
elevados en t?rminos de d?lares en relaci?n al resto del mundo. =
Por eso, esos 672,50 d?lares (pesos) de sueldo promedio son altos en =
relaci?n al nivel salarial en d?lares del resto del mundial, pero no =
llegan a cubrir el 70% de una canasta familiar b?sica. Pero quien =
puede ganar much?simo dinero, sobrepasar largamente la canasta =
familiar, y por lo tanto ahorrar, la convertibilidad le da el para?so =
de que ese ahorro est? en la moneda de mayor poder de compra del =
mundo. Como no hay magia, claro, esto s?lo puede ser posible para un =
peque?o grupo (?5%?).

El resto de los argentinos a?n tienen que sobrevivir. Y la ley de =
convertibilidad hace que el dinero sea escaso. La necesidad hace que se =
busquen otros mecanismos. Surge el "Club del Trueque": 300.000 personas =
que en 500 sitios ofrecen productos y servicios de los m?s diversos =
desde una consulta odontol?gica al alquiler de una casa en Necochea; =
clases de yoga a crema de limpieza; los carpinteros, el alba?il, el =
m?dico (Clar?n, 28-01-2001). Sin pesos, ni d?lares, ni yen, ni =
euros; estas personas, de todos modos, mantienen el uso de =
con-ver-ti-bi-li-dad que hace Cavallo. "Convierten" sus bienes y =
servicios en otros. Y, adem?s, crean su propio cr?dito ("moneda =
social"); por valor de un peso cada cr?dito, "seg?n sus =
estad?sticas, en el ?ltimo mes las operaciones que se hicieron en =
todos los clubes del pa?s alcanzaron un total de 30 millones de =
"cr?ditos" o pesos" (Clar?n, 28-01-2001). Tan desarrollado est? el =
sistema, que una pareja, que s?lo usa dinero para el colectivo y para =
pagar impuestos, se "convirti?" al amor: "Fuimos a Mar del Plata y =
tanto el hotel, como las excursiones y las comidas las pagamos en =
cr?ditos. Ni siquiera para el transporte tuvimos que desembolsar =
dinero. Las agencias de viaje que se sumaron a la red del trueque nos =
van a permitir que hasta la luna de miel la hagamos tambi?n en =
cr?ditos" (Clar?n, 28-01-2001). El trueque hace girar al mundo y al =
amor.

M?s all? de la pregunta de qu? tan terrible ser?a que el Banco =
Central emitiera esos 30 millones de pesos "sin respaldo en d?lares" =
(o m?s cantidad, teniendo en cuenta la larga deflaci?n), y de =
percibir que el trueque, como el dinero, hace la felicidad, surge la =
chocante realidad: el ejemplo del club del trueque muestra que la gente =
quiere emisi?n de pesos. Y no parece importarle mucho si es con o sin =
esa "esa suerte de propiedad" de ser convertible en d?lares; como es =
el caso de la "moneda social" del Club del Trueque.

Dado que, por la extensi?n de la pr?ctica del trueque, cientos de =
miles de argentinos comienzan a percibir c?mo la ley de =
convertibilidad "convierte" sus vidas en una econom?a sin dinero pero =
hacia un creciente empobrecimiento, quiz?s, tambi?n comiencen a =
"convertir" su rechazo a abandonar la ley de convertibilidad en =
admisi?n. Y, as?, la convertibilidad, "con su suerte de propiedad de =
la moneda", de eterna, se "convierta" en temporal; perecedero, =
transitorio temporal.

Si alguien ve en el Club del Trueque una muestra m?s de la ingeniosa =
viveza criolla, rebusc?ndosela ante la crisis, vale recordar que dicho =
ingenio ya fue patentado por el hombre hace unos varios de miles de =
a?os. Es que si La ley de convertibilidad ya implicaba retroceder al =
Siglo XIX, como bien dice la cronista de Clar?n, el trueque... " es un =
mecanismo tan antiguo como el hombre y representa la m?s primitiva =
actividad comercial de la humanidad".





"O jugar el juego de la existencia hasta el final;
de El Principio, de El Principio..."
("Ma?ana Nunca Se Sabe", Beatles).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Mafaldaresiste" <mafaldaresiste at arnet.com.ar>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- End of forwarded message -------

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Wed Feb  7 20:16:01 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Wed Feb  7 20:16:01 2001
Subject: A typo (RE: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of Dessalins)
In-Reply-To: <01c1e2809210721MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>
References: <200102071642.SAA16420@brain.sn.apc.org>
Message-ID: <038073324000821MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a RE: DEBATE: FW: RE: [CrashList] from the land of , 
el 7 Feb 01, a las 16:44, Gorojovsky dijo:

> > 
> 
> Deborah Giorgi? With D.H? 

Sorry, wrong name. 

Beatriz Nofal? With D.H.?

As to the rest, unchanged.

Sorry.

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Wed Feb  7 20:38:01 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Wed Feb  7 20:38:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] (Fwd) Documento del Foro Social Mundial (Porto Alegre)
Message-ID: <05ef23948000821MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

Cdes. and friends, 

Please find forwarded the final declaration of the Porto Alegre Forum.

Sorry for eventual problems with formatting. Have attempted to reformat this, 
but I am afraid I did not wholly succeed.

------- Forwarded message follows -------
From:           	"SIASRL" <siasrl at arnet.com.ar>
Subject:        	Para la Red Nac. y Pop.: Documento del Foro Social Mundial.
Date sent:      	Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:01:00 -0300



Documento del Foro Social Mundial.

LLAMADO DE PORTO ALEGRE A LA MOVILIZACION.
Fuerzas sociales procedentes de todo el mundo, nos hemos reunido aqu? en el
Foro Social Mundial de Porto Alegre. Sindicatos y ONGs, movimientos y
organizaciones, intelectuales y artistas, construimos juntos una gran
alianza para crear una nueva sociedad, distinta a la l?gica actual que
coloca al mercado y al dinero como la ?nica medida de valor. Davos
representa la concentraci?n de la riqueza, la globalizaci?n de la pobreza y
la destrucci?n de nuestra planeta. Porto Alegre representa la lucha y la
esperanza de un nuevo mundo posible, donde el ser humano y la naturaleza son
el centro de nuestras preocupaciones. 

Formamos parte de un movimiento en crecimiento a partir de Seattle.
Desafiamos a las ?lites y sus procesos anti-democr?ticos, representados en
el Foro Econ?mico de Davos. Venimos a compartir nuestras luchas,
intercambiar experiencias, fortalecer nuestra solidaridad y manifestar
nuestro rechazo absoluto a las pol?ticas neoliberales de la presente
globalizaci?n. 

Somos mujeres y hombres: campesinas y campesinos, trabajadoras y
trabajadores, profesionales, estudiantes, desempleadas y desempleados,
pueblos ind?genas y negros, provenientes del Sur y del Norte, comprometidos
a luchar por los derechos de los pueblos, la libertad, la seguridad, el
empleo y la educaci?n. Estamos en contra de la hegemon?a del capital, la
destrucci?n de nuestras culturas, la monopolizaci?n del conocimiento, los
medios masivos y de comunicaci?n, la degradaci?n de la naturaleza y el
deterioro de la calidad de vida por las corporaciones transnacionales y las
pol?ticas anti-democr?ticas. La experiencia de la democracia participativa,
como en Porto Alegre, demuestra que alternativas concretas son posibles.
Reafirmamos la supremac?a de los derechos humanos, ecol?gicos y sociales
sobre las exigencias de los capitales y de los inversionistas.

Al mismo tiempo que fortalecemos nuestro movimiento, resistimos a la ?lite
global, con el fin de mejorar la equidad, la justicia social, la democracia
y la seguridad para todos, sin distinci?n alguna. Nuestros m?todos y
alternativas constituyen un fuerte contraste con las pol?ticas destructivas
del neoliberalismo. 

La globalizaci?n refuerza un sistema sexista, excluyente y patriarcal.
Incrementa la feminizaci?n de la pobreza y exacerba todas las formas de
violencia contra las mujeres. La igualdad entre hombres y mujeres es una
dimensi?n central de nuestra lucha. Sin esta igualdad, otro mundo jam?s ser?
posible.

La globalizaci?n neoliberal desata el racismo, dando seguimiento al
verdadero genocidio de siglos de esclavitud y colonialismo, que destruyeron
las bases civilizatorias de las poblaciones negras de ?frica. Llamamos a
todos los movimientos a solidarizarse con el pueblo africano dentro y fuera
del continente, en la defensa de sus derechos a la tierra, la ciudadan?a,
la libertad, la igualdad y la paz, mediante el rescate de la deuda hist?rica
y social. El tr?fico de esclavos y la esclavitud son cr?menes contra la
humanidad. 

Expresamos especialmente nuestro reconocimiento y solidaridad con los
pueblos ind?genas en su hist?rica lucha contra el genocidio y el etnocidio y
en defensa de sus derechos, recursos naturales, cultura, autonom?a, tierra y
territorio.


La globalizaci?n neoliberal destruye el medio ambiente, la salud y las
condiciones de vida del pueblo. La atm?sfera, el agua, la tierra y tambi?n
los seres humanos son transformados en mercanc?as. La vida y la salud deben
ser reconocidos como derechos fundamentales y las decisiones econ?micas
deben estar sometidas a ese principio. 

La Deuda Externa de los pa?ses del Sur ha sido pagada varias veces.
Injusta, ileg?tima y fraudulenta, funciona como instrumento de dominaci?n,
privando a los pueblos de sus derechos fundamentales con el ?nico fin de
aumentar la usura internacional. Exigimos su anulaci?n incondicional y la
reparaci?n de las deudas hist?ricas, sociales y ecol?gicas, como pasos
inmediatos hacia una soluci?n definitiva de las crisis que la Deuda Externa
provoca.

Los mercados financieros extraen los recursos y la riqueza de los pueblos y
sujetan las econom?as nacionales a los vaivenes de los especuladores.
Reclamamos el cierre de los para?sos fiscales y la introducci?n de impuestos
sobre transacciones financieras.

Las privatizaciones transfieren los bienes p?blicos y los recursos hacia
las transnacionales. Nos oponemos a toda forma de privatizaci?n de recursos
naturales y bienes p?blicos. Hacemos un llamado de proteger el acceso a los
mismos para proporcionar una vida digna para todas y todos.

Las compa??as multinacionales organizan la producci?n mundial con un
desempleo masivo, bajos salarios y trabajo no calificado y se niegan a
reconocer los derechos fundamentales de los trabajadores, tal como son
definidos por la OIT. Reclamamos el reconocimiento genuino de los derechos
de los sindicatos para organizarse y negociar y para alcanzar nuevos
derechos para los y las trabajadores. Mientras bienes y capital pueden
cruzar libremente las fronteras, las restricciones sobre el movimiento del
pueblo exacerban la explotaci?n y represi?n. Exigimos el fin de tales
restricciones. 

Demandamos un sistema de comercio justo que garantice empleo pleno,
soberan?a alimentaria, t?rminos de intercambio equitativos y prosperidad
local. El &ldquo;libre comercio&rdquo; no es tan libre. Las reglas del comercio 
global provocan la acumulaci?n acelerada de riqueza y poder a las corporaciones
transnacionales, a la vez que generan mayor marginalizaci?n y
empobrecimiento de campesinas y campesinos, trabajadoras y trabajadores y
empresas locales. Reclamamos a los gobiernos que respeten sus obligaciones
seg?n los instrumentos internacionales sobre derechos humanos y los acuerdos
ambientales multilaterales. Convocamos a apoyar las movilizaciones en contra
de la creaci?n del Area de Libre Comercio de las Am?ricas, una iniciativa
que significa la reconquista de la regi?n y la destrucci?n de los derechos
humanos fundamentales sociales, econ?micos, culturales y ambientales.

El FMI, el Banco Mundial y los bancos regionales, la OMC, la OTAN y otras
alianzas militares son algunas de los agentes multilaterales de la
globalizaci?n transnacional. Exigimos el cese de su interferencia en las
pol?ticas nacionales. Estas instituciones no tienen legitimidad ante los
ojos del pueblo y vamos a continuar con protestas en contra de sus medidas. 

La globalizaci?n neoliberal ha provocado la concentraci?n de la tierra y
promovido una agricultura transnacionalizada, destructiva en lo social y
ambiental. Se basa en producci?n para la exportaci?n que necesita de
grandes plantaciones y de construcci?n de represas lo que trae aparejado la
expulsi?n de la gente de su tierra y la destrucci?n de sus medios de vida,
los que deben ser restituidos. Demandamos una Reforma Agraria democr?tica
con usufructo por parte del campesinado de la tierra, del agua y de las
semillas. Promovemos procesos agr?colas sustentables. Las semillas y el
material gen?tico son patrimonio de la humanidad. Exigimos la abolici?n del
uso de transg?nicos y patentes sobre la vida. 

El militarismo y la globalizaci?n en manos de corporaciones transnacionales
se refuerzan para socavar la democracia y la paz. Nos negamos totalmente a
aceptar la guerra como camino para resolver los conflictos. Estamos contra
el armamentismo y el comercio de armas. Exigimos el fin de la represi?n y la
criminalizaci?n de la protesta social. Condenamos la intervenci?n militar
extranjera en los asuntos internos de nuestros pa?ses. Exigimos el
levantamiento de los embargos y sanciones que son utilizados como
instrumentos de agresi?n y expresamos nuestra solidaridad con quienes sufren
sus consecuencias. Rechazamos la intervenci?n militar estadounidense a
trav?s del Plan Colombia en Am?rica Latina.

Llamamos a reforzar nuestra alianza frente a estos temas principales e
implementar acciones en com?n. Vamos a seguir moviliz?ndonos alrededor de
ellas hasta el pr?ximo Foro. Reconocemos que contamos ahora con una mejor
posici?n para emprender una lucha en favor de un mundo distinto, sin
miseria, hambre, discriminaci?n ni violencia; en favor de una mejor calidad
de vida, con equidad, respeto y paz. 

Nos comprometemos a apoyar a todas las luchas de nuestra agenda colectiva
que movilice la oposici?n al neoliberalismo. Entre las prioridades para los
meses venideros, vamos a movilizarnos globalmente en contra del:

&middot; Foro Econ?mico Mundial en Canc?n, M?xico del 26 al 27 de febrero
&middot; ?rea de L?bre Comercio de las Am?ricas, en Buenos Aires, Argentina
el 6-7 de abril y en Quebec, Canad? del 17-22 de abril
&middot; Asian Development Bank, en mayo en Honolul?
&middot; Cumbre del G-8 en G?nova, Italia, del 15-22 de julio
&middot; FMI y del Banco Mundial, Asamblea anual en Washington DC, del 28 de
septiembre al 4 de octubre
&middot; OMC, del 5-9 de noviembre (Qatar?)

El 17 de abril, nos uniremos a la movilizaci?n internacional en la lucha
contra las importaciones de productos agr?colas baratos que generan
dumping&rdquo; econ?mico y social. Asimismo, a la movilizaci?n feminista en
Genoa, contra la globalizaci?n. Apoyamos el llamado a un d?a mundial de
acci?n contra la Deuda, a realizarse este a?o el 20 de julio.

Estas propuestas formuladas forman parte de las alternativas elaboradas por
los movimientos sociales de todo el mundo. Se basan en el principio que los
seres humanos y la vida no son mercanc?as. Asimismo, en el compromiso con el
bienestar y los derechos humanos de todas y todos. 
 
Nuestra participaci?n en el Foro Social Mundial ha enriquecido la
comprensi?n de cada una de nuestras luchas y hemos salido fortalecidos.
Llamamos a todos los pueblos del mundo a unirse a esta lucha por construir
un futuro mejor. El Foro Social Mundial de Porto Alegre es un camino hacia
la soberan?a de los pueblos y un mundo justo. * (SN 3028/01).


------- End of forwarded message -------

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Borba100 at aol.com  Thu Feb  8 00:36:01 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Thu Feb  8 00:36:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Javier Solana's Visit to Belgrade is an Outrage!
Message-ID: <6b.f91d242.27b3411e@aol.com>

The URL for his article is http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/dem.htm
For a printer-friendly version of this article, please click here.

www.tenc.net 
[Emperor's Clothes]

Don't entertain him - arrest him!
Javier Solana's Visit to Belgrade is an Outrage! [2-7-2001]

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Jared Israel (editor, Emperor's Clothes) and Nico 
Varkevisser (President, Global Reflexion) 

Today thousands of Yugoslavs of varying political beliefs passionately 
protested against Javier Solana's visit to Belgrade. This protest, loud and 
spirited, was held in the center of Belgrade, on Knez Milosh Street, outside 
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It represents a most important act of 
defiance, held in the face of widespread violence and intimidation following 
the U.S-backed coup in Belgrade, Oct. 5th. 

Javier Solana was head of NATO during and after NATO?s 78 day bombing 
campaign. He was convicted of mass murder by a Yugoslav court and sentenced, 
in absentia, to 20 years hard labor. The court that made that decision still 
has jurisdiction under Kostunica, who insists that he stands for the rule of 
law.

Yet today Solana is in Belgrade. And the Kostunica/Djindjic regime is not 
arresting him. 

Now, all the media lies that were used as a pretext to bomb Yugoslavia ? from 
the lies about mass graves to the lies about the phony Racak massacre - have 
been refuted by NATO?s own data as well as by official organizations such as 
the FBI, Europol, the OSCE, the UNHCR and Finish Forensic experts. And yet it 
is now, mocking Yugoslav justice, that the new Belgrade regime, backed by 
NATO and the International Monetary Fund, invites Solana to Belgrade. Not to 
arrest him, but to meet with him and to celebrate, while at the same time 
they are hunting down those who resisted NATO and indicting them for NATO ?s 
crimes. 

Solana is a criminal. He is guilty of:

Crimes against humanity ? Javier Solana was head of NATO when, in violation 
of its charter and all international law, it launched the bombing war against 
Yugoslavia, including the use of nuclear-sheathed weapons. It was Solana who 
was responsible for the destruction of the homes and lives of Kosovo 
residents of all nationalities. It was Solana?s NATO that has put 25 million 
people in the Balkans at risk by bombing the area with low level nuclear 
weapons. Solana?s NATO oversaw the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of 
Yugoslavs from Kosovo after the bombing.

Crimes against the truth - Solana was not only an organizer he was a direct 
apologist for the war and the subsequent violent expulsions from Kosovo. For 
example, after NATO bombed a group of returning Albanian refugees in the town 
of Korisa, Solana went on TV declaring that the Serbs were at fault for the 
deaths although in fact the killing was done by NATO bombs. 

This truly insane argument was invoked recently by Carla Del Ponte of the 
kangaroo-court War Crimes Tribunal, who accused Milosevich of being 
responsible for the deaths of 16 people when NATO bombed Serbian television. 
Following Del Ponte?s lead, the Belgrade government has threatened to indict 
Dragoljub Milanovic, director of Serbian TV at that time, for the NATO 
bombing. Thus the Kostunica/Djindjic government invites Javier Solana, a 
convicted war criminal, to be wined and dined in Belgrade while trying to 
jail Yugoslav leaders for the bombs that NATO dropped.

Many Yugoslavs voted for Vojislav Kostunica because they saw in him a hope of 
peace with justice. But where is the justice when murderers are entertained 
and the innocent are accused of their crimes? Now, when the horrors of NATO?s 
use of depleted uranium are coming out, it is incumbent on those who 
supported this regime to join with all others in Yugoslavia and around the 
world to condemn the real criminals: Solana, Clinton, Blair, Schroeder, 
Chretien and all other NATO heads of state and heads of government and their 
Yugoslav political puppets.

- February 7, 2001

Further Reading

1) On NATO's carefully orchestrated campaign to turn neighbor against 
neighbor before and during the bombing of Kosovo in 1999, see 'Why Albanians 
Fled Kosovo During NATO Bombing' at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/keys.htm 

2) On NATO's involvement in expelling hundreds of thousands from Kosovo after 
the bombing, see         'Driven from Kosovo: Jewish Leader Blames NATO - 
Interview With Cedda Prlincevic' at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/ceda.htm 

3) On NATO's conscious effort to punish Yugoslavia by creating environmental 
disasters, see 'NATO Willfully Triggered Environmental Catastrophe In 
Yugoslavia' by Michel Chossudovsky at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/chuss/willful.htm and 'Chemical/Nuclear 
Warfare in Bosnia: Eyewitness To Hell' at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/tika/hell.htm 

4) On NATO's attempt to replace international law with the rule of NATO, see 
'Humanitarian War: Making the Crime Fit the Punishment' by Diana Johnstone at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/Johnstone/crime.htm and 'Mocking 
Tradition and Practice - NATO's War & World Security' by Raju Thomas at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/security.htm 

5) On the effort by distinguished Western lawyers to bring NATO to justice, 
see 'Report: Meeting with Carla del Ponte on NATO Crimes of War' by Michael 
Mandel at http://emperors-clothes.com/news/mandel.htm

6) On efforts to intimidate anti-NATO dissent in Yugoslavia, see "These 
Djindjic People are Brownshirts," at 
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/interviews/djindjic.htm 

and "Report on the Dec. 23 Elections" by the British Helsinki Human Rights 
Group at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/srbele.htm 

***

Yugoslav Journalists' Fund

Emperor's Clothes is trying to assist a few families of Yugoslav journalists. 
These journalists are among the many journalists who have literally been 
thrown out of work when thugs took over all TV and radio stations and 
newspapers during and after the Oct. 5th coup. These attacks are part of the 
terror in 'democratic' Serbia. We are providing some financial help; we need 
to provide more. 

It's really a privilege to be able to help these brave men and women who are 
trying to report 'the other side' within Yugoslavia and, through Emperor's 
Clothes and other media, to the outside world.

Meanwhile, our own operating costs have increased. (For instance, monthly 
fees for the superb news media search engine Lexis have more than doubled.)

If you can make a contribution either to our general expenses or specifically 
to help the Journalists' Fund, please do. Any amount will help. To use our 
secure server, please go to 
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm#donate. (If you use the secure 
server and wish your contribution to go to the Journalists' Fund, please send 
us a note at emperors1000 at aol.com 

Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 
02461-0321.

Or call 617 916-1705 from 9-5, Eastern U.S. time and ask for Bob. Thanks very 
much!

And please join our email list so we can keep you informed.

www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
 



From Borba100 at aol.com  Thu Feb  8 05:18:02 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Thu Feb  8 05:18:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
Message-ID: <a9.116ab8ff.27b3cc36@aol.com>

["Pride cometh before a fall"]

Reprinted from http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/alpha.htm 

8th February 2001 Depleted Uranium Watch 

>From Alpha to Z Net, With BAS In Between Piotr Bein, piotr.bein at imag.net, 
Vancouver, Canada 

"A 'sophisticated' smokescreen, a cover-up pretending to sound ever so 
militant," commented Rick Rozoff about a January 16th, 2001, article Thinking 
About DU by Michael Albert on Z Net. About the author, Rick remarked, "He 
really lets NATO off the hook on DU war crimes." I made a diagnostic test of 
the last paragraph in the article. It passed the test and definitely did not 
sound like anything prepared by NATO or the Pentagon Public Affairs: "What's 
wrong with the tools of war [...] as used by the US repeatedly around the 
world, of horrifically unjust war, [is the] overall morality and policies of 
an unjust and truly rogue state - that is, the US." Yet Rick is no novice, so 
I copied the article into my word processor, enlarged the font, and dug into 
it. Here is my assessment of what resembles disguised NATO propaganda. 

Epidemiologist 

Albert identifies DU's chemical toxicity, but unlike NATO spokesmen, he 
admits that alpha radiation from ingested tiny DU particles will "assault the 
cells more directly and strongly since intensity rises with proximity." But 
he obligingly repeats the standard NATO line that alpha particles coming from 
outside the body are "stopped even by skin, certainly by boots." He evidently 
forgot that people breath. Obviously, he is not aware that DU particles are 
so tiny, and therefore persistent in the air under all meteorological 
conditions, that even if they did not penetrate the skin's surface, they 
would be breathed in for sure, even after rain, causing illness and even 
eventual death . This is why cancer rates keep climbing over the years, as 
more and more low-level radioactive particles circulate around. 

Bring your DU combat boots home, store them under your child's bed as a 
souvenir of a victorious martial triumph that made Swiss cheese out of Iraqi 
tanks - and watch your child develop Gulf War syndrome or cancer. This 
actually happened, as related by a military nurse, Joyce Riley, on an 
American Coast to Coast Radio broadcast hosted by Mike Siegel on January 
11th, 2001. Other revelations from her about DU can be reviewed there as 
well. 

Enter Albert-the-epidemiologist. Although armed with "knowledge gleaned only 
from examining readily available reports of critics and supporters," he 
nevertheless states, "There is no compelling evidence, that is specific to 
DU's effects in the field, only intimations about what they might be." In 
this instance Albert resembles another amateur "student" of the subject, Ben 
Works, the director of the SIRI-US institute who labeled me an "hysteric" and 
(yes, you guessed it!) "leftist" when he ran out of "scientific" arguments to 
respond to me with. My latest psychiatric check confirmed a severe cognitive 
confusion because of the 1999 barbaric NATO attack on Yugoslavia, but my doc 
said not a word about hysteria. And my political orientation has as much to 
do with "leftism" ("communism" would be the diagnosis between the McCarthy 
era and the collapse of the Berlin Wall) as Michael Albert has with his 
namesake Einstein. 

So pontificates another seeming clone of assorted NATO spokesmen and their 
"scientific" mouthpieces: "The fact that people have gotten sick, or gotten 
leukemia, in countries that have their infrastructure obliterated, that have 
had all manner of chemical plants blown to pieces and scattered to the winds, 
and that are shrouded in metals, gasses, and other battlefield waste 
including but not even remotely limited to DU, doesn't implicate a specific 
cause as against all others." Which harks back to the "other factors" that I 
predicted a year and a half ago would be pulled out to cover up NATO's DU 
crimes in the Balkans. 

Blaming the "other factors" is easy to do when contending with leukemia, 
which can have a half a dozen or more causes besides radiation. Perhaps 
Albert would volunteer to assist the cause of science at this point and sniff 
a hefty dose of DU dust at his next party? This would be a controlled 
experiment, no "other factors" involved, except perhaps for some booze and 
other inebriants and stimulants of choice. "It's a technical and not a 
political determination," declares Albert (not Einstein) and proceeds to 
political arguments, perhaps a habit acquired from composing polemical tracts 
on Z Net. What is the scale of damage due to DU? Albert has a non-political 
answer. To impress the reader with the depth and range of his scientific 
approach, he insists that, "as far as fact is concerned, we don't know out of 
the tens of reported deaths and the hundreds of reported illnesses how many 
are due to DU radiation or to the chemical toxicity of DU, or due to other 
heavy metals or pollutants, or due to innumerable other likely causes 
including the destruction of civilian infrastructure, which has extraordinary 
health consequences (quite apart from the sanctions in Iraq, which have 
exacerbated all these problems enormously)." Neat. Just what NATO needed. 
Never mind the over 33 thousand deaths among almost 700 thousand Gulf War 
veterans from combined causes, including DU. Well over 100 thousand of the 
same group are in line for premature death or suffering for the rest of their 
lives. Even if DU was the aetiology for only 10 percent of the cases, that 
would mean a whopping umpteen thousand military casualties, from a war that 
supposedly was "septic"' and virtually did not cost one American life. Who 
cares anymore about the far larger damage sustained by Iraqi civilians and 
combatants? The Balkans might bring a toll of hundreds of thousands in the 
long-term, based on increased population density and, hence, greater exposure 
rates. No wonder NATO hyped up their naive Western public with grotesquely 
inflated accounts of hundreds of thousands of Kosovo Albanians allegedly 
perishing from "Serb genocide". Having achieved this propaganda gambit, in a 
bean-counter's wrap-up of their "humanitarian intervention" they would trade 
off DU casualties against the atrocities of "Milosevic" and show that it was 
"still worth it." 

Bunch of Leftists 

But I am no epidemiologist, oncologist or molecular biochemist. Let's see 
what the scientists say from a January 26th, 2001 conference in Athens on the 
DU health risk subject. (Don't rush to the NATO website, you will not find it 
there.) 

Mr. E. Sideris, a radiobiologist at the Democritus Institute, said that the 
action of internal alpha particles could lead to "extensive degeneration in 
the DNA." He ended his talk with the admonition, "only a sick mind could 
design a weapon of this sort." Sick minds at Z Net? No way! 

Dr Maria Sotiropoulou-Arvaniti, president of the Greek section of Physicians 
Against Nuclear War, said the radioactivity from the explosion of DU shells 
was very different from that at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, there still 
was an increase in leukaemia in southern Iraq, and a significant increase in 
other diseases. She also said the uranium missiles used in Bosnia in 
1994-1995 had not yet wreaked their full effect, and that banning radioactive 
weapons, as well as nuclear weapons, was the only way we were to survive as a 
species. Are you there, Mr. Albert? Do you get it now why the "leftists" 
latched on to this "uranium" issue? 

Dr. Catherine Euler (another "leftist", although from good old democratic 
England) pointed out the fraudulent use of science in cover-ups of illnesses 
from low-level radiation persisting all over the globe after 1950s and 1960s 
nuclear tests, reactor accidents, and uranium mining and processing. A 
mathematical model extrapolating from the external acute exposures of 
Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors is the favourite among "scientists" on 
nuclear industry paycheques and grants. However, several studies have shown 
empirical support for what Dr. Chris Busby's cellular response model; very 
low doses actually cause more harm than a higher dose, up to a certain point. 

The only way to contribute towards a settling of the dispute is to carry out 
an independent epidemiological survey, not another desk study. Dr. Euler 
outlined the study suggested by Dr. Rosalie Bertell, a veteran in the battle 
against the low-level radiation nightmare. So, Mr. Albert, how is that? The 
facts have been known for decades. Dr. Bertell is already grown grey in 
service to the truth, yet the nuclear mafia has been effectively preventing 
empirical studies that would only prove - something they already know darn 
well - their crimes. 

Dr. Theophilou, a nuclear physicist who had worked for twelve years in a 
European Union atomic fission lab, said we know enough about them to condemn 
DU munitions, and that epidemiology was not required, but that more molecular 
biology was. With the addition of only one alpha particle, the health of the 
individual was at risk. Theophilou emphasised how energetic alpha particles 
were, and that they could therefore damage cells. Erroneous copies of cells 
would be produced, causing cancers and leukaemia. If the alpha particle 
damaged the DNA, then erroneous copies would be produced forever afterwards. 
He was extremely concerned when he heard there were particles of Pu (not poo, 
Mr. Albert, but plutonium) mixed with the DU. 

Referring to dust particles 1-10 microns in size, Theophilou said they can 
reach "all the different areas of our body, and most are insoluble." Harmful 
reactions could result from the entry of uranium to the stomach. He said the 
dust could be transferred up into the atmosphere and travel very far, in the 
same way that dust from the Sahara has been found in Greece. Gee, what a 
"leftist hysteric" this Dr. Theophilou! 

A professor of nuclear physics at Athens University, Dr. A.K. Geranios, said 
several labs performed tests on alpha exposure effects on cells, and that the 
alpha energy seemed to travel only as far as one or two cells, and therefore 
caused limited damage. However, the current model used to estimate the risks 
from radiation may not be correct, he said. He spoke about how some radiation 
limits were set not according to their biological effects, but by economic or 
financial considerations. Radiation standards had continuously dropped since 
the 1930s: "We have tended to underestimate risks." Radiation risks were not 
one-off events, but continued as long as the decay continued. To wait until 
we have further proof of the harm of DU was "utterly fallacious," he said, 
"and until then we must make sure the weapon is abolished." 

According to the oncologist Rigatos, "No matter what the quantity, we know 
uranium may be carcinogenic." There have been studies dating back to 1902 
showing the relationship between radiation and cancer, and Ukraine's health 
minister had reported an increase in leukaemia after Chernobyl. We are now 
seeing "localised nuclear war," Rigatos said, referring to the DU employed in 
wars since 1991. 

Professor K. Pangalos listed several genetic abnormalities attributable to 
DU. They would become apparent in the third or fourth generation. He 
suggested that those countries using DU must ban these weapons if "they don't 
wish to mourn the consequences in their populations." Dr. Dimistris Moghnie, 
who had spent ten years working as a doctor in Iraq after the Gulf War, 
completed the grim picture with cancer statistics. He said cancer cases in Al 
Basarah (Basra, in southern Iraq) had increased from 1,713 in 1991 to 22,000 
in the year 2000. In some districts, they had increased even more 
dramatically during the same period. 

Own Soldiers 

So much for civilians. Back on the Z Net website, Albert-the-moralist 
returns, asking, "What about the US military's attitude toward its own 
soldiers?" and answers with the obvious, "Soldiers are fodder. Generals don't 
take up residence on the field of combat, it's too dangerous." But a few 
sentences on, Albert seems to lose his common sense and says, "The aim of US 
war is to destroy without US casualties - and they actually do a rather good 
job both of destroying and of minimizing US casualties." I read the sentence 
again; no, it did not say "good job of destroying its own troops." I would 
recommend a phone call from Z Net to the US Gulf War veterans association to 
help get down to earth from the Z clouds. Albert wonders, "Is the US military 
stupid or blind enough to use DU, not to the moral consequences that they 
don't care about, but to the political consequences of using DU, if it is as 
portrayed by its detractors? Maybe. [...] But I haven't seen enough to make 
me believe it." He has not seen enough. Obviously. If you don't look, you 
don't find. The US military is neither stupid nor blind. That 's why they are 
trying to cover up so hard: Because the political consequences are creeping 
out from every crack. And the surfacing of political consequences spells 
"liability" and "genocide". 

The Z Net editor shows his true colours when he expresses the doubt, "Why 
should the case of DU wherein the impact is seemingly relatively low 
alongside one of the most barbaric instances of chemical and biological 
warfare in history [...] rise to such prominence in the media, and even on 
the left?" This must be the prime question PsyOp professionals are currently 
wrestling with in designing their propaganda. 

Albert strains his rightiZt brain further, "Moderately affecting our troops 
or civilians and not only those of 'enemies' is not justification for hugely 
enhanced leftist focus." If instead of delving into the difference between 
their right and left brain lobes, Z Net scribes followed the events, they 
would have noticed that "leftists" and non-affiliated people like myself 
"focused" on NATO in Iraq and Balkans ever since the above's four-corner star 
showed up in the regions in question to correct ostensibly misguided and 
intractable "humanity". During the time of Khrushchov, we would be called 
"Soviet agents". Albert's focus on the dividing line between hiZ right and 
all others left, fogs up his search for "the cause of the left's heightened 
interest" in DU. He rejects the obvious contention that "the grotesque 
immorality of the use of toxic materials" could be the reason for "heightened 
attention from seasoned leftists" because such use is supposedly no surprise 
to them. Having so put a question mark over the rationality of "leftists," 
Albert proceeds to convince his reader that "the relative impact of DU, 
however great, is modest to minuscule compared to the impact of the bombing 
per se, or the sanctions per se." I gather Albert-the-researcher concluded 
this after examining the "evidence" from the NATO DU website. 

StrategiZing 

Albert's conclusion: Leftists must believe that focusing on DU is a "good way 
to build generalized opposition," or else abandon the quixotic crusade to ban 
uranium weapons. He then embarks on showing how futile such a "leftist" 
campaigning would be. What follows might as well come from the PsyOp analysis 
of a project titled "DU harmless even if Lord Robertson died of it." 

He notes that for a campaign to be strategically valuable it has to be 
embraced by "some sectors of the public." Presumably that sector Albert and Z 
Net belong to? 

Activism must also contribute to moral permanence and social values. "Does DU 
dissent do that?" Albert-the-rhetorician queries. He believes that maybe if 
the anti-DU campaigners spoke more about the generalised motives of war, then 
they would have a better chance of success combating DU. If, in addition, the 
information presented continually improved one's understanding of the much 
greater violence perpetrated during the Gulf War, the Iraq sanctions and the 
NATO bombings, and of US foreign policy in general, the chance would be 
greater still. 

One could think that Albert wishes anti-DU campaigners well. Do not be 
fooled. Just follow the ruses that, again, plant doubts in the reader's mind 
about the rationality and objectivity of the anti-DU activists, who may be 
making "wrong claims". Or DU dissent might "degenerate into irrational 
anti-science prejudices." Whatever putative science it is Albert claims to 
uphold, it is based on a fairly glaring ignorance of several decades of 
scientific research, and is based on an irrational and counterintuitive 
understanding of the human survival instinct. His positions being what they 
are, he might as well be the master-mind behind the NATO "information" 
website about DU. 

And finally comes the punch: Albert contrasts the "leftist" anti-DU 
transgressions with "rightful skepticism of establishment 'expert' 
testimony." Since he is not leftist (surely in this sense) and does not 
accept the scientist evidence that the establishment covers up, he must be a 
self-proclaimed "Know It All About DU Health Risks," particularly in 
contradistinction to the 'other' factors. 

I can't help remarking that Albert's seemingly anti-war article contains 
puzzling statements, not unlike his mentor Chomsky's writings against NATO 
"humanitarian interventions" which persistently refer to "Serb atrocities," 
for which proofs are not forthcoming despite the NATO countries' heroic 
forensic efforts to prove the unprovable. However hard the authors at Z Net 
may be trying to pose as intellectuals and thinkers, their arguments just do 
not stand up to the most elementary tests of common sense and scientific 
fact. 

Lightbulb 

After writing this brief reflection I noticed right above Albert's own 
article on Z Net main page a link to a 1999 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 
disinformation piece on DU by two professors of (what did you expect?) public 
affairs, Steve Fetter and Frank von Hippel. The authors proudly announced in 
that pseudo-scientific article that "detailed calculations whose results are 
discussed here are to be published in Science & Global Security." The 
calculations must have been "right," if the essay was posted on NATO DU site. 
It looks like the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists must be another 
contractor of NATO PsyOp, since they published William Arkin's accolades 
about NATO "smart" bombs against "dumb" Serb targets, to which I had the 
pleasure of replying. [See http://emperors-clothes.com/news/arkin.htm ]

 A lightbulb lit up in the left half of my leftist brain: Albert must have 
drawn inspiration for his revelatory intellectual opus on DU from Fetter and 
von Hippel! 

(copyleft: reproduce and acknowledge the source) 

This page: http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/alpha.htm 



From zapata at sezampro.yu  Thu Feb  8 08:22:01 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Thu Feb  8 08:22:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <a9.116ab8ff.27b3cc36@aol.com>
Message-ID: <005d01c091cf$4aa41920$a4bd6ac2@andrej>

Is it possible that this sort of Maoist reasoning is still actual?
I do not know, I have not the slightest idea why, but article written by
Mike Albert , taken as a pretext for attack on ZNet, is completely
misinterpreted.
Albert's analyses are very similar to my own, published on ZNet ( gosh!),
and I would be honored if some parts of Milosevic's political Diaspora would
try to find traces of "sophisticated smokescreen" there:
http://www.zmag.org/grubacic.htm
 Once again, if you want to help real opposition in Yugoslavia, fighting for
ideals of social justice, truth and libertarian socialism, please contact us
first. Center for Libertarian Studies, Belgrade (left) Libertarian Group and
Initiative for Economical Democracy are more than willing to help you with
some substantial facts. You can contact me, or our webmaster on
diabolik at yubc.net for all information's you would like to have. SPS and JUL
and so on and so forth, are not workers struggling for democracy and
self-management! Workers, students, left intelligentsia, are fighting with
us, against neoliberal government of DOS and against pseudo-leftist
formations like JUL, SPS, NKPJ. And you are not doing us a great favor by
defending pseudo leftist option: on the contrary, you are making the
atmosphere for creating authentic new left in Yugoslavia very delicate.
Please, stop with this accusations, needles accusations, and unite in your
efforts to help Yugoslav people fighting against Scyla and Haribda of
neoliberal capitalist government and pseudo-leftist and non progressive
opposition. Join workers, students, academics, journalists, in their fight
against simplifications and injustices in Yugoslavia and with regards to
Yugoslavia. Collaborate with ZNet instead of attacking them.
Comradely,
           Andrej
 ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
     Andrej Grubacic
Belgrade Initiative for Economical Democracy
http://ined.excelland.com/
http://www.ied.exit.de/
Gospodar Jevremova 46
 Tel: 634-130
11 000 Belgrade
Serbia/ Yugoslavia

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~





----- Original Message -----
From: <Borba100 at aol.com>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:17 AM
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium


> ["Pride cometh before a fall"]
>
> Reprinted from http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/alpha.htm
>
> 8th February 2001 Depleted Uranium Watch
>
> From Alpha to Z Net, With BAS In Between Piotr Bein, piotr.bein at imag.net,
> Vancouver, Canada
>
> "A 'sophisticated' smokescreen, a cover-up pretending to sound ever so
> militant," commented Rick Rozoff about a January 16th, 2001, article
Thinking
> About DU by Michael Albert on Z Net. About the author, Rick remarked, "He
> really lets NATO off the hook on DU war crimes." I made a diagnostic test
of
> the last paragraph in the article. It passed the test and definitely did
not
> sound like anything prepared by NATO or the Pentagon Public Affairs:
"What's
> wrong with the tools of war [...] as used by the US repeatedly around the
> world, of horrifically unjust war, [is the] overall morality and policies
of
> an unjust and truly rogue state - that is, the US." Yet Rick is no novice,
so
> I copied the article into my word processor, enlarged the font, and dug
into
> it. Here is my assessment of what resembles disguised NATO propaganda.
>
> Epidemiologist
>
> Albert identifies DU's chemical toxicity, but unlike NATO spokesmen, he
> admits that alpha radiation from ingested tiny DU particles will "assault
the
> cells more directly and strongly since intensity rises with proximity."
But
> he obligingly repeats the standard NATO line that alpha particles coming
from
> outside the body are "stopped even by skin, certainly by boots." He
evidently
> forgot that people breath. Obviously, he is not aware that DU particles
are
> so tiny, and therefore persistent in the air under all meteorological
> conditions, that even if they did not penetrate the skin's surface, they
> would be breathed in for sure, even after rain, causing illness and even
> eventual death . This is why cancer rates keep climbing over the years, as
> more and more low-level radioactive particles circulate around.
>
> Bring your DU combat boots home, store them under your child's bed as a
> souvenir of a victorious martial triumph that made Swiss cheese out of
Iraqi
> tanks - and watch your child develop Gulf War syndrome or cancer. This
> actually happened, as related by a military nurse, Joyce Riley, on an
> American Coast to Coast Radio broadcast hosted by Mike Siegel on January
> 11th, 2001. Other revelations from her about DU can be reviewed there as
> well.
>
> Enter Albert-the-epidemiologist. Although armed with "knowledge gleaned
only
> from examining readily available reports of critics and supporters," he
> nevertheless states, "There is no compelling evidence, that is specific to
> DU's effects in the field, only intimations about what they might be." In
> this instance Albert resembles another amateur "student" of the subject,
Ben
> Works, the director of the SIRI-US institute who labeled me an "hysteric"
and
> (yes, you guessed it!) "leftist" when he ran out of "scientific" arguments
to
> respond to me with. My latest psychiatric check confirmed a severe
cognitive
> confusion because of the 1999 barbaric NATO attack on Yugoslavia, but my
doc
> said not a word about hysteria. And my political orientation has as much
to
> do with "leftism" ("communism" would be the diagnosis between the McCarthy
> era and the collapse of the Berlin Wall) as Michael Albert has with his
> namesake Einstein.
>
> So pontificates another seeming clone of assorted NATO spokesmen and their
> "scientific" mouthpieces: "The fact that people have gotten sick, or
gotten
> leukemia, in countries that have their infrastructure obliterated, that
have
> had all manner of chemical plants blown to pieces and scattered to the
winds,
> and that are shrouded in metals, gasses, and other battlefield waste
> including but not even remotely limited to DU, doesn't implicate a
specific
> cause as against all others." Which harks back to the "other factors" that
I
> predicted a year and a half ago would be pulled out to cover up NATO's DU
> crimes in the Balkans.
>
> Blaming the "other factors" is easy to do when contending with leukemia,
> which can have a half a dozen or more causes besides radiation. Perhaps
> Albert would volunteer to assist the cause of science at this point and
sniff
> a hefty dose of DU dust at his next party? This would be a controlled
> experiment, no "other factors" involved, except perhaps for some booze and
> other inebriants and stimulants of choice. "It's a technical and not a
> political determination," declares Albert (not Einstein) and proceeds to
> political arguments, perhaps a habit acquired from composing polemical
tracts
> on Z Net. What is the scale of damage due to DU? Albert has a
non-political
> answer. To impress the reader with the depth and range of his scientific
> approach, he insists that, "as far as fact is concerned, we don't know out
of
> the tens of reported deaths and the hundreds of reported illnesses how
many
> are due to DU radiation or to the chemical toxicity of DU, or due to other
> heavy metals or pollutants, or due to innumerable other likely causes
> including the destruction of civilian infrastructure, which has
extraordinary
> health consequences (quite apart from the sanctions in Iraq, which have
> exacerbated all these problems enormously)." Neat. Just what NATO needed.
> Never mind the over 33 thousand deaths among almost 700 thousand Gulf War
> veterans from combined causes, including DU. Well over 100 thousand of the
> same group are in line for premature death or suffering for the rest of
their
> lives. Even if DU was the aetiology for only 10 percent of the cases, that
> would mean a whopping umpteen thousand military casualties, from a war
that
> supposedly was "septic"' and virtually did not cost one American life. Who
> cares anymore about the far larger damage sustained by Iraqi civilians and
> combatants? The Balkans might bring a toll of hundreds of thousands in the
> long-term, based on increased population density and, hence, greater
exposure
> rates. No wonder NATO hyped up their naive Western public with grotesquely
> inflated accounts of hundreds of thousands of Kosovo Albanians allegedly
> perishing from "Serb genocide". Having achieved this propaganda gambit, in
a
> bean-counter's wrap-up of their "humanitarian intervention" they would
trade
> off DU casualties against the atrocities of "Milosevic" and show that it
was
> "still worth it."
>
> Bunch of Leftists
>
> But I am no epidemiologist, oncologist or molecular biochemist. Let's see
> what the scientists say from a January 26th, 2001 conference in Athens on
the
> DU health risk subject. (Don't rush to the NATO website, you will not find
it
> there.)
>
> Mr. E. Sideris, a radiobiologist at the Democritus Institute, said that
the
> action of internal alpha particles could lead to "extensive degeneration
in
> the DNA." He ended his talk with the admonition, "only a sick mind could
> design a weapon of this sort." Sick minds at Z Net? No way!
>
> Dr Maria Sotiropoulou-Arvaniti, president of the Greek section of
Physicians
> Against Nuclear War, said the radioactivity from the explosion of DU
shells
> was very different from that at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, there
still
> was an increase in leukaemia in southern Iraq, and a significant increase
in
> other diseases. She also said the uranium missiles used in Bosnia in
> 1994-1995 had not yet wreaked their full effect, and that banning
radioactive
> weapons, as well as nuclear weapons, was the only way we were to survive
as a
> species. Are you there, Mr. Albert? Do you get it now why the "leftists"
> latched on to this "uranium" issue?
>
> Dr. Catherine Euler (another "leftist", although from good old democratic
> England) pointed out the fraudulent use of science in cover-ups of
illnesses
> from low-level radiation persisting all over the globe after 1950s and
1960s
> nuclear tests, reactor accidents, and uranium mining and processing. A
> mathematical model extrapolating from the external acute exposures of
> Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors is the favourite among "scientists" on
> nuclear industry paycheques and grants. However, several studies have
shown
> empirical support for what Dr. Chris Busby's cellular response model; very
> low doses actually cause more harm than a higher dose, up to a certain
point.
>
> The only way to contribute towards a settling of the dispute is to carry
out
> an independent epidemiological survey, not another desk study. Dr. Euler
> outlined the study suggested by Dr. Rosalie Bertell, a veteran in the
battle
> against the low-level radiation nightmare. So, Mr. Albert, how is that?
The
> facts have been known for decades. Dr. Bertell is already grown grey in
> service to the truth, yet the nuclear mafia has been effectively
preventing
> empirical studies that would only prove - something they already know darn
> well - their crimes.
>
> Dr. Theophilou, a nuclear physicist who had worked for twelve years in a
> European Union atomic fission lab, said we know enough about them to
condemn
> DU munitions, and that epidemiology was not required, but that more
molecular
> biology was. With the addition of only one alpha particle, the health of
the
> individual was at risk. Theophilou emphasised how energetic alpha
particles
> were, and that they could therefore damage cells. Erroneous copies of
cells
> would be produced, causing cancers and leukaemia. If the alpha particle
> damaged the DNA, then erroneous copies would be produced forever
afterwards.
> He was extremely concerned when he heard there were particles of Pu (not
poo,
> Mr. Albert, but plutonium) mixed with the DU.
>
> Referring to dust particles 1-10 microns in size, Theophilou said they can
> reach "all the different areas of our body, and most are insoluble."
Harmful
> reactions could result from the entry of uranium to the stomach. He said
the
> dust could be transferred up into the atmosphere and travel very far, in
the
> same way that dust from the Sahara has been found in Greece. Gee, what a
> "leftist hysteric" this Dr. Theophilou!
>
> A professor of nuclear physics at Athens University, Dr. A.K. Geranios,
said
> several labs performed tests on alpha exposure effects on cells, and that
the
> alpha energy seemed to travel only as far as one or two cells, and
therefore
> caused limited damage. However, the current model used to estimate the
risks
> from radiation may not be correct, he said. He spoke about how some
radiation
> limits were set not according to their biological effects, but by economic
or
> financial considerations. Radiation standards had continuously dropped
since
> the 1930s: "We have tended to underestimate risks." Radiation risks were
not
> one-off events, but continued as long as the decay continued. To wait
until
> we have further proof of the harm of DU was "utterly fallacious," he said,
> "and until then we must make sure the weapon is abolished."
>
> According to the oncologist Rigatos, "No matter what the quantity, we know
> uranium may be carcinogenic." There have been studies dating back to 1902
> showing the relationship between radiation and cancer, and Ukraine's
health
> minister had reported an increase in leukaemia after Chernobyl. We are now
> seeing "localised nuclear war," Rigatos said, referring to the DU employed
in
> wars since 1991.
>
> Professor K. Pangalos listed several genetic abnormalities attributable to
> DU. They would become apparent in the third or fourth generation. He
> suggested that those countries using DU must ban these weapons if "they
don't
> wish to mourn the consequences in their populations." Dr. Dimistris
Moghnie,
> who had spent ten years working as a doctor in Iraq after the Gulf War,
> completed the grim picture with cancer statistics. He said cancer cases in
Al
> Basarah (Basra, in southern Iraq) had increased from 1,713 in 1991 to
22,000
> in the year 2000. In some districts, they had increased even more
> dramatically during the same period.
>
> Own Soldiers
>
> So much for civilians. Back on the Z Net website, Albert-the-moralist
> returns, asking, "What about the US military's attitude toward its own
> soldiers?" and answers with the obvious, "Soldiers are fodder. Generals
don't
> take up residence on the field of combat, it's too dangerous." But a few
> sentences on, Albert seems to lose his common sense and says, "The aim of
US
> war is to destroy without US casualties - and they actually do a rather
good
> job both of destroying and of minimizing US casualties." I read the
sentence
> again; no, it did not say "good job of destroying its own troops." I would
> recommend a phone call from Z Net to the US Gulf War veterans association
to
> help get down to earth from the Z clouds. Albert wonders, "Is the US
military
> stupid or blind enough to use DU, not to the moral consequences that they
> don't care about, but to the political consequences of using DU, if it is
as
> portrayed by its detractors? Maybe. [...] But I haven't seen enough to
make
> me believe it." He has not seen enough. Obviously. If you don't look, you
> don't find. The US military is neither stupid nor blind. That 's why they
are
> trying to cover up so hard: Because the political consequences are
creeping
> out from every crack. And the surfacing of political consequences spells
> "liability" and "genocide".
>
> The Z Net editor shows his true colours when he expresses the doubt, "Why
> should the case of DU wherein the impact is seemingly relatively low
> alongside one of the most barbaric instances of chemical and biological
> warfare in history [...] rise to such prominence in the media, and even on
> the left?" This must be the prime question PsyOp professionals are
currently
> wrestling with in designing their propaganda.
>
> Albert strains his rightiZt brain further, "Moderately affecting our
troops
> or civilians and not only those of 'enemies' is not justification for
hugely
> enhanced leftist focus." If instead of delving into the difference between
> their right and left brain lobes, Z Net scribes followed the events, they
> would have noticed that "leftists" and non-affiliated people like myself
> "focused" on NATO in Iraq and Balkans ever since the above's four-corner
star
> showed up in the regions in question to correct ostensibly misguided and
> intractable "humanity". During the time of Khrushchov, we would be called
> "Soviet agents". Albert's focus on the dividing line between hiZ right and
> all others left, fogs up his search for "the cause of the left's
heightened
> interest" in DU. He rejects the obvious contention that "the grotesque
> immorality of the use of toxic materials" could be the reason for
"heightened
> attention from seasoned leftists" because such use is supposedly no
surprise
> to them. Having so put a question mark over the rationality of "leftists,"
> Albert proceeds to convince his reader that "the relative impact of DU,
> however great, is modest to minuscule compared to the impact of the
bombing
> per se, or the sanctions per se." I gather Albert-the-researcher concluded
> this after examining the "evidence" from the NATO DU website.
>
> StrategiZing
>
> Albert's conclusion: Leftists must believe that focusing on DU is a "good
way
> to build generalized opposition," or else abandon the quixotic crusade to
ban
> uranium weapons. He then embarks on showing how futile such a "leftist"
> campaigning would be. What follows might as well come from the PsyOp
analysis
> of a project titled "DU harmless even if Lord Robertson died of it."
>
> He notes that for a campaign to be strategically valuable it has to be
> embraced by "some sectors of the public." Presumably that sector Albert
and Z
> Net belong to?
>
> Activism must also contribute to moral permanence and social values. "Does
DU
> dissent do that?" Albert-the-rhetorician queries. He believes that maybe
if
> the anti-DU campaigners spoke more about the generalised motives of war,
then
> they would have a better chance of success combating DU. If, in addition,
the
> information presented continually improved one's understanding of the much
> greater violence perpetrated during the Gulf War, the Iraq sanctions and
the
> NATO bombings, and of US foreign policy in general, the chance would be
> greater still.
>
> One could think that Albert wishes anti-DU campaigners well. Do not be
> fooled. Just follow the ruses that, again, plant doubts in the reader's
mind
> about the rationality and objectivity of the anti-DU activists, who may be
> making "wrong claims". Or DU dissent might "degenerate into irrational
> anti-science prejudices." Whatever putative science it is Albert claims to
> uphold, it is based on a fairly glaring ignorance of several decades of
> scientific research, and is based on an irrational and counterintuitive
> understanding of the human survival instinct. His positions being what
they
> are, he might as well be the master-mind behind the NATO "information"
> website about DU.
>
> And finally comes the punch: Albert contrasts the "leftist" anti-DU
> transgressions with "rightful skepticism of establishment 'expert'
> testimony." Since he is not leftist (surely in this sense) and does not
> accept the scientist evidence that the establishment covers up, he must be
a
> self-proclaimed "Know It All About DU Health Risks," particularly in
> contradistinction to the 'other' factors.
>
> I can't help remarking that Albert's seemingly anti-war article contains
> puzzling statements, not unlike his mentor Chomsky's writings against NATO
> "humanitarian interventions" which persistently refer to "Serb
atrocities,"
> for which proofs are not forthcoming despite the NATO countries' heroic
> forensic efforts to prove the unprovable. However hard the authors at Z
Net
> may be trying to pose as intellectuals and thinkers, their arguments just
do
> not stand up to the most elementary tests of common sense and scientific
> fact.
>
> Lightbulb
>
> After writing this brief reflection I noticed right above Albert's own
> article on Z Net main page a link to a 1999 Bulletin of the Atomic
Scientists
> disinformation piece on DU by two professors of (what did you expect?)
public
> affairs, Steve Fetter and Frank von Hippel. The authors proudly announced
in
> that pseudo-scientific article that "detailed calculations whose results
are
> discussed here are to be published in Science & Global Security." The
> calculations must have been "right," if the essay was posted on NATO DU
site.
> It looks like the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists must be another
> contractor of NATO PsyOp, since they published William Arkin's accolades
> about NATO "smart" bombs against "dumb" Serb targets, to which I had the
> pleasure of replying. [See http://emperors-clothes.com/news/arkin.htm ]
>
>  A lightbulb lit up in the left half of my leftist brain: Albert must have
> drawn inspiration for his revelatory intellectual opus on DU from Fetter
and
> von Hippel!
>
> (copyleft: reproduce and acknowledge the source)
>
> This page: http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/alpha.htm
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>





From zapata at sezampro.yu  Thu Feb  8 09:02:02 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Thu Feb  8 09:02:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] From Porto Alegre, with solidarity
References: <a9.116ab8ff.27b3cc36@aol.com>
Message-ID: <008701c091d6$ea545c80$a4bd6ac2@andrej>

5- From Porto Alegre with solidarity
____________________________________________________________

Porto Alegre Call for Mobilisation

Social forces from around the world have gathered here at the World
Social Forum in Porto Alegre. Unions and NGOs, movements and
organizations, intellectuals and artists, together we are building a
great alliance to create a new society, different from the dominant
logic wherein the free-market and money are considered the only
measure of worth. Davos represents the concentration of wealth, the
globalization of poverty and the destruction of our earth. Porto
Alegre represents the hope that a new world is possible, where human
beings and nature are the center of our concern.

We are part of a movement  which has grown since Seattle. We challenge
the elite and their undemocratic processes, symbolised by the World
Economic Forum in Davos. We came to share our experiences, build our
solidarity, and demonstrate our total rejection of the neoliberal
policies of globalisation.

We are women and men, farmers, workers, unemployed, professionals,
students, blacks and indigenous peoples, coming from the South and
from the North, committed to struggle for peoples' rights, freedom,
security, employment and education. We are fighting against the
hegemony of finance, the destruction of our cultures, the
monopolization of knowledge, mass media, and communication, the
degradation of nature, and the destruction of the quality of life by
multinational corporations and anti-democratic policies. Participative
democratic experiences -- like that of Porto Alegre -- show us that a
concrete alternative is possible. We reaffirm the supremacy of human,
ecological and social rights over the demands of finance and
investors.

 At the same time that we strengthen our movements, we resist the
global elite and work for equity, social justice, democracy and
security for everyone, without distinction. Our methodology and
alternatives stand in stark contrast to the destructive policies of
neo-liberalism.

Globalisation reinforces a sexist and patriarchal system. It increases
the feminisation of poverty and exacerbates all forms of violence
against women. Equality between women and men is central to our
struggle. Without this, another world will never be possible.

Neoliberal globalization increases racism, continuing the veritable
genocide of centuries of slavery and colonialism which destroyed the
bases of black African civilizations. We call on all movements to be
in solidarity with African peoples in the continent and outside, in
defense of their rights to land, citizenship, freedom, peace, and
equality, through the reparation of historical and social debts. Slave
trade and slavery are crimes against humanity.

We express our special recognition and solidarity with indigenous
peoples in their historic struggle against genocide and ethnocide and
in defense of their rights, natural resources, culture, autonomy,
land, and territory.

Neoliberal globalisation destroys the environment, health and people's
living environment. Air, water, land and peoples have become
commodities. Life and health must be recognized as fundamental rights
which must not be subordinated to economic policies.

The external debt of the countries of the South has been repaid
several times over. Illegitimate, unjust and fraudulent, it functions
as an instrument of domination, depriving people of their fundamental
human rights with the sole aim of increasing international usury. We
demand its unconditional cancellation and the reparation of
historical, social, and ecological debts, as immediate steps toward a
definitive resolution of the crisis this Debt provokes.

Financial markets extract resources and wealth from communities and
nations, and subject national economies to the whims of speculators.
We call for the closure of tax havens and the introduction of taxes on
financial transactions.

Privatisation is a mechanism for transferring public wealth and
natural resources to the private sector. We oppose all forms of
privatisation of natural resources and public services. We call for
the protection of access to resources and public goods necessary for a
decent life.

Multinational corporations organise global production with massive
unemployment, low wages and unqualified labour and by refusing to
recognise the fundamental worker's rights as defined by the ILO. We
demand the genuine recognition of the right to organise and negotiate
for unions, and new rights for workers to face the globalisation
strategy. While goods and money are free to cross borders, the
restrictions on the movement of people exacerbate exploitation and
repression. We demand an end to such restrictions.

We call for a trading system which guarantees full employment, food
security, fair terms of trade and local prosperity. Free trade is
anything but free. Global trade rules ensure the accelerated
accummulation of wealth and power by multinational corporations and
the further marginalisation and impoverishment of small farmers,
workers and local enterprises. We demand that governments respect
their obligations to the international human rights instruments and
multilateral environmental agreements. We call on people everywhere to
support the mobilizations against the creation of the Free Trade Area
in the Americas, an initiative which means the recolonization of Latin
America and the destruction of fundamental social, economic, cultural
and environmental human rights.

The IMF, the World Bank and regional banks, the WTO, NATO and other
military alliances are some of the multilateral agents of neoliberal
globalisation. We call for an end to their interference in national
policy. These institutions have no legitimacy in the eyes of the
people and we will continue to protest against their measures.

Neoliberal globalization has led to the concentration of land
ownership and favored corporate agricultural systems which are
environmentally and socially destructive. It is based on export
oriented growth backed by large scale infrastructure development, such
as dams, which displces people from their land and destroys their
livelihoods. Their loss must be restored. We call for a democratic
agrarian reform. Land, water and seeds must be in the hands of the
peasants. We promote sustainable agricultural processes. Seeds and
genetic stocks are the heritage of humanity. We demand that the use of
transgenics and the patenting of life be abolished.

Militarism and corporate globalisation reinforce each other to
undermine democracy and peace. We totally refuse war as a way to solve
coflicts and we oppose the arms race and the arms trade. We call for
an end to the repression and criminalisation of social protest. We
condemn foreign military intervention in the internal affairs of our
countries. We demand the lifting of embargoes and sanctions used as
instruments of aggression, and express our solidarity with those who
suffer their consequences. We reject US military intervention in Latin
America through the Plan Colombia.

We call for a strenghtening of alliances, and the implementation of
common actions, on these principal concerns. We will continue to
mobilize on them until the next Forum. We recognize that we are now in
a better position to undertake the struggle for a different world, a
world without misery, hunger, discrimination and violence, with
quality of life, equity, respect and peace.

We commit ourselves to  support all the struggles of our common agenda
to mobilise opposition to neoliberalism. Among our priorities for the
coming months, we will mobilize globally against the:
? World Economic Forum, Cancun, Mexico, 26 and 27 February
? Free Trade Area of the Americas, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 6-7 April
and Quebec City, Canada, 17-22 April
?Asian Development Bank, Honolulu, May
?G8 Summit, Genova, Italy, 15-22 July
? IMF and World Bank Annual Meeting, Washington DC, USA, 28
September - 4 October
? World Trade Organisation, 5-9 November (Quatar?)

On April 17, we will support the international day of struggle against
the importation of cheap agricultural products which create economic
and social dumping, and the feminist mobilization against
globalization in Genova. We support the call for a world day of action
against debt, to take place this year on July 20.

The proposals formulated are part of the alternatives being elaborated
by social movements around the world.  They are based on the principle
that human beings and life are not commodities, and in the commitment
to the welfare and human rights of all.

Our involvement in the World Social Forum has enriched  understanding
of each of our struggles and we have been strengthened.  We call on
all peoples around the world to join in this struggle to build a
better  future. The World Social Forum of Porto Alegre is a way to
achieve peoples' sovereignty and a just world.

Hundreds of organizations have signed this call. If you want to see
the endorsements, please check
http://attac.org/fra/asso/doc/doc502sign.htm

If your organization wants to sign it, please send a email to
attacint at attac.org mentioning your endorsement and giving all useful
information.


______________________________






From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Thu Feb  8 09:35:02 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Thu Feb  8 09:35:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] (Spanish) (1) Atomic corruption in Argentina (2) Sexual slavery in Macedonia
Message-ID: <0b9100633140821MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

Some interesting news. From Agencia Nova, La Plata, Argentina.



NOVA 8.803  DENUNCIAN IRREGULARIDADES EN LA NUCLEOEL?CTRICA ARGENTINA   
LA PLATA, Febrero 07 (Agencia NOVA) El diputado Socialista Democr?tico H?ctor  
Polino, denunci? ?grav?simas irregularidades administrativas y un escandaloso  
pedido de los dineros p?blicos? en la empresa Estatal Nucleoel?ctrica Argentina 
 S.A., que contrasta de manera irritiva con el recorte salarial que padecen los 
 empleados del sector p?blico y del propio organismo. Nucleoel?ctrica Argentina 
 S.A.(N.A.S.A.), con capital 100 por ciento estatal a cargo de la Secretar?a de 
 Energ?a, es una empresa que se dedica a la generaci?n el?ctrica. Tiene a su  
cargo la explotaci?n de dos Centrales Nucleares, una Central Hidroel?ctrica de  
Bombeo que tiene los transformadores rotos y adem?s hay un cr?dito otorgado por 
 la Secretar?a de Energ?a que no fue utilizado, siendo responsable de la  
terminaci?n y puesta en marcha de la Central Nuclear Atucha II. Seg?n se  
denunci?, ?la incompetencia de los funcionarios p?blicos que hoy se encuentran  
al frente de la empresa Nucleoel?ctrica Argentina S.A.(N.A.S.A.), son los  
causantes de la situaci?n de crisis que esta atravesando la instituci?n, ya que 
 a la fecha, las dos centrales en explotaci?n est?n fuera de servicio y la obra 
 de la Central Nuclear Atucha II est? paralizada?. Cuando asumieron los nuevos  
funcionarios designados por LA Secretar?a de Energ?a, el 28 de enero del 2000, 
 las dos Centrales Nucleares se encontraban en funcionamiento, al igual que la  
Central Hidroel?ctrica de Bombeo R?o Grande. Transcurrido un a?o de la nueva  
gesti?n, la instituci?n se encuentra con la siguiente situaci?n: ?Central  
Nuclear Atucha II el avance de la obra ha sido cero. Se rompi? la relaci?n  
comercial con el proveedor principal (SIEMENS NUCLEAR POWER GMBH), derivando en 
 un juicio en el Tribunal Arbitral de Par?s, lo que incrementa el perjuicio  
econ?mico para la instituci?n ?Central Nuclear Atucha I fuera de servicio  
(aproximadamente tres meses) por incumplimiento de los compromisos asumidos por 
 las autoridades de la instituci?n, ante la AUTORIDAD REGULATORIA NUCLEAR  
(A.R.N). ?Central Nuclear Embalse estuvo fuera de servicio por fallas t?cnicas  
durante 28 d?as, esta pr?xima al periodo de arranque y conexi?n al sistema  
el?ctrico nacional, y al d?a de la fecha, la central nuclear Embalse trabaja a  
media m?quina porque el Ing. Bouvier no concret? la compra de los elementos  
combustibles con la firma CONUAR. ?Central Hidroel?ctrica de Bombeo Ri? Grande  
fuera de servicio por fallas t?cnicas (ocho meses). Los fondos necesarios para  
la reparaci?n de dos transformadores fueron aportados por la Secretar?a de  
Energ?a. 

NOVA 8.805  ESCLAVA SEXUAL DE LOS SOLDADOS DE LA OTAN EN MACEDONIA
   LECCE, Febrero 06 (Agencia NOVA) Anna, una joven moldava de 28 a?os, con un  
ni?o de ocho a?os que la espera en su pa?s, se ha decidido a denunciar a la  
opini?n p?blica lo que ha sufrido como ?esclava sexual? de fuerzas de la OTAN  
en Macedonia. Acogida en el centro ?Regina Pacis? de la di?cesis italiana de  
Lecce, cuenta su odisea que ha durado casi un a?o. ?Por cien d?lares, pod?an  
hacer de m? lo que quisieran. Llegaban borrachos a cualquier hora, pagaban y  
hac?an de todo. Quise pedir ayuda a uno de los muchos soldados que me han  
llevado a la cama pero ellos pagaban, s?lo quer?an una cosa, y no escuchaban?.  
Es la historia de miles de j?venes de los pa?ses del Este, denunciada ya por  
numerosas asociaciones. Pero es de las pocas veces que una de ellas se decide a 
 contar los abusos sufridos. Anna apunta directamente contra las fuerzas de la  
OTAN presentes en los Balcanes y, concretamente a la KFOR, acuartelada en  
Macedonia. Seg?n la joven, los soldados de la KFOR se habr?an aprovechado  
durante diez meses de su condici?n de ?esclava? del sexo, inform? la agencia de 
 noticias ZENIT. Su pesadilla comienza en un pueblecito entre Moldavia y  
Ruman?a. Algunos hombres de su pa?s se ponen en contacto con ella y le ofrecen  
un trabajo en Italia como camarera. Luego, es vendida sucesivamente en el  
mercado del sexo y pasa sucesivamente a ser propiedad de rumanos, kosovares,  
macedonios, hasta que llega a Truka, peque?a ciudad donde tiene su cuartel la  
KFOR.  Los soldados que pagaron por abusar de ella sexualmente, informan desde 
 el centro ?Regina Pacis?, eran ?franceses, ingleses, italianos y alemanes?. 
M?s  tarde, la joven volvi? a ser vendida y esta fue su salvaci?n porque, desde 
 Valona, lleg? a Italia. Su destino final deb?an ser las calles de las ciudades 
 del Reino Unido. Pero Anna ha denunciado al proxeneta que la hab?a comprado, 
al  mismo tiempo que eran acogida en el centro de la di?cesis de Lecce ?Regina  
Pacis?. Ahora la joven quiere rehacer su vida y reencontrarse con su hijo que  
la espera en Moldavia. El padre Cesar Lodeserto, responsable del centro ?Regina 
 Pacis?, viajar? a Ungheni, en Moldavia, con este motivo. Lo acompa?ar? la  
presidenta de la comisi?n del Consejo de Europa sobre la violencia contra las  
mujeres, Elisa Pozza Tasca. Lodeserto explica que el caso de Anna no es un  
hecho aislado. Se trata de la punta del iceberg del tr?fico de personas, en su  
mayor?a v?ctimas de mafias internacionales, enga?adas con falsas promesas: un  
trabajo en el ?para?so? occidental, y acaban sometidas a prostituci?n.   
HISTORIAS  El padre Lodeserto recuerda tantas historias como la de Anna y no  
tiene dudas respecto a las declaraciones de la joven moldava; ?En Truka, en  
Macedonia, puede haber al menos ochenta j?venes escondidas y controladas por  
organizaciones de maleantes que las explotan, poni?ndolas a disposici?n de los  
militares de la Fuerza multinacional de paz?. De hecho, explica el sacerdote,  
en Truka existen mujeres moldavas, ucranianas, rumanas, y albanesas, en una  
situaci?n como la de Anna, quien en concreto ha informado sobre el caso de una  
joven de su pa?s que ha quedado all? secuestrada y pide que se act?e  
r?pidamente. El sacerdote a?ade que, viendo en el mapa la zona de donde procede 
 Anna, cercana la frontera con Rumania, ?no es absurdo pensar en una aut?ntica  
"ruta comercial" de estos traficantes. Una ruta en la que existen mujeres  
susceptibles de ser enga?adas y sometidas a esclavitud para venderlas en  
Europa?.  


N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Thu Feb  8 10:16:01 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Thu Feb  8 10:16:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] (Spanish) Two most interesting informations from Argentinean unions
Message-ID: <0bc471533140821MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

The first information is very interesting, on many angles. It speaks of the 
negotiations that are carried on in order to allow for Argentinian agricultural 
workers to work in Spain. I am sure that those interested in the Third World 
will find what is written there simply fascinating.

The second one registers the different positions of a lawyer connected with the 
CGT of Moyano, a representative of the business side, and the government as 
regards the recently imposed labor code. While the two first agree in that the 
impact of the code on unemployment will be zero, government officials still 
beat the drum that the new code will bring it down. But there are more 
interesting issues lurking within the article.

Happy hunting.

------- Forwarded message follows -------

NEUQU?N, ARGENTINA, 1(PSI).- CATALANES Y NEUQUINOS DISCUTEN LA 
LETRA CHICA DE LOS CONTRATOS ?GOLONDRINA?. Sindicalistas neuquinos y 
catalanes se sentaron a redactar la letra chica del contrato que llevar?
trabajadores golondrina a trabajar en contratemporada en la cosecha frut?cola 
en Alcarr?s, Espa?a. Juan Vergu?s, representante de la Uni? de Payeses, el
sindicato catal?n representante de los agricultores, dijo que la contrataci?n
?puede ser o no una alternativa?, pero indic? que es necesario cumplir con los
requisitos de la ley de extranjer?a y, de todas maneras, los planteles no 
cubren la demanda de 600 trabajadores que se necesitan.
         La delegaci?n espa?ola que lleg? el lunes ?integrada adem?s por
empresarios y miembros de cooperativas de producci?n y empaque- estuvo ayer en 
la zona productiva de San Patricio del Cha?ar y Vista Alegre, y se interes? m?s 
en observar el trabajo en galpones y chacras que en adelantar eventuales
inversiones en la regi?n.
               El resorte de la contrataci?n est? en manos de la Uni? de 
Payeses y por lo tanto Vergu?s, que hoy se reunir? con representantes de los 
sindicatos de la Fruta y la Uni?n Argentina de Trabajadores Rurales (UATRE), 
consider? que antes de avanzar ?se evaluar?n los aspectos positivos y 
negativos? de la futura relaci?n laboral, que tiene numerosas variables: 
?costos, cantidad de personas, requisitos?.
               La delegaci?n recorri? una de las empresas frut?colas de Vista
               Alegre ?las chacras y galp?n de Mo?o Azul-, posteriormente 
fueron a un establecimiento mediano en San Patricio del Cha?ar, y por ?ltimo 
recorrieron parte de la zona denominada ?tercera etapa? en esa misma localidad.
               La agenda de los catalanes fue comandada por el subsecretario de
 Trabajo,  Guillermo Pereyra y uno de sus principales colaboradores, el 
director de Empleo, Ernesto Seguel. Justamente Seguel fue uno de los art?fices 
del acuerdo entre Neuqu?n y el ayuntamiento de Alcarr?s, ya que en octubre 
pasado estuvo en Espa?a para formalizar el primer borrador que  el gobernador 
de Neuqu?n, Jorge Sobisch, y el alcalde Gerard Serr? i Mart?nez hab?an firmado 
en junio.
               De la recorrida tambi?n participaron los legisladores del
Movimiento Popular Neuquino Eduardo Carbajo y Manuel Vera; el intendente 
Leandro Bertoya y representantes sindicales y empresarios.
               Serr? i Mart?nez dijo que en Alcarr?s las 11 mil hect?reas est?n
en manos de 5.000 habitantes, que son propietarios de las tierras, ?no ocurre 
como aqu?, que hay empresas con grandes extensiones y los dem?s trabajan para 
ellas?.
               Los empresarios se mostraron sorprendidos por la rapidez de los
embaladores en el galp?n de empaque y el cuidado de las mujeres en el manipuleo
de la fruta, en tanto halagaron la destreza de los peones rurales en cosechar
pera.
               Vergu?s baj? el tono de los elogios y consider? que ?aqu? como
all?, debe haber buenos y malos, pero no hay suficientes?. El sindicalista dijo 
que los Payeses representan al 74% de los agricultores de Catalu?a y que su 
misi?n consiste en organizar la campa?a y procurar la mano de obra que falta en 
las fincas (chacras) y el empaque. ?En Catalu?a tenemos que conseguir unas 
3.000 personas, a nivel Estado se nos encomend? unas 20.000?, dijo.
               A?n no se iniciaron las negociaciones sobre c?mo se costear? el
pasaje de los contratados, porque ?eso es lo que tenemos que hablar con el 
gobierno. Nosotros transportamos y contratamos gente de Marruecos, Ecuador y 
Colombia. Argentina puede ser una alternativa?, finaliz?.
               Pese a que el convenio firmado entre el alcalde de Alcarr?s,
Gerard Serr? i Mart?nez y el gobierno de Neuqu?n fij? hasta 600 operarios para 
trabajar en la temporada frut?cola de Espa?a, todo depender? de la cosecha. ?La 
cantidad de personas a contratar no se puede confirmar a?n, tenemos que pasar 
los meses de fr?o, las heladas y la piedra. Dar una cifra ser?a generar 
ilusiones que no tenemos intensiones de generar?, dijo el representante de la 
Uni? de Payeses, Juan Vergu?s. La asociaci?n, que representa a los agricultores 
asociados de Alcarr?s, definir? la contrataci?n de los cosecheros y de los 
obreros del empaque porque los due?os de los empaques son las cooperativas.
               El subsecretario de Trabajo, Guillermo Pereyra detall? que de 
los 570 preseleccionados, hay un padr?n ?muy depurado? de 380 operarios listos 
para viajar.
               El aporte financiero para el viaje tambi?n se negociar? con la
delegaci?n espa?ola. El gobierno busca compartir gastos con los empresarios, 
trabajadores. En ese sentido efectuar? gestiones para que el traslado se 
realice a trav?s de la Fuerza A?rea. ?Esto se ver? con los productores, la idea 
es que para los trabajadores sea algo ?nfimo que no signifique sacrificios 
econ?micos?, dijo Pereyra.
               El secretario general de la UATRE ?peones rurales- Carlos
Figueroa, dijo que hoy se definir? la cantidad de personas a emplear, el 
alojamiento, la remuneraci?n, los tr?mites migratorios y la asistencia m?dica. 
Su postura es m?s favorable ?a que los espa?oles vengan a invertir ac? para 
darle trabajo a nuestra gente y no que los obreros tengan que salir?.
               Respecto a los que se contraten el alcalde de Alcarr?s, Gerard
Serr? i Mart?nez dijo que ?hemos visto que tanto los trabajadores del empaque 
como los recolectores son muy profesionales?, y asegur? que no habr? problemas 
con la ley de extranjer?a. Con una poblaci?n de unas 5.000 personas, en 
Alcarr?s hay m?s de 200 familias de emigrantes de Africa. ?Ellos consiguen los 
papeles y ya no realizan trabajos en el campo, se dedican al sector de 
servicios?, explic?.
               Serr? i Mart?nez firm? con el gobernador Jorge Sobisch y
posteriormente con el subsecretario de Planificaci?n ?ahora vicejefe de 
gabinete-, Marcelo Fern?ndez Dotzel, las gestiones para procurar mano de obra 
?contratada en origen? para la temporada frut?cola. Agreg? que conseguir mano 
de obra para la fruta ?no es sin?nimo de inmigraci?n ilegal, sino contrataci?n 
en origen, con ida y vuelta?.
               All? todo agricultor chico o mediano (de 8 a 10 y de 15 a 20
hect?reas) que se dedica a cultivar y comerciar su producido es considerado un 
empresario. A trav?s de la asociaci?n empacan su fruta y la comercializan. 
Josep Sentis es el director general de Fruits de Ponent, una cooperativa de 
segundo grado integrada por m?s de dos entidades. La firma es la propietaria 
del galp?n que ocupa a m?s de 400 trabajadores en ?poca de empaque. El a?o 
pasado contrataron ?en origen? a 35 operarios de Colombia para el galp?n y de 
acuerdo con la producci?n de sus integrantes, en esta temporada podr?an tomar a 
unas 200 personas de afuera. Los operarios podr?an ganar entre 600 y 700 
d?lares por mes en una temporada de tres meses que se iniciar?a en mayo pr?ximo


BUENOS AIRES, 1(PSI).- LA REFORMA LABORAL TUVO UN IMPACTO CERO EN EL 
EMPLEO. La ley de Reforma Laboral no s?lo qued? envuelta en las sospechas de
sobornos en el Senado para su aprobaci?n. Por si fuera poco, no produjo ning?n
efecto positivo sobre el crecimiento del empleo. Desde ?ngulos opuestos,
coincidieron en ello el asesor de la CGT disidente, H?ctor Recalde, y uno de 
los consultores m?s importantes del sector empresarial, Juli?n De Diego.
               Para este ?ltimo, el efecto de la cuestionada reforma fue
?neutro?. De Diego destac? que ?ning?n marco laboral (por m?s moderno que sea) 
funciona, si no hay un notable crecimiento de la actividad econ?mica?. Y en 
vistas al futuro, el mismo dej? un dato desesperanzador al indicar que ?a?n 
cuando se consigan crear 500.000 puestos de trabajo en los pr?ximos dos a?os 
(como anunci? el ministro de Econom?a, Jos? Luis Machinea), el desempleo no 
bajar? del 16 por ciento porque cada a?o se incorporan 250.000 personas al 
mercado laboral?.
               Sin embargo, desde su punto de vista empresarial, De Diego no
deja de  destacar que el texto de la ley ?es positivo?, pero ?carece de toda 
influencia debido a la recesi?n?.
               -?El crecimiento del 5% que pronostica el gobierno podr?a poner
en marcha los beneficios de la econom?a? 
??Dicho incremento se producir?a en el cuarto cuatrimestre. Adem?s hay que 
tener en cuenta que con un 3% de crecimiento bajar?a un punto la desocupaci?n?, 
relativiz? De Diego, y destac? que ?los nuevos contratos (reglamentados por un 
reciente decreto) bajar?an el costo laboral en el caso de hombres mayores de 40 
a?os, j?venes de hasta 26 a?os, mujeres jefas de hogar, pero en la pr?ctica no 
existe demanda?.
               Desde un punto de vista muy distinto, Recalde no s?lo se refiere
al ?impacto 0? de la reforma laboral en la demanda de trabajo, sino que 
advirti? que no va a bajar el desempleo aunque se deje atr?s la recesi?n.
               El laboralista cercano a Hugo Moyano, record? que ?pese al gran
crecimiento que se produjo durante la primera etapa menemista, la desocupaci?n 
creci? del 6 al 18%, porque el derecho de los trabajadores es ajeno a la suerte 
de la econom?a nacional?. Para Recalde la implementaci?n de modalidades 
flexibles tuvo y tendr? un efecto nulo sobre los indicadores de empleo: ?El 
gremio de mayor desocupaci?n es el de la construcci?n que carece de 
indemnizaci?n por despido?, ejemplific?.
               En tal sentido, expres? que ?de hecho hoy todos los contratos 
son flexibles,  porque la indemnizaci?n en los contratos por tiempo 
indeterminado viene bajando a niveles insignificantes?.
               Por otra parte, De Diego remarc? que hay aspectos pendientes 
como la negociaci?n colectiva que ni siquiera se reglamentaron. En s?ntesis, 
para De Diego la reforma desde el punto de vista formal fue ?positiva? pero ?a 
ocho meses de su sanci?n- no produjo efectos por la recesi?n. En tanto, seg?n
Recalde, signific? un cambio ?negativo? que aument? la precarizaci?n, sin crear
empleo.
               Como una forma de dar cr?dito a la ?nueva etapa? pol?tico
econ?mica que pregonan desde el Ejecutivo nacional, la ministro de Trabajo, 
Patricia Bullrich, consider? que, en relaci?n con el ?ndice de desempleo, 
?vamos a estar en la baja de un punto por a?o?. La ministra confirm? el 
vaticinio de su par de Econom?a Jos? Luis Machinea, y evalu? que ?la ley 
laboral est? funcionando como un aliciente muy importante a la baja de la tasa 
de desempleo? as? como a favor de ?aquellos sectores que han sido expulsados 
del mercado de trabajo y que son m?s dif?cilmente empleables, que es el caso de 
los mayores de 45 a?os y el caso de las jefas de hogar?.
               El gobierno iniciar? el viernes una serie de contactos con
empresarios l?deres de cada sector de la econom?a, con el fin de conocer de 
primera mano las dificultades que tienen para darle un renovado impulso a la 
producci?n.
               Las reuniones ser?n de car?cter cerrado y asistir?n no m?s de
seis empresarios l?deres por cada rubro de la actividad productiva. El viernes 
por la tarde el ministro Jos? Luis Machinea, y el secretario de Industria y 
Comercio, Javier Tizado, se sentar?n con los principales directivos de las 
petroqu?micas PASA, Dow Chemical y Dupont, entre otras firmas de primer nivel.
               ?Se est? buscando conocer qu? dificultades tienen para 
invertir?,inform? un vocero de Industria. La serie de encuentros seguir? 
despu?s con empresas del sector de la alimentaci?n, petr?leo y siderurgia. En 
tanto no se tiene previsto convocar a entidades de tipo gremial. ?Vamos a tener 
una serie de reuniones con empresarios en esta semana con el objetivo de 
alentar al sector privado en el proceso de inversi?n y que contribuya 
decididamente hacia este crecimiento que se avizora?, anticip? Tizado en 
declaraciones de prensa. 
               El secretario de Industria se?al? que ?en la econom?a actual, el
rol del Estado es el de crear incentivos y condiciones, pero el futuro depende 
de los actores, es decir, los empresarios"?-

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Thu Feb  8 11:32:01 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Thu Feb  8 11:32:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Porto Alegre Call
Message-ID: <sa828435.024@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

Does the Crash-list want to sign this call ?

Charles Brown

__________
Hundreds of organizations have signed this call. If you want to see
the endorsements, please check
http://attac.org/fra/asso/doc/doc502sign.htm 

If your organization wants to sign it, please send a email to
attacint at attac.org mentioning your endorsement and giving all useful
information.
5- From Porto Alegre with solidarity
____________________________________________________________

Porto Alegre Call for Mobilisation

Social forces from around the world have gathered here at the World
Social Forum in Porto Alegre. Unions and NGOs, movements and
organizations, intellectuals and artists, together we are building a
great alliance to create a new society, different from the dominant
logic wherein the free-market and money are considered the only
measure of worth. Davos represents the concentration of wealth, the
globalization of poverty and the destruction of our earth. Porto
Alegre represents the hope that a new world is possible, where human
beings and nature are the center of our concern.

We are part of a movement  which has grown since Seattle. We challenge
the elite and their undemocratic processes, symbolised by the World
Economic Forum in Davos. We came to share our experiences, build our
solidarity, and demonstrate our total rejection of the neoliberal
policies of globalisation.

We are women and men, farmers, workers, unemployed, professionals,
students, blacks and indigenous peoples, coming from the South and
from the North, committed to struggle for peoples' rights, freedom,
security, employment and education. We are fighting against the
hegemony of finance, the destruction of our cultures, the
monopolization of knowledge, mass media, and communication, the
degradation of nature, and the destruction of the quality of life by
multinational corporations and anti-democratic policies. Participative
democratic experiences -- like that of Porto Alegre -- show us that a
concrete alternative is possible. We reaffirm the supremacy of human,
ecological and social rights over the demands of finance and
investors.

 At the same time that we strengthen our movements, we resist the
global elite and work for equity, social justice, democracy and
security for everyone, without distinction. Our methodology and
alternatives stand in stark contrast to the destructive policies of
neo-liberalism.

Globalisation reinforces a sexist and patriarchal system. It increases
the feminisation of poverty and exacerbates all forms of violence
against women. Equality between women and men is central to our
struggle. Without this, another world will never be possible.

Neoliberal globalization increases racism, continuing the veritable
genocide of centuries of slavery and colonialism which destroyed the
bases of black African civilizations. We call on all movements to be
in solidarity with African peoples in the continent and outside, in
defense of their rights to land, citizenship, freedom, peace, and
equality, through the reparation of historical and social debts. Slave
trade and slavery are crimes against humanity.

We express our special recognition and solidarity with indigenous
peoples in their historic struggle against genocide and ethnocide and
in defense of their rights, natural resources, culture, autonomy,
land, and territory.

Neoliberal globalisation destroys the environment, health and people's
living environment. Air, water, land and peoples have become
commodities. Life and health must be recognized as fundamental rights
which must not be subordinated to economic policies.

The external debt of the countries of the South has been repaid
several times over. Illegitimate, unjust and fraudulent, it functions
as an instrument of domination, depriving people of their fundamental
human rights with the sole aim of increasing international usury. We
demand its unconditional cancellation and the reparation of
historical, social, and ecological debts, as immediate steps toward a
definitive resolution of the crisis this Debt provokes.

Financial markets extract resources and wealth from communities and
nations, and subject national economies to the whims of speculators.
We call for the closure of tax havens and the introduction of taxes on
financial transactions.

Privatisation is a mechanism for transferring public wealth and
natural resources to the private sector. We oppose all forms of
privatisation of natural resources and public services. We call for
the protection of access to resources and public goods necessary for a
decent life.

Multinational corporations organise global production with massive
unemployment, low wages and unqualified labour and by refusing to
recognise the fundamental worker's rights as defined by the ILO. We
demand the genuine recognition of the right to organise and negotiate
for unions, and new rights for workers to face the globalisation
strategy. While goods and money are free to cross borders, the
restrictions on the movement of people exacerbate exploitation and
repression. We demand an end to such restrictions.

We call for a trading system which guarantees full employment, food
security, fair terms of trade and local prosperity. Free trade is
anything but free. Global trade rules ensure the accelerated
accummulation of wealth and power by multinational corporations and
the further marginalisation and impoverishment of small farmers,
workers and local enterprises. We demand that governments respect
their obligations to the international human rights instruments and
multilateral environmental agreements. We call on people everywhere to
support the mobilizations against the creation of the Free Trade Area
in the Americas, an initiative which means the recolonization of Latin
America and the destruction of fundamental social, economic, cultural
and environmental human rights.

The IMF, the World Bank and regional banks, the WTO, NATO and other
military alliances are some of the multilateral agents of neoliberal
globalisation. We call for an end to their interference in national
policy. These institutions have no legitimacy in the eyes of the
people and we will continue to protest against their measures.

Neoliberal globalization has led to the concentration of land
ownership and favored corporate agricultural systems which are
environmentally and socially destructive. It is based on export
oriented growth backed by large scale infrastructure development, such
as dams, which displces people from their land and destroys their
livelihoods. Their loss must be restored. We call for a democratic
agrarian reform. Land, water and seeds must be in the hands of the
peasants. We promote sustainable agricultural processes. Seeds and
genetic stocks are the heritage of humanity. We demand that the use of
transgenics and the patenting of life be abolished.

Militarism and corporate globalisation reinforce each other to
undermine democracy and peace. We totally refuse war as a way to solve
coflicts and we oppose the arms race and the arms trade. We call for
an end to the repression and criminalisation of social protest. We
condemn foreign military intervention in the internal affairs of our
countries. We demand the lifting of embargoes and sanctions used as
instruments of aggression, and express our solidarity with those who
suffer their consequences. We reject US military intervention in Latin
America through the Plan Colombia.

We call for a strenghtening of alliances, and the implementation of
common actions, on these principal concerns. We will continue to
mobilize on them until the next Forum. We recognize that we are now in
a better position to undertake the struggle for a different world, a
world without misery, hunger, discrimination and violence, with
quality of life, equity, respect and peace.

We commit ourselves to  support all the struggles of our common agenda
to mobilise opposition to neoliberalism. Among our priorities for the
coming months, we will mobilize globally against the:
? World Economic Forum, Cancun, Mexico, 26 and 27 February
? Free Trade Area of the Americas, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 6-7 April
and Quebec City, Canada, 17-22 April
?Asian Development Bank, Honolulu, May
?G8 Summit, Genova, Italy, 15-22 July
? IMF and World Bank Annual Meeting, Washington DC, USA, 28
September - 4 October
? World Trade Organisation, 5-9 November (Quatar?)

On April 17, we will support the international day of struggle against
the importation of cheap agricultural products which create economic
and social dumping, and the feminist mobilization against
globalization in Genova. We support the call for a world day of action
against debt, to take place this year on July 20.

The proposals formulated are part of the alternatives being elaborated
by social movements around the world.  They are based on the principle
that human beings and life are not commodities, and in the commitment
to the welfare and human rights of all.

Our involvement in the World Social Forum has enriched  understanding
of each of our struggles and we have been strengthened.  We call on
all peoples around the world to join in this struggle to build a
better  future. The World Social Forum of Porto Alegre is a way to
achieve peoples' sovereignty and a just world.

Hundreds of organizations have signed this call. If you want to see
the endorsements, please check
http://attac.org/fra/asso/doc/doc502sign.htm 

If your organization wants to sign it, please send a email to
attacint at attac.org mentioning your endorsement and giving all useful
information.


______________________________



From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Thu Feb  8 15:00:02 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Thu Feb  8 15:00:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Fw: A cancerous web of deception
Message-ID: <00a601c09209$84306920$2501f0d5@EUnet.yu>

> Al-Ahram, Cairo 
> 
> http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2001/519/re4.htm
> 
> A CANCEROUS WEB OF DECEPTION
> 
> By Ashraf El-Bayoumi* 
> 
> [The writer is a professor of physical chemistry &
> biophysics in Michigan State University and Alexandria
> University, and Vice- President of Alexandria Human
> Rights Association.]
> 
> 
> Efforts over recent years by human rights activists to
> expose the disastrous health consequences of using
> depleted uranium (DU) weapons were for the most part
> unsuccessful. Weapons containing DU made their debut
> in combat during the 1991 Gulf war, when more than 300
> tons were used -- substantially more than the 12 tons
> subsequently dropped on Kosovo and Bosnia. Large areas
> of southern Iraq, and parts of Kuwait and Saudi
> Arabia, have as a consequence been contaminated. 
> 
> Thousands of Iraqi civilians and soldiers were exposed
> to DU. An unprecedented number of deadly cancers and
> unusual deformities has since been documented amongst
> them. Babies born to these victims are more likely to
> be severely deformed than is statistically normal.
> Thousands of Kuwaiti and Saudi Arabian civilians were
> also likely to have been exposed to DU dust, as were
> thousands of US, UK and Arab soldiers who participated
> in the war. Egyptians were undoubtedly exposed as
> well. 
> 
> DU weapons were used in Bosnia in 1994 and then
> Yugoslavia in 1999. Reports of widespread outbreaks of
> cancer related to radioactive DU among Iraqi civilians
> and soldiers were met with repeated denials. Ailments
> among thousands of US and UK soldiers who participated
> in the Gulf war, known as Gulf War Syndrome, received
> a persistent "lack of evidence" argument, as did
> initial reports of "the Balkan Syndrome" among NATO
> soldiers and civilians. 
> 
> However, when 15 European peace keepers who served in
> the Balkans suddenly died from leukaemia, the
> catastrophic effects of DU weapons became front-page
> news. Several European leaders expressed their alarm
> and called for the identification and clean-up of
> areas targeted by DU weapons and for medical screening
> of those who were exposed to it. 
> 
> So the wall of silence and denials has slowly begun to
> crumble. Previously concealed official reports that
> clearly warned in advance of potential health hazards
> are now being openly written about in the media. One
> example is a confidential paper issued by the UK
> Atomic Energy Commission that warned of radioactive
> contamination as a result of the use of DU. Another is
> a letter issued by the US Army Surgeon General's
> Office requiring more details about DU, "because the
> effects on soldiers from exposure to DU dust include a
> possible increased risk of cancer (lung and bone) and
> kidney damage." 
> 
> Shells tipped with DU are highly effective in piercing
> armour due to uranium's high density (1.7 times that
> of lead) and inflammable properties that make it
> ignite instantly and, therefore, roast alive anyone
> inside the armoured vehicle it penetrates. DU is the
> byproduct of the enrichment process to produce
> weapons-grade nuclear material and nuclear fuel. 
> 
> As a result of 50 years of nuclear weapon and nuclear
> fuel production in the US, there are now in excess of
> one million tons of DU in existence. Storing large
> amounts of radioactive and poisonous material presents
> a problem for the US government, which, therefore,
> provides it free to arms manufacturers -- who reap
> huge profits as a result. 
> 
> Despite its name, the percentage of fissionable (and
> more radioactive) uranium isotopes in DU is roughly
> fifty per cent of that present in natural uranium. The
> name "depleted" is deceiving, since DU remains
> radioactive. Moreover, as a heavy metal, DU is highly
> toxic. Upon impact, it burns and produces tiny
> aerosolised particles of oxidised uranium that become
> airborne and can spread for 40 kilometres or more.
> This radioactive toxic dust enters humans by
> inhalation and by the ingestion of contaminated
> animals, water and plants. 
> 
> There is, for obvious reasons, tremendous resistance
> at the Pentagon to the release of any information that
> may eventually lead to a ban on those effective
> "wonder" weapons. The Pentagon wants to protect DU
> weapons for future wars. A main concern is the
> possibility that compensation amounting to billions of
> dollars would be paid to hundreds of thousands of
> victims, along with billions more to finance clean-up
> operations. Admission that there is a link between DU
> weapons and cancer would also have damaging political
> fallout, since several scholars have already
> determined that DU weapons are illegal according to
> international law. 
> 
> All these considerations help explain the official
> denial campaign aided by a general blackout by the
> Western media on the subject. One can compare this to
> the years of effort undertaken by many activists to
> expose the use of the highly toxic Agent Orange in
> Vietnam. 
> 
> Last week it was reported that traces of Uranium-236
> have been found in spent DU shells retrieved from the
> battlefields of Kosovo. This has resulted in alarm and
> anxiety in Europe, since U-236 is 10 times more
> radioactive than DU and "acts very quickly." These new
> revelations may explain the quick deaths of exposed
> soldiers. U-236 does not occur in natural uranium, but
> rather is created by nuclear reactors. Its presence
> must, therefore, mean that DU has been contaminated
> with recycled nuclear fuel. 
> 
> Moreover, it could mean that other highly dangerous
> isotopes such as plutonium are also present. On 20
> January, the German defence minister strongly
> criticised the US for failing to inform its NATO
> partners of these facts which were previously known to
> Pentagon officials. A newly published book in France,
> Depleted Uranium, Invisible War, refers to a US
> military report in 1995 stating that DU provided by
> the US government "may contain trace amounts of
> U-236." 
> 
> Scientific studies in Iraq have shown a four-fold
> increase in the incidence of cancer in battleground
> and neighboring areas. The relationship of this sudden
> increase to the Gulf war has been confirmed. Other
> studies examined the relative frequencies of various
> types of cancer and found them to be similar to those
> in Chernobyl after the infamous nuclear accident
> there. 
> 
> A recent international conference organised by the
> Spanish Solidarity Committee also dealt with DU's
> health effects. One of the papers revealed that there
> is a clear correlation between the incidence of cancer
> and the locations where DU was used in Iraq. Isotopes
> found in plants near battlefields confirm conclusively
> that uranium is its source. As a scientist who had the
> opportunity to attend two international meetings on DU
> and reviewed the available data, I personally find
> that the methodology is sound, and the evidence
> convincing. 
> 
> Recently, Ramsey Clark (former US attorney general)
> and Damacio Lopez (a health activist researcher)
> reported in the Italian parliament that the samples
> they had collected a day earlier from the Iraqi desert
> have "extremely high radioactivity." Undoubtedly, more
> comprehensive studies, surveys and medical screenings
> are urgently needed. Only then will the extent of the
> damage be adequately assessed and individuals
> requiring medical attention be identified. An
> independent international scientific study would be
> particularly welcome. This will counter claims that
> there is a lack of evidence and "no epidemiological
> data". Moreover, it would provide all the necessary
> legal evidence. 
> 
> Particularly important to consider is that the amount
> of DU weapons used in the Balkans was only a fraction
> of what was used in the killing fields of Iraq.
> Moreover, DU shells are suspected of having been fired
> at Palestinians during the Intifada. 
> 
> Why is it that the Western media has not given
> proportional coverage to the disastrous effects of use
> of DU in Iraq? Why have the Arab governments,
> including the Egyptian government, not initiated
> independent studies to investigate the matter? Why did
> the authorities not carry out medical surveys amongst
> the thousands of soldiers -- Egyptian, Kuwaiti, Iraqi,
> and Saudi -- to determine the extent of exposure to DU
> during the Gulf war? 
> 
> Why have questions not been raised in the People's
> Assembly in Egypt? Why has the Egyptian and other Arab
> media not thoroughly examined the issues related to
> DU? Why do we not hear protests and condemnation from
> the Arab world against the Pentagon and the British
> military for their use of DU in Iraq and for
> concealing information regarding the hazards of DU
> dust during the Gulf war? 
> 
> 
> source: Al-Ahram Weekly On-line  1 - 7 February 2001
> 
> 
> 
> =====================================================
> for fair use only 
> 
> 
> 




From gcamp at bryant.edu  Thu Feb  8 16:28:01 2001
From: gcamp at bryant.edu (Glen Camp)
Date: Thu Feb  8 16:28:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Unsubscribe
References: <05ef23948000821MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <3A830F26.C70698DD@bryant.edu>


Gorojovsky wrote:

> Cdes. and friends,
>
> Please find forwarded the final declaration of the Porto Alegre Forum.
>
> Sorry for eventual problems with formatting. Have attempted to reformat this,
> but I am afraid I did not wholly succeed.
>
> ------- Forwarded message follows -------
> From:                   "SIASRL" <siasrl at arnet.com.ar>
> Subject:                Para la Red Nac. y Pop.: Documento del Foro Social Mundial.
> Date sent:              Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:01:00 -0300
>
> 
>
> Documento del Foro Social Mundial.
> 
> LLAMADO DE PORTO ALEGRE A LA MOVILIZACION.
> Fuerzas sociales procedentes de todo el mundo, nos hemos reunido aqu? en el
> Foro Social Mundial de Porto Alegre. Sindicatos y ONGs, movimientos y
> organizaciones, intelectuales y artistas, construimos juntos una gran
> alianza para crear una nueva sociedad, distinta a la l?gica actual que
> coloca al mercado y al dinero como la ?nica medida de valor. Davos
> representa la concentraci?n de la riqueza, la globalizaci?n de la pobreza y
> la destrucci?n de nuestra planeta. Porto Alegre representa la lucha y la
> esperanza de un nuevo mundo posible, donde el ser humano y la naturaleza son
> el centro de nuestras preocupaciones. 
> 
> Formamos parte de un movimiento en crecimiento a partir de Seattle.
> Desafiamos a las ?lites y sus procesos anti-democr?ticos, representados en
> el Foro Econ?mico de Davos. Venimos a compartir nuestras luchas,
> intercambiar experiencias, fortalecer nuestra solidaridad y manifestar
> nuestro rechazo absoluto a las pol?ticas neoliberales de la presente
> globalizaci?n. 
> 
> Somos mujeres y hombres: campesinas y campesinos, trabajadoras y
> trabajadores, profesionales, estudiantes, desempleadas y desempleados,
> pueblos ind?genas y negros, provenientes del Sur y del Norte, comprometidos
> a luchar por los derechos de los pueblos, la libertad, la seguridad, el
> empleo y la educaci?n. Estamos en contra de la hegemon?a del capital, la
> destrucci?n de nuestras culturas, la monopolizaci?n del conocimiento, los
> medios masivos y de comunicaci?n, la degradaci?n de la naturaleza y el
> deterioro de la calidad de vida por las corporaciones transnacionales y las
> pol?ticas anti-democr?ticas. La experiencia de la democracia participativa,
> como en Porto Alegre, demuestra que alternativas concretas son posibles.
> Reafirmamos la supremac?a de los derechos humanos, ecol?gicos y sociales
> sobre las exigencias de los capitales y de los inversionistas.
> 
> Al mismo tiempo que fortalecemos nuestro movimiento, resistimos a la ?lite
> global, con el fin de mejorar la equidad, la justicia social, la democracia
> y la seguridad para todos, sin distinci?n alguna. Nuestros m?todos y
> alternativas constituyen un fuerte contraste con las pol?ticas destructivas
> del neoliberalismo. 
> 
> La globalizaci?n refuerza un sistema sexista, excluyente y patriarcal.
> Incrementa la feminizaci?n de la pobreza y exacerba todas las formas de
> violencia contra las mujeres. La igualdad entre hombres y mujeres es una
> dimensi?n central de nuestra lucha. Sin esta igualdad, otro mundo jam?s ser?
> posible.
> 
> La globalizaci?n neoliberal desata el racismo, dando seguimiento al
> verdadero genocidio de siglos de esclavitud y colonialismo, que destruyeron
> las bases civilizatorias de las poblaciones negras de ?frica. Llamamos a
> todos los movimientos a solidarizarse con el pueblo africano dentro y fuera
> del continente, en la defensa de sus derechos a la tierra, la ciudadan?a,
> la libertad, la igualdad y la paz, mediante el rescate de la deuda hist?rica
> y social. El tr?fico de esclavos y la esclavitud son cr?menes contra la
> humanidad. 
> 
> Expresamos especialmente nuestro reconocimiento y solidaridad con los
> pueblos ind?genas en su hist?rica lucha contra el genocidio y el etnocidio y
> en defensa de sus derechos, recursos naturales, cultura, autonom?a, tierra y
> territorio.
> 
> 
> La globalizaci?n neoliberal destruye el medio ambiente, la salud y las
> condiciones de vida del pueblo. La atm?sfera, el agua, la tierra y tambi?n
> los seres humanos son transformados en mercanc?as. La vida y la salud deben
> ser reconocidos como derechos fundamentales y las decisiones econ?micas
> deben estar sometidas a ese principio. 
> 
> La Deuda Externa de los pa?ses del Sur ha sido pagada varias veces.
> Injusta, ileg?tima y fraudulenta, funciona como instrumento de dominaci?n,
> privando a los pueblos de sus derechos fundamentales con el ?nico fin de
> aumentar la usura internacional. Exigimos su anulaci?n incondicional y la
> reparaci?n de las deudas hist?ricas, sociales y ecol?gicas, como pasos
> inmediatos hacia una soluci?n definitiva de las crisis que la Deuda Externa
> provoca.
> 
> Los mercados financieros extraen los recursos y la riqueza de los pueblos y
> sujetan las econom?as nacionales a los vaivenes de los especuladores.
> Reclamamos el cierre de los para?sos fiscales y la introducci?n de impuestos
> sobre transacciones financieras.
> 
> Las privatizaciones transfieren los bienes p?blicos y los recursos hacia
> las transnacionales. Nos oponemos a toda forma de privatizaci?n de recursos
> naturales y bienes p?blicos. Hacemos un llamado de proteger el acceso a los
> mismos para proporcionar una vida digna para todas y todos.
> 
> Las compa??as multinacionales organizan la producci?n mundial con un
> desempleo masivo, bajos salarios y trabajo no calificado y se niegan a
> reconocer los derechos fundamentales de los trabajadores, tal como son
> definidos por la OIT. Reclamamos el reconocimiento genuino de los derechos
> de los sindicatos para organizarse y negociar y para alcanzar nuevos
> derechos para los y las trabajadores. Mientras bienes y capital pueden
> cruzar libremente las fronteras, las restricciones sobre el movimiento del
> pueblo exacerban la explotaci?n y represi?n. Exigimos el fin de tales
> restricciones. 
> 
> Demandamos un sistema de comercio justo que garantice empleo pleno,
> soberan?a alimentaria, t?rminos de intercambio equitativos y prosperidad
> local. El &ldquo;libre comercio&rdquo; no es tan libre. Las reglas del comercio
> global provocan la acumulaci?n acelerada de riqueza y poder a las corporaciones
> transnacionales, a la vez que generan mayor marginalizaci?n y
> empobrecimiento de campesinas y campesinos, trabajadoras y trabajadores y
> empresas locales. Reclamamos a los gobiernos que respeten sus obligaciones
> seg?n los instrumentos internacionales sobre derechos humanos y los acuerdos
> ambientales multilaterales. Convocamos a apoyar las movilizaciones en contra
> de la creaci?n del Area de Libre Comercio de las Am?ricas, una iniciativa
> que significa la reconquista de la regi?n y la destrucci?n de los derechos
> humanos fundamentales sociales, econ?micos, culturales y ambientales.
> 
> El FMI, el Banco Mundial y los bancos regionales, la OMC, la OTAN y otras
> alianzas militares son algunas de los agentes multilaterales de la
> globalizaci?n transnacional. Exigimos el cese de su interferencia en las
> pol?ticas nacionales. Estas instituciones no tienen legitimidad ante los
> ojos del pueblo y vamos a continuar con protestas en contra de sus medidas. 
> 
> La globalizaci?n neoliberal ha provocado la concentraci?n de la tierra y
> promovido una agricultura transnacionalizada, destructiva en lo social y
> ambiental. Se basa en producci?n para la exportaci?n que necesita de
> grandes plantaciones y de construcci?n de represas lo que trae aparejado la
> expulsi?n de la gente de su tierra y la destrucci?n de sus medios de vida,
> los que deben ser restituidos. Demandamos una Reforma Agraria democr?tica
> con usufructo por parte del campesinado de la tierra, del agua y de las
> semillas. Promovemos procesos agr?colas sustentables. Las semillas y el
> material gen?tico son patrimonio de la humanidad. Exigimos la abolici?n del
> uso de transg?nicos y patentes sobre la vida. 
> 
> El militarismo y la globalizaci?n en manos de corporaciones transnacionales
> se refuerzan para socavar la democracia y la paz. Nos negamos totalmente a
> aceptar la guerra como camino para resolver los conflictos. Estamos contra
> el armamentismo y el comercio de armas. Exigimos el fin de la represi?n y la
> criminalizaci?n de la protesta social. Condenamos la intervenci?n militar
> extranjera en los asuntos internos de nuestros pa?ses. Exigimos el
> levantamiento de los embargos y sanciones que son utilizados como
> instrumentos de agresi?n y expresamos nuestra solidaridad con quienes sufren
> sus consecuencias. Rechazamos la intervenci?n militar estadounidense a
> trav?s del Plan Colombia en Am?rica Latina.
> 
> Llamamos a reforzar nuestra alianza frente a estos temas principales e
> implementar acciones en com?n. Vamos a seguir moviliz?ndonos alrededor de
> ellas hasta el pr?ximo Foro. Reconocemos que contamos ahora con una mejor
> posici?n para emprender una lucha en favor de un mundo distinto, sin
> miseria, hambre, discriminaci?n ni violencia; en favor de una mejor calidad
> de vida, con equidad, respeto y paz. 
> 
> Nos comprometemos a apoyar a todas las luchas de nuestra agenda colectiva
> que movilice la oposici?n al neoliberalismo. Entre las prioridades para los
> meses venideros, vamos a movilizarnos globalmente en contra del:
> 
> &middot; Foro Econ?mico Mundial en Canc?n, M?xico del 26 al 27 de febrero
> &middot; ?rea de L?bre Comercio de las Am?ricas, en Buenos Aires, Argentina
> el 6-7 de abril y en Quebec, Canad? del 17-22 de abril
> &middot; Asian Development Bank, en mayo en Honolul?
> &middot; Cumbre del G-8 en G?nova, Italia, del 15-22 de julio
> &middot; FMI y del Banco Mundial, Asamblea anual en Washington DC, del 28 de
> septiembre al 4 de octubre
> &middot; OMC, del 5-9 de noviembre (Qatar?)
> 
> El 17 de abril, nos uniremos a la movilizaci?n internacional en la lucha
> contra las importaciones de productos agr?colas baratos que generan
> dumping&rdquo; econ?mico y social. Asimismo, a la movilizaci?n feminista en
> Genoa, contra la globalizaci?n. Apoyamos el llamado a un d?a mundial de
> acci?n contra la Deuda, a realizarse este a?o el 20 de julio.
> 
> Estas propuestas formuladas forman parte de las alternativas elaboradas por
> los movimientos sociales de todo el mundo. Se basan en el principio que los
> seres humanos y la vida no son mercanc?as. Asimismo, en el compromiso con el
> bienestar y los derechos humanos de todas y todos. 
>  
> Nuestra participaci?n en el Foro Social Mundial ha enriquecido la
> comprensi?n de cada una de nuestras luchas y hemos salido fortalecidos.
> Llamamos a todos los pueblos del mundo a unirse a esta lucha por construir
> un futuro mejor. El Foro Social Mundial de Porto Alegre es un camino hacia
> la soberan?a de los pueblos y un mundo justo. * (SN 3028/01).
> 
>
> ------- End of forwarded message -------
>
> N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
> gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From zapata at sezampro.yu  Thu Feb  8 16:34:01 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Thu Feb  8 16:34:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Fw: [exyualista] From Porto Alegre with solidarity
Message-ID: <01e701c09171$c8487e60$9d74fac3@andrej>


Con Saludos,
       Andrej



5- From Porto Alegre with solidarity
____________________________________________________________

Porto Alegre Call for Mobilisation

Social forces from around the world have gathered here at the World
Social Forum in Porto Alegre. Unions and NGOs, movements and
organizations, intellectuals and artists, together we are building a
great alliance to create a new society, different from the dominant
logic wherein the free-market and money are considered the only
measure of worth. Davos represents the concentration of wealth, the
globalization of poverty and the destruction of our earth. Porto
Alegre represents the hope that a new world is possible, where human
beings and nature are the center of our concern.

We are part of a movement  which has grown since Seattle. We challenge
the elite and their undemocratic processes, symbolised by the World
Economic Forum in Davos. We came to share our experiences, build our
solidarity, and demonstrate our total rejection of the neoliberal
policies of globalisation.

We are women and men, farmers, workers, unemployed, professionals,
students, blacks and indigenous peoples, coming from the South and
from the North, committed to struggle for peoples' rights, freedom,
security, employment and education. We are fighting against the
hegemony of finance, the destruction of our cultures, the
monopolization of knowledge, mass media, and communication, the
degradation of nature, and the destruction of the quality of life by
multinational corporations and anti-democratic policies. Participative
democratic experiences -- like that of Porto Alegre -- show us that a
concrete alternative is possible. We reaffirm the supremacy of human,
ecological and social rights over the demands of finance and
investors.

 At the same time that we strengthen our movements, we resist the
global elite and work for equity, social justice, democracy and
security for everyone, without distinction. Our methodology and
alternatives stand in stark contrast to the destructive policies of
neo-liberalism.

Globalisation reinforces a sexist and patriarchal system. It increases
the feminisation of poverty and exacerbates all forms of violence
against women. Equality between women and men is central to our
struggle. Without this, another world will never be possible.

Neoliberal globalization increases racism, continuing the veritable
genocide of centuries of slavery and colonialism which destroyed the
bases of black African civilizations. We call on all movements to be
in solidarity with African peoples in the continent and outside, in
defense of their rights to land, citizenship, freedom, peace, and
equality, through the reparation of historical and social debts. Slave
trade and slavery are crimes against humanity.

We express our special recognition and solidarity with indigenous
peoples in their historic struggle against genocide and ethnocide and
in defense of their rights, natural resources, culture, autonomy,
land, and territory.

Neoliberal globalisation destroys the environment, health and people's
living environment. Air, water, land and peoples have become
commodities. Life and health must be recognized as fundamental rights
which must not be subordinated to economic policies.

The external debt of the countries of the South has been repaid
several times over. Illegitimate, unjust and fraudulent, it functions
as an instrument of domination, depriving people of their fundamental
human rights with the sole aim of increasing international usury. We
demand its unconditional cancellation and the reparation of
historical, social, and ecological debts, as immediate steps toward a
definitive resolution of the crisis this Debt provokes.

Financial markets extract resources and wealth from communities and
nations, and subject national economies to the whims of speculators.
We call for the closure of tax havens and the introduction of taxes on
financial transactions.

Privatisation is a mechanism for transferring public wealth and
natural resources to the private sector. We oppose all forms of
privatisation of natural resources and public services. We call for
the protection of access to resources and public goods necessary for a
decent life.

Multinational corporations organise global production with massive
unemployment, low wages and unqualified labour and by refusing to
recognise the fundamental worker's rights as defined by the ILO. We
demand the genuine recognition of the right to organise and negotiate
for unions, and new rights for workers to face the globalisation
strategy. While goods and money are free to cross borders, the
restrictions on the movement of people exacerbate exploitation and
repression. We demand an end to such restrictions.

We call for a trading system which guarantees full employment, food
security, fair terms of trade and local prosperity. Free trade is
anything but free. Global trade rules ensure the accelerated
accummulation of wealth and power by multinational corporations and
the further marginalisation and impoverishment of small farmers,
workers and local enterprises. We demand that governments respect
their obligations to the international human rights instruments and
multilateral environmental agreements. We call on people everywhere to
support the mobilizations against the creation of the Free Trade Area
in the Americas, an initiative which means the recolonization of Latin
America and the destruction of fundamental social, economic, cultural
and environmental human rights.

The IMF, the World Bank and regional banks, the WTO, NATO and other
military alliances are some of the multilateral agents of neoliberal
globalisation. We call for an end to their interference in national
policy. These institutions have no legitimacy in the eyes of the
people and we will continue to protest against their measures.

Neoliberal globalization has led to the concentration of land
ownership and favored corporate agricultural systems which are
environmentally and socially destructive. It is based on export
oriented growth backed by large scale infrastructure development, such
as dams, which displces people from their land and destroys their
livelihoods. Their loss must be restored. We call for a democratic
agrarian reform. Land, water and seeds must be in the hands of the
peasants. We promote sustainable agricultural processes. Seeds and
genetic stocks are the heritage of humanity. We demand that the use of
transgenics and the patenting of life be abolished.

Militarism and corporate globalisation reinforce each other to
undermine democracy and peace. We totally refuse war as a way to solve
coflicts and we oppose the arms race and the arms trade. We call for
an end to the repression and criminalisation of social protest. We
condemn foreign military intervention in the internal affairs of our
countries. We demand the lifting of embargoes and sanctions used as
instruments of aggression, and express our solidarity with those who
suffer their consequences. We reject US military intervention in Latin
America through the Plan Colombia.

We call for a strenghtening of alliances, and the implementation of
common actions, on these principal concerns. We will continue to
mobilize on them until the next Forum. We recognize that we are now in
a better position to undertake the struggle for a different world, a
world without misery, hunger, discrimination and violence, with
quality of life, equity, respect and peace.

We commit ourselves to  support all the struggles of our common agenda
to mobilise opposition to neoliberalism. Among our priorities for the
coming months, we will mobilize globally against the:
? World Economic Forum, Cancun, Mexico, 26 and 27 February
? Free Trade Area of the Americas, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 6-7 April
and Quebec City, Canada, 17-22 April
?Asian Development Bank, Honolulu, May
?G8 Summit, Genova, Italy, 15-22 July
? IMF and World Bank Annual Meeting, Washington DC, USA, 28
September - 4 October
? World Trade Organisation, 5-9 November (Quatar?)

On April 17, we will support the international day of struggle against
the importation of cheap agricultural products which create economic
and social dumping, and the feminist mobilization against
globalization in Genova. We support the call for a world day of action
against debt, to take place this year on July 20.

The proposals formulated are part of the alternatives being elaborated
by social movements around the world.  They are based on the principle
that human beings and life are not commodities, and in the commitment
to the welfare and human rights of all.

Our involvement in the World Social Forum has enriched  understanding
of each of our struggles and we have been strengthened.  We call on
all peoples around the world to join in this struggle to build a
better  future. The World Social Forum of Porto Alegre is a way to
achieve peoples' sovereignty and a just world.

Hundreds of organizations have signed this call. If you want to see
the endorsements, please check
http://attac.org/fra/asso/doc/doc502sign.htm

If your organization wants to sign it, please send a email to
attacint at attac.org mentioning your endorsement and giving all useful
information.


______________________________

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 10575 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010208/70a9f614/attachment.txt>

From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Thu Feb  8 16:34:04 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Thu Feb  8 16:34:04 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Cancer: De(p)leted case [STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
Message-ID: <012901c0907d$804cc340$7d01f0d5@EUnet.yu>

STOP NATO: ?NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
--------------------------- ListBot Sponsor -------------------------- Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/links/joinlb ----------------------------------------------------------------------
{PRIVATE}6th February 2001  {HYPERLINK "../index.htm"}Depleted Uranium Watch  Cancer: De(p)leted case
Piotr Bein, {HYPERLINK "mailto:piotr.bein at imag.net"}piotr.bein at imag.net, 
Vancouver, Canada 
Media coverage of the depleted uranium (DU) scandal raises more questions and suspicions than it provides answers and comfort. Why leukemia and not other diseases, and why afflicted peacekeepers and not civilians? Why Western European and not Yugoslav soldiers? Yugoslav troops were on the ground, breathing air spiked with DU particles, while NATO personnel played joystick war from bombers flying safely above the clouds. 
Leukemia is a disease of the blood-forming organs. "Its cause is unknown but it is considered to be of the same nature as that of various other forms of cancer [...] Probably many factors lead to its development. One that is clearly established is exposure to irradiation," states a 1960 encyclopedia, while one from 1996 added half a dozen causes. There is no doubt that the disease is a form of cancer: "An almost uniformly fatal cancerous disease characterized by excessive production of white blood cells," according to the Random House dictionary. 
NATO and the media first emphasized "leukemia" cases from the Balkans. This was as significant as invoking miscellaneous chemical and social factors as possible causes of soldiers' deaths and illnesses from DU. The military did not examine all cases and also hid evidence, so it's likely leukemia was not the main cause of death. Most probably, the mounting evidence of non-leukemic cases made NATO switch abruptly on January 24th, 2001, from the broken record of "no link between DU and leukemia" to "no link between DU and any forms of cancer." 
This was the first indirect indication by NATO that not just "leukemia" cases may be involved and that NATO was preparing a disinformation campaign against that incriminating fact. 
"{HYPERLINK "../petrovich/dangerous.htm"}Dangerous at any speed" fittingly catches the dominant characteristics of DU, but not any that are listed by standard NATO sources. The analogy with car risks does not arouse comparable concern from medical scientists, doctors and health policy bureaucrats on NATO's payroll. When it comes to cars and traffic accidents, everyone is an expert. On DU, it seems, mainly an army of NATO propagandists and a handful of true scientists have spoken out in an information war between government lies and the medical and scientific truth. 
German nuclear physicist Hans-Peter {HYPERLINK "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/message/55"}Schnelb ?gl considers depleted uranium (DU) to be "highly dangerous both because of its radiological and chemical toxicity. [...] DU is millions of times more dangerous than it was in the original uranium ore because of its modified consistency [in form of, among others] dispersible fine powder. All these forms have the ability to enter the human body via inhalation or the food chain, which is a precondition for [...] alpha radiation to become effective, as well as chemical toxicity. In contrast, the uranium in the uranium ore has very little chance to get inside the human body." 
If Not Benzene, Why Not Lead? 
Leukemia was initially highlighted because it would be a convenient {HYPERLINK "http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/psyops.htm"}PsyOp tool for diverting public attention from other DU illnesses. Since many factors besides DU could cause leukemia, it became an opportune "theme" to fool the public with. NATO will not admit that they spread most of the other "factors" in the course of recent wars. 
Whether from DU or from other pollution, veterans from NATO's toxic- nuclear wars, and civilians living downwind from affected battlefields, are getting sick and dying. Which of the 'leukemia' cases come from Kosovo, and which ones date to the 1994-95 Bosnia war? Also foggy are figures on total military casualties attributable to the Balkan Syndrome. NATO should not and can not be trusted to provide reliable figures. Would anyone sane entrust, for example, the tobacco industry to conduct investigations of lung cancer causation? 
Lack of published data on the Balkan Syndrome among Bosnia- Herzegovina and Kosovo civilians is an outright scandal, for which the UN and NATO administrations are as responsible as their local counterparts. The Balkan Syndrome, investigated under such auspices, would be managed like the Gulf War Syndrome was earlier: denial, blaming "other factors", manipulation of reports, criminal neglect of sick veterans, wrong medical examination procedures, hiding medical records, and indifference to the fate of local populations. 
The cause of their illness and eventual death aside, a common complaint of the surviving Gulf War veterans is that the government does not subject them to proper testing. Tests conducted under government auspices are intended to keep the truth under a lid rather than discover any facts. Last year the Canadian government invited all veterans complaining of Gulf War and Balkan Syndrome to receive voluntary tests, but the {HYPERLINK "http://www.umproj.org/gov_testing.html"}designated labs did not have the equipment required to detect traces of uranium. 
Medication is prescribed for mental illness, not for the real ailments and sicknesses the Gulf War veterans suffer from. They have chronic fatigue, bowel and renal problems, pains, cancers in different stages, concentration and memory problems, shortness of breath, lymphatic problems, bronchial complaints, weight loss, bleeding, unsteady gait and persistent cough, yet they are given mostly psychoactive drugs like Prozac. Half of these symptoms were described in 1998 US Agency for Toxic Substances report. DU specialists claim that some Iraqi tank crews hit by DU projectiles died on the spot from acute uranium poisoning. Three British prison officers claimed recently that they have elevated levels of uranium in their bodies, after two fires at an adjacent DU weapon manufacturing plant. 
Chemicals in the wood that the soldiers supposedly handled, benzene with which they allegedly cleaned their guns, natural asbestos deposits and lead contamination in Kosovo - all kinds of "factors" reminiscent of post-Gulf War "investigations" appeared in statements defending against Balkan Syndrome DU contamination accusations. 
More {HYPERLINK "http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/apologists.htm"}b izarre explanations were taken straight from uranium industry cover- ups. Portuguese soldiers categorically denied that they use benzene. Lead was not a health problem in Kosovo before free market "investors" like George Soros wanted to grab it with KFOR help. 
"Dr." Bernard Rostker from the Pentagon's outdated DU investigation program announced on Januray 15th, 2001, that "pesticides" caused Gulf War syndrome. After the bombing of Kosovo, on October 19th, 1999, {HYPERLINK "http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/saga2.htm"}Rostke r informed the public that a RAND study found anti-nerve gas pills to be the culprit. The list grows longer every day. Whatever the causes of the Balkan and Gulf syndromes are, the Pentagon and NATO deposited them on the battlefields. 
Balkan Soldiers 
Two young Bulgarian soldiers who served in the KFOR contingent in Kosovo, Danail Danailov and Emil Ivanov, went through an ordeal that could kill a healthy person. Instead of looking after the sick, Bulgarian authorities intimidated the soldiers, while their health deteriorated from week to week, and put them off with bureaucratic delays and cover ups. Eventually, the defense minister accused Danailov of forging his medical file! 
Flu-like symptoms are often characteristic of DU poisoning and alleged flu cases were cited by the Bulgarian Army Medical Academy to diffuse public suspicion of DU contamination in other Bulgarian soldiers who came back from Kosovo with strange symptoms. The cover- up unfolded in earnest, for the soldiers were declared to have no "leukemia", in contrast to their sick and dying collegues in Western Europe. They were initially diagnosed in a German military hospital in Pristina with renal illness, one of the first symptoms of acute DU poisoning. As journalist Blagovesta Doncheva sent translations from the Bulgarian press to the Internet, the soldiers' condition was deteriorating fast. 
The Bulgarian Academy could not make up its mind if it was 14 toxins they uncovered in their sick soldiers or the flu. At the same time, the minister of defence threatened the sick and their desperate parents. In a TV debate on the subject, a Bulgarian independent medical specialist was shut up as soon as she mentioned the Balkan Syndrome. 
"After the first outburst in the media [...] an almost graveyard silence on the subject descended on the Bulgarian media," wrote Doncheva to the Internet on January 26th. Some NATO officials visited Bulgaria in the interim and Lord Robertson sent a letter. Bulgarian officials keep silence or give conflicting statements about it. The Bulgarian Minister of Defence Boiko Noev declared he would visit Kosovo with his 10-year-old daughter to prove how ungrounded the "DU danger stories" are. 
Meantime, Danailov was sent to Germany for medical checks. Before, Bulgarian authorities declared him to be "clinically healthy" and in no need of treatment. His colleague Emil Hristov from the same Bulgarian contingent in Kosovo was successfully silenced. The army doctors found "genetic deviations" in Hristov's family. Presumably, babies born in Bulgaria next to the boundary with Yugoslavia are deformed because "couples with genetic problems" from all over Bulgaria decide to move and settle there. {HYPERLINK "http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/apologists.htm"}W e know this "clustering" and "migration" excuse from somewhere. 
Danailov and Ivanov were not the only casualties. A Bulgarian volunteer in the Yugoslav army in the Kosovo confict, Alexander Vasiliev, claims that 80% of his army friends from the war, both Bulgarian and Serb, have similar symptoms: generalized weakness, bad coughs, pain and cataracts in the eyes, and neck tumors that immobilize the shoulders and arms. Vasiliev cited a captain in the Yugoslav army chemical units that came to Kosovo for checks during the bombing. The captain told Vasiliev confidentially that the situation was "catastrophically disastrous" at that time. 
Eye Removed 
Jonathan Steele, reporting for the British newspaper The Guradian from Belgrade on January 22nd, 2001, wrote about two ex-soldiers who served in Kosovo where NATO fired shells containing DU and who now have cancerous tumours in their eyes. 36-year-old reserve officer Milan Bisercic, with no history of cancer in his family, had one eye removed in January after vision troubles started in December 2000. Stanisa Zivkovic's eyesight was also destroyed by an unexplained cancer. 
Both men served in Urosevac, one of 112 sites that American planes targeted with DU munitions. Bisercic witnessed repeated NATO attacks on the barracks at Urosevac: "I was never closer than 500 metres to the explosions, so I don't know why I should have got [ir]radiated more than anyone else, if that was what gave me cancer." The two men are the first confirmed cases of cancer among Kosovo veterans from the Yugoslav army, and although there is no proof that their illnesses were caused by radiation from DU, "Like NATO governments, the Yugoslav army has been trying to play down the effect of DU exposure on its soldiers," wrote Steele. 
According to a senior medical source at Belgrade's military academy hospital, Yugoslavia checked 1,100 of the more than 100,000 soldiers who served in Kosovo, and apparently found no problems. A Yugoslav army doctor who was not part of the team which checked the men asked a question similar to one asked by Gulf War veterans since 1991: "But the question is what kind of examination did they perform and what specialised equipment did they use?" 
In the week preceding Steele's story, the Belgrade weekly Nedeljni Telegraf reported that three officers from the Pristina Corps had died of leukaemia in recent months and 10 other soldiers were ill with the disease, four of them terminally. They were all stationed near Prizren, in areas of western Kosovo where NATO dropped many DU weapons. One man was a personal escort for General Nebojsa Pavkovic, who commanded Yugoslav land forces in Kosovo against NATO's attacks. The Yugoslav army has denied the Nedeljni Telegraf report. 
Widowed by DU 
On January 22, the Budapest Sun reported the deaths of four Hungarians who served in the Balkans. Sergeant Istvan Kormendi, a 39- year-old father of three, died in September 1999, possibly from exposure to DU or other toxic materials during tours of duty in Bosnia in 1996 and 1999. Another Hungarian Balkan veteran died of colon cancer since returning home; and one of a pulmonary embolism, according to Gabor Borokai, spokesman for the Prime Minister's Office. The cause of the other death has not yet been published. 
Zsuzsanna Kormendi, who had been demanding further explanation for the cause of her husband's death for over a year, informed the Budapest Sun that her husband told her he had never been warned by his superiors of any risk of exposure to dangerous substances. An ambulance driver during one month's duty in summer 1999, he drove all over Bosnia, became ill in Sarajevo, lost wieght, returned home and died a month later. Defense Minister Janos Szabo said the soldier's illness could not have been a result of his tour of duty, as he had been in the region only one month and in areas where no such weapons had been used. However, "If any causal relationship between his illness and any negligence by his senior officer during his service was proved, compensation could be granted." 
Circumstances of Kormendi's 1996 tour of duty are still foggier when described by the military. Former Defense Minister Gyorgy Keleti said that in 1996 DU weapons had not yet been used in the areas in which the soldier served. The army's Chief Medical Officer, Laszlo Sved, told the press that Kormendi did not die of leukemia, but in fact internal bleeding resulting from an infection caught from rodents and insects. The widow said her husband's death certificate clearly states that although causes similar to those cited by Sved contributed to her husband's death, leukemia was the primary cause. 
Agence France Presse wrote from Moscow on January 23rd that Russia had detected the first case of cancer in a Kosovo peacekeeper which "could be linked to the US use of DU arms," according to ORT public TV station. The soldier was diagnosed with a blood cancer "similar to leukemia", but according to the AFP dispatch, "Russia has so far denied that any of its troops" who served in Kosovo had contracted cancer possibly linked to American DU bullets. 
Kenny Duncan, one of those interviewed in a recent BBC Radio 4 program, had removed destroyed Iraqi tanks from an Desert Storm battlefield. He has a bitter view of the government. "They're sitting around watching veterans die. They're waiting for us to die off, so they don't need to pay out money. They'll just tell us nothing and deny everything. They don't care about the veterans' health, even though some from the Balkans vets are starting to get ill. And still they say it's not an issue." 
If the governments responsible for sowing DU and other poisons don't care about their own soldiers, why would they care about foreign civilians?
>From the Horse's Mouth 
As the renowned expert on DU (though predictably dismissed by the Pentagon), Dr. Doug Rokke, {HYPERLINK "http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/rokke/rokke.htm"}testi fied before the British House of Commons: "US and NATO officials continue to state specifically that there are no known adverse health effects in those of us in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Depleted Uranium Medical project. That is a lie." Then follows a litany of ailments that have afflicted Gulf War veterans from the US since 1991. "As proven by our own medical records based on diagnosis of medical problems completed by our personal primary care physicians," added Rokke. 
On Rokke's list of symptoms and ailments, "leukemia" is lumped with other cancers under "various forms of skin and organ cancer". Blood and lymph node cancers are linked to organic causes. "Birth defects in offspring" are amply illustrated by [WARNING: Graphic images] {HYPERLINK "http://www.wakefieldcam.freeserve.co.uk/extremedeformities .htm"}horrifying cases from Iraq and Bosnia. Other points from Rokke's dry, compressed list include catch-all names for many ailments and illnesses. "Neuro-psychological disorders" include symptoms of persons with fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue that used to be called the "yuppie flu" by doctors who had no concrete way of explaining the syndrome.
The evidence concerning the gruesome health- and life-endangering effects of DU on civilians in the Persian Gulf was never allowed into the West. Any attempts by Iraqi scientists to bring the problem forward met with a cold shoulder and with the label "Saddam's propaganda." No information regarding the cleaning up of extensive DU contamination was ever given to Iraq, but Kuwait received the full package from the US. 
Not only US and UK veterans and the local population from the Gulf War suffer from cancers and many other sicknesses related to DU, but so do civilians near DU shooting ranges and processing and manufacturing plants around the world. Where civilians have been exposed, "we are seeing adverse health effects amongst this entire group," testified Dr. Rokke before the British House of Commons. 
Baghdad believes in a link between DU and their calamitous health problems. Iraqi health minister Umid Mubarak said on January 23rd, 2001, "American use of DU is linked with lots of diseases which appeared especially in the regions which directly suffered bombardments." Death from cancer and a range of resurgent diseases had rocketed since sanctions were imposed after the Gulf War, which used over 300 tons of DU ammunition. Leukemia is six times more common in Iraq today than in 1989 and infectious diseases had become six to 20 percent more prevalent. Cholera and malaria, almost eradicated before 1990, are back.
"We have proof of traces of DU in samples taken for analysis, and that is really bad for those who assert that cancer cases have grown for other reasons," Mubarak said. Damacio Lopez from the International Depleted Uranium Study Team announced on January 23rd that radiation readings near Basrah indicate DU projectiles used during the Gulf War contained enriched uranium waste, as was also discovered in Kosovo recently. Lopez has just returned from a DU testing trip to Iraq with Ramsey Clark, former US attorney general and founder of the International Action Center in New York, one of the first whistle-blowers about the DU weapon problem. 
Speaking from Melbourne on January 18th, 2001, Bill Hartley, Media Officer of the Australian-Iraqi Friendship Bureau, said in a radio broadcast that attempts by the USA and Britain to deny responsibility for unexplained leukemias in Iraq and the Balkans were now in absolute disarray. "A comparison of the location of cancer victims to the spread of air raids and military action across Iraq leaves no doubt that dust from DU weapons has compounded the suffering of the Gulf War," said Hartley, adding that maps of cancer and leukemia clusters around Basra, which had been covered in DU dust and aerosols from exploding shells, showed a seven-fold increase. 
What Next? 
Volumes have been written to date on DU, but NATO cover-up propaganda, spoon-fed to TV viewers and newspaper readers, still dominates public opinion. Given the desperation of the masters to cover up DU consequences, it was suggested in mid-2000 that a Bundeswehr report about a Dutch peacekeeper from Kosovo who apparently became ill of DU was a {HYPERLINK "http://www.vorstadtzentrum.net/cgi-bin/joesb/news/viewnews .cgi?category=all&id=969989108"}PsyOp plot designed to discredit a wave of DU cancers expected by 2001. 
When leukemia and other cancer cases start to pick up among soldiers stationed and civilians living in Kosovo in a couple of months, the TV screen will be filled with some Bush zipper scandal, doubtlessly with a Prawinsky lady. By then the {HYPERLINK "http://www.swans.com/library/art7/ga101.html"}issue would be "so technically obtuse that the public will simply pass on it [...] the issue disappears on its own volition," anticipated Gilles d'Aymery on January 22nd, 2001. 
(copyleft: reproduce and acknowledge the source)
This page: {HYPERLINK "http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/cancer.htm"}http: //www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/cancer.htm

______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, write to STOPNATO-unsubscribe at listbot.com 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 23203 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010208/a9df3bb9/attachment.txt>

From mstainsby at tao.ca  Thu Feb  8 21:35:03 2001
From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby)
Date: Thu Feb  8 21:35:03 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <a9.116ab8ff.27b3cc36@aol.com> <005d01c091cf$4aa41920$a4bd6ac2@andrej>
Message-ID: <007a01c0921f$3868af00$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>


> Is it possible that this sort of Maoist reasoning is still actual?
> I do not know, I have not the slightest idea why, but article written by
> Mike Albert , taken as a pretext for attack on ZNet, is completely
> misinterpreted.

Red-Baiting, and useless. First you spend your energy attacking people who attack
those who bombed your country rather than those who attack the government targetted
by that bombing. Fine, I expect such "logic"from an Anarchist on this matter. But now
you resort to crude flaming deeply indebted to the ghost of Joe McCarthy. I can't be
bothered to read such spittle, Andrej. I like Albert, sometimes, but I don't think
that opposing him automatically makes one a Maoist. You need to do a lot more study
of the Chinese reality from the last 3/4 of the century before one gets that honour.
Nonetheless, you need more substantiation and less crude labels to reach anyone.

Is it possiblew that this kind of Ararchist idiocy is still real? Didn't it get
imploded with the IWW?

Macdonald




From embark at epud.net  Thu Feb  8 22:53:01 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Thu Feb  8 22:53:01 2001
Subject: [Crashlist] Porto  Alegre Call
References: <E14Qycg-0002wJ-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <000801c0924a$eb224220$1ba3bdcf@rowan>

>>>From: "Charles Brown" <CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Subject: [CrashList] Porto Alegre Call
Reply-To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com

Does the Crash-list want to sign this call ?

Charles Brown >>>


It is my purely personal opinion that we should express solidarity with them
in some way. I am ambivalent that this is the vehicle to do so; but then it
is the only vehicle immediately presented to us, and it is their wish that
we use it, correct?

what say you others?

Tom Warren



__________





From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Fri Feb  9 01:04:02 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri Feb  9 01:04:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] (Portuguese) Cardoso-Bush phone talk (an excellent joke)
Message-ID: <0d5835614010921MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

American subscribers who can read Portuguese will really enjoy this. Excellent 
piece of Brazilian political humor.

------- Forwarded message follows -------
Repasso a conversa fict?cia - o que n?o quer dizer fantasiosa, falsa ou
insidiosa - Cardoso-Bush, do Luiz Fernando Ver?ssimo

O convite
- Al?.
- Who is this, please?
- What?
- Quem ? que est? falando?
- ? o presidente.
- De onde?
- Brasil.
- Brazil! Menem, right?
- Cardoso.
- Cardoso, claro. Preciso decorar esses nomes. Por que voc?s, hisp?nicos,
n?o t?m nomes f?ceis, como Fox, em vez de Fujimori etc.? Por isso nos damos t?o
bem com o M?xico. Eles cooperam. 
- Quem est? falando? 
- ? o Bush. 
- Quem? 
- Bush. Dobliu Bush. O novo presidente dos Estados Unidos. 
- Que surpresa! 
- Pois ?. Eu estava mexendo aqui na minha mesa, tentando me familiarizar com as 
coisas, e vi que o Clinton tinha deixado uns n?meros pr?-gravados no telefone. 
O bot?o n?mero um, por exemplo, ? de algu?m chamado "Putin". Voc? conhece? 
- ? o presidente da R?ssia. 
- Por isso eu n?o entendi nada do que ele dizia! J? o seu ingl?s ? perfeito, 
Carlos. 
- Cardoso. Obrigado. O bot?o numero dois, de quem ??
- Aqui s? diz "Estagi?ria". E no tr?s diz "Sargenta". Deve ser a Hillary. 
- E qual ? o n?mero do Brasil? 
- Voc?s est?o sob "Outros". Logo depois de "Tele-pizza". 
- Sei. E como vai a coisa por a?, Bush? Muitos problemas com o Congresso? 
- Nem me fale. Os democratas n?o queriam aprovar meu secret?rio de
Justi?a, Ashcroft. S? porque ele ? contra o controle da venda de armas porque
assim ningu?m teria como atirar em quem ? pr? aborto, chamam ele de direitista.
Veja voc?. N?o ? f?cil governar com a oposi??o contra. 
- Voc? n?o sabe o que ? governar com o PFL a favor. 
- Mas deve haver uma maneira de n?o depender do Congresso, hein, Cardenas? 
- Cardoso. E h?, Bush. Se chama Medida Provis?ria.
Ela torna o Legislativo obsoleto. Aqui no Brasil n?o se usa outra coisa, h?
anos... 
- Mas, Cardosa... Isso ? democr?tico? - N?o menos do que perder uma
elei??o por meio milh?o de votos e mesmo assim ser empossado, Bush. 
- N?o sei do que voc? est? falando... Mas escuta: por que voc? n?o d? um pul o 
at? aqui para me ensinar como ? essa tal de Provisory Measure, Carduna? 
- Cardoso. Irei com
muito prazer, Bush. Ainda n?o guardei meu sobretudo. S? tem uma coisa... 
- Yes?
- N?s vamos em cinco avi?es, e ouvi dizer que o seu secret?rio de Defesa ? dos
que disparam primeiro e pedem o prefixo depois. Avisa que n?o ? um ataque. 
-Pode deixar. Vou ficar esperando. Quanto tempo de viagem, de Buenos Aires a
Washington, Cardoso? 
- Bras?lia, Bush. 
- Bras?lia? N?o era Cardoso?
------- End of forwarded message -------

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 02:29:01 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 02:29:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
Message-ID: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com>

In a message dated 02/08/2001 9:36:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
mstainsby at tao.ca writes:

<<  Is it possiblew that this kind of Ararchist idiocy is still real? Didn't 
it get
imploded with the IWW? >>

My dear Macdonald, I agree with you 100% except please don't glorify the 
politics of  this Andrej by comparing him to the IWW, which never, in its 
entire history, once sided with the kind of fascist thugs with whom Andrej 
works closely in Belgrade and whom he tries to portray as revolutionaries. 
(But even BETTER than revolutionaries cause they get millions from the US, 
Germany, Norway, England...)

Indeed, it was precisely the predecessors of the goons whom Andrej supports 
who attacked and beat members of the International Workers of the World in 
the early 1900s The 'great' Oct. 5 March on Belgrade was, according to a 
recent work by pro-DOS writers,  modelled on Mussolini's  March on Rome, as 
the British Helsinki Group's report on the recent sham Serbian elections 
points out .  (see http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/srbele.htm)  

Jared



From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 02:55:01 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 02:55:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Part II - Murder for Money: Congo, 1st Genocide of the 20th Century
Message-ID: <c9.d17429f.27b4f989@aol.com>

www.tenc.net 
[Emperor's Clothes]

continued...
Part II - Murder for Money: Congo, 1st Genocide of the 20th Century
(Bertrand Russell)

Enormous pains were taken to keep secret the large-scale systematic 
murder by which the royal capitalist obtained his profits. The officials and 
law-courts were both in his pay and at his mercy, private traders were 
excluded, and Catholic missionaries silenced by his piety. Belgium was 
systematically corrupted, and the Belgian Government was to a considerable 
extent his accomplice. Men who threatened disclosures were bought off, or, if 
that proved impossible, disappeared mysteriously. The only men in the Congo 
who could not be silenced were the Protestant missionaries, most of whom, not 
unnaturally, supposed that the King was ignorant of the deeds done in his 
name. To take one instance out of many, Joseph Clark, of the American Baptist 
Missionary Union, wrote on March 25, 1896: 

This rubber traffic is steeped in blood, and if the natives were to rise and 
sweep every white person on the Upper Congo into eternity there would, still 
be left a fearful balance to their credit. Is it not possible for some 
American of influence to see the King of the Belgians and let him know what 
is being done in his name? The Lake is reserved for the King ? no traders 
allowed ? and to collect rubber for him hundreds of men, women, and children 
have been shot. [Morel, op. cit., p. 54.]

But it was easy to suppose that the missionaries exaggerated, or that these 
were merely isolated instances of officials who had been turned to cruelty by 
fever and solitude. It seemed incredible that the whole system was 
deliberately promoted by the King for the sake of pecuniary gain. The truth 
might have remained long unrecognized but for one man ? E. D. Morel. Sir H. 
H. Johnston, an empire-builder untainted with eccentricity, thoroughly 
familiar with Africa, and originally a believer in King Leopold, after 
describing his influence in stifling criticism throughout the civilized 
world, says: 

Few stories are at once more romantic ? and will seem more incredible to 
posterity ? than that which relates how this Goliath was overcome by a David 
in the person of a poor shipping clerk in the office of a Liverpool shipping 
firm which was amongst the partners of King Leopold.
      This shipping clerk ? E. D. Morel ? was sent over to Antwerp, and 
Belgium generally, because he could speak French, and could therefore arrange 
all the minutiae of steamer fares and passenger accommodation, and the scales 
of freights for goods and produce, with the Congo State officials. In the 
course of his work he became acquainted with some of the grisly facts of 
Congo maladministration. He drew his employers? attention to these stories 
and their verification. The result was his dismissal.
      Almost penniless, he set to work with pen and paper to enlighten the 
world through the British press and British publishers on the state of 
affairs on the Congo. [Op. cit., p. 355.]

>From that day to the moment of his death, Morel was engaged in ceaseless 
battle ? first against inhumanity in the Congo, then against secret diplomacy 
in Morocco, then against a one-sided view of the origin of the War, and last 
against the injustice of the Treaty of Versailles. His first fight, after 
incredible difficulties, was successful, and won him general respect; his 
second and greater fight, for justice to Germany, brought him obloquy, 
prison, ill health, and death, with no success except in the encouragement of 
those who loved him for his passionate disinterestedness. No other man known 
to me has had the same heroic simplicity in pursuing and proclaiming 
political truth. 

Morel?s difficulties in the Congo Reform agitation were such as most men 
would have found overwhelming. The French, impressed by the magnitude of 
Leopold?s profits, had established a very similar system in the French Congo, 
where it was producing the same results; they were, therefore, by no means 
anxious that the world should know the inevitable consequences of his 
economic methods. The British Foreign Office, needing the friendship of 
France and Belgium for reasons of high politics, was very loath to be 
persuaded, and at first suppressed consular reports tending to confirm the 
accusations of Morel and the missionaries. 

The Roman Catholic Church ? acting, according to Morel, under orders from the 
Vatican ? represented that the whole movement for reform was a disguised 
attack upon Roman Catholicism emanating from the Protestant missionaries; but 
later, when the evidence proved irresistible, this defence was abandoned. 
King Leopold and his agents, of course stuck at nothing in the way of 
vilification and imputation of discreditable motives. 

Nevertheless, Morel and the Congo Reform Association succeeded in rousing 
public opinion, first in England, and then throughout the civilized world. 
The British Government was forced to admit that the accusations had been 
confirmed by our Consuls, especially Casement (who was hanged during the 
War). The King, to keep up the pretence that the atrocities had occurred 
against his wishes, was compelled to appoint a commission of three impartial 
jurists to investigate the charges, and, although he published only a 
fragment of their report, what was allowed to appear made it evident that the 
charges were well founded. At last, in 1908, Europe, using the authority 
conferred by the Berlin Congress, deprived him of the Congo and handed it 
over to Belgium, on the understanding that the King?s system of exploitation 
should cease. By this time King Leopold had come be to avoided by his brother 
monarchs, on account both of his cruelty to negroes and of his kindness to 
ballet-girls. 

Against King Leopold, it was possible for the conscience of mankind to be 
victorious, for he was, after all, a minor potentate. Against France, 
agitation has proved powerless. Except in the coastal regions, from which 
travellers are not easily excluded, large-scale atrocities occurred, and 
probably still occur; but ?an impenetrable mist still lies upon the forest 
.? [Morel, The Black Man?s Burden (1920), p. 147.] - Bertrand Russell

Reprinted here For Fair Use Only. (C) The Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation.

The above text is reprinted from theWebsite of one Rae West at 
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/littleton/brfobcon.htm#st . The following are some 
of Mr. West's comments:


"Booklets published by the Congo Reform Association are available in the 
British Library. I was surprised to see how much of the work seems to have 
been done by women. 
"There's some irony in Russell's distinction between 'savages' and the 
'civilized world': I don't think he ever considered whether survival in 
dangerous and unhealthy regions of Africa didn't, in fact, require 
considerable skill. He used the same word 'savages' in his Autobiography, 
which was written/revised when he was in his 90s. It's possible that the word 
was meant in the sense of being wild or unplanned, rather than in the 
technical sense of 'uncivilised' or the other senses suggesting cruelty or 
unsociability?his History of Western Philosophy has a passage stating in 
effect that modern techniques wouldn't permit people to survive in small 
groups. 
"Russell seems never to have revised his views of the various imperialisms, 
or attempted to seriously weigh evidence, always for example regarding the 
British Empire as benevolent, and the Russians as barbaric; perhaps similarly 
with regard to earlier epochs he seems never to have encountered views 
seriously anti-Norman Conquest or anti-Spanish in South America, or 
pro-Attila or pro-Genghis Khan. 
"Casement also investigated and reported on Catholic atrocities in Peru. He 
appears to have been targeted with a 'dirty tricks' campaign, involving a 
supposed diary of his, but I'm uncertain whether it was shown to be forged." 
***

If you find emperors-clothes.com useful, we can use your help...

All our expenses are covered by individual donations. Any donation will help 
with our work. To use our secure server, please click here or go to 
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm.

Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 
02461-0321.

Or call 617 916-1705. Thanks very much.

www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]



From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 02:58:02 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 02:58:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Part 1 - Murder for Money: Congo, 1st Genocide of the 20th Century
Message-ID: <8.100970e3.27b4f7a0@aol.com>

The URL for this article is http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/russell.htm

www.tenc.net 
[Emperor's Clothes]

Murder for Money: Congo, 1st Genocide of the 20th Century
By Bertrand Russell [posted 1-24-2001]

>From Russell's book, 'Freedom and organization 1814-1914' (London:George 
Allen and Unwin,1934)

Introductory Notes
by Jared Israel 

"Each village was ordered by the authorities to collect and bring in a 
certain amount of rubber ? as much as the men could collect and bring in by 
neglecting all work for their own maintenance. If they failed to bring the 
required amount, their women were taken away and kept as hostages in 
compounds or in the harems of government employees. If this method failed, 
native troops, many of them cannibals, were sent into the village to spread 
terror, if necessary by killing some of the men; but in order to prevent a 
waste of cartridges, they were ordered to bring one right hand for every 
cartridge used. If they missed, or used cartridges on big game, they cut off 
the hands of living people to make up the necessary number." (From Bertrand 
Russell's text, below.)

Bertrand Russell, the eminent philosopher who inspired the 1967 War Crimes 
Tribunal which exposed the horrors of the U.S. war in Vietnam (see 
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/littleton/v1tribun.htm ) wrote the following 
informative report on the Belgian effort to 'civilize' the Congo and 
introduce free enterprise which, as Russell notes, cost 10,000,000 Congolese 
lives. The novel "Heart of Darkness" by the great Polish author Joseph Conrad 
is a fictionalized account of these events.

The U.S. and Britain are continuing in Belgium's footsteps, destroying the 
Congolese economy and slaughtering its population. This is done partly 
through proxies (the Ugandan and Rwandan governments, which are Anglo-U.S. 
creations). The Belgians worked through proxies as well. Plus ca change, plus 
c'est la m?me chose. [ The more things change, the more they remain the 
same.] 

I wonder about Russell's use of 'savage' to describe the Congolese whom 
Belgium profitably slaughtered at the end of the 19th century and beginning 
of the 20th. Was Russell prejudiced? Or was this bitter irony? 

The text follows. - JI

***

Congo

The Slave Trade having been abolished, and slaves having been emancipated, 
the easiest way to exploit black labour was to occupy the countries in which 
the black men live, and it conveniently happened that these countries 
contained various valuable raw materials. Greed was only one, though the most 
important, of the motives to African imperialism, but there was one case, 
that of the Congo ?Free? State, in which it appears to have been the sole 
motive. Some of the Philosophical Radicals thought that pecuniary 
self-interest, rightly understood, should be an adequate motive for useful 
activity. The example of the Congo will enable us to test this theory. 

The Congo is a vast river, draining an area about as large as Europe without 
Russia, flowing through dark forests, and passing through territory almost 
entirely inhabited by savages. Although the mouth had long been known, the 
upper reaches were first discovered in 1871 by the virtuous Dr. Livingstone, 
who combined in equal measure a love of exploration and a desire to convert 
Africans to the Christian faith. Stanley, who discovered him at Ujiji on Lake 
Tanganyika, was less interested in the Gospel than in some other aspects of 
Christian civilization. His first journey was undertaken on behalf of the New 
York Herald, his subsequent journeys (which established the whole course of 
the Congo and of several tributaries) were made at the expense and in the 
interests of Leopold, King of the Belgians, of whom Stanley spoke always in 
terms of the highest praise. 

King Leopold was the son of  Queen Victoria?s Uncle Leopold, whose advice she 
valued in the early years of her reign. He was moreover, as Sir H. H. 
Johnston puts it, ?grandson of Louis Philippe, husband of an Austrian 
Archduchess, a devoted upholder of the Roman Church, and a very rich man.? He 
was a promoter of scientific research, particularly in Africa, and a patron 
of missionary efforts. The Berlin Conference of 1884, convened for the 
partition of Africa, decided that this high-minded monarch should be 
entrusted personally with the government of a territory which extended over 
about one million square miles, and contained the greater part of the Congo 
basin. He was respected by diplomats, extolled by travellers, and generally 
believed to be a model of philanthropy in his attitude to the negroes. In 
1906, when he offered ?12,000 for scientific research as to the prevention of 
sleeping sickness, he declared in a manifesto: 

If God gives me that satisfaction (victory over sleeping sickness) I shall be 
able to present myself before His judgement-seat with the credit of having 
performed one of the finest acts of the century, and a legion of rescued 
beings will call down upon me His grace. [Quoted by E. D. Morel, Red Rubber, 
p. 151.]

When King Leopold took over the Congo, he announced that his purpose was 
purely philanthropic. Stanley, who conducted propaganda for him in England, 
explained how much he loved the black man, and feared that English people 
could not ?appreciate rightly, because there are no dividends attached to it, 
this restless, ardent, vivifying, and expansive sentiment which seeks to 
extend civilizing influence among the dark places of sad-browed Africa.? The 
Prince of Wales (Edward VII), whose help was invoked by King Leopold as early 
as 1876 in calling a conference to discuss ?the settlement by Europeans of 
unexplored Africa and the encouragement of exploration with a view to 
spreading civilization,? became dubious when assured that the sole motive was 
philanthropy. He wrote to Sir Bartle Frere: 

"The question is whether the public who represent money will take the same 
interest that he does. Philanthropy is all very well, but unless it is 
practical and gives a practical result it will not find that favour in the 
eyes of the English public that it deserves." [Sidney Lee, King Edward VII, 
I, p. 629.]

However, Leopold?s emphasis on philanthropy served his purpose. The other 
Powers showed little enthusiasm for an enterprise that was represented as 
involving expenditure without hope of pecuniary recompense, and when he 
offered to bear all the expense himself, they allowed him to assume the 
burden (as they supposed it) on condition of his preserving freedom of 
religion, freedom of trade, freedom of the Press, and so on. 

After winning the approval of the world by suppressing Arab slave-raiders, 
the royal philanthropist set to work to introduce orderly government into his 
dominions. Being thoroughly up-to-date, he established a system of State 
Socialism, the most thoroughgoing that has ever existed; and in agreement 
with much modern opinion, he seems to have held that Socialism should involve 
no nonsense about democracy. He issued decrees by which all the land, all the 
rubber, and all the ivory was to be the property of the State ? which was 
himself. It was made illegal for natives to sell rubber or ivory to 
Europeans, and for Europeans to buy either from natives. He next sent a 
secret circular to his officials, explaining that they ?must neglect no means 
of exploiting the produce of the forests,? and that they would receive a 
bonus on all rubber and ivory, which would be great when the cost of 
collection was small, and small when it was great. For example, if the cost 
of collection was thirty centimes or less per kilo, the official received 
fifteen centimes per kilo; while if the cost was over seventy centimes per 
kilo, the official received only four centimes. The financial results were 
all that could have been hoped. Parts of the Congo were worked directly for 
the King, parts for companies in which he was a large shareholder. Take, for 
example, the Anversoise Trust, which exploited a region to the north of the 
river. The paid-up capital, of which the State had half, was ?10,000, and the 
net profits in six years were ?370,000. Another company, in four years, made 
a profit of ?731,680 on a paid-up capital of ?40,200. The original value of 
the shares ? of which the King held half ? was 250 francs, but in 1906 their 
value had risen to 16,000 francs. It is more difficult to discover what were 
the profits of the vast areas which were reserved as the King?s private 
domain, but it is estimated by Professor Cattier that they amounted to 
?300,000 a year. [Morel, op. cit., p. 145.] 

The methods by which these vast profits were accumulated were very simple. 
Each village was ordered by the authorities to collect and bring in a certain 
amount of rubber ? as much as the men could collect and bring in by 
neglecting all work for their own maintenance. If they failed to bring the 
required amount, their women were taken away and kept as hostages in 
compounds or in the harems of government employees. If this method failed, 
native troops, many of them cannibals, were sent into the village to spread 
terror, if necessary by killing some of the men; but in order to prevent a 
waste of cartridges, they were ordered to bring one right hand for every 
cartridge used. If they missed, or used cartridges on big game, they cut off 
the hands of living people to make up the necessary number. The result was, 
according to the estimate of  Sir H. H. Johnston, which is confirmed from all 
other impartial sources, that in fifteen years the native population was 
reduced from about twenty million to scarcely nine million. [Sir H. H. 
Johnston, The Colonization of Africa (Cambridge Historical Series), p. 352.] 
It is true that the sleeping sickness contributed something to this 
reduction, but the spread of this disease was greatly accelerated by King 
Leopold?s practice of moving hostages from one end of his dominions to the 
other. 

CONTINUED, See Part II



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  9 03:25:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  9 03:25:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000601c09271$c0e70820$499720d9@mjones>

[Jared, I responded to your wrongly-argued Borodin article first time around,
perhaps you missed it. Here is another chance to respond. Best, Mark]

Jared, I think the story about Pavel Borodin is more complicated than this. Your
interest in the matter seems to come down to this: an important Russian diplomat and
public official is arrested. This is prima facie an attack on 'the former Soviet
peoples' themselves  and a sign of renewed American aggression.

If only life was so simple. I guess where you are coming from is the parallels with
the possible fates of former Yugoslav leaders, or, let me rephrase that, leaders of
different ethnic and political and national groupings within the ex-YF. But frankly
I don't think you are doing your cause many favours by attaching it to the fate of
someone as notoriously corrupt and evil as Pavel Borodin, someone that, according to
opinion polls cited yesterday on Johnson's Russia List, many ordinary Russians
*themselves* don't want back. Borodin is a hate-figure for millions of Russians; he
is one of the oligarchs and pro-western modernisers with strong Kremlin links, like
Anatolii Chubais or Boris Berezovsky, who could not appear in a public place: if he
did, the mob would tear him to pieces. So arresting Borodin is one of the few
'unfriendly acts' by Americans which most ordinary Russians would actually be
grateful for.

Before being shunted off to the semi-retirment of his new post as  Secretary of the
Russian-Belarus Union, Borodin was in charge of the Kremlin property administration.
This was the heart of darkness of the Yeltsin programme for plundering Russia and
enriching his oligarch cronies. Trying to save Borodin on the grounds of his alleged
diplomatic status is equivalent say to the attempts which some well-meaning
Americans made to have Hermann Goering saved from the noose on the grounds that he
was a former member of a Govenrment and should have immunity as a result of the
German surrender.It is absurd to argue that criminals can enjoy life with immunity
because they own a piece of paper. But I'll tell you something else about Russian
diplomat passports: these documents occupy a special place in Russian consciousness
even today, because the main beauty of them during the Soviet era was not so much
that you could go *into* any third country with them, but that they allowed you
*out* of the Soviet Union without the (almost impossible to obtain) exit visa. This
made the dip passport such a revered object that any Soviet (now Russian) possessor
of one has an almost preternatural awareness of its importance; if you have one, you
are in a class apart.

This means that Borodin did a thing almost incomprehensible to any Russian,
especially a high-placed bureaucrat, when he chose to travel on an ordinary passport
because he couldn't get a visa for his dip. passport. True, these days a Russian
doesn't need an exit visa from the KGB to leave his homeland. That's the theory. But
in practice, life is not so simple. Highly-placed persons who have fallen from
grace, like Borodin, in particular are aware that coming and going is not so simple.

Not only the Russian people are calm about Borodin's arrest, so too is president
Putin, who so far has not uttered a single word on this incident. Why is that? The
answer is that there is a secret war going on between the Putinites and the
Yeltsinites. It is not a war for the soul of Russia, but it is a fight between 2
groups, one in decline, one ascendant, for access to the stream of plundered wealth
and for new sources of power and privilege. Yeltsin's 2 main oligarch backers,
Gusinsky and Berezovsky, are in trouble. Gusinsky is in a Spanish jail awaiting
extradition to Russia. Berezovsky, now in New York, faces the same fate.

Top bureaucrats and oligarchs do live in fear, surrounded by guards, with travel
plans constantly updated. Chubais himself recently fled Russia for a time. ALL these
people -- the elite of "New Russians" -- depend on being able to flee Russia at a
moment's notice. There were times in Yeltsin's presidency when HE HIMSELF  had his
personal jet warm its engines up, when the going  got specially rough. ALL these
people have based themselves on the export of capital: phenomenal amounts. There are
more than 100 dollar billionairs living in the Moscow region alone. A game has gone
on for more than a decade, in which the West has not only countenanced but
encouraged the export of capital from the ex-SU, perhaps a trillion dollars in all.
This helped impoverish the Soviet people, destroy its industry and turn it into a
helpless appendage of the West, thus ensuring the West's victory in the Cold War.
This flood of money also mightily helped fuel the US boom, for eg by enhancing asset
values then used to leverage into the debt which powered growth. And, best of all,
it made political hostages out of the Russian elite, who are hated by their
impoverished countrymen, and who therefore depend on being allowed by the Western
monetary and political authorities to salt their loot in Swiss banks, or (in
Borodin's case) the Bank of New York, or the Caymans, Cyprus etc. The elites also
depend on being allowed to slip abroad and enjoy their ill-gotten gains in comfort
and security. That is why Borodin's arrest makes them nervous. After all, Borodin
was just one "muzhik" among many others; if they can arrest "our Pasha" they can
arrest anyone. That's the thinking of the oligarchs.

It is odd to argue for the rights of people like Pavel Borodin to rob Russia
undisturbed, and have a constant safe haven abroad. Borodin's actual job was to
dispose of the asset-base of the CPSU. He controlled fabulous power and wealth. He
spent $500 million (!!!) on refurbising Yeltsin's Kremlin apartments. What happened
to that money? He and Berezovsky systematically looted the hard currency earnings of
Aeroflot, the national airline What happened to that, and the literally hundreds of
billions of dollars which disappeared, looted from Soviet Russia?

Putin wants to assert himself against "the Family", ie the Yeltsin clan which put
him there. But it is hard, because they have so much dirt on Putin himself. Before
he can really assert himself, he must complete his crab-like Long March thru the
institutions of the Russian state, getting a steely grip on the KGB, the army, the
regions, and above all, getting a grip on the mass media. Only when he has the media
fully under control, can Putin be sure that the Yeltsinites no longer are capable of
embarrassing him with revelations about the dirt from his own sordid climb to power
over a heap of still-warm bodies.

This is why Putin began his attack on the oligarchs by going after Gusinsky and
Berezovsky, because they were the media-magnates he needed to neutralise first. When
Chubais tried a minicoup of his own recently and tried to grab a piece of the media
pie, he was forced to flee Russia. They all know that he that controls TV controls
the masses.

>From the point of  view of the West, the position is also highly contradictory and
confusing. On the one hand, Bush wants to dish the remnants of the Clinton/Gore
Russia policy, and destroy many enemies in Washington at the same time. Tainting
Gore with his former association with corrupt people like Borodin is one way. On the
other hand, it does not do to make the remaining oligarchs desperate by giving them
the feeling that there are no safe havens left. The West needs to keep its grip on
the collective scrotum of the New Russians. Therefore a complex minuet is being
played out. The West has answered calls to arrest Gusinsky, but none of these folks
has yet actually been sent back to face the music. It must first be made clear to
the Russian elite, to the oligarchs, that these are 'special cases', that it is
merely a little housekeeping, cleaning up the most grotesque and bizarre forms of
highly visible and completely unacceptable corruption of the Yeltsin era. Once that
is done, it will be back to business as usual, ie robbery and plunder of Russian
oil, raw materials etc, but without flamboyant excesses. So it is a question of
training the quislings how to behave. Their children are all at western (mostly
Swiss) finishing schools anyway, learning how to 'go on', how to be part of the
world bourgeoisie: to be polite, charming, discreet, and make highly-publicised
charitable contributions etc, while you plunder the planet and impoverish the
masses. It is all just a matter of time and of the continued absorption and
digestion of the fSU by the western python.

As for Borodin, Gusinsky etc, of course they will be allowed to live out their lives
in quiet obscurity in their villas on the Cote d'Azur, so don't shed too many tears
for them, Jared. It is a mistake to allow these rascals to drape themselves in the
twin flags of 'human rights' and of 'Russian national pride'. To argue that "Pavel
Borodin's arrest indicates that new aggressions are planned in the military,
political and financial spheres, new attacks on the people of the former Soviet
Union" is to ignore the truth that Borodin has been a key player, a key quisling,
who helped the West destroy Russia for more than a decade. The Yeltsin's and
Borodin's were the fifth columnists and shock troops who did the West's job for it.
Why defend them?

And while it is possible that sharply antagonistic contradictions might yet emerge
between Russia, China, India on one hand and Nato/US on the other, that is still not
likely absent a major geopolitical earthquake, and the reason it is not likely is
that the Russian, Chinese, Indian etc elites are fully integrated into the world
bourgeoisies and fully accept US imperial hegemony. The fact that Putin is cynical
enough to throw a few cost-free sops to the Russian masses, like the music but not
words to the Soviet anthem, is only further proof if proof were needed. We should
not allow ourselves to be duped by such obvious games. The oligarchs are playing the
patriot cardbecause (a) it makes them a little less loathsome in the eyes of their
fellow-countrymen and women and (b) because they want a little more wiggle-room in
their dealings with their Western masters, they want to loosen their collars a
little and not be quite so slavihly dependent on Western goodwill. For ten years
they have been marionettes of the CIA and State Dept and they are fed up. This has
made them punchdrunk, this living in constant fear, and may well explain why Borodin
did such an otherwise inexplicable thing as fly to NY *with no dip passport*. He
must have known,  because his own contacts in the Russian Foreign Ministry certainly
told him, that the fact the US had denied him a diplomatic visa could only mean one
thing: he faced  arrest. Perhaps it became clear to Borodin -- perhaps he received
one of those anonymous but well-informed phone calls which are the bane of elite
lives and which tipped him off that Putin had him in his sights, and it was time to
go. Better an American jail than a Russian one, hey?

Mark



Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a Lie

by Jared Israel [revised 1-31-2001]

Elsewhere we have posted excerpts from a Moscow Press conference given by Genrikh
Pavlovich Padva, a lawyer for Pavel Borodin. Mr. Borodin, a Russian diplomat and
Secretary of the Russian-Belarus Union, was arrested on January 17th at Kennedy
Airport in New York as he stepped off the plane from Moscow. He was on his way to
the Bush Inauguration. That is, Mr. Borodin was invited by the U.S. to come to the
U.S. on what amounted to an official State visit, and then arrested.





From mstainsby at tao.ca  Fri Feb  9 05:35:01 2001
From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby)
Date: Fri Feb  9 05:35:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <003f01c09284$a7862a60$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>

> My dear Macdonald, I agree with you 100% except please don't glorify the
> politics of  this Andrej by comparing him to the IWW, which never, in its
> entire history, once sided with the kind of fascist thugs with whom Andrej
> works closely in Belgrade and whom he tries to portray as revolutionaries.

Absolutely, and without question. I stand (humbly and happily) corrected on this
matter.

Cheers,
Macdonald




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  9 06:15:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  9 06:15:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] forwarded: Natural Science Note-Books Of Marx And Engels
Message-ID: <000201c09289$75467320$668a20d9@mjones>

[fwd from Siddhartha Chatterjee [siddhart at syr.edu]]

The Natural Science Note-Books Of Marx And Engels: Middle Of 1877  Early 1883

                         Somnath Ghosh (AM-18210)  and   Pradip Baksi

                         It is customary to associate the names of Marx and Engels
with the emergence of scientific socialism in the 19thcentury Europe. Students of
socialist literature also associate the name of Engels with the study of  natural
sciences of the last century, from within the socialist movement. However, the
natural science studies of Karl Marx remain relatively unknown. The present
communication announces the publication of the 31st Volume of Section IV of the MEGA
(Marx-Engels-Gesammtausgabe; Complete Works of Marx-Engels)1, on the 16th of
December, 1999.2 This volume contains Marxs notes and excerpts on Inorganic and
Organic Chemistry and Electricity. Together with Engels excerpts and notes on parts
of Physics and Ecology, related to his Dialectics of Nature .  The present volume is
of interest to the students of history of the 19th century on many counts : it
provides new source materials for the study of the interrelationships of the history
of natural and social sciences of that century, for Marx-studies and Engels-studies
and, through these, for the study of the interrelationships of the sciences and the
socialist movement.
                         Before we proceed with the contents of MEGA IV/31, a few
words about the MEGA itself are in order3. Some 27 years after the death of Marx
and, 15 years after the death of Engels, in the year1910, the plan for publishing
the Complete Works of Marx and Engels, in the original languages of their texts, was
discussed for the first time, at a meeting of some prominent Austro-Marxists, who,
however, could not start the project. David Borisovich Rjazanov (Goldendach)
(1870 1938), an imigri  Russian revolutionary intellectual, present at that meeting
began to realize this plan, with active support from Lenin and the Comintern, in the
1920s from Moskow, Frankfurt-am-Main and, Berlin. At that time the Marx-Engels
archives were the property of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD). They
permitted the Russians to photo-copy the  Marx-Engels papers. Thus began the first
historical attempt to publish the MEGA. Subsequently, as the relations between the
SPD and Rjanozovs sponsors  the Comintern-- soured, the SPD leadership cancelled
the arrangement, and the fate of MEGA was sealed. Events followed in quick
succession: in Russia Rjazanov was removed from his responsibility; in Germany the
Nazis came to power in 1933; the publication of MEGA  came to a halt in 19354. In
the face of the lawlessness of the Nazi regime, a large part of the SPD archives,
including the Marx-Engels papers, were taken out of Germany. Subsequently, these
papers were sold to a Dutch insurance company, which in turn gave them to the newly
established Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis (IISG), at Amsterdam,
in 1938. Some more papers were collected at Moscow, both before and after the second
world war. As of now some 2/3 of the  Marx-Engels papers are being preserved at the
aforementioned institute at Amsterdam and, about 1/3 of them are being preserved at
two Russian centres5, which grew out of the now defunct Institute of
Marxism-Leninism of Moscow.
                                  In the 1960s a new attempt to publish the MEGA
was made  by the Institutes of Marxism-Leninism (IML) of Berlin and Moscow. The
IISG, permitted the IMLs to use the documents preserved at Amsterdam,  but did not
participate in the project.  This attempt is now called MEGA(2)  and, the earlier
attempt is called MEGA(1). The Karl-Marx-House (KMH) of Trier in Germany also
maintained close contact with the project.
                                 In 1989, the fast unfolding political changes in
GDR and USSR created uncertainities for the future of  MEGA(2). IISG and KMH changed
their earlier stand and, agreed to participate in the project, to ensure its further
continuation. In the autumn of 1990, the  International-Marx-Engels-Stiftung (IMES;
International Marx-Engels Foundation) was established, with its office at IISG,
Amsterdam, with the sole purpose of completing the MEGA(2). By that time, 43 volumes
or parts thereof of the MEGA(2) were already published; work was in progress on 7
more volumes or parts thereof. These volumes were published by 1993. A new editorial
policy was formulated in 19926. Since 1994 the IMES is publishing its house journal
the MEGA-Studien7 .It has been decided that under the new management, MEGA(2)will be
completed in 114 volumes, grouped into the following 4 divisions : Division I  all
the works, articles and drafts, other than those related to the Capital (32
volumes);  Division II  the Capital and the work preparatory to it (15 volumes,
many containing several parts); Division III  Correspondence(35 volumes);and
Division IV  excerpts , notes and marginalia (32 volumes). The Akademie Verlag of
Berlin8 are the current publishers of the MEGA(2).
                               At present 11 teams are working on the different
yet-to-be-published volumes of the MEGA(2), in Denmark, France, Germany, Japan, the
Netherlands, Russia and the USA. The first volume under the new management came out
in December 19989. Two more volumes have been published in 199910.
                              So far, some of Marxs excerpts and notes on Geology,
Agro-Chemistry and Soil Science have been published in  MEGA IV/ 6, 8 and 9.
Elsewhere, parts of his Mathematical Manuscripts have also been published11. A vast
amount of his notes and excerpts on these disciplines and, on Physics, Technology,
Agriculture, Geology and Physiology, still remain unpublished12.
                             The recently published MEGA IV/31 consists of two parts
: Texts and, Text-critical Apparatus. The Text portion is subdivided into two
sections. The first section contains Marxs excerpts and notes on Inorganic and
Organic Chemistry and, Electricity. The second section consists of Engels excerpts
and notes on parts of Physics and Ecology. The Text-Critical Apparatus contains a
general introduction; introductions to the subsections of the texts; The inventories
of variant readings, corrections and comments, which everywhere indicate the
corresponding page and line number of the text ; name index; indexes of literature
used in the apparatus; and a subject index. The technical standards of editing and
production are veritable examples for other editors and publishers of similar works
to follow. The introductions in the apparatus portion provide valuable historical
data related to the topics of the texts; these may help the reader situate the texts
in the history of the corresponding disciplines and, appreciate the specificity of
the interests shown by  Marx and Engels in the study of these sciences.
                               Marxs excerpts and notes on Chemistry, pertaining to
the period 1877 1883, are  distributed in 6 different notebooks. They appear in
this volume as :

     Serial No.  			Title			       Marxs Chemistry Notebook No.
           1.                      On the Atomic Theory
[1]
2. Tabular Summaries of Inorganic and
                         Organic Chemistry
[2]
3.                       Tables of Chemistry
[3]
          4.                        Tables of Inorganic and Organic Chemistry
[4]

 Serial No.                                         Title
Marxs Chemistry Notebook No.
          5.                            Tables of Inorganic and Organic Chemistry
[5]
          6.                            Formulae of Organic Chemistry
[6]

For these excerpts Marx used some earlier and contemporary literature on Chemistry,
as well as some literature of the related sciences, like Physics, Geology and
Physiology. The sources used by him are :
1. Lothar Mayer, Die Modernen Theorien der Chemie und ihre Bedeutung fur die
Chemische Statik. 2., umgearb. und sehr verm. Aufl. ( The Modern Theories of
Chemistry and their Significance for Chemical Statics. 2nd revised and largely
augmented ed.) . Breslau 1872.
2. Henry Enfield Roscoe, Kurzes Lehrbuch der Chemie nach den neuesten Ansichten der
Wissenschaft .Dt.Ausg. , unter Mitw. des Verf. Bearb. von Carl Schorlemmer. 4., nach
den neuesten Forschungen verm. und Verb. Aufl. ( A Concise Textbook of Chemistry in
the light of the Latest ideas of that Science). German ed. In collaboration with
Carl Schorlemmer as author and
editor. 4th ed. , revised and improved in the light of latest research ).
Braunschweig 1873.
3. Carl Schorlemmer, Lehrbuch der Kohlenstoffverbindungen oder der organischen
Chemie. 2.
Verb. Aufl. (A Textbook of Carbon Compounds or  of the Organic Chemistry.  2nd
revised ed.)
Braunschweig 1874.
4. Henry Enfield Roscoe, Carl Schorlemmer, Ausfurliches Lehrbuch der Chemie (A
Comprehensive
Textbook of Chemistry ) . Bd.1 (vol . 1). Braunschweig 1877. Bd.2 (Vol.2) .
Braunschweig 1879.
5. Benjamin Witzschel, Die Physik fasslich dargestellt nach ihrem neuesten
Standpunkte (Physics 
Comprehensively interpreted according to its latest standpoints). 2. Ausg. (2nd
ed.). Leipzig 1858.
   6.     Wilhelm Friedrich Kuhne, Lehrbuch der phygiologischen Chemie ( A Textbook
of Physiological
   Chemistry ) . Leipzig 1868.
    7.     Ludimarr Hermann, Grundriss der Physiologie des Menschen ( Foundations of
Human
  Physiology) . 5., verm. und verb. Aufl. (5th augmented and revised ed. ). Berlin
1874.
8. Johannes Ranke, Grundzuge der Physiologie des Menschen mit Rucksicht auf die
Gesundheits
-pflege .  3.,umgearb. Aufl. ( Essentials of Human Physiology, taking Health Care
into
Consideration ). 3rd. updated ed. Leipzig 1875.
9. Joseph Beete Jukes , The Students Manual of Geology. 3rd. ed. Edinburgh 1872
The selection of sources mirrors Marxs interest in Inorganic, Organic, Physical
,Physiological and
Geological Chemistry. As a rule Marx worked with many sources on a single topic.
                              The excerpts titled  On the Atomic Theory  his
notebook [1]  contain a discussion of
the : (1) atomistic principle as propounded by John Dalton (17661844), (2) related
stoichiometric laws of chemical combination of elements and, (3) determination of
atomic and molecular weights of elements and  compounds  wherein the doctrine of
Joseph Louis Gay-Lussac (17781850)  and, the principle of Lorenzo Romano Amadeo
Carlo comte di Quaregna e Ceretto Avogadro (1776 -1856), together with the follow up
corollaries like the relation between vapour density and molecular weight, have
been discussed with various illustrations.
              		 The repeatedly excerpted tables of Inorganic and Organic
Chemistry  in his notebooks [2]  [6]-- contain tables for Non-metals and Metals ;
the Periodic System of Julius Lothar Meyer (1830-1895); discussion of Quantitative
Valency, Oxides, Hydroxides, Acids and Salts; tables of the various groups of
Organic compounds, like the Paraffins, Carbohydrates, Aromatic Compounds, alkaloids,
Uric Acid and related substances, Carbonyl and Sulfocarbonyl Compounds, Etheric and
Anhydride substances, Ammonia and its derivatives, Organic Acids etc.
                              Marxs chemistry-excerpts are followed by his excerpts
from : Edouard Hospitalier,
La physique moderne. Les principales applications de lelectricite 2.ed. ( Modern
Physics.The Principal Applications of Electricity . 2nd ed. )  Paris 1882. It
contains discussions on : (1) the sources of electricity, like the Vol taic  Piles
or Galvanic Batteries ; the physical  nature of their functioning; (2) the
characteristics of current electricity  Ohms Law and related issues; and (3) lists
the units for measuring Electrical Current, Voltage, Resistance etc. The first
section of MEGA IV/31 comes to an end with these excerpts.
                              The second section of the volume contains Engels
excerpts from :
1. William Thomson, Peter Guthrie Tait,  Treatise on Natural Philosophy. Vol.1.
Oxford 1867.
2.  Carl Fraas, Klima und Pflanzenwelt in der Zeit, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte
beider .
( Climate and Plant World in Time, a contribution to the History of Both ). Landshut
1847.
3. Hermann Helmholtz , Ueber die Erhaltung der Kraft, eine physikalische Abhandlung,
vorgetragen in der physikalschen Gescselschaft zui Berlin am 23. Juli 1847 ( On the
Conservation of Force, a physical treatise, presented at the meeting of the Physical
Society at Berlin on the 23rd of July 1847). Berlin 1847.
4.  Jean Baptiste Le Rond dAlembert, Traite de dynamique ..  (Treatise on
Dynamics .) Paris 1743.
5.   Gustav Wiedemann,  Die Lehre vom Galvanismus und Electromagnetismus  ( The
Doctrine of Galvanism and Electromagnetism ). 2. neubearb. und verm. Aufl. Bd. 1.2
(2nd revised and augmented ed. Vol.1.2 ). Braunschweig 1874.
6.  A note on Heat.
7.   A note on the Units of Measureing Electricity.
Engels made use of these excerpts and notes in several articles of the Dialectics of
Nature13 -- titled The Measure of Motion --Work,  Tidal Friction. Kant and
Thomson - Tait.  The Share of Labour in the Apes becoming Human Beings  ( Anteil
der Arbeit an der Menschwerdung des Affen : usually rendered  in English as The
Part Played by Labour in Transition from Ape to Man), Electricity, and Heat.
                             In view of the fact that Engels study of the natural
sciences has received the attention of interested scholars for quite some time14, in
the remaining part of the present paper we shall concentrate on Marxs natural
science studies.
                              Marxs interest in Chemistry coincides with the period
of his intense preoccupation with political economy. Since the 1850s he noticed that
there are connections among : ground rent, soil fertility, use of fertilizers in
agriculture, plant nutrients and, changes in the science of Chemistry15. He studied
some of the works of James Finlay Weir Jhonston (1796 1855)16 , Justus Freiherr von
Liebig (1803--1873) 17;
Attended the lectures on modern chemistry delivered by the Director of Royal College
of Chemistry at London, August Wilhelm von Hofmann (1818- !892) 18. He was also
aware of some of the works of Christian Friedrich Schonbein (1799 1868) 19, Auguste
Laurent (18071853) 20 , Charles Fre/de/rick Gerhardt (1816 1856) 21, Charles
Adolphe Wurtz (1817  1884) 22 , and , Friedrich August Kekule/ von Stardonitz
(1829 1896) 23. His friend Carl Schorlemmer (18341892)  a student of Robert
Wilhelm Bunsen  (18111899), Heinrich Will (18121890) and Hermann Kopp
(18171892)  greatly influenced his study of Chemistry.
                              The then developments in Chemistry were governed by
the introduction of atomic and molecular theories, the theories of structure and
bonds and, the periodic systems. Marxs extracts  and notes on Chemistry partly
mirror these developments. In the case of periodic system, it appears that Marx was
acquainted with the work of Julius Lothar Meyer (1830 1895), but not with that of
Dimitry Ivanovich Mendeleev (1834 1907).
                              Marxs interest in electricity also dates back at
least to the 1850s. In July 1850 Marx observed that steam was going to be superseded
by electricity as the source of energy for industrial technology24  In May 1851 he
discussed with Engels and Daniels the possibility of use of electricity in
agriculture 25, in the light of an article published earlier in The Economist 26.
The excerpts from Hospitaliers book indicate a rekindling of his interests in the
progress of theoretical and practical knowledge about electricity.
                              MEGA IV/31, thus documents only a phase and some
aspects of Marxs intensive pre-occupation with the natural sciences. Students of
history of science, and of socialism in the 19th century,eagerly
Await the publication of his notes and excerpts on Physics, History of Technology,
Geology, Soil Science, History of Agricultural Plants,,Agricultural Chemistry,
Physiology of Plants, of Animals and  of Human Beings, parts of Mathematics and, on
the interrelationships of the Natural Sciences and Philosophy27.
                              The editorial work on MEGA IV/31 began in GDR, after
the publication of MEGA I/26, in 1985. It continued within a decaying East German
state, under conditions of managerial incompetence, staff reduction, underpayment,
and political perfidy. After the unification of Germany and, take over of the
MEGA by a new management, the entire work had to be comprehensively revised
according to the stipulations prescribed in the new rules for editing (see : n.2
above). But never mind, as they say in Persian: Der aayad, durust aayad ( It came
late, but it has been delivered well) !

Acknowledgements
                              We express our heartfelt thanks to Prof. Dr. Manfred
Neuhaus of the Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften and, to the
Akademie Verlag of Berlin, for kindly sending us  a copy of MEGA IV/31 and, the
response to it in the German press. Thanks are also due to Sri Nilay Bhattacharya
for helping us with the German texts and, to Mrs. Suparna Ghosh for providing
similar help in respect of the extracts in French. The usual disclaimers apply
everywhere.



                                                                       References


1. Karl Marx/ Friedrich Engels : Gesamtausgabe (MEGA). Herausgegeben von der
International  Marx-Engels-Stiftung. IV Abteilung : Exzerpte, Notizen, Marginalien.
Band 31 : Naturwissenschaftliche Exzerpte und Notizen Mitte  1877 bis Anfang 1883.
Bearbeitet von Anneliese Griese, Friederun Fessen,          Peter Jaeckel und Gerd
Pawelzig. Akademie Verlag. Berlin 1999. 1055 S. in Zwei Halbbaender. DM 298. ISBN
3-05-03399-1.
       2.       Arnold Schoelzel,  Universaler  bookstall : Zwei neue Baende der
Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe
              sind erschienen,  Junge Welt, Berlin vom 29. Dezember 1999.
 3.   For a description of the MEGA and its history see : Juergen Rojahn , 
Publishing Marx and
Engels  after 1989 : the fate of the Mega ,,, Critique , no. 30 31 (Glasgow , 1998)
pp. 196 207 and, a Bengali tr. of the same : Euergen Roiyahan,   1989 Saler Par
Marks-Engels-Rachanasamagra (Tr.  Pradip Baksi ),  Anustup ( Calcutta), XXXIII :
Summer-Rainy Season Jt. No. 1406 (1999), pp. 40 76.
      4.     See :  Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels : Historisch--Kritische
Gesamtausgabe. Werke, Schriften,
Briefe. Im Auftrage des Marx-Engels-Instituts Moskau hrsg. Von D. Rjazanov bzw. V.
Adoratskij,                          Erste Abteilung : Samtliche Werke und Schriften
mit Ausnahme des Kapital . Bd. 1-7; Dritte Abteilung:
Briefwechsel. Bd. 1-4. Frankfurt a. M. bzw. Berlin 1927 1935 . Sonderausgabe :
Friedrich Engels : Herrn Eugen DuhringsUmwalzung der Wissenschaft . Dialektik der
Natur. 1873-1882. Sonderausgabe zum Vierzigsten Todestage von Friedrich Engels.
Moskau, Leningrad 1935.
    5.    Rossiiskii nezavisnyi institut sotsyalnykh i natsionalnykh  problem
(e-mail : snpi at glasnet.ru)
    and, Rossiskii tsentr khranenija  i izucheniya dokumentov noveischei istorii
(e-mail :
    iisgmosofl at glasnet.ru).
     6.    See : Editionsrichtlinien der Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe. Berlin, 1993.
        7.    Contact address : Juergen Rojahn, Executive Editor, MEGA-Studien,
IMES, IISG, Cruquiusweg 31,
              1019 AT Amsterdam, The Netherlands ( Phone: + 31/20/668 5866, Fax :
+31/20/665 4181,
              e-mail : jro at iisg.nl).
8. Contact address : Akademie Verlag, Muhlenstr. 33-34, Berlin, Germany (Phone :
+49/30/478 89355, Fax : +49/30/478 89357, e-mail : info at akademie-verlag.de).
9. MEGA IV/3. Karl Marx, Exzerpte und Notizen, Sommer 1844 bis Anfang 1847. 1998.
IX,
866p., ill. 18. DM 298. ISBN 3-05-003398-3.
10. One of these two is the topic of this paper (see n.1 above). The other one is :
MEGA IV/32. Die
Bibliotheken von Karl Marx und Friedrich Engels. Annotiertes Verzeichnis des
ermittelten Bestandes. Vorauspublication. 1999.738p. DM 298. ISBN 3-05-0034408.
   11.   See: Karl Marx, Mathematical Manuscripts. Ed. and Tr. Pradip Baksi.
Calcutta : Viswakos
        Parisad, 1994, p.404. A Bengali tr. of these MSS have also been published in
1994, by the same
        house.
12. See: Pradip Baksi, Karl Marxs Study of Science and Technology,
Nature,Society, and Thought
(Minneapolis), 1996, IX, 3, pp.261-296. Anneliese Griese, Hans Joerg Sandkuehler
(Hrsg.), Karl
Marx  Zwischen Philosophie und Naturwissenschaften. Frankfurt/M etc. 1997 ( Review
in :
MEGA-Studien, 1998/2,pp.107-110).
13. See: MEGA I/26. Friedrich Engels, Dialektik der Natur (1873-1882). 1985. LVI,
1,111. DM248.
ISBN 3-05-003363-0.
14. At least since 1925. See : Friedrich Engels, Dialektik und Natur (Dialectics
and Nature). Hrsg.
David Rjazanov, in : Marx-Engels-Archiv. Bd.2 Frankfurt/M 1927, S. 117-395.
Friedrich Engels,
Natur Dialektik. Dialektika Prirody (Nature Dialectics. Dialectics of Nature),
Podred. i  s Pridisloviem D. Rjazanova, Archiv K. Marksa i F. Engelsa, Km. 2. Moskva
i Leningrad, 1925, S. 2-440.See also : Bonifati Mikhailovich Kedrov,  Polveka
raboty nad tekstami i zamyslami F. Engelsa (  Half a century of work on F. Engels
texts and plans), in : Filosofiya i estestovoznaniya.Moscow 1974.Bengali tr. in :
Marksbad  O Bijnan samuher Dwandikata.(Marxism and the Dialectics of the Sciences)
                  Ed. and Tr. P.Baksi, Calcutta 1986, pp.86-107 .Anneliese Griese,
Gerd Pawelzig, Friedrich Engels
                 Dialektik der Natur : eine vergleichende Studie zur
Editionsgeschichte ( Friedrich Engels
                 Dialectics of Nature : a comperative study of the history of its
editions), MEGA-Studien,
                  1995/1, pp.33-60.
15. Marxs letter to Adolf Cluss, 5 October 1853; Marx-Engels, Collected
Works(henceforth MECW),
Moscow 1975. Vol, 39, p. 382. Marxs letters to Engels, 13 and 20 February 1866;
MECW,
Vol.42,pp. 227,232. Karl Marx, Capital I, in MECW, 35, p.313,n.2.
16. James Finlay Weir Johnston, Catechism of agricultural chemistry and geology.23rd
ed.
Edinburgh 1842. Id., Lectures on agricultural chemistry and geology. Edinburgh 1847.
Id., Elements of agricultural chemistry and geology. 4th ed. Edinburgh 1856.
17. Justus von Liebig, Die organische Chemie in ihrer Anwendung auf Agrikultur und
Physiologie (The Organic chemistry in its application to agriculture and
Physiology ). 4th ed. Braunschweig 1842. New ed. 1862. Id., Herr Doctor Emil Wolff
in Hohenheim und die Agrikultur-chemie ( Dr. Emil Wolff in Hohenheim and
Agricultural chemistry ).Braunschweig 1855.
18. Out of these lectures grew : August Wilhelm von Hofmann, Einleitung in die
moderne Chemie
 ( Introduction to Modern Chemistry ). Braunschweig 1866.
19. Christian Friedrich Schoenbein,  Neue  Beobachtungen ueber voltaische Stroeme,
erregt durch chemische Tendenzen (  New observations on voltaic currents, excited
through chemical tendencies in : Annalen der Physik und Chemie. Leipzig. (Bd.43.)
Reihe 2. Bd. 13. 1838. S.229-241. Id.,  Electrochemische Untersuchungen
(Electrochemical investigations), in: Ibid. (Bd.56.) Reihe 2.
Bd.26.1842.S.135-150. Id., Uber die Sauer-Wasserstoffsaule (  On the
Acid-HydrogenColumn), in : Ibid. (Bd. 58.) Reihe 2. Bd. 28.1843. S.361-375. Id.,
Beitrage zur Physikalischen Chemie ( Contribution to Physical Chemistry ). Basel
1844.
20. Auguste Laurent, Methode de chimie ( Methods of Chemistry ).. Paris 1854.
21. Charles Frederic Gerhardt,  Recherches sur les acides organiques anhydres
(Researches on the organic acid anhydrides), in : Annales de chimie. Paris T.37.
1853. S. 285.
22. Charles Adolphe Wurtz,Lec,ons de philosophie chimique ( Lessons of chemical
philosophy).
Paris 1864.
23. Friedrich August Kekule von Stardonitz, Ueber die sogenannten gepaarten
Verbindungen und die
Theorie der mehratomigen Radikale. ( On the so-cslled coupled compounds and the
theory of
multi-atomic radicals), in: Annalen der Chemie und Pharmacie. Heidelberg, Leipzig.
Bd.104.
1857. S.129-150. Id., Ueber die Constitution und die Metamorphosen der chemischen
Verbindungen und uber die chemische Natur des Kohlenstoffs ( on the constitution
and the metamorphoses of chemical compounds and on the chemical nature of Carbon),
in : Ibid.
Bd. 106. 1858. S. 129-159. Id., Lehrbuch der organischen Chemie oder der Chemie der
Kohlenstoffverbindungen (A Textbook of Organic Chemistry or of the Chemistry of
Carbon Compounds). 3 vols. Erlangen 1861-1867.
24. See; Wilhelm Liebknecht,  Reminiscences of Marx, in : Marx and Engels through
the eyes of
their contemporaries. Moscow 1978, pp. 64-65.
25. See: MECW, 38,  S. 344-45, 350-51 (Marx to Engels, 5 May 1851 and, Engels to
Marx, 9 May 1851) and, Voprosy Filosofii, No. 5, 1983 : pp. 109, 115-116 (Roland
Daniels to Karl Marx, 12 April and 25 May 1851).
26.  Remarkable Discovery -- Electricity and Agriculture. The Economist, Vol III,
Nos. 17 and 18, of 26 April and 3 May 1845.
27. See:  Chronologischer und inhaltlicher Ueberblick uber die
naturwissenschaftliche Exzerpte von Karl Marx (  A chronological and contentwise
overview of the natural science excerpts of Karl Marx), in: Peter Jaeckel und Peter
Krueger,  Aktualisierte Uebersicht ueber die naturwissenschaftlichen Exzerpte von
Karl Marx (1846 bis 1882) [ An updated survey of the natural science excerpts of
Karl Marx (1846 to 1882)], in : Griese, Sandkuhler (Hrsg), Karl
Marx  Zwischen Philosophie und Naturwissenschaften, l.c. (n.12), pp. 95-98.











From zapata at sezampro.yu  Fri Feb  9 07:41:01 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Fri Feb  9 07:41:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <00a701c09294$a43f4980$d1bd6ac2@andrej>

He, he, it's funny reading your letters guys, man can discover a whole new
universe!
Your arguments aside ( I am not referring to Mac here, the Maoist label was
used  with purpose and with an argument, but I don't want to get into this)
I just want to disappoint this Isreal. Although I have , personally, nothing
to do with 5-Th of October ( I was home with my wife) IWW, and Belgrade
Libertarian Group as it's section for Yugoslavia + Confederation of Work,
were engaged in demonstrations and that misnamed revolution. So,
unfortunately, IWW is not on the height of your expectation:-((
They were very supportive:-(
Ha, ha, always a pleasure to enjoy in your ignorance Israel, but spare me
this anthropological adventures in the future, by not answering me.

<<  Is it possiblew that this kind of Ararchist idiocy is still real? Didn't
> it get
> imploded with the IWW? >>
 Oh yes, very much so! And this idiocy ( you were referring to the classical
meaning of the word of course) is preventing anarchists to side with
governments or political parties in general..
Unlike ex Maoist who were leaders of Progressive Labor Parties......
 No more answers from me, I am going back to read some interesting things on
this list.
Con Saludos,
       Andrej
----- Original Message -----
From: <Borba100 at aol.com>
To: <crashlist at lists.






From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 10:38:02 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 10:38:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a Lie
Message-ID: <f2.75520e2.27b56742@aol.com>

The URL for his article is http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bor.htm
www.tenc.net 
[Emperor's Clothes]

Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a Lie

by Jared Israel [revised 1-31-2001]

Elsewhere we have posted excerpts from a Moscow Press conference (1) held by 
Genrikh Pavlovich Padva, a lawyer for Pavel Borodin. Mr. Borodin, a Russian 
diplomat and Secretary of the Russian-Belarus Union, was arrested on January 
17th at Kennedy Airport in New York after he stepped off a plane from Moscow. 
He was on his way to the Bush Inauguration, to which he had been invited. 
That is, Mr. Borodin was asked by the U.S. to come to the U.S. on what 
amounted to an official State visit, and when he came he was arrested. This 
was a deliberate provocation intended to humiliate Russia, separate it from 
the spirited government in Belarus, and further reduce it to a colony.

We had no choice

Washington's explanation is as follows: FBI agents arrested Borodin to 
satisfy an arrest warrant issued by Switzerland. The Swiss police wanted (and 
still want) Borodin extradited to Switzerland so they can question him 
regarding kickbacks and subsequent money laundering that allegedly occurred 
when he was in charge of remodeling the Kremlin. (Note that the Swiss have 
not charged Borodin with any crime.)

So. The Swiss issue a warrant; Washington, which, like Justice itself, is 
blind, has to comply; international politics is not involved. 

That's the story.

That is unbelievable. 

Arresting a leader of another country, especially Russia, creates an 
international incident. This particular arrest, which has given the mass 
media the opportunity to talk endlessly about supposed Russian corruption, 
can only serve to smear Russia. If Washington wished to avoid an incident 
with such negative consequences, it had a host of remedies; it failed to 
employ them. This was not an oversight. It was not the result of confusion 
during the Clinton-Bush transition. Quite the contrary, the Clinton State 
Department and the Bush people worked together to guarantee Borodin's arrest. 

The Setup

Three days after Switzerland sent Washington a warrant for Borodin's arrest, 
the Bush administration invited Borodin to the Inauguration. The invitation 
came from one Vincent Zenga, a member of what Bush calls his 'Inauguration 
Team.' The notion that the invitation was issued by mistake (as Mr. Zenga now 
claims) is not credible. (2) 

The State Department knew Mr. Borodin was coming. How can we be sure? Because 
Mr. Borodin requested a diplomatic visa from the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. 
According to the 'Washington Post' (Jan. 19th), this routine request led to 
"urgent" consultations between the U.S. Embassy in Moscow and the State 
Department. Why did the Embassy have to consult urgently with State? Because 
if the Embassy gave Mr. Borodin a diplomatic visa his diplomatic immunity 
would have been more apparent, and his arrest more questionable legally. More 
important, if Borodin had an official diplomatic visa and were nonetheless 
arrested, it would have played badly in the mass media. Ordinary people in 
Western countries would have wondered: how can they arrest a diplomat?

The State Department told the U.S. Embassy in Moscow to stall, neither to 
issue Borodin a diplomatic visa nor to urge him to stay home. Mr. Borodin 
didn't want to miss his plane, so he left Moscow, using a previously issued 
standard American visa. 

An arrest complaint against Mr. Borodin was then filed in Brooklyn Federal 
Court. This was on the morning of Jan. 17th, while Mr. Borodin's plane was in 
the air. When he landed at Kennedy International, he was arrested.

A Russian official commented: 

"The Americans didn't do during the first stage what they could have done in 
principle."... "In particular, they could have given a signal that Borodin 
shouldn't go to the United States. Finally, they didn't have to make a scene 
and flood the arrivals lounge with FBI agents, but could have put Borodin 
back on the plane he had arrived on and sent him back home." (Unnamed Russian 
official quoted by Interfax Russian News, January 29, 2001)

Alexander Fishkin, a N.Y. lawyer for Mr. Borodin, observed:

"The warrant for his arrest was issued in Switzerland on January 10. He was 
sent an invitation to inauguration festivities on January 13. Borodin himself 
told me he did not know until January 15 whether he would fly to America or 
not. It took him quite long to get all the approvals for his trip. In the 
morning of January 17 when he was still in the air an appeal was submitted to 
the Federal Court in Brooklyn for the issue of an American warrant for his 
arrest. The appeal stated the date and time of his arrival and even the 
number of his foreign passport. The request was immediately satisfied and in 
the evening the State Secretary was taken into custody," Fishkin said. " 
('Interfax Russian News', January 23, 2001)

If any question remained that this was a deliberate attempt to humiliate 
Russia by accusing it of out-of-control corruption, President-elect Bush 
tried to make things clear. He was interviewed on '20/20' by Barbara Walters 
two days after the arrest. In that interview, with the assistance of Ms. 
Walters, Bush attempted to lecture Russia and other emerging colonies about 
the importance of "raiding out corruption." (3) 

The Swiss Refuse to Accept a Voluntary Meeting

As we noted, the Swiss authorities say they issued the warrant because they 
needed to question Mr. Borodin regarding supposed money laundering. But 
according to Mr. Borodin's Russian lawyer, the Russian government previously 
offered to have Mr. Borodin meet voluntarily with Swiss officials. (4) The 
Swiss rejected a voluntary meeting. They insisted Borodin be extradited - 
that is, taken to Switzerland by force. The Swiss have admitted this is true:

[Swiss Prosecutor Bertossa said:] "Yes, an offer of that kind did indeed 
reach us. We analysed it closely and reached the conclusion that the Russian 
Government had no legal instruments for ensuring that voluntary appearance." 
(Izvestiya, Moscow, Jan. 26, 2001) 

This is double-talk. What could the Swiss possibly have lost by agreeing to 
the Russian offer? If Mr. Borodin did not meet with them, they could simply 
have issued the warrant. Why turn down a Russian offer to have Borodin meet 
with them and then issue an arrest warrant to force Borodin to - meet with 
them?

Arresting Borodin could only increase international tensions. Why do it? 
Unless of course Switzerland and Washington wanted to increase international 
tensions.

What could Switzerland, that is Washington, have hoped to achieve by having a 
slew of FBI agents swoop down on a Russian diplomat on his way to an official 
U.S. State event? 

For one thing, they wanted to intimidate the countries of the Former Soviet 
Union, and in particular they hoped to drive a wedge between Russia and 
Belarus, which is led by the independent (from Washington) President 
Alexander Lukashenko. Mr. Lukashenko is currently a focus of demonization. 
Originating in Washington, London and Berlin, this demonization has been 
taken up by the mass media and is being parroted by the usual parrots, 
including some birds on the Left. Lukashenko is authoritarian; he is crazy; 
and so on. Yes, Lukashenko is crazy enough to resist Washington's neoliberal 
economic policies, with the result that working people in Belarus are better 
off than working people in other parts of the Former Soviet Union. 

Some may wonder why we are devoting space to this arrest. Isn't it a 
relatively minor incident? No, it is not a relatively minor incident. It is 
an important message, delivered by the United States Establishment to the 
politicians and ordinary people of the Former Soviet Union. The message is as 
follows: We are the rulers, you the ruled. Since you are incapable of 
functioning in an honest, democratic fashion, you must learn humility and let 
us control and guide you. However, those who resist may be arrested, or 
possibly shot.

How big-hearted of Washington and Switzerland to guide the backward Soviet 
people.

The Senior guide is, of course, Washington. It has experience and money. It 
presently guides millions of people directly or through proxies on every 
continent, for instance the KLA in Kosovo, the Djindjic government in 
Belgrade as well as similar governments in Albania, Bulgaria and so on, the 
Ugandan and Rwandan armies in Congo, the Colombian death squads as well as 
the regular Colombian Army, the grisly Islamist secessionists in the Former 
Soviet Union and similar types in Algeria, Indonesia, etc. It is true that 
virtually all these proxies are gangsters involved in drug trafficking and 
money laundering, but the U.S. is involved as well and therefore one cannot 
properly speak of corruption. 

Switzerland is new to the business of Colonial Guidance; hence it is a Junior 
Guide. In the past it disdained such work, preferring to operate from on 
high, handling money matters for 'people' like the Nazis and investing 
profitably in war. But Washington has humbled Switzerland and made it part of 
the team. Perhaps Mr. Bush will call this the "Guidance Team", assigned to 
putting new colonies (like Russia) in their place. Since Switzerland is just 
a Junior Guide it is only natural that Switzerland be given Junior tasks, 
such as issuing arrest warrants that force Washington to arrest people whom 
Washington wishes to arrest. 

The legal (or should we say, illegal) attack on Mr. Borodin will be 
accompanied by endless discussions in the Western mass media concerning 
Russian corruption. The goal of such discussions is to condition public 
opinion to view Russia with contempt, thus creating an atmosphere that 
facilitates new aggressions in the financial and military spheres, new 
attacks on the people of the former Soviet Union. 

Why has Washington chosen this time to increase the attacks on Russia? Not 
because the U.S. Establishment has a new facade in Washington but rather 
because it has installed a reliable government in Belgrade. As always, the 
precondition for attacking Russia is defeating Yugoslavia. 

But are the Serbs truly defeated? They have been underestimated before. 
Hitler underestimated them, much to his regret. For that matter, the Russians 
have been underestimated too. 

Perhaps history is not over. Let's not give up on her, yet.

-- Jared Israel, February 1, 2001

(Another article on this subject, 'Borodin Arrest Targets Russian-Belarus 
Union', can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/borodin.htm 
)

Further reading

1) For the text of the press conference given by Pavel Borodin's Russian 
lawyer, please go to http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bordoc2.htm 

2) For a discussion of Mr. Zenga's invitation, see 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/borodin.htm#f 

3) The relevant section of Bush's interview with Barbara Walters is posted on 
Emperor's Clothes. It can be read at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/borodin.htm#2 

4) The Russian offer to have Borodin meet with the Swiss on a voluntary basis 
is discussed by his lawyer. Please see 
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bordoc.htm#8 

If you find emperors-clothes.com useful, we can sure use your help...

All our expenses are covered by individual donations. Any donation will help 
with our work. To use our secure server, please click here or go to 
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm.

Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 
02461-0321.

Or call 617 916-1705. Thanks very much.

www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
 

 

 

 



From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 11:05:02 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 11:05:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
Message-ID: <5a.10e2e263.27b56da0@aol.com>

In a message dated 02/09/2001 3:26:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
jones.mark at btconnect.com writes:

<<  [Jared, I responded to your wrongly-argued Borodin article first time 
around,
 perhaps you missed it. Here is another chance to respond. Best, Mark] >>

Dear Mark, didn't answer you on account didn't know you'd written anything in 
fact 
wasn't aware my Borodin article was posted on crashlist.  Just read your long 
commentary, hjowever, and I think you miss the point - which is, arrest of 
Borodin is flagrant act of aggression by the Us and SWISS cohorts.  It 
employs a new US weapon of choice - whom the US would make an example of, it 
first calls corrupt.  Whether or not the charge is without foundation - as is 
apparently the case with Milosevic - or whether it may have foundation which 
you say is true with Borodin is irrelevant.  The accusers are corrupt on a 
scale impossible for mere Russians to achieve - including creating the 
conditions of misery for most Russians today.  Moreover the accused is, 
whether you are accurately judging Borodin's corruption or not - the accused 
happens to be a Russian leader who is pushing union with Belarus which has 
stood up to the US and EU. The Belarus leader, Lukashenko is the new 
Milosevich - target of US/EUORPEAN wrath - for booting georgie soros, for 
refusing to coddle the phony democracy groups and the various mildly left 
wing critics on Norwegian or English payrolls, and so on.  The arrest is a 
warning - if  any of you  guys try to push militant policies we will nail you 
- just as we have nailed Borodin etc. etc.  

Lukashenko of Belarus has offered his view - that this is calculated slap in 
the face to Russian and Belarus sovereignty and an attempt to sabotage the 
Russia-Belarus union - and I think he's right.  As for the corruption of 
leaders, I say, let the Russian people - who with all due respect are not 
adequately represented by Internet polls - decide on that.  I think that when 
we from the Imperial homelands start adjusting - with of course the best 
intentions - to US-Anglo-Swiss acts of aggression because the target is 
really a crook - albeit one who the US leaders think has attacked them -  we 
are in BIG trouble, my friend.

BTW Since we are quoting polls, Lukashenko is more popular than Putin in  
Russia.  Also BTW isn't it an outrage that Putin has remained silent on this 
- calling Bush to congratulate him on his inauguration after Bush went on the 
Barbara Walters show 20/20 to read Russia a lecture about corruption after 
arresting a state secretary - and Putin calls to congratulate.  And then 
there was that sub which rapparently was really rammed by a US vessel and 
which coincidentally had been helping the Yugoslavs during the bombing and 
Putin said nothing...Oh my.

Best regards,
Jared



From julp at freesurf.ch  Fri Feb  9 11:49:01 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Fri Feb  9 11:49:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] [brief] CNBC on US energy costs
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.09.fietapfl@computer>

Since the markets were moving today, I looked quickly at CNBC and what do I see?
They had a guest on who was talking about how much the US consumers paid for 
increases in energy costs... The estimate is 53 billions in the fourth quarter and 50+ 
billions in the first quarter on top of the expenses made last year. That's not 
astounding but that's still quite a bit of money considering that this is not some 
financial figure but money coming from actual budjets.
I thought that this might interest some people. This is the first thing of the sort I'm 
seeing. If someone has better sources (not hard), please post.

Julien




From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  9 12:33:01 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri Feb  9 12:33:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin problems have nothing to do with geopolitics
In-Reply-To: <5a.10e2e263.27b56da0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010209122951.00f921c0@popserver.panix.com>

The Scotsman, January 29, 2001, Monday

FAMILY ROW SETTLED BY FAVOURITE SON PUTIN

Chris Stephen In Moscow

RUSSIA'S president has underlined his transition from servant into master
by dumping the two men who put him in the Kremlin.

Last week his parliamentary allies voted to lift the absolute immunity from
prosecution that had been enjoyed by the former president, Boris Yeltsin.
And now Mr Putin's former mentor, the former Kremlin property manager,
Pavel Borodin, has been told nothing will be done to save him from
answering charges of multi-million pound theft in Swiss courts. The two
cases are separate, but together they seal a year in which Mr Putin,
installed to protect Mr Yeltsin and his followers, has in fact routed most
of them, one by one, from positions of power.

Mr Yeltsin picked Mr Putin as his prime minister in 1999, and his
replacement as president in January of last year, in return for a decree by
the new president giving him immunity from the growing number of corruption
investigations closing in on him. Now Mr Yeltsin will be looking over his
shoulder after the Duma, led by Mr Putin's Unity Party, last week voted
itself the power to strip him of this immunity if prosecutors decided to
bring "serious charges" against him.

Mr Borodin - the man who brought Mr Putin into the Kremlin as his deputy in
the mid-1990s - has been told the government will do nothing to save him
from answering theft charges in Switzerland. Indicted on a Swiss Interpol
warrant, he was arrested at a New York airport en route to President George
Bush's inauguration.

Mr Borodin is accused of taking GBP 18 million in bribes in return for
awarding two Swiss firms contracts to restore the Kremlin. Officially,
Russia's government objects to the Swiss extradition case now winding
through the US courts. Unofficially, the Kremlin seems almost relieved that
a man who was also investigated by Russian prosecutors is out of the way.
Mr Putin has maintained a studied silence on the issue.

Mr Borodin's fate appears to be sealed now that his job, as secretary of
the largely ceremonial Union of Russia and Belarus, has been given to
someone else. In its haste, Russia has not only decided not to wait for his
trial, but did not even inform Belarus, which is supposed to make the
appointment jointly with Moscow. The move completes a remarkable transition
for Mr Putin who, as a low-ranking KGB officer, arrived on the government
stage with almost no political experience. One year ago, Mr Putin, who
eventually rose to be head of the secret police, was installed as president
by an ailing Mr Yeltsin in an attempt to find someone to beat the rising
opposition parties.

Mr Putin's war in Chechnya and tough-anti corruption moves have seen him do
just that - but now he has turned his guns on the so-called "Family" - Mr
Yeltsin's entourage of politicians and tycoons. First to go were two media
tycoons, Boris Berezovsky, a key "Family" member, and Vladimir Gusinsky, a
former Yeltsin supporter. Both are now exiles being chased by the courts.
Next were the country's 98 regional governors, installed as corrupt barons
in return for their loyalty to Mr Yeltsin. Mr Putin kicked the governors
out of the upper house of parliament and installed seven "super governors"
to watch over them.

Then he turned on the mighty companies - whose bosses were part of the
"Family" and included the largest gas, oil, energy and car companies -
placing them under investigation for tax offences.

Finally, key jobs have been given to Mr Putin's former KGB colleagues, most
notably the leadership of the security council, the second most important
job in the country, held by Sergei Ivanov. Last week, the FSB (formerlyKGB)
was given control of the Chechen war - a humiliation for the army.

There are many who believe Mr Borodin was pressurised into flying to New
York, under threat of a more far-reaching prosecution by the Russian courts
if he stayed.

"I take my hat off to Putin, he is brilliant," said Natalia Babasyan, a
Moscow political analyst. "Borodin was very much part of the 'Family', but
Putin decided to get rid of him. Putin couldn't be seen to do it himself.
So he is making it happen with the hands of the Americans."

Neither Mr Borodin nor Mr Yeltsin are yet convicted of anything. But Mr
Borodin will be lucky to escape jail once extradited to Switzerland, while
Mr Yeltsin will be at the mercy of the state prosecutor. The two may also
be linked to the possible prosecution of Mr Yeltsin's daughters, Tatyana
Dyachenko and Yelena Okulova, accused by the Swiss of taking bribes from
the same Swiss companies involved with Mr Borodin.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Fri Feb  9 12:55:02 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Fri Feb  9 12:55:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com> <00a701c09294$a43f4980$d1bd6ac2@andrej>
Message-ID: <004901c092c1$346128e0$aa01f0d5@EUnet.yu>

Jared
You should be proud, Andrej Grubacic is on the pay-roll of German secret
police(BND).
colonel
----- Original Message -----
From: Andrej Grubacic <zapata at sezampro.yu>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:34 PM
Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium


> He, he, it's funny reading your letters guys, man can discover a whole new
> universe!
> Your arguments aside ( I am not referring to Mac here, the Maoist label
was
> used  with purpose and with an argument, but I don't want to get into
this)
> I just want to disappoint this Isreal. Although I have , personally,
nothing
> to do with 5-Th of October ( I was home with my wife) IWW, and Belgrade
> Libertarian Group as it's section for Yugoslavia + Confederation of Work,
> were engaged in demonstrations and that misnamed revolution. So,
> unfortunately, IWW is not on the height of your expectation:-((
> They were very supportive:-(
> Ha, ha, always a pleasure to enjoy in your ignorance Israel, but spare me
> this anthropological adventures in the future, by not answering me.
>
> <<  Is it possiblew that this kind of Ararchist idiocy is still real?
Didn't
> > it get
> > imploded with the IWW? >>
>  Oh yes, very much so! And this idiocy ( you were referring to the
classical
> meaning of the word of course) is preventing anarchists to side with
> governments or political parties in general..
> Unlike ex Maoist who were leaders of Progressive Labor Parties......
>  No more answers from me, I am going back to read some interesting things
on
> this list.
> Con Saludos,
>        Andrej
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Borba100 at aol.com>
> To: <crashlist at lists.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>




From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 13:02:01 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 13:02:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin's arrest has ONLY to do with geopolitics
Message-ID: <f5.71b41d1.27b588ef@aol.com>

In a message dated 02/09/2001 12:34:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
lnp3 at panix.com writes:

<< nd now Mr Putin's former mentor, the former Kremlin property manager,
 Pavel Borodin, has been told nothing will be done to save him from
 answering charges of multi-million pound theft in Swiss courts.  >>

The argument here is that because Putin is not lifting a finger to help 
Borodin, therfore "his problems have ntohign to dow with geopolitics."  

But Borodin was not arrested by Putin he was arrested by Washington which 
lured him to the arrest.  The Russian government offered to have him meet 
voluntarily with the Swiss - the Swiss, on US - not Putin's - instructions 
refused.  If Putin chooses not to help for local reasons (as the article 
suggests) so what?  And irrelevant of the state of relations between Borodin 
and Putin I repeat, the failure to stand up to this flagrant violation of 
Russian sovereignty is quite amazing.  Mr. Lukashenko apparently cut short a 
recent trip to Moscow by way of protest.  

We live in an imperfect world.  The U.S. wishes Russia reduced to colonial 
status.  It has made much headway.  One of the marks of being a colony is 
that you are subjected to public ridicule and your laws - including imperfect 
ones - are mocked at will by the Imperial power.  That is what is happening 
here.  

What are we to do?  Only object when the U.S. has the courtesy to attack 
perfect people?

Jared



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  9 13:05:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  9 13:05:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a Lie
In-Reply-To: <f2.75520e2.27b56742@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000401c092c2$d9c2b1e0$a67a20d9@mjones>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
> [mailto:crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com]On Behalf Of
> Borba100 at aol.com
> Sent: 09 February 2001 15:31
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> Subject: [CrashList] Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a
> Lie
>
>
> The URL for his article is http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bor.htm
> www.tenc.net
> [Emperor's Clothes]
>
> Borodin Falsely Arrested - Washington's Excuse a Lie
>
> by Jared Israel [revised 1-31-2001]

Jared, this has already been posted to the CrashList by Mrs Jovanovic. I answered it
because it is full or error (IMO), and what I'm still hoping for is your rebuttal.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  9 13:06:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  9 13:06:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin problems have nothing to do with geopolitics
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20010209122951.00f921c0@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <000501c092c2$e9bd9380$a67a20d9@mjones>

Indeed, that is pretty much my point, and I'm waiting for Jared to answer.

Mark



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  9 13:07:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  9 13:07:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin's arrest has ONLY to do with geopolitics
In-Reply-To: <f5.71b41d1.27b588ef@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000601c092c3$25291020$a67a20d9@mjones>

Jared, you simply are not addressing the issues I raised, which go right to the
heart not only of your understanding of what is happening in Russia (pretty scanty,
I have to say) but to your understanding of the modalities of modern imperialism and
its centre-periphery articulations.

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
> [mailto:crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com]On Behalf Of
> Borba100 at aol.com
> Sent: 09 February 2001 17:55
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> Subject: [CrashList] Borodin's arrest has ONLY to do with geopolitics
>
>
> In a message dated 02/09/2001 12:34:44 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> lnp3 at panix.com writes:
>
> << nd now Mr Putin's former mentor, the former Kremlin property manager,
>  Pavel Borodin, has been told nothing will be done to save him from
>  answering charges of multi-million pound theft in Swiss courts.  >>
>
> The argument here is that because Putin is not lifting a finger to help
> Borodin, therfore "his problems have ntohign to dow with geopolitics."
>
> But Borodin was not arrested by Putin he was arrested by Washington which
> lured him to the arrest.  The Russian government offered to have him meet
> voluntarily with the Swiss - the Swiss, on US - not Putin's - instructions
> refused.  If Putin chooses not to help for local reasons (as the article
> suggests) so what?  And irrelevant of the state of relations between Borodin
> and Putin I repeat, the failure to stand up to this flagrant violation of
> Russian sovereignty is quite amazing.  Mr. Lukashenko apparently cut short a
> recent trip to Moscow by way of protest.
>
> We live in an imperfect world.  The U.S. wishes Russia reduced to colonial
> status.  It has made much headway.  One of the marks of being a colony is
> that you are subjected to public ridicule and your laws - including imperfect
> ones - are mocked at will by the Imperial power.  That is what is happening
> here.
>
> What are we to do?  Only object when the U.S. has the courtesy to attack
> perfect people?
>
> Jared
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Fri Feb  9 13:17:03 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri Feb  9 13:17:03 2001
Subject: Global organized crime and Justice (was RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium)
In-Reply-To: <000601c09271$c0e70820$499720d9@mjones>
References: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <08c495402170921MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Ura, 
el 9 Feb 01, a las 8:24, Mark Jones dijo:

> 
> Jared, I think the story about Pavel Borodin is more complicated than this. Your
> interest in the matter seems to come down to this: an important Russian diplomat
> and public official is arrested. This is prima facie an attack on 'the former
> Soviet peoples' themselves  and a sign of renewed American aggression.
> 
> If only life was so simple. [...] frankly I don't think you are doing your cause many favours
> by attaching it to the fate of someone as notoriously corrupt and evil as Pavel
> Borodin, [...] one of the oligarchs and pro-western
> modernisers with strong Kremlin links, like Anatolii Chubais or Boris
> Berezovsky, who could not appear in a public place: if he did, the mob would
> tear him to pieces. So arresting Borodin is one of the few 'unfriendly acts' by
> Americans which most ordinary Russians would actually be grateful for.
> 
> 
> [...] Trying to save Borodin on
> the grounds of his alleged diplomatic status is equivalent say to the attempts
> which some well-meaning Americans made to have Hermann Goering saved from the
> noose on the grounds that he was a former member of a Govenrment and should have
> immunity as a result of the German surrender.It is absurd to argue that
> criminals can enjoy life with immunity because they own a piece of paper. 

The situation in Russia resembles, again, that in Latin America. I will never 
stop reminding everybody that, even though the Bolshevik revolution would have 
failed (as many used to state) as a socialist revolution, the passage from 
whatever the fSU was to a Latin American status is anything but a good, 
progressive, step in history.

In fact, after the Pinochet case -where we had some strong exchanges, namely 
with yours truly defending Chilean sovereignty against British and Spanish 
imperialist outrage- there appeared a couple of minor cases involving, this 
time, Argentinean criminals. In all three of these cases, our sovereignty was 
brutally maimed by all-powerful imperialist courts. In this sense, one can't 
but point out that this cannot be accepted.

 _But_ (and this is a big "but")...

If we look at the issue from closer quarters, however, there is a substantial 
difference between the Pinochet case and what has been happening our 
Argentinean or Russian rogues. Chile, partly under imperialist pressure, partly 
due to internal tensions, HAS ACTUALLY PUT PINOCHET TO THE BENCH, and 
the bloc of  assassins of 1972 seems to have been rent apart. That the personal 
cowardice of Pinocho made it easier[1] and that in fact this is only a 
demonstration of the STRENGTH, not the weakness, of the post-1972 regime, is 
not essential for what I will argue here.

This difference makes it much more difficult, as eagerly Mark points out, to 
defend the right of sovereignty of states such as Russia or Argentina today. 

Why, in Argentina we even have a legal framework that protects the criminals 
from indictment (a legacy of both Alfons?n and Menem, while De la R?a was one 
of the most outspoken defenders of the military in 1976)! No surprise at all: 
both Alfons?n, De la R?a -and our shameless Minister of Foreign Relations 
Rodr?guez Giavarini[2]-  share an upbringing in a gorilla-military environment 
during the high years of the Shooting Revolution of 1955, the thing most 
resembling Chile 1972 and Yugoslavia 2000 you can imagine. Menem, at his turn, 
was a petty rogue in the way of Napoleon the 3rd., who established the closest 
relationship between the world of organized crime and our ruling classes and 
gave Peronism the final blow that had been the desire of all the 1955 bloc for 
three decades of mortal political struggle in Argentina.

Thus, a difference must be established. Chilean criminals, at least their arch-
criminal, is under trial by law. Ours are safely convinced they will not. 
Similar situation for Russians, or so it seems.

Under these conditions, although I still  keep convinced that sovereignty of 
states such as Argentina or Russia must be defended against any kind of 
"international" (that is extra-territorial) courts, it is important to note 
that the pertinent, territorially valid courts, are themselves a piece in the 
system of extra-territoriality. This, basically, because these courts have been 
so deeply turned into a gang of concealers that they will violate any principle 
of Justice in order to defend both the establishers of the current situation 
(civilian and military) _and_ the current (civilian) "administrators" of their 
heritage.

Thus, defending a country such as ours against the unbelievable Judge Garz?n 
and his likes takes a lot more than merely stating the absolutely correct -but 
partly just formal- truth that extra-territorial courts are a crime themselves. 
I understand Mark's objections too well. And, still...
******************************************************************

N O T E S 

[1] He forced other military to assume responsibilities on issues he did not 
want to appear as responsible himself, thus leading to at least one of them 
carefully keeping the records of what actually happened and eventually bringing 
them to light in a "safe" -that is, non-conflictive for imperialism- 
environment. This gives the case against Pinocho strong amount of legal 
evidence, with the then commander of Northern Chile revealing that he had been 
ordered to murder dozens of political prisoners by Pinocho himself, while 
Pinocho's defence lies on the argument that poor good kid knew nothing of what 
was going on...

[2] The guy who is outraged because Fidel Castro simply told the world the 
already evident truth that even a country that in its own way had been 
powerful, such as Argentina, becomes a boot-licker of imperialists due to the 
debt

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From zapata at sezampro.yu  Fri Feb  9 13:36:01 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Fri Feb  9 13:36:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com> <00a701c09294$a43f4980$d1bd6ac2@andrej> <004901c092c1$346128e0$aa01f0d5@EUnet.yu>
Message-ID: <003201c092c6$35fb1080$89bd6ac2@andrej>

CIA, snajka, Cia.....
Con Saludos,
       Andrej
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mrs. Jela Jovanovic" <nerajov at EUnet.yu>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium


> Jared
> You should be proud, Andrej Grubacic is on the pay-roll of German secret
> police(BND).
> colonel
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andrej Grubacic <zapata at sezampro.yu>
> To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
>
>
> > He, he, it's funny reading your letters guys, man can discover a whole
new
> > universe!
> > Your arguments aside ( I am not referring to Mac here, the Maoist label
> was
> > used  with purpose and with an argument, but I don't want to get into
> this)
> > I just want to disappoint this Isreal. Although I have , personally,
> nothing
> > to do with 5-Th of October ( I was home with my wife) IWW, and Belgrade
> > Libertarian Group as it's section for Yugoslavia + Confederation of
Work,
> > were engaged in demonstrations and that misnamed revolution. So,
> > unfortunately, IWW is not on the height of your expectation:-((
> > They were very supportive:-(
> > Ha, ha, always a pleasure to enjoy in your ignorance Israel, but spare
me
> > this anthropological adventures in the future, by not answering me.
> >
> > <<  Is it possiblew that this kind of Ararchist idiocy is still real?
> Didn't
> > > it get
> > > imploded with the IWW? >>
> >  Oh yes, very much so! And this idiocy ( you were referring to the
> classical
> > meaning of the word of course) is preventing anarchists to side with
> > governments or political parties in general..
> > Unlike ex Maoist who were leaders of Progressive Labor Parties......
> >  No more answers from me, I am going back to read some interesting
things
> on
> > this list.
> > Con Saludos,
> >        Andrej
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <Borba100 at aol.com>
> > To: <crashlist at lists.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  9 13:41:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  9 13:41:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: <5a.10e2e263.27b56da0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c092c7$c227a860$a67a20d9@mjones>

OK, now I have Jared's response and I'm sorry if I seemed peevish. FWIIW, I much
respect Jared's work so this is a comradely talk.

>Just read your long
> commentary, hjowever, and I think you miss the point - which is, arrest of
> Borodin is flagrant act of aggression by the Us and SWISS cohorts.  It
> employs a new US weapon of choice - whom the US would make an example of, it
> first calls corrupt.  Whether or not the charge is without foundation - as is
> apparently the case with Milosevic - or whether it may have foundation which
> you say is true with Borodin is irrelevant.  The accusers are corrupt on a
> scale impossible for mere Russians to achieve - including creating the
> conditions of misery for most Russians today.

'Mere Russians' took the decisions to liquidate the Soviet Union, and no-one else.
It was an unforced move. They didn't have to do it. If Cuba can survive, so
self-evidently could the USSR. There were many forks which the postwar Soviet
leadership stumbled over and took the wrong turning, but the really critical one was
the decision by Gorbachev to surrender, to concede defeat in the Cold War. I know we
all know by heart Trotsky's famous lines on how the 'bureaucracy' was a bourgeoisie
in waiting, but there were and are always antidotes - *political* antidotes - to
Jekyll + Hyde transformations. 'Corruption' was not a kind of accessory, it was the
whole idea, the only game in town, and it wasn't long before 'mere Russians' like
Borodin and Yeltsin began to give lessons to their US (Harvard-trained) masters in
how it is done. They really took the best of the old and melded it with the best of
the new. Every minor form of bureaucratic self-enrichment and self-advancement
perfected in Brezhnev's time now flourished like cancer gone world in the brave new
world of Russian capitalism. And Pavel Borodin was amongst the grossest,
Roman-empire style, thieves. To say that we must line up in defence of him is
grotesque, and surely absurd. We cannot talk like this; it insults our own movement,
+ the huge historical struggle and sacrifice of the Soviet working class, and to the
whole tradition of Marxist and Leninist theory and practice.

Nor is it the case that this is simply the US employing a new weapon )to do what?
Terrorise corrupt plunderes and thieves? If so, it's NOT a new weapon and indeed it
is a very old weapon, often used by imperial nomenclaturas against quislings who
become a political embarrassment: to take just one example out of many, Noriega --
is he someone we should defend?). But in fact, in this case it seems clear that
their is collusion between the Kremlin and the Swiss and US authorities. But if it
is true that Putin is trying to establish his independence from Yeltsin (stooge,
criminal and quisling No. 1) and is trying to create a new 'strong' Russian state -
as the Bushites themselves now appear to be arguing, then you might expect that the
US would not be rushing to help him, you might indeed expect them to simply refuse
to act in a way which *supports* Putin and which pulls the rug from under their old
ally, Yeltsin and family. So it simply is not the case that the Borodin arrest is
another example of US state terrorism against foreign leaders.

As for theBelarus connection, Borodin's disappearance can only HELP the
strengthening of ties between Belarussia and Russia. His presence as secretary for
the Belraussian-Russian alliance was simply a guarantee that nothing woiuld happen
except the discovery of new forms of corruption and enrichment.

And I think that relations between Putin and Lukashenko are etxremely warm and are
developing strongly; nor have I heard one word of complaint from Lukanshenko about
Borodin's fate, only the same ominous silence as from Putin himself.

> Lukashenko of Belarus has offered his view - that this is calculated slap in
> the face to Russian and Belarus sovereignty and an attempt to sabotage the
> Russia-Belarus union - and I think he's right.

I haven't seen this. Can you provide a reference?

> As for the corruption of
> leaders, I say, let the Russian people - who with all due respect are not
> adequately represented by Internet polls - decide on that.

Internet polls? We are talking about public opinion polls tekn by VtSIOM and other
domestic Russian agencies.

>
> BTW Since we are quoting polls, Lukashenko is more popular than Putin in
> Russia.  Also BTW isn't it an outrage that Putin has remained silent on this
> - calling Bush to congratulate him on his inauguration after Bush went on the
> Barbara Walters show 20/20 to read Russia a lecture about corruption after
> arresting a state secretary - and Putin calls to congratulate.  And then
> there was that sub which rapparently was really rammed by a US vessel and
> which coincidentally had been helping the Yugoslavs during the bombing and
> Putin said nothing...Oh my.


There is no evidence that the Kursk was rammed, and it almost certainly sank as a
result of an onboard explosion.

Mark




From johnwood at umich.edu  Fri Feb  9 13:47:01 2001
From: johnwood at umich.edu (John Woodford)
Date: Fri Feb  9 13:47:01 2001
Subject: Global organized crime and Justice (was RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks 
 Test on Depleted Uranium)
References: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com> <08c495402170921MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <3A843AF2.70A9DB7B@umich.edu>

And, on the question of sovereignty,  it should be added that Pinochet was himself a stooge of
imperialism, and recognized as such by the Chilean people.
It will soon be clear enough whether Putin is acting in the Borodin affair so as to make himself
more attractive and investment-worthy to the US elite, or chiefly to consolidate his power, or some
other reason..

Gorojovsky wrote:

> En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Ura,
> el 9 Feb 01, a las 8:24, Mark Jones dijo:
>
> >
> > Jared, I think the story about Pavel Borodin is more complicated than this. Your
> > interest in the matter seems to come down to this: an important Russian diplomat
> > and public official is arrested. This is prima facie an attack on 'the former
> > Soviet peoples' themselves  and a sign of renewed American aggression.
> >
> > If only life was so simple. [...] frankly I don't think you are doing your cause many favours
> > by attaching it to the fate of someone as notoriously corrupt and evil as Pavel
> > Borodin, [...] one of the oligarchs and pro-western
> > modernisers with strong Kremlin links, like Anatolii Chubais or Boris
> > Berezovsky, who could not appear in a public place: if he did, the mob would
> > tear him to pieces. So arresting Borodin is one of the few 'unfriendly acts' by
> > Americans which most ordinary Russians would actually be grateful for.
> >
> >
> > [...] Trying to save Borodin on
> > the grounds of his alleged diplomatic status is equivalent say to the attempts
> > which some well-meaning Americans made to have Hermann Goering saved from the
> > noose on the grounds that he was a former member of a Govenrment and should have
> > immunity as a result of the German surrender.It is absurd to argue that
> > criminals can enjoy life with immunity because they own a piece of paper.
>
> The situation in Russia resembles, again, that in Latin America. I will never
> stop reminding everybody that, even though the Bolshevik revolution would have
> failed (as many used to state) as a socialist revolution, the passage from
> whatever the fSU was to a Latin American status is anything but a good,
> progressive, step in history.
>
> In fact, after the Pinochet case -where we had some strong exchanges, namely
> with yours truly defending Chilean sovereignty against British and Spanish
> imperialist outrage- there appeared a couple of minor cases involving, this
> time, Argentinean criminals. In all three of these cases, our sovereignty was
> brutally maimed by all-powerful imperialist courts. In this sense, one can't
> but point out that this cannot be accepted.
>
>  _But_ (and this is a big "but")...
>
> If we look at the issue from closer quarters, however, there is a substantial
> difference between the Pinochet case and what has been happening our
> Argentinean or Russian rogues. Chile, partly under imperialist pressure, partly
> due to internal tensions, HAS ACTUALLY PUT PINOCHET TO THE BENCH, and
> the bloc of  assassins of 1972 seems to have been rent apart. That the personal
> cowardice of Pinocho made it easier[1] and that in fact this is only a
> demonstration of the STRENGTH, not the weakness, of the post-1972 regime, is
> not essential for what I will argue here.
>
> This difference makes it much more difficult, as eagerly Mark points out, to
> defend the right of sovereignty of states such as Russia or Argentina today.
>
> Why, in Argentina we even have a legal framework that protects the criminals
> from indictment (a legacy of both Alfons?n and Menem, while De la R?a was one
> of the most outspoken defenders of the military in 1976)! No surprise at all:
> both Alfons?n, De la R?a -and our shameless Minister of Foreign Relations
> Rodr?guez Giavarini[2]-  share an upbringing in a gorilla-military environment
> during the high years of the Shooting Revolution of 1955, the thing most
> resembling Chile 1972 and Yugoslavia 2000 you can imagine. Menem, at his turn,
> was a petty rogue in the way of Napoleon the 3rd., who established the closest
> relationship between the world of organized crime and our ruling classes and
> gave Peronism the final blow that had been the desire of all the 1955 bloc for
> three decades of mortal political struggle in Argentina.
>
> Thus, a difference must be established. Chilean criminals, at least their arch-
> criminal, is under trial by law. Ours are safely convinced they will not.
> Similar situation for Russians, or so it seems.
>
> Under these conditions, although I still  keep convinced that sovereignty of
> states such as Argentina or Russia must be defended against any kind of
> "international" (that is extra-territorial) courts, it is important to note
> that the pertinent, territorially valid courts, are themselves a piece in the
> system of extra-territoriality. This, basically, because these courts have been
> so deeply turned into a gang of concealers that they will violate any principle
> of Justice in order to defend both the establishers of the current situation
> (civilian and military) _and_ the current (civilian) "administrators" of their
> heritage.
>
> Thus, defending a country such as ours against the unbelievable Judge Garz?n
> and his likes takes a lot more than merely stating the absolutely correct -but
> partly just formal- truth that extra-territorial courts are a crime themselves.
> I understand Mark's objections too well. And, still...
> ******************************************************************
>
> N O T E S
>
> [1] He forced other military to assume responsibilities on issues he did not
> want to appear as responsible himself, thus leading to at least one of them
> carefully keeping the records of what actually happened and eventually bringing
> them to light in a "safe" -that is, non-conflictive for imperialism-
> environment. This gives the case against Pinocho strong amount of legal
> evidence, with the then commander of Northern Chile revealing that he had been
> ordered to murder dozens of political prisoners by Pinocho himself, while
> Pinocho's defence lies on the argument that poor good kid knew nothing of what
> was going on...
>
> [2] The guy who is outraged because Fidel Castro simply told the world the
> already evident truth that even a country that in its own way had been
> powerful, such as Argentina, becomes a boot-licker of imperialists due to the
> debt
>
> N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
> gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base






From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Fri Feb  9 14:17:02 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Fri Feb  9 14:17:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Fw: CIA Hits Again
Message-ID: <00e401c092cc$ba0446c0$aa01f0d5@EUnet.yu>

Letter from Bulgaria
----- Original Message -----
From:
To: <nerajov at EUnet.yu>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: CIA Hits Again


> Jela!
> I have just heard about the MURDER of your former Minister of Internal
Affairs!
> THAY HAVE STARTED IT!
> Just as I have written they will do.
> They will kill all your former political figures one by one - that't the
way CIA works.
> They will NOT stop till they manage to kill all your prominent political
persons. They have list of them and will work non-stop.
> Even some lower level SPS party functionaries might be killed too.
> The idea is to leave you without leaders, helpless sheep ready for the
slaughter-house!
>  Be sure that when they finish with the political  men and women they will
start with the intellectuals!
> I repeat: their aim is to have your people beheaded, helpless, bewildered
and on its knees to be able to exterminate it more conveniently!
> That's what they have done with my people!
> Your leaders should be protected! Please, think in that direction! All
your leaders'lives are in danger!
> My heart is with you!
> Love,

> I hope you will "welcome" Solana The Murderer as he deserves!
>





From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Fri Feb  9 14:31:01 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Fri Feb  9 14:31:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com> <00a701c09294$a43f4980$d1bd6ac2@andrej> <004901c092c1$346128e0$aa01f0d5@EUnet.yu> <003201c092c6$35fb1080$89bd6ac2@andrej>
Message-ID: <00fd01c092ce$9127d940$aa01f0d5@EUnet.yu>

Gnjido nacisticka  takve kao ti CIA ne placa, takvi sluze kao korisni
idioti.
pukovnik
----- Original Message -----
From: Andrej Grubacic <zapata at sezampro.yu>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium


> CIA, snajka, Cia.....
> Con Saludos,
>        Andrej
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mrs. Jela Jovanovic" <nerajov at EUnet.yu>
> To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
>
>
> > Jared
> > You should be proud, Andrej Grubacic is on the pay-roll of German secret
> > police(BND).
> > colonel
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Andrej Grubacic <zapata at sezampro.yu>
> > To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
> > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:34 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
> >
> >
> > > He, he, it's funny reading your letters guys, man can discover a whole
> new
> > > universe!
> > > Your arguments aside ( I am not referring to Mac here, the Maoist
label
> > was
> > > used  with purpose and with an argument, but I don't want to get into
> > this)
> > > I just want to disappoint this Isreal. Although I have , personally,
> > nothing
> > > to do with 5-Th of October ( I was home with my wife) IWW, and
Belgrade
> > > Libertarian Group as it's section for Yugoslavia + Confederation of
> Work,
> > > were engaged in demonstrations and that misnamed revolution. So,
> > > unfortunately, IWW is not on the height of your expectation:-((
> > > They were very supportive:-(
> > > Ha, ha, always a pleasure to enjoy in your ignorance Israel, but spare
> me
> > > this anthropological adventures in the future, by not answering me.
> > >
> > > <<  Is it possiblew that this kind of Ararchist idiocy is still real?
> > Didn't
> > > > it get
> > > > imploded with the IWW? >>
> > >  Oh yes, very much so! And this idiocy ( you were referring to the
> > classical
> > > meaning of the word of course) is preventing anarchists to side with
> > > governments or political parties in general..
> > > Unlike ex Maoist who were leaders of Progressive Labor Parties......
> > >  No more answers from me, I am going back to read some interesting
> things
> > on
> > > this list.
> > > Con Saludos,
> > >        Andrej
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <Borba100 at aol.com>
> > > To: <crashlist at lists.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb  9 15:09:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri Feb  9 15:09:01 2001
Subject: Global organized crime and Justice (was RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks  Test on Depleted Uranium)
In-Reply-To: <3A843AF2.70A9DB7B@umich.edu>
Message-ID: <000101c092d4$12efc780$54a020d9@mjones>

Nestor wrote:

> > Thus, defending a country such as ours against the unbelievable Judge Garzsn
> > and his likes takes a lot more than merely stating the absolutely correct -but
> > partly just formal- truth that extra-territorial courts are a crime themselves.
> > I understand Mark's objections too well. And, still...

This misses the point that Borodin was arrested by the US authorities at the behest
of the *Swiss* authorities because of financial malfeasance under *Swiss* law. There
was a valid Interpol arrest warrant. You can't just blame the CIA for everything.
This is quite different from the British arrest of Pinochet. There is no doubt that
Borodin and Berezovsky embezzled Russian state funds and misused Swiss bank
accounts, breaking Swiss law in the process, in order to hide the money. Berezovsky
has admitted as much himself. Why on earth is this matter an attack on the dignity
of the Russian state??? Why on earth was this self-confessed criminal, Borodin, made
secretary of the Russian-Belarus Union?

Mark




From nerajov at EUnet.yu  Fri Feb  9 15:09:03 2001
From: nerajov at EUnet.yu (Mrs. Jela Jovanovic)
Date: Fri Feb  9 15:09:03 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Fw: Greece: new anti-NATO demonstrations and concerts
Message-ID: <00e001c092cc$8eac15c0$aa01f0d5@EUnet.yu>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Communist Youth of Greece 
To: Micha Vilner 
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 11:32 AM
Subject: Greece: new anti-NATO demonstrations and concerts


And the rage became a song and the anger a massive slogan...

 *Thousands of people gathered in the centre of Athens yesterday 8/2 to demand the dissolution of NATO, to kick out NATO's bases and its nuclear weapons from the region, to demand the return of the Greek soldiers from Yugoslavia and the return of the Greek students in Yugoslavia. 

?Murderers of the people, Americans!? was one of the slogans shouted by young people, by workers from different working places, from mothers and their children.

The protest was organized by the Labour Centre of Athens and various other massive organizations which supported it. After the different speeches made by members of the peace movement, the Labour Centre of Athens, there was a concert made by different famous singers. (photo attached)


* Larisa: NATO vehicles - get out of our city!

Members of the peace movement gathered together yesterday 8/2 in Larisa protesting against the transferring of NATO vehicles from Kosovo to Larisa. They symbolically blocked the free way of Athens - Thessaloniki.


* Today, Friday 9/2 a anti-NATO demonstration is organized in Karditsa, and also a concert will be held in Sparti, organized by the "Youth Action for Peace" and the coordination of high schools of Sparti.


* The friends and members of KNE and KKE abroad also take initiatives. On Sunday 11/2, a manifestation will be held in Toronto of Canada on the consequences of the war against Yugoslavia, organized by the Club of Friends of KKE in Toronto. 
KNE
 
The international department of KNE
...........................................
Communist Youth of Greece
11, Kotopouli str - Athens 10432
tel: +301-5282523 / fax: +301-5241526
http://www.forthnet.gr/kne-odigitis/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 4418 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010209/f398ab50/attachment.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: concert8fl.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 17138 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010209/f398ab50/attachment.jpg>

From aabdo at webtv.net  Fri Feb  9 16:14:01 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Fri Feb  9 16:14:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: "Mrs. Jela Jovanovic" <nerajov@EUnet.yu>'s message of Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:52:15 +0100
Message-ID: <15376-3A845D37-2055@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Emperor's Clothes commentary about Michael Albert, one of my least
favorite Left intellectuals....
<His positions being what they are, he might as well be the master-mind
behind the NATO "information" website about DU.>

and now Jela's flash of brilliance .....
<Jared 
You should be proud, Andrej Grubacic is on the pay-roll of German secret
police(BND). 
colonel>

Yes, Jela and Jared.     These are very evil people.      They are both
Fifth Columnists who have besmirched and smeared the reputation of
Slobodan Milosevic, last defender of workers paradise in one country.

I knew that Albert was just as well part of NATO misinformation campaign
when he published his commentary rejecting the idea that the Chinese
Embassy bombing was a deliberate act.     I first thought he was nothing
more than a mistaken jerk.      Now, I fully understand that he was
doing the work of Nazi masters at NATO.

Sincerely, An Indignant Citizen












From zapata at sezampro.yu  Fri Feb  9 18:04:00 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Fri Feb  9 18:04:00 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <a7.b95b413.27b4f4b8@aol.com> <00a701c09294$a43f4980$d1bd6ac2@andrej> <004901c092c1$346128e0$aa01f0d5@EUnet.yu> <003201c092c6$35fb1080$89bd6ac2@andrej> <00fd01c092ce$9127d940$aa01f0d5@EUnet.yu>
Message-ID: <001c01c092d3$9557fc20$b074fac3@andrej>

Joj, koji recnik;  mogu li imati zadovoljstvo da mi se vi predstavite?
Ko ste vi , uopste, i zasto se potpisujete kao pukovnik? Zar niste bili
istoricar umetnosti?
Con Saludos,
       Andrej
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mrs. Jela Jovanovic" <nerajov at EUnet.yu>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium


> Gnjido nacisticka  takve kao ti CIA ne placa, takvi sluze kao korisni
> idioti.
> pukovnik
> ----- Original






From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Fri Feb  9 18:58:01 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri Feb  9 18:58:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: <000d01c092c7$c227a860$a67a20d9@mjones>
References: <5a.10e2e263.27b56da0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <067cf3319210921MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Ura, 
el 9 Feb 01, a las 18:40, Mark Jones dijo:

> to take just one example out of many, Noriega --
> is he someone we should defend?)

YES.

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 19:16:02 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 19:16:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes article
Message-ID: <ae.10f780dc.27b5d9b5@aol.com>

In a message dated 02/09/2001 4:14:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
aabdo at webtv.net aTTRIBUTES TO EMPEROR'S CLOTHES  the statement that:

<< His positions being what they are, he might as well be the mastermind
 behind the NATO "information" website about DU.> >>


For Tony's peace of mind, that is not a quote from an emperor's clothes 
article, it is a quote from a piece on the STOPNATO list, written by Piotr 
Bein.  I forwarded the piece not because of the above quote, which is 
pointless speculation, but because of the substantial point, that what  Mr. 
Albert has said about depleted uranium is very wrong, and very harmful to 
buidling a movement.

My emphasis is reflected in the title, which is the only part I wrote: "Z-Net 
Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium" - and that is what I think.  Albert of Z-Net 
flunked.  True, as you point out, Tony, he flunked AGAIN.  

As to why Mr. Albert consistently flunks out, e.g., by supporting Otpor on Z 
website, you got me.  I don't read his mail. As to why Andrej redbaits and 
supports the overthrow of Serbian democracy in the guise of supporting 
democracy, you got me again.  

To put it bluntly, I am interested in actions and arguments, not in 
witchhunts for paymasters.  The important point about Mr. Albert at Z is that 
he consistently takes a stance that undermines action - waffling on the KLA, 
backing Otpor, fiercely attacking anyone who suggested the Chinese Embassy 
bombing might have been deliberate, and now this thing on DU which may end up 
killing  --- I don't want to think how many it may kill.  I think it's better 
to stick to these issues and show why Albert is wrong - as Piotr did, mainly. 
 That's why I posted it.  The sentence Tony seizes on is pointless precisely 
because it allows the discussion to be misfocused and trivialized, as 
unfortunately Mr. Aabdo has done, diverting from the horror of what  Albert 
advocates to the pointless speculation about his motives.

Best regards,
Jared.  

For that matter, as to why Tony Aabdo writes silly snipes, which either one 
replies to (which takes time) or one ignores (in which case people might 
believe them) - e.g. that THIS PARTICULAR ARTICLE by Piotr Bein article 
appeared on emperor's clothes when  the text begins with the words, 
"Reprinted from http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/alpha.htm"  - as to 
why Tony likes to build straw men and then mercilessly knocks them down, you 
got me a third time.  



From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 19:48:01 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 19:48:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Moscow Times: Carnegie Foundation & Borodin
Message-ID: <7a.10562a27.27b5e219@aol.com>

Regarding the matter of Mr. Borodin, I offer the article below from Moscow 
Times.

Note that the Carerngie Foundation which - shockingly - is tolerated in 
Moscow is reported seeing Mr. Putin's response to the Borodin arrest as an 
attack on the current government of Belarus. 

Nestor Gorojovsky pointed out to me today that when the Imperial attacks on 
Argentina have for half a century ALWAYS avoided the real issue - always 
finding a humanitarian or left-sounding cover.  The Carnegie Foundation 
provided the venue for a study of that question.  It is discussed thoroughly 
by Diana Johnstone.  I will re-post her piece in a moment.

Best regards,
Jared



Copyright 2001 Independent Press   
The Moscow Times 
January 26, 2001 

/SECTION: No. 2129 

LENGTH: 442 words 

HEADLINE: Borodin Replaced as Union Head 

BYLINE: COMBINED REPORTS 

BODY: 
Reuters, MT 

The Russian government rejected accusations of high-handedness from Belarus 
on Thursday after replacing Pavel Borodin, who is under arrest in the United 
States, as head of their planned union. The former Kremlin property manager 
was due to attend a bail hearing in New York later Thursday linked to Swiss 
attempts to extradite him. He is accused of taking multimillion dollar 
kickbacks from Swiss construction companies. 

Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov appointed Igor Selivanov, one of Borodin's 
deputies, acting secretary of the Belarus-Russia Union, a nebulous body 
preparing a planned economic merger of Belarus and Russia. 

The appointment brought an indignant reaction in Minsk. "Theoretically 
Kasyanov has the right to propose candidates for council secretary," an 
official in Minsk said on condition of anonymity. 

"But it should be confirmed by the Council of Ministers. Not just by the 
Russian prime minister but by the Belarussian too," he said. "Kasyanov cannot 
give directions and orders for both governments." Deputy Prime Minister 
Viktor Khristenko said the Belarus-Russia Union needed an acting chief to 
prepare for a meeting on Monday. 

Vladimir Zhirinovsky led a parade by his supporters to the Swiss Embassy in 
Moscow on Thursday, waving banners and placards backing Borodin. "This is a 
form of war against Russia," Zhirinovsky said. "It is provocation." 
Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko has vehemently criticized 
Borodin's arrest and said he was "duty-bound" to support the head of the 
Belarus-Russia Union. 

Media say Lukashenko signaled his fury at Russia's inaction over Borodin this 
week by returning to Minsk from Moscow a day early, ostensibly to meet 
Kyrgyzstan President Askar Akayev. 

"Some insist that Lukashenko, offended by such treatment, decided himself to 
cut short his Moscow trip. Others assert that the request came from the 
Kremlin," Belorusskaya Delovaya Gazeta newspaper said. 

Andrei Ryabov of the Moscow Carnegie Center said Thursday that the decision 
to replace Borodin is a "pretext to show Lukashenko that he is losing the 
Kremlin's favor." Yevgeny Volk of the Heritage Foundation's Moscow office 
also said that Borodin was too closely affiliated with Lukashenko. "In my 
view, Russian authorities have recently lost trust in Borodin because he has 
become an odious figure," Volk said. 

Ryabov and Volk agreed that the Kremlin has not used all the resources at its 
disposal to help Borodin's arrest. "It would be wrong to say that the Kremlin 
gave Borodin up, but, for a number of reasons, it chose not to fight (for his 
freedom) too hard," Ryabov said. 




From zapata at sezampro.yu  Fri Feb  9 19:53:01 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Fri Feb  9 19:53:01 2001
Subject: [CrashList] No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes article
References: <ae.10f780dc.27b5d9b5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002701c092fb$08459b80$afbd6ac2@andrej>

This is not sent to Israel but to other members of the list ( so, Jared,
please discipline your scribomania, and do not answer this)- namely, I want
to ask you something: isn't all of this, this manichean picture, just too
black and white for your taste?
 Regardless of my opinion on Albert- I do not know the man in person so I
don't like to give public comments- I would like to examine, for a moment,
this "ZNet problem". You have ZNet web site. Many people, I think thousands
of people, are going there for main references. It was, as a matter of fact,
the first progressive web site I have encountered on the net, some years
ago. So, this web site has a great potential. Many of people present on this
list, concerned with problems raging from capitalism to imperialism, could
get involved, with their writings ( and I am still subbed to this list
because of some extraordinary articles and writings), involved in ZNet, and
contribute to awareness-raising of young , progressive people visiting this
popular lefty web site as their "first step" . From your point of view.
Besides Patrick Bond I haven't seen any article of yours there. Why? I think
this is a mistake.
Secondly, the reputation which ZNet is enjoying is based on plurality of
thing presented there.
It is true, you have OTPOR, you have Free Serbia , two disgusting neoliberal
youth camps, related to DOS goons, linked to Z, but you also have some of my
articles there, and articles of the people who were  very much against
bombing of my country: take Herman or Said for instance. I would mention
Chomsky too, but I know that there is ( as far as my opinion is worth ,
irrational) resistance towards his works. But Herman, and even Albert, were
very aggressive towards NATO- you can see this in their works in Kosovo
pages. And, again yes, on the same pages you can find voices of Kosovo
Albanians. But I do not think that this is a mistake. I think, on the
contrary , that this is an advantage. Plurality is always more convincing
than chiaroscuro of some deluded activist.....Man can assess different
arguments and make up his/her mind, according to their quality. I wish that
reality was that simple as some people are experiencing it. Listen to this
sentence, for example:
 > Your leaders should be protected! Please, think in that direction! All
>your leaders'lives are in danger!

What sort of worshipping is this? Some sort of neo-paganism?
Again,  coming to my point , expressed many times on this list: people who
wish to help Yugoslavs, and who have never been in Yugoslavia, like Israel
and his friends, must embrace a more complex picture and more complex critic
if they want to help people suffering there.
Every intelligent progressive person, after reading those lines quoted
above, would react very negatively with respect to NATO aggression. Things
are not this simple. And if you want to be involved in Yugoslavian, Cuban,
Latin American problems, you have to build your positions on arguments, not
on insults and simplifications. Unless it is just a case of self-promotion.
Please, try to understand this arguments and to think about them, before
deleting this letter.
Comradely,
                     Andrej


----- Original Message -----
From: <Borba100 at aol.com>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 12:39 AM
Subject: [CrashList] No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes article





From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 20:17:02 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 20:17:02 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin's arrest has ONLY to do with geopolitics
Message-ID: <71.aad3f5a.27b5e01d@aol.com>

In a message dated 02/09/2001 1:07:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jones.mark at btconnect.com writes:

<< Jared, you simply are not addressing the issues I raised, which go right 
to the
 heart not only of your understanding of what is happening in Russia (pretty 
scanty,
 I have to say) but to your understanding of the modalities of modern 
imperialism and
 its centre-periphery articulations >>

I've always been weak on that center-periphery stuff.  You (Mark) think I am 
missing the point.  I think you are missing the point, which is sovereignty.  
I think this is a big point to miss for those of us who are residents of the 
U.S. and its Establishment's teacher, the English ruling class.  I think we 
need to rather strongly expose the attempt to justify attacks on sovereignty 
cloaked in attacks on corruption - which are, as it happens, the rage.  
(Philippines, Russia, Zimbabwe, Congo, and on and on).  Let the Russians 
decide who is what in their country - we should be focusing on what England 
and the U.S. are doing: humiliating and demoralizing citizens of the Former 
Soviet Union, targeting Lukashenko, using the Borodin arrest as a way of 
putting leaders of Russia to the test: will they crawl and obediently get rid 
of Lukashenko, or not?  

I think what I am saying is a projection of your own basic views.  But this 
avalanche of propaganda on corruption gets even very smart guys like you to 
forget the key question: since when do the mass murderers who own the U.S. 
and Switzerland and England  have the right to arrest and lecture the Russian 
government?  Jail THEM - Jail Solana, Clinton, Blair.  Jail is to good for 
Blair.  Free Borodin.  

This is quite apart from the question of whether the present Russian 
government is my personal wish-government for Russia.  (It isn't, but then, 
history didn't ask me.) 

Jared



From Borba100 at aol.com  Fri Feb  9 20:20:04 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Fri Feb  9 20:20:04 2001
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
Message-ID: <3d.74198ab.27b5dca3@aol.com>

In a message dated 02/09/2001 1:37:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
zapata at sezampro.yu quotes Jela suggesting he is a CIA snake while she praises 
me. 

So let me set the record straight: I didn't say you were in the CIA, Andrej. 
I wouldn't know and I try to deal with what I do know.  So here's what I do 
know: I have had a good number of exchanges with you, I and I therefore know 
that you offer a leftish-sounding cover for the U.S.-take over of your 
country - and that is a good deal more serious than how you do or do not make 
your living.  

Jared



From cburford at gn.apc.org  Sat Feb 10 01:05:31 2001
From: cburford at gn.apc.org (Chris Burford)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:05:31 -0000
Subject: [CrashList] Can we afford desserts?
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20010210073317.02ebc280@pop.gn.apc.org>

I have just caught an Open University (UK) programme about the experiments 
of Biosphere 2, a massive atmospherically-controlled closed system in 
California for the study of ecology.

The carbon dioxide concentration soared 10 times. The humans decided they 
had to stabilise the system by sacrificing the desserts, watering them, and 
creating much more biomass to absorb the CO2.

This was at a time when there was a debate about the management of the 
atmosphere on the earth. It was suggested and will presumably be suggested 
again, that the rise in CO2 is so inexorable that massive biosphere 
engineering will be necessary of the order of magnitude of irrigating the 
Saharah.

Of course capitalism would be willing to tender for such projects but only 
if the finances and the ability to accumulate surplus value is ensured by 
some sort of global government.


Is this fanciful? I think not.

A further detail of the Biosphere 2 experiment of the early 1990's was that 
if anything the CO2 did not rise as much as was expected relative to the 
fall in oxygen. In fact it was the fall in oxygen that became so marked 
(down to 14%) that for the sake of the humans the protocol had to be broken 
and oxygen was pumped in to boost them in oxygen saturation chambers.

So where did the CO2 go? It went, and this is ominous, into concrete.

The original designers of the experiment had started the soil off with 
enough organic matter to last 100 years as fertilizer. This was paradise 
for soil bacteria which produced massive amounts of CO2. But they also had 
laid down very large areas of concrete as the base. Concrete, containing 
calcium hydroxide, converts gradually to calcium carbonate with the 
absorption of carbon dioxide.

Now the laying down of concrete is what is happening massively in the world 
now as people flock off the land into giant conurbations. In ecological 
terms this is already equivalent to rebuilding the White Cliffs of Dover.

What this means is that the rising levels of CO2 in the world now, are 
occuring *despite* massive urbanised building.

This merely delays the decade when humanity will have to sacrifice the 
desserts to soak up more carbon dioxide.

We are already on an escalator requiring more and more active socially 
responsible involvement in the environment just to keep some stability. 
Otherwise, less technically than the humans sealed into Biosphere 2, we 
will die out as a species.


Chris Burford

London






From mstainsby at tao.ca  Sat Feb 10 01:38:08 2001
From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 00:38:08 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes article
References: <ae.10f780dc.27b5d9b5@aol.com> <002701c092fb$08459b80$afbd6ac2@andrej>
Message-ID: <00af01c0933d$a7793300$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>

> It is true, you have OTPOR, you have Free Serbia , two disgusting neoliberal
> youth camps, related to DOS goons, linked to Z, but you also have some of my
> articles there, 

But??

Macdonald




From mstainsby at tao.ca  Sat Feb 10 01:44:50 2001
From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 00:44:50 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin's arrest has ONLY to do with geopolitics
References: <71.aad3f5a.27b5e01d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <00bb01c0933e$96a931a0$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>

Jared:

> (Philippines, Russia, Zimbabwe, Congo, and on and on).  

Philippines? Don't tell me you are defending Estrada....

Macdonald




From aabdo at webtv.net  Sat Feb 10 03:30:17 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 02:30:17 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes article
In-Reply-To: Borba100@aol.com's message of Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:39:33 EST
Message-ID: <5494-3A851838-793@storefull-237.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

No, Jared, it's not I that deliberately trivializes the debate.     It's
you, with your repulsive, personalized and insulting style of trying to
besmirch people like Andrej, Albert, and Chomsky.      You open the way
to people like Jela, who then make mindless accusations that Andrej is
paid by the Germans.      Does ths style of silliness ring a bell?
Lenin on the train back to Russia as an agent of Germany?

As for why I mistakenly identified this bile written by Piotr as being
published on Emperor's Clothes, it has to do with writing after working
a nightshift, and with a small child interrupting me constantly, also.
However, you posted the commentary, and praised it.    Why?

I think the answer lies in your fondness for 'fascist-baiting' others.
It's not enough for you to state your disagreements with Chomsky and
gang, you have to run them through the mud and attribute sinister
motives to them.     In fact, you attribute sinister motives to me,
also.

<For that matter, as to why Tony Aabdo writes silly snipes, which either
one replies to (which takes time) or one ignores (in which case people
might believe them) - e.g. that THIS PARTICULAR ARTICLE by Piotr Bein
article appeared on emperor's clothes when the text begins with the
words, "Reprinted from
http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/alpha.htm" - as to why Tony
likes to build straw men and then mercilessly knocks them down, you got
me a third time.>

Jared, you are no straw man I want to build to knock down.      It's
just that your style of praising and publishing thuggish name-calling
commentaries, detracts from political debate.      I don' t think that
Emperor's Clothes, with you as political guru, represent any model for
building a future movement against US imperialism.       In fact,
Emperor's Clothes borders on characture at times, precisely because it
is so full of material in the style of Piotr's comments.

I disagree with Chomsky and Albert.    And I think that Andrej was way
too neutral in his idea of resistance to both Milosevic and NATO at the
same time.      However, I won't impugn their motives with the mud
slinging style you seem to love.

You think that mudslinging and character defaming is just part of the
process of drawing political lines clearly.      Well, there is a
history of this sort of thing.....      A long sorry history that led to
the degeneration of the fSU.       A history that has no constructive
role in rebuilding a movement for Socialism.

It is the style of labelling Social Democrats as 'social-fascists', and
Trotskyists as imperialist agents.      Draw the wagons around,
Comrades.    This is war.     And to do it, on the flimsiest of
political pretexts.

Sometimes, political currents do appease the capitalist class or
imperialism.      And there is nothing wrong in pointing this out when
it occurs.      But a hysterical and rapid style detracts from doing
that, Jared.

It's really sad, to have to repeatedly make this point.     Because, I
am very much in agreement with much of the general point of view found
on Emperor's Clothes.      Reminds me of a time when I was 99.99% in
agreement with the positions of a political party whose 'leadership'
thuggery and rudeness forced me out.      I have no nostalgia at all for
this sort of thing.

Tony Abdo

FYI, Comrade.      My last name is Abdo, not Aabdo.      You seem to
have a problem with getting that spelling correct.
_________________________________
Piotr...
<< His (Michael Albert) positions being what they are, he might as well
be the mastermind behind the NATO "information" website about DU.> >>

Jared responds......
To put it bluntly, I am interested in actions and arguments, not in
witchhunts for paymasters. The important point about Mr. Albert at Z is
that he consistently takes a stance that undermines action - waffling on
the KLA, backing Otpor, fiercely attacking anyone who suggested the
Chinese Embassy bombing might have been deliberate, and now this thing
on DU which may end up killing --- I don't want to think how many it may
kill. I think it's better to stick to these issues and show why Albert
is wrong - as Piotr did, mainly. 

??That's why I posted it. The sentence Tony seizes on is pointless
precisely because it allows the discussion to be misfocused and
trivialized, as unfortunately Mr. Aabdo has done, diverting from the
horror of what Albert advocates to the pointless speculation about his
motives.












From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Fri Feb  9 10:02:45 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:02:45 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] (Fwd) (Fwd) Todo lo que Fidel dijo del voto argentino.
Message-ID: <088e94502170921MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

Recent declarations by Fidel Castro have generated diplomatic turbulence 
between Cuba and Argentina. The issue began when Fidel declared that under the 
current conditions of exploitation by the foreign debt and wholesale sellout of 
Argentinean property, a country can't even allow itself to have a parcel of 
dignity in its foreign policy and, as Argentina certainly will, heeds the 
directions by the United States when the moment comes to condemn Cuba in the 
United Nations. There is a slightly inaccurate comment on unemployment in 
Argentina. The official figure is above 15%, and people with serious labor 
problems are more than a 60%, according to official statistics. Street vendors 
of useless crap made in Taiwan are, of course, occupied (in the "informal 
sector")...

The speech of Fidel (in Spanish) follows.


------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent:      	Fri, 09 Feb 2001 00:51:12 -0300
Subject:        	Todo lo que Fidel dijo del voto argentino.
From:           	NAC&POP <nacypop at ciudad.com.ar>
BCC to:         	
Lo que Fidel Dijo
Palabras de Fidel sobre la cr?tica situaci?n en que se halla la Argentina

Con el prop?sito de que los argentinos no se dejen enga?ar por la
afirmaci?n de que el discurso de Fidel Castro en la clausura del Tercer
Encuentro Internacional de Economistas era una ofensa al pueblo argentino, tal
como lo declar? el se?or Adalberto Rodr?guez Giavarini, Ministro de Relaciones
Exteriores de Argentina, que acaba de viajar a Washington para implorar ayuda 
al
gobierno de Estados Unidos llevando como moneda de cambio el voto contra Cuba 
en
Ginebra, enviamos a Uds. lo publicado por el periodico Granma de las palabras
que Fidel expres? en el mencionado acto de clausura, referidas a la cr?tica
situaci?n econ?mica de ese hermano pa?s: La Argentina.

Un registro y sintesis de Ismael Francisco
Gentileza de Claudia Camba para la Nac & Pop


"Hay pa?ses que hoy est?n en crisis, por ejemplo, Argentina. Espero que
nadie se ponga bravo si digo que, asociado a la incertidumbre de cu?ndo le van a
dar los 39 500 millones para salir de la crisis, hace poco alguien hizo unas
declaraciones imp?dicas afirmando que van a mantener la misma posici?n que
tuvieron en Ginebra el a?o pasado en la Comisi?n de Derechos Humanos.

"S? lo que est?n haciendo nuestros vecinos (se refiere a Estados Unidos).
Han enviado sus embajadores a todas partes porque est?n buscando promotores;
porque los mismos checos andan metidos en camisa de once varas.

Ahora mismo hay una disputa por dos checos que, enviados por los que all? en
Estados Unidos reciben fondos del Gobierno para las actividades de
desestabilizaci?n y subversi?n en Cuba, fueron arrestados porque cometieron
serias violaciones de nuestras leyes, lo cual est? totalmente probado.

Han armado un gran esc?ndalo, pero parece que es europeo el esc?ndalo,
porque Alarc?n -que ven?a del Foro Social Mundial de Porto Alegre- me
dijo: 'All? en Porto Alegre me hicieron como ocho entrevistas y nadie me
abord? ese tema'. El esc?ndalo es all?. Mecanismo: declaraciones
mentirosas y falsas, mensajitos para cancilleres y vanos intentos de presi?n.

"Andan buscando a Argentina para estas aventuras. S?, han enviado (los
Estados Unidos) a varios pa?ses latinoamericanos representantes buscando
reclutar a alguno que presente su moci?n. Hasta ahora ninguno ha dicho que lo va
a hacer.

No creo que se atrevan, porque ya la posici?n vergonzosa adoptada el a?o
pasado tuvo mucha oposici?n en Argentina, y hubo gente de la propia
Administraci?n que expresaron su descontento, y estoy seguro de que si hacen ese
triste papel se van a encontrar con un gran descontento en Argentina, porque
tenemos muchos amigos en Argentina, de los distintos partidos pol?ticos; y esa
tarea se la dejamos a los argentinos, que no est?n nada felices con las cosas
que est?n ocurriendo.

"La deuda de Argentina era en un momento dado de 61 000 millones de d?lares.
Antes del neoliberalismo, que empez? con Menem y sigui? con los que vinieron
detr?s de ?l, y se va a recrudecer. En ?poca de Menem ?ste acarici? la idea de
la dolarizaci?n, el billete verde. ?Qu? felicidad!: cr?ditos, consuma, compre!
?Qu? maravilla de desarrollo! ?Qu? contenta la gente comprando refrigeradores,
televisores, autom?viles, todo! Y, por otro lado, el gobierno vendi?ndolo todo,
hasta los parques.

"Tengo total coincidencia seguramente con el 99% de los argentinos que est?n
aqu?. No pretendo que piensen todos igual que yo, o que todos est?n de acuerdo
con lo que estoy planteando. Solo digo que, de 61 000 millones de d?lares, han
pasado a una deuda de 145 000 millones. Todo cambia por d?a.

"Pregunt? hace como dos o tres d?as y me dijeron que la deuda era de 148 000
millones. Estoy ofreciendo datos conservadores, me apoyo en datos conservadores;
es mejor para que no digan que exageramos; 2,4 veces subi? la deuda y est?n
pidiendo 39 500 millones. Espa?a les ofreci? 1 000 millones y les prometi?
adelantar 500 lo m?s r?pido posible; un poco de ox?geno para no morir de
asfixia, para no ahogarse cuando el agua est? llegando hasta aqu? (se?ala el
cuello) y el Banco Mundial les ofreci? 2 250 y la promesa de entregarles creo
que 200 ? 250 millones pronto. Necesitan 750 millones a toda velocidad y no ha
salido el gobierno argentino de la angustia de lo que pueda pasar. Nada m?s que
optimistas declaraciones. No se siente nada seguro.

"Me parece que es muy mal momento para hacer la declaraci?n que hizo el
Canciller hace como dos o tres d?as, y que vi por cable.

Lo que valdr?a la pena es preguntarle qu? d?a y a qu? hora lo llamaron
de Washington, independientemente de gestiones directas que hicieron los yankis
con relaci?n a Ginebra pidiendo promoci?n, y a otro pa?s que visitaron, que no
hace falta identificarlo.

"No produce rabia, m?s bien dan ganas de re?r o l?stima, porque uno se da
cuenta del grado de debilidad, de entrega y desesperaci?n.

Es que bajo esa pol?tica neoliberal no es posible ni siquiera para un
gobierno sostener la verg?enza y el pundonor.

"Ahora necesita casi 40 000 millones m?s. Eso es lamer la bota de los
yankis. ?Para qu?? ?Adelanten, por favor, los 39 500 millones, que no hay
quien aguante!

Con el 30 por ciento de los argentinos que desean emigrar y con un desempleo
enorme... ?T? me puedes ayudar? (le pregunta Fidel a un economista argentino).

Yo tengo el dato de por lo menos el 9 por ciento. ?Est? m?s arriba? (Le
responde que el oficial es 9 por ciento, pero la realidad es que el desempleo en
Argentina es superior al 30 por ciento).

"?Qu? porvenir brillante para nuestros pueblos! ?Viva el d?lar! ?Viva
el ALCA! ?Viva la bandera de las barras y las estrellas!, no hay que a?adir m?s
que unas cuantas.

Al parecer ese es el pensamiento de algunos, pero no est?n contando con los
pueblos. Y esta no es una simple declaraci?n de deseo: es que los pueblos no
soportan y no lo van a soportar.

"Quedar? pr?xima a los 200 000 millones la deuda argentina.

Y a pagar religiosamente, a mantener la paridad y a venderlo todo, aunque ya no
hay nada que vender: petr?leo, l?neas a?reas, tel?fonos, parques, trenes,
calles, todo est? vendido, hasta la tierra.

"Compran todo all?, y hay mucha gente extranjera que se ha dedicado a
comprar all? hasta los recursos naturales, no solo instalaciones, sino
recursos naturales. ?Todo est? vendido!

Realmente no s? si queda alguna cosa por vender. ?Ustedes tienen algo por
all?? (Les pregunta a algunos economistas argentinos. Estos le responden que el
obelisco de un fundador.) No, no hay que venderlo, hay que cuadrarlo frente al
imperio, y poner una banderita de las barras y las estrellas. ?Si ya no pueden
haber ultrajado m?s la memoria de los fundadores!

Y se creen que los pueblos no se dan cuenta de eso, y que son bobos, por la
mucha propaganda y los muchos reflejos condicionados que han tratado de crearles
en la mente."

Fidel Castro
------- End of forwarded message -------
------- End of forwarded message -------

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 04:10:27 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:10:27 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: <15376-3A845D37-2055@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <000401c09352$1987b7a0$b19d20d9@mjones>

Tony, this is a flame pure and simple.

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
> [mailto:crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com]On Behalf Of Tony Abdo
> Sent: 09 February 2001 21:12
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
> 
> 
> Emperor's Clothes commentary about Michael Albert, one of my least
> favorite Left intellectuals....
> <His positions being what they are, he might as well be the master-mind
> behind the NATO "information" website about DU.>
> 
> and now Jela's flash of brilliance .....
> <Jared 
> You should be proud, Andrej Grubacic is on the pay-roll of German secret
> police(BND). 
> colonel>
> 
> Yes, Jela and Jared.     These are very evil people.      They are both
> Fifth Columnists who have besmirched and smeared the reputation of
> Slobodan Milosevic, last defender of workers paradise in one country.
> 
> I knew that Albert was just as well part of NATO misinformation campaign
> when he published his commentary rejecting the idea that the Chinese
> Embassy bombing was a deliberate act.     I first thought he was nothing
> more than a mistaken jerk.      Now, I fully understand that he was
> doing the work of Nazi masters at NATO.
> 
> Sincerely, An Indignant Citizen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
> 



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 04:12:53 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:12:53 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Re: No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes article
In-Reply-To: <5494-3A851838-793@storefull-237.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <000501c09352$71970d60$b19d20d9@mjones>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
> [mailto:crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com]On Behalf Of Tony Abdo
> Sent: 10 February 2001 10:30
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> Subject: [CrashList] Re: No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes
> article
>
>
> No, Jared, it's not I that deliberately trivializes the debate.

Tony, these kinds of remarks might be better addressed to Jared offlist. Please try
to keep to the topic. Less flaming all round please.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 04:13:30 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:13:30 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Borodin's arrest has ONLY to do with geopolitics
In-Reply-To: <71.aad3f5a.27b5e01d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000601c09352$86c606a0$b19d20d9@mjones>

> I've always been weak on that center-periphery stuff.  You (Mark) think I am
> missing the point.  I think you are missing the point, which is sovereignty.
> I think this is a big point to miss for those of us who are residents of the
> U.S. and its Establishment's teacher, the English ruling class.

Sovereignty is indeed the key issue here. I disagree with your and Nestor's take, as
argued in this thread.

Of course, the same issues recurs all the time, usually in the form of discussions
about self-determination. For those interested, some of Jim Blaut's articles on the
subject are archived on the crashlist website and ought to be essential reading.
Where I disagree with Nestor is his conflation of national autonomy with popular
sovereignty. No state in the world enjoys complete freedom of action, including the
US. All are bound by multilayered, complex systems of international law and of
reciprocal obligation, treaties, alliances, and participation in supranational and
intrastate institutions of many kinds. Sovereignty was always an abstraction which
can never be realised in practice, and the fact that nations sometimes dominate and
colonise other nations has always coincided with the fact that those SAME nations
are sometimes SIMULTANEOUSLY in the process of being colonised and dominated by
other, third, powers. Since international relations really is a wilderness of
mirrors and only Machievalli's rules apply, nothing is what it seems and we have to
look beneath the surface to see what's really going on.

We have to take a class view of the question, ie, we start by analysing the
underlying class realities in each situation, and we interpret our findings in the
light of marxist theory. In other words, we start from the position that the working
class is the only true international class, which consists of the vast bulk of
humankind, but that this class is corralled off within arbitrary territorial borders
on the basis of ethnic, linguistic, geographical and economic factors. Common
culture, language and tradition and the existence of longstanding markets are some
of the factors which help legitimate the nation-state to its working class. But this
whole historical and spatial dimension of the world system of nation-states and
complementary supranational instances, is only a *form of appearance* of world
capitalism, ie of capital-in-general. It is one of the key ways in which class
struggle between the (world) working class and the (world) bourgeoisie is mediated
and an important mechanism of bourgeois political hegemony. In imperialism, all
subordinate states enjoy only the most relative forms of autonomy, and today all
states are to some degree (much more than most people realise) US dependencies. Even
Germany is fundamentally dependent on US geopolitical power. Russia is now simply a
satrapy ruled by quislings who enjoy popular hatred and would not survive a weekend
without US support.

While struggle for national self-determination and for working class popular
sovereignty within a state is a necessary and important form of struggle, and may be
the highest possible form of struggle at any one time, it is nevertheless only a
*contingent* form of struggle, it is only a *form of appearance* of working class
struggle.

Neither the capitalists nor thr workers have a real interest in preserving the
nation-state. It is a device which sometimes suits their purposes and sometimes not.
What workers are involved in (if they are involved in anything at all) is not a
struggle for national independence but for *Class* independence, not for national
autonomy but for *class* autonomy.

Once you start to fetishise nationalist issues and make them an end in themselves,
you start to put the cart before the horse and you start to play the bourgeois' own
game of fetishing the nation-state. You cannot put the struggle for national
sovereignty above class struggle. And that means, inter alia, you cannot spend your
time defending "your own" Pinochets, Borodins, Noriegas etc on the basis that they
may be SOBs but at least they are our SOBs. In fact, there is a certain principled
unity between the capitalists and the workers -- both are looking for the state to
uphold certain principles of law, equity, justice, security etc. It would be absurd
to get into a position where bourgeois politicians are calling for the law to be
upheld, and criminals brought to justice, while the workers' representtaives were
calling for these same criminals to be wrapped in the, made objects of patriotic
fervour, and let off scot-free! It makes more sense for us to cheer on every attempt
to bring financiers, bankers and other swindlers to book, and to call for more of
the same, as you rightly say.

In short, bourgeois society depends upon observance of the law, and that includes
international law, and that is also a proper concern for us. However hypocritical
their reasons are, when they stop turning a blind eye to the criminal behaviour of
their own creatures and start arresting them and calling them to account, it is not
the business of the workers' movement and the workers' parties to start defending
these same criminals. It was absurd to attack the British government for arresting
Pinochet. It is as absurd to attack the Swiss for having Borodin arrested. Let them
all arrest each other, there are plenty of grounds. Let us celebrate the good start
they have made by arresting Borodin. Defending Borodin will not help Russian
workers. Creating a strong Russian capitalist state will not help Russian workers
either, but in fact these are OPPOSITE THINGS and your idea that arresting Borodin
is somehow an attack on Russia is utterly wrong.

Defending Pinochet will not help Chilean workers. This is just ABC. Creating a
strong Russian capitalist state will not be a bulwark for Russian workers against US
capitalism. Was Pinochet's strong state a bulwark against US imperialism?

>I think we
> need to rather strongly expose the attempt to justify attacks on sovereignty
> cloaked in attacks on corruption - which are, as it happens, the rage.
> (Philippines, Russia, Zimbabwe, Congo, and on and on).  Let the Russians
> decide who is what in their country - we should be focusing on what England
> and the U.S. are doing: humiliating and demoralizing citizens of the Former
> Soviet Union, targeting Lukashenko, using the Borodin arrest as a way of
> putting leaders of Russia to the test: will they crawl and obediently get rid
> of Lukashenko, or not?

Are you seriously saying that "the Russians" decided they wanted to be robbed by
"their own" Borodin? That Russians decided they wanted to be looted and condemned to
freeze and starve by a RUSSIAN rather than a Swiss banker or American cola salesman?

Are you seriously saying that there *IS* such a thing as "Russian democracy"? If so,
you are surely doing your best to legitimate the post-Soviet robber regime in
Russia. As for Lukashenko, there are no arrest warrants out for him, as far as I
know. You seem to begin with the idea, to my mind completely absurd, that this
defeated, destroyed, humiliated, ravaged, plundered country, Russia, would actually
enjoy 'sovereigny' if not for these 'outrages', the arrest of some of the worst
plunderers. (Altho I never hear you even mention other arrests, including but not
only, Gusinsky for eg. Why are you silent about them?) Instead of weeping loudly
about Borodin, let us shed a few tears for the TEN MILLION (by some estimates)
Russians and former Soviets who are no longer alive because of the genocidal
activities of the West and their Russian quislings, Borodin, Yeltsin etc. There is
no logic to your argument.

>
> I think what I am saying is a projection of your own basic views.  But this
> avalanche of propaganda on corruption gets even very smart guys like you to
> forget the key question: since when do the mass murderers who own the U.S.
> and Switzerland and England  have the right to arrest and lecture the Russian
> government?  Jail THEM - Jail Solana, Clinton, Blair.  Jail is to good for
> Blair.  Free Borodin.

There is no avalanche of propaganda about corruption that I can see, it is business
as usual, but this is very two-edged sword, isn't it? I agree, let them arrest ALL
those tainted with illegalism and corruption. It's a good demand. 'Free Borodin' is
not a good demand. It is a senseless demand. A more sensible demand would be for the
normal laws of bourgeois civil society to be upheld in Russia, so that such
outrageous, indecent, public displays of corruption as those by Borodin, Berezovsky
etc, would be unthinkable to begin with. But if you argued for that, you'd be
agreeing with the FBI, the State Department and all those other agencies which keep
calling on the Russians to get their act together, crack down on corruption etc. No
doubt it will happen and indeed IS happening. And thus a stronger capitalist state
is indeed being forged in Russia, which is a sad state of affairs; but such is the
contradictoriness of life.

Borodin has been arrested for malfeasance. Mark Rich, his billionaire pal and
arch-plunderer of Russia, has just been given a presidential pardon by Bill Clinton.
That is obviously wrong. Rich (a onetime FBI 'public enemy No. 1', who now lives
quietly in Switzerland) is a notorious swindler wanted by the FBI for wire scams,
fraud, embezzlement and more. It is a hypocrisy that the Swiss have sheltered him
and his billions for so long. It is monumental hypocrisy and a disgrace that the
Swiss have not arrested Rich (whose ex-wife but still business partner, Denise Rich,
is helping fund the Clinton Library in Arkansas) but HAVE had Borodin arrested.
Almost certainly, Putin not only agrees with the arrest but even persuaded the
Americans to do it, as part of his campaign against the corruption of the Yeltsin
era. Putin wants to clean up Russia and make its oligarchs obey the law. The US not
only tolerates this, they are urging Putin to be  a strongman, and to make Russia
more law abiding. The reason for this is that western investors find Russia
impossible to work in. They need proper laws, law-enforcement and efficient banks
and markets, in order to plunder Russia properly and exploit its markets and workers
properly. Of course there is a danger that Russia may become so strong that it will
be a real competitor for the US, geopolitically, militarily, strategically. But that
is not likely, not for decades if ever. Russia is too pitifully weak and backward,
and the US too strong and technically advanced.

Thus Borodin is a pawn sacrificed by both sides for the greater good of the
bourgeoisie. An unpleasant man, he will hardly be missed. Your idea that what is
going on is the US trying to cow poor 'sovereign'  Russia is wide of the mark. You
are extrapolating from what you suppose is the situation with Milosevic. You should
remember that the reason Milosevic lost in Kosovo is because the Russians (meaning
Yeltsin AND Putin) sacrificed him. There is no honour among thieves. Find a worthier
cause to fight for.

Mark






From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 04:13:46 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:13:46 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Moscow Times: Carnegie Foundation & Borodin
In-Reply-To: <7a.10562a27.27b5e219@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000701c09352$90cb0740$b19d20d9@mjones>

Well, without prejudice to the authoritativeness or not of the Moscow Carnegie
centre (as desperate a bunch of academic bandits as you could ever hope to meet
outside some midwestern university for zombies), or the Moscow Times (an
English-language newspaper run by a Dutch media company on a loss-making basis, draw
your own conclusions) this article shows that Minsk is NOT defending Borodin but is
only criticising THE MANNER of his replacement. Kasyanov is anyway a problematic
figure in Putin's cabinet, and is seemingly in conflict even with Putin. Lukashenko
does not blame Putin; this is just low-level intrigue. What Carnegie offers is
theories advanced by jounalistic rascals of the extreme right. Where is there a
statement by *Lukashenko* about Borodin? The idiotic speculations of the likes of
Ryabov is just shit being stirred in a night pot (as the Russians say).

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
> [mailto:crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com]On Behalf Of
> Borba100 at aol.com
> Sent: 10 February 2001 00:15
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> Subject: [CrashList] Moscow Times: Carnegie Foundation & Borodin
>
>
> Regarding the matter of Mr. Borodin, I offer the article below from Moscow
> Times.
>
> Note that the Carerngie Foundation which - shockingly - is tolerated in
> Moscow is reported seeing Mr. Putin's response to the Borodin arrest as an
> attack on the current government of Belarus.
>
> Nestor Gorojovsky pointed out to me today that when the Imperial attacks on
> Argentina have for half a century ALWAYS avoided the real issue - always
> finding a humanitarian or left-sounding cover.  The Carnegie Foundation
> provided the venue for a study of that question.  It is discussed thoroughly
> by Diana Johnstone.  I will re-post her piece in a moment.
>
> Best regards,
> Jared
>
>
>
> Copyright 2001 Independent Press
> The Moscow Times
> January 26, 2001
>
> /SECTION: No. 2129
>
> LENGTH: 442 words
>
> HEADLINE: Borodin Replaced as Union Head
>
> BYLINE: COMBINED REPORTS
>
> BODY:
> Reuters, MT
>
> The Russian government rejected accusations of high-handedness from Belarus
> on Thursday after replacing Pavel Borodin, who is under arrest in the United
> States, as head of their planned union. The former Kremlin property manager
> was due to attend a bail hearing in New York later Thursday linked to Swiss
> attempts to extradite him. He is accused of taking multimillion dollar
> kickbacks from Swiss construction companies.
>
> Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov appointed Igor Selivanov, one of Borodin's
> deputies, acting secretary of the Belarus-Russia Union, a nebulous body
> preparing a planned economic merger of Belarus and Russia.
>
> The appointment brought an indignant reaction in Minsk. "Theoretically
> Kasyanov has the right to propose candidates for council secretary," an
> official in Minsk said on condition of anonymity.
>
> "But it should be confirmed by the Council of Ministers. Not just by the
> Russian prime minister but by the Belarussian too," he said. "Kasyanov cannot
> give directions and orders for both governments." Deputy Prime Minister
> Viktor Khristenko said the Belarus-Russia Union needed an acting chief to
> prepare for a meeting on Monday.
>
> Vladimir Zhirinovsky led a parade by his supporters to the Swiss Embassy in
> Moscow on Thursday, waving banners and placards backing Borodin. "This is a
> form of war against Russia," Zhirinovsky said. "It is provocation."
> Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko has vehemently criticized
> Borodin's arrest and said he was "duty-bound" to support the head of the
> Belarus-Russia Union.
>
> Media say Lukashenko signaled his fury at Russia's inaction over Borodin this
> week by returning to Minsk from Moscow a day early, ostensibly to meet
> Kyrgyzstan President Askar Akayev.
>
> "Some insist that Lukashenko, offended by such treatment, decided himself to
> cut short his Moscow trip. Others assert that the request came from the
> Kremlin," Belorusskaya Delovaya Gazeta newspaper said.
>
> Andrei Ryabov of the Moscow Carnegie Center said Thursday that the decision
> to replace Borodin is a "pretext to show Lukashenko that he is losing the
> Kremlin's favor." Yevgeny Volk of the Heritage Foundation's Moscow office
> also said that Borodin was too closely affiliated with Lukashenko. "In my
> view, Russian authorities have recently lost trust in Borodin because he has
> become an odious figure," Volk said.
>
> Ryabov and Volk agreed that the Kremlin has not used all the resources at its
> disposal to help Borodin's arrest. "It would be wrong to say that the Kremlin
> gave Borodin up, but, for a number of reasons, it chose not to fight (for his
> freedom) too hard," Ryabov said.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 04:14:08 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:14:08 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: <067cf3319210921MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <000801c09352$9e714a80$b19d20d9@mjones>

> > to take just one example out of many, Noriega --
> > is he someone we should defend?)
>
> YES.

You don't defend quislings when their own masters turn against them. This has
nothing to do with issues of sovereignty, except in the sense that the very presence
of quislings at the helm of state indicates that this is not a sovereign country but
a fiefdom. Argentina is not a sovereign country. It can only retrieve sovereignty
thru a popular revolution. No-one will die at the barricades for the like of Borodin
or Noriega. This is just a counsel of despair.

Mark.




From aabdo at webtv.net  Sat Feb 10 04:42:09 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 03:42:09 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Defamation of Libertarian Socialists
In-Reply-To: "Mark Jones" <jones.mark@btconnect.com>'s message of Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:13:06 -0000
Message-ID: <17435-3A852910-457@storefull-236.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Agreed, Mark.    I was going to sit this out until Jela's accusation
against Andrej came along.      I don't think that it can just be passed
off because it's only! Jela making them.      Accusing a list member of
being an agent of the German military does merit some sort of response
on list.

Tony 
________________________________

Tony, these kinds of remarks might be better addressed to Jared offlist.
Please try to keep to the topic. Less flaming all round please.












From aabdo at webtv.net  Sat Feb 10 04:57:26 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 03:57:26 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] US Prisons- The Other Death Penalty
Message-ID: <17435-3A852CA6-471@storefull-236.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Below, is a rare US Left commentary about the other death penalty
administered by the American Misjustice System...... that of killing the
poor in US jails by not providing medical sevices, combined with
encouraging physical abuse of prisoners, and constructing disease ridden
prisons.

The situation is even worse here in Texas.

Tony
________________________________
Via Workers World News Service
Reprinted from the Feb. 8, 2001
issue of Workers World newspaper 
------------------------- 
CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA:
MEDICAL NEGLECT KILLS WOMEN PRISONERS 
By Anne Sadler 

Over 150 bereaved family members, friends and prisoner- rights activists
traveled hundreds of miles to this women's maximum-security prison Jan.
27 to express their outrage at the recent rash of unnecessary and
preventable deaths here. 

The memorial protest commemorated the lives of these women who died from
lack of medical care. Wearing black and carrying replica tombstones with
the names of the victims who were mothers, sisters, daughters and aunts,
marchers demonstrated in front of the gates of this prison that is
surrounded by hundreds of miles of farmland. 

Chowchilla is the biggest women's prison in the United States. Over
3,000 women are incarcerated here. 
Also here, an unprecedented 17 healthcare-related deaths have occurred
in one year. Nine of them were in the last two months of 2000 alone. 
These traumatic and unexpected deaths may appear on the surface to be
unrelated. But a clear pattern of health-care neglect in the California
prison system is apparent. 

Most if not all of these deaths could have been prevented if proper,
timely medical care had been available. Instead, these women--some who
were due to be paroled within a matter of weeks--were given a death
sentence at the hands of the state of California. 

Guards with minimal medical training are allowed, within their
adversarial role with prisoners, to decide who lives and who dies under
their "care." Prison-rights activists say that guards decide who gets
medical attention and who gets to see advanced medical professionals. 
Even getting a yes decision is no guarantee of adequate medical
attention. 

"We have been fighting for medical care at this prison for over seven
years. It's tragic that women are still dying from criminally negligent
health care," said Beth Feinberg of California Prison Focus. 

The Jan. 27 protest was organized by a coalition of prison activist
groups including Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, California
Prison Focus, Justice Now and the California Coalition for Women
Prisoners. 
- END -












From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Sat Feb 10 07:29:19 2001
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol B Cox)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:29:19 -0600
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
References: <5a.10e2e263.27b56da0@aol.com> <067cf3319210921MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <3A8554AC.CE0DE430@ilstu.edu>


Gorojovsky wrote:

> En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Ura,
> el 9 Feb 01, a las 18:40, Mark Jones dijo:
>
> > to take just one example out of many, Noriega --
> > is he someone we should defend?)
>
> YES.

Very definitely Yes, and had i two hands i would defend
the point at length.

But, Nestor, I think it of some importance to be prepared
to recognize, when they appear, situations which represent
either (1) an exception to the principles we share here
(probably rare) OR (2) not an instance in which the principles
have no reference whatever -- and it is just possible that
the Borodin case is an instance of the latter. It is merely a
routine criminal case -- being handled in the way the Marc Rich
case should have been handled.

But the kidnapping of Noriega was a particularly outrageous
instance of u. s. violation of the sovereignty of a small nation.
Nestor is right to shout YES in all caps.

Carrol




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sat Feb 10 07:07:14 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:07:14 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] Rogues and sovereignty I
In-Reply-To: <000801c09352$9e714a80$b19d20d9@mjones>
References: <067cf3319210921MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <098331407140a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

I am unsure as to whether Mark has answered me on CrashList alone, so that I am 
copying this posting to L-I and Marxmail as well. Please excuse me if I am 
wrong.

En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Ura, 
el 10 Feb 01, a las 11:14, Mark Jones dijo:

> 
> > > to take just one example out of many, Noriega --
> > > is he someone we should defend?)
> >
> > YES.
> 
> You don't defend quislings when their own masters turn against them. This has
> nothing to do with issues of sovereignty, except in the sense that the very
> presence of quislings at the helm of state indicates that this is not a
> sovereign country but a fiefdom. 

I defend the Panamanians from invasion. Noriega, on the other side, was a rogue 
but he was attacked _because he was not roguish enough_, in a similar manner 
that the American establishment helped Fidel oust Batista by a mistaken 
computation of actual forces in Cuba. This was the last opportunity, because 
they learnt their lesson well. (Sigh.): Whenever there is a possibility that a 
situation gets unstable and there is a slight risk that the "normal" political 
movement within the peripheric country may imply the possibility that perhaps, 
maybe, who knows, some popular upheaval does for its own behalf the task that 
the American troops will do for the sake of the Empire, then the sovereignty of 
that people is ALWAYS at stake. This, to begin with. I would comradely ask from 
my great friends in the First World to stick to the simple position: "US 
(Britain, France, Germany) out of ......... !". But please allow me to probe 
deeper into this issue. 

Presence of Quislings at the head of a state is not the indication that the 
country is not sovereign, much to the contrary. Unlike the original Quisling, 
who had been installed by the Nazis, even the worst of our rogues (Batista) is 
still one of "us", not of "them". 

The simile is more _Petain_ (a noble French product of its own brewery actually 
representing truly existing forces in France after the German invasion), not 
_Quisling_  (a puppet who had as much links to the Norwegian society as I am 
linked to Planet Uranus). Noriega was the degenerate continuation of Torrijos, 
and he was taken away by a bloody invasion because he was that continuation, 
not because he was degenerate.  _The Panama Deception_ is very instructive in 
this sense. In a certain way, invasion toppled the _continuator_ in order to 
make sure that no local movement replaced the _degenerate_. A _degenerate_ was 
necessary, not a _continuator_. Whenever there is an imperialist country in 
action, they are The Voice of Evil. By definition. They are like the scorpion 
of the joke (it is in their nature to kill, even though they kill the poor 
little beaver who is wading them cross the river).

I have been thinking over this issue yesterday night, and I believe I found the 
way to make my own ideas clear to all. I can only thank Mark, because his 
posting is giving me the occasion to pose them as a kind of debate not with him 
but with the ultra-left petty bourgeois who, locally, are vocal distributors of 
the same ideas (ideology?) he exposes below. They, through Mark, say:

> Argentina is not a sovereign country. It can
> only retrieve sovereignty thru a popular revolution. No-one will die at the
> barricades for the like of Borodin or Noriega. This is just a counsel of
> despair.

To begin with, save for direct colonial status (such as Puerto Rico today), the 
main feature of the non-core countries (you see I am very careful as to 
language, do you?) is that all of us "enjoy" a limited degree of sovereignty. 
The thesis so brutally exposed by Brezhnev in 1968 is, in fact, business as 
usual in the semicolonial periphery. That is why we are semicolonies:

"Not only there are the two basic groups of countries -owners of colonies and 
colonies-, but another characteristic feature of the time is the existence of 
manifold forms of dependent countries that, from a formal point of view, are 
politically independent but are in fact enmeshed in the net of financial and 
diplomatic dependency." wrote Lenin on _Imperialism_ (chapter 6, "Partage of 
the world  between the great powers, which is most useful here).

Strict semicolonies, for Lenin, included China, Persia, and Turkey. But he 
explored the data available to him, and discovered that there were other kinds 
of countries that must be considered dependent, although in varying degrees. 
Since he would never dare say more than the data available to him could allow, 
he was cautious in the drafting of this chapter (five years, a civil war, and a 
Socialist Revolution later, he would still remind the representatives at the 
3rd Congress in Baku that "we know nearly nothing on Latin America"). 

But he could not fail to realize that countries which, to the naive eye of 
Europe, may look independent and thriving, could in fact be nearer to a 
semicolony than they actually were. He thus simply exposed a couple of examples 
of those "manifold forms" that did not fit a strict definition of semicolony: 
Argentina ("It is not hard to imagine the solid links established between the 
financial capital --and her faithful 'friend', diplomacy-- and the circles 
controlling all the economic and political life in that country"[1]), and 
Portugal ("a sovereign independent state but in fact a British protectorate for 
more than two hundred years, since the War of Spanish Sucession (1701-1714)" in 
a "somehow different kind of financial and diplomatic dependency together with 
political independence").

I am not very fond of quoting. But if I quote Lenin on this, it is because 
these developments, _which were somehow marginal by the times he noticed them_, 
have become the _basic trait_ of imperialism after World War II, when open 
protectorates and colonies were dismantled and a host of independent political 
formations mushroomed in the colonial world (the French African example is 
quite instructive: each "d?partement" in the A.E.F. and the A.O.F. was turned 
into a "country").

The new conditions in which imperialism was forced to operate (direct 
occupation is always the Panacea, seldom possible however in our days) 
transformed the equation in a way that Mark's positions as stated above (as 
well as those of my fellow countrypeople who support ultra-left positions, and 
who consequently either get immolated in suicidal actions, are isolated from 
our masses, or relapse into bitter cynicism by considering that "there is no  
alternative") are not taking into account. The eventual result (scant as it is, 
it is a positive result) of the immense wave of upheavals that followed World 
War II was the possibility, for our own societies, to enact our own politics, 
in a way that no open colonial state (not even "Home Ruled" India) could 
imagine. This makes everything messier, of course, but this is a fact that any 
political analysis must take into account.

Yes, in a sense "Argentina is not a sovereign country. It can
only retrieve sovereignty thru a popular revolution", as Mark has established 
above (may I suggest that one of the reasons why he did it is my own 
pertinacious set of comments in this sense?). And, perhaps, "no-one will die at 
the barricades for the like of Borodin or Noriega" [2]. But my strong 
affirmative answer to Mark's question, far from being "just a counsel of
despair" is a strong, pertinacious, unwielding defense of Leninist positions 
against ultra-leftism (or direct pro-imperialism).

Just allow me to show a cognate though different case, that of Argentina.

When Peronism returned to power in 1973, most Argentineans either hoped to live 
again the golden age of 1945-55 (basically workers), or had a vague expectation 
that Per?n's proclaimed "socialismo nacional" was our own Argentinean way to 
socialism (basically the petty bourgeois layers who had been forced by history 
to 'rediscover'their own country and resignify Peronism). What actually 
happened was that the programme of Peronism -which was already anachronic in 
1955- couldn't solve the dilemma of Argentina during the mid 70s, proved itself 
useless, and in the end showed it had become a new M. Valdemar in a country 
full of such kind of political entities.

After Per?n died, July 1st, 1974, the Vice President and widow of Per?n, Isabel 
Mart?nez de Per?n, took power. 

Now, General Juan Per?n, although himself a quite refined spirit (he was in a 
sense what one may call a "gaucho rico", that is a child of rural Argentina not 
devoid of culture, taste and money), had a tendency to relish on the company of 
some bufoons and jesters that a then comrade of mine aptly defined as an 
incurable illness, "malandrofilia", which might be translated as "roguephilly". 
This may be given a political reading, but it is not our interest now.
 
At the moment of his death, Per?n had been chosen President, for the third 
time, less than a year ago (in September 1973) after a complex process that 
implied the resignation of President C?mpora (chosen on March, 1973) and thus 
the loss of positions for the petty-bourgeois "Peronist Left" that had gathered 
around C?mpora (against C?mpora's own will, by the way) with the dream of 
putting Per?n in the attic with Grandma's photographs, and the old toys of 
childhood. 

(continued)



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sat Feb 10 07:07:10 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:07:10 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] Rogues and sovereignty II
Message-ID: <098fa1007140a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

(continued)

This was an impossible dream. Argentineans, that is the mass of Argentinean 
working class, did not share the illussion of those newcomers. They wanted to 
exercise the right to vote for Per?n (C?mpora had been a transitional candidate 
to dodge the proscriptive clause -set by the military regime of Lanusse as the 
only condition to retreat- according to which Per?n could not be candidate), 
not for an _ersatz_. Per?n himself, very old and ill, was not very eager to be 
a President again. But he could not escape his destiny which, like Greek 
tragedies, was overwhelming and abiding.  He had lost control of his own fate 
on October 17, 1945.  His proscription was not a personal issue, it was the 
proscription of a whole country. He _had_ to become President again.

During the process that ended up with the September elections, dramatic 
struggles arose within Peronism on the issue of the Vice Presidency (please 
take into account that in those times, "dramatic" in Argentina might well mean 
"by the shotgun").  In order to smother these struggles, he decided that Isabel 
would go with him on the ticket. But in so doing, he was half-consciously 
paving the way for imperialist intromission (and rule) in the popular 
government. 

Isabel was in the hands of one of the unclear types that had usually marked 
Per?n's intimate circles: Jos? L?pez Rega. A former Police officer, head of an 
esoteric sect, strongly linked with the darker sides of different intelligence 
services, the rightmost wing of Peronism, and the P2 logia (yes, the one of the 
scandal in the Banca Ambrosiana), L?pez Rega, through Isabel, was the 
forerunner of the 1976 coup _within_ the government that had begun with C?mpora 
and Per?n.

The situation slowly became a Hell of massacres and crime. The economy began to 
shake, and the bourgeois programme established by Jos? Ber Gelbard (a secret 
affiliate to the Communist Party and a succesful bourgeois who had drafted a 
bourgeois programme for Argentina whose political carreer had always been 
supported by Per?n since 1953) proved too timid to counter reaction. Gelbard 
was fired by Isabel who chose a conservative economist (though still a 
Peronist) to replace him. Worker's militancy made it impossible to estabilize 
the economic system through a cut in wages. Popular anger was expressed through 
many ways, and terrorist groups (from the right and the "left") made life in 
Argentina more or less like crossing an avenue in Chicago during a showdown 
between the guys of Elliot Ness and Al Capone.

Finally, a "cold" coup was attempted by the gorilla military. They secluded 
Isabel at the Naval Base of Mar del Plata (more precisely, in the Lighthouse, a 
postcard view of this seaside resort), and no pressure was spared to have the 
President of the Senate -successor of Isabel in the chain of acephaly- Italo 
Argentino Luder declare her incompetent, and become the new President (with the 
support of the military and, of course, the Radical party who logically 
expected to destroy Peronism on the 1977 elections --but wanted to have 
elections!). Luder resisted the move, which speaks to his praise in fact, and 
the military had to release Isabel and allow her to return to power.

In the meantime, the bands of L?pez Rega, the terrorist groups and the groups 
of state terrorism were turning everyday life in a nightmare. Unions boiled 
over at inflation, and new salaries were negotiated week after week. Finally, 
Isabel decided to entrust Argentinean economy to an economist who was to be the 
Proceso before the Proceso: Celestino Rodrigo. Rodrigo immediately imposed a 
plan as tremendous as those that, after the Coup, would become the regular 
prescription of economic policy for Argentina. He lasted a couple of weeks. An 
immense popular mobilization, on June 27, 1975, forced his resignation and 
forced L?pez Rega to abandon the country.

Isabel was now helplessly alone in power. The union leaders, who had been the 
generators of the mobilization (in the same way that they had been the 
generators of the general strike which, in 1969, had started the Cordobazo and 
the series of popular upheavals in the Inland Country that would put the 
military government of 1966 to an end), did not transform this massive strike 
into a "porte?azo". This would have been too much for a Peronist union leader 
of the time. A "porte?azo", that is a massive popular upheaval in Buenos Aires 
City, would have meant civil war around next corner, and socialism after the 
other street. Thus, they were content to oust the Minister of Economy and 
obtain a general hike in wages that would stop the effects of the brutal and 
massive devaluation by Rodrigo.

Economy began to turn chaotic. Direct sabotage by the managers of the large 
firms, petty-bourgeois misery, financial squeeze, foreign pressure, all at the 
same time answered this last moment of glory of the Argentinean working class 
such as had been born in 1945. In a few days, the country was beginning to be 
prepared for the psychological campaign that would precede the coup. Isabel 
would not remain to the end of her mandate (it was to be finished within less 
than a year, the Radicals -a ballot box in their heart, as always- nervously 
reminded their military friends). The economic plan of imperialism could not 
accept the possibility that a "democratic" government gave the working classes 
to defend their own rights.

The die had been cast. On December 1975, a ridiculous coup, led by a 
hydrophobic Fascist Air Force Commander, gave the last warning. The _La Raz?n_ 
paper, owned by the most oligarchic Peralta Ramos family, began to editorialize 
in the headlines: "There are n days left". On March 24, 1976, the coup took 
place. An age had gone forever.

Now, many people in that moment, at the obvious and self-evident roguish, nay, 
reactionary, nay, pro-imperialist, features of Isabel and her entourage, quite 
reasonably argued that Argentina had already lost any shred of sovereignty, 
that the recent experience had shown that the time for political strife was 
over, that we had to chose either to have a popular revolution or become a 
direct colony. This last proposition, in particular, was very perverse. It was 
absolutely right, but it was abstract. A mere "child of Reason", which, as Goya 
stated once, "generate monsters".

The concrete fact of the moment was that the last shred of political legitimacy 
in Argentina lay with this repugnant little woman of dark past and darker 
present. If we allowed the military to oust them, then things would be still 
worse.

So that what we should have done then was to support her (some in the country, 
such as yours truly, actually did) against what was obviously to become the 
dismantling of Argentina at the hands of imperialism.

Then, we arrive at today's Argentina, a tragic joke of what it was. A country 
that does not control its own currency, nor does it control its public 
utilities, nor anything. A country where, as I commented on PEN-L a short time 
ago, flags of the supermarkets wave in the squares, instead of the Argentinean 
flag: a Rolerball country, so to say. This Rollerball country is the 
consequence of many factors, but certainly one of them is Carlos Sa?l Menem, 
the last Peronist president, who reverted everything that Per?n had done and 
turned Argentina into nothingness.

Menem is a particularly roguish type, who would have made Napoleon the Third 
blush in awe (I can see Napoleon le petit bursting to himself: "How didn't _I_ 
think of that!"). He has transformed Argentine in a paradise for laudering 
money from the drug trade. A maffia-type regime has been installed by the 
financial sectors under his cloak. He destroyed the modest "welfare state" 
institutions that we Argentineans had been building from long before Peronism. 
He destroyed our economic independence and substituted lackey-like agreement 
with the Department of State for the up to him more or less dignified foreign 
policy that had been a feature of Argentina, save for some terrible periods, 
ever since 1880.

That is, he was the ultimate rogue, wasn't he? Worse still than Isabel, worse 
still than L?pez Rega. But, know what? Even in the case of these rogues, I 
would have supported the Argentinean government against an attempt by the 
imperialist courts to put them to trial and jail. Why? Well, because these 
courts would of necessity be kangaroo courts... directed against myself and my 
own people. The source of power of these rogues and the source of power of 
those courts is one and only source of power, the same source of power: 
imperialist exploitation of the world. 

There has never been a case in history where a settlement of accounts between 
scoundrels has been for the benefit of the victims. The final result has always 
been (and this is what these settlements of account are made for) a further 
victimization, a deeper humiliation, a greater exploitation, by the Greater 
Scoundrel.

No, Mark. You are wrong. We have not lost our sovereignty if by that one means 
the right to wage a struggle against the Empire and its Petains. This right, 
among others, implies our strong opposition to any attempt by the Empire to 
settle accounts with the Petains --to our worst fate. The struggle to arrive at 
the "popular revolution"  by which we shall not exactly "retrieve sovereignty", 
but simply enlarge the microscopic piece imperialists have not been able to 
snatch from our hands, that microscopic piece that extraterritorial courts are 
bent on destroying.

Be confident in ourselves. We shall judge our rogues, and be reassured that the 
punishment will be worst than anything imperialist judges can imagine of. In 
the meantime, may I most friendly and comradely ask you to please oppose with 
all your strength, with all your unflinching will, to _any_  attempt of your 
own burgeoisie to substitute their own rule for even the rule of our local 
rogues?

In the confidence that I will move more than one on these lists to reflection, 
a hug to all,

N?stor.


N O T E

[1] Unfortunately, most Argentinean "Leftists" (particularly the Communists) 
did not pay attention to this slight issue, and thus their politics tended to 
systematically range with the Empires at the crucial points in our history

[2] In the last case, facts belie Mark's bold assertion: there was an invasion, 
working class neighborhoods were particularly stormed, and lots of Panamanians 
fought against the American paratroopers. Many were disappeared, shot and/or 
tortured, AND, ah, coincidence: all of them belonged to the national-popular 
side, included the great philosopher Ricaurte Soler [to my knowledge; would 
love to learn otherwise]. A puppet government was immediately installed, not 
roguish but more subservient during the moment when the Panama Canal was being 
transferred to Panamanian sovereignty as a consequence of the Treaties signed 
by Torrijos.

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Borba100 at aol.com  Sat Feb 10 07:45:25 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:45:25 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
Message-ID: <30.104ebcff.27b6ae05@aol.com>

In a message dated 02/10/2001 9:30:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
cbcox at ilstu.edu writes:

<< nd it is just possible that
 the Borodin case is an instance of the latter. It is merely a
 routine criminal case -- being handled in the way the Marc Rich
 case should have been handled. >>

Carol, have you read my two texts concerning this on tenc. net as well as the 
article I posted from the Moscow Times?  This is hardly an ordinary criminal 
case - how could it be, when the man is lured to NY - NY NY, not NY Moscow - 
to be arrested - when he is deliberately denied a diplomatic visa - when he 
is arrested on his way to a state function?  

Jared



From Borba100 at aol.com  Sat Feb 10 07:49:16 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:49:16 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes article
Message-ID: <25.1123ebc3.27b6aeeb@aol.com>

Dear friends,

Mr. Aabdo is a flame artist. He makes things up, apparently taking pleasure 
in muddying the water and diverting others.  I will not particpate in this by 
answering his flames.  

Jared



From embark at epud.net  Sat Feb 10 09:13:44 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:13:44 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Can we afford Deserts?
References: <E14RXcL-0002Hc-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <001201c0937c$71581680$38a3bdcf@rowan>


> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 07:50:47 +0000
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> From: Chris Burford <cburford at gn.apc.org>
> Subject: [CrashList] Can we afford desserts?
> Reply-To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
>
> I have just caught an Open University (UK) programme about the experiments
> of Biosphere 2, a massive atmospherically-controlled closed system in
> California for the study of ecology.
[snippage for brevity only]

> So where did the CO2 go? It went, and this is ominous, into concrete.

> We are already on an escalator requiring more and more active socially
> responsible involvement in the environment just to keep some stability.
> Otherwise, less technically than the humans sealed into Biosphere 2, we
> will die out as a species.
>
>
> Chris Burford
>
> London
>

Subsequent later work in CO2 studies in the arctic environment compounds the
problem. In the biosphere of Earth -- as opposed to the controlled
Biospheres 1&2 -- the millions of years of CO2 absorption went not into
concrete but into the carbon sinks of soil, ocean floor and lake beds. As we
heat up the atmosphere, the CO2 is released. (very big time release.)

So a projected global government implementing draconian standards, rather
than Kyoto Protocol band-aids, could plant biomass on every square mile of
desert and still be playing catch-up as the temperatures rise ....

I believe this was one of the revealations of the last 12 months that had
made Mark so gloomy about our future.  I know it did little to lighten MY
mood.

I am busy researching the tolerance of rats and roaches to increased CO2
levels Mark. (a joke, son) Perhaps not even THEY will inherit when we pass,
after all.

I wonder if Borodin or his captors have an eye on this problem? Surely such
a threat has more significance than their squabbles? Surely they have more
sane priorities than they display?

I know, I know:  ...  don't call you Shirley.

Tom Warren
(searching for GM techniques that will allow him to transpirate CO2)












From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb 10 09:34:19 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:34:19 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Can we afford Deserts?
In-Reply-To: <001201c0937c$71581680$38a3bdcf@rowan>
References: <E14RXcL-0002Hc-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <200102101634.LAA15683@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>

Tom Warren:
>Subsequent later work in CO2 studies in the arctic environment compounds the
>problem. In the biosphere of Earth -- as opposed to the controlled
>Biospheres 1&2 -- the millions of years of CO2 absorption went not into
>concrete but into the carbon sinks of soil, ocean floor and lake beds. As we
>heat up the atmosphere, the CO2 is released. (very big time release.)
>
>So a projected global government implementing draconian standards, rather
>than Kyoto Protocol band-aids, could plant biomass on every square mile of
>desert and still be playing catch-up as the temperatures rise ....

Here's more bad news. The scientists have backtracked and now back the
foolish proposal to grow more trees rather than attack the problem at its
source, namely the right of corporations to make profits selling SUVs, etc.

NY Times, February 10, 2001
New Report Backs Planting More Trees to Fight Warming
By ANDREW C. REVKIN

An influential panel of scientists is preparing to endorse two strategies
for curtailing global warming that have been major points of contention
between the United States and Europe in efforts to complete a climate treaty.

In a report scheduled for next month, the panel concludes that by
protecting existing forests and planting new ones, countries could blunt
warming by sopping up 10 to 20 percent of the heat-trapping carbon dioxide
that is expected to be released by smokestacks and tailpipes over the next
50 years.

It also says the cost to industrialized countries of a global climate plan
could be cut in half if they were allowed to buy and sell credits earned by
those that make the deepest reductions in carbon dioxide and other
so-called greenhouse gases.

The conclusions could bolster the position of the United States when
negotiations over details of the treaty resume this summer. But some
experts involved in the talks stressed that a scientific analysis of
untested climate-control strategies says little about whether such efforts
would prove effective.

"The big question is whether real programs in the real world will work,"
said Dr. Daniel A. Lashof, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources
Defense Council, a private environmental group. "The devil's in the details."

The report was written by a working group within the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, a network of hundreds of scientists who advise
governments on climate issues under the auspices of the United Nations. The
group plans to release it at a meeting in Ghana.

A final draft was recently sent to governments for comment, and a copy was
given to The New York Times by an American official.

The panel's findings are closely watched by governments as a barometer of
mainstream scientific thinking on global warming.

Full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/10/science/10CLIM.html


Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/



From zapata at sezampro.yu  Sat Feb 10 10:25:32 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:25:32 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Re: No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes article
References: <25.1123ebc3.27b6aeeb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002f01c09385$ebfe0300$b7bd6ac2@andrej>

Dear Comrades,
I fully agree with you on the point that flames, mudslinging and defaming,
should be prevented. I want to stress, however, that reaction made by Tony
was provoked by this:
>Jared
You should be proud, Andrej Grubacic is on the pay-roll of German secret
police(BND).
colonel<

And to this:
>Gnjido nacisticka  takve kao ti CIA ne placa, takvi sluze kao korisni
idioti.
pukovnik<

In loose translation: "You nazi germ, you are not even worthy of being paid
by the CIA, you are just used by them".....

I find this sort of "flame" and insults much more dangerous than Tony's
reaction. I accept critic of Tony, Nestor, Mac, and even Jared in his last
mail, but I cannot tolerate this sort of speech. So, if you want to stop
this "flame art", please re-direct your critic to this sort of discussion
and to MRS. Colonel or J. Israel.

Con Saludos,
       Andrej
----- Original Message -----
From: <Borba100 at aol.com>
To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: [CrashList] Re: No, Tony, it wasn't an Emperor's Clothes
article







From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 11:01:35 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:01:35 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Can we afford Deserts?
In-Reply-To: <001201c0937c$71581680$38a3bdcf@rowan>
Message-ID: <000701c0938b$8b4eac20$e28e20d9@mjones>

>As we
> heat up the atmosphere, the CO2 is released. (very big time release.)

What has made me terminally gloomy is that people are so slow to get it. The risks
of runaway warming are real, yet some of the very scientists who first announced
them have now sold the pass and begun to blithely and emptily talk about planting
eucalyptus trees. It is so obvious that this won't work (trees die off in a century
or so and re-release the carbon they very temporarily trapped, so the idea of
trapping carbon by reforestation is not only not a solution, it is an anti-solution
since all it does is make people more relaxed about driving around in SUVs) that
I've concluded that scientists who really understand the problem and know that there
is no hope, have simply sold out to First Use and taken the money to a playground in
the Bahamas, and who can blame them? I should be so lucky. Carbon sequestration
schems are merely an ephemeral madness. These schemes are the equivalent of the
desperate thoughts that go thru the mind of a person who sees his car is about to
crash into a wall and is helpless to prevent it.

The danger of runaway warming resides in (a) collapse of the polar ice sheets; (b)
collapse of methane hydrates, (c) collapse of carbon sinks in the frozen (now
rapidly thawing) tundra, because in these three sites are locked up astronomically
huge amounts of carbon; when they release it will be the equivalent of fifty million
nuclear world wars all at once, and the planet will fry. Probably it is already too
late to prevent this. Huge and irreversible avalanches of change have been set free
in the climate-ocean circulation processes. Planting trees is sticking plasters on
small pox sores. Only the most determined and relentless political pressure can hope
to have an effect and ONLY WE CAN DO IT.

NO-ONE ELSE CAN DO IT. ONLY WE CAN DO IT.

If I have some kind of residual faith in socialist ideas and mass movements it is
probably just the old man's psychic equivalent of sucking on a lolly, but I don't
know any other way that offers less illusory hope, except perhaps prayer. The deep
ecos are completely hopeless, politically speaking. Only the masses can change
things, only if there is the kind of eruption into history of the most submerged
masses of humanity as there was after 1914, and much more so, can we hope for real
change.

This is the historical context which makes me seriously doubt the pointfulness of
spending our energy rushing to the rescue of Noriega, Borodin etc.


Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 11:24:40 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:24:40 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Rogues and sovereignty I
In-Reply-To: <098331407140a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <000801c0938e$c4f67860$e28e20d9@mjones>

Nestor:

>>The new conditions in which imperialism was forced to operate (direct
occupation is always the Panacea, seldom possible however in our days)
transformed the equation in a way that Mark's positions as stated above (as
well as those of my fellow countrypeople who support ultra-left positions, and
who consequently either get immolated in suicidal actions, are isolated from
our masses, or relapse into bitter cynicism by considering that "there is no
alternative") are not taking into account. The eventual result (scant as it is,
it is a positive result) of the immense wave of upheavals that followed World
War II was the possibility, for our own societies, to enact our own politics,
in a way that no open colonial state (not even "Home Ruled" India) could
imagine. This makes everything messier, of course, but this is a fact that any
political analysis must take into account.<<

Nestor, this huge wave of anti-colonial and national liberation struggles,
post-1945, was based on a still earlier, and equally immense wave of struggle which
erupted 100+ years before (Indian Mutiny, China, Latin America) and produced Sun
Yat-Sen and Gandhi and the ANC, as well as Peron, and a host of other struggles. All
these things happened under the iron heel of colonialism and amid desperate
difficulty. The 'freedoms' you speak of seem to me however to have produced a
pitifully smaller revolutionary wave in our own time. What is there to celebrate?
Patrick Bond's struggle for stand-pipes? The "new conditions in which imperialism
was forced to operate" have been almost entirely successful in castrating the
working classes of the peripheries. I think you have proved my point for me: not
only does Argentina today have LESS sovereignty (formal and real) than a century
ago, there is also much less mass political awareness and less mass resistance now
than then.

I'm not at all suggesting suicidal, isolationist activites or ultra-left
immolationism. I'm merely pointing to the historical realities, which you have yet
to come to terms with.

Mark




From Borba100 at aol.com  Sat Feb 10 12:35:53 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:35:53 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] In Fact Lukashenko DID and DOES call for defense of Borodin
Message-ID: <9.10d84fe1.27b6f218@aol.com>

In a message jones.mark at btconnect.com writes that Jared misread the Moscow 
Times article he posted and that in fact:

<< this article shows that Minsk is NOT defending Borodin but is  only 
criticising THE MANNER of his replacement. K >>

I think you have misread the article, Mark, old friend.  It says:

"Media [this refers to the Russian media in general] say Lukashenko signaled 
his fury at Russia's inaction over Borodin this week by returning to Minsk 
from Moscow a day early, ostensibly to meet Kyrgyzstan President Askar 
Akayev."

Isn't this clear?  This was BEFORE Borodin was replaced. When Lukashenko 
returned to Minsk he immediately released a statement that he was "duty 
bound" to defend Borodin from THIS ATTACK.  By the way, this does not 
constitute Lukashenko rendering a legal judgment on the Borodin case; the 
charges were already dismissed by a Russian court because a) Borodin said his 
signatures had been forged and b) the Swiss REFUSED to make original copies 
of documents available.  Lukashenko's statement is not a LEGAL JUDGMENT ABOUT 
BORODIN'S AFFAIRS rather it is a LEGAL AND POLITICAL STATEMENT about the U.S. 
flagrant attempt to degrade Russia and attack the militants in Belarus, with 
whom Borodin was associated, by luring him to Kennedy Airport and having an 
army of FBI agents descend on him. (After which the idiot Bush went on 
Barbara Walters' show and tried to make clear this was a warning about 
"corruption" - Bush HATES corruption!!!

Lukashenko is trying to defend Russian sovereignty and the MORALE OF THE 
RUSSIAN people from the outrageous condition of being fully colonized with 
greater and greater reductions of sovereignty.  

You are right that Lukashenko did object to the high handed method of 
Moscow's replacing of Borodin - but this was in addition to not instead of 
objecting to the lack of defense of Borodin. 

The Heritage Foundation in Moscow is quoted in the article.  It represents 
the U.S. Republican Party i.e. the Bush administration. It makes clear the 
U.S. view when, as the article notes:

"Yevgeny Volk of the Heritage Foundation's Moscow office
also said that Borodin was too closely affiliated with Lukashenko."

TOO CLOSELY AFFILIATED.  That is the U.S. message. What could be clearer?  

By making this statement, this U.S. operative  was signaling Russian 
politicians that if they got too close to Lukashenko they would be arrested 
or other bad things would happen to them.  It is very significant that 
Heritage said this publicly because Heritage  is seen in  Russia as 
representing Bush's views (in so far as Bush has views or a brain...) - 
anyway, shall we say, as representing the current administration's views.  
Washington does NOT mind it if things are made very clear to Russian leaders 
and other targets.  

In Serbia, where U.S. operatives did and still do things more crudely (or 
maybe it's just that Serbia isn't nuclear armed...) the U.S. had people "too 
close too" Milosevich (read: Lukashenko) murdered - this while aggressively 
offering other leaders bribes.  The message was: take our money and do our 
bidding or YOU WILL END UP DEAD.  In Moscow the message is, for now: "Or you 
will end up in jail."

That is an Imperial message and I repeat it comes from Washington and, as 
always, Washington's big brother and experienced adviser, London.  And it is 
incumbent on those of us who are citizens of these two most monstrous 
criminal entities in world history (the  U.S. and England) to denounce the 
hypocrisy of mass murderers (e.g., the serial poisoners of the world with DU 
- see emperor's clothes) - the hypocrisy of arresting leaders who are to some 
extent resisting Anglo-U.S. Imperial plunder - the hypocrisy of arresting 
these leaders as "corrupt."

Jared



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 13:22:14 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:22:14 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] FEAR AND LOATHING IN HAITI
Message-ID: <000a01c0939f$32fe8cc0$e28e20d9@mjones>

The update of Stan Goff's article is now at:
http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base/goff2.html



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 13:28:17 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:28:17 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] useful research tool
Message-ID: <000b01c093a0$0b3a6280$e28e20d9@mjones>

The British Library catalogue (10 million books!) has been put online at:

http://blpc.bl.uk/adp0147aFrMaWelcome.jsp#



From Borba100 at aol.com  Sat Feb 10 14:36:56 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:36:56 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] What's the Effect of a Website like "Z"?
Message-ID: <4b.749b444.27b70e78@aol.com>

What is the real EFFECT of a Website like Z?  It is to achieve the reputation 
for militancy and then to undermine resistance to the sharpest acts of 
Imperialism. 

Thus the patron saint of Z, Noam Chomsky, during the bombing of Yugoslavia 
went on Z and the leftish Pacifica Radio station and said the bombing was bad 
because it gave the monstrous Serbs the eexcuse and reason to carry out even 
more atrocities against Albanians.  A lie!  A lie uttered without even saying 
the bombing  was a war crime. If you doubt me, you can listen to it on 
Pacifica, before it gets pulled.

Go to  http://www.commondreams.org/kosovo/moreviews.htm  That is the page on 
the Common Dreams website called "Kosovo Crisis: More Views" Then do a word 
search for Chomsky.  That will take you to a file entitled "Noam Chomsky 
Discusses NATO Bombing."   Click on that - you will need to have Real Player 
installed, to hear it.  

Keep in mind, this station potentially reaches 500,000 - this is the very 
popular Goodman show, listened to by hoards of leftish people.  Ask 
yousrself: after hearing and believing Chomsky's crap, would you want to 
organize aganst the bombing? Or wouldn't you say you had more important stuff 
to do? That this was a fight between monsters?

And what you have just heard on Pacifica is the same thing Chomsky and Albert 
and Shalom and Said said on Z.  So the bones that are tossed to radicalism at 
Z  - opposition to corporations, love of ecology, whatever - are used in a 
very important practical sense  to create credibility which then allows Z to 
UNDERMINE THOSE IN THE IMPERIALIST COUNTRIES WHO WANT TO ORGANIZE OPPOSITION 
TO THE REAL LIVING CRIMES OF IMPERIALISM.

Sorry for the caps.  It makes me scream.  By pushing this line of "the 
bombing has unleashed the monstrous serbs and hence it is bad" Chomsky and 
the others at Z were far more harmful than the mainstream media precisely 
because no leftist would believe the mainstream media's justification for war 
- but when a Chomsky (or on a smaller scale, a Chomsky-groupie like Albert) 
says this same stuff it has credibility.  

Jared
 



From Borba100 at aol.com  Sat Feb 10 14:21:12 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:21:12 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Oy Vey Is Mir, or, With Such Reasoning, One Does Not Agree, One Submits
Message-ID: <e8.1059d632.27b70ac7@aol.com>

Ain't it charming to see Andrej (now) calling Otpor fascist.  I don't recall 
him saying that before, but OK. So let me see:  1) Chomsky and Andrej 
described Oct. 5 as a progressive revolution 2) that revolution's real deeds 
- the sacking of parliament, the forceful dispossession of staff at Tanjug, 
Politika, Borba and other anti-NATO institutions, the visits to nationalists 
and socialists and communists with death threats - all this was carried out 
by Otpor and by similar forces such as the explicitly pro-US (indeed, pro 
Monarchy) Mayor of Canak and his paid followers whose march on Belgrade was 
modeled on the march on Rome (see British Helsinki Group's report on Serbian 
election farce at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/srbele.htm  )  

The Crisis Committees which forced the Socialist-Radical government out and 
replaced them with the pro US forces of Djindjic, Protic and Svilanovic - 
these were staffed by Otpor et al as well.  But Andrej now says Otpor and the 
like are - fascists.  So fascists were the shock troops of a  revolution and 
the revolution was progressive.   
With this kind of reasoning, it is impossible for one to agree. One must 
SUBMIT.  It is all explained by the forefather of such reasoning, Mr. H. 
Dumpty, quoted by L. Carroll, as follows:

   "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful 
tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less."
    "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so 
many different things."
    '"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be 
master----that's all."

--Lewis Carroll, Through The Looking-Glass

Jared



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 14:51:15 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 21:51:15 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] More notes on revolutionaries: Nadezhda Krupskaya
Message-ID: <001101c093ab$a36e9d40$e28e20d9@mjones>

Nadzezhda Krupskaya wrote in "Memories of Lenin":

"Peter[sburg], autumn 1893; an unknown Marxist arrives from the Volga;
an exercise book is passed around `the comrades'- each page is folded in
half, one side covered in an unsightly scrawl, with many crossings out and
emendations. This contained the views `On Markets' of Krasin, the `legal'
Marxist. The other side carefully written, with no corrections, contains the
replies of the newly-arrived Ulyanov. 

The social-democratic circles; the Sunday Evening Adult School, discussion 
groups, clubs, illiteracy classes, the `workers' study circles beyond 
the Nevsky Gate'. Agitation and propaganda. The workers circles read 
Vol I of Marx's Capital, then Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private  
Property and the State:  `The method of agitation on the basis of the 
workers' everyday needs  became rooted deeply in our Party's work',
Krupskaya wrote.

 Unlike social-democratic parties in the West, they did not stand
aside from purely `trade-union' struggles, strikes etc. As police surveillance
increased, Lenin showed unusual aptitude for covert work. `He knew all
the courtyards' and gave the police spies the slip. He learnt ciphers. Harrassed
by the police, he continued to do agitational work. A A Yakubova and Z O
Nevzorova did a leaflet for women workers at the Laferme tobacco factory
on Vasilievski Ostrov Street. They rolled the leaflets up in tiny tubes and
loitered by the factory gates tll the hooter sounded. As the workers poured
out in great throngs, the rushed through them scattering the leaflets from
their aprons into the very hands of the astonished employees. Lenin played
an increasingly central role, travelled to Berne and Zurich and met
Plekhanov, came back and was hunted as an `important state criminal'. 

On 9 December 1895, Lenin and his closest comrades were arrested. From
prison voluminous correspondence began, all in code with letters written 
in  invisible ink made of milk. 

Lenin even wrote The Development of Capital in Russia in prison.
`Today I have eaten 6 inkpots' was the PS on a letter. The inkpots were
made of bread, and eaten whenever a warder appeared.
In May 1898 Krupskaya went to Shushenskoye where Lenin was exiled.
Krupskaya arrived with her mother at dusk, `Vladimir Ilyich was out
hunting'. His `izba' (log hut) had whitewashed walls decorated with fir
branches, and brightly-coloured home-spun mats on the floors. The owners
of the izba and the neighbours all crowded round. Later when Lenin
returned the owner told him a drunken friend had arrived and scattered his
books everywhere; he shot up the wooden steps at the very moment
Krupskaya emerged. Lenin was lean, healthy and very fit. 

They talked `for hours and hours' and strolled under the Siberian stars too.

They rented half a house with kitchen-garden  attached, which grew
cucumbers, carrots, beetroots and pumpkins. They planted hope; Lenin
hunted deer and rabbits and ducks and  hares, dressed in leather breeches
and often getting into bogs and ditches after the game hidden there. In the
mornings Lenin translated the Webbs (the English Fabian leaders) and in
the afternoons worked on his book, Development of Capitalism in Russia.
Huge landscape, feudal society, illiterate serfs groaning under kulak
oppression: `After the winter frosts, Nature bursts forth tempestuously into
the spring,' Krupskaya writes. '...Sunset. In the great spring-time pools in
the fields, wild swans were swimming,' the wood-cocks were clucking,
waters burbling. Lenin had a retriever, a Gordon setter called Zhenka: `In
the autumn we went to far-off forest clearings. Vladimir Ilyich said: `If we
meet any hares, I won't shoot as I haven't brought any straps to carry them.'
But when a hare darted out Vladimir Ilyich fired at it just the same'.
In the evenings, he read German philosophy- or Russian novels, Pushkin
or Lermontov or Tolstoy. They corresponded voluminously -- with Anna
Ilyinichna, Lenin's sister, and with many comrades in Petersburg and
elsewhere. 

In exile Lenin reflected on the political strategy for the future.
News from Russia grew scant; the Party was in complete disarray but the
Economists had made huge strides. The `Credo' became popular.
So what was to be done? In his last year of exile, 1899, Lenin had already
clarified the organisational plan which he later developed in What is to be
Done? and in Letter to a Comrade: There would have to be an All-Russian
newspaper, published abroad. `Vladimir Ilyich began to have sleepless
nights, and became terribly thin', Krupskaya would write., 'thinking out his
plan in minute detail'.

February 1900: Lenin leaves Siberian exile for Russia, travelling  on
horseback hundreds of miles along the Yenisei. 

They rode by day and by night, under clear skies and bright moonlight, 
wrapped in elk-skin coats and wearing felt boots. 

They arrived at Pskov on 10 March 1900. On 2 June Lenin arrived 
in Petersburg with Martov, was promptly arrested and
soon found himself in exile once more. Krupskaya was still in exile; his
mother, alone in Moscow;  his sister Maria-Ilyinichna in jail, his sister
Anna-Ilyinichna abroad. Then followed the years of exile, and the at first
uncertain, desperate, unremitting efforts to set up a revolutionry centre
among the emigre communities; a world of false-bottomed suitcases, secret
passports and papers, of hiding, hunger, lack of news, enforced separations,
of bitter quarrels which were destined to leave their marks on the Russia of
the future.

Lenin went abroad first, and for a time was separated by force of
circumstance from Nadezhda. When she finally tracked him down, going
mistakenly first to Prague and finally locating him in Munich, she found
him boarding in a pub and eating out at a German hausfrau's kitchen in
Mehlspeise. Lenin had a tin mug hung on a nail in his room, to drink tea
with; from here he began to create Iskra, a project which drew dismissive
scorn from older, more world-weary exiles like Vera Zasulich. But in
Munich, then London, Iskra came alive, grew, and was soon at the heart of
a web of revolutionaries throughout the Russian empire -- the plot as laid
down in `What is to be done?' (written during this time in Munich). They
lived communally, in the bohemian, often extravagant fashion which
became the caricatural image of the exiled Russian revolutionary of the
`Red Terror Party', as some British newspapers called it. Vera Zasulich
dressed carelessly, smoked endlessly, lived in apparent disorder, and raised
a child too: she was asked by some middle-class English ladies for Russian
recipes - How did she cook her meat?

`It just depends', she told them. `If I am hungry I cook it for ten minutes; if
I am not hungry, about three hours'. She, like Krupskaya, like all the exiles,
yearned for Russia, and feared what Krupskaya called `the dead sea of
emigre life, that drags one to the bottom'.

Soon there were Iskra agents in Berlin, Paris, Brussels, Berne. Letters
came from Petersburg, Moscow, the Urals, the South. Lenin -- working
feverishly, pacing the room, muttering under his breath what he was about
to write --  22 January 1917 Lenin gives lecture to a youth meeting at the
Zurich People's Hall. Subject: 1905 revolution. Many in audience from
Germany and elsewhere - pacificsts, war-resisters and the like. Lenin
wanted to show what a revolution feels like. The coming European
revolution, he foresaw, would be both proletarian and socialist: `Only stern
battles, only civil wars, can free humanity from the yoke of capital'; and it
will be class conscious wkers who come forth to lead the submerged,
exploited masses in these titanic struggles. But Lenin says he has no idea
when these events will begin: `We of the older generation may not live to
see the decisive battles of this coming generation'. Then one evening ,
while Ilyich was getting ready to leave for Zurich library to read the
newspapers, as was his custom, a fellow-emigre, Bronsky, arrived with the
news: a revolution had broken out in Peter! Lenin and Krupskaya walked
down to the lake, where the nespapers were displayed. `I do not remember
how the rest of the day and the evening passed,' wrote Krupskaya, but next
day they plunged headlong into the incessant activity which led them,
breathless, to October.

They worked out desperate schemes for getting back to Russia. In `the
semi-delirium of the night' they thought of returning by airplane- but this
would mean Swedish identities and then, Krupskaya told him, one night
`you'll fall asleep, dream of Mensheviks, start swearing... and give the game
away'...Lenin sat in Geneva, tormented; on 18 March he lectured Swiss
workers on the lessons of the Paris Commune (it was the anniversary); they
left elated, but Lenin crushed by feelings of impotence...He bombarded
Pravda with his `Letters from Afar', including the article on the proletarian
militia (only published posthumously; his cautious Petersburg comrades
thought Vladimir Ilyich had gone mad) -- the hated police were abolished
overnight after the February revolution (and were never replaced). Lenin
wanted a general arming of the citizens, wanted the militia not only to keep
order but distribute bread, act as `sanitarki', see every family was
provisioned and each child given a bottle of good milk - and that no rich
family has extra milk, that the palaces of the rich are not left unoccupied
with the poor are destitute.... `What other organisation except a universal
people's militia with women participating as the equals of men, can do such
deeds?' he wrote.

And then, characteristically, while arguing about whether militiamen
delivering infants' milk was socialism or not, Lenin struck at the root
question dogging the whole revolutionary process: `Theoretical
classification doesn't matter now. It would indeed be a grave error if we
tried now to fit the complicated, urgent, rapidly unfolding tasks of the
revolution into the procrustean bed of a narrowly conceived "theory",
instead of regarding theory first of all and above all as a guide to action'.

The Mensheviki - even the bourgeois parties, in their  unfettered cynicism
- criticised Lenin for his opportunism, for his blatant disregard of all that
the classics of Marxism taught about the need to observe the stages of a
revolution - and accused him of rivetting together from the fragments of
mass desires, a programme which had nothing in common with Marxism,
which borrowed greatly from the SR's agrarian platform, and which had
only one real purpose - to lever Lenin and his henchmen into power, at any
cost. Lenin, they said, knew a backward country like Russia could not build
socialism in isolation- and knew, or suspected, that World Revolution was
a chimera. Yet Lenin's pragmatic determination to follow a mass line, to
speak only of `Peace Bread and Land' because that was what the masses
wanted, Marxist or no- could (the Mensheviks argued) in the end mean
only the betrayal of his working-class supporters and the destruction of his
party amid the fanatastical pursuit of `socialism in one country'. Lenin was
contemptuous of these criticisms.


Mark Jones



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 14:51:22 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 21:51:22 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] More notes on revolutionaries: Alexandra Kollontai
Message-ID: <001201c093ab$a743c120$e28e20d9@mjones>

The Bolshevik Alexandra Kollontai wrote in Pravda, 17 February 1913, that: 
'Women's Day is a link in the long, solid chain of the women workers' movement...
Let a joyous sense of serving the common class  cause and of fighting
simultaneously for their own female emancipation inspire women workers
to join in the celebration of Womens' Day.'

In 'The War and Our Immediate Tasks', 1914, Kollontai wrote: 
"Social-Democracy ... underestimated the *moral
influence* of the old bourgeois world on the mood of the people... the
governments of the bourgeois states understood popular psychology better
than the very representatives of the democratic and working-class
masses!

Kollontai was in the Reichstag on 4 August 1914 when the German
Social-Democracy voted for Bethmann-Hollweg and the war-credits: 'I
experienced horror and despair. I was walled into an atmosphere so
suffocating, so claustral and dark there seemed no hope... In that
moment of total confusion and the collapse of the Second International,
when the bourgeois capitalist parties were rejoicing... there rang 
out the mighty voice of Lenin. Alone against the whole world, he 
pitilessly analysed ... the imperialist war and, more importantly, 
showed how it must be transformed into civil war and revolution. 
He who desires peace must declare war against opportunism and break 
with his compromise, with his own bourgeoisie... This was one of the 
most significant moments of my life...The lower sank the opportunists, 
he larger towered the fearless image of a man who, amidst all this 
bloody chaos, clearly pointed the way."

>From Pravda, 6 March 1917: 'Our Memorial to the Freedom Fighters':
"There are memorable days in the life of mankind which run like a golden
thread of popular celebration down the centuries... today we are
singing... a hymn of victory over the grave of tsarist autocracy, with 
all its crimes and bloodshed, its obscurantism, its cruel indifference 
to the sufferings of the working people, its serfdom, its abuse of the 
common soldiers, its corrupt tsarist officials, its prisons, its 
Siberian exile, its whips, gallows, arbitrary violence and oppression.

Lenin's room at the Smolny Institute (where the Bolsheviks made their
headquarters in preparing for the October Rising) was on second floor.
Lenin's table was pushed up against the wall, and an electric bulb hung
just above it. The windows of the room looked out on the steel-grey, 
blustery Neva. Crowding around Lenin at the table, the members of Sovnarkom; 
by the window, N P Gorbunov , Sovnarkom secretary. Once Kollontai arrived
there with some round, red Dutch cheeses sent her to give Lenin, by some
Swedish comrades she'd had known in exile.

Lenin asked her to divide the cheese up amongst the half-famished
ministers of the new Soviet government, `not forgetting Gorbunov'. But
pressure of business meant no-one had time to eat the cheese, and when
Kollontai returned later that day to Lenin's study the cheese was gone-
eaten by the equally-hungry guard on Lenin's room.

Nadezhda Konstantinovna Krupskaya, Lenin's wife, wearing her plain
grey dress, slipping unobserved at the back of crowded meeting-halls,
observing and later relating all to Vladimir Ilyich...
.... Yelena Dmitryevna Stasova, a comrade-in-arms of Lenin during the
underground years, and  secretary of the Party CC. Her clear, high brow
and tall, statuesque figure was often to be seen at Petrosoviet meetings
at the Tauride Palace, or at the house of the ballerina Kshesinskaya, then
and then at Smolny. In her hands a notebook, round her a press of comrades
from the front, soldiers, workers, Red Guards, women workers, Soviet
Deputies, seeking a quick, clear answer or an order....

...Klavdia Nikolayeva, a working women of humble origins, joined
Bolsheviks in 1908, faced arrest, exile, imprisonment (like Stasova). In
1917 she returned to Petrograd and began to edit _Kommunistka...

...Konkordia Samoilova , who died 'at her revolutionary post' of cholera
in 1921 - - -another great Bolshevik women's organiser.

...Inessa Armand , `gentle, charming, feminine'...

....December 1917 ... Winter still not set in properly, sleet falling
and a cold northerly wind blowing up the Neva. Lenin exhausted, insomniac,
is persuaded to visit the Halila sanatorium on the Karelian Isthmus,
Finland, for three days- actually he wanted to write a new work amid  
the frosts of a magnificent Finnish forest, where he could also go 
hunting. He leaves the Finland Station on the morning of December 24th, 
with Krupskaya and his sister Maria Ilyinichna- they travel incognito 
in a 2nd class compartment: as the train is about to leave, Lenin -- 
head of the first workers state -- remembers he has no money and turns 
to Kollontai, who has come from the stores of the Welfare Commissariat 
to say good-bye and loan them furs; Lenin asks to borrow 100 Finnish 
marks for the journey; but the Commissar for Welfare discovers at the 
Currency Exchange desk that she has no Russian money either....

Mark Jones





From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sat Feb 10 15:27:24 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:27:24 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] Moscow Times: Carnegie Foundation & Borodin
In-Reply-To: <000701c09352$90cb0740$b19d20d9@mjones>
References: <7a.10562a27.27b5e219@aol.com>
Message-ID: <0c43c2427220a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Moscow Times: Carnegie Foundation, 
el 10 Feb 01, a las 11:13, Mark Jones dijo:


> ... this article shows that Minsk is NOT defending
> Borodin but is only criticising THE MANNER of his replacement.

But this also shows that it is not Borodin who is at stake. You are arguing for 
my benefit, Mark, thank you so much.

A hug,



N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sat Feb 10 15:27:29 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:27:29 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] Rogues and sovereignty I
In-Reply-To: <000801c0938e$c4f67860$e28e20d9@mjones>
References: <098331407140a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <0c69f2927220a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

Allow me to reassure Mark first of all.  Will begin by the end of his posting.

En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Rogues and sovereignty I, 
el 10 Feb 01, a las 18:24, Mark Jones dijo:

> I'm not at all suggesting suicidal, isolationist activites or ultra-left
> immolationism. I'm merely pointing to the historical realities, which you 
> have yet to come to terms with.

My dear Mark, I am sure you would probably be the last person to suggest 
"suicidal, isolationist activites or ultra-left immolationism". That is out of 
the question and if I did not know you quite well by now, I would be upset by 
your suggestion that I am implying anything like that. 

This does not mean, however, that I accept your idea that I have not "come to 
terms" with some particular historical reality. There must be a thrillion 
zillion facts I must come to terms with, of course, but this time I am afraid, 
instead, that this time a sweeping generalization took you too high in the 
atmosphere of theoretic prediction, with the resulting risk of asphyxia. 

If I understand you well, when you are saying that

> ... this huge wave of anti-colonial and national liberation struggles,
...
> have produced a pitifully smaller revolutionary wave in our own time.

I am afraid you misunderstood me. I did not mean that we should _celebrate_ the 
sad results of the wave of revolutionary action that, under the worst 
conditions, changed the face of the world during the last century. 

Decolonization was almost always followed by recolonization, albeit under a 
disguise. Of course. However, this "disguise" is not a minor issue. The 
difference between formal colonies (that is, occupied lands) and "informal 
empires" is not to be disparaged, and if only this slight difference were the 
result of the enormous wave of heroism that was defeated in more senses than 
one during the last three decades, it would be worth defending. Not 
celebrating. Defeats are not to be celebrated, not on my book at least.

> What is
> there to celebrate? Patrick Bond's struggle for stand-pipes? 

This is not what _I_ think, as both Patrick and you know. I think that the 
answer to the tactical victories of our enemies does not reside in proposing 
that  "in the meantime" we should struggle for stand-pipes (which, by the way, 
are not unimportant for concrete human beings...). What I want to call _your_ 
attention to, instead, is to the fact that it is not from a general view of the 
workings of the global system that we can develop concrete weapons and tactics 
for our struggle. That is, I shun generalizations such as your

> The "new conditions
> in which imperialism was forced to operate" have been almost entirely successful
> in castrating the working classes of the peripheries. 

Sure? In my own country, imperialism was forced to _destroy_ a militant working 
class that did not allow to be emasculated. Elsewhere, in countries where the 
working class is a new class, with mostly a peasant background, we are 
witnessing a growing wave of labour militancy. Witness the Korean workers, the 
Brazilian "landless" (who are militantly taken away from the pool of cheap 
labour around the cities by a movement that resettles them in the lands of the 
great landowners, thus questioning the regime of bourgeois property and helping 
workers _with_ a job to struggle against a diminished army of reserve).

I would rather say (but don't take me too seriously, because this is just 
another sweeping generalization) that if any working class has been emasculated 
after 1945 (and even before) that working class is NOT the working class in the 
peripheries. But this is not the point, however. The point is that according to 
you,

> you [Nestor] have proved my [Mark's]
> point for me: not only does Argentina today have LESS sovereignty (formal and
> real) than a century ago, there is also much less mass political awareness and
> less mass resistance now than then.

How on Earth you reached this conclusion is still a mystery to me. But the ways 
of Allah are unfathomable. I bow at His might (sorry, Allah seems to have been 
male).

Now, of course Argentina is today a bloody clown who puts the head through an 
opening in a wall, waiting for the next ball to hit in the face. But 
"Argentina" is an abstraction. I think in class terms myself, as you proposed 
on a different posting which I will deal with later. The ruling classes in 
Argentina have turned the country into that kind of clown. In the meantime, 
they have forcibly destroyed a good deal of our social tissues, and have 
mercilessly reduced the working class to a ghost of itself, a working class 
where the unemployed are more important than the employed. What they cannot do, 
however, is to provide a solution to the essential human necessities of the 
members of this (and other subject) class (es).  So that, in the end, they have 
no way out of the problem.

Now, the problem in fact lies in the clear perception by most members of that 
working class that the starting point of the machine of human destruction lies 
in the particular relation of Argentina to the world system. Argentineans do 
NOT ignore that we have been recolonized. How could one, when one's own country 
has achieved the unsurmountable feat of CREATING a new imperialism, namely 
Spanish imperialism, out of scratch?

Political awareness and resistance are not unrelated to the terrorist tactics 
employed by the oligarchs and the imperialists, tactics which include the 
permanent drumming of many "leftists" on the "human rights" issue. They have 
scared people, but they have not blunted our awareness. The problem lies in 
discovering the way to make people realize that, since (as they already know) 
things not only CAN be worse, they WILL be worse, and necessarily so, "there is 
nothing to be lost but our chains". 

On a recent posting you lectured me on the importance of having a good legal 
environment (remember?  on the Bush fraud issue). Now I feel I need to lecture 
you on the importance of a state-terrorism environment.

At any rate, you have not answered the basic question I posed on my lengthy 
mails, Mark. Please read them again. I know that they are a good piece of 
political literature, by the way. Whether you agree with me or not, you will 
enjoy a second reading.

Hugs,


> 



N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sat Feb 10 15:27:34 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:27:34 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: <3A8554AC.CE0DE430@ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <0c2fa3427220a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Ura, 
el 10 Feb 01, a las 8:48, Carrol B Cox dijo:

> 
> But, Nestor, I think it of some importance to be prepared
> to recognize, when they appear, situations which represent
> either (1) an exception to the principles we share here
> (probably rare) OR (2) not an instance in which the principles
> have no reference whatever -- and it is just possible that
> the Borodin case is an instance of the latter. It is merely a
> routine criminal case -- being handled in the way the Marc Rich
> case should have been handled.


I am eager to accept the possibility. Moreover, I stated on my first posting 
that even in the case of my "own" rogues I was in a disposition to accept that. 
An example that may be found fitting is that of the criminal Cavallo by name 
(but so far as I know bearing no relation with Cavallo the economist other than 
their common belonging to the Ugly Side) who was captured in Mexico and is 
being judged in Spain. I even stated that the fact that Argentine criminals 
were somehow defended by the institutional set up in Argentina made it harder 
to defend sovereignty of Argentina, establishing a _de facto_ intervention into 
our own system of Justice, and I even compared this situation with the more 
favourable one that was prevailing in Chile (though I also pointed to its 
uglier class contents: if they can indulge in such a display of justice, the 
ruling classes in Chile must be fully aware that there is no possibility that a 
popular reaction takes the results of the Pinochet trial and throw it at the 
face of Pinochet's sponsors, inheritors and continuators).

However, I must state here that these musings are reasonable for me, in 
Argentina. They don't seem reasonable, from my point of view, for Mark, in 
London. Truth is always concrete. What I am requesting is, as Bol?var once 
requested, "Allow us to live through our Middle Ages by ourselves". I believe 
that it is my duty to make justice to my own Quislings. And it is Mark's duty 
to ensure that it is not his own rulers who do it instead. This is my position, 
in a nutshell.

I still believe, with Vladimir Lenin, that the division between imperialist 
countries and the colonial and semicolonial world is the basic division of our 
current global system. I only draw the conclusions, with the highest respect 
for comrades who are waging a battle in the belly of the Beast. 

Hugs, and glad to debate in these terms,



N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From zapata at sezampro.yu  Sat Feb 10 15:47:36 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 23:47:36 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Oy Vey Is Mir, or, With Such Reasoning, One Does Not Agree, One Submits
References: <e8.1059d632.27b70ac7@aol.com>
Message-ID: <006201c093b2$e9eda020$56bd6ac2@andrej>

To the other people on the list:
I never used term fascist for OTPOR / as far as I can remember, and if I
did, I want to withdraw it/ because fascism for me has a rather definite
historical meaning.
I said this, however: "It is true, you have OTPOR, you have Free Serbia ,
two disgusting neoliberal youth camps, related to DOS goons, linked to Z".
I have never called October the 5Th to be a progressive revolution. Please,
find the place where I have said this. Lies, lies, lies....Why is so
difficult to build a political position on arguments? Oh yes, because than
you would have to find arguments.....
 Some people, present on this list, are making this peculiar sort of
judgement:
>But Andrej now says Otpor and the
like are - fascists.  So fascists were the shock troops of a  revolution and
the revolution was progressive.
With this kind of reasoning, it is impossible for one to agree. One must
SUBMIT.  It is all explained by the forefather of such reasoning, Mr. H. <
And,
>Ain't it charming to see Andrej (now) calling Otpor fascist.  I don't
recall
>him saying that before, but OK.

I wasn't lazy, so I went to the list archives to find messages these men
built this "argument" on.
And here are those letters:
Reply from Andrej (sept. 5th)

Dear Jared,
I respect your work very much, as I have told you this several times. We,
from "Resistance web site",are publishing , with your kind permission many
of your articles, or articles coming from your site.
So, please read this as a friendly suggestion:
Milosevic is a criminal. Big time. I am living under his yoke, witnessing
his crimes everyday. He is a little ruthless dictator, with a mad wife, with
two idiotic kids. He is privatizing everything, he has organized a perfect
cleptocracy for his family and his oligarchy, he had killed almost all of
the opposition press ( it's low quality notwithstanding, we are talking
about freedom of thought and expression); he have stolen the elections in
1996; his thugs are beating up kids in the middle of the day, his assassins
are killing or kidnapping people ( Ivan Stambolic is the most recent
example) - the list of his crimes in internal politics is endless. And, with
regards to his external politics, people form all over the world, good
people , are deceived with his leftist-anti imperialist mask: he is not a
leftist. He is haunting leftist, authentic radicals, in his own country. His
party is the richest party on this side of Colorado river. He is using every
opportunity, and every emotion, to preserve power and to stay on power.
Yugoslavia is a wonderful country. Yugoslav people deserve help and
protection from "antiserb racism" which we are all witnesses of. We should
fight back this idea of collective crime which is casted upon us.
But Yugoslavia is not Milosevic. Fighting against imperialism, injustices
made to Yugoslavs, new wars which Imperial States of AmeriKKKa are
instigating on this soil, slowly but very skillfully, is possible without
attachment to Milosevic. He doesn't deserve it. I guess that my word isn't
enough, but please just acknowledge that I am an insider, radical leftist
and a person who suffered a lot under foreign imperialism and under
Milosevic. I think that this opportunity gives me a chance to be as
objective as one could be , in complex situation like this.
With regards to Chomsky, contrary to what you may believe, his books helped
radical leftist here to make a clearer picture about the nature of state
violence, nature of AmeriKKKan foreign politics, European Imperialism,
shaping of the mental images and representations, and to offer this picture
to the people here, with much success. Chomsky helped us a lot. His mistakes
notwithstanding. He made good deal of mistakes, yes. But who of us, involved
in a fight for social change, for a better and healthier society, didn't?
With respect, in solidarity,
Andrej Grubacic
In addition to my suggestion to Jared that he should reconsider his position
on Milosevic and Chomsky, without a danger to forget the moment of US-Euro
imperialism and their crimes in the region- crimes which Yugoslavs are not
likely to forget- I am sending another Chomsky epistle- answer to some nerd
advocating new NATO intervention on ZNet forum. Chomsky is fighting this
line of argumentation masterly. And he is reminding us, again, that things
are never simple when it comes to this sort of situation, and that we
shouldn't choose "lesser evil" in political realm but fight every evil
instead. Difficult task? It is.
"Between two evils don't make me choose the lesser one!" Karl Kraus said.
Please don't make me choose between NATO and Milosevic, as my friend, young
anarchist, like to say!
In struggle,
Andrej

Jared


Reply from Andrej (sept. 5th)

My dear Jared,
It is strange that you cannot recall our idea- my proposal - to write a book
about NATO war against Serbia. It was made in the middle of the war. We had
a long phone call, talking over 20 minutes, and I have told you that the
only condition for writing for this book was that facts, facts, facts and
facts are respected and that Milosevic shouldn't be presented as benefactor
and great antiimperialistic factor. You have rejected the proposal , with
the words that you have to write in favor of Milosevic because "the whole
campaign is being made on his demonization"; you have stayed on this same
line and I respect that- I admire your consistency. What buffles me is the
thing that you don't remember our rich correspondence , and good deal of it
was about Sorosh, Yugoslav "Americanisms", pseudo-NGO's, US militarism and
interests in region and so forth. I made clear to you that I am against all
of these, that I have even a reputation in Belgrade as someone who is in
silent war with Sorosh and his community, because of their anti leftist,
anti libertarian , capitalist, pseudopfilantropist and , yes,
spy-organization role here. Ask around, I am sure that this "score of
activist Serb" do no my name and positions rather well.
So, telling me this, is rather a waste of time:
You ignore the most important fact about Yugoslavia internally(.)
> Serbia - working for US intelligence or for Soros, its private arm.

I am not ignoring anything, I am very well aware of this, and I try to fight
it, best I can.
But, just like you, I am also on the same line: I am an ethical anarchist,
left libertarian, radical leftist who cannot feel support towards the State,
Government, nationalism...I know only too well how nationalism is being used
in class manipulation. And I am witnessing Milosevic crimes- I am not saying
that he is the most brutal dictator?- every day. He is not more brutal than
Salvadorian death squads or Turkish government, but where are those
comparisons taking us exactly? People are suffering under Milosevic booth.
This is enough for me.
And I think that you should admit that Chomsky was also very consistent; he
made many mistakes, but he never did abandon his crucial principal: "Not
supporting the government but opposing foreign intervention". He never did
supported Vietnamese leaders. He opposed criminal war against Vietnam people
and their right to chose. Same for Nicaragua, Salvador , Columbia ( he is
very much against FARC as you know, of course)....
So, in brief, I don't see that Chomsky did something harmful. Once again,
he was very useful to us, leftist community here, as someone who had
brilliantly demasked AmeriKKKan imperialism , media deceptions, State
violence per se......
I cannot judge his usefulness to American anti war movement because I am
not
in America. So, i would like to ask you, in the name of courtesy, to stop
explaining me Milosevic and his government. Fighting NATO and Milosevic is
much more admirable task, and strongly advice you to re-think your
position.
I find this words, made by Mr. Wood, illuminating in this sense:

"... I think that what this debate reflects with wonderful
clarity is what Fanon called the "pitfalls of the national
consciousness". This is linked to the debate that some of us
had just a little earlier. A purely national consciousness
rallies to defend the leadership of the "oppressed nation"
as its bulwark against imperialism. But an anti-imperialism
that is not thoroughly guided by anti-capitalist and
anti-bourgeois radicalism simply becomes a defense of
scoundrels, opportunists and tin-pot dictators. These latter
are demagogues who know the political and rhetorical value
of "anti-imperialism" only too well. But what is so
deceiving is that their rhetoric always contains a grain of
truth. My point is that we need so much more than this
little nationalist grain of truth........."

We must tolerate a great level of complexity here, but giving support to
Milosevic certainly isn't a best choice to fight US imperialism, i.e. to
help people in Yugoslavia.
Yours,

Andrej

Reply from Andrej (sept. 6th)

Dear fellow, what is exactly the problem here?
Why are you constantly attacking Tony about the things he isn't saying?
Why are you in constant need for opponents? Hey, we agree with you! What
seems to be the problem?
Who had denied this:
>
> Yugoslavia is a tiny country. It has stood up to the biggest
tyrannosaurus
> and not capitulated. This had a wonderful affect on the world. The Yugo
> government is not racists. They have superb relations with Libya. They
> have a military alliance with China and Iraq. They have welcomed tens of
> thousands of Chinese immigrants. They remain pretty damned cool in the
face
> of constant provocation. Not bad for a a little country that used to be a
> virtual US colony run by a guy who used to be a banker in NY.
>

I didn't? Tony did not. Tony was very astute in his defense of my countryman
in his discourse on this and many other lists.
What are we reproaching to you? You are abolishing YU Government from crimes
it committed and continue to commits. To make myself perfectly clear: I am
not saying that YU government is the worst thing in universe, quite far from
it, but it is a criminal organization with one thief and dictator , along
with his idiotic wife ( to put it mildly not "rather disgustingly") and who
needs serious medical attention ( I mean wife, her husband needs other kind
of attention)....Don't let me repeat all the crimes they've committed. And
please don't make from me, or Tony, an apologists for NATO lobby in
Yugoslavia! My dear friend, I went trough bombing and I'll never forget that
experience! I am target of Imperial US and not Milosevic! But it doesn't
mean that i should fall in love with one petty dictator because of it. Quite
the contrary, I'll fight USA - European militarism and imperialism, as well
as Milosevic misdoing.
On the more practical level, I am sure that US is helping Milosevic to stay
on power; that there is a secret, tacit agreement between these two
political Mafiosi, your and mine government, to destroy Yugoslavia:
Milosevic for the sake of preserving power and US for the sake of
ideological, economical, geostrategical etc, etc, interests. Milosevic is
useful to them, like Saddam. As a negative of group portrait. As an excuse
for Keynzian, Pentagon economy, ideological justifications, finishing
Yugoslavia by Montenegrian secession.
Chomskyian balance again: Don't defend governments, defend people! Oppose
wars don't establish erotic relationship with the oppressed governments!
Comradely, Red and Black Regards,
Andrej








From embark at epud.net  Sat Feb 10 15:58:22 2001
From: embark at epud.net (embarkadero)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:58:22 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: CrashList digest, Vol 1 #295 - 16 msgs
References: <E14ReMP-0005bO-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <000301c093b6$92fda040$132b74d8@pavilion>

> From: "Mark Jones" <jones.mark at btconnect.com>
> To: <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>
> Subject: RE: [CrashList] Re: Can we afford Deserts?

> What has made me terminally gloomy is that people are so slow to get it.
[snip]
> Only the most determined and relentless political pressure can hope
> to have an effect and ONLY WE CAN DO IT.
[snip]
>Only the masses can change
> things, only if there is the kind of eruption into history of the most
submerged
> masses of humanity as there was after 1914, and much more so, can we hope
for real
> change.
>
> This is the historical context which makes me seriously doubt the
pointfulness of
> spending our energy rushing to the rescue of Noriega, Borodin etc.
>
>
> Mark

Amen. One indeed asks the question as to why so much effort is spent on
those trivialities instead of reorganizing the priorities of those on the
left. It is no longer hard to discover where lie the biggest threats to the
masses -- and the workers -- AND everyone. Air, water, energy, food? Are
there any more fundamental priorities?

Shouldn't the responsibility of all those who champion the masses -- or seek
to lead them --be to at least acquire cognizance of the relative importance
of issues?  Jela? Jared? Andrej?  Where is your consciousness? More
importantly, where are your voices regarding global warming?

Only we can do it.

Tom
(another completely hopeless deep-eco, politically speaking.)

PS Nestor! I am chanting my mantra!!!!!







From Borba100 at aol.com  Sat Feb 10 17:36:03 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:36:03 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Double-talk, or, Sounds like support to me
Message-ID: <bc.102d61da.27b73873@aol.com>

1) Apologies. Andrej didn't say Otpor is fascist - I misread his text. He 
indeed said they are disgusting neoliberals.  My mistake. 

2) Calling them neoliberals is really off the point. A reading of the 
Helsinki report on the Serbian sham elections gives a far more sinister 
picture.  See http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/srbele.htm I also suggest 
reading "These Djindjic people are brownshirts" at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/djindjic.htm

3)  Andrej denies he supported the coup. I did a quick search and found two 
posts from him, one from Oct 2, 3 days before the coup and one from the 8th, 
three days after.  

In the first, he offers what certainly appears to be enthusiastic support for 
the buildup for the coup.  He certainly seems to have some idea about what is 
coming for he says that he dislikes the neoliberals who are in the lead but: 
"we think that taking Milosevic from the power is top  priority now and that 
ordinary people will benefit from it. Also we hope that we will have more 
space for our actions here." This is a few days prior to the coup (Oct. 1) 

He speaks enthusiastically about his friends from Cacak (in a recent post I 
called it Canak - a typo).  He enthusiastically reports that Cacak is 
blockaded - we now know that this was to permit the unhindered preparation  
of  the Mayor's March on Rome (I mean Belgrade). This was organized by the 
worst, U.S. paid elements, under notorious Mayor Illic who led the Cacak gang 
that sacked Parliament, which had made the outrageous error of having a 
Socialist majority.

His second post is in response to an email from Tariq Mahmood

who had written, to him

"Dear Professor Andrej Grubacic,
> where were you when the good old Milosevic was eliminating Muslims in
> Bosnia and Croats and Kosovars?
> Yours, Tariq Mahmood>

Andrej replies: "At the very same place where I was when Muslims , Croats and 
Kosovars were eliminating  Serbs: on the streets," - in other words, he 
accepts the Western lie of a racist Milosevich government as if it were true. 
 

Milosevich NEVER targeted racial groups, period.  That's a slander, repeated 
by  all the Z-niks such as Chomsky, Shalom and our Andrej. In fact Milosevich 
has always been quite anti-racist, for example making it a point of arresting 
paramilitaries who attacked Albanians in Kosovo..  Grouping him, as Andrej 
does in the second post, with Tudjman and Izetbegovic, both of them real 
Fascists, is simply an outrage.  Ditto with his description of Milosevich's 
so-called gangsterism.  Milosevich's government, and I have interviewed two 
of the Ministers (so far I only posted one of two interviews with Banislav 
Ifkovic on Emperor's Clothes) - their error was clearly that they were super 
legalistic.  They allowed the creation of a U.S.-paid Fifth column, including 
political parties, "civil society" groups, NGO's like G17 - all financed from 
Western overt and covert money.  U.S. paid trouble makers should have been 
thrown out of the country or, where appropriate, jailed.  Letting the U.S. 
create and pay an opposition is nuts. 

Later in his second offering, Andrej says  "We have cleaned our backyard, as 
the old saying goes. I hope that western leftist do realize that it is about 
time for them to take care of moral monsters , comfortably seated in their 
governments."

"We have cleaned our backyard." What can this mean, to ordinary mortals, when 
it is posted Oct. 8?   Three days after the coup? Except support for the coup 
and the creation of the Crisis Committees. It is true that he then adds a 
wish that Western leaders do likewise with their own governments.  But since 
Milosevich was overthrown (which he said was the key thing BEFORE it happened 
and nows certainly appears to be supporting AFTER it happened) and since 
nobody is actually overthrowing Western governments, you will forgive me if I 
say: strip away the bullshit and this means support for the coup from the 
"left". 

Now Andrej denies he supported the coup.  This sounds like double talk. It is 
very much like Chomskym who wrote that Milosevich's government installed an 
"aprheid like" regime in Kosovo - and then when he was criticized for writing 
this simply denied saying it.  With Chomsky and apparently Andrej you can say 
something and then, like Humpty Dumpty, you can act aghast when somebody has 
the nerve to take your words at face value because OBVIOUSLY you meant the 
opposite!

Please. 

Here are the two pieces. 

Dear friends,
>     Today (2 October 2000) General Strike started in whole Serbia. We,
> anarchists and anarcho-syndicalists from Serbia, are supporting the
strike,
> even if it is made by opposition which we don't support because of their
> nationalistic and neo-liberal views and of course because of our anarchist
> believes that political parties are not going to bring anything good to
the
> people, because we think that taking Milosevic from the power is top
> priority now and that ordinary people will benefit from it. Also we hope
> that we will have more space for our actions here.
>     Strike started all over Serbia, including capital Belgrade. Belgrade
is
> totally closed, main streets are closed down by busses and trams that are
on
> the stand still. Workers in most of public firms are on strike. Students
> from High schools and Universities are protesting also. Proposed strategy
by
> strikers it that people will start taking over electronic media (which, in
> Belgrade especially, are mostly controlled by state) by entering the
> buildings and forcing state people out. Milosevic is in panic, he was
forced
> for the first time to talk himself on television, accusing people who are
> striking of being paid by NATO.
>     Situation in small cities is even better for strikers RTS
> (Radio-Television Serbia) locals in few cities stopped announcing state
> informations and started informing people about real situation in Serbia.
> Our anarcho-syndicalist friends from Cacak (small city in Serbia) told us
> that Cacak is totally blocked, that only institution that is working is
one
> elementary school in which policemans are in, it is planned expulsion of
> those policemans out. Also main highway is blocked.
>     That is news for now. When I have more time I'll send some fresh
news...
>

Andrej Grubacic zapata at sezampro.yu
Sun, 8 Oct 2000 02:50:03 +0200 

Previous message: [CrashList] Fw: A Message of Support to the Serbian people, 
from a Friend in Greece and London 
Next message: [CrashList] Fw: A Message of Support to the Serbian people, 
from a Friend in Greece and London 
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

Hello,
At the very same place where I was when Muslims , Croats and Kosovars were
eliminating  Serbs: on the streets, protesting about the war and about our
myopia of not seeing what sort of a danger US imperialism really do
represent on our soil. I was, as all other progressives here, very active in
opposing wars in Yugoslavia which were instigated by Euro-American
imperialism and conducted by people like Milosevic, Izetbegovic, Kucan and
Tudjman. I hope that you are not buying CNN- BBC story of Milosevic as a
chief culprit and personification of Balkan "evils"? Milosevic was just one
of the many who listened to western dictates and used them for their own,
dreadful, purposes. But I am waiting for a moment when people who are more
responsible for Yugoslav bloodshed than this pathetic garniture of our local
thugs is going to be trailed: power structures of Germany, Imperial States
of America, England and so on. We have cleaned our backyard , as the old
saying goes. I hope that western leftist do realize that it is about time
for them to take care of moral monsters , comfortably seated in their
governments.
Respectfully,
(etc)

> Dear Professor Andrej Grubacic,
> Well said I like the way you argue. It is very forceful. Would please tell
> me where were you when the good old Milosovic was eliminating Muslims in
> Bosnia and Croats and Kosovars?
> Yours, Tariq Mahmood
>



                            




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Sat Feb 10 18:23:40 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:23:40 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Double-talk, or, Sounds like support to me
In-Reply-To: <bc.102d61da.27b73873@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20010210201713.01342c00@pop2.igc.org>

 their error was clearly that they were super 
>legalistic.  They allowed the creation of a U.S.-paid Fifth column,
including 
>political parties, "civil society" groups, NGO's like G17 - all financed
from 
>Western overt and covert money.  U.S. paid trouble makers should have been 
>thrown out of the country or, where appropriate, jailed.  Letting the U.S. 
>create and pay an opposition is nuts. 

Not to engage in self-promotion, but I suggest folks take a look at the
article Marc posted on the web about Haiti.  Aristide is making precisely
Milosevic's error as we speak, and the pattern of US destabilization and
intervention becomes clear in its repitition.  I will include it here as an
attachment, since the document has the appropriate italics, etc.

Stan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: In Port-au-Prince.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 64512 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010210/8e22d8ed/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------



"Since Cassius first did whet me against Caesar
I have not slept.
Between the acting of a dreadful thing
And the first motion, all the interim is
Like a phantasma or hideous dream.
The Genius and the mortal instruments
Are then in council; and the state of a man,
Like to a little kingdom, suffers then
The nature of an insurrection"

			-Brutus

From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 18:52:09 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:52:09 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Rogues and sovereignty I
In-Reply-To: <0c69f2927220a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <000301c093cd$41609000$478a20d9@mjones>

Nestor:

> At any rate, you have not answered the basic question I posed on my lengthy
> mails, Mark. Please read them again. I know that they are a good piece of
> political literature

They are indeed important and I'm wondering if you can't organise these and other
postings of yours into one (or better, several) essays to go on the website.
Incidentally there are other CrashListers whose articles ought to go on the Website,
it would be invidious to mention names so I'll immediately do so: Tom, Julien, Seth,
Jorge, Henry, Jim, Jose, Charles, Lou, Tahir, Rob, Steve and many others including
some like Pat and Stan already archived there. Now that the message archives are
running into dozens of megabytes there is some point in making the best of the best
more visible and I'd be glad if people would not show bourgeois false modesty but
simply send me your most precious political jewels for the sake of posterity, if
there is one.

Nestor, I did read your postings carefully and I think most of the issues between us
probably are questions of point of view -- there are few substantive differences,
just slightly different perspectives. Of course, every national proletariat, every
people in fact, has the right to defend itself by all and every means against the
horrors of neocolonialism, globalism and imperial predation generally, and of course
we shoud try to make "our own" state apparatus serve that role. And of course we
should be alive to the ways in which "our own" leaders can be compromised,
criminalised, assassinated or otherwise rendered harmless by imperialism. The people
who own and operate the USA are simply criminal gangs themselves, inhuman,
planet-busting, life-eating criminals who give no quarter and must expect none. The
point -- my whole point in fact -- is only this: the revolutionary party and the
workers' movement must be, and be seen to have, real political and social autonomy,
and cannot be the political or psychological prisoner of a national bourgeoisie
which has managed to wrape itself in the national flag.

I'd like to suggest that we look at striking examples from history to see how
revolutionary movements find ways to work with their "own" national bourgeoisie or
comprador elites, while still preserving their own autonomy and while still
preparing to seize state power. A good example is the complex relationship which
developed between the Chinese Communist Party and the Kuomintang in the 1930s and
1940s. There are people here like Henry Liu and Steve Philion who know a great deal
about that. We need to think about the meaning of 'antagonistic' and
'non-antagonistic' contradictions and how revolutionary movements can use these
ideas and methods to structure their relationships with allies from different social
classes and even their allies in the national elites and ruling classes, even highly
reactionary, comprador elites who are completely treacherous and even genocidal, but
whose own contradicitons with imperialism can still be exploited.

Nestor is right to point to the rising tides of class struggle in Latin America and
many other places. Of course it is true that, either the future is ours, or there is
no future. The future cannot be theirs.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 10 18:56:18 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:56:18 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Re: CrashList digest, Vol 1 #295 - 16 msgs
In-Reply-To: <000301c093b6$92fda040$132b74d8@pavilion>
Message-ID: <000601c093cd$d6c3aa60$478a20d9@mjones>

Tom wrote:
> (another completely hopeless deep-eco, politically speaking.)

Well, I didn't mean you, obviously. But you know who I mean.



From zapata at sezampro.yu  Sat Feb 10 19:24:46 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 03:24:46 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Double-talk, or, Sounds like support to me
References: <bc.102d61da.27b73873@aol.com>
Message-ID: <004401c093d1$405da220$9974fac3@andrej>

Fantastic!
My dear Jared, you obviously do not want to indulge me by stopping this
useless exchange. Apparently, my arguments cannot be useful for you and vice
versa. Why insisting , then?
But the funny part is that you are- obviously not taking into account long
memory of a historian:-) - deliberately lying. This text, this "first
letter", is true, with one minor correction. It wasn't written by me. It is
an enthusiastic picture from Belgrade, written by Ratibor Trivunac, IWW-AIT
secretary for Yugoslavia- I have just forwarded it to this list. With his
signature, of course.
So, this is a lie. Why, dear Jared? Our positions are so divergent that you
do not have a need to use lies to prove your assessments. Here is my reply,
but this is the last message you are going to receive from me on this
subject: I think that this list, together with my mental peace, suffered
enough.

> 1) Apologies. Andrej didn't say Otpor is fascist - I misread his text. He
> indeed said they are disgusting neoliberals.  My mistake.

Accepted!

> 2) Calling them neoliberals is really off the point. A reading of the
> Helsinki report on the Serbian sham elections gives a far more sinister
> picture.  See http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/srbele.htm I also suggest
> reading "These Djindjic people are brownshirts" at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/djindjic.htm

For an old First World lefty, perhaps, but for my country, in transition to
Third World status, this is a very important fact. We are facing some more
complex challengies right now.

> 3)  Andrej denies he supported the coup.

Yes, I have few friends here, who can witnes that I was home :-)

> In the first, he offers what certainly appears to be enthusiastic support
for
> the buildup for the coup.  He certainly seems to have some idea about what
is
> coming for he says that he dislikes the neoliberals who are in the lead
but:
> "we think that taking Milosevic from the power is top  priority now and
that
> ordinary people will benefit from it. Also we hope that we will have more
> space for our actions here." This is a few days prior to the coup (Oct. 1)

This is true, of course. And I was right. Now we really have more space
here. My magazine "Counterpoint", libertarian socialist political mag., is
now in print. Milosevic banned it. Along with my familly who was left on the
streets without job because they were, as professors, supporting students in
1996 when Milosevic had stolen the election ( he admited this fact).

> He speaks enthusiastically about his friends from Cacak (in a recent post
I
> called it Canak - a typo).  He enthusiastically reports that Cacak is
> blockaded - we now know that this was to permit the unhindered preparation
> of  the Mayor's March on Rome (I mean Belgrade). This was organized by the
> worst, U.S. paid elements, under notorious Mayor Illic who led the Cacak
gang
> that sacked Parliament, which had made the outrageous error of having a
> Socialist majority.

Jared is here reffering to the infamous letter of Mr. Trivunac,
conviniently, fo the sake of honest disccusion , contributed to me. Comments
are not neccessary, I think.

> His second post is in response to an email from Tariq Mahmood
>
> who had written, to him
>
> "Dear Professor Andrej Grubacic,
> > where were you when the good old Milosevic was eliminating Muslims in
> > Bosnia and Croats and Kosovars?
> > Yours, Tariq Mahmood>
>
> Andrej replies: "At the very same place where I was when Muslims , Croats
and
> Kosovars were eliminating  Serbs: on the streets," - in other words, he
> accepts the Western lie of a racist Milosevich government as if it were
true.

Yes, this letter is not a figment of Jared's imagination.


> Milosevich NEVER targeted racial groups, period.  That's a slander,
repeated
> by  all the Z-niks such as Chomsky, Shalom and our Andrej. In fact
Milosevich
> has always been quite anti-racist, for example making it a point of
arresting
> paramilitaries who attacked Albanians in Kosovo..  Grouping him, as Andrej
> does in the second post, with Tudjman and Izetbegovic, both of them real
> Fascists, is simply an outrage.  Ditto with his description of
Milosevich's

I never said that. Jared is very skilfull- years of experience in Maoist
Progressive Labour Party- with manipulating the facts.
What I did say was that I was against war, as an anti-millitarist. Tudjman
and Izetbegovic are, without any doubt, nazi like figures, with similar
political programs. Milosevic, on the other hand, was just a money-thirsty
thug, enchanted by power.
I was protesting against the killing of my country, Yugoslavia ( because I
feel like Yugoslav), killed in a  joint operation of western power
structures and domestic oligarchs.





> Now Andrej denies he supported the coup.  This sounds like double talk. It
is
> very much like Chomskym who wrote that Milosevich's government installed
an
> "aprheid like" regime in Kosovo - and then when he was criticized for
writing
> this simply denied saying it.  With Chomsky and apparently Andrej you can
say
> something and then, like Humpty Dumpty, you can act aghast when somebody
has
> the nerve to take your words at face value because OBVIOUSLY you meant the
> opposite!

Milosevic government did installed apartheid in Kosovo.
Problem is much deeper, with a sensitive historical background, which is
confirming that, troughout history Serbs were victims- just like today- but,
nevertheless, Milosevic did introduced apartheid......
I didnt know that Noam denied this ( or said this, as a matter of fact). But
if he denied this, he made a misitake. But, judging by Jared's devotnes to
fair arguments and honesty (cf. falsified letters), I cannot be sure. But
what this ammounts to? I dont have a slightest idea. Milosevic was killing
Albanians, Albanians were killing Serbs, NATO was killing everybody.
And I was against the war, yes, and I was not supportive regarding the
coup........
I was, as Tony said, and Nestor before him, "way too neutral"- I addmit, but
I think that I was right.

> Please.

?


> Here are the two pieces.

I hope that now, when true nature of your arguments has been exposed, you
are going to shut up. If not, even if you make some/another/ wild
construction, I don't think that it will merit a response.
One more plead: dont send this to the list anymore. I think that people here
do have more important things to do than to read "our" exchange. If you want
to write something, send it to my private address, and  promise that I will
erase it only after I read it.
 Ciao,
             Andrej







From bill at billkath.demon.co.uk  Sat Feb 10 19:43:45 2001
From: bill at billkath.demon.co.uk (Bill Howard)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 02:43:45 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Oy Vey Is Mir, or, With Such Reasoning, One Does Not Agree, One Submits
References: <e8.1059d632.27b70ac7@aol.com> <006201c093b2$e9eda020$56bd6ac2@andrej>
Message-ID: <015f01c093d5$3c99bf80$68c0989e@pc01>

>Milosevic is a criminal. Big time. I am living under his yoke, witnessing
>his crimes everyday. He is a little ruthless dictator, with a mad wife, with
>two idiotic kids. 

    If he has a noisy lawnmower, I know just what you mean.

    Sympathetically,

    Bill.





From aabdo at webtv.net  Sat Feb 10 19:45:54 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:45:54 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Rabbits, Rats and Even Hyenas
Message-ID: <10949-3A85FCE2-200@storefull-233.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Memory Lane.       It seems that some have never figured out that the
overthrow of Milosevic was not just a NATO maneuver, but also a popular
event.     Of course, those people celebrating were in actuality....///
'nothing more than 'rabbits, rats, and even hyenas'.

Let's take a trip down memory lane.........

Aabdo
________________________________

Milosevic's final days: from arrogance to panic to disgrace
1.25 p.m. ET (1739 GMT) October 7, 2000
By Dusan Stojanovic,?Associated Press
BELGRADE, Yugoslavia (AP) ?  The chubby man in the red track suit
didn't know it, but he was about to make history. 
Something ? frustration, rage or just the heat of the moment ? drove
him through a surprised knot of riot police and onto the steps of the
federal parliament. For a moment, he was there alone, standing on the
cusp of an uprising. 

"Don't do it, there'll be a bloodbath!'' cried an opposition leader over
a loudspeaker. 
The people in the crowd on Thursday ? more than 200,000 angry
opponents of Slobodan Milosevic ? weren't listening. They were
watching the lone man in the track suit. He was waving them on. 

A few people stepped forward. Then more. Then a stampede that
overwhelmed the line of police. 

With their votes, they had expressed their demand for change. Now, on a
brisk afternoon, they were literally trampling Milosevic's 13 years of
rule ? a period of war, corruption and despair that saw Yugoslavia
ripped apart and reduced to a pariah, beggar nation. 

Soon the wide, granite steps of the parliament were clogged with
protesters. They were at the front doors of the stately building,
surrounding the bronze horse statues that watch over the main entrance. 

>From inside, police launched another barrage of tear gas and stun
grenades. But this time, there was no stopping the mob. They choked.
Their eyes stung. But still they came. Even the weather helped them: A
strong wind helped carry away the tear gas. 

Within minutes, the parliament ? a symbol of Milosevic's autocratic
rule ? was set on fire and looted. The autocratic leader's dreaded
policemen were in disarray. They fled or tossed away shields and batons
to surrender to the demonstrators. 

"He's finished!'' read a wrinkled opposition banner left dangling on the
assembly's doors. 

Milosevic had called Yugoslav presidential and parliamentary elections
for Sept. 24, feeling it was his best bet to refresh his power before
another harsh winter with no heating and a lack of staple goods. He also
was counting on riding anti-Western sentiments stirred up by last year's
78-day NATO bombing. 

Milosevic and his neo-communist cronies were brimming with confidence. 
"We'll beat them 100-0,'' predicted Ivan Markovic, one of Milosevic's
closest allies. 
But by early September, Milosevic was trailing badly in the polls behind
a stiff, unpolished law professor named Vojislav Kostunica. Milosevic
dismissed the results as "enemy'' propaganda financed by the West. 

But when his Socialist did their own poll, revealing an even worse
shortfall for Milosevic, he threw a pollster out of his presidential
office in the heavily protected Dedinje district. 

"You are lying,'' he shouted, according to sources close to the former
president. He ordered criminal charges to be filed against the
opposition polling companies, saying they were misinforming the public. 
Milosevic was privately in panic by late September. He turned for help
to his Marxist wife, Mirjana Markovic, using her for what she does best:
launch merciless verbal attacks against perceived foes of Yugoslavia. 

Milosevic, too, hit the road. At one rally in Montenegro, Serbia's
smaller partner in the two-republic Yugoslav federation, Milosevic
lashed out at his opponents, calling them "rats and hyenas.'' 
Serbian TV and the Politika daily newspaper ? his chief pillars of
propaganda ? inflated the number of those who took part in poorly
attended rallies. 

The Vecernje Novosti daily carried a front-page photo from the
Montenegro rally, merging several pictures to make the crowd look huge.
The trick was so obvious it was mocked in public. 

Milosevic's wife called the elections "a matter of life and death.'' But
according to party sources who spoke on condition of anonymity, she also
tried to dispel fears among party officials, saying: "The winner will be
the one who counts the vote and not the one who wins.'' 

On election night, Milosevic spokesman Nikola Sainovic was the messenger
bearing bad news. 

He rushed to the president's White Palace in Dedinje to tell him that
Kostunica appeared to be surging toward an outright victory. Milosevic
reacted with fury, grabbing Sainovic by his mustache and telling him to
go and reverse the results, Socialist party sources said. 

The Milosevic-controlled election commission is accused of shaving off
just enough votes from Kostunica to justify calling a run-off. Kostunica
refused the second round, saying new balloting would give the
beleaguered Milosevic enough time to regroup, cheat even more and try to
steal victory. 

With Milosevic unlikely to concede the clear defeat and step down,
opposition leaders forged a plan that included widespread civil
disobedience and possible use of force. Massive strikes and road
blockades, unseen in Yugoslavia's 55-year history, spread throughout the
country. 

On Oct. 2, in a last-ditch attempt to stem the tide, Milosevic used a
televised address to plead with Serbs to rally behind him, saying the
country would break apart and become a Western colony if he were not in
charge. 

He later summoned his secret service chief, Rade Markovic, and another
close ally, army chief of staff Gen. Nebojsa Pavkovic, for a crisis
meeting. Milosevic urged them to prepare a crackdown against his
opponents, a source at the meeting said. But they told him there was a
simmering mutiny within the police and army and that officers were
likely to switch sides in case of an intervention, sources said. 

"Milosevic looked like he was going to die,'' one source said. "And Mira
(Markovic) went into hysterics. Doctors had to give her a tranquilizer
injection.'' 
In Cacak, an opposition stronghold in the industrial belt south of
Belgrade, Mayor Velimir Ilic gathered a group of radicals including
known local gangsters, karate experts and a few former policemen. They
forged a plan to be put into effect in case Milosevic refused to step
down by their deadline: 3 p.m. on Oct. 5. 

That morning, with Milosevic still clinging to power, they packed up a
front-end loader and drove to Belgrade. During the 60-mile drive to the
capital, the Cacak crowd swelled to more than 10,000. Nothing stood in
their way. They people pushed aside four police roadblocks ? including
one with trucks loaded with sand ? and marched to the front of the
parliament building. 

"Everything was planned,'' Ilic said. "We said we won't return to Cacak
until Milosevic was gone. And why hide it? Many of our men were armed
and they knew exactly what they were doing.'' 
Ilic said the takeover plan included the onslaughts that eventually
materialized at the parliament, the state broadcasting headquarters and
the Politika newspaper. 

At the TV headquarters, a front-end loader plowed down the doors and the
crowd streamed in. Several well-known reporters were severely beaten by
the vengeful crowd as payback for years of feeding the public the warped
Milosevic version of reality. At parliament, members of the crowd who
surged past the police cordon took over the building. Fires broke out
inside as protesters trashed offices, hurling pictures of Milosevic
supporters out the windows. 

Having been virtually deserted by top allies and fearing reprisals,
Milosevic and his wife fled their usual residence and went into hiding
in another house in Dedinje. 

On Friday, a day after the downtown rampage, Milosevic finally conceded
the electoral defeat. The once-formidable Yugoslav president looked like
a shadow of his former self. 

"I intend to rest a bit and spend some more time with my family and
especially with my grandson, Marko, and after that to help my party gain
force and contribute to future prosperity,'' he said in a televised
address. 

Many weren't ready to let it go at that. 
"Milosevic and his wife should hang,'' exclaimed student Miroslav
Jankovic during the carnival-like celebration, which stretched well into
Friday before jubilation turned to happy exhaustion. "Only then we'll be
certain they won't torment us again.'' 

EDITORS NOTE: Dusan Stojanovic has covered all four Balkan wars
triggered by Milosevic and uprisings in neighboring Romania and
Bulgaria.
_______________________________
Tensions rise as Milosevic faces defeat 
US navy sends reinforcements to Adriatic ahead of poll
Special report: Serbia
Jonathan Steele
Thursday September 21, 2000
The Guardian

The Yugoslav president, Slobodan Milosevic, flew to an army base in
Montenegro yesterday to denounce his opponents as "rabbits, rats and
even hyenas" and warn the west not to interfere in elections on Sunday,
which the opinion polls indicate that he cannot win. 

Scores of Mr Milosevic's critics have been detained and with tension
rising the chief opposition candidate, Vojislav Kostunica, has warned
that the president could use fraud to stay in power. Western governments
fear he will use the army to crush protests if he is declared the
winner. A US aircraft carrier is being sent to the Adriatic. 

It was Mr Milosevic's first visit to Montenegro - which with Serbia
makes up Yugoslavia - since he became federal president three years ago.
His helicopter brought him to the rally near the town of Berane, within
15 miles of Kosovo, where Nato-led troops could have arrested him on war
crimes charges brought by the Hague tribunal last year. 

The republic of Montenegro is deeply divided and its pro-western
government, led by Milo Djukanovic, is boycotting the Yugoslav election.
A former Serbian information minister, Aleksandar Tijanic, warned that
Mr Milosevic was preparing to arrest the Montenegrin president. 
Mr Djukanovic said last night that Montenegro would defend itself if Mr
Milosevic provoked a military clash. 

Speaking to Russian television, he said: "If Milosevic decides to
provoke a military conflict with Montenegro, we would have no choice but
to defend our freedom." 

A US navy spokeswoman confirmed yesterday that the aircraft carrier
George Washington would arrive in the Adriatic from the Persian Gulf on
about September 30. "This is much the normal tour of duty," the
spokeswoman said. "There hasn't been a carrier in the Adriatic for about
three or four months and the George Washington is on its way back to the
Atlantic." 

Mr Milosevic yesterday told a crowd of 10,000 supporters bussed in from
nearby towns: "Our country is the focus of much attention from the
world's strongest nations, as if mankind has no other worries but how
... Serbs and Montenegrins will govern their joint state." Many in the
crowd shouted "Slobo, Slobo" and "We are all Yugoslavia". 

He has clamped down on the independent media and ordered police to
confiscate computers and other material from Serbian election monitoring
groups. Under the law, independent observers have no right to enter
polling stations or attend the count. 

Despite the pressures, the opposition has done remarkably well by
uniting behind Mr Kostunica, a Belgrade lawyer, Only the maverick
Serbian Renewal Movement is running a separate candidate. An opinion
poll by the Belgrade-based Strategic Marketing agency gave Mr Kostunica
32.5% of the vote to Mr Milosevic's 26.6%. The Centre for Policy Studies
gave Mr Kostunica 41% to Mr Milosevic's 20%. 

Mr Milosevic has support in rural areas and has manipulated the campaign
through control of state television. State controls on the price of
staple goods have also cushioned the realities of a weak economy. But
years of war and corruption at the top have disillusioned many urban
voters. 

Warning of vote rigging, Mr Kostunica told a rally at the weekend: "They
are bullies, liars and thieves and have stolen years of our lives and
dignity. Now they are preparing to steal the elections". 

Mr Milosevic could cheat by falsifying votes from Kosovo. The UN has
allowed the poll to go ahead there but will not be running or
supervising it. In the last Serbian presidential elections as many as
200,000 Albanians supposedly voted for Mr Milosevic's right-hand man.
Because of the boycott in Montenegro, Mr Milosevic can also steal votes
which are cast in army camps and town halls run by the pro-Belgrade
party. 

The EU has offered to lift sanctions if the election "leads to
democratic change". The wording was chosen with care as the Yugoslav
constitution is so ambiguous it could allow Mr Milosevic to serve out
his term until next July, even if the opposition wins. But most
observers believe he is more likely simply to declare victory and hope
to ride out - or shoot out - any protests.












From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb 11 01:47:39 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:47:39 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: <0c2fa3427220a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <000901c09407$49e992a0$149120d9@mjones>

I honestly don't think we differ much. I have a serious problem with the idea that
"it is Mark's duty
to ensure that it is not his own rulers who do it instead. " This would have meant
for instance, campaigning in support of Pinochet while mass demonstrations against
him were going on in London. That just doesn't feel right.

But it's all a question of context, and the context is how do you create
oppositional and ultimately revolutuionary forces which have real political autonomy
and are not hostages to the political chicanery of comprador/quisling national
elites which wrap themselves in the flag?

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
> [mailto:crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com]On Behalf Of Gorojovsky
> Sent: 10 February 2001 21:46
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> Subject: Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
>
>
> En relacisn a Re: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Ura,
> el 10 Feb 01, a las 8:48, Carrol B Cox dijo:
>
> >
> > But, Nestor, I think it of some importance to be prepared
> > to recognize, when they appear, situations which represent
> > either (1) an exception to the principles we share here
> > (probably rare) OR (2) not an instance in which the principles
> > have no reference whatever -- and it is just possible that
> > the Borodin case is an instance of the latter. It is merely a
> > routine criminal case -- being handled in the way the Marc Rich
> > case should have been handled.
>
>
> I am eager to accept the possibility. Moreover, I stated on my first posting
> that even in the case of my "own" rogues I was in a disposition to accept that.
> An example that may be found fitting is that of the criminal Cavallo by name
> (but so far as I know bearing no relation with Cavallo the economist other than
> their common belonging to the Ugly Side) who was captured in Mexico and is
> being judged in Spain. I even stated that the fact that Argentine criminals
> were somehow defended by the institutional set up in Argentina made it harder
> to defend sovereignty of Argentina, establishing a _de facto_ intervention into
> our own system of Justice, and I even compared this situation with the more
> favourable one that was prevailing in Chile (though I also pointed to its
> uglier class contents: if they can indulge in such a display of justice, the
> ruling classes in Chile must be fully aware that there is no possibility that a
> popular reaction takes the results of the Pinochet trial and throw it at the
> face of Pinochet's sponsors, inheritors and continuators).
>
> However, I must state here that these musings are reasonable for me, in
> Argentina. They don't seem reasonable, from my point of view, for Mark, in
> London. Truth is always concrete. What I am requesting is, as Bolmvar once
> requested, "Allow us to live through our Middle Ages by ourselves". I believe
> that it is my duty to make justice to my own Quislings. And it is Mark's duty
> to ensure that it is not his own rulers who do it instead. This is my position,
> in a nutshell.
>
> I still believe, with Vladimir Lenin, that the division between imperialist
> countries and the colonial and semicolonial world is the basic division of our
> current global system. I only draw the conclusions, with the highest respect
> for comrades who are waging a battle in the belly of the Beast.
>
> Hugs, and glad to debate in these terms,
>
>
>
> Nistor Miguel Gorojovsky
> gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb 11 05:08:24 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:08:24 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Jim Blaut on colonialism and the national question
Message-ID: <000d01c09423$462a08e0$149120d9@mjones>

[Blaut's paper, published in Science & Society, December 1997, retains its
relevance]

EVALUATING IMPERIALISM

                            J. M. Blaut

                                I.

John Willoughby's essay, "Evaluating the Leninist Theory
of Imperialism" (1995), is the latest in a long series of
unfriendly critiques of that theory by academic Marxists
who are hostile to the modern theories which mainly
descend from Lenin's theory of imperialism. The critical
procedure has by now become routinized. First: just one
of Lenin's many writings on imperialism is discussed,
this being his pamphlet Imperialism, The Highest Stage of
Capitalism (1916a), an important work but one which
discusses only the economic part of the theory, and
which, significantly, bears the subtitle, "A Popular
Outline." Second: the claim is made (or implied) that
this economic part is the whole theory, and everything
else -- politics, geopolitics, society, culture, etc. --
is irrelevant, except as a deduction from the theory, or

as a form of practice somehow sanctioned by the theory.
Third: Lenin's argument in Imperialism, The Highest Stage
of Capitalism is shown to be heavily dependent on earlier
writings on the economics of imperialism by Hobson,
Hilferding, and others, and Lenin's work is therefore
judged to be rather unoriginal and (intellectually, at
least) unimportant. Finally: it is shown that the
economic theory presented in the Imperialism pamphlet
does not prove, as Lenin supposedly thought it did, that
imperialism is the final, catastrophic stage of capital-
ism and will lead to socialist revolution. Capitalism,
these academic Marxists assure us, has passed beyond the
stage of bellicose imperialism and is now a relatively
peaceful system, still somewhat progressive, though of
course imperfect.

      Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism is not
the best place to begin an analysis of Lenin's theory.
Or, if we start here, we should start with the preface to
that work and read the preface very carefully. The work
was written in 1916 and published only after the fall of
the tsarist government in early 1917. In the preface
Lenin says:

      This pamphlet was written with an eye to the tsar-
      ist censorship. Hence, I was not only forced to
      confine myself strictly to an exclusively
      theoretical, specifically economic analysis of
      facts, but to formulate the few necessary
      observations on politics with extreme caution, by
      hints...It is painful, in these days of liberty, to
      re-read the passages of the pamphlet which have
      been distorted, cramped, compressed in an iron vice
      on account of the censor. That the period of
      imperialism is the eve of the socialist revolution;
      that social-chauvinism...is the utter betrayal of
      socialism; that [the] split in the working-class
      movement is bound up with the objective conditions
      of imperialism, etc. -- on these matters I had to

      speak in a slavish tongue, and I must refer the
      reader who is interested in the subject to the
      articles I wrote abroad in 1914-17 (1916a, 18;
      emphasis added).

These articles are not often referred to, much less
analyzed. Willoughby mentions none of them in his S&S
essay. The only work which he evaluates is the
Imperialism pamphlet. (He is hardly alone in this
practice. See, for instance, Arrighi, 1978; Barone, 1985;
Brewer, 1980; Warren, 1980; Weeks,1983.) As a result,
Willoughby (like these other scholars) attributes to
Lenin a theory of imperialism that is not Lenin's and is
in some ways antithetical to Lenin's; a theory that is
economistic, Eurocentric, unoriginal, and bland.

                                II.

      Lenin developed his theory of imperialism mainly in
1915 and 1916, when he was in exile in Switzerland. This
was a time of profound crisis for socialists. Lenin and
other revolutionaries were trying to prevent socialists
from supporting a war in which workers killed other
workers on behalf of capitalism. Most socialist leaders
and parties were succumbing to national chauvinism, and
were trying to justify their position by appeals to
Marxist theory, including the arguments about the new
stage of capitalism which had been developed by

Hilferding, Kautsky, and other theoreticians, arguments
which seemed to suggest the likelihood of a quick and
fair peace and a future in which capitalism would
peacefully develop into socialism. The core of these
arguments was the economistic thesis that, since
capitalism as an economic system "has become fully
international," "has transcended the bounds of the
national state" (much-used expressions at the time), wars
between states no longer are functional for capitalism.
Lenin set out to demonstrate that this thesis was false.
At the same time, Lenin had to counter a strangely
similar argument that was being propounded by some
revolutionaries, including Bukharin: Since capitalism has
become fully international as an economic system, has

transcended the bounds of the national state, merely
national issues no longer are important, and
revolutionaries should discard the "minimum program" of
struggles for democracy and self-determination within the
capitalist state. Lenin (1916b, 18) described this as
"imperialist economism": economism of a type that is
peculiar to the imperialist epoch. ("The same old
fundamental mistake of the same old Economism: inability
to pose political questions.")

      The essential argument against the first of these
two contrasting economistic positions is given in Lenin's
essays "The Collapse of the Second International"
(1915a), "Socialism and War" (1915b), and "Imperialism
and the Split in Socialism" (1916d). His argument against
the second is developed most fully in "The Nascent Trend
of Imperialist Economism" (1916b), "A Caricature of
Marxism and Imperialist Economism" (1916c), and "The
Discussion on Self-determination Summed Up" (1916e) .
These articles, together with Imperialism, present a

coherent theory of capitalist society, and the capitalist
world, in the era dominated -- politically and socially
as well as economically -- by monopoly capitalism. But
this theory grew out of earlier theoretical work by
Lenin, and later, after the revolution, was modified in
significant ways into what can be thought of as Lenin's
mature theory of imperialism. It is best, I think, to
examine the theory-building process as a whole.

      Lenin's earliest writings displayed a strongly
diffusionist view of social evolution, a view that was
held in common by all Marxists in that period and was a
legacy from classical Marxism.1 At the center of the
world system, capitalism had matured, and the conditions
for its transformation into socialism were ripening. In
the periphery, capitalism was advancing outward,

effectuating the bourgeois revolution as it proceeded.
Most Marxists viewed this as a smooth outward flow of
basically economic forces (Bernstein, 1961; Bauer, 1907;
Luxemburg, 1907-1908). Most of them (though not
Bernstein) deplored colonialism, but they rejected the
idea that state-formation in the periphery would be
important enough to perturb the essentially steady
diffusion of a center-dominated capitalism that was
becoming fully international.

      Lenin's book, The Development of Capitalism in
Russia (1899), is routinely cited as the classic
description of this diffusion process, but this is a
serious error. In The Development of Capitalism in Russia
Lenin was describing a diffusion process within a state,
a process of uneven economic development across a
politically undifferentiated landscape, quite unlike a
landscape of multiple states on which political
boundaries and social forces modify, obstruct, and
redirect economic flows (a process not reducible to

"uneven development"). In various writings between 1903
and 1914, Lenin developed a strikingly different theory
of economic and political tendencies at the world scale;
this was the germ of his theory of imperialism. The
spread of capitalism ignites bourgeois-national
movements, producing a tendency toward the proliferation
of independent national states. While these movements are
primarily anti-feudal, they are also struggles against
colonialism and semi-colonialism, hence counters to the
spreading power and the accumulation strategy of
metropolitan capitalism. Marxists who disagreed with
Lenin argued the economistic, diffusionist position:
against an inexorably expanding metropolitan-capitalist
dominance, national movements generally are nonviable and

unprogressive, and the "law of concentration" -- that
economies grow larger as capitalism matures -- implies
that states and their empires also will grow larger,
moving toward the future world-wide socialist state.
Lenin at first replied that Russia ("the prison-house of
nations") was an exception to these tendencies, but he
moved to the view that many national movements were
likely to win out in all parts of the world except the
advanced-capitalist states and thus were a significant
force in the struggle against world capitalism, which
thereby becomes not merely an in situ struggle between
classes but one in which peripheral bourgeois states
confront the advanced-capitalist states. And he came to
reject the idea that big states are progressive:
"Everyone would laugh...if, parallel with the law that
small-scale production is ousted by large-scale
production, there were presented another 'law'...of small
states being ousted by big ones" (Lenin 1916c, 49-50).
The notion that a qualitatively new stage of capitalism
has arrived is still largely implicit in Lenin's writings
before the beginning of the World War (but see Lenin,
1895-1896, 109; 1907, 75-81; 1908, 192). This is not yet
a theory of imperialism but it contains most of the
elements for such a theory.

      Some time around October, 1915, Lenin developed the
central propositions of his theory (see Lenin, 1915c,
735-743). Monopoly capitalism no longer can survive
without continuously increasing investment and
exploitation of labor in colonies and other peripheral
regions. This enables it to resolve, temporarily, the

contradictions at the center, because very high returns,
"superprofits," are obtained under colonial and semi-
colonial political regimes which enforce low wages and
suppress local competition. (Note here the intertwining
of politics and economics.) These superprofits not only
maintain the rate of return on investment overall, but
they provide a fund with which the upper stratum of the
working class can be "bribed" into quiescence, thus
holding back the development of economic and political
struggles against capitalism at home. But all of this
merely set the stage for the great crisis of monopoly
capitalism: the World War. The world is finite in extent,
and the "partitioning" of the peripheral regions into
colonies and semi-colonies has been completed. This means

that the imperialist countries no longer can expand their
territories for superexploitation and superprofits unless
they make war on one another in order to "repartition"
these territories -- steal away one another's colonies
and spheres of domination. This, said Lenin (1915a), made
a World War inevitable and indeed was the primary cause
of the war. Why did the workers agree to fight in the
war? One reason was ideological obfuscation, which Lenin
blamed partly on the working-class leadership, now
bribed, submissive, and dutifully chauvinist. But Lenin
argued that, in addition to the bribes to the labor
aristocracy, enough "crumbs" from imperialist
superprofits were passed to the broad working class to
gain its temporary support for the war (1916c; 1916d).
The root cause was monopoly capitalism, but Lenin viewed
this as a political and social as well as economic system
in the advanced-capitalist countries. At the world scale
it was imperialism.

      This analysis led Lenin to argue that the most
important feature of world-scale imperialism -- "the
essence of imperialism" -- is the division of the world
into "oppressor" and "oppressed" countries, the former
being the imperialist powers, the latter including all of
the colonial and semi-colonial periphery as well as many
small countries in Europe (Lenin, 1915d, 409). This seems
to be the origin of the core-periphery model which
underlies modern theories of underdevelopment,
dependency, and imperialism, both Marxist and non-

Marxist. It stands in direct opposition to the
diffusionist model, or rather it posits that, in the era
of monopoly capitalism or imperialism, the primary force
no longer is the world-scale diffusion of capitalism
(though this continues in various ways) but rather the
fixing in place of a two-sector world, a world divided
into oppressor and oppressed regions. Lenin did not
belittle the significance of working class struggles in
the oppressor or imperialist countries, and he did not at
this time question the principle that the workers of the
advanced countries would lead the world revolution. He
did argue, as (I believe) no Marxist before him had
argued, that workers and peasants in the oppressed
countries were an essential part of the struggle against
world capitalism. And that struggle now assumed a

somewhat new form. The period before imperialism had
seemed to be a relatively peaceful time, as capitalism
"rose" and then "matured" into a world system. But
capitalism had not "matured," said Lenin: it had become
imperialist. This new era was one in which political
struggles were becoming more intense, not less intense.
The old view that nationalism declines as capitalism
matures into an international system turns out to be
erroneous. Nationalism and national struggles increase in

the era of imperialism. The oppressor countries fight one
another in efforts to annex more territories, and they
impose ever harsher oppression in the peripheral
countries in efforts to increase or maintain the flow of
the needed superprofits: "Imperialism is the era of the
oppression of nations on a new historical basis" (Lenin,
1915c, 739). In the oppressed countries, there is great
intensification of the struggle for liberation.2

      Theory-building continued after the Bolshevik
revolution. In 1919, Lenin argued against the view that
imperialism has completed the differentiation of social
classes and therefore national and other democratic
struggles within the state are now purely bourgeois and
reactionary -- of no interest to the proletariat. Even in
the imperialist countries, he said, social
differentiation is far from complete, and so these
struggles remain progressive and important. Even in post-
revolutionary Russia, self-determination and other
democratic rights must still be upheld, because imperial-
ism is a superstructure on capitalism, the defeat of the
one does not automatically eliminate the other, and
therefore popular struggles of the former era are now
part of the socialist revolution (Lenin, 1919, 168).

      Two additional propositions remained to be added to
the theory. At the Second Congress of the Communist
International, in 1920, Lenin interacted with
revolutionaries from colonial and semi-colonial
countries, and as a result (I believe) of this
interaction he came to the conclusion that struggles in

the peripheral sector are no less essential and no less
important for the world revolution than are struggles
within the imperialist countries (see Adhikari, 1971,
156-205). Later, as he contemplated the sad state of the
working-class movement in Western Europe and the
resilience of monopoly capitalism, he went so far as to
speculate that the periphery might play a greater role
than the center in the world revolution, simply because
so many more oppressed people lived in the colonial and
semi-colonial world than in Europe (Lenin, 1923, 500).
Here we have a theoretical proposition within the
Leninist theory of imperialism -- the significance of
anti-colonial and other struggles in the periphery --
that has been very influential in Third World liberation
movements, Marxist and non-Marxist.

      Lenin's theory posits that imperialism is the final
stage of capitalism, and that, unlike the prior era of
competitive capitalism, it will be an era of turmoil. But
Lenin's views on this matter of prognostication are often
misunderstood, partly because so many of his statements
are hortatory or polemical, exaggerating this or that
argument in ways appropriate to the context but confusing
when read many years later. During the World War Lenin
predicted a long period of intermittent wars, including
a second World War. Toward the end of his life he
speculated that capitalism might actually survive for
another 50 years. In opposing Kautsky's theory of "ultra-
imperialism," the view that rival powers might eventually
settle their differences and begin a peaceful era of
collective exploitation across the entire world -- a view
that Lenin argued against vehemently, mainly because it
implied that acquiescence in chauvinism in the short run
might be rewarded with lasting peace in the long run --
Lenin did not insist that peaceful capitalism was an
impossibility; rather, this was highly unlikely as a
permanent condition and was in any case a matter
concerning the distant future, with no relevance to the
present struggle (Lenin, 1915d). Thus the theory of
imperialism did not, as some think, predict a quick
downfall of capitalism. It predicted an entire epoch of

strikes, wars, revolts, and other such tumultuous
happenings, followed sooner or later by socialism. Note
that this previsions a second World War, a great
depression, the rise and fall of fascism, the Chinese
revolution, the Korean War, the two Vietnam wars, the
other wars of liberation, the "police actions," the
bloody civil wars fomented and assisted by imperial
powers, the massacres carried out by neocolonial elites
in defense of local and multinational capitalism, etc.
Lenin's prediction that the period of imperialism would
be a period of turmoil appears to be holding up well.

                               III.

      John Willoughby describes the Leninist theory of
imperialism, then asserts that the theory has no
relevance today. But it has no relevance today because it
leads us to view the present-day world, and the future,
in a way that Willoughby dislikes. Lenin's theory, he
says, fails to stress "the progressive features
of...'modernization'" (Willoughby, 1995, 329). It is "not
true that global capital accumulation must coerce the
Third World into a position of permanent economic
backwardness" (p.331), and there is no "inevitable
necessity of the North-South divide" (p.332).
Protectionism and "opposition to the continued
globalization of the world economy," such as Ross Perot's

"attempt to halt trade agreements" -- meaning NAFTA --
are ill-considered (p.332). And apparently there will be
no "ultimate breakdown of liberal capitalism" (p.332).
Willoughby believes that capitalism, now fully
international, is still quite progressive and free trade
is diffusing its fruits to the Third World. Someone who
holds such views cannot possibly consider Lenin's theory
to be of any relevance today, however it may be
described. And Willoughby's description is a caricature.
Remember that it is based exclusively on Imperialism, The
Highest Stage of Capitalism (plus a passing reference to
two 1920 articles). I will take up Willoughby's major
assertions one by one.

      (1) Willoughby quotes Lenin's statement in
Imperialism that, "if it were necessary to give the
briefest possible definition of imperialism, we should
have to say that imperialism is the monopoly stage of
capitalism" (p.323). Willoughby comments on this "famous"
statement as follows:

      To suggest that imperialism is a stage of
      capitalism obviously implies that eliminating
      imperialism requires the elimination of capitalism,
      since imperialism is capitalism. But this verbal
      sleight of hand can inhibit a study of the
      connection between two distinct social
      institutions: a mode of production...and a system
      of political domination...Perhaps imperialism grows
      out of "monopoly capitalism," but this should [not]
      be treated as...an axiomatic statement which must
      be true." (p. 324)

Here the "verbal sleight of hand" is Willoughby's, not
Lenin's. In this essay, Lenin (with an eye to the censor)
was trying to make the point that political imperialism
is inherent in monopoly capitalism. The word
"imperialism" at that time was on everyone's lips as a
term meaning colonial expansionism, military annexations,
the enemy's "imperialism" (as against our "defence of the
fatherland"), etc. If such policies and actions were
indeed inherent in monopoly capitalism -- which Lenin saw

as a total social system, not just a "mode of production"
-- then it would be perfectly proper, and politically
helpful, to use the word "imperialism" as a synonym for
"monopoly capitalism": a matter of usage, not axioms. (In
fact Lenin also used the word in the other, more common
ways.) Another verbal sleight of hand: if "imperialism is
a stage of capitalism" then "imperialism is capitalism"
and "eliminating imperialism requires the elimination of
capitalism." As we saw, Lenin viewed imperialism as a
superstructure on capitalism and expected the latter to
persist after monopoly capitalism had collapsed; also, he
advocated some alliances with the bourgeoisie of
oppressed nations, introduced the New Economic Policy in
Russia, etc. Willoughby wants to argue that imperialistic
politics no longer characterize capitalism; but instead
of saying that Lenin's theory predicts otherwise, he
caricatures the theory and ridicules it as "verbal
sleight of hand."

      (2) Willoughby argues that Lenin's theory is little
more than "a succinct, synthetic popularization of the
newly developed Marxian theory of imperialism" (p.322).
The main author of the latter theory, he says, was
Hilferding, whose Finance Capital became "the consensus
statement for most of the high priests of Marxism's
'golden age'" (p.324). The principal error here comes

from the fact that Willoughby reads Lenin only from the
Imperialism  pamphlet. As we noted above, this work was
indeed a popularization, and was "a specifically economic
analysis." Much of this economic analysis did indeed come
from Hilferding, Hobson, and (prewar) Kautsky. But the
originality, and importance, of Lenin's work stems mostly
from the fact that it gave a comprehensive analysis of
imperialism as a total social system.

      (3) Willoughby reads Lenin's theory from the
Imperialism pamphlet, then attacks the theory as
"reductionist" -- as explaining everything in terms of
economics. Well, economics is the topic of the pamphlet.
Recall Lenin's preface: "...forced to confine myself
strictly to an...economic analysis...to formulate the few
necessary observations on politics with extreme
caution...I must refer the reader...to the articles I

wrote abroad..." Willoughby, who does not refer to these
articles, interprets "the few necessary observations on
politics" as deductions from the theory: "Every
[Leninist] argument about imperial politics rests on an
economic law. The link between economic tendencies and
political outcome is unproblematic" (p.325). The illogic
here is self-evident. You look only at the economic part
of a complex social theory, then you attack the whole
theory for reducing everything to economics. Ironically,
Willoughby's argument is itself redolent of economic
reductionism. To modern economists, economic theory tends

to focus on money, value, etc. To Marx, Engels, Lenin,
Luxemburg, Trotsky, Bukharin, et al., economics meant
"economic base," comprising environment, resources,
tools, labor, social relations of production, class
struggle, and more; even politics and ideology crept in.
Willoughby appeals to economics of the narrower sort
rather more than Lenin does.

      (4) Willoughby, however, makes one argument about
economic reductionism which has substance, though not
validity. He asserts (unoriginally) that the state is
partially autonomous, and accuses, not just Lenin but
"the early Marxian tradition" in general, of
"inability...to account theoretically for the autonomous
coercive power of the state" (p.334). They reduce
everything to economics. He does not argue, as many
Marxists today do, that the capitalist state (in its
various forms) is mostly responsive to the needs and
demands of ruling classes though many other social and
cultural forces are at work. He suggests that capitalism
has only a limited relation to political power, citing

the importance of state officials' interests, domestic
political sentiments, the global balance of power, even
personality, as major factors helping to explain
politics. He may or may not be right, but this argument
strays very far from the traditions of Marxism, Leninist
and non-Leninist. Firstly, Marxists assert only one
determinism, which is normative, not economic: capitalism
must give way either to socialism or to barbarism.
Secondly, Marxists argue that the economic base, broadly
defined (to include, for instance, class struggle and
therefore the ideas and acts of humans), is more

important as a causal force in history than is any other
major part of culture. If Willoughby denies these
propositions, which he may or may not be doing -- I
cannot tell from this text or his earlier study
(Willoughby, 1986) -- then he is offering, not a form of
Marxism but an alternative to Marxism.


                                IV.

      Marx and Engels were diffusionists. They believed,
as did every thinker of their time, that capitalism and
modernity were spreading out over the world. But unlike
mainstream thinkers, they believed that this was the
spread of a plague, not a blessing, and that capitalism
was under siege at the center: the proletariat would
overthrow it in Europe, then would march, victorious, to
the gates of Peking and beyond, spreading socialism
across the world. Socialist theorists of the Second
International saw things somewhat differently. Either

before the World War (Bernstein) or later (Kautsky,
Hilferding, Bauer), they came to believe, not only that
capitalism is maturing into a fully international system
(etc.), is diffusing progress and civilization to the
periphery, but that capitalism at the center is not under
siege: with the help of the proletariat (acting through
the socialist parties in power, trade unions, Fabian
societies, academic Marxists), capitalism was gradually
ascending toward socialism. This is a classically
diffusionist belief: progress at the center; diffusion of
progress to the periphery.

      Lenin did not share these views. His theory of
imperialism was an alternative, non-diffusionist model of
the world. It was uniformitarian (Blaut, 1993) in the
sense that it ascribed revolutionary activism to the
people of the periphery as well as the center. The
exploiters in the center were now confronting the
exploited masses in the periphery as well as in their own
countries. The world as a whole was now divided into two
sectors, the monopoly-capitalist countries and the

oppressed countries. Capitalism could only survive at the
center, maintaining profit levels and pacifying the
workers with minimally acceptable wages, working
conditions, job security, and living conditions, by
intensifying the exploitation of workers in the
periphery, even translocating masses of workers from the
periphery to the center with its sweatshops, ghettos,
secondary labor markets (Lenin, 1917, 168). This theory
was the first strong challenge to the Eurocentric world
models which dominated European thought, Marxist and non-
Marxist, in the early years of the 20th century.

      Willoughby believes that capitalism is progressive,
the Third World is developing, and imperialism no longer
really exists. Thus he takes his stand with other
diffusionist Marxists, like Brenner (1977), Brewer
(1980), and Warren (1980); and with many non-Marxist
supporters of liberal capitalism, NAFTA, and the New
World Order. Of course, we do not have to stand with
Willoughby or with Lenin: there are alternative views. We
choose for ourselves.

University of Illinois at Chicago

                               NOTES

1     Diffusionism is discussed in Blaut 1987a, 1987b,
      1989, 1993, 1994.

2     These matters are treated in Blaut 1982 and 1987b.

                            REFERENCES

Adhikari, G., ed. 1971. Documents of the History of the
Communist Party of India, Vol. 1. New Delhi: People's
Publishing House.

Arrighi, Giovanni, 1978. The Geometry of Imprerialism.
London: .NLB

Barone, Charles. 1985. Marxist Thought on Imperialism.
Armonk: Sharpe.

Bauer, Otto. 1907. Die Nationalitaetenfrage und die Soz-
ialdemokratie. Vienna: Ignaz Brand.

Bernstein, Eduard. 1961 (1899). Evolutionary Socialism.
New York: Schocken.

Blaut, J.M. 1982. "Nationalism as an Autonomous Force."
Science and Society, 46:1 (Spring), 1-23.

____.1987a. "Diffusionism: A Uniformitarian Critique."
Annals of the Association of American Geographers,
77:1, 30-47.

____. 1987b. The National Question: Decolonizing the
Theory of Nationalism. London: Zed.

____. 1989. "Colonialism and the Rise of Capitalism."
Science & Society, 53:3 (Fall), 260-296.

____. 1993. The Colonizer's Model of the World:
Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History. New
York: Guilford.

____. 1994. "Robert Brenner in the Tunnel of Time."
Antipode, 26:4, 351-374.

Brenner, Robert. 1977. "The Origins of Capitalist
Development: A Critique of Neo-Smithian Marxism." New
Left Review, No. 104, 25-93.

Brewer, Anthony. 1980. Marxist Theories of Imperialism.
London: Routledge.

Lenin, V.I. Various dates. Collected Works. 45 volumes.
Moscow: Progress.

____. 1895-1896. "Draft and Explanation of a Program
for the Social-Democratic Party." Collected Works, Vol.
2, 93-121.

____. 1899. The Development of Capitalism in Russia.
Collected Works, Vol. 3.

____. 1907. "The International Socialist Congress in
Stuttgart." Collected Works, Vol. 13, 75-81.

____. 1908. "Bellicose Militarism." Collected Works,
Vol. 15, 191-201.

____. 1915a. "The Collapse of the Second
International." Collected Works, Vol. 21, 205-259.

____. 1915b. "Socialism and War." Collected Works, Vol.
21, 297-338.

____. 1915c. "Notes for Lecture on 'Imperialism and the
Right of Nations to Self-Determination'" (Oct. 28,
1915). Collected Works, Vol. 39 (Notebooks on
Imperialism), pp. 735-742.

____. 1915d. "The Revolutionary Proletariat and the
Right of Nations to Self-Determination." Collected
Works, Vol. 21, 407-414.

____. 1916a. Imperialism, The Highest Stage of
Capitalism. Collected Works, Vol. 22, 185-304.

____. 1916b."The Nascent Trend of Imperialist
Economism." Collected Works, Vol. 23, 13-21.

____. 1916c. "A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist
Economism." Collected Works, Vol. 23, 28-76.

____. 1916d. "Imperialism and the Split in Socialism."
Collected Works, Vol. 23, 105-20.

____. 1916e. "The Discussion on Self-determination
Summed Up." Collected Works, Vol. 23, 320-360.

____. 1917. "Revision of the Party Program." Collected
Works, Vol. 24, 455-480.

____. 1919. "Eighth Congress of the R.C.P.(B.)."
Collected Works, Vol. 29, 141-225.

____. 1923. "Better Fewer, But Better." Collected
Works, Vol. 33, 487-502.

Luxemburg, Rosa. 1908-1909. "The National Question and
Autonomy." In Horace B. Davis, ed., The National
Question: Selected Writings of Rosa Luxemburg, 101-288.
New York: Monthly Review.

Warren, Bill. 1980. Imperialism: Pioneer of Capitalism.
London: NLB.

Weeks, John. 1983. "Imperialism and World Market." In
Tom Bottomore, ed., Dictionary of Marxist Thought, 223-
227. Cambridge: Harvard.

Willoughby, John. 1986. Capitalist Imperialism, Crisis
and the State. Chur: Harwood.

____. 1995. "Evaluating the Leninist Theory of
Imperialism." Science & Society, 59:3 (Fall),320-338.




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb 11 05:17:41 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:17:41 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] New stuff on the website
Message-ID: <000e01c09424$a5be0080$149120d9@mjones>


     Fall of the USSR:   Mark Harrison on Are command economies unstable? Why did
the Soviet economy collapse?

	http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base/Collapse.pdf




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb 11 11:47:13 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 18:47:13 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] fwd from JORGE FIDELINO GALVCO DE FIGUEIREDO
Message-ID: <000301c0945b$0dc31f40$499320d9@mjones>

Y A-T-IL UNE +PENSIE UNIQUE; EN ICONOMIE POLITIQUE ?

Rimy HERRERA


Efforgons-nous, avant dentreprendre ce piriple ` travers liconomie politique, d
attacher le fil conducteur de notre discours ` la rialiti du monde, dont lividence
est si brutale quelle finit par crever les yeux. Au risque, dilibiriment accepti,
de parantre priviligier le percept sur le concept et tomber demblie du logos au
pathos, contemplons un instant ce que le monde donne ` voir de ses diffirences. Ce
sont dabord, ailleurs et au loin, ` la piriphirie, au Sud, dimmenses villes de
ttle, de boue et de poussihre, le dinuement giniral, les manques et linsicuriti, la
violence des conditions dexistence et de travail de masses gigantesques et
impersonnelles dhommes et de femmes, denfants aussi, humiliis et offensis. Ce que
nous avons encore sous le regard, que nous le voulions ou non, ici mais toujours de
loin, au centre, au Nord, ce sont des spectres errants du XIXhme sihcle, des
milliers dhommes et de femmes sans abris, des vieillards solitaires, +
intouchables ; aux visages diformis par la mishre, dipossidis et dishumanisis. Cette
vision partisane et sentimentale, toute empreinte de subjectiviti, semble assez bien
saccorder avec la neutre et rigoureuse objectiviti de la statistique. Les 20 % les
plus riches de la population mondiale disposeraient de 83 % du revenu total, tandis
que la part des 20 % les plus pauvres dipasserait ` peine 1 % . Le PNB per capita
serait de 22 770 dollars dans les + iconomies ` revenu ilevi ; (925 millions d
habitants), contre 3 230 dollars pour le reste du monde, Afrique, Amirique latine,
Asie, Europe de lEst (5 milliards dhabitants), oy 3 milliards dindividus, soit la
moitii de la population de la planhte, vivent avec moins de 3 dollars par jour . L
icart de revenus entre dirigeants de firmes transnationales et ouvriers du secteur
informel pourrait correspondre ` un rapport de un ` plusieurs dizaines de milliers
aux Etats-Unis, dont la structure de ripartition du revenu est presque aussi
inigalitaire quen Inde . En dipit de leur caracthre approximatif et exagiri , ces
chiffres timoignent de la polarisation du systhme mondial capitaliste , dont les
consiquences en termes de dureti de vie pour les peuples de la piriphirie et, de
manihre ginirale, pour les classes populaires, se lisent jusque dans les indicateurs
de durie de vie : lespirance de vie est de 77 ans dans les pays du Nord, contre 61
ans en Asie du Sud et 52 en Afrique subsaharienne  ; en France, lespirance de vie `
35 ans est de 4445 ans pour les inginieurs, cadres supirieurs et professions
libirales, contre 38 ans chez les ouvriers spicialisis et 35 chez les man
uvres .
Ces donnies rivhlent un itat de fait. Mais elles ne fournissent aucun outil d
analyse pour comprendre lenchannement des micanismes articulant marchis et
organisations qui produisent cette polarisation systimique consubstantielle ` la
dynamique du capital, et qui la reproduisent sur une ichelle toujours ilargie. Ces
outils analytiques ne peuvent jtre dicouverts que dans et par linvestigation
thiorique. Or, quobserve-t-on aujourdhui dans la thiorie iconomique ? La
domination dun courant de pensie  nous le qualifierons trhs provisoirement de +
nioclassiqueniolibiralorthodoxe ;  qui, face ` la rialiti de ces inigalitis,
choisit de lexclure de son champ de vision par la nigation, dhs ses prisupposis, de
la pertinence des concepts et mithodes susceptibles de rendre compte de cette
polarisation, et par lidification compensatoire dun paradigme fictif fait d
iquilibres optimaux et dharmonies imaginaires, pritendant ` la science et ` l
universaliti mais toujours apologitique dun capitalisme saisi comme unique pensable
de la thiorie et horizon indipassable de lhistoire. Ceci nous amhnera ` la question
de savoir par quel itrange effet les iconomistes
nioclassiquesniolibirauxorthodoxes saccommodent du fait davoir ` formuler des
viritis scientifiques et universelles sur le fonctionnement de ce monde si
extraordinairement iniquitable et violent dans lequel ils sont plongis et qui
traverse de part en part leur neutraliti de chercheurs.

Une +pensie unique; est-elle pensable?

On ne saurait a priori tenir pour seulement pensable lexistence dune +pensie
unique; en iconomie politique. En tant quelle est constitutive  avec la sociologie
et la science politique (et dans une certaine mesure lhistoire, lanthropologie et
le droit)  du c
ur des sciences sociales qui sest institutionnalisi dans ses
formations et recherches depuis le XIXhme sihcle , liconomie est de ces domaines
oy la confrontation des rifirents thioriques est inhirente au travail du chercheur .
Il y demeure toujours au fond un conflit irriductible entre des positions adverses
inconciliables, conflit ` entendre comme le moteur propulsif mjme qui permet ` la
discipline de se diployer et de ne trouver sens que dans la contradiction. Pas plus
que le sociologue ou le politologue, liconomiste ne peut se digager de lemprise qu
a sur sa pratique lidiologie, ni se dipartir dune subjectiviti qui renvoie son
jugement ` la Weltanschauung et au rephre philosophique qui sont plus ou moins
consciemment les siens. Personne particulihre, attachie ` un groupe de personnes
particulihres, il est conduit ` ne pouvoir revendiquer quune universaliti et une
viriti relatives, toujours opposies ` dautres conceptions particularistes
concurrentes. Son universalisme voile donc un particularisme (ethnocentrique par
exemple)  oppressif au sens oy le reprisentant du courant ditenteur du pouvoir
social tend ` trouver + naturel ; litat des choses qui lui est favorable , de la
mjme manihre que sa science masque une idiologie  mystificatrice en ce quelle
dinie ` la viriti scientifique sa nature profondiment historique. Cette coprisence
de lidiologie et de la science laisse dailleurs son empreinte jusque dans l
inditermination de liconomie politique ` cerner ce qui fait en propre son objet d
analyse, tant sy avhre puissante, comme la souligni Walras , linfluence des
enjeux politiques quelle soustend. De tout ceci dicoule limpossibiliti
irriversible didentifier dans la discipline un + noyau axiomatique ; (conceptuel,
mithodologique, thiorique) qui formerait un corpus commun aux diffirentes icoles de
pensie et qui impulserait la recherche de fagon spontanie et homoghne. Laccrition
des connaissances iconomiques ne peut se rialiser quautour de paradigmes distincts,
exclusifs les uns des autres (quoique pouvant donner lieu ` certaines tentatives de
synthhse). Selon nous, le clivage le plus profond localisable au sein de la +
communauti scientifique ; (fictive) des iconomistes sipare, en dernihre analyse,
partisans et adversaires du capitalisme, ceux qui pour une raison ou une autre s
arrjtent devant la critique de son ordre social quils croient amendable et ceux qui
sengagent dans sa critique radicale en rejetant lidie dune rigulation dun +
capitalisme ` visage humain ;.
On pergoit par l` ce qui distingue irrimidiablement liconomie politique, et avec
elle les autres sciences sociales, des sciences dites +dures;:  notamment
mathimatique (oy une certaine uniti se dessine entre des branches disciplinaires en
communication de plus en plus directe pardel` les antagonismes traditionnels) et
physique (qui, malgri labsence de thiorie unifiie des forces, offre ` tous les
chercheurs une matrice diquations de base). Les sciences de la matihre ou
naturelles (chimie, biologie) peuvent aussi progresser ` partir dun c
ur thiorique
s{r de manihre cumulative et (en un sens spicial) transcendante, par ilargissement
et approfondissement successifs de leurs savoirs  pluttt que par rejet difinitif
des anciennes thiories. Mais mjme dans ces disciplines, oy un inonci peut jtre
massivement reconnu comme juste et faire lobjet dun accord entre spicialistes, l
existence dune pensie unique est tout ` fait incertaine, sinon inconcevable. En
sciences physiques par exemple, il demeure des polimiques dont lissue est ouverte
et non difinitivement tranchie, parce que renvoyant ` des points de vue
ipistimologiques, et in fine ` des dibats intellectuels plus larges, situis en deg`
de la physique, soit dans liliment de la mitaphysique . Pas plus en iconomie
politique quen toute autre science donc, lidie dune pensie unique nest mjme `
proprement parler pensable. Il ne pourra sagir dans la discipline iconomique que
des pensies dominantes, fussent-elles higimoniques, mais toujours concurrencies et
contingentes.

Quest-ce que + la pensie unique ; ?

Il reste que la figure dune + pensie unique ;, aux contours iconomicistes, est
dinoncie, midiatiquement, par certains . Prolongeant une discussion sur l+ economic
correctness ; et engageant la polimique avec les tenants dun capitalisme naturel et
dune alternance politique sans alternative iconomique, Ramonet fustigeait au milieu
des annies 90 cette + traduction en termes idiologiques ` pritention universelle des
intirjts dun ensemble de forces iconomiques, celles en particulier du capital
international ; , qui itouffe le + raisonnement rebelle ; et instaure un + rigime
globalitaire ; (analogue + ` la doxa stalinienne des annies 50 ; sempressa d
ajouter Halimi). Cette dinonciation fut appuyie par plusieurs autoritis
intellectuelles, dont Bourdieu, et quelques autres, parmi lesquels un petit nombre d
iconomistes regroupis autour dun + Appel pour sortir de la pensie unique ; et
entrer dans la + risistance idiologique ;. Tout le paradoxe  et pour nous lintirjt
de cette agitation midiatique  vient en rialiti de ce que non seulement cette
expression (la susmentionnie + pensie unique ;) + a fait florhs ; mais encore de ce
que son succhs a par trop dipassi les ambitions de ses initiateurs, au point de
devenir lun des thhmes ricurrents du discours de ceux quelle entendait pricisiment
condamner. Se coulhrent ainsi confortablement dans cette + critique ;, +
journalistes de marchi ; et autres ejusdem farinae (mis au pas durant la guerre du
Golfe et tout juste revenus de leur condamnation des mouvements sociaux de 1995), la
presque totaliti de la classe politique nationale (de droite comme de + gauche ;),
et jusqu` certains des plus iminents reprisentants des forces dominantes du systhme
mondial : Greenspan, prisident de la Federal Reserve des Itats-Unis, lequel mit en
garde les marchis contre + leur exubirante irrationaliti ;, Stiglitz, iconomiste en
chef de la Banque mondiale, qui entendait + riguler les flux financiers ;, ou le
spiculateur et dirigeant de groupes financiers Soros, qui nourrit lespoir quil f{t
encore possible de + sauver le capitalisme du niolibiralisme ;.
La pensie unique niolibirale sest donc aisiment fondue dans celle de ses +
adversaires ;. Ce nitait pas l` leffet, pourtant redoutablement efficace, de sa
force centriphte mais bien pluttt parce que ces attaques laissaient intact l
essentiel : la perpituation du systhme mondial capitaliste, audeg` du
perfectionnement de ses formes, la permanence de lhigimonie itatsunienne, audeg`
du riaminagement de ses forces. Car ces condamnations de la pensie unique ont
toujours iti celles dun antiniolibiralisme, jamais celles dun anticapitalisme 
or, de ces deux critiques, seule la seconde ressortit pleinement au projet
socialiste. Ainsi, en censurant dans lanalyse toute rifirence thiorique ` l
exploitation et aux classes, ` lappropriation sociale des moyens de production, `
la construction dune sociiti authentiquement dimocratique, ` la diconnexion et au
diveloppement autocentri, ` la lutte contre limpirialisme (sont-elles si
dipassies aujourdhui ? ), ne vide-t-on pas du mjme coup le dibat de toute
possibiliti dilaborer des propositions de redifinition des normes dacchs au marchi
(i.e. de dislocation des rhgles de lOMC et des privilhges des oligopoles), de
refonte des systhmes monitaires et financiers (i.e. de remise en cause des fonctions
et sans doute aussi de lexistence du FMI et de la Banque mondiale, pour mettre fin
` la domination des opirations de spiculation, orienter les investissements vers les
activitis productives et favoriser la stabilisation rigionale des changes), de la
mise en place dune fiscaliti de portie mondiale (au del` dune taxe Tobin, par
exemple via la taxation des rentes liies ` lexploitation des ressources
naturelles), dune transformation dimocratique de lONU (par la constitution dune
organisation capable de concilier exigences de luniversalisme et droits
sociopolitiques des individus et des peuples)  ? Cest en fermant ces
perspectives, qui sont celles dun audel` du capitalisme mondial et dune
transition au socialisme mondial, que lon sinterdit de difinir les crithres
permettant de tracer la frontihre entre le dedans et le dehors de cette pensie
unique et que lon se condamne ` faire des rialitis dhier aujourdhui disparues
(ItatProvidence en Occident [+ capitalisme nationalsocial ;], itatisme despotique
` lEst [+ capitalisme sans capitalistes ;], diveloppementalisme nationalbourgeois
dans le TiersMonde [+ capitalisme piriphirique ;]) les utopies capitalistes de
demain.

La pensie unique a-t-elle une histoire?

Dans ces conditions, la pensie unique ne saurait jtre autrement comprise que comme
pensie unique du capitalisme, soit ce que Marx et Engels qualifiaient d+ idiologie
dominante de la classe dominante ; . Si nous pouvons tenir, daprhs eux, et aprhs
eux Althusser, que cette pensie na pas dhistoire (+ ` elle ;) , il nous est
toutefois possible de dicrypter une histoire des pensies uniques du capitalisme  qui
se sont succidi  depuis que la science iconomique sest autonomisie et
institutionnalisie dans un espacetemps pricis : au XIXhme sihcle et au centre du
systhme mondial Europe de lOuest / Amirique du Nord. Il sagira alors aussi pour
nous de repirer livolution du contenu de classe de ces pensies successives, jusqu`
lactuelle domination de la finance sur le capitalisme mondial. Cette histoire
commenga avec la pensie unique bourgeoise diployie au XIXhme sihcle, lidiologie +
classique ; du libiralisme, celle des petits propriitaires attachis aux principes de
la pripondirance de marchis (autorigulis) et de la libreconcurrence
(antimonopole), engagis dans une rivolution industrielle oy les interventions de l
Itat jouent dij` un rtle crucial dans la formation de la + sociiti de marchi ;, le
laissezfaire et laccumulation primitive du capital. Cette pensie de la +
civilisation bourgeoise ; sut se faire celle des + droits de lhomme ; dans le
discours, en acceptant la colonisation europienne et le racisme blanc en acte. L
histoire des pensies uniques se poursuivit avec un + libiralisme monopolistique ;,
de la fin du XIXhme sihcle ` la Seconde Guerre mondiale, issu des transformations du
capitalisme par une fusion banqueindustrie puissamment appuyie par un Itat ayant
parachevi au centre son intigration nationale et considirablement accru ses
dipenses. Cette pensie unique sut perfectionner la dimocratie bourgeoise sur la base
de blocs politiques de classes, par lalliance du capital avec les classes moyenne
et/ou aristocratique, en se muant le moment venu en fascisme (ou en lun de ses
sousproduits), l` oy la classe ouvrihre gagnie au communisme menagait directement
son higimonie : rivolution spartakiste en Allemagne, mouvement des conseils en
Italie, ripublique en Espagne, Front populaire en France. A partir de 1945 et jusqu
au dibut de la dicennie 70, la pensie unique du capitalisme se transforma, sous les
pressions conjuguies des victoires militaires de lArmie rouge, des luttes
syndicales et partisanes du prolitariat occidental et des succhs des mouvements
populaires piriphiriques anticolonialistes, en + libiralisme nationalsocial ;.
Cette pensie, cimentie au Nord autour du compromis keynisien, sut parfaitement
concilier progrhs social intramuros et guerres coloniales ginocidaires, soutiens
criminels directs aux dictatures niofascistes et appuis itatiques systimatiques des
stratigies cr{ment impirialistes des firmes transnationales occidentales audehors .
La fin de la dicennie 60 a marqui, on le sait, lentrie en crise du systhme
capitaliste dans les pays du centre, repirable tout spicialement dans le diclin des
taux de profit. Cette crise sest giniralisie dans les annies 70, avec le
basculement de lensemble du systhme dans le chaos monitaire et financier
international, le chtmage de masse et lexplosion des inigalitis. Les fondements du
Welfare State occidental (et la progression de concert du salaire et de la
productiviti), qui trois dicennies durant avaient fait la preuve de leur efficaciti
en assurant lessor de laprhsGuerre, devenaient inopirants. La conjonction de la
remise en cause du modhle de rigulation du capitalisme au Nord (confronti ` la
stagflation dans les annies 70), de lichec des plans de diveloppement des
bourgeoisies nationales au Sud (mise en ividence par la crise de la dette des annies
80) et de leffondrement du bloc soviitique ` lEst (achevi au tout dibut des annies
90), provoqua une modification trhs profonde du rapport de force capitaltravail ` l
ichelle mondiale. Cest seulement dans ce nouveau contexte global de recul des
positions de force conquises par les travailleurs et les peuples de la piriphirie `
la suite des victoires sur le fascisme et le colonialisme, et de riorientation
consicutive des politiques iconomiques destinies ` girer la crise de lexpansion du
capital et ` consolider le retour au pouvoir de la finance, quest envisageable la
comprihension du diploiement mondialisi de loffensive niolibirale.

La nouvelle pensie bourgeoise niolibirale du capitalisme ?

Les dogmes niolibiraux sont connus. Au niveau national, il sagit : i) de mener une
stratigie antiitatique agressive, se traduisant par la privatisation des
entreprises publiques (soit la diformation de la structure de propriiti du capital
au profit du secteur privi) et la riduction des dipenses budgitaires (associie au
dimanthlement de la protection sociale) et ii) dimposer la rigueur salariale,
permise par leffacement des + rigiditis syndicales ;, comme pivot dune
disinflation (+ compititive ; dans sa version frangaise) prioritaire sur toute autre
considiration (soit un partage de la valeur ajoutie favorable au capital et le
maintien de taux dintirjt riels ilevis). Au niveau international, ils visent : i) `
perpituer la suprimatie du dollar sur le systhme monitaire international (par l
adoption des changes flexibles, doy son contrepoids europien dune monnaie unique
soumettant ` sa loi toute la politique iconomique) et ii) ` promouvoir le
libreichange (avec abaissement des barrihres protectionnistes et libiralisation des
transferts de capitaux). La normalisation planitaire de cette stratigie globale de
+ dirigulation ; des marchis  ` apprihender comme une + rerigulation ; de ces
derniers par le seul capital mondialement dominant  relhve des fonctions du
complexe formi par les organisations internationales (FMI, Banque mondiale, OMC) et
les instances monitaires et financihres locales (Banques centrales +
indipendantes ;, ministhres des Finances)  le dispositif tout entier itant placi,
jusqu` ce jour, sous higimonie des Itats-Unis, dont la composante militaire
garantit en dernier ressort, par la guerre si besoin est, le fonctionnement du
systhme mondial capitaliste.
Les politiques niolibirales, conduites sous ligide de la finance, cherchent ainsi,
nous lavons dit, ` girer la crise de lexpansion du capital. Cette gestion
capitaliste de la crise consiste, face ` linsuffisance des possibilitis d
investissements rentables pour les profits tiris de lexploitation capitaliste, `
ilargir les dibouchis de lexcident de capitaux flottants afin diviter leur
divalorisation. Bien quelles ne soient pas parvenues, depuis trois dicennies, `
sortir le systhme de la crise, ces politiques sont rationnelles du point de vue du
capital : elles lui offrent, sur des marchis des capitaux libiralisis, lopportuniti
dune fuite en avant dans des placements financiers spiculatifs, extrjmement
profitables pour lui, et assurent la continuiti des transferts de surplus du Sud
vers le Nord, grbce aux stratigies de gestion (i.e. de remboursement du service) de
la dette et aux programmes dajustement structurel, imposis unilatiralement aux pays
pauvres par la force dinstitutions internationales sous contrtle nordamiricain.
Mais ce choix de gestion du systhme, ripitonsnous, fait des victimes, nombreuses 
quil faudra peut-jtre un jour apprendre ` compter en unitis physiques (en morts d
hommes) et ` localiser spatialement (pour lessentiel dans la piriphirie dun
systhme mondial au sein duquel la circulation de toutes les marchandises est +
libre ;, sauf une  + marchandise ; trhs particulihre  : le travail).
Loffensive ricente de lidiologie niolibirale nest donc rien dautre que le
produit intellectuel dirivi de transformations majeures enregistries dans lordre
conflictuel des rapports sociaux ` lichelle mondiale. Elle ne doit rien au
triomphe, illusoire, de la doctrine raisonnie des niolibiraux sur les arguments
irraisonnis de leurs adversaires socialistes dans lespace airien de lesprit ou la
sphhre ithirie des idies : elle est la risultante de livolution dun rapport de
force sur le terrain riel de la production qui a brutalement et massivement basculi
` lavantage du capital  et tout spicialement de sa nouvelle fraction higimonique :
la finance . Reste nianmoins qu` lheure actuelle, la suprimatie des valeurs
philosophiques et des prifirences politiques niolibirales se manifeste en itroite
solidariti avec la pridominance sur la thiorie iconomique, presque sans partage
depuis le dibut des annies 1980, du courant nioclassique, dont la pritention ` la
scientificiti est venue renforcer le discours de la nouvelle pensie unique
bourgeoise du capitalisme.

Une pensie qui sinvente son histoire ?

Pour simposer comme systhme de reprisentations rifirentiel et rationnel, la
nouvelle pensie unique bourgeoise du capitalisme a encore besoin de se livrer ` une
riicriture de sa propre histoire, quelle prisentera comme seule lecture possible de
la succession des idies et doctrines, lunique histoire de la pensie. Pour ce faire,
ginialogistes et ipistimologues du courant dominant se chargent dinventer ` la
thiorie nioclassique et ` la philosophie niolibirale de (trop) prestigieuses
filiations : la premihre est inscrite de fagon artificielle et accommodante dans la
lignie de l
uvre des classiques, quelle viendrait en quelque sorte logiquement
prolonger et dipasser  ; la seconde rattachie aux doctrines ilabories par les
thioriciens libiraux aux XVIIIhme et XIXhme sihcles . Cette reconstruction des
histoires des pensies iconomique et philosophique seffectue par un mouvement d
inversion : des ruptures tout ` fait fondamentales dans la thiorie sont prisenties
comme des continuitis ; des continuitis thioriques fortes sont donnies pour des
ruptures. Ainsi, l` oy une analyse critique approfondie rivhle des rigressions
scientifiques dans lhistoire des pensies uniques bourgeoises du capitalisme, un
ricit historicomythique idiologiquement construit y fera apparantre des progrhs. Il
ne restera plus au main stream qu` souligner, ` lappui de ses pritentions pour lui
vitales ` la scientificiti et ` luniversaliti, la richesse de ses + nouvelles
thiories ; quand la recherche iconomique dont il contrtle la production
institutionnellement ne fournit plus, de lavis mjme de certains de ses plus fameux
reprisentants, le moindre risultat novateur significatif .
Le courant nioclassique a ainsi pris lhabitude de se prisenter comme lunique
hiritier direct des classiques. Or les ruptures quil sest vu contraint dopirer
par rapport ` ces derniers  ruptures que les diveloppements marxiens
(destructeurscriateurs), si proches parents de travaux classiques, rendaient
absolument nicessaires  ont iti dicisives pour la trajectoire que devait prendre
par la suite la science iconomique moderne. Ces coupures ipistimologiques, que les
auteurs orthodoxes sefforcent de risoudre au point den faire ritroactivement des
crises de croissance de leur thiorie, se rephrent aux niveaux mithodologique (avec l
individualisme mithodologique disparant au sein de la pensie bourgeoise toute
vision sociohistorique du capitalisme, bloquant ainsi tout recours aux analyses
congues en termes de classes sociales et de tendances longues), thiorique (du fait d
un ancrage sur lutiliti, qui rabat la rialiti sociale sur une collection dhomines
oeconomici, le pont entre la thiorie de la valeur et celle de lexploitation est
rompu, et du mjme coup aussi un certain rapport de liconomique au politique) et
conceptuel (par la substitution dun iquilibre de court terme par ajustement des
prix ` un iquilibre de long terme par ajustement des quantitis, la riflexion sur la
crise et les cycles se trouve compromise). Ce renversement de ruptures en
continuitis (des classiques aux nioclassiques) et de continuitis en ruptures (entre
les classiques et Marx) permet en consiquence de tenir un continuum idiologique
entre + harmonie universelle ; des thiories (historiques et sociales) des classiques
et + iquilibre optimum ; des thiorhmes (ahistoriques et asociaux) des
nioclassiques pour un continuum thiorique. Ou comment faire communier les uns et les
autres dans une vision apologitique unifiie du capitalisme. Leffet de camera
obscura est parfois visible + ` l
il nu ; tant le ditournement des icrits
classiques est grossier et la manipulation sommaire . Mais il peut mobiliser plus de
subtiliti, comme cest le cas (nous lavons montri ailleurs ) de la + nouvelle
thiorie ; nioclassique de la croissance.
Pour que lefficace de la pensie unique fonctionne ` plein, ces
inversionsinventions doivent aussi opirer + au plan philosophique ;. La philosophie
sousjacente aux travaux des contemporains niolibiraux (ou ultralibiraux) est ainsi
le plus friquemment situie dans le prolongement direct de celle des libiraux des
XVIIIhmeXIXhme sihcles. Von Hayek et Friedman en particulier, dont les positions
(individualiste, antiitatiste, monitariste) sont placies au fondement des
politiques iconomiques menies depuis deux dicennies  dans le contexte de
transformations sociales que nous avons rappeli  sont ainsi considiris, Vergara  l
a parfaitement dimontri, comme les hiritiers de sang des Turgot et Smith, Bentham et
Ricardo, avec lesquels ils partageraient tout naturellement, par une mjme communauti
desprit, le choix de la + liberti ; comme crithre ithique ultime. Un simple prifixe
suffirait-il ` diviser leurs visions de ce quest le + libiralisme ; ? Friedman ne
diclare-t-il pas dailleurs qu+ en tant que libiraux, nous [i.e. en tant que +
nous ; poursuivons l
uvre des libiraux] prenons la liberti de lindividu comme but
ultime permanent pour juger les institutions sociales ;  ? Ce serait l` omettre que
le droit naturel des uns (Turgot, Condorcet, Jefferson) et lutilitarisme des
autres (Hume, Smith, Bentham) nont jamais ilevi + la liberti de lindividu ; au
statut de crithre premier, et dissimuler la profonde altiration que les + nouveaux ;
libiraux ont introduit dans la thiorie des anciens. Car les nouvelles ginirations
niolibirales se caractirisent par un iclectisme fort peu rigoureux dans la
ditermination de leurs crithres philosophiques de jugement . Ce miticuleux travail
de reconstruction de lhistoire de la pensie, destini ` assurer, par del` les
divergences entre ces diffirentes pensies bourgeoises, luniti proprement
idiologique entre tous les partisans du capitalisme, est encore ` l
uvre lorsquil
sagit pour ces derniers de se positionner au sujet de limmixtion de lItat dans l
allocation des ressources. Cest alors au Turgot et au Smith + non
interventionnistes ; que lon fera appel pour itayer les argumentations
antiitatistes contemporaines  et ce, jusquen matihre diducation .
Il faudrait ici reconnantre les similitudes existant entre ce travail dinversion
effectui sur lhistoire des idies et une entreprise de fond beaucoup plus vaste, qui
va toujours de pair avec lui, dinvention de lhistoire des faits (de lhistoire
universelle) depuis longtemps engagie par les auteurs bourgeois . Bernal montre par
exemple comment, des deux versions de lhistoire grecque qui se sont affronties, l
une (le + modhle aryen ;) prisentant la Grhce antique comme essentiellement
europienne, lautre (le +modhle ancien;) comme une civilisation situie au carrefour
des aires africaine (igyptienne) et asiatique (simite) et issue dun milange ficond
des cultures de la Miditerranie orientale, cest la premihre que les enseignements
ont imposi et dans laquelle le sens commun a de facto le plus naturellement placi sa
croyance. Or lauteur a dimontri comment ce modhle aryen a iti crii de toutes pihces
au cours de la premihre moitii du XIXhme sihcle colonial, puis radicalisi ` lipoque
impirialiste, tout spicialement durant la vague dantisimitisme des annies
18901920, dans sa nigation du fait riel (attesti par les auteurs grecs de lipoque
classique) des colonisations extraeuropiennes, et dans sa reconnaissance du seul
apport civilisationnel des Hellhnes de langue indoeuropienne et dorigine nordique
aux peuples de lIgie + prihellinique ; . De la mjme manihre, Diop avait dij`
rappeli que lidentiti noire de lIgypte ancienne itait + pour tous les auteurs
antirieurs aux falsifications grotesques et hargneuses de la moderne igyptologie, et
contemporains des anciens Igyptiens () un fait dividence qui tombait sous le sens,
cest-`-dire sous le regard et donc quil e{t iti superflu de dimontrer ;  alors qu
elle exige aujourdhui de nous un effort pour sarracher ` la pesanteur idiologique
qui nous fait par riflexe + couper ; lIgypte du continent africain . Ce qui vaut
pour les faits historiques les plus reculis continue ` plus forte raison djtre
valable pour le temps contemporain, sur lequel la prignance de lidiologie
dominante, giniratrice de mythologie et de mystification, est totale . Notre propos
nest pas de dinoncer une machination orchestrie par le cynisme didiologues
professionnels, dont les constructions en iconomie ne seraient que lun des rouages,
mais pluttt dinoncer les biais introduits et complaisamment ripitis dans lhistoire
des idies et des faits (par inversions, inventions, nondits), systimatiquement
orientis ` lavantage des forces dominantes du systhme mondial capitaliste.

Limpossibiliti de se constituer en science contre lhistoire

Pour ce qui est spicifiquement de liconomie, la diffusion des pensies uniques
bourgeoises du capitalisme a dividence gagni en efficaciti avec sa mutation
progressive d+ iconomie politique ; (XVIIIhme sihcle) en + iconomie pure ; (XXhme
sihcle)  le point tournant itant sans doute la construction de l+ iconomie
politique pure ; walrasienne (XIXhme sihcle). A mesure quelle se ditachait de la
philosophie et du droit et que se siparaient delle la sociologie (centrie sur la
sociiti civile) et la science politique (traitant de lItat), la discipline
affirmait, dans son mouvement dinstitutionnalisation et sa recherche de
scientificiti, une vocation ouvertement nomothitique et antiidiographique. En s
assignant pour tbche de destituer les mithodes historiques et holistiques au profit
du subjectivisme et de latomisme de lindividualisme mithodologique (+ notre
Robinson ; [Bastiat], + individu isoli ; [Jevons], + atteint de myopie sur une nle
diserte ; [Menger], + dans sa cabane isolie au milieu de la forjt vierge ;
[BvhmBawerk], + Robinson Crusoi ;[Barro]) , les nioclassiques ont pu non seulement
avancer que le comportement iconomique nitait que le reflet dune psychologie
individualiste universelle  pluttt que dinstitutions socialement construites, +
abstractions populaires et pseudoentitis collectives ; (von Hayek)  mais encore
affirmer le caracthre naturel des principes du laissezfaire et, plus largement, des
fondements mjme du systhme capitaliste  dont bien ividemment + la reconnaissance
intigrale de la propriiti privie des moyens de production ; contre + lantilogique,
lantiscience, lantipensie ; quest le marxisme (von Mises). Les nioclassiques sont
maintenant lancis ` la conqujte de sujets considiris traditionnellement comme
relevant de la sociologie (iconomie de la famille), de la science politique (icole
du Public Choice) ou de lhistoire (cliomitrie), ` partir dun modhle analytique
standard et sur un mode de discours excluant toute pensie discursive  le formalisme
mathimatique, qui nest pourtant quun langage parmi dautres en iconomie .
Cest que la mathimatique constitue un domaine oy, comme lavaient pressenti Gauss
et plus tard le groupe Bourbaki, lunification de la marche de la discipline est
relativement forte et comme maximale lautonomie de sa surrection au riel (a
fortiori en regard du temps historique) , oy lhistoire de la pensie semble celle de
la progression par labstraction et la seule ditermination riciproque de ses
concepts (+ orientie par une dialectique interne des notions ;, pour le dire avec
Cavaillhs ), oy la science parant mjme atteindre quelque chose dune pureti. Comment
les thioriciens nioclassiques auraient-ils pu ichapper ` la tentation  eux qui ont
cette supirioriti sur les physiciens que davoir rialisi lexploit didentifier la
particule ilimentaire (unique : lhomo oeconomicus) et la force fondamentale (unique
: la maximisation sous contrainte)  de sapproprier un peu du prestige de cette
science mathimatique pour itablir leurs lois, + vraies ; en tout temps et en tout
lieu ? Le risultat ne pouvait-il jtre que catastrophique : par un fbcheux salto
mortale, les thioriciens nioclassiques (dont limmense majoriti na pas regu de
formation mathimatique authentique), qui sefforgaient de divelopper une
connaissance + objective ; de la rialiti sociale, ont replongi dans ce quils
entendaient fuir : la spiculation. Le risultat est une discipline iconomique
fictivement apolitique  mais riellement dominie par un courant higimonique
dogmatique, qui la fait tendre, au mieux, vers une + idiologie scientifique ; (au
sens que donne ` cette expression Canguilhem dans Idiologie et rationaliti), au
pire, vers une + sciencefiction iconomique ; (comme Althusser a pu parler dune
+science politiquefictiondont le rtle antisocial est ivident;).
Le terme de + pensie unique ; a donc iti choisi par les forces actuellement
dominantes du capitalisme pour nommer sa propre idiologie. La pensie bourgeoise du
capitalisme qui parvient ` simposer est celle qui ripond de la manihre la plus
appropriie aux besoins historiques immidiats de la dynamique de celui-ci. Cette
pensie unique : 1) articule une thiorie iconomique (nioclassique) ` pritention
scientifique et une philosophie politique (niolibirale) ` vocation universelle pour
idifier un projet +sociitaire; et +culturel; total ; 2) incorpore en la subsumant et
en surmontant ses contradictions toute thhse externe et/ou critique comme lune des
composantes de son uniti ; 3) fonctionne ` lunanimiti + persicutive ;  par le jeu d
une nicessaire liberti de pensie pluraliste et dimocratique (au sens bourgeois) et
dappareils acadimiques et midiatiques autoritairement normalisis ; 4) exclut des
processus de dicisions iconomiques et politiques fondamentales les masses, par la
polarisation des savoirs et la technicisation des tbches ; 5) dirive dun rapport de
forces dans la vie rielle entre le capital et le travail ` lichelle mondiale,
traduisant laccession de la finance ` lhigimonie ; 6) sappuie sur lhigimonie
itatsunienne, menacie mais toujours effective, ` base de monopoles (dont celui,
rigulateur en dernier ressort, de la force armie) ; 7) vient ligitimer par une
caution ithique et comme + naturaliser ; la pratique du capital en lui permettant de
durer pardel` lichec de sa gestion ; 8) iclaire la dynamique du capital, en
priservant ce quil a dessentiel tout en aminageant ce quil y a daccessoire par l
effet en retour des politiques niolibirales ; 9) fait corps avec la forme de lItat
(unique ` lichelon national, embryonnaire au plan mondial), qui lui confhre
autoriti et autonomie, tout en apportant ` ce dernier la confirmation de son
universaliti et la fiction dun consensus  ; 10) produit lillusion que la lutte se
limite au champ des idies et au cadre des institutions acadimiques oy + les armes de
la critique ; font oublier + la critique des armes ; .




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Sun Feb 11 15:11:49 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 17:11:49 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Assassination ban lifted ?
Message-ID: <sa86c7d5.071@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

>From the New Paradigms Project [Not Necessarily Endorsed] 
Note: We store 100's of related "New Paradigms Posts" at: 
http://www.msen.com/~lloyd/oldprojects/recentmail.html 

From: "Ruddner" 
Subject: Bush Endorses Assassination: LET THE KILLING BEGIN!! 
Date: Monday, February 05, 2001 12:37 AM 

The NWO henchmen will soon be on the march. 

http://www.copvcia.com/assassination_ban.htm 

HOUSE BILL PROPOSES LIFTING BAN ON ASSASSINATIONS 

BUSH ADMINISTRATION WASTING NO TIME IN MOVING TOWARD WAR FOOTING 

Armitage The Executioner 

FTW 1/24/01 - HR 19, Introduced by Republican Georgia Congressman Bob Barr on January 3, 2001, the first day of the new 107th Congress, would legislatively repeal sections of three Executive 
Orders specifically prohibiting assassinations by the United States Government. 

Entitled the "Terrorist Elimination Act of 2001", the bill, submitted to the House International Relations Committee, would specifically nullify sections of three previous Executive Orders 
including one initiated by Ronald Reagan in 1981. It is interesting to note that acts of Congress are not required to nullify previous 
Executive Orders (EOs) which are, by definition, orders issued by the President and Commander in Chief to all federal employees (including military) under his authority. All that is necessary to reverse one EO is another EO. This is exactly what President George W. Bush did with respect to EOs issued by President Clinton on the 
environment in the last days of his administration. 

Section 3 of HR 19 specifically states: 

"The following provisions of Executive orders shall have no further force or effect: 

(1) Section 5(g) of Executive Order 11905. (2) Section 2-305 of Executive Order 12306. (3) Section 2.11 of Executive Order 12333." 
[By Ronald Reagan] 

Section 5 (g) of Executive Order 11905, signed by Gerald Ford on 2/18/76 specifically prohibited "political" assassination. Section 
2-305 of Executive Order 12036, signed 1/24/78 by Jimmy Carter renewed the ban. Section 2.11 of Executive Order 12333, signed by Ronald Reagan on 12/4/81 renewed the ban on assassinations, or 
conspiracy to commit assassinations, as part of a broader package which gave virtually complete control of the American National Security apparatus to then Vice President George H.W. Bush. 

The full text of HR 19 may be viewed at http://thomas.loc.gov. Enter a search in the 107th Congress for 19 and it will take you straight to the bill. 

The bold move, unreported and ignored by any major media, offers a chance for an early referendum on the new administration's full- 
speed run at a more violent and brutish foreign policy. 

The current bill, introduced by staunch Bush supporter and Clinton impeachment leader Barr, indicates that the Bush administration is 
seeking to add legitimacy to the move by implying that Congress and the American people support the action. This can only mean that there is quite likely a list of people the Bush Administration wants to start killing fairly quickly. The appointment of career covert operative and Annapolis graduate Richard Armitage as Deputy 
Secretary of State under Colin Powell only underscores the clear message that the Bush Administration is sending to the world. 

Armitage, who was denied a 1989 appointment as Assistant Secretary of State because of links to Iran-Contra and other scandals, served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs in the Reagan years. U.S. Government stipulations in the Oliver North trial specifically named Armitage as one of the DoD officials responsible for illegal transfers of weapons to Iran and the Contras. But Armitage's dirty past goes much deeper. 

The 1992 best-seller "Kiss The Boys Goodbye" by former "60 MINUTES" producer Monika Jensen-Stevenson details Armitage's role as Reagan 
point man on Vietnam POW-MIA issues and describes why Armitage has earned the enmity of many POW activists. However, in a 1995 interview with "The Washington Post", Colin Powell referred to 
Armitage as his "white son." This,notwithstanding the fact that the 6 foot, balding, power-lifter, now 56, can still bench press 300 or more pounds and reportedly "enjoys killing." 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Sun Feb 11 10:50:57 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:50:57 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] U.S. prison labor
Message-ID: <sa868ab1.072@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

The Daily Bruin (UCLA) January 31, 2001

Slave labor means big bucks for U.S. corporations

By Michael Schwartz

Los Angeles -- It seemed like a normal factory closing. U.S. 
Technologies sold its electronics plant in Austin, Texas, leaving its 
150 workers unemployed. Everyone figured they were moving the 
plant to Mexico, where they would employ workers at half the cost. 
But six weeks later, the electronics plant reopened in Austin in a 
nearby prison.
At the same time, the United States blasts China for the use of 
prison slave labor, engaging in the same practice itself. Prison labor 
is a pot of gold. No strikes, union organizing, health benefits, 
unemployment insurance or workers' compensation to pay. As if 
exploiting the labor of prison inmates was not bad enough, it is 
legal in the United States to use slave labor. The 13th Amendment 
of the Constitution states that "neither slavery nor involuntary 
servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall 
have been duly convicted shall exist within the United States." 
There are approximately 2 million people behind bars in the United 
States -- more than three times the number of prisoners in 1980. 
The United States now imprisons more people than any other 
country in the world. In fact, in the last 20 years California has 
constructed 21 new prisons while in the same amount of time, it 
has built only one new university. That statistic is even more 
astounding when we think about the fact that it took California 
almost 150 years to build its first 12 prisons. Another five new 
prisons are under construction and plans are in the works to build 
another 10.
The question that needs to be answered is -- why? Why are 
prisons such a booming business? The answer lies in the prison 
industrial complex. At the same time that prisons clear the streets 
of those you feel are a "threat" to society, prisons also offer jobs in 
construction, guarding, administration, health, education and food 
service.
Prisons in impoverished areas often end up with inmates from 
the local area who had previously worked in the community. Often 
they were laid off from a factory job that moved overseas and they 
turned to alcohol or drugs, which ultimately landed them in prison. 
Others are luckier and get a job in the prison. One of the fastest-
growing sectors of the prison industrial complex is private 
corrections companies. Private prisons also have an incentive to 
gain as many prisoners as possible and to keep them there as long 
as possible.
Many corporations, whose products we consume on a daily 
basis, have learned that prison labor can be as profitable as using 
sweatshop labor in developing nations. You might have had a first-
hand experience with a prison laborer if you have ever booked a 
flight on Trans World Airlines, since many of the workers making 
the phone reservations are prisoners. Other companies that use 
prison labor are Chevron, IBM, Motorola, Compaq, Texas 
Instruments, Honeywell, Microsoft, Victoria's Secret and Boeing. 
Federal prisons operate under the trade name Unicor and use their 
prisoners to make everything from lawn furniture to congressional 
desks. Their Web site proudly displays "where the government 
shops first."
Federal safety and health standards do not protect prison labor, 
nor do the National Labor Relations Board policies. The 
corporations do not even have to pay minimum wage. In California, 
inmates who work for the Prison Industrial Authority earn wages 
between 30 and 95 cents per hour before required deductions for 
restitutions and fines.
State Corrections agencies are even advertising their prisoners 
to corporations by asking these questions: "Are you experiencing 
high employee turnover? Worried about the cost of employee 
benefits? Getting hit by overseas competition? Having trouble 
motivating your work force? Thinking about expansion space? Then 
the Washington State Department of Corrections Private Sector 
Partnerships is for you."
Prisons are being filled largely with the poor, the mentally ill, 
people of color, drug addicts and many combinations of these 
characteristics. They are not reserved for violent people who are 
extremely dangerous to society. In fact, of the nearly 2 million 
prisoners, about 150,000 are armed robbers, 125,000 are 
murderers and 100,000 are sex offenders. Prisons are certainly not 
filled with corporate criminals who make up only 1 percent of our 
nation's prisons.
In California, then-Gov. Pete Wilson signed the "three strikes 
and you're out" law in 1994. The law states that if an offender has 
two or more previous serious or violent felony convictions, the 
mandatory sentence for any new felony conviction is 25 years to 
life. Though people thought the three-strikes law was intended to 
protect society from dangerous career criminals, the actual 
enactment of the law has been dramatically different. Kendall 
Cooke was convicted under the three-strikes law for stealing one 
can of beer with two previous convictions of theft. Clarence 
Malbrough was sentenced to 25 years to life for stealing batteries, a 
crime that would usually send someone to jail for about 30 days. 
Eddie Jordan stole a shirt from a JC Penney store, Juan Murro 
attempted to steal wooden pallets from a parking lot and Michael 
Garcia stole a package of steaks from a grocery store. All of these 
people are facing life in prison for petty theft. They are fueling the 
prison industry. They are not the exception, either. Eighty-five 
percent of those sentenced under the law in California faced prison 
for a nonviolent offense. Two years after the law went into effect, 
there were twice as many people imprisoned under the three-
strikes law for possession of marijuana as for murder, rape and 
kidnapping combined. More than 80 percent of those sentenced 
under the three-strikes law are African-American and Latino.
In the 1980s, Congress established several different mandatory 
minimum sentences. These laws require offenders of certain crimes 
to receive fixed sentences without parole. Mandatory sentences, 
especially for drugs, are largely responsible for the ever-increasing 
number of people behind bars in the United States. In May of 1998, 
drug defendants made up 60 percent of the federal prison 
population, up from 25 percent in 1980. The disproportionate 
number of African Americans being sent to prison for drug use, 
however, is largely due to racism in the actual mandatory minimum 
laws themselves. Though crack and powdered cocaine are virtually 
the same drug (crack is powder cocaine mixed with baking soda) 
possession of five grams of crack gets you a mandatory five years 
in jail, while it takes 500 grams of powdered cocaine to get this 
same sentence. The U.S. Sentencing Commission reported that in 
1995, whites accounted for 52 percent of all crack users and 
African Americans, 38 percent. But just 4.1 percent of those 
sentenced for crack offenses are white, while 88 percent are 
African Americans. Seventy percent of our nation's prisons are 
made up of African Americans. You now know that they are there 
through a variety of unjust racist laws. Corporations are happily 
using these people for slave labor, which is perfectly legal under 
the constitution. Almost 2 million human beings are now locked up 
in our nation's prisons. The vast majority are not there because 
they are murderers, rapists or other violent people. They are there 
because prisons are a business in this country, whether we're 
talking about private prisons or private companies using prison 
labor. The next time you think of prison slave labor you don't have 
to think of China, think of the United States. And go take a look at 
the 13th Amendment.





From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sun Feb 11 16:59:22 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 20:59:22 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Uranium
In-Reply-To: <000901c09407$49e992a0$149120d9@mjones>
References: <0c2fa3427220a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <038052259230b21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Z-Net Flunks Test on Depleted Ura, 
el 11 Feb 01, a las 8:47, Mark Jones dijo:

> I honestly don't think we differ much. 

Neither do I. It is simply a matter of perspective, Mark. While I can see 
issues you see with more difficulties, you can target my blind spots with 
amazing precission. This is what I would term "intellectual internationalism".

> I have a serious problem with the idea
> that "it is Mark's duty to ensure that it is not his own rulers who do it
> instead. " This would have meant for instance, campaigning in support of
> Pinochet while mass demonstrations against him were going on in London. That
> just doesn't feel right.

Not necessarily, nay, not at all. Campaigning against the right of the employer 
of Pinochet to be, at the same time, his judge, is campaigning just against the 
employer, and leaving Pinochet not off the hook, but off the _employer's_ hook. 
You may be sure that our own hooks are quite more terrible than those you can 
get in England. All the _good_ ones have been exported by your bourgeoisie to 
the periphery. Hooks and hoods...

> 
> But it's all a question of context, and the context is how do you create
> oppositional and ultimately revolutuionary forces which have real political
> autonomy and are not hostages to the political chicanery of comprador/quisling
> national elites which wrap themselves in the flag?

Yes, this is the zillion rupees question. But the answer, though it is not easy 
to turn into militant practice, is not _that_ difficult. They, simply, don't 
deserve that flag. One must show this in the practice of politics. On the other 
side, there is a different point to be made, on which I am sure you will be in 
agreement with me. After the wave of retreat and defeats, few national elites 
remain that can struggle for that flag. Most former "national" bourgeoisies in 
the semicolonial world (never a very serious partner for anyone, neither the 
imperialists against local workers nor the workers against imperialist, by the 
way) have been either crushed or turned into transmission belts for the "world 
markets", that is for Shylocks. So that they will most probably oppose the 
movement from its very inception. 

The issue here is that by keeping the right of imperialists to intervene -even 
against our own rogues- we don't help the movement to start ahead again, which 
is the best situation for chameleons (sorry, dear chameleons!) to remain with 
their "progressive" outlook in the eyes of the masses. Most probably, the wave 
of resistence that is now sweeping most of the semicolonial world will, if we 
don't fight for our right to have an unintervened political scenario here,  
relapse into a muddy backwater and come to an end. We need to turn it into a 
tidal wave, and in order to do so the first step is to make it very clear that 
_any_ intervention of imperialists (even of righteous imperialist courts) in 
our affairs is a form of intervention. So that, when you support the right of 
the courts in London, NYC, Barcelona or Paris to judge their own rogues you are 
actually helping the tide to wear away. And this is -of course- exactly what 
you, Mark, DO NOT want to do.

Now, it is not by yelling histerically at G. Soros on TV (as Hebe de Bonafini 
is so proud to have done) that one fights against Soros. The basis of his power 
in the Third World (or whatever you call it) is ideological dictatorship. Hebe 
may well scream at him a thousand times, but while she does not uncover the 
relationship between the murders during the 70s, the "human rights" agenda 
imposed from the imperialist centers (during the Jimmy Carter era), and the 
trials of the employees by the employers, she is simply helping Soros rule the 
world because she does not make the movement at the colonies advance a single 
step ahead against foreign domination and control of our economies, nay, of our 
minds.

One of the reasons why I am absolutely convinced that this thread has been so 
productive, indeed, is that most of what I have said above has already been 
worked and reworked by you, Mark, on this and other lists. I insist: of course 
we are in good agreement (not "full", thank God, life would be so dull...) We 
both have seen the true face of "democracy" at work. You have seen it in the 
fSU, I have seen it in my own country.

A hug,

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sun Feb 11 16:59:20 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 20:59:20 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] Rogues and sovereignty I
In-Reply-To: <000301c093cd$41609000$478a20d9@mjones>
References: <0c69f2927220a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <037202059230b21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a RE: [CrashList] Rogues and sovereignty I, 
el 11 Feb 01, a las 1:52, Mark Jones dijo:

> The
> point -- my whole point in fact -- is only this: the revolutionary party and the
> workers' movement must be, and be seen to have, real political and social
> autonomy, and cannot be the political or psychological prisoner of a national
> bourgeoisie which has managed to wrape itself in the national flag.

We could not agree more. In fact, I think that I will try to translate to 
English a recent essay (that we are now distributing as a leaflet among 
Argentinean mid-rank cadres of the union movement) by my cde. Osvaldo Calello 
which bears exactly on this issue. Why do you think, dear Mark, that we in the 
Izquierda Nacional have remained in proud isolation, risking the event (which 
resulted in grim truth) that we could have to traverse a long road of decades 
as a small propaganda group, instead of joining Peronism? Because we like to be 
small, because we hate grandeur? Not at all. Sometimes you have to pay a price 
of decades for a correct political decission. We chose not to soothe 
Argentinean workers in their option for a national bourgeois path for our 
revolution, AND not to appeal to the most primitive elements in the class by 
dragging them into a simpleton's schema of "bourgeois vs. proletarian" 
economicism. We chose to dive deep into the history of our country, to discover 
the main threads of revolution, and to painstakingly build up from their 
current -understandable enough, by the way, given the record of what was known 
as the Left in Argentina- level of consciousness to help them step ahead into 
the full consciousness of their historic duty with themselves.

You can rest assured, dear Mark, that if we had chosen either of the paths 
above, our life would have been easier, sweeter, smoother, softer, and 
politically irrelevant or directly reactionary. So that, yes, we do agree on 
this. The cornerstone of revolutionary politics in the Third World is summed up 
in your lines. And yes, I agree that 
> 
> ... we look at striking examples from history to see how
> revolutionary movements find ways to work with their "own" national bourgeoisie
> or comprador elites, while still preserving their own autonomy and while still
> preparing to seize state power. 

Critical support is the watchword, IMHO. Strike together, march separately. And 
wait. Don't anticipate the betrayal by the bourgeoisie, but anticipate it. Try 
to generate the conditions for this betrayal to be more apparent and less 
harmful. And keep waiting, keep watching the horizon. 

There is a very good couple of lines by an Uruguayan poet, Alfredo Zitarrosa: 
"no hay nada m?s sin apuro / que un pueblo haciendo su historia" (a roguish 
translation would be "there is nothing less in a hurry / than a people doing 
its own history"). This is, by the way, a very Platine observation, since -as a 
refugee from Guatemala told our comrades once- "Argentineans and Uruguayans are 
people of slow digestive processes: too much beef in their diet".

> A good example is the complex relationship which
> developed between the Chinese Communist Party and the Kuomintang in the 1930s
> and 1940s. There are people here like Henry Liu and Steve Philion who know a
> great deal about that. We need to think about the meaning of 'antagonistic' and
> 'non-antagonistic' contradictions and how revolutionary movements can use these
> ideas and methods to structure their relationships with allies from different
> social classes and even their allies in the national elites and ruling classes,
> even highly reactionary, comprador elites who are completely treacherous and
> even genocidal, but whose own contradicitons with imperialism can still be
> exploited.

Yes, I fully support the above. The experience of the Chinese Revolution, 
though very specific in its own way, is at the same time a source of lessons 
for anyone trying to get to power outside the core. Perhaps to your rage, Mark, 
I would also suggest that entire blocks of Trotsky are -sometimes even as an 
anticipation of Mao's experience- equally apt to this task. And, of course, 
Lenin, always Lenin. 

> 
> Nestor is right to point to the rising tides of class struggle in Latin America
> and many other places. Of course it is true that, either the future is ours, or
> there is no future. The future cannot be theirs.

They belong to the Realm of Death. If the future is theirs, then there is no 
future. Let us always keep in mind, at any time, Marx's phrases on the 
domination of the World of the Living by the World of the Dead.

Dead labor rules over living labor, and the ideas of the dead generations 
"oppress as a nightmare the brain of the living ones". If we don't prevail, 
Death will reign unchallenged for ever.

We could not agree most, dear Mark. Happy to realize it still once again, 
though a little bit bored ;-)

Hugs,

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb 11 19:17:41 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 02:17:41 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] From mud to pebbles
Message-ID: <000001c0949a$026323e0$2b8e20d9@mjones>

 [I'll be away for a few days. Tom Warren is minding the store. Mark]

Mike Davis tells how western empires wrought destruction in Late Victorian
Holocausts

Sunday February 11, 2001
The Observer

Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niqo, Famines and the Making of the Third World
Mike Davis
Verso #20, pp464


Driven to insurrection by the drought of 1877, the native Kanak people of New
Caledonia rose against their French colonists in a desperate and ultimately tragic
revolution. In a meeting with the Governor, Olry, the rebel leader Atai acted out a
graphic explanation of his people's grievances. He carried with him two sacks, the
contents of which he emptied at the Frenchman's feet. The first contained soil.
'This,' said Atai, 'is what we had before you came.' The second contained pebbles.
'And this is what we have now.' By June of 1878 Atai's rebellion was over after a
slash and burn policy had reduced hundreds of Kanak villages to ash. Atai himself
was captured and decapitated by the French, his head sent back to Paris as a trophy
of war.

It is a grim irony that many of those who fought in the war of extermination against
the Kanaks were themselves exiles from the revolutionary Paris Commune of 1871. But
Louise Michel, The Red Virgin of Paris, took the Kanak side and even gave half her
famous red scarf to two rebel friends.

In her memoirs Michel wrote movingly of the failed rebellion: 'The strength and
longing of human hearts was shown once again, but the whites shot down the rebels as
we were mowed down in front of Bastion 37 and on the plains of Satory. When they
sent the head of Atai, I wondered who the real headhunters were; as Henri Rochefort
had once written to me, "the Versailles government could give the natives lessons in
cannibalism".'

Atai's simple but dramatic demonstration before the French governor and Michel's
more conventional colonial narrative both express the central argument of Mike
Davis's book.

He maintains that the droughts that struck across Asia, Africa, South America and
the Pacific at the end of the nineteenth century were at best exacerbated by the
colonial powers and at worst turned into vehicles of extermination by European
governments blinded by the yoked ideologies of neo-Darwinism and free-market
capitalism.

Since the French invasion of 1853 the indigenous Melanesians of the Pacific island
of New Caledonia had been driven off the fertile land on the west coast into
reserves in the mountainous interior. In a policy developed first in Algeria, the
French replaced potentially troublesome local chiefs with pliant placemen loyal to
the new regime. Within two years the French had thrown the Kanaks off 90 per cent of
the best land and destroyed the tribal culture. The famine and its aftermath did the
rest.

Late Victorian Holocausts is two great books in one. The first is a political
history of the droughts and famine that killed millions in the colonial world just
as it was being wiped out in western Europe. The second is the scientific history of
the phenomenon that became known as the El Niqo Southern Oscillation (Enso): the
cyclical pattern of extreme weather conditions that created the droughts in the
first place. This part of the book celebrates the work of scientists, culminating in
that of Jacob Bjerknes of University of California, Los Angeles, in the 1960s who
studied the inner workings of El Niqo, the rapid warming of the tropical Pacific
that leads to drought, and its equally deadly twin La Niqa, which causes torrential
rain and flooding

Davis draws together these meteorological and social phenomena to produce a picture
of what he calls 'the malign interaction between climactic and economic processes'.

Between 1876 and 1902 as many as 60 million people died as a result of famines in
India, China and Brazil. The earliest official examination of the causes of mass
death in India by the Famine Commission of 1899-1902 found that it had been caused
by high prices and not a shortage of food. In fact 1877, when millions died as a
result of famine, was also a record year for Indian grain exports to Britain.

According to Davis, the Third World was created at this moment. Late Victorian
Holocausts will redefine the way we think about the European colonial project. After
reading this, I defy even the most ardent nationalist to feel proud of the so-called
'achievements' of empire.
------------------
Hunger strike

Sukhdev Sandhu on Late Victorian Holocausts - the famines that fed the empire - by
Mike Davis

Saturday January 20, 2001
The Guardian

Late Victorian Holocausts: El Nino Famines and the Making of the Third World
Mike Davis
464pp, Verso, #20
Buy it at a discount at BOL

Recording the past can be a tricky business for historians. Prophesying the future
is even more hazardous. In 1901, shortly before the death of Queen Victoria, the
radical writer William Digby looked back to the 1876 Madras famine and confidently
asserted: "When the part played by the British Empire in the 19th century is
regarded by the historian 50 years hence, the unnecessary deaths of millions of
Indians would be its principal and most notorious monument." Who now remembers the
Madrasis?

In Late Victorian Holocausts, Mike Davis charts the unprecedented human suffering
caused by a series of extreme climactic conditions in the final quarter of the 19th
century. Drought and monsoons afflicted much of China, southern Africa, Brazil,
Egypt and India. The death tolls were staggering: around 12m Chinese and over 6m
Indians in 1876-1878 alone. The chief culprit, according to Davis, was not the
weather, but European empires, with Japan and the US. Their imposition of
free-market economics on the colonial world was tantamount to a "cultural genocide".

These are strong words. Yet it's hard to disagree with them after reading Davis's
harrowing book. Development economists have long argued that drought need not lead
to famine; well-stocked inventories and effective distribution can limit the damage.
In the 19th century, however, drought was treated, particularly by the English in
India, as an opportunity for reasserting sovereignty.

A particular villain was Lord Lytton, son of the Victorian novelist Edward
Bulwer-Lytton ("It was a dark and stormy night...") after whom, today, a well-known
bad writing prize is named. During 1876 Lytton, widely suspected to be insane,
ignored all efforts to alleviate the suffering of millions of peasants in the Madras
region and concentrated on preparing for Queen Victoria's investiture as Empress of
India. The highlight of the celebrations was a week-long feast of lucullan excess at
which 68,000 dignitaries heard her promise the nation "happiness, prosperity and
welfare".

Lytton believed in free trade. He did nothing to check the huge hikes in grain
prices, Economic "modernization" led household and village reserves to be
transferred to central depots using recently built railroads. Much was exported to
England, where there had been poor harvests. Telegraph technology allowed prices to
be centrally co-ordinated and, inevitably, raised in thousands of small towns.
Relief funds were scanty because Lytton was eager to finance military campaigns in
Afghanistan. Conditions in emergency camps were so terrible that some peasants
preferred to go to jail. A few, starved and senseless, resorted to cannibalism. This
was all of little consequence to many English administrators who, as believers in
Malthusianism, thought that famine was nature's response to Indian over-breeding.

It used to be that the late 19th century was celebrated in every school as the
golden period of imperialism. While few of us today would defend empire in moral
terms, we've long been encouraged to acknowledge its economic benefits. Yet, as
Davis points out, "there was no increase in India's per capita income from 1757 to
1947". In Egypt, too, the financial difficulties caused to peasants by famine
encouraged European creditors to override the millennia-old tradition that tenancy
was guaranteed for life. What little relief aid reached Brazil, meanwhile, ended up
profiting British merchant houses and the reactionary sugar-planter classes.

The European "locusts" did not go unchallenged. Rioting became common. Banditry
increased. In China, drought-famine helped to spark the Boxer uprising. In Europe,
the fin de sihcle was largely an opportunity for pale-faced men to wear purple
cummerbunds and spout rotten symbolist poetry; for colonized peoples it genuinely
seemed to presage mass extinction. It was, says Davis, "a new dark age of colonial
war, indentured labour, concentration camps, genocide, forced migration, famine and
disease."

Davis's attention to the importance of environment may recall the work of the
Annales school of historians, but he is far more radical than any of them. His
writing, both here and in such classic books as City of Quartz and Ecology of Fear,
is closer to that of Latin American intellectuals such as Ariel Dorfman and the
Urguayan, Eduardo Galaeno, who for decades have spotlighted capitalism's casual
abuse of the third world and who have sought to champion the poor and dispossessed.
Such commitment, forcefully and lucidly expressed, is unfashionable these days.

"Class" may be passi in academic circles, yet the catalogue of cruelty Davis has
unearthed is jaw-dropping. A friend to whom I lent the book was reduced to tears by
it. Late Victorian Holocausts is as ugly as it is compelling. But, as Conrad's
Marlow said in Heart of Darkness : "The conquest of the earth, which means the
taking away from those who have a different complexion and slightly flatter noses
than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look at it too much."




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 12 01:59:59 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:59:59 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] FT: A glimpse of the secrets of life
Message-ID: <000301c094d2$2a86e360$b88d20d9@mjones>

The results of the Human Genome Project show unexpected layers of complexity in our
genes, says Clive Cookson
Published: February 11 2001 20:42GMT | Last Updated: February 11 2001 20:45GMT



Eight months ago, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair linked up to proclaim one of science's
greatest achievements: decoding the human genome or "book of life". But that public
relations spectacular was not supported by research data or conclusions. This week
scientists get their first look at the evidence, with the official publication of
the human genome sequence in the journals Nature and Science.

The two rival sequencing organisations - the public Human Genome Project and Celera,
the US biotechnology company - have produced scores of scientific papers. Their most
striking conclusion is how few genes we have: around 30,000. That is about the same
number as a mouse and only twice as many as a fly or a worm. Most scientists had
expected to find about 100,000 human genes and some estimates ran to 140,000 genes.

Our low gene count will disappoint those who think more is better. Eric Lander,
director of the Whitehead Centre for Genome Research in the US, says: "It seems to
be some kind of affront to human dignity."

But you can look at it another way: if the number of genes required to specify a
person is similar to that for other animals, then human biology attains a glorious
new level of richness and complexity.

Biologists will have to stop thinking of individual genes giving the body
instructions to make individual proteins (proteins are the molecules such as
hormones and enzymes that control biological processes). Instead, all our DNA - the
genome - must be seen as one immensely complex system.

As Craig Venter, president of Celera, puts it, "There are no 'good' genes or 'bad'
genes, merely networks that exist at various levels and various connectivities, and
at different states of sensitivity to perturbation. The notion that one gene equals
one disease, or that one gene produces one key protein, is flying out of the
window."

No one knows how many proteins there are. The answer will be revealed over the next
few years by the emerging field of proteomics, successor to genomics. But Dr Venter
estimates that we have 250,000 different proteins - about 10 for every gene - to do
the essential work in our bodies.

John Sulston, of the Sanger Centre near Cambridge, where one-third of the human
genome was sequenced, says the results show that we achieve our human complexity not
so much by adding new protein-making instructions as by "increasing the variety and
subtlety of genes that control other genes." Many human genes can be read in
alternative ways, and many proteins can be modified by other proteins without the
intervention of genes.

"This builds into a picture of exquisite control of genes and proteins, with genes
being turned on and off, up and down, with extraordinary subtlety - driving our
development from fertilised egg to adult, and maintaining and repairing our bodies
during the rigours of daily life," says Richard Gallagher, publisher of Nature.

Some experts were saying yesterday that the unexpectedly low number of human genes
would be good for medicine, since there are fewer genes to understand. But it could
work equally well in the opposite direction: the complex interactions between genes
may make it harder to cure disease by changing one or two of them, for example
through gene therapy. This may explain partly why gene therapy has given
disappointing results in clinical trials over the past 10 years. The emerging
technology of stem cells - replacing failing cells with potent new cells - may
produce better results because the patient is receiving the whole genetic system at
once.

The genomes published this week are composite sequences, derived from five
volunteers in the case of Celera and a dozen people for the public project. All the
main racial groups are represented. The results show that DNA from two unrelated
individuals is 99.9 per cent identical - on average, about 3m of the 3bn chemical
'letters' in their genetic code will be different.

But the real biological differences are far less even than this figure would
suggest, according to Dr Venter. The majority of variations in the human genetic
code have no effect and "only about 10,000 genetic differences between unrelated
humans will be biologically significant," he predicts.

Discovering the DNA differences that matter is one of the most important pieces of
unfinished business for the human genome project. It will be the basis, for example,
of pharmacogenomics - understanding why some people with a particular disease
respond better than others to drug treatment.

"If you could identify those patients where the drug was toxic versus those patients
where the drug would have its desired effect, then there is a potential treasure
chest out there of medicines already discovered and partially developed but which
cannot yet be used," says Mike Dexter, director of the Wellcome Trust, the British
charity that has contributed #210m to the public project. "The information we are
now accumulating will provide us with an ability to carry out diagnostic tests, to
use existing medicines better, and the ability to develop new medicines because we
have new targets."

Another important avenue of research will be to compare the human genome in detail
with other animals. Differences will help to reveal the functions of the genes, most
of which are still unknown. Mouse DNA is being sequenced both by Celera and by a
independent public-private sector consortium and, Dr Venter says, "we already know
that there only 300 genes in the human genome that do not have a counterpart in the
mouse."

Meanwhile, technologists are working to drive down the costs of DNA sequencing so
individual human genomes can routinely be read out on gene chips. If miniaturisation
and automation continue to cut costs by a factor of 10 every decade, Dr Gallagher
says, it will be possible by 2020 to sequence individual genomes for a few thousand
pounds each.

George Church, director of the Lipper Centre for Computational Genetics at Harvard,
points out that the information content of an individual genome can fit on a
computer DVD disk. He is confident that affordable technology will be soon developed
to read it.

Researchers warn such information must be used wisely as health, behaviour and
characteristics are influenced by many factors. As the Celera scientists conclude in
Science: "there are two fallacies to be avoided: determinism, the idea that all
characteristics of a person are 'hard wired' by the genome; and reductionism, that
now the human sequence is completely known, it is just a matter of time before our
understanding of gene functions and interactions will provide a complete causal
description of human variation."





From Borba100 at aol.com  Mon Feb 12 04:36:44 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 06:36:44 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Reflections on a Declining Old Age
Message-ID: <79.10236376.27b924cb@aol.com>

Oy Vey is Mir means "Woe is me" but it really means "What a world."  In reply 
to Mr. Andrej, I say, "Oy Vey and Vey again".

Andrej claims that my assertion - that he supported the coup in Belgrade - is 
based on lies.  To 'prove' this he wriggles and, ultimately, he redbaits. 

What were my 'lies'?

I offered two emails by way of evidence. One of them was an email that Andrej 
posted Oct. 8 It included a note from a man in Greece, along with Andrej's 
reply. The man from Greece had written:

"Would please tell me where were you when the good old Milosevich was 
eliminating Muslims in  Bosnia and Croats and Kosovars?" 

This is quite clear. The man has charged Milosevich with "eliminating" people 
based on religion or ethnic group.  In other words, Milosevich is/was (he 
claims) a racist. He guesses that Andrej failed to protest this alleged 
racism.  

Does Andrej refute this outrageous slander? Does he say, 'I was opposed to 
these wars - BUT Milosevich never attacked anyone based on ethnic group or 
religion'?

No. Instead he accepts the lie without comment and boasts that he was on the 
streets, opposing these crimes. Where was Andrej when Milosevich was doing 
these racist things? "[I was] At the very same place where I was when Muslims 
, Croats and Kosovars were eliminating  Serbs: on the streets, protesting 
about the war..." 

It is a tragic fact that "Muslims [that is, Islamists] , [secessionist] 
Croats and Kosovars" DID "eliminate Serbs" on a racial basis during the 
1990s.  For example, before the attacks on Serbs in 1990-1991 in Split, the 
local fascist-secessionists (who happened to be Croatian) went to Serbian 
houses and marked them for attack.  

So Andrej is IN FACT equating the Miloseivch government with TRULY  racialist 
regimes in Bosnia and Croatia. Because he presents himself as a progressive 
Yugoslav, Andrej's acceptance of the charge that Milosevich targeted racial 
or ethnic groups is a HUNDRED TIMES worse than similar charges, made by 
western Serb bashers, because the Andrejs of this world pose as progressives 
and are therefore listened to by Western progressives who might otherwise 
organize against Western Serb-bashing. 

This is precisely the role that Chomsky has played, though on a much bigger 
stage - as witness the wave file of his interview on Pacifica Radio during 
the bombing of Serbia where his ONLY criticism of the bombing of Yugoslavia 
was that it had (he says - and he lies) encouraged/allowed the Serbs to 
massacre more Albanians. 

OK.  That's what Andrej wrote In October of 2000.  But in February of 2001, 
Andrej says it's a lie that he has ever accused Milosevich of racialist 
policies. The February Andrej says: " 
<"Tudjman and Izetbegovic are, without any doubt, nazi like figures, with 
similar political <programs. Milosevic, on the other hand, was just a 
money-thirsty thug, enchanted by power."  

Doesn't this totally contradict what the October Andrej wrote to the 
gentleman from Greece?  Yes, indeedie.  Like, totally dude. 

Then, having accused me (Jared)  of lying, the February Andrej says: " The 
Milosevic government did installed (sic) apartheid in Kosovo. Problem is much 
deeper, with a sensitive historical background, which is confirming that, 
troughout history Serbs were victims- just like today- but, nevertheless, 
Milosevic did introduced apartheid...'

So - Andrej never accused Milosevich of racism - but Milosevich "did 
introduced (sic) apartheid" in Kosovo?  Nice trick, Drej. (BTW, for 
refutation of Andrej's apartheid LIE, which is known by everyone in Serbia to 
be a LIE, see http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/Johnstone/1yugo.htm)

Andrej says I am lying about him supporting the coup.  Here again is his Oct. 
8 answer to the man from Greece: "Milosevic was just one of the many who 
listened to western dictates and used them for their own, dreadful, purposes. 
But I am waiting for a moment when people who are more responsible for 
Yugoslav bloodshed than this pathetic garniture of our local thugs is going 
to be trailed: power structures of Germany, Imperial States
of America, England and so on. We have cleaned our backyard, as the old
saying goes."

"WE HAVE CLEANED OUR OWN BACKYARD."  This was THREE days after the coup.  
Andrej is right - he does not merely ENDORSE the coup - he speaks of it is 
"OUR own".

Andrej makes a big point that the other piece I cited was not actually 
written by him - that he only forwarded to the list.  But so what? Andrej 
quotes a part of the email in question, in which the writer says that a coup 
will be good because it will allow the writer to do more political work - and 
Andrej then says:

>This is true, of course. And I was right. Now we really have more space
>here. My magazine "Counterpoint", libertarian socialist political mag., is
>now in print. Milosevic banned it. Along with my familly who was left on the
>streets without job because they were, as professors, supporting students in
>1996 when Milosevic had stolen the election ( he admited this fact).

"AND I WAS RIGHT" - in other words, the email in question, while not written 
by him, was presented on Oct. 2 as REPRESENTING HIS VIEWS.  And even now, 
when he is trying to dissociate himself from the Oct,. Andrej - he cannot 
resist quoting this letter (not written by him) and saying "AND I WAS RIGHT."

Now let's look at the implication of what he was "right" about.

Prior to the Oct. 5 coup there was far more press freedom in Yugoslavia than 
in the West; as Diana Johnstone, Petar Makara, Tika Jankovich and a score of 
other experts and Yugoslavs have confirmed the entire spectrum was 
represented.  And yet Andrej says HIS paper was banned. His group finds the 
new climate to be far better.  

Lots of "space." Aint that nice.

Today, most Yugoslavs have far LESS  "space." The entire media is supervised 
by the crypto-Fascist Crisis Committees.  Even the huge Socialist Party is 
able to operate only one newspaper, 24 Hours, without the Crisis Committees 
present. But for Andrej, there is loads more freedom. What does this tell us? 

Since the Crisis Committees are everywhere, preventing independent 
publication, perhaps they do not find his views to be a challenge to their 
rule?

Rational refutation failing him, Andrej resorts to slander.  He repeats over 
and over that I am lying - while his "refutations" confirm my assertions.  
And then, of course, he redbaits:

<<Jared is very skilfull- years of experience in Maoist  Progressive Labour 
Party- with manipulating the facts>>

Dear Readers, I am an old fart of 56 1/2.  In my passionate youth, I was 
first in the civil rights movement (went on a freedom ride when I was 18) 
then in the May 2nd movement (I am proud to say I was part of the group of 
child maniacs that disrupted and permanently closed down the infamous House 
UnAmerican Acitivites Committee in '64) - and became a leader of the 
Progressive Labor Party, which in them days was reasonably sane, but became 
totally nutso after the fall of 1969 - another story for another time. 

People in Progressive Labor in Boston (before fall 1969) put all their effort 
into building various mass struggles.  I was a student activist - I helped 
lead the Harvard Building Takeover  of 1969 which led to shutting Harvard 
down for three weeks - in itself a victory for the people.  I proposed PL's 
pre-1969 theory of student work.  It was based on opposition to hypocrisy.  
We conducted struggles WITH THE GOAL OF EXPOSING THE LIES OF UNIVERSITY 
ADMINISTRATIONS - because, so our theory and practice went, when students saw 
that the school administrators were lying about their non-involvement in the 
war in Vietnam, then these students would question many other beliefs.

THAT is where I learned to expose lies, Andrej.  The glorious struggles of my 
youth have prepared me to deal with -  you.

Yay, have the mighty fallen.

Jared



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 12 06:17:25 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:17:25 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] New on the website: Capital & Class Papers
Message-ID: <000401c094f6$1cfd4580$8d7c20d9@mjones>

I'm in Wales, looking at castles. Before leaving I uploaded <Capital&Class Papers>

Here are 120 papers by leading Marxist thinkers and economists, from the Conference
of  Socialist Economists.  All you ever wanted to know about Value Theory, the
Transformation Problem, the Organic Composition of Capital, the Falling Rate of
Profit, and then some.

http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base/C&C.htm

Mark




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Mon Feb 12 06:34:30 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:34:30 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] (Spanish) Three histories of the world of labour in Argentina today
Message-ID: <031f03034130c21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

Those who want to know what does "globalization" mean in workers' everyday life 
may profit from what follows. These are little bits of an iceberg which is far 
more serious than what the stories below show.

The first one is a medical report explaining that due to pressures from the 
owners, teachers in the Argentinean private educational system are showing a 
growing propension to resort to psychotropic drugs. Pressures include 
dissemination of fear due to lack of payment of fees by the parents of the 
pupils, for example, not only the "usual" pressure an owner places on a worker.

The second one is a serious denounce which is not unrelated to American cdes. 
Some years ago the IBM company was discovered as heading a scandal of bribery 
by means of which it intended to obtain some new deal with the Argentinean 
government. It should be stated that everybody in the business knows that this 
is the standard in negotiations established _by IBM_ since it began doing this 
kind of deals, during the military regime established in 1966. One of the big 
hats that were discovered as having received bribes was Aldo Daddone, one of 
the most important men of Cavallo, and head of the Banco Naci?n. The 
denunciation was made by two unionists of the Bank, who were fired by Daddone. 
Daddone is now in prison, but the unionists are still jobless...

The third one puts in correct perspective the information on road blocks in the 
province of Salta. A new road block is taking place. Please note that blockers 
are requesting help from the State, not socialist revolution as someone tried 
to have us believe not so long ago...
------- Forwarded message follows -------
From:           	Gorojovsky <Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar>
To:             	@INTRAPIN.PML
Subject:        	Tres historias muy instructivas
Send reply to:  	gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar
Date sent:      	Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:57:16 -0300

C?RDOBA, 12(PSI).- CRECE EL CONSUMO DE ANSIOL?TICOS EN DOCENTES. 

Los docentes del sector privado que dictan clases en escuelas de esta Capital y
de la provincia, consumen cada vez m?s ansiol?ticos, seg?n demostr? un trabajo
estad?stico desarrollado por la Obra Social de Docentes Particulares (Osdop). 
El
estudio tom? en cuenta el per?odo enero-octubre de 2000 que, comparado con 
igual
segmento del a?o anterior, reflej? un incremento del 30 por ciento. En esencia,
entre los ocho mil afiliados titulares que tiene la obra social, se consumieron
4.891 cajas de ansiol?ticos y similares.

Rodolfo Catt?neo, m?dico asesor de la Osdop, inform? que el aumento de los
tranquilizantes menores tiene que ver con un incremento de los problemas y
patolog?as psicol?gicas que sufren los docentes privados, observados
fundamentalmente el a?o pasado.

Cabe recordar que la principal enfermedad que afecta a los trabajadores del
magisterio, sigue siendo la que tiene que ver con las v?as respiratorias 
(gripe,
angina, laringitis aguda, laringitis cr?nica). El profesional asever? que la
edad promedio de quienes consumen estos medicamentos, oscila entre los 24 y los
45 a?os.

Consider? que acuden a ellos en el marco de una terapia psicofarmacol?gica
dirigida a corregir conductas y pensamientos patol?gicos y/o estados de ?nimo
por medios qu?micos o f?sicos. 

En cuanto a las causas que provocan el generalizado consumo de estos 
psicof?rmacos -cuya sobremedicaci?n produce somnolencia, confusi?n y 
dificultades de dicci?n- el profesional mencion? las condiciones laborales de
los docentes.

Para Claudio Gelatti -coordinador de Osdop de la regi?n Centro-Cuyo y 
secretario
general del Sadop- los factores desencadenantes de este proceso son varios y
concurrentes, y tienen estrecha relaci?n con el estr?s, es decir, el primer
estadio de incomodidad que sufren los afectados.

Gelatti asegur? que los docentes privados, en general, trabajan con escasez de
insumos y deben soportar la problem?tica de la instituci?n educativa que le
trasladan algunos empleados, propietarios de los colegios.

"Esta situaci?n se transforma en un factor de tensi?n y presi?n permanentes,
pues el bajo ?ndice de matr?cula o la morosidad en el pago de las cuotas, por
citar s?lo dos ejemplos, constituyen problemas que no les pertenecen pero que
los reciben como propios", indic?.

Tambi?n mencion? otros elementos como generadores de dificultades psicol?gicas:
aulas superpobladas, multiplicidad de tareas, salarios insuficientes, ausencia
de pago de bonificaciones, inestablidad laboral y jubilaci?n discriminatoria. 

"Los maestros privados sufren numerosos inconvenientes que los afectan 
directamente. Por caso, hay muchos propietarios de escuelas que no les pagan el
Fondo de Incentivo Docente (Fonid) porque argumentan que no reciben subsidios
estatales. As?, hay casos en que en la misma escuela algunos maestros lo cobran
y otros no", sostuvo el gremialista.

Si bien no las especific?, Gelatti se?al? que el Sadop realiza varias 
estrategias tendientes a obtener mejores condiciones laborales que permitan que
los docentes alcancen una calidad de vida superior. Lo cierto es que, seg?n el
propio estudio de la Osdop, el consumo de ansiol?ticos aumenta cada a?o y, al
menos en lo inmediato, no se perciben modificaciones de esa tendencia.

Consultas efectuadas por PSI entre docentes consumidores de tranquilizantes,
permitieron demostrar que, en general, se apela a estos f?rmacos para disminuir
las tensiones y no quedar excluidos del servicio educativo. La frase preferida
por los maestros para justificar su necesidad fue la siguiente: "Si no tomo 
algo
que me calme, tengo que irme del colegio y entonces me quedo sin trabajo".- XXX

SANTA FE, 12/PSI).- RECLAMAN AL GOBIERNO NACIONAL LA REINCORPORACI?N DE 
BANCARIOS DESPEDIDOS POR EL COIMERO ALDO DADONE

La gremial bancaria de Santa Fe denunci? el incumplimiento del gobierno 
nacional
de la comprometida reincorporaci?n de los trabajadores del banco Naci?n, Carlos
Loys y Omar Carrera, cesanteados por el directorio del actual preso Aldo Dadone
(ex presidente del Banco designado por Domingo Cavallo) debido a la denuncia
p?blica y legal efectuada en el denominado caso IBM-Banco Naci?n.

Sostienen que se ejerce injusticia pol?tica contra los trabajadores y delegados
honestos que denunciaron en su oportunidad a funcionarios p?blicos por el caso
de corrupci?n econ?mica y pol?tica del menemismo.

A pesar de los reclamos del gremio -hacen notar- y las disposiciones en el 
mismo
sentido del Congreso Nacional imponiendo al Poder ejecutivo la reincorporaci?n
de los cesantes y las promesas electorales de Fernando de la R?a
comprometi?ndose a subsanar esta situaci?n, nada ha cambiado, con la excepci?n
del dictado de asociaci?n il?cita y prisi?n de Dadone.- XXX

ALLEN, RIO NEGRO, 12(PSI).- EXPLOTAN A TRABAJADORES GOLONDRINAS ENTRERRIANOS. 
NO
LES PAGARON NI LES DIERON COMIDA EN 15 D?AS Y LOS ALOJARON EN TAPERAS.  

Los trajeron con la promesa de que iban a tener trabajo hasta abril, que 
cobrar?an 6 pesos el bins de fruta cosechada, y que tendr?an un alojamiento
confortable. "S?lo tienen que traer las s?banas", les dijeron. Pero al llegar a
Allen se encontraron con una pesadilla: no les pagaron, les retuvieron los
documentos y las viviendas eran taperas con techos rotos, sin camas ni
colchones. Durante varios d?as, siete trabajadores rurales entrerrianos
estuvieron comiendo frutas, durmiendo sobre cajones y tomando agua de una
acequia. Los ?nicos recipientes que les dieron para recolectar agua eran latas
vac?as de agroqu?micos, imposibles de utilizar, seg?n denunciaron.

El viernes, junto con la polic?a, la delegaci?n de Trabajo y la Uni?n Argentina
de Trabajadores Rurales (UATRE) realizaron una inspecci?n en una chacra de
Fernando Barrag?n, ubicada a escasos kil?metros al oeste del acceso Mart?n
Fierro de esta ciudad. All? estaban algunos de los aproximadamente 50
trabajadores rurales que vinieron a la zona en la misma situaci?n. Los obreros
dijeron que el contacto no lo hicieron con el due?o de la propiedad, a quien
vieron en contadas ocasiones. "Vinimos el aviso por canal 5 de televisi?n, en
Entre R?os", dijeron. El anuncio dec?a que se requer?a personal para trabajar en
el alto Valle de R?o Negro y Neuqu?n. Y motivados por las necesidades laborales,
se presentaron.

La relaci?n la tuvieron siempre con Jos? Mar?a Romero, un hombre domiciliado en
Buenos Aires, quien les asegur? que iban a cobrar seis pesos el bins (cuando en
la zona lo est?n pagando alrededor de 4,50 o 5 pesos seg?n los casos) y que
tendr?an trabajo toda la temporada. S?lo ten?an que hacerse cargo del pasaje,
que se paut? en 71 pesos. "Antes de salir, nos pidieron los documentos a todos.
Cre?amos que era por los pasos en el camino", coment? uno de los trabajadores.

Hasta ese momento todo estaba bien, pero el problema comenz? a presentarse
cuando llegaron. Siete de ellos se quedaron en la chacra de Allen y los dem?s
fueron distribuidos entre Plottier, Villa Manzano y El Cha?ar, "todas
propiedades de la firma "Frutos del sol", cuyo responsables es Barrag?n",
explicaron. 

Los entrerrianos arribaron a la zona el 22 de enero. La gente que qued? en Allen
comenz? a trabajar el 23, ya con la desilusi?n de que parte de la promesa se
hab?a deshecho: las condiciones de alojamiento eran "p?simas". "Nos tuvimos que
hacer unos catres con maderas de cajones", dijo uno de los trabajadores. S?lo
uno de ellos ten?a un colch?n y los dem?s tuvieron que dormir desde entonces
sobre precarias tablas apiladas. As? y todo, trabajaron. Como no pod?an cosechar
bins completos porque el tama?o de la fruta no daba para hacer todas las
pasadas, hicieron otras tareas rurales. Pero del pago no ten?an noticias, los
documentos no aparec?an a pesar de los reclamos, y carec?an de alimentos. Con un
poco de az?car que consiguieron hicieron alguna vez algo de compota. Si no,
com?an peras y manzanas, y tomaban mate. S?lo algunos de ellos lograron, a
fuerza de reclamos, que les dieran 25 pesos en ticket de alimentos.

El martes por la noche, cansados de la situaci?n, realizaron una exposici?n en
la comisar?a Sexta de Allen. Para entonces ten?an el dato de que el
intermediario -que despu?s apareci? con otra persona que no conoc?an,
identificada como Osvaldo Minaglia- pensaba retenerles "un peso por bins
cosechado".

"De d?nde sacaron eso?. En ning?n momento se les secuestr? la documentaci?n. Los
documentos los entregaron ustedes", les recrimin? Romero el viernes a mediod?a
en medio de la inspecci?n. El contratista dio algunas explicaciones a los
delegados, sin poder explicar "la situaci?n irregular tanto de las condiciones
de vivienda como laborales" que detectaron los dirigentes gremiales y de la
delegaci?n de Trabajo. Finalmente se labr? un acta, en la que la Subsecretar?a
de Trabajo dio un plazo de 48 horas para que se concrete el pago de los
jornales. La notificaci?n fue tanto para los dos intermediarios como para el
propietario de "Frutos del sol", quien no estuvo en la chacra mientras se
realizaron las inspecciones.

La inspecci?n en la chacra de "Frutos del sol" hab?a comenzado poco antes de las
10 de la ma?ana. Apenas entraron a la misma los delegados de UATRE, de la obra
social Osprera y de la Subsecretar?a de Trabajo, se encontraron con un grupo de
trabajadores que esperaba "para cobrar". Uno de ellos les coment? que todav?a
reclamaba sus haberes "de diciembre", mientras otro les pregunt? c?mo pod?a ser
que les pagaran s?lo con ticket de comida. "Ac? vienen, arreglan con ticket y no
preguntan. Con eso no pagamos la luz", recrimin? el pe?n.

En este grupo no estaban los trabajadores entrerrianos. Los dirigentes y 
funcionarios comenzaron luego a recorrer los distintos cuadros de la chacra,
haciendo un relevamiento del personal. Reci?n cerca del mediod?a comenzaron a
hablar con los trabajadores "golondrina" de Entre R?os, que aparentemente -al
menos algunos de ellos- era la primera vez que ven?an a la regi?n. "Por ley 1867
no pueden ingresar nuevos. Si ante la necesidad entran, tiene que haber una
notificaci?n con diez d?as de anticipaci?n a la Subsecretar?a de Trabajo",
coment? uno de los delegados de la inspector?a de Trabajo. El procedimiento lo
realizaron Hayd?e Coila, secretaria general de la seccional Allen de la  UATRE,
Luis Cervera de Osprera (obra social de los rurales) y Jorge Espinoza, de la
delegaci?n de Trabajo de Allen. Mientras estaban tomando los datos de los
trabajadores de Concordia, Entre R?os, llegaron a la chacra en una Renault
Trafic los dos intermediarios, Jos? Mar?a Romero y Osvaldo Minaglia. Muy
nerviosos, y al ver la llegada de efectivos policiales al lugar, ambos
respondieron algunas de las preguntas que les hicieron los delegados de Osprera
y de Trabajo. Al identificarse Romero revel? que tiene domicilio en Buenos Aires
y asegur? en todo momento "que va a pagar". "Nadie los trajo enga?ados", fue una
de las primeras frases que emple?. Para entonces, los entrerrianos estaban
adquiriendo confianza y salieron a recriminarles hasta el descuento de "un peso
por bins", que les iban a hacer por haberles conseguido trabajo. 

"Qui?n les iba a cobrar un peso?", les pregunt? Romero, quien se encontraba
junto a Minaglia. "Ellos salieron de Concordia sabiendo que ten?an habitaci?n,
pero no colch?n ni cucheta. La base que hab?a para el bins era de seis pesos",
afirmaron. 

-"Qui?n iba a pagar eso", les pregunt? el delegado de Trabajo. 

-"Nosotros". -le respondieron.

-"?Ustedes qui?nes son?" -insisti? el funcionario de Trabajo.

-"Nosotros, que somos contratistas", replicaron.

Y no hubo m?s detalles.

"Nos prometieron el oro y el moro y nos tiraron peor que a los animales", 
coment? Julio Domingo Contartesi, uno de los entrerrianos que trabaj? en la
chacra de Allen. El hombre asegur? que antes de salir de Entre R?os hab?an
arreglado que tendr?an trabajo hasta abril, pero "no cumplieron nada de lo que
prometieron".

Los siete que quedaron en Allen trabajaron desde el 23 de enero hasta el domingo
pasado inclusive, cuando les dijeron que deb?an parar porque "no hab?a plata".
"El due?o de la chacra le pagaba a Romero, y ?l despu?s nos ten?a que pagar a
nosotros", comentaron los rurales. Por intermedio de UATRE el martes por la
noche -luego de hacer la denuncia policial- los entrerrianos consiguieron que
Acci?n Social del municipio les diera bolsas con comida. Por otra parte, si bien
a?n tienen que esperar los resultados de las gestiones de la Subsecretar?a de
Trabajo para cobrar los jornales, por lo menos durante el procedimiento lograron
recuperar los documentos de identidad, que los ten?an retenidos los
intermediarios. Con los documentos en la mano, podr?n empezar a buscar trabajo
en otras chacras para aprovechar la temporada de cosecha.- XXX

SALTA, 12(PSI).- DESOCUPADOS CORTARON LA RUTA NACIONAL 34 EN EMBARCACI?N

Desocupados de la localidad de Embarcaci?n (Departamento San Mart?n), a unos 280
kil?metros al Norte de esta capital, realizan cortes intermitentes sobre la ruta
nacional 34, en el acceso al pueblo, desde el jueves ?ltimo. Piden puestos de
trabajo del Plan Trabajar, viviendas y becas para estudiantes, entre otros
puntos. Para destrabar el conflicto, el ministro de Gobierno, Juan Angel P?rez,
demand? la presencia de los legisladores nacionales y especialmente la del
diputado Ricardo G?mez Diez, referente de la Alianza en Salta.

El grupo de aproximadamente 150 personas que cortan la ruta 34 demandan 300
puestos laborales, 30 becas para estudiantes terciarios y secundarios, 250 becas
para alumnos de la primaria y un salario m?nimo de 600 pesos y que los
desocupados no paguen los servicios de agua y luz hasta no resolver su situaci?n
laboral.

El conflicto que se inici? el pasado mi?rcoles se extiende hasta hoy, al unirse
los dos grupos originales en uno solo que tambi?n unificaron los reclamos.- XXX 


------- End of forwarded message -------

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From julp at freesurf.ch  Mon Feb 12 07:21:33 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:21:33 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] FT: A glimpse of the secrets of life
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.12.khpccgqb@computer>

>Biologists will have to stop thinking of individual genes giving the body
>instructions to make individual proteins (proteins are the molecules such as
>hormones and enzymes that control biological processes). Instead, all our DNA - 
>the genome - must be seen as one immensely complex system.
>
>As Craig Venter, president of Celera, puts it, "There are no 'good' genes or 'bad'
>genes, merely networks that exist at various levels and various connectivities, and
>at different states of sensitivity to perturbation. The notion that one gene equals
>one disease, or that one gene produces one key protein, is flying out of the
>window."

Finally... The end of the hype? Hopefully we won't have to take nonsense anymore. 
Next step for the media: recognizing that the DNA isn't all there is.




From aabdo at webtv.net  Mon Feb 12 08:04:06 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:04:06 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] A coup, a coup, a coup.... or a loss of popular support, Jared?
In-Reply-To: Borba100@aol.com's message of Mon, 12 Feb 2001 06:36:43 EST
Message-ID: <5515-3A87FB66-1288@storefull-237.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Jared seems to think that if he can repeat the word <coup> umpteen
billion times, that somehow that can trump the reality that Milosevic
became an unpopular head of state.      Examining the reasons for why
that was so, might detract from his ability to maintain a self righteous
hysteria.

Other contributors have been able to maintain balance  enough to examine
why the Sandinistas made a similar miscalculation to hold national
elections midst a United States war of aggression .      The Sandinistas
also miscalculated the popularity of their own power during the
onslaught of US imperialism.     It turned out that the Sandanistas had
made more enemies than they had realized.

But the Sandanistas were relative saints compared to Milosevic and his
clique.       Jared woud like us to pretend that Milosevic was neither
corrupt, nor played to Greater Serb nationalism at the expense of less
powerful ethic groups.    All of that is pure imperialist propaganda
according to Jared's take on reality.      We are to believe that
Milosevic lost power because he was a pussycat!

Truth be, Milosevic sank Yugoslavia because of his misleadership, and
the misleadership of the clique of hacks he headed.      It was the
sorriest lot of incompetents since Stalin went up against Hitler.

The only force that Yugoslavia had to resist the imperialist effort to
split and partition the country was internationalism.    Instead,
Milosivic made himself synonymous with Serbia.     And within Serbia
proper, he became synonymous with bureaucratic cliquism and corruption.

Coup, coup, coup, Jared?    Or was it just that the Yugoslav nation
didn't want to be pummelled further while under the misleadership of a
rotten scumbag, Stalinist hack?

Tony Abdo












From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 08:12:07 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:12:07 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] A coup, a coup, a coup.... or a loss of
  popular support, Jared?
In-Reply-To: <5515-3A87FB66-1288@storefull-237.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
References: <Borba100@aol.com's message of Mon, 12 Feb 2001 06:36:43 EST>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010212100941.00f6d888@popserver.panix.com>

>Coup, coup, coup, Jared?    Or was it just that the Yugoslav nation
>didn't want to be pummelled further while under the misleadership of a
>rotten scumbag, Stalinist hack?
>
>Tony Abdo

I don't see why Tony feels at liberty to abuse this mailing list with this
kind of language. Perhaps it is because he understands that he can't get
away with it elsewhere. Use of this kind of hectoring, baiting language is
a dead giveaway that he is not really in command of the facts. Let the
facts speak for themselves and there is no need to use inflammatory language.

In fact Milosevic was trying desperately to keep some semblance of the
Titoist legacy alive. The one piece of evidence that supposedly indicts him
as a Serb nationalist, a speech given in Kosovo 10 years ago or so, does
not read that way at all. At any rate, I don't understand why a list
devoted to economic and ecological crisis is being burdened by this type of
discussion, which merely consists of arguments being repeated. Let's move on.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 12 08:21:11 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:21:11 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Capital & Class Papers
Message-ID: <000701c09507$70bfc6a0$8d7c20d9@mjones>

I made a mistake with the url of <Capital&Class Papers> 
It's:

http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base/CandC.htm

Mark



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 12 08:31:51 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:31:51 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] flames
Message-ID: <000901c09508$eec46820$8d7c20d9@mjones>

>the misleadership of a
>rotten scumbag, Stalinist hack?

Tony, gimme a break. I'm on holiday. Don't dump on Tom while I'm away. Quit flaming,
please.

Mark




From zapata at sezampro.yu  Mon Feb 12 08:42:09 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 16:42:09 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] A coup, a coup, a coup.... or a loss of popular support, Jared?
References: <Borba100@aol.com's message of Mon, 12 Feb 2001 06:36:43 EST> <3.0.1.32.20010212100941.00f6d888@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <001d01c09509$cd3f5ce0$5d74fac3@andrej>

It is not a question of milosevic nationalism, it is a question of the
nature of his rule.
So:
> In fact Milosevic was trying desperately to keep some semblance of the
> Titoist legacy alive. The one piece of evidence that supposedly indicts
him
> as a Serb nationalist, a speech given in Kosovo 10 years ago or so, does
> not read that way at all. At any rate, I don't understand why a list
> devoted to economic and ecological crisis is being burdened by this type
of
> discussion, which merely consists of arguments being repeated. Let's move
on.
>

Yes, let's move on, but it is terribly painful to move on when three or four
lefties who had never been to my country, who do not speak the language and
do not have elementary education in historical factuality, are trying to
deduct, according to the concepts they are holding to be universal, the
reality of my country, with unbelievable sort of impertinence. This, my dear
Luis, is imperialism, pure and simple. It comes from deep seeded imperialist
instincts that you have, as a resident of an Empire. Imperial arrogance,
combined with insufficient education and internet radicalism. Some of the
people here are , obviously, capable, or fortunate, to fight these imperial
instincts, inherited trough your education system. The others, like you, and
what's his name, are not, and this is the whole story. Only emancipation of
imperial education you have received , humble attitude of confronting
complexities regarding country you have never been to, and  sticking to
facts, facts & facts, can make you a conversation partner, worth of having a
discussion with me.
When you learn my language ( I made certain effort to try to learn yours,
along with some others), when you spend some time living here, getting to
know the mentality, starting to breathe and smell  history, we can talk
without boring repetition of arguments. Until you are not ready to stand up
to these challenges, your preaching to Yugoslav people what they should do
or they should not do, is nothing more than a behavior of an  imperialist
missionaries. With a hammer and sickle instead of cross, but with same
prejudices and pretensions to docta ignorantia.
 So, and this goes for you, for our Harvard mischief here, and all others,
learn about my country or live it the fuck alone! If you, of course, do not
share the attitude of your countryman Kisinger that " you should not stand
still only because Yugoslav people are so irresponsible to overthrow a
ruthless thug".
STOP WITH THIS DISCUSSIONS, please,
            Andrej






From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 09:14:26 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:14:26 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] A coup, a coup, a coup.... or a loss of
  popular support, Jared?
In-Reply-To: <001d01c09509$cd3f5ce0$5d74fac3@andrej>
References: <Borba100@aol.com's message of Mon, 12 Feb 2001 06:36:43 EST>
 <3.0.1.32.20010212100941.00f6d888@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010212111201.00d5d630@popserver.panix.com>

Andrej:
>Yes, let's move on, but it is terribly painful to move on when three or four
>lefties who had never been to my country, who do not speak the language and
>do not have elementary education in historical factuality, are trying to
>deduct, according to the concepts they are holding to be universal, the
>reality of my country, with unbelievable sort of impertinence. 

What an impossibly patronizing attitude. This is not about being able to
speak your language, it is about political differences. I am not an
anarchist and view Yugoslavia through the ideological prism of Marxism,
especially the analysis in Leon Trotsky's "Revolution Betrayed". If I had
to speak the native language of every country on the leading edge of the
class struggle today, I might as well watch television situation comedies
rather than participate on Internet debates. Furthermore, this is the same
lame argument that we used to hear from white Southerners during the civil
rights movement, namely that we pro-integration Northerners should not
meddle in their affairs because we don't know their history and customs.
This does not appeal to our desire for proletarian internationalism, but
caters to a kind of backwater provincialism. Finally, Noam Chomsky, your
ideological bedfellow, knows less than me about the history of your
country, I'm quite sure, but that does not prevent him from pontificating
on it.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From johnwood at umich.edu  Mon Feb 12 09:31:40 2001
From: johnwood at umich.edu (John Woodford)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:31:40 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] More notes on revolutionaries: Alexandra Kollontai
References: <001201c093ab$a743c120$e28e20d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <3A880FCC.E75976F7@umich.edu>

"In 'The War and Our Immediate Tasks', 1914, Kollontai wrote:
"Social-Democracy ... underestimated the *moral
influence* of the old bourgeois world on the mood of the people... the
governments of the bourgeois states understood popular psychology better
than the very representatives of the democratic and working-class
masses!'"

This is  an observation that must be constantly borne in mind, appreciated,
understood and dealt with to the best of our abilities.

Mark Jones wrote:

> The Bolshevik Alexandra Kollontai wrote in Pravda, 17 February 1913, that:
> 'Women's Day is a link in the long, solid chain of the women workers' movement...
> Let a joyous sense of serving the common class  cause and of fighting
> simultaneously for their own female emancipation inspire women workers
> to join in the celebration of Womens' Day.'
>
> In 'The War and Our Immediate Tasks', 1914, Kollontai wrote:
> "Social-Democracy ... underestimated the *moral
> influence* of the old bourgeois world on the mood of the people... the
> governments of the bourgeois states understood popular psychology better
> than the very representatives of the democratic and working-class
> masses!
>
> Kollontai was in the Reichstag on 4 August 1914 when the German
> Social-Democracy voted for Bethmann-Hollweg and the war-credits: 'I
> experienced horror and despair. I was walled into an atmosphere so
> suffocating, so claustral and dark there seemed no hope... In that
> moment of total confusion and the collapse of the Second International,
> when the bourgeois capitalist parties were rejoicing... there rang
> out the mighty voice of Lenin. Alone against the whole world, he
> pitilessly analysed ... the imperialist war and, more importantly,
> showed how it must be transformed into civil war and revolution.
> He who desires peace must declare war against opportunism and break
> with his compromise, with his own bourgeoisie... This was one of the
> most significant moments of my life...The lower sank the opportunists,
> he larger towered the fearless image of a man who, amidst all this
> bloody chaos, clearly pointed the way."
>
> >From Pravda, 6 March 1917: 'Our Memorial to the Freedom Fighters':
> "There are memorable days in the life of mankind which run like a golden
> thread of popular celebration down the centuries... today we are
> singing... a hymn of victory over the grave of tsarist autocracy, with
> all its crimes and bloodshed, its obscurantism, its cruel indifference
> to the sufferings of the working people, its serfdom, its abuse of the
> common soldiers, its corrupt tsarist officials, its prisons, its
> Siberian exile, its whips, gallows, arbitrary violence and oppression.
>
> Lenin's room at the Smolny Institute (where the Bolsheviks made their
> headquarters in preparing for the October Rising) was on second floor.
> Lenin's table was pushed up against the wall, and an electric bulb hung
> just above it. The windows of the room looked out on the steel-grey,
> blustery Neva. Crowding around Lenin at the table, the members of Sovnarkom;
> by the window, N P Gorbunov , Sovnarkom secretary. Once Kollontai arrived
> there with some round, red Dutch cheeses sent her to give Lenin, by some
> Swedish comrades she'd had known in exile.
>
> Lenin asked her to divide the cheese up amongst the half-famished
> ministers of the new Soviet government, `not forgetting Gorbunov'. But
> pressure of business meant no-one had time to eat the cheese, and when
> Kollontai returned later that day to Lenin's study the cheese was gone-
> eaten by the equally-hungry guard on Lenin's room.
>
> Nadezhda Konstantinovna Krupskaya, Lenin's wife, wearing her plain
> grey dress, slipping unobserved at the back of crowded meeting-halls,
> observing and later relating all to Vladimir Ilyich...
> .... Yelena Dmitryevna Stasova, a comrade-in-arms of Lenin during the
> underground years, and  secretary of the Party CC. Her clear, high brow
> and tall, statuesque figure was often to be seen at Petrosoviet meetings
> at the Tauride Palace, or at the house of the ballerina Kshesinskaya, then
> and then at Smolny. In her hands a notebook, round her a press of comrades
> from the front, soldiers, workers, Red Guards, women workers, Soviet
> Deputies, seeking a quick, clear answer or an order....
>
> ...Klavdia Nikolayeva, a working women of humble origins, joined
> Bolsheviks in 1908, faced arrest, exile, imprisonment (like Stasova). In
> 1917 she returned to Petrograd and began to edit _Kommunistka...
>
> ...Konkordia Samoilova , who died 'at her revolutionary post' of cholera
> in 1921 - - -another great Bolshevik women's organiser.
>
> ...Inessa Armand , `gentle, charming, feminine'...
>
> ....December 1917 ... Winter still not set in properly, sleet falling
> and a cold northerly wind blowing up the Neva. Lenin exhausted, insomniac,
> is persuaded to visit the Halila sanatorium on the Karelian Isthmus,
> Finland, for three days- actually he wanted to write a new work amid
> the frosts of a magnificent Finnish forest, where he could also go
> hunting. He leaves the Finland Station on the morning of December 24th,
> with Krupskaya and his sister Maria Ilyinichna- they travel incognito
> in a 2nd class compartment: as the train is about to leave, Lenin --
> head of the first workers state -- remembers he has no money and turns
> to Kollontai, who has come from the stores of the Welfare Commissariat
> to say good-bye and loan them furs; Lenin asks to borrow 100 Finnish
> marks for the journey; but the Commissar for Welfare discovers at the
> Currency Exchange desk that she has no Russian money either....
>
> Mark Jones
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base






From aabdo at webtv.net  Mon Feb 12 09:36:36 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:36:36 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: A coup, a coup, a coup.... or a loss of popular support, Jared?
In-Reply-To: Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com>'s message of Mon, 12 Feb 2001
	10:09:41 -0500
Message-ID: <4021-3A881114-3012@storefull-234.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Well, my desire is not to flame anybody.    But in turn, I expect not to
see flames directed at Libertarian Socialists.      I'm not one myself,
but that doesn't mean that I am going to feel tolerant to those that
feel that they can launch character assaults against this particular
political tendency on the Left.      And this was being done.

Lou wrote....
<In fact Milosevic was trying desperately to keep some semblance of the
Titoist legacy alive.>

That's being very generous.     But trying to image build for Milosevic
is about as productive as trying to refurbish the image of Leonid
Breznev.      If not worse.      At least Breznev didn't drag his
country unpreparedly, and DIRECTLY, into a war with the US.

They both led their countries to ruin.     And through the identical
reasons of cliquism, bureaucratic corruption, and becoming totally
identified with the nationalism of the dominant group in a multinational
country.

And above all through arrogance and prepotencia.      Through acting and
behaving like a superior class above the rest of society.

Tony 












From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 10:01:33 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 12:01:33 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: A coup, a coup, a coup.... or a loss of
  popular support, Jared?
In-Reply-To: <4021-3A881114-3012@storefull-234.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010212115908.00fa1cd0@popserver.panix.com>

>That's being very generous.     But trying to image build for Milosevic
>is about as productive as trying to refurbish the image of Leonid
>Breznev.      If not worse.      At least Breznev didn't drag his
>country unpreparedly, and DIRECTLY, into a war with the US.
>
>They both led their countries to ruin.     And through the identical
>reasons of cliquism, bureaucratic corruption, and becoming totally
>identified with the nationalism of the dominant group in a multinational
>country.
>
>And above all through arrogance and prepotencia.      Through acting and
>behaving like a superior class above the rest of society.
>
>Tony 

I must stress the importance of documenting such charges, since so much of
the perception of Yugoslavia and Milosevic seems framed by free-wheeling
assertions. Unless we can substantiate charges such as dragging Yugoslavia
into war through material from scholarly histories or Lexis-Nexis, then the
discussion simply will consist of mere opinionating. As Jonathan Swift once
said:

?That was excellently observed,? say I when I read a passage in another
where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, then I pronounce him to
be mistaken.



Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From zapata at sezampro.yu  Mon Feb 12 11:39:48 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:39:48 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Re: A coup, a coup, a coup.... or a loss of popular support, Jared?
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com> <3.0.1.32.20010212115908.00fa1cd0@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <005101c09522$9ecdfba0$c574fac3@andrej>

I agree with Louis that:


>I must stress the importance of documenting such charges, since so much of
>the perception of Yugoslavia and Milosevic seems framed by free-wheeling
>assertions.

I think that this is , really, a crucial need. Where I disagree is that
Louis, coming from trotskyst positions, thinks that this is the point of
divergence between our approaches. I really couldn't care less from which
segment of the Left you are coming from. I am in very good relationships
with your comrades from French LCR, for instance. I think that members of
this party are favoring wonderful sense of plurality and diversification,
combined with class struggle for social justice. I do not agree with their
methodology and ideological background, but that is really besides the
point. The thing that matters, however, is that people from LCR, trotskysts,
are having very similar approach to Yugoslavia as I have. And people who I
am lucky to know from this group are very patient students of Yugoslav
history and-languages. They are speaking fluently Russian language, and they
study hard Serbo-Croat; they come here , to Yugoslavia, very often. And
this is why I respect their arguments even if they are in disagreement with
my own. So, this is the point where I think you are mistaken, when you say
that:
> especially the analysis in Leon Trotsky's "Revolution Betrayed". If I had
> to speak the native language of every country on the leading edge of the
> class struggle today, I might as well watch television situation comedies
> rather than participate on Internet debates.

I wouldn't dare preaching to someone from Argentina about the nature of
class relationship and history of his country on the basis of second-hand
sources, without knowledge of history & political culture of this county.
Sure, I have my views. But when a person from Argentina, who is coming from
the Left, is trying to explain to me ( not convince, explain) about the
situation in his country, his ideological background notwithstanding, it
could be even Jared Israel or what's his name, I would listen, with some
respect. Perhaps I would nod in disagreement. But I would try to listen and
I wouldn't attack him. Especially If I bare in mind that he was bombed for
three months and participated in three wars.
I hope that this makes some sense,
Kind Regards,
                 Andrej








From Borba100 at aol.com  Mon Feb 12 11:28:42 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:28:42 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Serbian workers threaten nationwide General Strike
Message-ID: <b9.b6467c0.27b9855a@aol.com>

The URL for his article is 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/zorich/strike.htm
www.tenc.net 
[Emperor's Clothes]

As Serbian workers threaten nationwide General Strike -
The Issue is, Who Gets the Shares?

By Milos Zorich - Special to Emperor's Clothes
Belgrade, 2-12-2001
Translated by Tika Jankovich and Jared Israel

 

Will the ranks of 800,000 already jobless Serbian workers be swelled by 
thousands laid off following planned changes in the Privatization Law? 
Belgrade is being watched carefully by international business. They want 
auctions where they can buy companies at bargain prices and they want legal 
guarantees protecting investments. Meanwhile, the Serbian Parliament will 
decide whether to halt a wave of privatizations by workers. And the workers 
are threatening a General Strike 
A Proclamation to the People

"In short, the state is selling. Foreigners are buying. Workers and citizens 
are loosing. We workers are not for sale. Let's stop the plunder!" 

Thus writes the Association of Serbian Unions. Urging the Serbian people to 
protest changes in the Privatization Law announced by the Serbian Government, 
the unions have called a General Strike starting February 14 at 8:00 AM. 

The Core of the Conflict

The current Privatization Law was passed during the Miloshevich 
administration, a coalition of the Yugoslav Left, the Socialist Party and the 
Radical Party. If a company was privatized, the first priority in obtaining 
shares would go to the workers who invested their labor for many years. 

Anticipating the present regime's intention to sell companies which are 
supposedly in bad financial shape to foreign bidders, workers and managers 
have speeded-up privatization under this law. They are trying to preempt the 
process before a government sell-out to foreign interests can take place. 

Thus a race is underway, with the workers privatizing state and public 
property, and the government trying to halt it.

This reporter spoke to several people on the street about the proposed 
sell-off. Here are the words of Vladimir Matvejevic, an engineer and one of 
800,000 men and women in Serbia who are unemployed and looking for work: 

"Before our eyes we have the examples of Bulgaria, Romania, Russia and other 
economies in "transition" where the largest industrial enterprises have been 
handed over to foreign corporations. As a consequence, thousands of workers 
were fired, in obedience to rules imposed by the International Monetary Fund 
and the World Bank.

"One should bare in mind that for decades our Yugoslav model of 
social-economy differed from those in Eastern Europe. They had central state 
economic control. We built a system where businesses under workers' 
self-management existed side by side with others that were privately owned. 
In the self-managed sector, the companies were run by elected 
representatives. Workers shared the profits." 

Workers Ask: Why Give Up Our Shares?

So, nobody is against privatization per se. The conflict is over how to do 
it. The workers demand to be the majority shareholders. The present regime 
insists that the major shareholders be investors, whose money, they say, can 
revive production, introduce more economical operating structures based on 
up-to-date technology and maximize savings in production. 

While this battle escalates, Belgrade is being watched closely by foreign 
investors and businessmen. Last week a delegation from the European Union 
visited Belgrade. Also, there was a two-day meeting of the Business Council 
of the Stability Pact for Southeastern Europe with representatives from sixty 
companies in Europe, Asia and the U.S.

This "Investors Mission" met with 150 leading Yugoslav industrial managers. 
Mr. Bodo Hombah, special coordinator for the Stability Pact, and Manfred 
Nusbaumer, Vice-President of the Business Council, held a press conference 
where they demanded that: "the Belgrade Government provide suitable 
conditions for business, along with a law that it will guarantee the safety 
of foreign investments." 

"Please, no more help," says Mrs. Brezovacki

"They are offering to help us from abroad? Please!" says Mrs. Goritsa 
Brezovachki, who works at a garment factory . "First they impose sanctions. 
Then they instigate civil war, stop production, bomb our factories. Now 
finally after devastating our country and putting us in a desperate position, 
they swarm in with their bags of gold to buy our businesses cheap and make us 
a colony. No more help!" (1)


The above opinion is not shared by Mrs. Mirosinka Dinkich, a member of the 
G-17 group of economists. (2) Says Mrs. Dinkich:

"It is better to be a well paid employee in a foreign owned company, than a 
poor shareholder in a company that makes no profits."

But workers counter this, asking, "Who says we will have any job at all if 
these foreign interests get a hold of our companies?" And Mrs. Dinkic admits 
that in the first year of the regime's proposed economic reforms 
approximately 300,000 more workers would be left jobless. Out of these, some 
50,000 could find jobs in reconstructed companies and another 50,000 in new 
companies. What about the remaining 200,000 desperate, hungry people? She 
recommends spending around $400 million. But this is only to help them during 
the first year. What about later on? And in any case, where would this money 
come from? The government has no answer.

"Stop stealing the Electrical Power Assets"

Today (Monday, February 12) the Government will submit its proposal for 
changing the old Law on Privatization to Parliament. Meanwhile, workers are 
angry and getting angrier.

Mr. Radomir Smiljanic, President of the Council of the Serbian Association of 
Unions, says that:

"This Government 'writes the lunch bill for the waiter,' avoiding 
consultations with the workers. As proposed by the Government, workers are 
entitled to 10% of the free shares. Other private parties may obtain 15%. But 
60% of the shares are earmarked for bidders in public auctions to be run by 
the state. The money thus obtained is to be used by the state to meet its 
obligations, including providing pensions."

Many workers feel this amounts to blackmail. If you want your pensions, the 
argument goes, you have to give up your right to shares in companies where 
you labored with the understanding that you were the shareholders.

Mr. Aleksandar Vlahovic, the Minister of Privatization, argues that, "it is 
essential that 'strategic partners', those with a fresh money supply, enter 
the company." 

To secure this plan, the new law would immediately halt the current wave of 
worker-oriented privatizations.

While the conflict between the regime and the workers intensifies, workers in 
major Serbian companies are sending out urgent messages about the "organized 
plunder" of national economic assets. "Stop the stealing of Serbian 
Electrical Power Assets", alerts the paper of the Serbian Electrical Power 
Industry. The employees say there's been a rapid erosion of asset-value by 
management. Last Fall management declared the assets to be worth more than 
$20 billion. Now the figure is down to $4.2 billion. 

Social Upheaval?

Last year, around 870 facilities out of a total of 7,000 were privatized 
under the old Privatization Law. But this year, in the past three months 
alone, 630 state and public companies have gotten new, private owners.

The Deputy Minister of the Ministry for Economical International Relations, 
Mr. Boran Karadjola, says "Whether we like it or not, globalization is an 
unstoppable process, which has to enter Yugoslavia, if it wants to be a part 
of the world." He has recently signed a document bringing Yugoslavia into the 
WTO as an observer.

Similarly, the head of the new Serbian Government, Mr. Zoran Djindjic, told a 
meeting with the Serbian managers of major companies three days ago that, "We 
want strong foreign capitalists to come in, not shaky ones."

Clearly the government won't willingly back down. It intends to open the door 
to foreign capital although it is fully aware that foreign bidders will 
collude to keep the selling price low. (3) 

The ongoing conflict between the government and workers is entering a period 
of great uncertainty. Social upheavals and the further destabilization of the 
otherwise poor Serbian economy are quite possible. Interviews I conducted 
with a dozen employees of the largest companies point in this direction. For 
example, a woman who works at Yugoslav Airlines, told Emperor's Clothes: 

"I have been working here 25 years and have acquired certain rights to the 
property of my company. Why should I agree now to be hired by a new owner who 
would buy our airplanes, buildings and technical equipment dirt cheap? If it 
happened, I would feel deceived and ripped off."

And other workers ask, after they buy our property dirt cheap, what prevents 
them from taking the assets and closing us down?

Such sentiments - that the country?s economic assets are being ripped off, 
that the country is becoming dependent on foreign powers which, during a 
protracted agony of economic transformation that they would impose on Serbia, 
would care only for their own interests - these sentiments of rebellion are 
the driving force behind the planned General Strike by the worker unions.

***

Further reading - 

1) Two very good background pieces on the so-called civil wars in Yugoslavia 
are: 'German and U.S. Involvement in the Balkans' by T.W. Carr, at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/carr/carr.html and Diana Johnstone's 
classic study, 'Seeing Yugoslavia Through a Dark Glass' at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/Johnstone/1yugo.htm

2) 'The International Monetary Fund And The Yugoslav Elections' by Michel 
Chossudovsky and Jared Israel. This article has been reprinted around the 
world. It documents the connection between the G-17 economists, the present 
Serbian regime, and the nation-destroying International Monetary Fund and 
World Bank. It can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/1.htm

3) We came across a most revealing U.S. Commerce Department Document, see 
Grand Theft: Montenegro... at http://emperors-clothes.com/news/commerce.htm

Please Support the Journalists' Fund 

Emperor's Clothes is trying to assist a few families of Yugoslav journalists. 
These journalists are among the many journalists who have literally been 
thrown out of work when thugs took over all TV and radio stations and 
newspapers during and after the Oct. 5th coup. These attacks are part of the 
terror in 'democratic' Serbia. We are providing some financial help; we need 
to provide more. 

It's really a privilege to be able to help these brave men and women who are 
trying to report 'the other side' within Yugoslavia and, through Emperor's 
Clothes and other media, to the outside world.

Meanwhile, our own operating costs have increased. (For instance, monthly 
fees for the superb news media search engine Lexis have more than doubled.)

If you can make a contribution either to our general expenses or specifically 
to help the Journalists' Fund, please do. Any amount will help. To use our 
secure server, please go to 
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm#donate. (If you use the secure 
server and wish your contribution to go to the Journalists' Fund, please send 
us a note at emperors1000 at aol.com 

Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 
02461-0321.

Or call 617 916-1705 from 9-5, Eastern U.S. time and ask for Bob. Thanks very 
much!

And please join our email list so we can keep you informed.

www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
 



From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 11:50:44 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:50:44 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: A coup, a coup, a coup.... or a loss of
  popular support, Jared?
In-Reply-To: <005101c09522$9ecdfba0$c574fac3@andrej>
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com>
 <3.0.1.32.20010212115908.00fa1cd0@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010212134820.00fa1ecc@popserver.panix.com>

Andrej:
>I think that this is , really, a crucial need. Where I disagree is that
>Louis, coming from trotskyst positions, thinks that this is the point of
>divergence between our approaches. I really couldn't care less from which
>segment of the Left you are coming from. I am in very good relationships
>with your comrades from French LCR, for instance. I think that members of
>this party are favoring wonderful sense of plurality and diversification,
>combined with class struggle for social justice.

Jonathan Swift: ?That was excellently observed,? say I when I read a
passage in another where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, then
I pronounce him to be mistaken.

>I wouldn't dare preaching to someone from Argentina about the nature of
>class relationship and history of his country on the basis of second-hand
>sources, without knowledge of history & political culture of this county.

Was I preaching? I'm sorry if I came across that way. But I am afraid that
you are putting impossible obstacles before us when you say that
second-hand sources are ruled out as a basis for making political
judgements. Unless you have grown up in Argentina, how else would you have
"knowledge of history and political culture"? Karl Marx never visited
Russia or the USA, but he wrote some extraordinarily intelligent things
based on investigations done at the London Library. Hurrah for books!!!

>Sure, I have my views. But when a person from Argentina, who is coming from
>the Left, is trying to explain to me ( not convince, explain) about the
>situation in his country, his ideological background notwithstanding, it
>could be even Jared Israel or what's his name, I would listen, with some
>respect. Perhaps I would nod in disagreement. But I would try to listen and
>I wouldn't attack him. Especially If I bare in mind that he was bombed for
>three months and participated in three wars.
>I hope that this makes some sense,
>Kind Regards,
>                 Andrej

No it doesn't, but hope springs eternal in the human breast.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From zapata at sezampro.yu  Mon Feb 12 13:31:51 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:31:51 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com><3.0.1.32.20010212115908.00fa1cd0@popserver.panix.com> <3.0.1.32.20010212134820.00fa1ecc@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <003b01c09532$453b6e00$4fbd6ac2@andrej>



Louis:

>Jonathan Swift: "That was excellently observed," say I when I read a
>passage in another where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, then
>I pronounce him to be mistaken.

Is this some sort of best quote festival?

>Was I preaching? I'm sorry if I came across that way. But I am afraid that
>you are putting impossible obstacles before us when you say that
>second-hand sources are ruled out as a basis for making political
>judgements.

And Karl May ( not Marx!) wrote his best books while he was in prison in
Germany while never visited US, but we dont take his books as a historical
sources, do we?
I dont see where this talk is getting us, exactly.

>Unless you have grown up in Argentina, how else would you have
>"knowledge of history and political culture"?

I have problems, very ilustrative problems, debating with you guys....
There seems to be some sort of twisted competition in the air, here. Who is
the loudest ! He takes it all!
I doubt that your intelligence is preventing you from understanding what I
wanted to say, but if repeating is the way of talking, in your concept of
dialogue, Ok.
Of course that you can have a knowledge about political culture, and
history, even if you are not a native speaker. My example: I am a specialist
in the field of German history. I dont see what is preventing me to
understand German reality. As a ( bad, probably) english speaker, I am
following debates about many things of interest in English. As I have
knowledge of French and Rusian, I am in rather good relationship with this
production too. I am learning spanish 'cause my wife is Peruvian and I am
trying to understand her culture- by listening to her, her experience, by
visiting Peru, etc.
So, if you want to be serious about the Balkans, go to London Library and
start reading. Visit the Institute for Foreign Lenguages- and start learning
the lenguage.Fantastic experience! Very exciting! Go to Yugoslavia, live
there for a while. Find some friends who are living there. Talk with them.
Read the local papers, visit local libraries. And than come to talk with me
about the Balkans. I am afraid that Trotsky's books are not the best guide
trough this particular area. Read a bit more! Expand your horizons!

>Karl Marx never visited
>Russia or the USA, but he wrote some extraordinarily intelligent things
>based on investigations done at the London Library. Hurrah for books!!!

Hurrah for Karl Marx! I am glad that you have a healthy pretension to
compare yourself with one of the most ingenious man of our time / modesty is
a virtue of fools, Goethe( German writer) wrote / but Marx spoke english? Or
he read those books in German? As far as I know he didnt spoke Russian. And,
unfortunately,  he wrote some very inaccurate things about Russia. But I
suspect that saying this is a sacrilige. Nevertheless, let's be adventorous!
As far as I can remember, he wrote that Bakunin and Herzen were  wrong and
that revolution will not going to happen in Russia but in more industrilized
countries? This is the problem with "scientific theories".....Being applied
on subjects which you are not well acquainted with......But, let's stop with
this blasphemy and return to your comments. You didnt reply to my suggestion
that you have to look up to LCR? Perhaps you overlooked it?
The thing that matters, however, is that people from LCR, trotskysts,
are having very similar approach to Yugoslavia as I have. And people who I
am lucky to know from this group are very patient students of Yugoslav
history and-languages. They are speaking fluently Russian language, and they
study hard Serbo-Croat; they come here , to Yugoslavia, very often. And
this is why I respect their arguments even if they are in disagreement with
my own.
I am here , on this list, although I am a libertarian socialists. Why?
Because I think that marxist have much to offer to all people interested in
social change. Why again? because I want to learn.
I agree with Marx that you can learn something from everybody. I think that
he would be very disappointed to see that some of his disciples are trying
to teach everyone without efforts to learn something themselves.
 @.






From aabdo at webtv.net  Mon Feb 12 13:39:10 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 12:39:10 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] He and She
In-Reply-To: Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com>'s message of Mon, 12 Feb 2001
	11:59:08 -0500
Message-ID: <55-3A8849EE-972@storefull-231.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

One of the 'problems of communism' that keeps cropping up around the
world is the problem of nepotism.      That's right.      How many of us
commies have even given it any thought? 

But people really hate nepotism in politics.      And a system that
seems dependent on it, or that is promoting it in some form or another,
quickly loses the people's political respect.     In the US, I can name
4 huge examples right off the cuff.

Dubya!     Dummie son, reads off cheat cards, daddy got him off......
and in.      Brother stole the election for dummie.     Couldn't do shit
on his own.

Hillary!    Feminist shrew.     The brains and balls behind slick
willlie, tom cat.... got his dick stuck in a thong.     Oh my god, could
she be the next president?    PC, NOW, New CiC....of US.army with its
balls cut off!     Tame, and slightly chubby, kind of like big mac
hubby.    Say a prayer.

Patty.     Little girl my foot.    Married her body guard.     Daddy's
little girl.   Out in no time.      Brainwashed by SLA.
Boo-hoo-hoo..... Citizen Kane.

Kennedy Klan.     Cherub faced, pontificating papist-betrayers of the
cause.      Hate that namby, wamby accent.    Clean cut catholic school
kids with their nasty little wanks.     Onassis.    Rapist. Got off
scott free with drowning and beach affair, and White House affairs.
Young and part of the beautiful people.     Martyrs, JC on the cross
with MLK.    Mafia.     Cruising on, Joseph.

But none of these nepotic families totally dominate the national scene.
Not yet, at least.     But what about the brothers two, dad and son, and
he and she (and their idiotic family, as Andrej put it)?      The
'hardliner-wife'?     Discoteque kiddy.    Sandinista sunglasses.
Setting The Balkan pace? 

And the island?    How stable is a new society run by brother?     Think
about it from a Cuban perspective.     Is it all in the family?     And
nothing more?     

Korea.   The inheritance.      Father to son......      Meanwhile people
are asked to sacrifice and suffer for the national good?

These are not good situations.     We may like to sluff it off, but
other, less generous souls will not.     They will see it as an immense
form of corruption.

A new society has to build on more than this.      It is a 'problem of
communism' in degeneration/ stagnation.

Tony

P.S.- Lou, I am sorry if I am weak on the Lexis-Nexis approach to
politics.  ________________________________
I must stress the importance of documenting such charges, since so much
of the perception of Yugoslavia and Milosevic seems framed by
free-wheeling assertions. Unless we can substantiate charges such as
dragging Yugoslavia into war through material from scholarly histories
or Lexis-Nexis, then the discussion simply will consist of mere
opinionating. As Jonathan Swift once said: 
"That was excellently observed," say I when I read a passage in another
where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, then I pronounce him
to be mistaken.












From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 13:40:13 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:40:13 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <003b01c09532$453b6e00$4fbd6ac2@andrej>
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com>
 <3.0.1.32.20010212115908.00fa1cd0@popserver.panix.com>
 <3.0.1.32.20010212134820.00fa1ecc@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010212153749.00fa0fc0@popserver.panix.com>

Andrej:
>As far as I can remember, he wrote that Bakunin and Herzen were  wrong and
>that revolution will not going to happen in Russia but in more industrilized
>countries? This is the problem with "scientific theories".....Being applied
>on subjects which you are not well acquainted with......But, let's stop with
>this blasphemy and return to your comments.

Actually, Marx wrote in the late 1870s that the best prospects for
revolution anywhere in the world were in the Russian countryside and that
the peasants would be in the vanguard.

> You didnt reply to my suggestion
>that you have to look up to LCR? Perhaps you overlooked it?

I am familiar with what the LCR wrote. This is what happens when a
revolutionary group becomes too close to polite middle-class opinion.

>The thing that matters, however, is that people from LCR, trotskysts,
>are having very similar approach to Yugoslavia as I have. And people who I
>am lucky to know from this group are very patient students of Yugoslav
>history and-languages. They are speaking fluently Russian language, and they
>study hard Serbo-Croat; they come here , to Yugoslavia, very often. And
>this is why I respect their arguments even if they are in disagreement with
>my own.

Jonathan Swift: ?That was excellently observed,? say I when I read a
passage in another where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, then
I pronounce him to be mistaken.

>I am here , on this list, although I am a libertarian socialists. Why?
>Because I think that marxist have much to offer to all people interested in
>social change. Why again? because I want to learn.
>I agree with Marx that you can learn something from everybody. I think that
>he would be very disappointed to see that some of his disciples are trying
>to teach everyone without efforts to learn something themselves.

Let me know who you are speaking of and I will be sure to kick them in the
shins.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 13:49:33 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:49:33 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] He and She
In-Reply-To: <55-3A8849EE-972@storefull-231.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010212154709.00f9fa10@popserver.panix.com>

>Tony
>
>P.S.- Lou, I am sorry if I am weak on the Lexis-Nexis approach to
>politics. 

What do you mean? Your posts on Mexico are very strong on the Lexis-Nexis
approach. They always use newspaper coverage to back up your arguments.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From zapata at sezampro.yu  Mon Feb 12 14:58:17 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:58:17 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com><3.0.1.32.20010212115908.00fa1cd0@popserver.panix.com><3.0.1.32.20010212134820.00fa1ecc@popserver.panix.com> <3.0.1.32.20010212153749.00fa0fc0@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <005e01c0953e$592ff500$b974fac3@andrej>

?

Actually, Marx wrote in the late 1870s that the best prospects for
revolution anywhere in the world were in the Russian countryside and that
the peasants would be in the vanguard.

Perhaps you would like to suggest to me where, and on which page, I can find
this?
I would appreciate this, and I think that it is going to be a nice
contribution to socialist history.
Ha, ha, ha!
Sorry if I am a bit middle class non polite, but you are really something!
You and that Boston fellow, what a qiute arrogance! Based on the same,
imperial ignorance!

> You didnt reply to my suggestion
>that you have to look up to LCR? Perhaps you overlooked it?

I am familiar with what the LCR wrote. This is what happens when a
revolutionary group becomes too close to polite middle-class opinion.

If you are, than please inform me. Somehow, I suspect that you read anything
coming from their pen, regarding Yugoslavia. Could you send me something you
have?
So, you think that LCR are middle class sentimentalists. Well, one thing is
for certain: they are going to enjoy in this forward!


Jonathan Swift: "That was excellently observed," say I when I read a
passage in another where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, then
I pronounce him to be mistaken.

You have some problem with this sentance?
Do you want me to send you another quote if you are out of stock?

>I am here , on this list, although I am a libertarian socialists. Why?
>Because I think that marxist have much to offer to all people interested in
>social change. Why again? because I want to learn.
>I agree with Marx that you can learn something from everybody. I think that
>he would be very disappointed to see that some of his disciples are trying
>to teach everyone without efforts to learn something themselves.

Let me know who you are speaking of and I will be sure to kick them in the
shins.

Let's not be so violent. But if I had to choose, I think that you would be
my choice: the other one, what's his name, is on the other side of
dissapintement.
Ciao!
          @.







From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 12 15:19:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:19:02 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] FW: EH.NET PROJECT 2000: Landes on _The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business_
Message-ID: <000d01c09541$cceef880$9c7b20d9@mjones>

[know thy enemy]



------------ EH.NET BOOK REVIEW --------------
Project 2000: Significant Works in Twentieth-Century Economic History

Alfred D. Chandler, Jr., _The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution
in American Business_. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Belknap, 1977. xvi +
608 pp.

Review Essay by David S. Landes, Departments of Economics and
History, Harvard University.


Alfred Chandler: World Master of Institutional Business History


Alfred Chandler is the world master of institutional business
history. He began his career as scholar and researcher innocently
enough, with a doctoral monograph (1952) on the life and career of
Henry Varnum Poor, railway pundit of the nineteenth century. But then
he went on to work in the business and personal archives of the du
Ponts of Delaware, to whom he was related by family and friendship,
and the result was a first-class company and entrepreneurial history,
written with the aid and collaboration of Stephen Salsbury: _Pierre
S. Du Pont and the Making of the Modern Corporation_ (New York:
Harper & Row, 1971.). As the title indicates, he was already
interested in the larger question of the structures and evolution of
corporate enterprise.

Then, in the mid 1970s, he brought out the first of a series of major
works on this subject, his _Visible Hand_, which won the Pulitzer and
Bancroft prizes in 1978. The title reference is to deliberate
organizational arrangements designed to make big business work.
Chandler was not the first to write on this. As his introductory text
and references make clear, the topic is one that has interested
economists and essayists going back at least to Adam Smith, that
incredible seer into past, present, and future. More recent
predecessors (over the last century) would include Werner Sombart,
James Burnham, Ronald Coase, Douglass North, and Oliver Williamson.
But all of these dealt with the problem as part of larger agendas. It
was Chandler who, focusing on the theme, rewrote in effect the course
of American economic history and laid the basis for comparative
international explorations.

The book lays out the task and theme by stating a number of propositions:
1. Modern business enterprise came in when administrative
coordination did better than market mechanisms in enhancing
productivity and lowering costs.
2. The advantages of coordinating multiple units within a single
enterprise could not be realized without a managerial hierarchy.
3. It was the growing volume of economic activities that made
administrative coordination more efficient than market coordination.
4. Once a managerial hierarchy does its job, it becomes its own
source of permanence, power, and continued growth.
5. Such hierarchies tend to become increasingly technical and professional.
6. Over time, such professional structures become separate from ownership.
7. Professionals prefer long-term stability and growth to short-term gains.
8. Big businesses grew to dominate branches and sectors of the
economy, and so doing, altered their structure and that of the
economy as a whole.

So much for the United States. Much of the book is a historical
review of these processes, beginning with the colonial era and the
early decades of independence. In those days, business structures
were not so different from what they had been several centuries
earlier, in Renaissance Italy or, later, in the Low Countries and
England. Chandler offers here an overview exceptional for its
coverage through time and space, its attention to the variety of
economic activity and commercial specialization. One of the most
striking features of this presentation is his attention to the
precocity of American development: a colonial, frontier area, low in
density, handicapped in matters of inland transport, yet rich in
human capital and opportunity. One silent evidence of this modernity:
the large number of watch and clock dealers and repairers.

None of this, though, generated the modern corporate business
structure, for reasons implicit in Chandler's propositions. The
economy and its business units were not yet big enough. That came
with the railroad in the 1840's and 1850's. Here for the first time
one had large enterprises dispersed in space, requiring heavy
investment and maintenance in road, rails, tunnels, and bridges,
tight organization of rolling stock, and all kinds of passenger and
freight arrangements including timely service, mobilization of
capital and handling of money income and outlays -- in short a world
of its own. Chandler noted here the critical contribution of men
trained in the military academies, for armies were even earlier
enterprises of vast scale, though more improvisational and transitory
in character, and with destructive-predatory rather than constructive
objectives. (The only comparable commercial enterprises to the
railroads were the canals, but for topographical reasons, these were
less important in the United States than in Europe. The one exception
was Erie, but even there the waterway was soon lined with railroads.
Chandler notes that in the 1840's, only 400 miles of canal were
built, to make the nation's total canal mileage something under
4,000. In that same decade, over 6,000 rail miles were completed,
making the national total 9,000. Time counted, and railroads were
faster and more efficient.)

The introduction of such managerial and organizational techniques
into industry waited on gains in scale of enterprise. The traditional
manufacturing firm, for example, was a personal or familial
operation, assisted by outside supply and demand facilities and
initiatives -- the shop writ large. Past a certain threshold,
however, ways had to be found to pull the parts together, to oversee,
coordinate, and control. In the United States, it was the chemical
and even more the automobile manufactures that led the way. Chandler
is particularly well informed here because of his earlier work on Du
Pont, with its subsequent ownership of a controlling share of General
Motors. GM itself tells a fascinating story of transition from
personal to corporate enterprise. It started with William C. Durant,
a kind of freebooter who pulled together a number of independent
manufacturers - Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac, Chevrolet et al. -- and
did his best to stay on top but ran into impossible financial
impasses, personal and corporate. It then fell into the hands of the
bankers and moneymen: J.P. Morgan and Company and Pierre du Pont
(rich from wartime earnings). And with the aid of manager Alfred
Sloan, Jr., they set up a command structure that became a model for
all manner of industrial enterprises.

Chandler's analysis would have been even richer had he made an
explicit comparison between GM and the Ford Motor Company, because
the latter is an exquisite, tortuous example of industrial gigantism
under personal autocracy gone astray and awry. Ford was just the
opposite of the Chandler prescription: all manner of organizational
improvisation in the face of arbitrary whimsy. What the costs to
Ford, no one will ever know: this was a company that estimated income
and outgo by the height of piles of paper and had only an approximate
idea of its debts and credits. When in money trouble, it taxed its
dealers.

The move to a rational managerial system was bound to encourage
professionalization. One of Chandler's merits was not only to call
attention to new schools and curricula, but also to show how much
could be achieved in the strangest places. Here again, his later
comparative work filled out the American story along lines already
explored by European scholars: the creation and transformation of
professional schools to meet the needs of state bureaucracies; the
differences in national achievement; the implications for the larger
process of economic growth and development. Again, each industry had
its own requirements and opportunities, just as each society had its
own areas of preference. The British, who had accomplished much on
the basis of apprenticeship and bench learning, were slow to adopt
formal class and lab instruction. The Continental countries,
especially the Germans, French, and Scandinavians, strained to catch
up and learned not only to transform the older branches but to
advance in new areas of production.

The growing reliance on professionally trained managers entailed an
assault on the structures and habits of personal and familial
enterprise. This was particularly true of technologically complex
branches of production, which found it easier to hire good people
than to tame them. Inevitably, the people who ran the show nursed
aspirations that contradicted family control, the more so as such
experts often were remunerated by share options that gave them a
piece of ownership. Growth, moreover, entailed mobilization of funds,
whether via bank loans or public sales of ownership shares, and this
too often countered family interests.

By the same token, the success and resources of managerial
corporations have made them the arch seducers of the business world.
This is a new, major aspect of the shift away from family control:
how can a family firm say no to such generous offers, often exceeding
the prospect of immediate gains? The recent sale of Seagram by the
Bronfman interests to the French conglomerate Vivendi is an excellent
example of money trumping blood, marriage, and personal aspirations.
Another is the purchase by LVMH (Mokt Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA) of a
number of Swiss watch manufacturers by way of establishing itself as
a major player in the luxury watch trade. These acquisitions
exemplify "what can happen to a small, family-founded business under
the umbrella of a global corporate superpower with plenty of
financial resources. The chairman and chief executive of LVMH,
Bernard Arnault, is known for sparing no expense to gain dominance in
luxury brands as diverse as champagne and handbags." The manger of
one of these family brands put it straight: "LVMH is prepared to
overinvest in Ebel without short-time return. They know that to build
up a luxury brand you need time and money." (Quoted in the
_International Herald-Tribune_, February 5, 2001, p. 11.)

Chandler's model, like most powerful syntheses, simplifies reality.
The world of enterprise is full of variants, of diverse responses to
the tensions and conflicts implicit in entrepreneurial strategy and
in the personal circumstances and histories of business endeavor. The
family firm has not disappeared and will not. New ones are created
all the time. There is even an international fraternity of family
firms that go back more than two hundred years, Les Henokiens, named
after the biblical patriarch Enoch. And there are enterprises that
somehow seem to blend the personal and managerial with such art that
one is hard pressed to classify.

But Chandler's model, in combination with Chandler's extraordinary
energy, has served as the standard, the measure, the incentive to
further inquiry. A small library has appeared on this subject, and
one has only to read the book Chandler edited with Herman Daems,
_Managerial Hierarchies: Comparative Perspectives on the Rise of
Modern Industrial Enterprise_ (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1980), to appreciate the quality and versatility of the
collaborators, (Leslie Hannah, Jurgen Kocka, Maurice Levy-Leboyer,
Morton Keller, Oliver Williamson), the range of the scholarship, and
the opportunities for thought and reconsideration. The Chandlerian
model is a monument to present and future scholarship, and the
_Visible Hand_ an example and encouragement to scholars everywhere.


David S. Landes is professor emeritus of history and economics at
Harvard University and the author of several books including _The
Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change and Industrial Development
in Western Europe from 1750 to the Present_ (1969) and _The Wealth
and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor_ (1998).

Copyright (c) 2001 by EH.NET. All rights reserved. For permissions,
please contact the EH.NET Administrator (administrator at eh.net;
Telephone: 513-529-2850; Fax: 513-529-3308)

-------------- FOOTER TO EH.NET BOOK REVIEW  --------------





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 12 15:50:21 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:50:21 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] flames
Message-ID: <000e01c09546$2f857a60$9c7b20d9@mjones>

I have a poor connection right now and don't see all messages. I'm concerned at the
amount of flaming.

The discussion about Yugoslavia appears to have reached the end of its usefulness. I
think we should all move on. I'd be glad if people focussed on the issues and did
not personalise.

Mark





From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 16:37:14 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:37:14 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <005e01c0953e$592ff500$b974fac3@andrej>
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com>
 <3.0.1.32.20010212115908.00fa1cd0@popserver.panix.com>
 <3.0.1.32.20010212134820.00fa1ecc@popserver.panix.com>
 <3.0.1.32.20010212153749.00fa0fc0@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <200102122337.SAA26610@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>

Andrej:
>Actually, Marx wrote in the late 1870s that the best prospects for
>revolution anywhere in the world were in the Russian countryside and that
>the peasants would be in the vanguard.
>
>Perhaps you would like to suggest to me where, and on which page, I can find
>this?
>I would appreciate this, and I think that it is going to be a nice
>contribution to socialist history.
>Ha, ha, ha!

It can be found in the letters to Vera Zasulich, dated February-March 1881.
In the final draft, he states that the rural peasant commune is the fulcrum
for revolution in Russia. There is also the letter to the editorial board
of the populist newspaper "Otechestvennye Zapiski" from around the same
time in which Marx disassociates himself with certain Marxists who believe
that industrialization is a precondition for socialism. He states that the
version of economic development found in Capital was geared only to England
and similar countries and did not necessarily apply to countries like
Russia. His words for this view are apt: "a historico-philosophical theory
of the general course fatally imposed on all peoples". It is a view he
rejects. In general the notion that socialism is not possible without
establishing industrial capitalism beforehand is typical of Kautsky and
Plekhanov, not Marx or Lenin for that matter.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/



From farmelantj at juno.com  Mon Feb 12 17:27:01 2001
From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:27:01 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
Message-ID: <20010212.192625.-335815.0.farmelantj@juno.com>


On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:34:28 -0500 Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> writes:

> 
> It can be found in the letters to Vera Zasulich, dated 
> February-March 1881.
> In the final draft, he states that the rural peasant commune is the 
> fulcrum
> for revolution in Russia. There is also the letter to the editorial 
> board
> of the populist newspaper "Otechestvennye Zapiski" from around the 
> same
> time in which Marx disassociates himself with certain Marxists who 
> believe
> that industrialization is a precondition for socialism. He states 
> that the
> version of economic development found in Capital was geared only to 
> England
> and similar countries and did not necessarily apply to countries 
> like
> Russia. His words for this view are apt: "a historico-philosophical 
> theory
> of the general course fatally imposed on all peoples". It is a view 
> he
> rejects. In general the notion that socialism is not possible 
> without
> establishing industrial capitalism beforehand is typical of Kautsky 
> and
> Plekhanov, not Marx or Lenin for that matter.

In fact wasn't Marx in those letters consciously siding against Plekhanov
who had already been engaged in controversy with the Norodniks
precisely over this issue?  The journal for which Marx wrote those
letters, was I believe a Narodnik journal.

Jim Farmelant
> 
> Louis Proyect
> Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.



From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 17:38:10 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:38:10 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <20010212.192625.-335815.0.farmelantj@juno.com>
Message-ID: <200102130038.TAA18203@menyapa.cc.columbia.edu>

>In fact wasn't Marx in those letters consciously siding against Plekhanov
>who had already been engaged in controversy with the Norodniks
>precisely over this issue?  The journal for which Marx wrote those
>letters, was I believe a Narodnik journal.
>
>Jim Farmelant

Yes, all this is dealt with in Teodor Shanin's "Late Marx and the Russian
Road", a truly great work of scholarship.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/



From zapata at sezampro.yu  Mon Feb 12 18:01:03 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 02:01:03 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
References: <Louis Proyect <lnp3@panix.com><3.0.1.32.20010212115908.00fa1cd0@popserver.panix.com><3.0.1.32.20010212134820.00fa1ecc@popserver.panix.com><3.0.1.32.20010212153749.00fa0fc0@popserver.panix.com> <200102122337.SAA26610@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>
Message-ID: <000601c09557$e185a760$93bd6ac2@andrej>

Hola!

>
> It can be found in the letters to Vera Zasulich, dated February-March
1881.
> In the final draft, he states that the rural peasant commune is the
fulcrum
> for revolution in Russia.

Yes, it is "mir" and "ruska obscina". But in this letter he is not saying
that Russia is a candidate for revolution: he ridiculed Bakunin because of
his prediction that Russia and Italy and Spain are the most serious
candidates for revolution. He was very skeptical with regards to possible
revolution in Russia before the English revolution, which was, of course, a
great mistake ( of a great thinker, but nevertheless).....


>There is also the letter to the editorial board
> of the populist newspaper "Otechestvennye Zapiski" from around the same
> time in which Marx disassociates himself with certain Marxists who believe
> that industrialization is a precondition for socialism. He states that the

This is interesting. Is this net-available or is it in archives?

> version of economic development found in Capital was geared only to
England
> and similar countries and did not necessarily apply to countries like
> Russia.

Yes, I am familiar with this words.

> His words for this view are apt: "a historico-philosophical theory
> of the general course fatally imposed on all peoples". It is a view he

Hm, I am not sure how much Marx was authentic in this prounancements, and
how much marxist intervened later....They contradict his original statements
starkly.
I am interested in marxist arguments against this notion:

> rejects. In general the notion that socialism is not possible without
> establishing industrial capitalism beforehand is typical

But isn't this one of the tenets of Marx's "scientifical" socialism?
@.








From david.welch at st-edmund-hall.oxford.ac.uk  Mon Feb 12 18:09:22 2001
From: david.welch at st-edmund-hall.oxford.ac.uk (David Welch)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 01:09:22 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <000601c09557$e185a760$93bd6ac2@andrej>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102130108170.3740-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk>

On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Andrej Grubacic wrote:
> 
> Hm, I am not sure how much Marx was authentic in this prounancements, and
> how much marxist intervened later....They contradict his original statements
> starkly.
> I am interested in marxist arguments against this notion:
>
>From Louis's own mailing list,
http://www.marxmail.org/archives/july98/shanin.htm.
 
> But isn't this one of the tenets of Marx's "scientifical" socialism?
>
Industrialisation yes, capitalism no.




From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 18:15:09 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:15:09 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102130108170.3740-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk>
References: <000601c09557$e185a760$93bd6ac2@andrej>
Message-ID: <200102130115.UAA07726@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>

David:
>Industrialisation yes, capitalism no.

Down with porkchops!

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 12 18:16:32 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 01:16:32 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] FW: Debate With Chomsky On Yugoslav Elections
Message-ID: <000601c0955a$8e737360$e17b20d9@mjones>

Debate With Chomsky On Yugoslav Elections
-----Original Message-----
From: crashlist-owner at lists.wwpublish.com
[mailto:crashlist-owner at lists.wwpublish.com] On Behalf Of Richard Hugus
Sent: 13 February 2001 01:04
To: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
Subject: Debate With Chomsky On Yugoslav Elections



An Exchange With Noam Chomsky On The Yugoslav Elections


The Left has been massively co-opted by United States propaganda regarding
Yugoslavia. So effective has this propaganda been that almost two years
after the US/NATO bombing in 1999 there is still no defense of Yugoslavia
that can't be stifled by reference to "Serb atrocities" or "the brutal
dictator, Milosevic."

The following correspondence illustrates how one Left critic, while
appearing to condemn the United States and NATO for their war on Yugoslavia,
nevertheless ends up justifying it. Professor Noam Chomsky wants to have it
both ways: he opposed the bombing of Yugoslavia, yet repeated propaganda
about Milosevic and Serb atrocities that was used to justify the bombing in
the first place. He has acknowledged US interference in the Yugoslav
elections, yet denies that this affected the outcome of those elections. He
is opposed to the present IMF/World Bank takeover of Yugoslavia, yet
supports the elections which made this takeover possible (agreeing with a
UPI reporter who says that the elections "accurately express the democratic
aspirations of the Serbian people"). Finally, Chomsky, more than anyone, has
taught us how little we can trust the mainstream press, yet he uses this
press as his main source of information.

The unfortunate reader who questions Professor Chomsky about these
contradictions, as I did, will be surprised at the responses: that they
could be so imperious and abusive; and that they could use such tortured
argument -- argument in which words themselves can be had both ways.

Many of us trust intellectual leaders to sort out the truth for them from
the avalanche of lies we are presented with in the mainstream press. But
what if these leaders have unwittingly mixed the lies and the truth
together, making it impossible for us to take necessary and decisive action?
And what of the people - in this case, of Yugoslavia - who will lose their
cause, their country, and perhaps their lives, because of this betrayal?

The following correspondence took place between January 7  and February 1,
2001.

Richard Hugus


-------------------------------------------




Dear Professor Chomsky,

Forgive me for forwarding the article on Yugoslav elections  ["What Is Going
On in Yugoslavia and The World? 'No Room for Abstentions!'" by Prof. Ivan
Angelov http://emperors-clothes.com/indexe.htm ] to you without an
introduction. The reason I sent it to you is because of a ZNet piece you
wrote about two months ago  ["Chomsky Comments on Milosevic Ouster, etc."
http://www.zmag.org/chomskyonelec.htm] comparing the Yugoslav elections
which resulted in the ousting of Milosevic to, of all things, the end of
apartheid in South Africa.

My belief is that the elections in Yugoslavia were grossly
manipulated by the usual cast of characters representing the United
States-- the CIA, USAID, the Soros Foundation, the State Department,
the Clinton Administration, the Pentagon, and Congress. In fact, I
see no difference between the Yugoslav elections and the undermining
of elections in a multitude of other countries by the U.S. in the
last 50 years.

The Emperor's New Clothes web site from which the Angelov article was
taken has numerous other articles which shed light on all the
propaganda that has made the US/NATO war against Yugoslavia possible.
 I hope that you will read some of them.

Respectfully,

Richard Hugus
Falmouth, MA

-
Dear Mr. Hugus,

I didn't receive the article that you said you forwarded to me.  Perhaps
it's  on the way.  I think, however, that you might have another look at the
Znet piece of mine to which you refer.  There is a reference to the end of
Apartheid, but you have seriously misread it: the implication is virtually
the opposite of the conclusion you drew.

There's no doubt that "there was extensive interference by the West" (to
quote the Znet piece).   I've read a good bit of material on the site you
mention, of varying quality.  And many other sources as well.   My own
judgment is that your comparison is very far from valid.  For the moment, I
see no reason to qualify what I wrote, or to question the conclusions of
Serb left militants on whom I in part relied and whose reaction is quite
different from yours.   I will be happy to look at other evidence, of
course.

Noam Chomsky



Dear Professor Chomsky,

Thanks for your reply. Here is the article I sent you before. If you've seen
The Emperor's New Clothes site, perhaps you've already read it.

Richard



Dear Mr. Hugus,

Thanks for sending the article.  It's not clear to me why you think it
illuminates the situation.  There are only a few allusions to Yugoslavia,
and no discussion at all of the crucial question: independent of the outside
intervention (which is familiar and uncontroversial), what were the internal
forces within Yugoslavia?  We have a good deal of information about that,
and it does not lend much credibility to the analogies that are proposed.

Incidentally, these same kinds of questions have to be asked even about much
more extreme cases of foreign intervention, like Nicaragua in 1990.  No time
to go into it now, but I was in Nicaragua a number of times, up to late
1989, at the invitation of the University and Jesuits (both sympathetic to
the Sandinistas) in 1989, and was giving talks and having discussions in
which I expressed my concerns that they would be defeated in an election for
reasons quite apart from the US aggression and terror.  I wasn't surprised
when it happened, despite the vast differences between this case and
Yugoslavia.

Superficial analogies are just not useful.  One has to look at the actual
circumstances and factors in the case at hand.

Noam Chomsky


Dear Professor Chomsky,

Granted that the Angelov article is not about Yugoslavia from the inside --
the writer speaks from Bulgaria -- but far from containing "only a few
allusions", the article is entirely about Yugoslavia.

Yes, there is "a good deal of information" about forces internal to
Yugoslavia. The question is, is any of it trustworthy? Coverage in the
mainstream press of the "popular revolution" which brought down Milsoevic
could hardly be called objective. The U.S. press, which supported the 1999
bombing and which demonized the Serbs and Milosevic, obviously has an axe to
grind. So do DOS newspapers funded by the U.S. These are the only sources
you've cited so far.
I'm sure that there was opposition to Milosevic inside Yugoslavia, but
because of massive U.S. interference in the affairs of this country, and in
the elections, and because of the unprecedented propaganda that has been
created, it is very difficult for us know the truth about that opposition.

You mention Nicaragua. So does Angelov, who compares the elections in
Nicaragua in 1990 with the recent elections in Yugoslavia. Both had in
common the threat of further violence from the U.S. should things go against
U.S. wishes. You say the Sandinistas may have been "defeated in an election
for reasons quite apart from the US aggression and terror." Perhaps the same
is true of Milosevic. But, again, how will we ever know? What is the point
of discussing such things, in either case, given the fantastic level of
outside interference? Indeed, who would think U.S. aggression and terror
could somehow be separated from the equation?

This is like saying: Yes, a herd of elephants trampled the flowers, but they
were going to die anyway. Or, taking it a step further: Since the flowers
were going to die anyway, perhaps the elephants aren't too much to blame for
trampling them. This becomes apologetics for U.S. terror.

Richard Hugus


Dear Mr. Hugus,

Your belief that because of US propaganda "we can never know" is true if you
mean "know with certainty," but then we can't know anything about physics
with certainty either.  It is false if you mean "we can never plausibly
conclude," in both cases.  That seems clear enough.

As for the Angelov article, it is "about Yugoslavia" in that it informs us
of his beliefs about Yugoslavia, without any support for these beliefs.

Noam Chomsky



Dear Professor Chomsky,

Regarding your October ZNet article:

I said that in this article you compared the Yugoslav elections which
resulted in the ousting of Milosevic to the end of apartheid in South
Africa. I'm not sure how you can say I "seriously misread" this.

Your exact words were:

"But ridding the country of Milosevic doesn't in itself
herald a final victory for the people of Serbia, who are
responsible for the achievement. There's plenty of
historical evidence to the contrary, including very recent
evidence. It's hard to think of a more spectacular recent
achievement than the overthrow of South Africa's Apartheid
horror . . . "

Perhaps the difference between us is that you saw the elections as
legitimate; I saw them as a fraud.

The sources cited in your ZNet article -- United Press International,
New York Times, London Times, BBC, Boston Globe, London Financial
Times -- are all mainstream press, and the mainstream press, though
mildly critical of U.S interference in the Yugoslav elections,
created the lie that Kostunica's victory was the desire, and the
outcome of the efforts, of the Serb people themselves.

My view is that the Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS) and the
elections which put it into power were bought and paid for in full by
the United States  with, literally, millions of dollars of overt
funding. This was accompanied by the threat of continued sanctions,
the terror induced by NATO's massive bombing campaign, by the ongoing
military occupation of a part of Serbia (Kosovo), the  intimidation
of "Naval exercises" being conducted in the Adriatic at the time of
the elections, and by protestors hired to riot (for example, burning
the same Belgrade TV station that NATO had earlier bombed).

The fraud involved in the Yugoslav election was 1,000 times worse
that what we just witnessed the election of George Bush Jr. in the
United States. Under such circumstances, how can anyone possibly say
that the popular will of the people prevailed?

Richard Hugus


Dear Mr. Hugus,

You raise several issues.  In order.

The passage you cite does not compare Milosevic's regime with Apartheid
South Africa, and does not even hint at such a comparison.  South Africa is
brought up to illustrate the fact that even in extreme cases of overthrow
of a horrendous regime the popular victory leaves plenty of problems.  A
fortiori, the overthrow of Milosevic's ugly and hated regime, even though
nothing like the Apartheid regime of South Africa, leaves plenty of
problems.  In fact, the problems that remain have some similarity to South
Africa's even though Milosevic's corrupt and brutal regime had virtually no
resemblance to the Apartheid regime.  You are drawing completely false and
unwarranted inferences from the passage you are misreading.

Second, you regard the elections as a fraud, and believe I saw them as
"legitimate." Again, you are misreading.  The article clearly says that
"there was extensive interference by the West and by Milosevic's harshly
repressive (but by no means "totalitarian") apparatus." So the elections
were anything but legitimate.  But that does not mean that they were a
fraud.  These are not the only options, plainly.

The mainstream press didn't "create the lie that Kostunica's victory was
the desire, and the outcome of the efforts, of the Serb people themselves."
In fact, the mainstream press labored hard to show that it was the outcome
of the NATO bombing, for obvious reasons.  That's stated explicitly,
clearly, and accurately at the beginning of the statement, as is the reason
why I cited reports that nevertheless made it through the standard media
barrage and pointed out the obvious: that it was the outcome of the efforts
of the Serb people who continued to strongly oppose the bombing, exactly
contrary to th standard line of the mainstream press.

That leaves your belief that the people of Serbia did not want to overthrow
the Milosevic gang, and that the appearance that they did was result of a
pay off from the West.  That runs counter to any evidence I know, and since
you present none (nor has anyone else, to my knowledge), I can't comment.
In fact, it's hard to think of other examples to which such a version of
events would apply.  I remain open to evidence; not to unsupported
assertion that runs counter to extensive evidence.

I don't understand the relevance of the November 2000 presidential
elections.  There's plenty to say about them, but on quite different
grounds.

Noam Chomsky



Dear Professor Chomsky,

On the Apartheid question, one would have to be a mindreader to extract the
meaning you cite below. This meaning is not in the original text, where you
are comparing two achievements -- that of ridding Yugoslavia of Milosevic,
and that of  overthrowing Apartheid in South Africa. The issue does not
merit further discussion.

You attribute to me the "belief that the people of Serbia did not want to
overthrow the Milosevic gang, and that the appearance that they did was
result of a pay off from the West." In fact, I believe that what the people
of Serbia themselves did or did not want will never be known because the
U.S. has controlled every aspect of the election, including what U.S.
citizens heard about it. I've touched on this in an earlier reply.

As for the relevance of our own recent elections. Imagine that a foreign
nation twenty times bigger than our country subjected us to 78 days of
bombing, destroying bridges, trains, hospitals, schools, TV stations,
foreign embassies, chemical factories, power plants, state buildings,
residential areas, and marketplaces, killing 2,000 people and injuring many
more. Then imagine that the foreign nation invaded and occupied, say, the
midwest, setting up a huge military base and separating the midwest off from
the rest of the country. Imagine that with all this the foreign nation had
long ago imposed sanctions which now immiserated the majority of the people
of the country. Imagine that the foreign nation had also earlier stirred up
ethnic differences and successfully broken off New England and the West
Coast from the country. Now imagine that we were about to have elections and
that the foreign nation poured the equivalent of $30 billion into an
apparatus set up for its chosen candidate. Could such an election be
characterized as being in some gray area -- somewhere between legitimate and
a fraud? I hardly think so.

We know that with the comparatively mild shenanigans of the Bush brothers in
Florida the U.S. election was a fraud. How is it that in Yugoslavia, where
vast enormities were committed by an outside nation -- a nation which has
undermined elections in countless other countries before this -- that it was
something else?

You say that I have only assertions, that you have evidence. There is no
shortage of evidence for the U.S./NATO bombing, invasion, and occupation of
Yugoslavia. Nor is there a shortage of evidence for massive U.S.interference
in the Yugoslav elections. You seem to be saying that Kostunica and Djindic
were  brought in by some internal force in Yugoslavia not affected by all
the machinery the U.S. brought to bear on the election, or on the country as
a whole. If you have evidence of this, please send it on.

Richard Hugus


Dear Mr. Hugus,

Your insistence on misreading the paragraph is rather curious.  Not even
the US government or the most extreme Serb-haters in the West accuses
Milosevic of running an Apartheid-style regime.  Anyone who made such a
comparison must be suffering from some mental illness, in which case, no
sensible person would bother writing to them.  And of course, the statement
you quote did nothing of the sort.  But if you insist, it's your privilege.

Your belief that the people of Serbia were 100% powerless in the election
("because the U.S. has controlled every aspect of the election") is not
only utterly false, but a remarkable insult to the Serbs.  That the US
controlled everything heard about the election here -- including, say, the
reports of Serb dissidents, left militants, etc. -- well, if you'd like to
believe it, again it's your privilege.

On the US elections, you wrote: "The fraud involved in the Yugoslav
election was 1,000 times worse
that what we just witnessed the election of George Bush Jr. in the United
States." In response, I wrote that I don't see the relevance of this
comment.  Your response confirms that it was utterly irrelevant.  You
respond by asking me to "Imagine that a foreign nation twenty times
bigger...." Whatever the validity of this comparison, it plainly has
nothing whatsoever -- repeat, nothing whatsoever -- to do with your
statement that "The fraud involved in the Yugoslav election was 1,000 times
worse that what we just witnessed the election of George Bush Jr. in the
United States." Surely that at least is clear.

This is descending to sheer irrationality.  I see no point in pursuing the
discussion.

Noam Chomsky



Dear Professor Chomsky,

Again, please send any information you might have showing that a majority of
the people of Serbia would have supported the new
Kostunica-Djindic-IMF-World Bank regime in Yugoslavia independent of U.S.
terror and coercion.

Richard Hugus


I'll be happy to do that in response to the information you provide to me
showing me that the people of Serbia would have supported Milosevic had the
US stayed out of it.

NC


Professor Chomsky,

Clever rebuttal, but unfair. It was you who cited "extensive evidence"
showing that the people of Serbia accomplished the ousting of Milosevic and
the bringing in of the Kostunica on their own. I am merely asking for the
evidence. Plaudits from the mainstream press are all you've provided.

For my part, I have already provided evidence of how -- through the
calculated use by the United States of long-term economic sanctions, active
support for a secessionist movement, unrelenting propaganda and
demonization, a ruthless 78 day bombing campaign, military occupation, and
massive election bribery -- the people of Serbia did not do it "on their
own."

You are in the position of defending what amounts to an old-fashioned CIA
coup which is well on the way to making Yugoslavia a new colony for the IMF
and World Bank. You are not in good company. Worse still, by endorsing the
result of the crimes I have just mentioned, you sell out both the people of
Yugoslavia and the ability of the American Left to act effectively to
condemn what the U.S. has done, and is doing, there.

Richard Hugus



Dear Professor Chomsky,

In your last message to me, you wrote:

"Dear Mr. Hugus,

Your insistence on misreading the paragraph is rather curious.  Not even the
US government or the most extreme Serb-haters in the West accuses Milosevic
of running an Apartheid-style regime.  Anyone who made such a comparison
must be suffering from some mental illness, in which case, no sensible
person would bother writing to them.  And of course, the statement you quote
did nothing of the sort.  But if you insist, it's your privilege."


Not that this was my point, but apparently you HAVE accused Milosevic of
running an Apartheid-style regime. In an article in Z Magazine (May 2000)
you wrote:

"Current indications are that Kosovo under NATO occupation has reverted to
what was developing in the early 1980s, after the death of Tito, when
nationalist forces undertook to create an "ethnically clean Albanian
republic," taking over Serb lands, attacking churches, and engaging in
"protracted violence" to attain the goal of an "ethnically pure" Albanian
region, with "almost weekly incidents of rape, arson,  pillage and
industrial sabotage, most seemingly designed to drive Kosovo's remaining
indigenous Slavs...out of the province." This "seemingly intractable"
problem, another phase in an ugly history of  intercommunal violence, led to
Milosevic's characteristically brutal response, withdrawing Kosovo's
autonomy and the heavy federal subsidies on which it depended, and imposing
an "Apartheid" regime. "

Would you care to comment?


Richard Hugus



The phrase "Apartheid" regime is in quotes because it is quoted: from
historian Mariana Vickers, as indicated.  It refers to Kosovo.  Your claim
was that I compared Serbia to South Africa's Apartheid regime, which of
course would be nonsense; recall that the reference was to the elections, in
which Kosovars barely took part.  Surely you can see the difference.

If you have something serious to say, I'll be glad to listen.  But I think
we are simply wasting each other's time, and I imagine we each have more
important things to do.

Noam Chomsky



Professor Chomsky,

First of all, it isn't clear who you're quoting in the Z article. Mariana
Vickers isn't mentioned anywhere in the text (perhaps she is mentioned in a
footnote in your Afterword to the French translation of The New Military
Humanism  from which the Z article is taken -- I don't know). In any case,
there is no indication that you are using quotation marks around "Apartheid"
either ironically or to distance yourself from your source -- you seem to be
in agreement with the term.

Taking this together with what you just wrote in your last message, would it
be correct to say that you believe Kosovo, not Serbia, to be the locus of
Apartheid in Yugoslavia?

Regarding the Yugoslavia elections, Kosovo was under full NATO occupation
when these elections were held. Thus, the government whom the people of
Kosovo were supposed to be voting for, or against, had already been
replaced. NATO had accomplished overtly the undermining of Yugoslav
government in Kosovo -- a process which in Serbia was still more or less in
the covert stage with the CIA-National Endowment for Democracy-supported
DOS. An election under such conditions would hardly be something to praise,
yet you describe the elections as a great achievement. Why?

Richard Hugus




The word &quot;extensive" appears once in the article to which you are
referring: "On the elections themselves, there is plenty of valid criticism:
there was extensive interference by the West..."

The only "evidence" you have presented is in support of what I wrote.  If
you'd like to support your extremely insulting charges against the people of
Serbia (and Nicaragua), perhaps you might also add an explanation of why
they capitulated so totally to the US in the parliamentary elections.

I'm afraid I don't have any more time for this, and will not be able to
respond any further.

NC



Professor Chomsky,

Regarding "extensive evidence", these were words you used in a message to me
in the following paragraph:

"That leaves your belief that the people of Serbia did not want to overthrow
the Milosevic gang, and that the appearance that they did was result of a
pay off from the West.  That runs counter to any evidence I know, and since
you present none (nor has anyone else, to my knowledge), I can't comment.
In fact, it's hard to think of other examples to which such a version of
events would apply.  I remain open to evidence; not to unsupported
assertion that runs counter to extensive evidence."

To the contrary, I wonder if the people of Serbia (and Nicaragua) wouldn't
find "extremely insulting" the idea that it took U.S. military intervention
and terror to show them the light about who their proper political
leadership should be.

Richard Hugus



Dear Mr. Hugus,

I have taken the trouble to respond carefully to every charge and claim you
made about what I had written.  In each case what you wrote was based on
gross misquotation, misreading, or falsification of fact, as I pointed out
to you in careful detail.  Surely you can understand that it is not my
responsiblity to document for you statements I make in letters -- which, in
fact, you can easily verify if you like.  For example, you might begin by
paying attention to the discussion and debate proceeding within left
dissident circles in Serbia, or you might ask yourself whether the results
of the parliamentary elections are also the result of the people of Serbia
blindly following their masters in Washington, as you claim.  It is also not
my responsibility to explain to you why your astonishing conclusions are a
profound insult to the people of Nicaragua and Serbia.  I've done far more
than courtesy requires.  I have already tried to explain, politely, that
unless you can find something sensible to say I am not going to continue
this correspendence.  I receive hundreds of letters a day from people who
really are serious, and though you may have endless time to waste, I don't.

NC


Professor Chomsky,

Thanks for telling me how polite you've been. You're joking, of course. I
can't count one of your messages that hasn't had some insult or other. I've
done my best to ignore them.

Let's put aside the question of whether the people of Yugoslavia freely
chose the majority DOS government they now have. Why do you think an
IMF/World Bank-friendly government is a positive development for Yugoslavia?

Richard Hugus



I'll be happy to answer as soon as you respond to an equally rational
question: tell me why YOU think that an IMF-WB-friendly government is a
positive development not only for Yugoslavia but for the entire world, and
when you are going to apply for a job with them, since you so plainly think
so.

Apologies.  It's not an equally rational question; rather, much more
rational.  After all, I don't know for certain that you regard the
presupposition about your beliefs as ludicrous, but you do know for certain
that your presupposition about my beliefs is ludicrous -- at least if you
have read the single passage from my article that you chose to misrepresent
in chapter one of your inquisition.

I'm afraid I cannot continue this.  I'm sure you can find other people to
harass inventions about what you'd like to believe, for some reason, that
they have written.

NC



Professor Chomsky,

Yes, you've clearly expressed your opposition to the IMF and World Bank. You
have also supported elections in Yugoslavia which have brought the
Democratic Opposition of Serbia to power.The DOS is compliant with the IMF
and World Bank. This is a contradiction.

Richard Hugus


Or to put it more accurately, the challenge you posed made no sense at all,
and you want to try something new, continuing the pattern.  Your new
question is why I supported an electoral outcome that is compliant with the
IFIs.  That question has the same answer as the earlier one: I didn't.  I
preferred an outcome that opposed such compliance, as the article you have
been trying to find something wrong with made completely explicit.  But I
didn't vote in Yugoslavia.

The issue is a completely different one: were the people who voted against
Milosevic in the presidential and (more dramatically) parliamentary
elections expressing their own wishes, or were they slavishly following
Washington's orders, as you believe (same in Nicaragua)?  Given your beliefs
about the matter, you are wasting not only my time but yours: you should be
agitating on the streets of Belgrade in favor of Milosevic, or if you don't
want to do that, at least organizing pro-Milosevic support groups and
actions, and doing what you can to make sure that your pro-Milosevic message
is heard among the great majority of the population who support him, so they
will know that they are not alone, and need not grovel before Uncle Sam.

Alternatively, if your commitment is solely to harassment, find some other
target.

NC









-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 31639 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010213/bf32dee8/attachment.txt>

From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb 12 19:08:41 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:08:41 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Deregulation: part 1
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102130108170.3740-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk>
References: <000601c09557$e185a760$93bd6ac2@andrej>
Message-ID: <200102130208.VAA29252@menyapa.cc.columbia.edu>

Until recently whenever the subject of "deregulation" came up on
television, my eyes tended to glaze over. It was typical McNeil-Lehrer
fare, usually some liberal Democrat or PIRG staffer facing off a Texas
Congressman named something like Bob Clyde Wyatt Junior who argued that
unless the government got out of the way of "bidness," the economy would
collapse.

All that changed when the rolling blackouts began in California this winter
leaving millions of people without electricity. That phenomenon has
triggered a lot of discussion, with rightwingers arguing that the problem
is that the deregulation did not go far enough and liberals calling for a
return to control of the utilities and the power companies that supply them.

In California, the utilities, which are still regulated, sell to the public
as has been true traditionally. However, the companies that supply the raw
power--the wholesalers in effect--are totally unregulated and may not even
be located in the state. These private, unregulated suppliers appear to be
run by men like the character Harry Lime in Graham Green's "The Third Man"
who made a fortune selling tainted penicillin in post-WWII Vienna.

In keeping with Graham Green's sense of skullduggery, we discover
conspiracies galore in California, or at least intimations of such. When I
posted an item to the Marxism list from the computer trade press alleging
that the blackout is tied to a spike in Internet electricity usage, Michael
Perelman replied that this was disinformation spread by the coal companies!
At least nobody can blame it on the Communists any more.

Over the past week or so, as I have begin to think more and more about
these issues, a number of questions began to take shape. First of all, why
would the ruling class allow such a threat to the ongoing stability of
capital accumulation take place? Wasn't it foolish to allow greedy,
essentially small-time power companies get in the way of the functioning of
Silicon Valley, agribusiness, the entertainment industry and everything
else that is synonymous with California? Was it possible that the whole
thing was just meant to scare the state into anteing up more money for
power? If so, what was the answer? More regulation in the Ralph Nader vein?
Or was it possible that the changes taking place in California were
symptomatic of deeper changes in the capitalist economy, *not* amenable to
policy review or reform?

It seemed that many of these developments lent themselves to Jim O'Connor's
"Second Contradiction" thesis, notwithstanding his erroneous conviction
that these kinds of destabilizing events in the public arena will in
themselves prove sufficient to jar the ruling class into structural reform.
This, after all, is a ruling class that risked nuclear war with the USSR in
order to regain control of sugar and tobacco assets in Cuba. Sort of like
cutting off your nose to spite your face.

So to answer those questions, I am embarking on a series of posts examining
the whole "deregulation" question, with looks at least these specific
areas: transportation, communications, public utilities and finance. More
topics may be added as I become more familiar with the terrain.

In this first post I want to look at the historical background which led to
regulation itself. Much of the data is derived from Daniel Yergin's "The
Commanding Heights", a 1998 Simon and Schuster book that is fairly
intoxicated with the whole movement toward "neoliberalism" and
"globalization". Although Yergin's ideology is completely false and
obnoxious, he does at least come up with some interesting background
information, unlike the awful Thomas Friedman of the NY Times, another
neoliberalism/globalization cheerleader, who hasn't had an interesting
thing to say in the past quarter century. He seems to be vying for the A.M.
Rosenthal memorial chair.

>From Yergin we learn that the first attempts at regulation originate with
the Interstate Commerce Commission of the late 1800s, an attempt to reign
in the railroad industry which had virtually on its own created the
populist radicalization. To counteract the robber barons, a board of 5
commissioners were elected to staggered six-year terms. This effort was
supported by figures such as Theodore Roosevelt, who was the first to use
the term "muckrakers", borrowed from Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress."

A key figure in the early days of regulation was "the people's lawyer of
the Progressive Era," Louis Brandeis. Brandeis was not that impressed with
Teddy Roosevelt, whom he regarded as being in favor of "regulated
monopoly", while he was in favor of "regulated competition". Needless to
say, such figures never considered removing the source of the evil: private
ownership of the means of production.

Regulation fell somewhat out of favor during the 1920s, the so-called "Jazz
Age", which was not unlike our own greed-infested, philistine 1970s, 80s,
90s and on, mingling disco, rap and other escapist popular art forms with
worship of real estate, mutual funds and situation comedies. Even Lincoln
Steffens, the best-known muckraker, got on board, declaring that "big
business in America is producing what the Socialists held up as their goal:
food, shelter, clothing for all." One might regard Steffens as a kind of
premature market socialist.

All of a sudden capitalism became less fashionable after the Great Stock
Market Crash of 1929.

Perhaps no more apt symbol of the excesses of 1920s capitalism was one
Samuel Insull, the Michael Milken of his day. Insull, like the sharks in
present-day California, built a complex and bewildering corporate pyramid
out of power utilities that left investors penniless and consumers in
misery. His chicanery gave birth to a word "Insullism" that inspired John
Dos Passos to devote a section to him in the final pages of "The Big
Money," the concluding installment in the great USA trilogy:

"Samuel Insull landed in America on a raw March day in eighty-one.
Immediately he was taken out to Menlo Park, shown about the little group of
laboratories, saw the strings of electriclightbulbs shining at intervals
across the snowy lots, all lit from the world?s first central electric
station. Edison put him right to work and he wasn?t through till midnight.
Next morning at six he was on the job; Edison had no use for any nonsense
about hours or vacations. Insull worked from that time on until he was
seventy without a break; no nonsense about hours or vacations. Electric
power turned the ladder into an elevator.

"Young Instill made himself indispensable to Edison and took more and more
charge of Edison?s business deals. He was tireless, ruthless, reliable as
the tides, Edison used to say, and fiercely determined to rise.

"In ninetytwo he induced Edison to send him to Chicago and put him in as
president of the Chicago Edison Company. Now he was on his own. My
engineering, he said once in a speech, when he was sufficiently czar of
Chicago to allow himself the luxury of plain speaking, has been largely
concerned with engineering all I could out of the dollar.

"He was a stiffly arrogant redfaced man with a close-cropped mustache; he
lived on Lake Shore Drive and was at the office at 7:10 every morning. It
took him fifteen years to merge the five electrical companies into the
Commonwealth Edison Company. Very early I discovered that the first
essential, as in other public utility business, was that it should be
operated as a monopoly.

"When his power was firm in electricity he captured gas, spread out into
the surrounding townships in northern Illinois. When politicians got in his
way, he bought them, when laborleaders got in his way he bought them.
Incredibly his power grew. He was scornful of bankers, lawyers were his
hired men. He put his own lawyer in as corporation counsel and through him
ran Chicago. When he found to his amazement that there were men (even a
couple of young lawyers, Richberg and Ickes) in Chicago that he couldn?t
buy, he decided he?d better put on a show for the public;

	Big Bill Thompson, the Builder:
	punch King George in the nose,
	the hunt for the treeclimbing fish,
	the Chicago Opera.

"It was too easy; the public had money, there was one of them born every
minute, with the founding of Middlewest Utilities in nineteen twelve Insull
began to use the public?s money to spread his empire. His companies began
to have open stockholders? meetings, to ballyhoo service, the small
investor could sit there all day hearing the bigwigs talk. It?s fun to be
fooled. Companyunions hypnotized his employees; everybody had to buy stock
in his companies, employees had to go out and sell stock, officeboys,
linemen, trolleyconductors. Even Owen D. Young was afraid of him. My
experience is that the greatest aid in the efficiency of labor is a long
line of men waiting at the gate."

In an attempt to forestall proletarian revolution, all sorts of measures
were adopted by FDR's New Deal. Some of these fell in the category of
social welfare, while others were in the regulation vein embraced by his
uncle Theodore at the turn of the century. The New Deal considered
regulation a lesser evil to nationalization, which was generally the
solution backed in countries where there was a strong labor movement and
working class parties.

One of the first targets of the regulators was the finance industry, which
was widely seen as the cause of the Great Crash. So the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) was created and Joseph Kennedy, the bootlegger,
slumlord and financier-thief, was put in charge of it. When critics
complained that Kennedy (father of Jack, Robert and Ted) was a master
speculator, FDR blithely responded that it was all to the good, since
Kennedy knew the tricks of the trade. Later on Ted Kennedy would follow the
example of his father by using his senatorial powers to deregulate
transportation. In either case--regulation or deregulation--a particular
ruling class family would find itself looking after the interests of the
class as a whole.

Overseeing the creation of the SEC was one James Landis, the son of
missionaries, who became one of the "prophets of regulation" in the words
of historian Thomas McCraw. After designing the SEC, Landis moved on to
create the Public Utility Holding Act of 1935, which laid the groundwork
for the Federal Power Commission, at whose doorsteps the current crisis in
California can be placed. The SEC and the FPC were soon joined by the FCC
(communications) and Civil Aeronautics Board.

Landis explained the purpose of all these regulatory commissions in "The
Administrative Process," a bible for regulators. They would in effect
constitute a fourth branch of government, designed to protect the public
interest against predatory corporations. Not only would they protect the
capitalist system from the shocks and abuses of individual corporations,
they would help the ruling class foster the illusion that solutions to
working people's problems could be forthcoming short of the adoption of
socialism. As FDR said, "I am against private socialism as thoroughly as I
am against governmental socialism. The one is equally dangerous as the
other; and destruction of private socialism is utterly essential to avoid
governmental socialism."

In my next post I will take a look at the deregulation of transportation.


Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Mon Feb 12 13:50:20 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:50:20 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] He and She
Message-ID: <sa88063c.005@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> aabdo at webtv.net 02/12/01 03:39PM >>>
One of the 'problems of communism' that keeps cropping up around the
world is the problem of nepotism.      That's right.      How many of us
commies have even given it any thought? 

(((((((((

CB: Actually , I just drafted an anti-nepotism ordinance for the City of Detroit as follows:

                                    Summary

This proposed ordinance amends Chapter 2, Article IV of the Detroit City Code by adding subsection 2-6-67 (B) to prohibit the hiring or appointment of relatives by the hiring or appointing authority.

By COUNCIL MEMBER NICOLAS HOOD

AN ORDINANCE to amend Chapter 2, Article IV of the Detroit City Code by adding subsection 2-6-67 (B) to prohibit the hiring or appointment of relatives by a public servant.

IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF DETROIT THAT:

Section 2-6-67 is amended as follows:


Section 2-6-67 Self-interested regulation prohibited.

(A) A public servant shall not make a loan of public funds, grant a subsidy, fix a rate, issue a license permit or certificate or otherwise regulate supervise or participate in a decision that pertains to an entity of which the public servant or a member of his or her immediate family has an ownership interest.

(B)
  (1) A PUBLIC SERVANT SHALL NOT HIRE , APPOINT, OR RETAIN BY CONTRACT FOR PERSONAL OR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES  A RELATIVE FOR EMPLOYMENT OR APPOINTMENT WITH THE CITY OF DETROIT

(2) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL PROHIBIT THE INDIRECT APPROVALS BY THE CITY COUNCIL , BY VIRTUE OF A VOTE,  OR ACTION BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT  OF HIRES, APPOINTMENTS OR CONTRACTS FOR PERSONAL OR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN OTHER BRANCHES, DEPARTMENTS OR AGENCIES





But people really hate nepotism in politics.      And a system that
seems dependent on it, or that is promoting it in some form or another,
quickly loses the people's political respect.     In the US, I can name
4 huge examples right off the cuff.

Dubya!     Dummie son, reads off cheat cards, daddy got him off......
and in.      Brother stole the election for dummie.     Couldn't do shit
on his own.

Hillary!    Feminist shrew.     The brains and balls behind slick
willlie, tom cat.... got his dick stuck in a thong.     Oh my god, could
she be the next president?    PC, NOW, New CiC....of US.army with its
balls cut off!     Tame, and slightly chubby, kind of like big mac
hubby.    Say a prayer.

Patty.     Little girl my foot.    Married her body guard.     Daddy's
little girl.   Out in no time.      Brainwashed by SLA.
Boo-hoo-hoo..... Citizen Kane.

Kennedy Klan.     Cherub faced, pontificating papist-betrayers of the
cause.      Hate that namby, wamby accent.    Clean cut catholic school
kids with their nasty little wanks.     Onassis.    Rapist. Got off
scott free with drowning and beach affair, and White House affairs.
Young and part of the beautiful people.     Martyrs, JC on the cross
with MLK.    Mafia.     Cruising on, Joseph.

But none of these nepotic families totally dominate the national scene.
Not yet, at least.     But what about the brothers two, dad and son, and
he and she (and their idiotic family, as Andrej put it)?      The
'hardliner-wife'?     Discoteque kiddy.    Sandinista sunglasses.
Setting The Balkan pace? 

And the island?    How stable is a new society run by brother?     Think
about it from a Cuban perspective.     Is it all in the family?     And
nothing more?     

Korea.   The inheritance.      Father to son......      Meanwhile people
are asked to sacrifice and suffer for the national good?

These are not good situations.     We may like to sluff it off, but
other, less generous souls will not.     They will see it as an immense
form of corruption.

A new society has to build on more than this.      It is a 'problem of
communism' in degeneration/ stagnation.

Tony

P.S.- Lou, I am sorry if I am weak on the Lexis-Nexis approach to
politics.  ________________________________
I must stress the importance of documenting such charges, since so much
of the perception of Yugoslavia and Milosevic seems framed by
free-wheeling assertions. Unless we can substantiate charges such as
dragging Yugoslavia into war through material from scholarly histories
or Lexis-Nexis, then the discussion simply will consist of mere
opinionating. As Jonathan Swift once said: 
"That was excellently observed," say I when I read a passage in another
where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, then I pronounce him
to be mistaken.










_______________________________________________
CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base



From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Tue Feb 13 08:54:37 2001
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:54:37 -0600
Subject: [CrashList] He and She
References: <sa88063c.005@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>
Message-ID: <3A8958AF.1A8A7D5A@ilstu.edu>


Charles Brown wrote:
> 
> >>> aabdo at webtv.net 02/12/01 03:39PM >>>
> One of the 'problems of communism' that keeps cropping up around the
> world is the problem of nepotism.   

One of the problems of class society, including the
movements of resistance it generates, is nepotism. Big
fucking deal. And the sky is blue when it isn't some
other color, Buenos Aires is not in Kerala, and the
endless squeals of self-hating leftists get boring as hell.

Carrol



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Tue Feb 13 11:16:11 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 15:16:11 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] He and She
In-Reply-To: <3A8958AF.1A8A7D5A@ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <091421116180d21MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a Re: [CrashList] He and She, 
el 13 Feb 01, a las 9:54, Carrol Cox dijo:

> Buenos Aires is not in Kerala

Of course. It is in Brazil, as everybody knows.

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Mon Feb 12 13:47:38 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:47:38 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Science decodes human mystery
Message-ID: <sa88059a.086@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

 Science decodes human mystery 

Gene sleuths explain how we're designed 



There has been a renewed confirmation of the remarkable unity of humanity, regardless of race, gender or nationality.

Every person shares 99.99 percent of his or her genetic code with all other people, a paper in the journal Science reports. And people from different racial groups can have more in common genetically than people of the same race. The other research will be presented in the journal Nature.



February 12, 2001

BY ROBERT S. BOYD
FREE PRESS WASHINGTON STAFF

WASHINGTON -- Heralding a new era in biology and medicine, two rival teams of scientists are to present today their first interpretations of the human genome, the complex set of minuscule instructions that specify a person.

These initial findings on how humans are built -- the first since the breaking of the genetic code was announced in June -- will be published later this week in two scientific journals. Among the findings:



Humans have about 30,000 genes, far fewer than the 100,000 or so that were expected and barely twice as many as the fruit fly.


There has been a renewed confirmation of the remarkable unity of humanity, regardless of race, gender or nationality.

Every person shares 99.99 percent of his or her genetic code with all other people, a paper in the journal Science reports. And people from different racial groups can have more in common genetically than people of the same race. The other research will be presented in the journal Nature.


"It is clear that what is called 'race,' although culturally important, reflects just a few traits determined by a tiny fraction of our genes," said the author of the Science paper, Svante Paabo, a German expert on evolutionary genetics.


These first comprehensive portraits of the human genetic code allow "some questions to be resolved and new mysteries to emerge," the lead paper in Nature declares.


The 40 scientific reports are the first fruits of an intensive effort by researchers around the world to make sense of -- and find practical uses for -- the listing of most of the 3 billion bases in the human genetic code.


The entire code is known as the genome. A copy of the genome, the famous double helix of DNA, is coiled up in every cell in the body. It contains the instructions for building that cell and making it do its job.


The reports, totaling hundreds of pages accompanied by colorful tables and charts, come a little more than half a year after rival teams of public and private researchers around the globe announced that they separately had determined the proper order, or sequence, of 95 percent of the bases -- A's, C's, G's and T's -- that make up the human genetic alphabet.


One of the teams, a 16-nation public consortium, headed by the University of Michigan's Francis Collins, will publish its preliminary analysis of the genome in Thursday's edition of Nature, a British journal. Collins is on leave from the school to be director of the U.S. National Institute of Health's Human Genome Project.


The other group is a private team headed by Craig Venter, chief executive officer of Celera Genomics Corp. The team's reports will be published in Friday's edition of Science, a publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.


The reports were not supposed to be made public until today, but a British newspaper, the Observer, violated the embargo on Sunday.


Although the two teams used different methods, their portraits of the genome are almost identical.


"Never before have we published a collection of papers as informative or as breathtaking in the scope of what it reveals about human life," said Nature's editor in chief, Philip Campbell. "Every editor dreams of a day like today."


Eric Lander, a geneticist at the Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass., wrote in Nature: "We find it humbling to gaze upon the human sequence as it comes into focus. In principle, the string of genetic bits holds long-sought secrets of human development, physiology and medicine. In practice, our ability to transform such information into understanding remains woefully inadequate."


Several of the reports acknowledged that sequencing the genome is only the beginning of a vast scientific enterprise. Genes, they say, are only a parts list for the construction of a human being.


Genes provide the instructions for making the proteins -- far more numerous and complicated biological compounds -- that do the real work of building tissue and making organs function properly.


As a result, research on proteins -- known as proteomics -- is now exploding in government, academic and commercial laboratories.


"The future belongs to proteomics," Stanley Fields, a researcher at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Seattle wrote in Science.


A major puzzle in the reports is how a relatively few genes can produce the far greater number of proteins a human being requires. The latest estimates of the gene population range from 23,000 to 39,000, but the final number is expected to be around 30,000.


The low count means that a person has barely twice as many genes as a fruit fly , less than twice as many as a worm -- and only five times as many as a single-celled bacterium. A common roadside weed, thale cress, has 26,000 genes, almost as many as a person.


((((((((

Key discoveries 

February 12, 2001

Humans have only about 30,000 genes, much lower than the 100,000 or so genes scientists were expecting. 

 Inherited genetic mutations arise about twice as often in men than in women.

Scientists are finding that genes instruct numerous proteins to build tissue and organs. The study of proteins is booming.
 
)))))))))

What does it all mean? 

February 12, 2001




So science now knows much about our genes -- with so much more that needs to be learned. What will be the effect?


 Cures: Mental illness, addiction, and even criminal traits  ( Yuk  !!!!! -CB )can be found inside the genetic code. 


"Ultimately, the human genome sequence will revolutionize psychology and psychiatry," said Dr. Peter McGuffin, coauthor of an analysis in the upcoming edition of the journal Science.


McGuffin, a researcher at the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College in London, and other experts contend that finding genes that influence behavior may lead to drugs that can treat or prevent some of society's major problems.


"The sequencing of the human genome will improve our ability to identify the genetic risk factors ...for a whole variety of conditions, from addiction to criminality to antisocial personality," said Dr. Eric Nestler, chairman of the department of psychiatry, University of Texas, Southwest Medical Center in Dallas. "This is going to be an enormous advance for this field."


Instead of the current one-size-for-all pharmaceuticals, itis possible for drugs to be specifically tailored to fit the unique pattern of genes in an individual patient, McGuffin said.


Fixing the problems early: Mutations in the human genome predispose or cause at least 1,500 conditions, ranging from diabetes and asthma to cancer and heart disease.


The connection between gene mutation and disease will become much clearer now, experts say.


In the future, newborns may be screened for treatable genetic diseases and "children at high risk of coronary artery disease can be identified and treated to prevent changes in their vascular walls during adulthood," thus preventing heart attacks, according to Dr. Leena Peltonen of the University of California at Los Angeles, and Dr. Victor McKusick at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.


It may now be possible, said Barbara Trask of the Hutchinson Cancer Center for medical science to pinpoint in each patient the genes that have gone awry and caused cancer, and then to design a treatment specifically for that problem.


(((((((
Experts, patients fear discrimination 

Gene info could sway employers and insurers 
February 12, 2001

BY PAUL RECER
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON -- Mapping the human genome opens a new era for medical science -- and a new frontier for potential discrimination.



New genetic research may make it possible to identify an individual's lifetime risk of cancer, heart attack and other diseases. Experts say they worry that this information could also be used to discriminate in hiring, promotions or insurance.


Employers and insurers could save millions of dollars if they could use predictive genetics to identify in advance, and then reject, workers or policy applicants who are predisposed to develop chronic disease.


Thus, genetic discrimination could join the list of other forms of discrimination: racial, ethnic, age and gender. 


Fear of such discrimination already is affecting how people view the medical revolution promised by mapping the human genome. A Time/CNN poll found last summer that 75 percent of 1,218 people in the United States surveyed did not want insurance companies to know their genetic code, and 84 percent wanted that information withheld from the government.


"There has been widespread fear that an individual's genetic information will be used against them," said Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn. To improve the quality of health care, "we must begin taking steps to eliminate patients' fears," said Frist, the only physician in the Senate.


A recent national survey of 2,133 employers by the American Management Association found that seven are using genetic testing for either job applicants or employees, according to the journal Science.


Many experts contend the only solution to potential genetic discrimination is a new federal law that specifically prohibits it.


Frist and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, are planning to introduce legislation that would prevent insurance companies from requiring genetic testing and ban the use of genetic information to deny coverage or to set rates.


A similar bill, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination in Health Insurance Act, passed the Senate in 2000 as part of an appropriations bill, but the provision later was removed.


Writing this week in the journal Science, Sens. James Jeffords, R-Vt., and Tom Daschle, D-S.D., say they both favor legislation prohibiting genetic discrimination.




From aabdo at webtv.net  Tue Feb 13 13:17:35 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 12:17:35 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: He and She
In-Reply-To: Carrol Cox <cbcox@ilstu.edu>'s message of Tue, 13 Feb 2001
	09:54:23 -0600
Message-ID: <13685-3A89965F-6862@storefull-236.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

<Buenos Aires is not in Kerala, and the endless squeals of self-hating
leftists get boring as hell.> 
Carrol

Carrol, I have been encouraged not to engage in a flame war.       So
changing the subject, here is yet another commentary provoked by the
book ..Fast Food Nation..      I hope that it is of interest.

Comradely, Tony
_________________________________

FEATURE-Author finds new meat 'Jungle' in High Plains 12 Feb 2001 15:05 
By Timothy Gardner 

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Jurgis Rudkus has walked off the pages of Upton
Sinclair's classic 1906 novel "The Jungle" and reemerged as a Mexican
migrant laborer drifting from factory to factory in rural Nebraska and
Colorado. 

Rudkus, a Lithuanian immigrant meatpacker toiling in Chicago stockyards,
was the hero of Sinclair's novel. The writer's portrayal of him sweeping
up guts from the kill room floor and shoveling pulverized bone for
fertilizer so disturbed President Theodore Roosevelt that he ordered an
independent investigation, which led to the passage of the Pure Food and
Drug Act of 1906. 

In the 1930s, unionization swept through the meatpacking industry, and
for decades meat jobs were well paid, came with health insurance and led
to stable communities. But that has all changed, according to Eric
Schlosser, author of "Fast Food Nation," published by Houghton Mifflin.
The industry has consolidated and moved its factories from the city to
the U.S. High Plains. In the late 1970s, the top four beef companies
controlled about 20 percent of the market; now they control more than 80
percent, Schlosser said. A return to poor working conditions in this
period is not only bad for laborers but ultimately dangerous to
consumers, he added. 

In 1995, Schlosser, an Atlantic Monthly correspondent, wrote a story
about Latin American migrant strawberry laborers in California. Rolling
Stone magazine editors read it and asked him to write about fast food in
the United States, leading to his new book, which spent six week under
review in Houghton Mifflin's legal department before publication. On
arriving in meatpacking towns, Schlosser would meet with migrant workers
from Mexico and Guatemala. Many of them were illiterate in English or
Spanish, which made it hard for them to work together or organize to
make conditions better, he said. "In Lexington, Nebraska, this Norman
Rockwell-esque town, I met Guatemalan Indians who barely spoke Spanish,"
he said. Many meatworkers are lured to the United States from Mexico by
Spanish radio advertisements paid for by U.S. meat companies, which bus
the workers to factories in the rural United States. 

RECRUITING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS? 
"I'm not going to say they deliberately recruit illegal immigrant labor,
but they recruit immigrant labor," Schlosser said. In one instance
documented by local media, a beef company bused workers from the Mexican
border to a Minneapolis homeless shelter. 

Meatpacking now employs just under 150,000 people, and the Immigration
and Naturalization Services estimates one quarter of the workers in
Nebraska and Iowa are illegal immigrants. 

Since migrant workers, legal or not, rarely spend more than a year in
one factory, most slaughterhouse workers are without health insurance.
They also accept lower wages. 

"We've gone backward," Schlosser said. "The wages in one Greeley,
Colorado, plant now are 30 to 40 percent lower than when the plant
opened in 1961. That's not supposed to happen." He read trade journals
and federal hearings to investigate insurance practices. In a 1994
article praising beef companies for minimizing insurance costs, one
executive confirmed his firm's slaughterhouses had a 100 percent annual
turnover. 

Schlosser interviewed workers, former supervisors and nurses, and
physicians who treated worker's injuries. They told him workers were
pressured to hide injuries, which cut their companies' insurance
burdens. 

"If the injury seems more serious, a Mexican worker is often given the
opportunity to return home for a while, to recuperate there, then come
back to his or her slaughterhouse job in the United States," he wrote.
Court documents show several of the largest companies kept two sets of
injury records, one for themselves and one for the U.S. Occupational
Safety and Health Administration. 

DANGER FOR WORKERS CAN MAKE MEALS DANGEROUS Meatpacking is the most
dangerous job in America. In 1998, the latest available statistics, at
least 29.3 percent of meatworkers suffered injury or illness, compared
to 9.7 percent for the rest of manufacturing, the Labor Department
reported. Unlike the chicken processing industry, automation in beef
packing plants is limited because cattle come in all shapes and sizes
and the knife remains the most important tool. 

Companies are under enormous pressure to speed up their lines, which can
lead to injuries and dangerous food, Schlosser wrote. "The three meat
packing giants -- ConAgra, IBP and Excel (the meat division of Cargill
Inc.) -- try to increase their earnings by maximizing the volume of
production at each plant." 

A former meat factory nurse told Schlosser: "I could always tell the
line speed by the number of people with lacerations coming into my
office." 

Speeding up lines can also mean workers have no time to clean or sharpen
their knives, which can lead to repetitive stress injuries and,
ultimately, dirty food. These conditions have already led to health
risks, particularly in eating hamburger, Schlosser writes, because
ground beef is more exposed to dirty working environments than meat
chops are. 

Since fast food chains, a $110 billion business, buy most of the
country's beef, people who eat fast food are most at risk, said
Schlosser, who ate at fast food chains during his travels while writing
the book and still eats beef, but not hamburgers. "I'm not coming at
this as a radical vegetarian," he said. Cattle intestines often carry
dangerous pathogens such as E. coli and are supposed to be kept away
from meat, but faster lines can lead to more intestinal spillage onto
meat, he said. 

Slaughterhouse workers told him they looked forward to packing beef
bound for the European Union, because companies slowed the lines then so
the meat would pass stricter EU inspections. 

Schlosser sees stronger meatpacking unions as one possible solution.
"There's no question that in some industries unions have become
corrupted and a source of inefficiency and operate more like organized
crime than a workers' rights group," he said. "But if there was ever an
industry in this country that needed more unions, it's this one." Last
summer, McDonald's fast food chain announced a strict policy on how its
suppliers treat live chickens in a campaign called "Be Kind to Hens" --
a response to protests from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. 

"McDonald's has instituted some strict rules for its suppliers on how
livestock should be treated," Schlosser said, "but what they really need
to do is institute strict rules for their suppliers on how human beings
should be treated." ( ) 

COPYRIGHT: ? 2000 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.












From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Tue Feb 13 14:00:05 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:00:05 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Bush's original affirmative action
Message-ID: <sa895a05.071@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

The Affirmative-Action President's Dilemma 
by  David B. Wilkins    
February 7, 2001, Chicago  Tribune

It is common knowledge that President Bush was not much of a student.  Although the facts of his lack of academic  distinction--at Phillips Academy in Andover,  Mass., Yale University and Harvard Business  School--are well known, few people have  stopped to ask a seemingly obvious question:  How did someone with mediocre grades get  admitted to two of this nation's most  prestigious universities? With respect to  Yale, the answer is plain. George W. Bush was  admitted to Yale because his father, George  Herbert Walker Bush, and his grandfather,  Prescott Bush, were prominent alumni.  Giving  preferential treatment to the children of  alumni is standard practice at most elite  institutions of higher learning. University  officials claim these "legacy admittees"  strengthen their schools by creating  continuity across the generations and building  a loyal alumni base. This justification  parallels the most commonly articulated  defense for affirmative action in minority  admissi!
ons. But Bush and many of his  supporters have expressed skepticism--and in  the case of U.S. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft,  outright hostility--for affirmative-action  policies for minority students while saying  virtually nothing about the affirmative help  routinely given to alumni children. 

The  president's admirers who oppose affirmative  action for minorities might try to avoid this  uncomfortable analogy by offering a different  justification for Yale's decision. During the  campaign, those supporting Bush typically  chalked up his academic difficulties to  youthful indiscretion, emphasizing instead his  record in business and as governor of Texas.  Judged from the perspective of his post-  graduation accomplishments, his defenders  implicitly assert, Yale's decision to admit  the future president was a wise one. 

The  empirical record, however, belies any attempt  to distinguish the two forms of affirmative  action on the basis of post-graduation  success. The overwhelming majority of minority  students who benefit from affirmative action  in university admissions also go on to become  productive and public-spirited citizens. In  the most comprehensive study to date, former  university presidents William Bowen and  Derrick Bok conclude that black students from  selective colleges and universities lead  successful and rewarding careers that parallel  those of their white classmates. A recent  study of the University of Michigan Law  School's minority graduates reaches a similar  conclusion. Indeed, the post-graduation  success of minority students who neither enjoy  Bush's ready access to circles of power, nor  the automatic assumption of competence that  still is attached to those who are white and  male, suggests that minorities actually get  more out of their education than their whi!
te  peers. 

Rather than seeking to distinguish  affirmative action for legacies from other  practices designed to tailor admissions  policies to meet university objectives, Bush  and his supporters would do better to ask what  the success of both kinds of affirmative  action says about the predictive value of the  "standard" criteria used to admit all  students. In the Michigan study, for example,  researchers found, with only one exception, no  statistically significant correlation for any  student between undergraduate grades and  scores on the Law School Admissions Test and  future income or public service. The exception  is the inverse correlation between test scores  and public service-- the higher a student's  LSAT score, the less likely he or she is to  engage in significant public service. These  findings suggest that law schools and other  educational institutions should re-examine  their admissions processes for all students.  

President Bush claims he wants to "leave  no child behind" and to "improve the tone in  Washington." Minorities might take this effort  more seriously if Bush were to acknowledge  forthrightly the role that legacy affirmative  action has played in his own life. Such candor  would go a long way toward persuading  minorities that the president really intends  to move beyond traditional Republican rhetoric  that brands any effort to aid minorities as  preferential treatment while ignoring  advantages routinely given to those already in  positions of power. 

Similarly, Bush's  pledge to leave no child behind would be more  credible if it were accompanied by an explicit  promise that the Bush Justice Department will,  notwithstanding the views of Atty. Gen.  Ashcroft, defend admissions policies that  ensure minority students have the same  opportunity to succeed as Bush was given when  he was admitted to Yale. 

Should Bush  yield to those on the right and attack  affirmative action for minorities while saying  nothing about legacy admissions, he will  reveal that compassionate conservatism has  almost nothing to do with practices that  promote diversity and everything to do with  policies that protect the children of  privilege. 

David B. Wilkins is a law  professor and director of the legal profession  program at Harvard Law School. 

Copyright  2001 Chicago Tribune 



From aabdo at webtv.net  Tue Feb 13 15:06:55 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:06:55 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Science decodes human mystery
In-Reply-To: "Charles Brown" <CharlesB@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us>'s message of Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:47:34 -0500
Message-ID: <4025-3A89AFFF-2141@storefull-234.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Short-haired scientists singing...... By and By, there will be pie in
the sky when you die......     This sort of happy, tech talk, is
standard course in the US.     We are all marching forward in progress
together!     Hallelujah!    Praise the Lord!

The passage below, is precisely the wrong approach to take in combatting
these two diseases, CAD and Cancer.      It detracts from admitting the
environmental causes of these disorders, and then doing something about
it.

It is a cover up and pitch for governmental monies to be directed into
new technology and development, to be used for yet new profiteering in
the 'Health Business'.

Tony Abdo
_______________________________ 
<Instead of the current one-size-for-all pharmaceuticals, it is possible
for drugs to be specifically tailored to fit the unique pattern of genes
in an individual patient, McGuffin said. 

Fixing the problems early: Mutations in the human genome predispose or
cause at least 1,500 conditions, ranging from diabetes and asthma to
cancer and heart disease. 

The connection between gene mutation and disease will become much
clearer now, experts say. 

In the future, newborns may be screened for treatable genetic diseases
and "children at high risk of coronary artery disease can be identified
and treated to prevent changes in their vascular walls during
adulthood," thus preventing heart attacks, according to Dr. Leena
Peltonen of the University of California at Los Angeles, and Dr. Victor
McKusick at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. 

It may now be possible, said Barbara Trask of the Hutchinson Cancer
Center for medical science to pinpoint in each patient the genes that
have gone awry and caused cancer, and then to design a treatment
specifically for that problem.>












From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Wed Feb 14 04:08:01 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:08:01 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] arctic oil?
Message-ID: <000201c09676$5c265fe0$be8c20d9@mjones>

Russia: Analysis From Washington -- Another Threat In The Arctic
By Paul Goble

Washington, 13 February 2001 (RFE/RL) -- A United Nations scientist said last 
week that global warming is destroying the permafrost layer in the Arctic, 
causing the tundra there to release greenhouse gases far more quickly than 
expected, threatening both industrial exploitation of the region and the 
lives of the indigenous peoples. 

Svein Tveidtal, a senior scientist of the UN Environmental Program, said that 
global warming is already causing "tremendous problems" in the Arctic and is 
likely to cause even more in the future. Rising temperatures there, he said, 
are causing the melting of the permafrost layer that has absorbed carbon 
dioxide in the past but now is releasing the kind of greenhouse gases that 
threaten the ozone layer.

And the release of such gases, Tveidtal said, then leads to even less 
retention of carbon dioxide in the Arctic, a thinner ozone shield in the 
upper atmosphere, and still more warming, a pattern that threatens to become 
an ever more vicious cycle in the first instance for the peoples of the high 
Arctic and then for the world community as a whole.

Because the destruction of the permafrost layer is likely to lead to a 
reduction in reindeer populations, Tveidtal said, the indigenous peoples are 
likely to find their traditional way of life under threat. The Russian 
Federation alone has some 200,000 such people, and there are also significant 
communities in Canada, Alaska, and Greenland.

Moreover, the thawing of the permafrost layer will threaten construction of 
buildings, pipelines, and other infrastructure erected there by outsiders 
seeking to exploit the region's enormous mineral reserves. Indeed, Tveidtal 
suggested, the loss of the permafrost layer may make it almost impossible to 
recover these reserves at current levels of technology.

And finally, what is happening with the Arctic's permafrost will have a 
spreading impact on the rest of the world not only because it will contribute 
to the destruction of the ozone layer but also because it may mean that the 
process of global warming -- over which there continue to be so many debates 
-- may proceed far more quickly than anyone had thought up to now.

For most of the last several hundred years during which outsiders have 
ventured into the Arctic, most of them have adopted an almost contemptuous 
attitude toward both the tundra and the people living there. Indeed, some 
observers have suggested that tundra is one of the few things almost anything 
will improve. And governments often have been unwilling to protect local 
people when money can be made from extractive industries. 

Many of the indigenous communities have seen their populations dwindle 
through disease, alcoholism, and the destruction of their traditional way of 
life, and, with only a few exceptions -- Canada being the most noteworthy -- 
the governments have done relatively little to protect these communities. 
Indeed, the attitude of many in these countries toward the northern peoples 
has been one of "adapt or die."

And these attitudes have only increased as more and more natural resources -- 
particularly oil -- are discovered in the region. Pressed by the more 
numerous populations in the lower latitudes, governments with Arctic 
populations have often taken the view that the economic needs of the majority 
should outweigh even the survival of traditional groups.

But the United Nations Environment Program's warning suggests that there are 
now additional reasons for these governments and indeed the international 
community to revisit the issue and to recognize that the processes of global 
warming may now be threatening populations in the temperate climatic regions 
both directly and even more through the impact of such warming on the Arctic 
region itself.

Only one wire service carried this story last week, an indication of the 
general neglect this issue has experienced up to now. But the problems that 
the story reported suggest that the melting of the permafrost may soon become 
an issue that no journalistic outlet and no government will be able to avoid.




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Wed Feb 14 05:48:17 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 09:48:17 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=28Spanish=29_Recent_research:_current_El_Ni=F1o_episodes_the_most_violent_in_130,000_years=3F?=
Message-ID: <037441748120e21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

Recent research on a coral reef off Huan Island, New Guinea, shows that the 
last El Ni?o episodes have been the worst known for 130,000 years. Though 
evidence is sparse and incomplete (scientists compare it with a few pages from 
a large book), the results are worth thinking about. Maybe comrades in 
Australia can give more information...


------- Forwarded message follows -------
To:             	<listageografia at yahoogroups.com>
From:           	"ljatoba" <ljatoba at ieg.com.br>
Date sent:      	Sun, 4 Feb 2001 17:53:49 -0200
Send reply to:  	listageografia at yahoogroups.com
Subject:        	[listageografia] El Nino

[ Double-click this line for list subscription options ] 

 -LA HISTORIA DE EL NI?O: El fen?meno meteorol?gico que llamamos El
Ni?o y que recientemente experiment? nuestro planeta, nunca hab?a sido tan
intenso como en esta ?ltima oportunidad. Esto es lo que nos revelan
antiguos arrecifes de coral del Pac?fico.


Utilizando fragmentos de antiguos arrecifes de coral como ventanas
que nos muestran la historia del clima, los ge?logos han descubierto que
nunca, durante los ?ltimos 130.000 a?os, el fen?meno meteorol?gico
denominado El Ni?o hab?a sido tan intenso como durante el ?ltimo siglo.

En la Pen?nsula Huon, de Nueva Guinea, existen una serie de
terrazas de arrecifes de coral que forman parte de una isla que se est?
levantando debido a los movimientos tect?nicos. Esto est? permitiendo a los
cient?ficos examinar muestras de arrecife que proceden de ?pocas tan antiguas
como 130.000 a?os atr?s. El an?lisis de las variaciones qu?micas e isot?picas 
en las muestras nos ha aportado se?ales de la existencia de al menos 14 
ventanas clim?ticas diferentes, cada una de ellas prolong?ndose entre 20 y 100 
a?os.

Para evaluar el comportamiento de El Ni?o durante los diferentes
reg?menes clim?ticos, se estudiaron per?odos fr?os de hace 40.000 a?os, y
per?odos calientes de hace 125.000 a?os. Dado que tenemos muchos datos de
El Ni?o correspondientes a los ?ltimos 100 a?os, sabemos que los per?odos
correspondientes a 1982-83 y 1997-98 han sido los m?s activos, no s?lo
durante el ?ltimo siglo, sino desde hace 130.000 a?os.

La informaci?n disponible indica que el comportamiento del Pac?fico
tropical durante los ?ltimos 100 a?os es at?pico, si lo comparamos con el
registro anterior, pero no se?ala los factores que modulan a El Ni?o. Los
cient?ficos creen que el calentamiento global estar?a relacionado con ello.

En la actualidad, se considera que El Ni?o es el resultado de
cambios meteorol?gicos a nivel mundial que ocurren despu?s de un incremento del
agua caliente en el Pac?fico oriental tropical.

Analizando la temperatura y la salinidad del agua, datos revelados
por los fragmentos de coral, es posible reconstruir el clima antiguo.
Adem?s de descubrir que El Ni?o no era tan potente en el pasado, se han
obtenido evidencias de que durante las edades del hielo su intensidad se
reduc?a a la mitad. Al contrario, en ?pocas c?lidas, su potencia aumentaba. Es
una pista m?s hacia la teor?a de que el calentamiento global puede ser el
responsable de la superior  actividad de El Ni?o durante las ?ltimas d?cadas 
del
siglo pasado.

Los cient?ficos advierten, sin embargo, que las 14 muestras
coralinas utilizadas no representan un per?odo de tiempo continuo, sino que
proceden de diferentes ?pocas. La historia completa, pues, no est? disponible,
como a un libro al que le faltaran p?ginas.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/1/_/717485/_/982152725/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

**********************************************
Para enviar mensagens para toda lista, escreva para:  
listageografia at eGroups.com Para informa??es "administrativas"-sair, mudar de
endere?o, etc:  pazera at zaz.com.br Arquivo autom?tico da lista (ordem
cronol?gica): http://br.egroups.com/messages/listageografia


------- End of forwarded message -------

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Wed Feb 14 06:03:26 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:03:26 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] (Spanish) A couple of interesting news
Message-ID: <0a6a42603130e21MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

Some news to put in perspective a recent fit of charlatanism.

(a) Former employees of the former National Oilfields Company YPF in Salta ask 
from the bourgeois President to help them legally obtain part of the money that 
is owed to them as a result of the ellimination of the company. How to square 
this with a "dual power" in Salta is a mystery to me...

SALTA, 14(PSI).- EX EMPLEADOS DE ?YPF? INTIMARON AL 
PRESIDENTE DE LA R?A. Los ex empleados de Yacimientos 
Petrol?feros Fiscales y de Gas del Estado ya ni quieren el subsidio de 
hasta 4.000 pesos que a fines de noviembre pasado les prometieron 
los miembros del ?Comit? de Crisis? del Gobierno nacional. El lunes 
firmaron un telegrama dirigido al presidente Fernando de la R?a, 
pidi?ndole que acelere el pago del 10 por ciento de las acciones de las 
ex empresas estatales correspondientes al Programa de Propiedad 
Participada (PPP).

Media hora de corte en dos puntos de la ruta nacional 34, entre 
General Mosconi y Salvador Mazza, y una posterior asamblea ante las 
puertas de la empresa Pluspetrol, constituyeron la forma de protesta 
elegida ayer por los ex empleados de Yacimientos Petrol?feros 
Fiscales y de Gas del Estado, quienes reclamaron por el 
incumplimiento del Gobierno nacional en el pago de un subsidio que 
hab?a sido comprometido por funcionarios nacionales.

Sin embargo, al t?rmino de la protesta, se resolvi? desistir del 
pedido de esta ayuda financiera de hasta 4.000 pesos que iba a 
beneficiar a 5.000 personas desvinculadas de YPF y Gas del Estado, 
tras su transformaci?n en una sociedad an?nima y la posterior venta 
a empresas privadas.

El reclamo esta vez est? orientado a apurar el pago del PPP, el 
porcentaje correspondiente a las acciones del Programa de Propiedad 
Participada que el Estado comercializ? a trav?s de la modalidad de 
oferta p?blica de acciones. 

En el Departamento San Mart?n hay unas 2.500 personas 
desvinculadas fundamentalmente de YPF que podr?an beneficiarse 
con un monto de 80.000 pesos cada una si se cumpliera con el pago 
del PPP. Este monto, como se sabe, fue propuesto a partir de la 
propuesta de acuerdo extrajudicial formulado al Estado nacional.

Ocurre que la causa est? en manos de la Justicia, m?s precisamente 
de la Corte Suprema, luego de dos fallos favorables que alentaron las 
expectativas de los ex empleados.

Estos ex trabajadores ayer se manifestaron en el norte provincial y 
enviaron, a trav?s de la conducci?n de la Mesa Coordinadora, una 
carta documento a trav?s de la cual emplazan al presidente Fernando 
de la R?a al pago del Programa de Propiedad Participada. La decisi?n 
fue adoptada luego de que el viceministro de Desarrollo Social, 
Gerardo Morales, rechazara la existencia de compromiso alguno para 
el pago de una ayuda econ?mica extraordinaria, como hab?a sido 
comprometido el pasado 27 de noviembre.

?Ese compromiso existe?, seg?n puntualiz? Roberto Gonz?lez, 
presidente de la Mesa Coordinadora. ?Ellos tratan de que nos 
peleemos entre los pobres. Por eso ahora los emplazamos, y si no hay 
respuesta, recurriremos a medidas m?s severas, como el corte de 
ruta?. ?No pedimos m?s subsidios ni ayuda , sino la deuda que el 
Estado mantiene con nosotros. La Corte de justicia no va a fallar 
porque hay muchos elementos extra?os; por eso es que ped?amos por 
un acuerdo extrajudicial, pero desde el Comit? de Crisis no hay 
voluntad de arreglar nada, sino que quieren solamente que cortemos 
la ruta?, dijo. Responsabiliz? de esta situaci?n a Gerardo Morales y al 
secretario de Provincias del Ministerio del Interior, Walter Ceballos.


Del mismo modo, Gonz?lez reclam? contra un legislador de su 
departamento que defendi? al Gobierno nacional sin escuchar el 
reclamo de los ex trabajadores de YPF. ?Los que votaron a ese 
legislador son personas del departamento y no los funcionarios 
nacionales; por eso es que repudiamos sus declaraciones?, expres?.- 
XXX

(b) Former Minister of Economy of Menem Roque Fern?ndez may be involved in the 
scandal of the bribes in the Argentinean Senate (this scandal welled out when 
it was denounced that the votes of the Senators for the new Labor Code were in 
many cases obtained against the reception of huge amounts of money distributed 
directly by the Alianza Government), says lawyer of the rebel (Moyano) CGT.

BUENOS AIRES, 14(PSI).- PIDEN CITAR A ROQUE FERN?NDEZ 
POR LAS COIMAS EN EL SENADO. El abogado de la CGT disidente 
H?ctor Recalde solicit? al juez federal Carlos Liporaci que cite a 
prestar declaraci?n testimonial al ex ministro de Econom?a, Roque 
Fern?ndez porque ?podr?a conocer las ilegales pr?cticas que se 
habr?an dado en el seno del Poder Legislativo?. Recalde efectu? la 
presentaci?n el lunes por la ma?ana y al hacerlo adjunt? un art?culo 
firmado por el periodista Joaqu?n Morales Sol?, en el que alude a 
presuntos pagos irregulares a legisladores.

Recalde tom? en cuenta las afirmaciones del periodista acerca de que 
?s?lo el ex ministro de Econom?a roque Fern?ndez acept? entre 
?ntimos que se encontr? en su despacho, cuando asumi?, con una lista 
de asignaciones fijas mensuales a unos ocho o nueve senadores 
decisivos en el manejo del cuerpo?.

Adem?s se?al? que seg?n ese art?culo period?stico ??se habr?a sido 
s?lo el piso de los recursos que percib?an los senadores de parte del 
gobierno; habr?an existido adem?s otros ministros que aportaban a 
las arcas personales de los senadores?.

Recalde ampli? la denuncia original, ya que el abogado fue 
responsable de una de las siete presentaciones judiciales, que se 
produjeron en agosto del 2000 cuando tom? estado p?blico la 
posibilidad de que en el Senado se hubieran pagado coimas para 
favorecer la sanci?n de la reforma a la ley Laboral.

Al referirse a Fern?ndez, Recalde adujo que encontr? como 
?conocedor de la ilegal pr?ctica tambi?n a un ex ministro de la 
Naci?n?, y que se vio ?en la obligaci?n de traer a conocimiento esta 
circunstancia, solicitando una vez m?s la amplia investigaci?n a los 
fines de arribar a la verdad?. Liporaci dispuso la falta de m?rito de 
once senadores para imputarlos o sobreseerlos en relaci?n con la 
investigaci?n sobre el presunto pago de sobornos en la C?mara alta.

Los fiscales Eduardo Freiler y Federico Delgado apelaron esa 
decisi?n en el caso de siete senadores y adem?s pidieron la 
indagatoria del ex presidente provisional del Senado Jos? Genoud. 

La presentaci?n del abogado laboralista estuvo acompa?ada de un 
ejemplar del libro ?El Divorcio? de mart?n Granovsky, en base al cual 
escribi? Morales Sol? el art?culo titulado ?Paso clave para acabar con 
el descr?dito? que dio origen a la ampliaci?n de la denuncia.

En la causa, Liporaci ya decidi? indagar al ex ministro de Trabajo, 
Alberto Flamarique el 20 de febrero; una semana m?s tarde ser? el 
turno del ex titular de la SIDE Fernando de Santiba?es y el 16 de 
marzo est? citado Genoud.- XXX


N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From zapata at sezampro.yu  Wed Feb 14 07:24:19 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:24:19 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Tariq Ali / Porto Alegre / Feb 10
Message-ID: <004e01c09691$40410080$f3bd6ac2@andrej>

Con Saludos,
       Andrej

> ====
>
> Porto Alegre
> By Tariq Ali
>
> The World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, in the deep South of Brazil was
more
> than a symbolic counter to Davos. The aim behind it was serious: to unite
> the Seattle generation with the Old Left and to think seriously about
> alternatives to neo-liberalism. It is an example from the American
continent
> for the rest of the world. It was North American students and trades
> unionists who came out on the streets of Seattle against capitalism. It is
> the South American left that is now demonstrating what can be achieved in
> practice.
>
> In that sense the polar contrast between cold, isolated Davos, beseiged by
> demonstraters and protected by the Swiss army on the one hand and the
> tropical warmth and openness of Porto Allegre  highlighted the gulf
between
> the two events. The province of Rio Grande Sul and the town is run by the
> left-wing of PT,  (the Brazilian  Workers Party) and a participatory
> democracy is at work. The local state is active. The mayor of Porto
Alegre,
> a self-confessed devotee of Antonio Gramsci, is confident that the PT's
> project has hegemonised a bulk of the population in the South. And not
just
> the South. In the recent mayoral elections in Brazil's largest city,  Sao
> Paulo (pop:14 million), Marta Sulpicy, a leading PT intellectual defeated
> the Right and took the  city against all predictions.
>
> It invests in schools and hospitals and infrastructural projects. This
> industrial port, the sixth largest city in Brazil with a population of one
> and a half million,  demonstrates  that a resistance to globalisation,
> however modest,  is possible. The budgets are limited by the centrral
> government, but  the PT local government involves the local population at
> every level in determining how the money is spent. It was an ideal setting
> for such a conference, which has greatly annoyed Brazil's President,
> Fernando Henrique Cardoso( one-time leftist and contributor to the New
Left
> Review, but now a great admirer of Tony Blair, Bill Clinton and the 'third
> way`), whose own neo-liberal solutions are currently under attack from all
> sides. Cardoso denounced the PT for using tax-payers money to fund the
Porto
> Allegre bash, but the tax-payers I met seemed very happy that their town
was
> the centre of world attention. The local Chamber of Commerce denounced
> Cardoso for his remarks, claiming that the out-of-season guests were
> benefiting the local economy. What worries Cardoso is that the example
might
> spread in Brazil itself , thus propelling the PT to power nationally.
>
> This conference and its location represents a nightmare gathering for  The
> pro-globalisation  pundits in the US press, typified by Daniel Yergin or
> Thomas Friedman of the NEW YORK TIMES , who spend their lives promoting
the
> message that the new economy is 'cool` and that any state intervention  is
> totalitarian. This message which has infected European social democracy
like
> a spreading cancer is what was being challenged  at this conference. There
> are delegates from 122 countries attending a dozen plenary sessions and
> nearly 400 workshops to discuss alternatives in more detail.  The
importance
> of Cuba to Latin America was demonstrated at the opening session when the
> conference applauded wildly the presence of delegates from the tiny
island,
> whose existence still remains important to the left in Latin America.
Ghosts
> from the past mingle easily with the large number of young people. There
> were loud cheers when 84-year old veteran Ahmed Ben Bella, the leader of
the
> FLN in Algeria   and a former President, announced that Che Guevara was
the
> most amazing person he had ever met and a fine figure of a man. Much to
our
> amusement this was mistranslated as a: " . and  Che had a beautiful body`.
>
> There are 40 Mayors of Latin American cities who have come here. Ken
> Livingstone was invited, but failed to even respond to the invitation.
> Mariano Arana, the Mayor of Montevideo, described the steady growth of
> misery in his own city. He was here to find ways of regulating and
> controlling the brutality of the free market.
>
> The strongest European presence was from France, the country hated the
most
> by US free-marketeers. Two ministers from the French Cabinet, dozens of
MPs
> and Euro-MPs and behind them the remarkable organising skills of Le Monde
> Diplomatique as seen in the organisation Attack.
>
> The tension between the Cardoso government in the Centre and the PT
> government in Rio Grande Sul reached breaking point on the last night of
the
> World SocialForum. The Federal police arrested the French farmer Jose Bove
> on the orders of the Minister of Interioir in Brasilia and served him with
> an expulsion notice. Bove had joined the Landless Peasants Movement which
> was occupying a Monsanto field trying out genetically modiefied crops. The
> local government had  declared it illegal to plant gm crops in its
province,
> but Monsanto obtained permission from the Federal governmment.  Bove's
> arrest and expulsion  was a spectacular own goal by Cardoso. It enraged
much
> of  the media and gave incredible publicity to the Forum. It also helped
to
> defuse the tension with the Forum between the two currents: the social
> movements and the politicians. Many activists from the social movements
had
> been annoyed by the opening session which was dominated by PT leader Lula
> and formere French Cabinet Minister Chevenement.
>
> The closing session restored the precarious balance. Jose Bove and the
> social movements dominated it with everyone chanting: WE ARE ALL JOSE
BOVE.
> Bove  was in a cheerful mood, when I spoke to him the morning after.  He
was
> planning to leave the country that day in any case,  but had decided to
defy
> the expulsion order.
>
> What was missing at the conference was the presence of Russians, Eastern
> Europeans, Chinese...... these are the citizens who are suffering the
> effects of  'shock-therapy' and capitalism. The figures on public
education,
> health, employment in all these countries show a sensational decline since
> 1990. Perhaps they will be there next year when the World Social Forum
> challenges Davos once again.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>







From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb 15 01:44:33 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 08:44:33 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] The World Bank is for borrowers
Message-ID: <000201c0972b$7b40b500$eea220d9@mjones>


The demands of creditor nations and aid agencies are crippling the institution.
Debtor nations can save it, says Robert Wade
Published: February 14 2001 20:06GMT | Last Updated: February 14 2001 20:10GMT



Many have laid the blame for the malaise at the World Bank squarely with James
Wolfensohn, its president. There is no doubt Mr Wolfensohn is challenged in the
management department. The future of the Bank would be brighter if he were to leave
or to limit his role to external relations, his forte. But there is also no doubt
that the Bank's future would be bleak, whoever the president was.

Lending has collapsed to the level of the early 1980s - apart from lending by the
International Development Agency, the soft-loan facility. Some of the fall is
cyclical but more of it looks to be long-term.

Staff in technical sectors such as agriculture, irrigation, energy and
infrastructure are leaving in droves. The matrix organisational structure put in
place in 1997, wonderful on paper, is a nightmare, particularly because it imposes
high costs of negotiating agreements about everything short of pencils. As a result,
the new, "client-focused" Bank spends more of its time on internal processing and
less on what it is good at - working with clients. Non-stop waves of redundancies
compound staff anger.

One solution is to close the Bank down. This is favoured by those who say that
private capital markets can provide enough development finance without public
intervention and private consulting firms can provide enough development advice.

Nonsense. About 70 per cent of private capital flows to developing countries go to
only 10 of them and are subject to large surges in and out. Private consulting firms
have no interest in helping clients to follow the Korean motto: "We learn things
only once."

The world needs multilateral development banks as a partial offset to failure in
both capital markets and consultancy markets. They pool the risk of lending to
developing countries and link money with advice based on experience of what works.
And the world needs a world bank, one that operates across the developing world and
can tackle global problems such as ocean pollution, atmospheric degradation and
nuclear waste.

The problem of the World Bank starts with the logo. "World" confers dignity,
prestige and a presumption of leadership. But when the mandate is as broad as
"development" and "poverty reduction" it also invites any entity striving for
influence to target the Bank to get its demands across.

Like it or not, the Bank has had to open itself up to all kinds of aid agencies and
pressure groups, mainly those based in the creditor countries, particularly in the
US. They can affect the Bank's lending resources and its survival by affecting the
willingness of the governments of creditor countries to underwrite its capital base
and to pledge funds for its IDA affiliate. Creditor countries, especially the US,
therefore have influence in the Bank way beyond their majority share of votes in the
governing body.

This has made the Bank both unmanageable and uncompetitive. The agendas to which it
must respond are often mutually inconsistent - the US Treasury and State Department
say the Bank must make a massive adjustment loan to Indonesia; many agencies
delegitimise the Bank for lending to a corrupt and repressive government. The
external groups do not have to resolve the inconsistencies among themselves, or take
responsibility. Instead, they happily insist the Bank make borrowers comply with
standards of resettlement, indigenous peoples, environmental assessments and
procurement that are higher than in leading industrialised countries. Why not?

The need to manage the inconsistencies makes hypocrisy a way of life in the Bank -
saying different things to different audiences and making declarations of intent
that cannot possibly be carried out.

But hypocrisy has its limits. The standards that the creditor countries require the
Bank to insist upon in its projects add greatly to the costs of borrowing from the
Bank compared with other sources.

Worse, the requirements in terms of project preparation can often be met only by
international consultants flown in for the task, so learning does not take place
locally. Borrowing governments are increasingly saying: "No, thanks." And when
agencies discover less than 100 per cent compliance in some part of the Bank's
portfolio, they stand ready to censure the Bank and demand cuts in its capital base
or soft-loan funds. The circle is vicious.

The borrowing governments and their representatives on the board of the Bank have to
become more active in governing the governance problem. They are meant to be the
primary beneficiaries of World Bank activities, yet they have for 50 years allowed
creditor governments to set the rules and policies.

They can do much more than at present to co-ordinate their actions and now that the
survival of the Bank is at stake they have every incentive to do so.

The writer is professor of political economy and development at the London School of
Economics and fellow of the Institute for Advanced Study, Berlin
from FT.com





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb 15 01:49:54 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 08:49:54 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] The Nixon Center/WHAT IS TO BE UNDONE?
Message-ID: <000401c0972c$315fefe0$eea220d9@mjones>

WHAT IS TO BE UNDONE?
A RUSSIA POLICY AGENDA FOR THE NEW ADMINISTRATION
The Nixon Center (www.nixoncenter.org)
February 2001


Foreword

America's relations with post-Communist Russia have posed a special
intellectual challenge.  Once the great ideological and moral contest with
the Soviet Union was ended, and so successfully, many Americans tended to
assume that Russia would, first of all, evolve easily into a democracy and,
second, be a natural friend of the United States.  Instead, U.S.-Russia
relations have reverted to what is in fact more normal in history, namely a
relationship between two major powers whose national interests sometimes
are parallel and sometimes do not coincide, even if there are no bitter
conflicts.

It should be possible to manage this relationship in the coming years, and
to turn it into a positive contribution to international order.  This
requires of the United States that it have a clear sense of its own
priorities-focused less on personalities and more on Russian actions, less
on internal politics that we cannot affect and more on Russian foreign
policies that affect us.

This is the contribution of The Nixon Center's report on Russia.  Its
recommendations, as well as its tone, are constructive even while being
sober and realistic.  It offers an excellent concise analysis of the recent
problems in the relationship, as well as valuable proposals.

HENRY A. KISSINGER
HONORARY CHAIRMAN
THE NIXON CENTER


Introductory Note

This report represents a collaborative effort by members of The Nixon
Center's Board and staff to outline a new American policy agenda toward
Russia, both to ensure a decisive break from failed policies and to focus
U.S. attention on changing priorities in our relations with Moscow.

We are most grateful to several members of the Center's Board of Directors
who offered ideas and extensive comments for the report.  They are: Robert
Ellsworth, Vice Chairman of the Center and a former Deputy Secretary of
Defense and U.S. Ambassador to NATO; Maurice R. Greenberg, Chairman of the
Center and Chairman and CEO of American International Group; Henry
Kissinger, Honorary Chairman of the Center and a former Secretary of State;
Eugene K. Lawson, President of the U.S.-Russia Business Council and former
Vice Chairman of the Export-Import Bank; James Schlesinger, Chairman of the
Center's Advisory Council and a former Secretary of Defense and Secretary
of Energy; and Brent Scowcroft, President of the Forum for International
Policy and a former National Security Advisor.

Nixon Center Director Paul Saunders was the principal drafter of the
report.  Members of the Center's senior staff-including Geoffrey Kemp,
Director of Regional Strategic Programs, David M. Lampton, Director of
Chinese Studies, Peter W. Rodman, Director of National Security Programs,
and myself-wrote sections of the report and made other substantive
contributions.

Needless to say, since the report is the product of a group effort, each of
the advisors and contributors does not necessarily agree with every word of
the text.

DIMITRI K. SIMES
PRESIDENT
THE NIXON CENTER


Executive Summary

Russia's disturbing domestic evolution, and changes in the international
system, have rendered America's recent agenda toward Russia increasingly
obsolete.  Defining a new agenda for U.S.-Russian relations requires a
clearer definition of U.S. interests and priorities.  The Clinton
Administration's inability to do this led to failure and disillusionment.
We identify four American priorities:

7 to deter Russia from emerging as a spoiler in the international system;
7 to limit Russia's role in the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction and other sensitive technologies;
7 to discourage Russia from promoting instability in regions where vital
U.S. interests are at stake; and,
7 to develop an interest-based overall relationship with Russia that would
give Russia a stake in cooperation, better serve both American and mutual
interests, and encourage Russia to see itself as a part of the West.

In addition to a clearer sense of U.S. priorities, we need a fundamentally
different policy approach, which would:

7 avoid attempts to micromanage Russian domestic politics;
7 seek to understand legitimate Russian interests and to respect them when
they do not clash with vital American interests or principles;
7 treat Russia like a "normal" country, whose role in the international
system depends on its own progress and conduct rather than its status as a
former superpower; and,
7 strive to restore a  bipartisan domestic consensus on policy toward Russia.

On this basis, this report makes eight recommendations for a new American
agenda in relations with Russia.  They are outlined in detail under the
following headings:

1. Preventing Russia's emergence as a spoiler: Russian-Chinese relations:
Avoiding, when possible, actions that push Russia closer to China or
otherwise contribute to Russian participation in a group of states seeking
to limit U.S. power must be among the Bush Administration's top priorities.

2. Proliferation: what are the real dangers? The U.S. should be very firm,
but also discriminating, in responding to Russian proliferation.  It should
be harsh in dealing with concrete threats to the U.S. or regional stability
but less concerned about other proliferation such as sales of older
conventional weapons.

3. Arms control, national missile defense, and the ABM Treaty: To the
extent the U.S. has the technology, the money, and the domestic political
will, it should be prepared to deploy national missile defense regardless
of Russian views.  Ultimately, a deal with Russia on the ABM Treaty is
desirable but not strictly necessary; the same is true of further arms
reduction agreements, which could be replaced by parallel unilateral
reductions after an appropriate review of U.S. requirements.

4. NATO enlargement: While taking into account Russian preferences and the
aspirations of potential members, the U.S. should make decisions on
enlargement on the basis of what is best for NATO.  Both Russia and
potential members should be informed that provocative behavior will
undermine their respective objectives.

5. The Caspian Basin: The U.S. should let commercial enterprises take the
lead in establishing oil and gas pipeline routes in the region.  More
broadly, America should adopt a two-tiered policy-acknowledging Russia's
legitimate interests while deterring its expansionist behavior, and
maintaining friendly relations with other post-Soviet states without
promising support we are unlikely to deliver.

6. The Russian economy: Since IMF endorsement of Russia's economic plans is
required for Paris Club talks on rescheduling $48 billion in Soviet-era
debt to proceed, the U.S. should not oppose a stand-by credit.  Russia must
understand, however, that it will not attract significant foreign
investment without living up to its financial obligations and conducting
meaningful reform.

7. Bilateral assistance programs: The U.S. should reassess all assistance
programs, including soliciting Russian perspectives, with a view to
deciding which programs to eliminate quickly and which to cut more slowly.
While most Nunn-Lugar programs should be continued, the strengthening of
the Russian state suggests that Moscow should be expected to assume
gradually increasing responsibility for the security of its nuclear materials.

8. Broader dialogue: Where the Clinton Administration focused on relations
with the Russian government (and select figures within it), U.S. policy
should seek a substantially broader dialogue with Russian society,
opposition political groups, and others.  At the same time, there should be
no illusion-especially given the apparent nature of the Putin regime-that
this approach will enable us to bypass the government or exert significant
leverage over it.


WHAT IS TO BE UNDONE?
A RUSSIA POLICY AGENDA FOR THE NEW ADMINISTRATION

MOVING BEYOND THE TRANSITION AGENDA

When the Soviet Union disintegrated, the United States was compelled to
redefine its entire complex of policies toward Russia.  Though some
elements of the Cold War agenda-such as arms control-remained important,
they had a different character in the new post-Cold War environment.  Other
components of American policy, like the global fight against communism,
became largely irrelevant.  New issues would form the backbone of this
"transition agenda": Russia's efforts at political and economic reform and
the problem of "loose nukes" were the most visible of these.

Today, however, it is increasingly clear that Russia's transition is coming
to an end.  Though Russia has not fulfilled optimistic hopes-it is not
democratic, pro-Western, or satisfied with the international status
quo-neither has it lived up to apocalyptic fears of a return to communism,
violent disintegration, or the anarchic proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction.

As a result of Russia's evolution and continuing changes in the
international system, the transition agenda, too, is now increasingly
obsolete.  Nor is a retooled Cold War agenda any more useful: the era of
global superpower rivalry has passed.  Instead, it is time for the United
States to develop a new agenda for the U.S.-Russian relationship.  This
twenty-first century agenda must be built from the ground up on a
foundation of American interests and American priorities.

Notwithstanding predictions of Russia's growing irrelevance, constructive
relations with Moscow remain important to the advancement of significant,
though sometimes contradictory, U.S. interests, including:

7 preventing the emergence of any coalition of states aimed at limiting
America's ability to exercise international leadership or exercising even
limited local, regional or global hegemony;
7 limiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, missiles, and
other sensitive military technologies;
7 maintaining stability in Europe and Asia;
7 using the United Nations and other international organizations
effectively to advance America's major international objectives;
7 ensuring secure access to energy from the Persian Gulf and Caspian Basin;
7 combating international terrorism;
7 having Russia as a positive voice in international affairs; and,
7 promoting political and economic reform in Russia in order to facilitate
its integration into the global economy and the creation of internal checks
and balances limiting aggressive international behavior.

Even now, Russia is capable of imposing significant costs on the U.S. in
these areas.

WHAT ARE AMERICAN INTERESTS AND PRIORITIES?

While the Clinton Administration correctly identified many of these diverse
interests, it often appeared blind to the tradeoffs among them.  This was
perhaps most clear in the administration's decision to press for NATO air
strikes on Yugoslavia at precisely the time that the alliance's formal (and
relatively cost-free) eastward expansion took place.  This combination of
events confirmed to Moscow that America's repeated assurances that NATO
would retain its defensive character were disingenuous.

The failure to define priorities also led to constant pressure on Russia
from senior administration officials on an array of U.S. preferences on
issues ranging from the composition of the Russian government to tax
policy, religious freedom, Chechnya, and Iran and Iraq notwithstanding the
administration's declaratory policy of engagement.  Even the President and
the Secretary of State seemed to take this hectoring laundry-list approach
during summit meetings.  Since Washington itself was unclear on what
mattered most to the U.S., it should have been no surprise that Moscow was
often unable to determine how serious the United States was in pursuing any
given issue.  The U.S. government wasted a considerable share of its
limited political capital with Russia's leadership on less consequential
matters.  Taking into account the limits on American leverage vis-`-vis
Russia, the Bush Administration must be careful how and when it exercises
U.S. influence.

Establishing a hierarchy of priorities does not mean that issues relegated
to lower levels of significance should be ignored.  This is true for two
reasons: first, the failure to mention such issues could lead to
justifiable U.S. domestic criticism-and undermine any attempt to build a
sustainable bipartisan policy in the process-and second, it could allow
Russian leaders to assume that Washington's preferences can be safely
ignored.  A creative, multi-track approach to American diplomacy could
ensure that the effective communication of U.S. priorities to Moscow does
not imply that nothing else really matters.

Taking into account the limits on American leverage vis-`-vis Russia, the
Bush Administration must be careful how and when it exercises U.S. influence.

Because conditions are changing, attempting to engineer Russia's evolution
or to protect its nuclear weapons are becoming as much goals of the past as
preventing nuclear war and resisting Soviet expansionism.  While all remain
desirable, none can be the principal drivers of U.S. policy toward
contemporary Russia.  Instead, this report identifies four new priorities:

7 Structure the relationship with Russia, including through positive and
negative incentives, to deter Russia from emerging as a spoiler using its
ties with major states like China, India, and Iran, and former Soviet
allies such as Iraq and North Korea, as well as its veto in the United
Nations Security Council.
7 Limit the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or other sensitive
technologies from Russia and protect Americans from the consequences of
whatever proliferation might nevertheless occur through ballistic missile
defenses or other means.
7 Discourage Russia from promoting instability in Europe, Asia, the Middle
East, and the Caspian Basin that could seriously threaten vital American
interests.
7 Build an interest-based bilateral relationship with Russia that would
give Russia a stake in cooperation, allow the U.S. to work with Moscow to
advance both mutual and strictly American interests, and encourage Russia
to see itself as a part of the West.

A NEW APPROACH

In addition to a clearer sense of American priorities, putting the
U.S.-Russian relationship back on track will require a fundamentally
different approach.

BE LESS INTRUSIVE IN RUSSIAN DOMESTIC POLITICS

While the U.S. would benefit from particular political and economic changes
in Russia, further intrusive American involvement in Russia's transition
simply will not work.  U.S. advice no longer has even the limited impact on
Russian society that it had in the early 1990s.  The negative impact of the
Clinton Administration's advice in many cases should also contribute to a
sense of humility.

Extricating the United States from Russian domestic developments will help
eliminate the pretense about the "progress" of Russia's transformation and
the impulse to romanticize the leaders who happen to be in power.  The
Clinton team's strong support for Yeltsin and his allies-almost without
regard to their conduct-often seemed to put the Russian regime's political
survival ahead of democracy, real reform, and even truth.  This was evident
in the administration's celebratory reaction to Yeltsin's October 1993 tank
attack on the Supreme Soviet, the bloody intervention in Chechnya from 1994
to 1996, the questionable "loans for shares" privatization in 1995, and
Yeltsin's disturbingly undemocratic re-election campaign tactics in 1996.
Despite all these developments, the Clinton Administration continued to
support Boris Yeltsin through rhetoric, bilateral programs, and heavy
pressure on the IMF, other international financial institutions, and
American allies.

The United States should seek to understand legitimate Russian interests
and respect them when they do not clash with vital American interests or
principles.

Within Russia, American support for the deeply unpopular Yeltsin and his
political and business allies discredited the United States and raised
questions about its motivations.  "Why would Washington support so visibly
leaders who have presided over our country's destruction?", many Russians
clearly wondered.  Other aspects of the Clinton policy-NATO military
intervention in the Balkans and U.S. efforts to reduce Russia's role in
transporting oil and gas from the Caspian Basin-contributed to a sense that
contrary to American rhetoric, the U.S. wanted to keep Russia weak.  In
fact, 81% of participants in a 2000 State Department-sponsored poll in
Russia agreed with the statement that the U.S. was exploiting Russia's
weakness to ensure that it remains a "second-rate power."  Many believe
that Washington was in essence paying off the Russian president's corrupt
inner circle with IMF money in exchange for symbolic concessions and lavish
praise.  Russians see the relationship as depriving Russia of a meaningful
role in world affairs or even on its own periphery.

REESTABLISH MUTUAL RESPECT

The United States should seek to understand legitimate Russian interests
and respect them when they do not clash with vital American interests or
principles.  And instead of paternalistic indulgence, American leaders
should also make clear what the U.S. expects from Russia and use
appropriate leverage to ensure that Washington's preferences are taken
seriously in Moscow.

At present, Russians are deeply frustrated with what they view as American
global arrogance.  For instance, U.S. actions in Yugoslavia (and so-called
humanitarian interventions more broadly), NATO enlargement, sanctions
policy, and unwelcome advice to Russia and others on human rights and
economic matters have been taken as evidence of American unilateralism if
not bullying.  This has contributed to a Russian public perception that the
U.S. seeks to dominate the world, a view expressed by 85% of respondents in
a spring 2000 State Department survey.

The previous administration's perceived failure to respect Russian
perspectives convinced many Russians that the benefits of accommodating
U.S. preferences were minimal.  Yet, by the same token, the Clinton
Administration's unwillingness to be really tough on Russia when key
American interests were at stake-as in the case of Russian provision of
nuclear and other sensitive technologies to Iran-allowed Russian leaders to
believe that the costs of failing to accommodate the U.S. were also low.
Under these circumstances, there is no incentive for Russia not to pursue
an assertive foreign policy to advance its own interests with only limited
attention to Washington.

Only Russia can win itself a prominent place in the community of nations.

TREAT RUSSIA LIKE A NORMAL COUNTRY

The Bush Administration should communicate to Moscow that like other states
its role in the international system depends principally on its own
internal and external behavior.  Only Russia can win itself a prominent
place in the community of nations; to do so, Moscow must establish power by
developing its economy and earn respect through its conduct.  From this
perspective, Russia's inclusion in the G-7 as a political consolation prize
was on balance a mistake, though Russia's sense of membership in the club
might have had some benefits.  Nevertheless, Russia is neither economically
advanced nor a democracy, and its presence in the G-8 fundamentally alters
the character of a group deliberately created to be exclusive rather than
inclusive.

Now that Russia is already in the G-8, however, its removal would be very
difficult and would also come at a cost.  At the least, however, the G-7
should give priority to their common business-the agenda of the Western
democracies and Japan-and reduce the proportion of G-8 activity.  Russia
should be made to understand that its future democratic evolution and
foreign policy compatibility with Western interests and values will
determine whether it can ever really become a full-fledged member of the
club or even continue to be invited to participate in its deliberations at
all.

Whichever direction Russia takes, the U.S. should avoid the
counterproductive practice of idolizing or demonizing Russia's leaders.  In
the specific case of President Vladimir Putin, it is much too early to make
definitive judgments.  Moreover, while some steps taken by his government
have been discouraging, the Russian president himself seems to be a
pragmatist prepared to adapt when his strategy for dealing with a given
issue is not working.  This is another reason to concentrate on the
incentives created for Russia by U.S. policy.

A BIPARTISAN RUSSIA POLICY

The new administration should strive to formulate a genuinely bipartisan
policy toward Moscow.  However, it must be a principled and effective
policy rather than an incoherent policy in the name of bipartisanship.
Russia is too important to be approached on the basis of the lowest common
denominator.

A less intrusive approach to Russia's internal transition would also help
to remove it from play as an American domestic political issue.  Russia's
troubled evolution took on political significance not because of a false
"who-lost-Russia" debate but much earlier, as a direct result of the
Clinton Administration's overly deep engagement in what should have been
Russian policy decisions and subsequent attempts to claim credit for
Russia's achievements and disavow its problems.  The new administration
should resist the temptation of constant commentary on Russia's progress.

The U.S. should avoid the counterproductive practice of idolizing or
demonizing Russia's leaders.

One challenge to a sustainable policy will be the fact that the Clinton
Administration's vocal endorsement of the illusion of Russian democracy has
made Russia's increasingly assertive conduct hard for most Americans to
understand.  The administration's regular self-congratulation for Russia's
economic progress similarly ensured that the 1998 financial crisis, the
1999 Bank of New York money-laundering scandal, and Russia's current modest
recovery each had a disproportionate impact on American perceptions.  This
distorted picture of Russia is likely to complicate any effort to build a
political constituency in favor of constructive relations with Russia.
Most Americans have probably given up on Russia.  Business leaders remain
deeply skeptical about investing in the country and are unlikely to change
their views in the absence of substantial Russian reforms.  In the policy
community, many who earlier seemed to see only good in Russia's
transformation now appear thoroughly discouraged.

Making the new U.S. policy toward Russia coherent, effective, and credible
will require careful personnel decisions as well.  A major debate on Russia
policy has been underway since the collapse of the USSR and it would be
wise to rely on those whose records over the last ten years can justify
confidence in both their judgment on Russia and their commitment to a truly
new policy.  There are more than enough experts who satisfy this
criterion-including Republicans and Democrats-to allow the new
administration to assemble a very strong team on this basis.

THE NEW AGENDA

The following eight recommendations should form the core of the new agenda
for the U.S.-Russian relationship.

PREVENTING RUSSIA'S EMERGENCE AS A SPOILER:
RUSSIAN-CHINESE RELATIONS

Avoiding unnecessary actions that push Russia closer to China or otherwise
contribute to Russian participation in a group of states seeking to limit
U.S. power must be among the Bush Administration's top priorities.  Vital
American interests could be seriously damaged by even a temporary, ad hoc
coalition of such disgruntled states.

There are objective limits to Sino-Russian cooperation including a deep
legacy of mutual suspicion.  Also, both countries pragmatically realize
that the U.S. is more important to each of them than they are to one
another.  For America, it is essential to ensure that this calculation
endures.

To the extent that Russian and Chinese fears of American "hegemony" are a
factor in their present collaboration, this is another reason for the U.S.
to tread carefully in the area of humanitarian interventions when none of
its vital interests or fundamental American values, such as the prevention
of genocide, are at stake.

In addition, Russian transfers to China of advanced weapons and military
technologies must be raised higher on the list of U.S. concerns with
Russia, as must the flow of Russian specialists to China.  This is so not
only because they assist China's development of a potential capability
against America's military power in the Asia-Pacific region, but also
because they may facilitate further proliferation from China.  More
generally, in structuring American relations with China, the U.S. should be
careful not to pursue policies that may inadvertently encourage Beijing to
rely more heavily on Russian military equipment and technology.
Russian arms or technology transfers that produce real threats to vital
U.S. interests should be a "deal breaker" in the relationship.

Finally, as a general matter, while being attentive to the implications of
Sino-Russian cooperation, the U.S. should not be seen as according it the
strategic weight Moscow and Beijing would like it to possess.  Too-visible
American concern over a Russian-Chinese entente might only further tempt
the parties to exaggerate their leverage.

PROLIFERATION: WHAT ARE THE REAL DANGERS?

It is no longer an insight to suggest that the end of the Cold War may have
made the actual use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction
(WMD) somewhere in the world more likely rather than less.  The new
administration must do better than its predecessor in discouraging Russian
nuclear, advanced military, and dual-use technology transfers, whether
formally authorized by the Kremlin or not.  In general, the U.S. should be
very firm but also discriminating; that is, it should be harsh in dealing
with concrete threats to the U.S. or regional stability, though less
concerned about conventional weapons sales, especially in the case of older
weapons also available from non-Russian sources.  By displaying greater
flexibility, this differentiated approach would address Russian resentment
of perceived efforts by the U.S. to exclude Moscow from international arms
markets.

Nevertheless, Russian arms or technology transfers that produce real
threats to vital U.S. interests should be a "deal breaker" in the
relationship.

The United States has more leverage than it has used to induce Russia to
halt its assistance to Iran's missile and nuclear development programs,
especially due to Russia's interest in cooperating with American companies
on a number of important and potentially lucrative technology projects.
Moscow should understand that any restrictions applied to U.S. technology
may have to be implemented across-the-board rather than against suspected
violators alone.  Of course, any restrictions imposed must be coordinated
with U.S. allies to ensure that they are effective and that they do not put
American firms at a competitive disadvantage.  Finally, Russia should be
told in unambiguous terms that continued support by Russian entities for
the Iranian missile program not only hastens the day when Iran can deploy
long range missiles, but also lends greater urgency to national missile
defense (NMD) in the U.S.

ARMS CONTROL, NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE,
AND THE ABM TREATY

Protecting the American people against nuclear or other WMD attacks is a
vital U.S. interest.  Therefore, to the extent the U.S. has the technology,
the money, and the domestic political will, it should be prepared to deploy
NMD regardless of Russian views.  Still, there is no reason to create a
diplomatic crisis before we know what we want to deploy and when we will be
able to do it.  Thus, at this early stage, contacts with Russia are
appropriate to further understand the Russian position and give Russia a
sense that the U.S. respects its concerns.  Indeed, U.S. NMD plans are not
directed against Russia.

Both Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, architects of the ABM Treaty,
declared forthrightly during the 1990s that the Treaty had served its
purpose and should not stand in the way of protecting vital U.S. interests
now that the Cold War was behind us.  Similarly, Russia must understand
that attempts to launch a "peace offensive" in Europe or agitate China are
counterproductive.  For the U.S., a deal with Russia on American deployment
of NMD is desirable but not strictly necessary; the U.S. should not repeat
the mistake of NATO enlargement by attempting to obtain Russian approval of
something that is perceived to be at odds with Russian interests.  Only
Russian acquiescence is necessary.

Still, the U.S. has many reasons to prefer an overall understanding with
Russia to unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the Treaty.  A unilateral
withdrawal would be difficult to manage diplomatically, whereas a deal with
Russia on Treaty amendments would pacify our European allies and help the
U.S. to manage Chinese opposition.

Pushing missile defense forward has already provided us with useful
leverage that led Russia to try to engage North Korea in restraints on its
missile tests.  As suggested above, it might be similarly useful to induce
Russian restraint vis-`-vis Iran.  In any case, any appearance of backing
off from missile defense will forfeit much of this political leverage.

Talks with the Russians could usefully attempt to draw them back to the
accord on limited NMD that Presidents Bush and Yeltsin achieved in 1992
(quickly scrapped by the Clinton Administration).  President Putin's recent
overtures on theater missile defense (TMD) for Europe and Asia, while
questionable in intent, could be used to carve out more U.S. freedom of
action on TMD.  In exchange for more freedom for NMD and TMD, the Russians
may accept a payoff in deeper cuts in offensive systems; this is a good
approach so long as the ceiling is not reduced so far that it creates an
incentive for China to expand its own offensive forces.  However, the U.S.
should commit to new cuts in offensive systems only after a comprehensive
review of its strategic posture.

Although a START III or other formal bilateral agreement would be
preferable, primarily because of its provision for verification, the United
States should be prepared to pursue parallel unilateral reductions in its
strategic nuclear forces after a review of U.S. requirements.  For the
foreseeable future, economic pressures are likely to drive Russia to
continue to reduce its strategic nuclear arsenal; Russia's failure to
implement serious military reform, also partly attributable to economic
forces, has a similar impact.  But as a result, Russia relies more heavily
on tactical nuclear weapons.

Ultimately, while taking into account Russian preferences and the
aspirations of potential members, the U.S. should make decisions about
enlargement on the basis of what is best for NATO.

NATO ENLARGEMENT

Washington should avoid giving Moscow the sense that it has a veto over
NATO enlargement or that Russia's earlier resistance to enlargement has
successfully intimidated NATO.  On the contrary, the U.S. should explain
that heavy-handed Russian behavior will only accelerate the timetable for
any new potential members.  The U.S. must simultaneously communicate to
potential members, such as the Baltic States and Ukraine, that provocative
conduct vis-`-vis Russia or Russian ethnic minorities will only complicate
their hopes for membership.

Ultimately, while taking into account Russian preferences and the
aspirations of potential members, the U.S. should make decisions about
enlargement on the basis of what is best for NATO.  Thus, as NATO prepares
for its 2002 summit-at which the allies are committed to decide on further
enlargement-we should consider not only the internal progress that aspirant
countries will or will not have made by that date, but also our vision of
NATO's strategic objectives.  NATO is not just a friendly club of
democracies; it is a military alliance for strategic purposes.

In northeastern Europe, the strategic problem is protecting the Baltic
States from Russian pressures.  This is a contingency that NATO neglects at
its peril, and NATO membership must be a live option.  But an interim step
that might be considered (without closing the door on eventual membership)
is a declaration of NATO's stake in Baltic independence, on the model of
NATO's "Charter" with Ukraine-short of an Article V commitment but a
security umbrella nonetheless.  Similarly, while integration of the Baltic
States into the European Union is not a substitute for NATO membership and
is also of concern to Russia, it may prove to be a useful transitional
measure in anchoring the region to the West.  The deployment of Russian
nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad, if confirmed, is another concern; it would
affect not only Baltic security but also arms limitation arrangements in
Europe, including the premises of the reassurances given by NATO at the
time of its enlargement.

In southeastern Europe, the strategic problem is not Russia but generic
stability.  Before expanding NATO into this region, NATO should be sure of
its strategy, the military commitments it is prepared to make, and how NATO
membership will further its strategic goals.

Finally, the new administration should review the relationship between
Russia and NATO established by the Founding Act in 1997.  The inherent
ambiguity of the Clinton Administration's "voice but no veto" formulation
of Russian participation in alliance deliberations-which each side
predictably interpreted in the manner most suited to its
interests-contributed significantly to Russian outrage over the Kosovo
campaign.  Cooperation between NATO and Russia is desirable, but should
take place on a basis less prone to misunderstanding.

THE CASPIAN BASIN

An honest evaluation of American interests in the Caspian Basin region
suggests that although it is an important area for the United States, it is
certainly not vital, whereas for Russia (and Iran) it is.  Current U.S.
policy toward the Caspian energy projects has been characterized by a
short-sighted effort to dilute Russia's control over energy export routes
and to deny Iran oil and gas routes from the Caspian as well as
participation in Caspian development schemes while promoting trans-Caspian
oil and gas pipelines that bypass Iran and Russia.  Continuing this
two-pronged exclusionary effort is likely to drive Moscow and Tehran into
even closer cooperation.  Ironically, by blocking alternatives to the
Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, the U.S. has also weakened states in the region that
could benefit from other routes.  As a result, some may be more rather than
less vulnerable to Russian (or Iranian) pressure.

On the issue of pipeline routes the U.S. does face genuine dilemmas.
Cooperation with Russia to crack down on Islamic extremism in Afghanistan
and Central Asia goes against previous (though only partly successful) U.S.
policy of nurturing independence and democracy in the former Soviet
republics.  Yet challenging Russia in a region it regards as vital may spur
Russia to play a less constructive role in the Persian Gulf, a region vital
to U.S. interests.    However, the experience of the last ten years
suggests that (with the possible exception of Tajikistan), the post-Soviet
states of the Caspian Basin and Central Asia have become sufficiently
stable to remain independent absent a substantially more aggressive Russian
policy.  The U.S. should adopt a two-tiered policy: first, by acknowledging
legitimate Russian interests in the region while deterring expansionist
behavior, and second by maintaining friendly relations with other
post-Soviet states in the region without promising support that America is
unlikely to deliver.

Ultimately, the best approach to the pipeline problem is to let commercial
enterprises take the lead.  The U.S. has three principal interests with
respect to pipelines: that they provide secure access to the region's
energy resources (which makes multiple pipelines desirable), that they are
commercially viable, and that American firms are permitted to take part in
fair competition over their construction and operation.  Since energy firms
are unlikely to invest billions of dollars in multi-year projects that they
do not expect to be secure and profitable, the American government's role
should be limited to attempting to ensure a level playing field for U.S.
companies.  Once pipelines have been constructed, the U.S. may have an
interest in expressing its commitment to the safe and politically
independent operation of particular routes-though this will depend to a
great extent on the routes developed and the quality, quantity, and
eventual destination of the oil and gas that flow along them.

THE RUSSIAN ECONOMY

The time for financial assistance from the International Monetary Fund and
other international financial institutions has passed.
Despite registering 7.6% growth during 2000, the Russian economy remains
deeply troubled and, in the absence of major changes, present growth rates
are unlikely to be sustainable.  Nevertheless, the time for financial
assistance from the International Monetary Fund and other international
financial institutions has passed.  The credits provided have served at
best to finance questionable policies of the Russian federal government and
at worst to subsidize the foreign bank accounts of Russia's crony
capitalists and reckless foreign speculators.  Neither outcome serves
American interests.  Some senior Russian officials have indicated that they
are not interested in further credit packages; until either Russia's
economic conditions or other international circumstances change, they
should be taken at their word.

Still, since IMF endorsement of Russia's economic plans is required for
Paris Club talks on rescheduling $48 billion in Soviet-era debt to proceed,
the U.S. should not oppose a stand-by credit.  Beyond that, however, taking
into account the Central Bank's $28 billion in currency reserves, Russia's
high trade surplus (over $60 billion in 2000), and Moscow's considerable
expenditures on the ongoing war in Chechnya, American pressure for further
debt rescheduling is not appropriate.  Because the U.S. holds only some $3
billion of the total debt it is not in a position to play the leading role
in these discussions.  America should, however, be an active participant in
the negotiations to ensure that whatever arrangement is made is
non-discriminatory in its results.  Also, the U.S. should ensure that
Moscow entertains no illusions about the consequences of a unilateral
failure to meet its Paris Club obligations for both Russia's credit rating
and its ability to win foreign investment.

Taking into account that substantial new credits from international
financial institutions are unlikely, U.S. officials must communicate to
Russia that it will have to rely upon its own resources for development and
that there is no practical substitute for foreign investment.  These funds
in turn will be available only after a meaningful (rather than selective)
campaign against corruption, serious reforms of the judicial system, the
banking system, and corporate governance and a sharp increase in
transparency.  So long as Russia's massive capital flight continues to
demonstrate that Russians themselves are unwilling to invest in their
country, significant foreign investment is unlikely.  Also, as a practical
matter, Russia's leaders should also be informed that internal repression
as well as military actions such as Moscow's intervention in Chechnya harm
Russia's image and discourage investment.

Though the U.S. should generally wind down bilateral assistance programs
(see below), the new administration should be prepared to consider
providing financing through the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private
Investment Corporation.  However, money should be made available for these
purposes only within each institution's established procedures and in the
context of broad improvement in the U.S.-Russian relationship.  If such
improvement occurs, the U.S. should also be prepared to consider further
measures to encourage American investment in Russia.

The new administration should convey clearly to Russia that the United
States supports Russian membership in the World Trade Organization in
principle, but that Russia (like China) can win membership only on
economically viable terms.  The U.S. should not repeat the mistake of
Russian membership in the G-7 by using the WTO as a political reward.

Overall, American and Russian officials alike should recognize that the
U.S. cannot help Russia in spite of itself.  If Russian decisions foreclose
or sharply limit the country's integration into the international system,
the U.S. must accept Russia's course but should not subsidize it.

BILATERAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS

Though U.S. aid to Russia has rarely matched American rhetoric, the new
administration should begin to phase out bilateral assistance to Russia as
we move away from the transition agenda.  A thorough assessment of
assistance programs-with a view to deciding which programs to eliminate
quickly and which to cut more gradually-should be an early priority.  As a
part of this process, the administration should consult Russian officials
to determine which programs they consider most useful.  Of course, it is
important that reductions in assistance are framed positively; hopefully
this could be done through a transition to U.S. efforts to facilitate
investment in Russia.  This depends to a considerable extent on Russia's
progress on essential reforms, however.

As a general matter, it seems difficult to justify continuing most current
assistance programs indefinitely, though exchange programs should continue
on a basis comparable to programs established with other key states, as
should technical assistance programs specifically requested by Russia that
remain useful to the U.S.  The Defense Department's Cooperative Threat
Reduction, or Nunn-Lugar, programs (and related Energy Department programs)
may be another exception; however, changing conditions in Russia suggest
that the U.S. should contemplate reductions here as well.  At a minimum,
the administration must carefully review each component of these efforts to
ensure that they are appropriate to the new environment in Russia.
President Putin's strengthening of the state, the greater role of Russia's
security services, the country's increased stability, and the declining
risk of civil war reduce the priority of American assistance to secure
Russia's nuclear and WMD arsenal.  Instead, Kremlin decisions on transfers
of nuclear technology and even some advanced conventional weapons and
technologies are likely to be more significant for U.S. interests.

BROADER DIALOGUE

In order to overcome the mistrust generated among many Russians by the
Clinton Administration's excessive support for Boris Yeltsin and certain
members of his entourage, the new administration should make a major effort
to promote a broader dialogue with Russian society, various political
groups, business leaders, and others.  Some existing programs have been
useful, such as the Russian Leadership Program managed by the Library of
Congress, which has brought thousands of Russia's emerging political
leaders to the United States.  Regrettably, the benefits of such efforts
have often been overshadowed by the damage done by the previous
administration's selective political contacts.  The new effort at dialogue
should include all responsible parties in the Russian political system.
The absence of serious official contacts with Russian opposition parties
has undermined America's understanding of Russia and the effectiveness of
U.S. policy.

Nevertheless, we must be realistic about the impact of such engagement,
especially while President Putin remains popular and his regime is strong.
For example, support for "society" or non-governmental organizations that
seems to be directed against the Russian government is likely to work
against those we support rather than the regime.  In a semi-authoritarian
country where anti-American sentiment is increasingly common, the U.S.
government cannot hope to mobilize elements of Russian society, let alone
the society as a whole, toward objectives opposed by the Kremlin.  Thus,
while disappointment with Russia's domestic evolution has led many to
emphasize contacts with Russian society as an alternative to the previous
preoccupation with the Yeltsin government, such efforts are no panacea.
Russian society today is too demoralized, too divided, and too alienated
from the United States to be a driving force in the U.S.-Russian relationship.

After almost ten years of painful transition from Communism there are no
simple answers in dealing with Vladimir Putin's Russia.  Still, there is no
cause for pessimism.  While an intimate U.S.-Russian partnership is hardly
a possibility any time soon, America's power and international standing
make successful management of the relationship possible and, with the right
set of policies, even likely.




From bantam at dingoblue.net.au  Thu Feb 15 04:22:10 2001
From: bantam at dingoblue.net.au (Rob Schaap)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 22:22:10 +1100
Subject: [CrashList] (Spanish) Recent research: current El Niño episodes the most violent in 130,000 years?
References: <037441748120e21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <3A8BBC6B.436C32BA@dingoblue.net.au>

G'day Nestor,

Quoth you:
 
> Recent research on a coral reef off Huan Island, New Guinea, shows that the
> last El Ni?o episodes have been the worst known for 130,000 years. Though
> evidence is sparse and incomplete (scientists compare it with a few pages from
> a large book), the results are worth thinking about. Maybe comrades in Australia can give more information...

Just in case this was a hopeful gesture in my direction, I'm afraid cruel
schedules keep me away from the grave business of crashlisting for a few weeks
yet.  I do promise to sniff around for a satisfactory reply, though.  For now,
all I can say with some certainty is that we have a tighter series of
particularly grave El Ninos now than we've had since the biggie of 1567.  Of
course, it's difficult to be sure, but Peruvian fishermen, to whom the
phenomenon is often the difference between full bellies and starving families
(if the current is flowing north, they eat, if south, they don't), apparently
maintain a very detailed oral tradition in the matter.  Anyway, it seems we've
had a few spikes over those four centuries that seem the equal of any one
spike these days, but we've never had so many consecutive spikes, or certainly
not so compressed a series of spikes, anyway.  

That fits with most Australians' experience, as I've yet to meet one who
remembers having heard of the thing before 1983, when the bits of Oz that
weren't already desert were fiercely ablaze.  And we've had three real bastard
Ninos since.  I think the last one we hand corresponded to a particularly
nasty La Nina on your side of the Pacific (I am ignorantly speculating, and
could do with some educating here), hence all those murderous floods,
mudslides and epidemics in Central America a couple of years back.

Cheers,
Rob.



From bantam at dingoblue.net.au  Thu Feb 15 05:38:31 2001
From: bantam at dingoblue.net.au (Rob Schaap)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 23:38:31 +1100
Subject: [CrashList] The World Bank is for borrowers
References: <000201c0972b$7b40b500$eea220d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <3A8BCE51.39D4FBA3@dingoblue.net.au>

Thanks, Mark.  

A not unintelligent mainstream analysis of the problems of the World Bank, I
reckon.  But the institutional relations to which Wade refers, not to mention
comrade Wolfensohn's salutary 'destroy-from-within' tactics, point to a
problem far deeper and scarier than anywhere Wade lets himself go.  A bank
must behave as a bank (not a high standard of behaviour, as Brecht reminded
us), and one side of its constituency (investors) are always going to be more
powerful than the other (borrowers).  The theoretical commonality of interests
that underpins the very notion of the World Bank is as nothing compared to
real interests in any real moment.  So Wade's compelling empirical explanation
as to why capital markets are demonstrably not a source of hope for world
development comes close, I submit, to being an institutionalist explanation
for the WB's troubles.  'Trouble is, to say that is to say the World Bank,
like any bank under capitalism, is a fundamentally flawed notion.  Which kinda
leads to the next question ... and 4 billion people need an answer to that one
pretty damned quickly.

Cheers,
Rob.



From aabdo at webtv.net  Thu Feb 15 16:05:21 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:05:21 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Boys With Toys Syndrome
Message-ID: <3752-3A8C60B1-153@storefull-234.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Yes, Boys With Toys Syndrome has struck again.     Air shows, ski lifts,
fishing boats..... nobody, nor nothing, is safe anymore.     Anywhere in
the world... they can strike at any time.     Hey!    At least we're not
Colombians, right?

I took the family to the 'lake' last weekend.     It's called Casa
Blanca Lake (here in Laredo), and they have the nerve to try and charge
a fee to enter the area of this cesspool.      The whole time we were
there, the military was flying different aircraft around the
circumference of the swamp.     And there's not even a base on the map
down here!

And they do the same in Corpus Christi.     They love to noisily loop
around Corpus Bay!     Plus, there are bases in Del Rio and Rio Grande
City, also.    If Pancho Villla ever tries to invade again, we'll blown
his ass away!    Not to mention El Paso, part of which has hidden land
mines to intercept invaders and hikers.      They have even detected
plutonium in Albuquerque neighborhoods, and a San Antonio neighborhood
sits on a secret military Love Canal over at Kelly America (new TM).

Nor to mention the Border Patrol.    The Laredo Sector has around 700
agents in the Webb County section alone.      I got a Border Patrol
pencil at the kid's fair this weekend.     A Meester Officer Friendly
was handing them out to the kids!     Gee. 
Has anyone visited the Texas Ranger Museum up in Waco?      And Red
Cross used to operate the Immigration Camp down in Brownsville.     Who
needs Wackenhut....when we have so many other fine people around?
Tour the largest prison 'hospital' in the world...     It's over in
Galveston (part of UTMB).     TDC does care.

And Houston, do you people take advantage of all the great educational
opportunities over at NASA?      Anybody, I'll trade you my Migra
pencils for your Space Program caps.      Look for my auctions on
Ebay..... under MILITARY.

I hope we find out who them civilians were driving that submarine.
They'll have to play paintball next time.     They need to be punished
and held accountable for their actions.     If not, they'll just do the
same again.       

Plus, that submarine belongs in Nevada .....at the Navy submarine
training center there (on the highway between Reno and Las Vegas).
It shouldn't be out in the middle of the Pacific.... if it's going to
hurt people like that.     This wouldn't have happened if Bill Clinton
was still Chief Commanding Officer.

Saludos, Tony          















From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Thu Feb 15 11:12:23 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:12:23 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Colombia, oil
Message-ID: <sa8bd5b7.020@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

RESOURCE CENTER OF THE AMERICAS
www.americas.org 

February 2001

			  Oil Rigged
		There's something slippery about
		 the U.S. drug war in Colombia
		--------------------------------

	By Thad Dunning and Leslie Wirpsa

The public face of U.S. policy toward Colombia has long been the war on
drugs. Colombia, according to widely reported CIA estimates, produces 90
percent of the U.S. cocaine supply and 65 percent of U.S. heroin imports.
U.S. officials say the aim of Plan Colombia, a $1.3 billion aid package
signed by President Clinton last year, is fighting "narco-guerrillas" and
eradicating coca crops.

But thats just part of the agenda. Plan Colombia is also about oil.

Colombias petroleum production today rivals Kuwaits on the eve of the Gulf
War. The United States imports more oil from Colombia and its neighbors
Venezuela and Ecuador than from all Persian Gulf countries combined. And,
last June, Colombia announced its largest oil discovery since the 1980s.
The Colombian government and transnational oil companies are eager to
secure their exploration and production activities with U.S. military
might.

Some U.S. military officials harbor no illusions about their role in
Colombia. Stan Goff, a former U.S. Special Forces intelligence sergeant,
retired in 1996 from the unit that trains Colombian anti-narcotics
battalions. Plan Colombias purpose is defending the operations of
Occidental, British Petroleum and Texas Petroleum and securing control of
future Colombian fields, said Goff, quoted in October by the Bogot daily
El Espectador. The main interest of the United States is oil.

Colombias two major guerrilla groups condemn foreign control of the
nations petroleum even as they rely on the oil companies for ransoms and
extortion payments. The guerrillas face competition from rightist death
squads known as paramilitaries, many with documented links to Bogots army
and some with alleged ties to the oil firms.

In recent months, the violence has begun to spread beyond the nations
borders. To the south, the Colombian war is further destabilizing Ecuador,
a country wracked for decades by political upheaval, including a military
coup during an indigenous revolt a year ago. To the north, the war is
heightening tensions in Venezuela, where populist President Hugo Chvez has
helped drive up world oil prices by reviving the Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries (OPEC).

Critics of U.S. policy in Colombia have likened it to past interventions
in Vietnam and El Salvador. But with world oil prices stuck at all-time
highs, with U.S. oil consumption expected to rise 25 percent over the next
two decades, and with Middle East producers increasingly unreliable,
another important comparison is the U.S. war against Iraq.

One question is whether U.S. military aid will help keep the Colombian oil
flowingwhether it will enhance or erode the security of oil operations.
More troubling questions surround the human cost of further militarizing a
conflict that has killed tens of thousands of Colombians and displaced
almost 2 million since 1985.


	Black gold
	----------

Colombias known oil reserves amount to 2.6 billion barrels, far fewer than
those of the worlds major oil powers. But only about 20 percent of the
countrys potential oil regions have been explored, due to the violence.
Desperate for more investment, President Andrs Pastranas administration
sweetened the terms a year ago, allowing foreign companies more of the
profit from Colombian oil operations. As a result, the states Empresa
Colombiana de Petroleos (Ecopetrol) awarded a record 13 new exploration
and production contracts last year.

Colombias biggest foreign investor is BP Amoco, formed when British
Petroleum merged with Chicago-based Amoco in 1998. The London-based giant
controls Colombias largest oilfield, a 1.5-billion-barrel trove called
Cusiana-Cupiagua in the northeastern province of Casanare (see MAP). A
444-mile pipeline called Ocensa carries BP Amoco oil to the Caribbean port
of Coveas for export.

Los Angelesbased Occidental Petroleum helps operate the nations
second-largest oilfield, Cao Limn, holding 1 billion barrels in Arauca, a
province just north of Casanare. Occidental pumps away its share through a
485-mile duct to Coveas.

The June announcement confirmed a deposit about 55 miles southwest of
Bogot. An international consortium led by Canadian Occidental Petroleum
expects as much as 300 million barrels from the oilfield, called Boquern,
making it the nations third-largest deposit.

Other major investors in Colombian oil have included Exxon, Shell and Elf
Aquitane. The transnationals have helped boost the nations oil production
almost 80 percent over the last decade. Most of the exports have gone to
the United States, putting Colombia among the top eight U.S. oil
suppliers.

Many of these companies have led the fight for U.S. military aid to
Colombia, the worlds third-largest recipient of U.S. security assistance.
In 1996, BP Amoco and Occidental joined Enron Corporation, a Houston-based
energy firm, and other corporations to form the U.S.-Colombia Business
Partnership. Since then, backed by hefty oil-industry donations to
political candidates, the partnership has lobbied hard for increased aid.
Lawrence P. Meriage, Occidentals public-affairs vice president, not only
pushed for Plan Colombia last year but urged a House subcommittee to
extend military aid to the nations north to augment security for oil
development operations.

The firms have allies in the U.S. national-security apparatus. In 1998,
Gen. Charles Wilhelm, then head of the U.S. Southern Command, told
Congress that oil discoveries had increased Colombias strategic
importance. Last April, Sen. Bob Graham (D-Florida) and former National
Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft warned in a Los Angeles Times editorial
that Colombias reserves would remain untapped unless stability is
restored.

Petroleum companies say their presence in Colombia creates employment
alternatives for coca farmers, adds muscle to counterinsurgency efforts
and, ultimately, promotes peace and stability. In 1996, British Petroleum,
Occidental and Royal Dutch/Shell co-sponsored a full-page ad about
Colombia in the Houston Chronicle, touting a powerful new weapon . . . in
the war against drugs. The ad pictured the nozzle of a gas pump.

	Petroviolence
	-------------

Numerous studies suggest that transnational extraction of natural
resources from the Third World promotes not economic and political
stability, but violence and lawlessness. From Indonesia to Nigeria to
Colombia, mining and oil drilling have spurred the growth of rightist
militias, criminal gangs and leftist insurgencies. Political scientists
call this the resource curse.

Since 1986, according to Colombian government sources, the countrys
guerrilla groups have bombed oil pipelines more than 1,000 times and have
kidnapped hundreds of oil-company executives and employees. Using these
operations as leverage, the guerrillas have generated roughly $140 million
per year in ransoms and extortion payments. They also squeeze taxes from
local contractors working for the companies. In all, the oil revenue
rivals conservative estimates of guerrilla earnings from the cocaine and
heroin trades.

<end of excerpt>




From zapata at sezampro.yu  Thu Feb 15 17:28:00 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 01:28:00 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
References: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102130108170.3740-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <005301c097ae$bc33f800$8674fac3@andrej>

I am interested in something viewed from your - if I am not mistaken-
leninist/trotskyst point of view, prevailing among  subscribers.
What is your opinion, and arguments, on ( and I suppose against) critical
theory of Frankfurt School and the "Institute"......
Thanks!
            Andrej







From philion at hawaii.edu  Thu Feb 15 17:58:43 2001
From: philion at hawaii.edu (Stephen E Philion)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 14:58:43 -1000
Subject: [CrashList] FW: Debate With Chomsky On Yugoslav Elections
In-Reply-To: <000601c0955a$8e737360$e17b20d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0102151457490.10005-100000@uhunix3>

I'd say Chomsky is right about the guy taking entirely out of context his
reference to South Africa.  

Steve

Stephen Philion
Lecturer/PhD Candidate
Department of Sociology
2424 Maile Way
Social Sciences Bldg. # 247
Honolulu, HI 96822






From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb 15 18:07:35 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 20:07:35 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <005301c097ae$bc33f800$8674fac3@andrej>
References: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102130108170.3740-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <200102160107.UAA09933@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>

>I am interested in something viewed from your - if I am not mistaken-
>leninist/trotskyst point of view, prevailing among  subscribers.
>What is your opinion, and arguments, on ( and I suppose against) critical
>theory of Frankfurt School and the "Institute"......
>Thanks!
>            Andrej

The Frankfurt School's unsteady evolution highlights the sometimes
problematic relationship these left-wing intellectuals had to the mass
movement. It would be safe to say that none of them ever resolved the
theory/praxis dichotomy successfully. Moreover, none of them ever seemed
that concerned about the problem.

The Institute for Social Research was founded in Frankfurt by an
industrialist in the late 20s who wanted to foster Marxist thought that was
adequate for the age. The political conditions which shaped the particular
Marxism of the school was:

1) Failure of the Russian revolution to spread to the rest of the world.

2) Degeneration of the revolution and the rise of fascism.

3) Working class retreat.

After Hitler came to power, the Frankfurt intellectuals came to the United
States. Ironically, Adorno, the hater of popular culture, settled in Los
Angeles. Marcuse ended up in NYC, where the work of the Frankfurt School
was continued on a formal basis at Columbia University. During the war
Marcuse consulted on Soviet studies with the OSS, the forerunner of the
CIA. After the war, Adorno and Horkheimer returned to Germany where they
also collaborated with American imperialism, on an even more insidious
basis than Marcuse. More about that presently.

Lukacs was the main intellectual influence on the Frankfurt School. His
emphasis on the Hegelian dialectic underpinning of Marx's thought was key
to Adorno, Horkheimer and Marcuse. The dialectic, especially the critical
or "negative" phase, was used to point out contradictions in bourgeois
society. As social critics, the Frankfurt thinkers were peerless,
especially in the cultural arena.

Adorno was a master of high culture and wrote knowledgeably about classical
music. Trained as a composer, he worked with Alban Berg and others in the
highly challenging and often unlistenable 12-tone school. During his stint
in Los Angeles, Adorno spent long hours in discussion with Thomas Mann, the
exiled German novelist. One long discussion between the two on the meaning
of Beethoven's 32nd piano sonata finds its way almost verbatim into a
chapter of Mann's "Doktor Faustus."

Adorno and Horkheimer collaborated on "The Dialectics of Enlightenment,"
while Marcuse wrote "Eros and Civilization." These two works were very
influential on 60s radicals, even though they were written in the 40s and
50s respectively. They seemed to address the particular character of
"postscarcity" capitalist society like no other Marxist literature could.
Marcuse's book predicted a rebellion in advanced capitalist societies based
on needs and desires. This view, while a departure from conventional
Marxist thought, did seem to correctly describe the primary impetus of the
60s movements.

After WWII, Adorno and Horkheimer returned to Germany under the aegis of
John McCloy, one of the US's most powerful cold warriors. Their hatred of
Stalinism found itself amenable to a pro-imperialist outlook in the
conditions of American postwar hegemony. As I pointed out the other day on
Doug Henwood's LBO-Talk list, there is no particular internal logic between
one or another expression of Marxist thought and adaptation to the US State
Department. Frankfurt thinkers, "third camper" Max Schachtman, Trotskyist
Felix Morrow, and Stalinist screenwriters alike ended up as flag-wavers
during the 1950s. The explanation is not flawed ideology, but the pressures
of a victorious and sometimes terrorizing bourgeoisie, with deep pockets
for intellectual bribery as well.

Adorno and Horkheimer sometimes acted like scoundrels. They refused to
publish Franz Neumann's "Behemoth," a classic study of the rise of Nazism
since there was presumably too much damning evidence of German corporate
complicity. They also bowdlerized Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of
Mechanical Reproduction," deleting various references to Marx in it. During
the Vietnam war, Adorno defended US policy and German students raised hell
in his classrooms to his great dismay. He died of a heart attack in 1969, a
bitter and isolated man.

While the tendency always existed in Adorno to place theory on a pedestal,
during his years in postwar Germany they became even more pronounced. His
retreat into theory for theory's sake was justified on the basis of the
Holocaust. Such a terrible event made practical action an impossibility.
The best thing that intellectuals could do was meditate on esthetic
problems. While the working-class was never a central actor in the earlier
work of Adorno, in the 1950s it became a subject of Adorno's "negative"
criticism. He questioned Marxism's preoccupation with production and
declared that one of the missions of "critical theory" was to call for the
abolition of labor. The workplace was not seen as an arena of struggle, but
as a symbol of degradation.

Marcuse took an entirely different trajectory than Adorno. Rather than
becoming an apologist for US capitalism, he remained a bitter foe of
injustice. He was a rebellious spirit and cooperated with student activists
throughout the 1960s and 70s, including Angela Davis. Whenever there was a
sit-in, the aristocratic "high professor" Marcuse was always there.

During his teaching days in San Diego, Marcuse's outspoken leftism drew the
attention of the rather powerful right-wing in the city, including the
American Legion, Ku Klux Klan and freelance fascists. He received
death-threats all the time. At one point, students posted sentries in front
of his classroom during lectures because there was a real fear of violent
attack. At one point, the threats became so serious that he went into
hiding for 2 months.

For all of his commitment to social justice, Marcuse suffered from problems
similar to Adorno. His rebelliousness was not theoretically linked up to
mass movements. Although he was personally committed to antiwar politics,
antiracism, etc., there was virtually no explanation in his writings of how
a "critical" dialectic could be used to advance political action. His
emphasis on the negative critique of American society excluded a positive
approach to a working-class which was seen as rapidly becoming assimilated
into the bourgeoisie.

Marcuse was subject to moods of great pessimism and optimism about radical
change in the USA. Without a grounding in political economy and without an
orientation to the working-class, Marcuse was prone to subjectivity. Since
the overwhelming preoccupation of the Frankfurt school was the Subject in
bourgeois society rather than classes, it is easy to see how he would be
affected in this way. The Frankfurt distance from the working-class was not
just theoretical. One of Marcuse's students at Columbia once told a leftist
friend of mine that he never saw Marcuse dine except on linen tablecloths
and being served by kitchen help.

With this kind of existential/political situation, the Frankfurt school
would understandably display an inability to ground social transformation
in the working class. The "postscarcity" framework of the Frankfurt school
now seems dated as the economic crisis of the past 20 years has gnawed away
at the living conditions of European and American workers.


Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/



From philion at hawaii.edu  Thu Feb 15 18:34:25 2001
From: philion at hawaii.edu (Stephen E Philion)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:34:25 -1000
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <200102160107.UAA09933@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0102151532500.19968-100000@uhunix3>

Lou wrote:
Marcuse consulted on Soviet studies with the OSS, the forerunner of the
CIA.


So did Paul Sweezy. A lot of members of the CPUSA also fought in WW 2 for
the US army, the precursor to the defender of the American Century...and
so on and so on....

Steve

Stephen Philion
Lecturer/PhD Candidate
Department of Sociology
2424 Maile Way
Social Sciences Bldg. # 247
Honolulu, HI 96822


On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Louis Proyect wrote:

> >I am interested in something viewed from your - if I am not mistaken-
> >leninist/trotskyst point of view, prevailing among  subscribers.
> >What is your opinion, and arguments, on ( and I suppose against) critical
> >theory of Frankfurt School and the "Institute"......
> >Thanks!
> >            Andrej
> 
> The Frankfurt School's unsteady evolution highlights the sometimes
> problematic relationship these left-wing intellectuals had to the mass
> movement. It would be safe to say that none of them ever resolved the
> theory/praxis dichotomy successfully. Moreover, none of them ever seemed
> that concerned about the problem.
> 
> The Institute for Social Research was founded in Frankfurt by an
> industrialist in the late 20s who wanted to foster Marxist thought that was
> adequate for the age. The political conditions which shaped the particular
> Marxism of the school was:
> 
> 1) Failure of the Russian revolution to spread to the rest of the world.
> 
> 2) Degeneration of the revolution and the rise of fascism.
> 
> 3) Working class retreat.
> 
> After Hitler came to power, the Frankfurt intellectuals came to the United
> States. Ironically, Adorno, the hater of popular culture, settled in Los
> Angeles. Marcuse ended up in NYC, where the work of the Frankfurt School
> was continued on a formal basis at Columbia University. During the war
> Marcuse consulted on Soviet studies with the OSS, the forerunner of the
> CIA. After the war, Adorno and Horkheimer returned to Germany where they
> also collaborated with American imperialism, on an even more insidious
> basis than Marcuse. More about that presently.
> 
> Lukacs was the main intellectual influence on the Frankfurt School. His
> emphasis on the Hegelian dialectic underpinning of Marx's thought was key
> to Adorno, Horkheimer and Marcuse. The dialectic, especially the critical
> or "negative" phase, was used to point out contradictions in bourgeois
> society. As social critics, the Frankfurt thinkers were peerless,
> especially in the cultural arena.
> 
> Adorno was a master of high culture and wrote knowledgeably about classical
> music. Trained as a composer, he worked with Alban Berg and others in the
> highly challenging and often unlistenable 12-tone school. During his stint
> in Los Angeles, Adorno spent long hours in discussion with Thomas Mann, the
> exiled German novelist. One long discussion between the two on the meaning
> of Beethoven's 32nd piano sonata finds its way almost verbatim into a
> chapter of Mann's "Doktor Faustus."
> 
> Adorno and Horkheimer collaborated on "The Dialectics of Enlightenment,"
> while Marcuse wrote "Eros and Civilization." These two works were very
> influential on 60s radicals, even though they were written in the 40s and
> 50s respectively. They seemed to address the particular character of
> "postscarcity" capitalist society like no other Marxist literature could.
> Marcuse's book predicted a rebellion in advanced capitalist societies based
> on needs and desires. This view, while a departure from conventional
> Marxist thought, did seem to correctly describe the primary impetus of the
> 60s movements.
> 
> After WWII, Adorno and Horkheimer returned to Germany under the aegis of
> John McCloy, one of the US's most powerful cold warriors. Their hatred of
> Stalinism found itself amenable to a pro-imperialist outlook in the
> conditions of American postwar hegemony. As I pointed out the other day on
> Doug Henwood's LBO-Talk list, there is no particular internal logic between
> one or another expression of Marxist thought and adaptation to the US State
> Department. Frankfurt thinkers, "third camper" Max Schachtman, Trotskyist
> Felix Morrow, and Stalinist screenwriters alike ended up as flag-wavers
> during the 1950s. The explanation is not flawed ideology, but the pressures
> of a victorious and sometimes terrorizing bourgeoisie, with deep pockets
> for intellectual bribery as well.
> 
> Adorno and Horkheimer sometimes acted like scoundrels. They refused to
> publish Franz Neumann's "Behemoth," a classic study of the rise of Nazism
> since there was presumably too much damning evidence of German corporate
> complicity. They also bowdlerized Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of
> Mechanical Reproduction," deleting various references to Marx in it. During
> the Vietnam war, Adorno defended US policy and German students raised hell
> in his classrooms to his great dismay. He died of a heart attack in 1969, a
> bitter and isolated man.
> 
> While the tendency always existed in Adorno to place theory on a pedestal,
> during his years in postwar Germany they became even more pronounced. His
> retreat into theory for theory's sake was justified on the basis of the
> Holocaust. Such a terrible event made practical action an impossibility.
> The best thing that intellectuals could do was meditate on esthetic
> problems. While the working-class was never a central actor in the earlier
> work of Adorno, in the 1950s it became a subject of Adorno's "negative"
> criticism. He questioned Marxism's preoccupation with production and
> declared that one of the missions of "critical theory" was to call for the
> abolition of labor. The workplace was not seen as an arena of struggle, but
> as a symbol of degradation.
> 
> Marcuse took an entirely different trajectory than Adorno. Rather than
> becoming an apologist for US capitalism, he remained a bitter foe of
> injustice. He was a rebellious spirit and cooperated with student activists
> throughout the 1960s and 70s, including Angela Davis. Whenever there was a
> sit-in, the aristocratic "high professor" Marcuse was always there.
> 
> During his teaching days in San Diego, Marcuse's outspoken leftism drew the
> attention of the rather powerful right-wing in the city, including the
> American Legion, Ku Klux Klan and freelance fascists. He received
> death-threats all the time. At one point, students posted sentries in front
> of his classroom during lectures because there was a real fear of violent
> attack. At one point, the threats became so serious that he went into
> hiding for 2 months.
> 
> For all of his commitment to social justice, Marcuse suffered from problems
> similar to Adorno. His rebelliousness was not theoretically linked up to
> mass movements. Although he was personally committed to antiwar politics,
> antiracism, etc., there was virtually no explanation in his writings of how
> a "critical" dialectic could be used to advance political action. His
> emphasis on the negative critique of American society excluded a positive
> approach to a working-class which was seen as rapidly becoming assimilated
> into the bourgeoisie.
> 
> Marcuse was subject to moods of great pessimism and optimism about radical
> change in the USA. Without a grounding in political economy and without an
> orientation to the working-class, Marcuse was prone to subjectivity. Since
> the overwhelming preoccupation of the Frankfurt school was the Subject in
> bourgeois society rather than classes, it is easy to see how he would be
> affected in this way. The Frankfurt distance from the working-class was not
> just theoretical. One of Marcuse's students at Columbia once told a leftist
> friend of mine that he never saw Marcuse dine except on linen tablecloths
> and being served by kitchen help.
> 
> With this kind of existential/political situation, the Frankfurt school
> would understandably display an inability to ground social transformation
> in the working class. The "postscarcity" framework of the Frankfurt school
> now seems dated as the economic crisis of the past 20 years has gnawed away
> at the living conditions of European and American workers.
> 
> 
> Louis Proyect
> Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
> 




From northsheep at juno.com  Thu Feb 15 14:14:05 2001
From: northsheep at juno.com (Karl S North)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 16:14:05 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Human Genome Project
Message-ID: <20010215.161514.-302629.3.northsheep@juno.com>

>The results of the Human Genome Project show unexpected layers of
>complexity in our
>genes, says Clive Cookson
>Published: February 11 2001 20:42GMT | Last Updated: February 11 2001
>20:45GMT

Can the person who posted this give me the publication source and
information on the professional status of the author, Clive Cookson?
Thanks for sharing this article, which I have shared with many others,
Karl


Karl North 
Northland Sheep Dairy
"Mother Nature never farms without animals" - Albert Howard
"Pueblo que canta no morira" - Cuban saying
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 985 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20010215/0e67a539/attachment.txt>

From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb 16 01:54:27 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:54:27 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Human Genome Project
Message-ID: <000e01c097f6$00877440$799020d9@mjones>

Karl S North asked:

>>Can the person who posted this give me the publication source and
information on the professional status of the author, Clive Cookson?
Thanks for sharing this article, which I have shared with many others,
Karl<<

The article was in the Financial Times and no doubt authoritative. I can't tell you
more right now, I'm not at my own pc

mark






From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb 16 02:03:24 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 09:03:24 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] FW: International Energy Annual 1999 Released-2/15/2001
Message-ID: <001101c097f7$46357a40$799020d9@mjones>


-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-aies-70423 at tonto.eia.doe.gov
[mailto:bounce-aies-70423 at tonto.eia.doe.gov] On Behalf Of Grillot,
Michael
Sent: 15 February 2001 21:21
To: Annual International Energy Statistics
Subject: International Energy Annual 1999 Released-2/15/2001


******  ******      **       *************************************
**        **       *  *      ***   U.S. Department of Energy    **
****      **      ******     * Energy Information Administration *
**        **     **    **    ** To unsubscribe see the message ***
******  ******  **      **   ************* footnote **************
EIA, the Nation's clearinghouse for energy statistics. ***********
******************************************************************

(NOTE: To best view this document, your email software should 
be set to view the item in an 80 character format, using a 
"non-proportional" font, e.g. courier)
******************************************************************

The International Energy Annual is the Energy Information Administration's annual
historical data summary for world energy production, consumption, and carbon
dioxide emissions.  Country-level data are provided for 1990-1999 and, in many
cases, for 1980-1999. In addition to summaries of all primary energy consumption
and production, other sections focus on petroleum, natural gas, coal,
electricity, carbon dioxide emissions, energy reserves, petroleum prices, and
population and gross domestic product.  An introductory World Energy Overview
discusses trends in world energy production and consumption between 1990 and 1999
and there is also a detailed Oil and Gas Market Chronology for 1999.  To access
this report, the World Wide Web Address is:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/iea

To access all of EIA's international energy data, forecasts, and analyses, visit
EIA's International (Energy) Channel at:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/international


--------------------------  To Unsubscribe  -----------------------------
You are currently subscribed to aies as: [mark at jones118.freeserve.co.uk]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-aies-70423M at tonto.eia.doe.gov.
Please do not use the reply button.




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Fri Feb 16 04:47:56 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:47:56 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0102151532500.19968-100000@uhunix3>
References: <200102160107.UAA09933@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>
Message-ID: <05fd55647111021MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a Re: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library, 
el 15 Feb 01, a las 15:34, Stephen E Philion dijo:

> Lou wrote:
> Marcuse consulted on Soviet studies with the OSS, the forerunner of the
> CIA.
> 
> 
> So did Paul Sweezy. A lot of members of the CPUSA also fought in WW 2 for
> the US army, the precursor to the defender of the American Century...and
> so on and so on....
> 

And Dashiell Hammett served somewhere in Alaska, even though he was very old.

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From aabdo at webtv.net  Fri Feb 16 06:02:32 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 05:02:32 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Khalil
Message-ID: <3746-3A8D24E8-1666@storefull-234.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Feb. 14, 2001, 9:06PM
Bus driver `just like all of us here? 

Family says anger caused man to drive into crowd of Israelis Associated
Press 

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip -- In a rutted street filled with windblown
plastic bags and jabbering children, bus driver Khalil Abu Olbeh spoke
of his anger over the deaths of young Palestinians. 

Heavy shooting in the southern Gaza Strip the past few days had left him
particularly aggrieved. But to friends and relatives, his emotions were
in tune with the rest of the neighborhood, and nothing seemed amiss with
the 35-year-old father of five. 

"We talked on the street Tuesday night, just like we do every night,"
said Abdullah Azhaq, a neighbor of 20 years. "He was very upset -- just
like all of us here." 

"God will save us," Abu Olbeh told his neighbor, before retiring to the
large cinderblock house he shares with his mother and his brother's
family in the overcrowded Sheik Radwan neighborhood, where the walls are
covered with anti-Israeli graffiti. 

Abu Olbeh rose at 2 a.m. Wednesday -- his usual wake-up time -- for his
journey to the Erez border crossing with Israel. He then drove fellow
Palestinian laborers to their jobs in Israel before dawn. 

After dropping off his passengers, Abu Olbeh rammed his bus into a bus
stop packed with Israeli soldiers and civilians south of Tel Aviv,
killing eight and injuring 20. 

Abu Olbeh fled in the bus, chased by police for more than 20 miles
before plowing into a truck at a traffic light. Police also fired at Abu
Olbeh, who was hit and later had his leg amputated at an Israeli
hospital. 

Abu Olbeh's brother, Hussein, said he was taken by surprise by his
brother's actions, but suggested it may have been revenge for Israel's
tough policies during five months of Israeli-Palestinian fighting. 

"The terrible situation we are living through ... every day there are
killings and assassinations by Israeli authorities," he said. "Of course
all of this can get to a person and of course could be a major reason
for someone to carry out such an act." 

Hussein Abu Olbeh said his brother had no ties to the Islamic militant
group Hamas, which claimed responsibility in a phone call to Israel
radio's Arabic service, or to Tanzim, the armed group linked to
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction. 

After news of the attack spread, curious neighbors filled Khalil Abu
Olbeh's street and dozens of relatives gathered inside the house. 

Facing the crowd, one of Abu Olbeh's sons, 8-year-old Muhammad, silently
held up a photograph of his father. 

Abu Olbeh has worked for Israel's Egged bus company for five years and
had undergone repeated security checks by Israel's Shin Bet security
agency. 

His work permit was renewed by the Shin Bet two weeks ago, according to
Israeli security sources. 

For the past four months, Abu Olbeh had been unemployed because of
Israel's closure of the Palestinian areas, which kept more than 100,000
Palestinians from their jobs in Israel. 

He worked as a taxi driver in Gaza, but it brought in little money. He
welcomed the chance to return to his regular job as a bus driver, his
friends said. 

"He didn't complain about the way he was treated at his job," said
Azhaq, the neighbor. 

Israeli authorities said they were certain that Abu Olbeh's actions were
deliberate. But Palestinians are deeply suspicious about any information
coming out of Israel, and in the street, some said they thought it could
have been an accident. 

Many Palestinians also are extremely cynical about Mideast peace
efforts, seeing it as an attempt by Israel and the United States to
pacify the Palestinians without improving their lot. 

"To Khalil, and to all of us, the talk is nothing but lies," said Azhaq,
65, a retired hospital worker. "We often talked about this. No one on
this street believed in the peace talks." 

Before night fell Wednesday, Abu Olbeh's family and relatives had left
their home, fearing a possible Israeli reprisal attack, and neighbors
wouldn't say where they had gone. 

"Since I live next door, I don't feel safe either," said Azhaq.












From zapata at sezampro.yu  Fri Feb 16 09:34:25 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:34:25 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
References: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102130108170.3740-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk> <200102160107.UAA09933@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>
Message-ID: <005401c09835$bf786140$56bd6ac2@andrej>

Thanks for the extensive reply. I appreciate it.
As far as I can see there are few substantial remarks:
1. Distance regarding working class
2. Transfer of revolutionary Subject
3. Personal remarks ( I am surprised and shocked with Adorno defending US
imperialism)
4. That framework is outdated
  I have read an interview with Marcuze recently ( it was made by Habermas,
when on Herbert's birthday ( 80 years  think), perhaps someone read it?
Interesting fact is that Marcuze, trying to resist tireless attacks made by
Habermas, is altering his theory according to which Subject of revolution is
working class, and only working class. Student movements, civil right
movements, feminist groups, he is calling them "anticipating groups,
catalizators ".....His main thesis here is that revolution must be  - in the
atmosphere of preventive counter-revolution, revised and that model of
revision should be the instruction that revolution should not be regarded as
a consequence of pauperization but as a consequence of consumer society. He
repeats his idea that only pre-structuring of instincts, from destructive to
creative, is going to bring to the light of history a new man Marx has
described (Eros vs. Tanatos). He is altering some of his positions on
aesthetics ( from _Affirmative Character of Culture_ to _Permanency of
Culture_).....There are some other interesting modifications.
 He is claiming his loyalty to Adorno and Horckhaimer and justifies his
campaign against From in a new manner.
  But he thinks that the crucial moment in critical theory is the trajectory
of capitalism- consumer society- destruction.......
 So, two questions:
1.) What do you think about Marcuze's insistence on similarities between him
and Adorno + Horkhaimer , and
2.) What do you recognize today as central framework of critical (meta)
theory?
 Question number two is rather interesting in Europe now because of the
attempts to revitalize critical theory in some Marxist circles.........
Comradely,
                   Andrej







From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb 16 09:51:13 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:51:13 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
In-Reply-To: <005401c09835$bf786140$56bd6ac2@andrej>
References: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102130108170.3740-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk>
 <200102160107.UAA09933@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010216114846.00db6bb4@popserver.panix.com>

> So, two questions:
>1.) What do you think about Marcuze's insistence on similarities between him
>and Adorno + Horkhaimer , and

I actually prefer Marcuse to Adorno by a long shot. The older that Marcuse
got, the more radical he got. Here's a defense of Marcuse that I wrote:

http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/mydocs/modernism/marcuse.htm

Here's a review of Adorno-Horkheimer's "Dialectics of Enlightenment":

http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/mydocs/modernism/adorno.htm

>2.) What do you recognize today as central framework of critical (meta)
>theory?
> Question number two is rather interesting in Europe now because of the
>attempts to revitalize critical theory in some Marxist circles.........
>Comradely,
>                   Andrej

You're asking the wrong guy basically. I view Western Marxism as a
departure from revolutionary theory, mostly because it detaches theory not
only from strategy, but from a class perspective as well. It has basically
created a sanitized version of Marxism suitable for chit-chat at Ivy League
universities like Columbia University where I work.

In the USA, "Social Text" is the journal most involved with breathing life
into the Frankfurt School project. Unfortunately, their website does not
contain sample articles: http://www.nyu.edu/pubs/socialtext/

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Fri Feb 16 13:10:31 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:10:31 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Toward a More Sustainable Economics
Message-ID: <sa8d42e7.051@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

Toward a More Sustainable Economics
... part of life, of reality. Marshall Sahlins: Lessons
from the Paleolithic. It has been said that there ... 
www.smartoffice.com/DesignGenius/Toward%20a%20More%20Sustainable%20Economics.html - 28k - Cached - Similar pages




From zapata at sezampro.yu  Fri Feb 16 17:58:09 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:58:09 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Louis P. in L. Library
References: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102130108170.3740-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk><200102160107.UAA09933@kachifo.cc.columbia.edu> <3.0.1.32.20010216114846.00db6bb4@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <002601c0987c$1e40be20$9074fac3@andrej>

Thanks for the pointers. I am going to read reviews and articles you have
sent.
Best Regards,
                    Andrej
>
> You're asking the wrong guy basically. I view Western Marxism as a
> departure from revolutionary theory, mostly because it detaches theory not
> only from strategy, but from a class perspective as well. It has basically
> created a sanitized version of Marxism suitable for chit-chat at Ivy
League
> universities like Columbia University where I work.
>
> In the USA, "Social Text" is the journal most involved with breathing life
> into the Frankfurt School project. Unfortunately, their website does not
> contain sample articles: http://www.nyu.edu/pubs/socialtext/
>
> Louis Proyect
> Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 17 14:27:18 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 21:27:18 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] two new papers on the political economy of crisis
Message-ID: <000701c09928$5c6c0ae0$fa9820d9@mjones>

2 new papers by Marxian economist Alan Freeman archived at the CrashList
website:

NEW PARADIGM OR NEW PARASITISM?
http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base/freeman2.doc

CRISIS AND THE POVERTY OF NATIONS
http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base/freeman3.doc

Is there a "New Economy"? Whither the US?

Alan Freeman writes:

"We are in the middle of a period of unstable and partial recovery whose core
is a renewed struggle, between leading industrial powers, to reconstitute
national profit rates at the expense of their rivals, in and through a
struggle for the domination of all those sources of surplus profits that arise
from the control of territory and markets; that is, a period characterised,
albeit with specific differences, by a return to classical imperialism."


"The price of recovery from general crisis necessarily includes a general
reorganisation of the world market, including all that goes with this: a
reorganisation of its territories, wars of intervention, the forcible
imposition of the necessary market relations where necessary against the will
of the nations concerned, and so on. It means that the exit from one kind of
catastrophe is, in the last analysis, another kind of catastrophe. The idea
that the market itself, if left to itself will simply restore the conditions
for its own existence, does not hold. The evidence confirms Marxs original
judgement of a hundred and thirty years ago that the market itself sets the
limits on its own existence; to this we must however add that the automatic
processes of the market are not the only ones in the world; no ruling class
has ever voluntarily surrendered its existence, and there is no evidence of
any intrinsic limit on the barbarism and destructiveness of which it is
capable: on the contrary, each new exit from general crisis reaches previously
inconceivable heights of it. As a way out therefore, what is now happening
can only be regarded by the human race with the most extreme distrust."




From rsp at uniserve.com  Sat Feb 17 23:50:12 2001
From: rsp at uniserve.com (Sam Pawlett)
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 22:50:12 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] [Fwd: [evol-psych] The worms' turn]
Message-ID: <3A8F706B.24EB3A1A@uniserve.com>


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [evol-psych] The worms' turn
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:23:25 -0000
From: "Ian Pitchford" <ian.pitchford at scientist.com>
Reply-To: "Ian Pitchford" <Ian.Pitchford at scientist.com>
Organization: http://www.human-nature.com/darwin/index.html
To: <evolutionary-psychology at yahoogroups.com>

THE GUARDIAN
The worms' turn
The good news: we have more genes than nematodes. The bad news: most of
them are junk
John O'Farrell
Guardian

Saturday February 17, 2001

This week a team of international scientists shared the incredible
revelation that homo sapiens has about 30,000 genes. There was then a
pause while everyone
tried to gauge whether they should be amazed that this number was so
high or so low. It transpires that they'd been expecting the American
citizens from whom they took their samples to have many more genes than
the nematode worm, but I
suppose that's what happens when you base your research on the
president.

Worms were used in the genome project because it was presumed that their
genetic code would be so simple to decipher that everyone could knock
off early
on Friday afternoon. But now the papers have had to report the
uncomfortable truth that there's not that much difference between
ourselves and the worm; the
simple, primitive, stupid worm. Frankly worms have been patronised
terribly in the media this week, and ought to take their case to the
press complaints commission, except they won't of course, because
they're so stupid.

Full text:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4137669,00.html



News in Brain and Behavioural Sciences
http://human-nature.com/nibbs/
To subscribe/unsubscribe/select DIGEST go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evolutionary-psychology
Join the Human Behaviour and Evolution Society
http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/hbesrenew/



From rsp at uniserve.com  Sat Feb 17 23:53:45 2001
From: rsp at uniserve.com (Sam Pawlett)
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 22:53:45 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] The New Anti-Capitalism
Message-ID: <3A8F7140.2BC58A2E@uniserve.com>

http://www.isj1text.fsnet.co.uk/pubs/isj88/harman.htm

A pretty good article relatively free of sectarian bullshit and SWP
shibboleth's like the permanent arms economy and 'state capitalism'
though with a blind spot around energy/fossil fuels.

Sam Pawlett



From aabdo at webtv.net  Sun Feb 18 12:32:26 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:32:26 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Why Iraq Was Bombed on Friday ....or Que opinas tu Dave Duke?
Message-ID: <3354-3A90234A-3501@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

The question is.... Why was Iraq bombed on Friday?     It is an entirely
different question from.... Why was Iraq bombed, Period?     The answer
to that, involves The Middle East, Europe, Russia, and the geopolitical
message of letting the world know once again, who the Chief Terrorist
will continue to be.

But why Friday, and not Thursday or Saturday?     Does it even matter
what day of the week the bombs were dropped?      Who even cares?

Well the answer to that, is that the Republican Right Wing would have
cared.    Precisely because they are at odds with George and family over
a key political issue; US/ Mexican relations.

Pete Wilson rises from his political grave like a half-undead vampire.
The Republican Party is split right down the middle between The Rabid
National Chauvinists, and the Republican Businessmen.     And it was
necessary to bomb Iraq Friday, to keep this division from tearing
usunder.     And most of all, to keep it out of public light.

Here was the problem Friday for Bush..... How to go to Mexico and hug
Fox ala Clinton?      And not get burned by the more rabid sections of
his own Party?     They hate Mexicans, and Bush promising a new day
ahead in US/ Mexican immigration, binational policing cooperation, and
new travel and immigration laws is not something that they are ready to
embrace!     Yet that is the promise way down South beyond Dixie.

The Texas business community is at odds with their Republican cohorts in
the rest of the nation.    Their only regional allies within the
Republican Party are with the Miami/ Cuban oriented Florida Republicans.
But 'free trade' means money, and 80% of the Mexican/ US flow of
products enters or leaves via Texas.      NAFTA is Texas.       And
Texas Republicans are in a new love affair with their senyorita,
Mexico... with Fox at the reign.

It's more than just 'free trade', too.     It's Pemex, oil, and natural
gas.      Texas business interests are the US enterprises that most
shall benefit off any pillage of Mexican natural resources.

Texaco for Mexico!      OK, Cousin Slim?     Well Cousin might not be
totally happy, but he is now worth $8 billion US dollars.      He
probably won't be protesting too hard.

So back to Friday, the day Iraq got bombed......     This was also the
day Dubya went down to Guanajuato to practice his Spanish, and to eat
some food better prepared than the usual Tex-Mex.    Family day for the
Bushes and Foxes!      Hugs, smiles, and hand clasps all around.
All for Mexican TV.

But US TV was another story.      It was just another routine day where
the family Bush slaps Saddam around.      Like Father, like Son.
All the Hard Right Evangelical Nuts, Military Gung Hoers, and Jesse
Helms Wannabes could hardly get bitter with Dubya for being like dad?!
Could they?

One of the benefits of living here on the Great Divide (the Tex-Mx
border), is that one gets two propaganda systems for the price of one!
And what a beauty it is, to see how in little more than 6 months the
Mexican Propaganda System has gone from selling support for
'dictatorship', to selling support for neo-liberal 'democracy'.   Those
Mexicans hardly blinked an eye.     It truly is like our Two Party
System here at home.     And I'm beginning to feel more safe now!

The Mexican side had little to say about the bombs, and lots about the
hugs.     The US side had lots to sayabout bombs, and little about hugs.
And that's why Iraq got bombed on Friday.

It's going to be hard balancing act for Dubya.     His supporters are
even holding Texas state legislative sessions in Spanish!     Can he
hold the Republican Pearly Gates open for the Tex-Mex professional crowd
to swing inside and away from the Democratic Party, or will he get
bashed in by The Traditionalists?    
Que opinas tu Dave Duke?    Que viva Mexico?      O que se chingue
Mexico?     

Tony Abdo












From aabdo at webtv.net  Sun Feb 18 19:03:33 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 18:03:33 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Tuxedos and Tacos and Bombs
Message-ID: <19777-3A907EF4-3610@storefull-233.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Saturday, February 17, 2001
Bush and Fox Broach Issue of Migration 
By EDWIN CHEN, JAMES F. SMITH, 

SAN CRISTOBAL, Mexico--President Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox
on Friday pledged a "full, mature and equitable partnership of
prosperity," heralding "a new day" in their two countries' relations.
????As a first step, the fledgling presidents launched formal
negotiations to develop a broad framework for addressing the contentious
issue of immigration-- including a possible "guest worker" program for
temporary migrant workers. 

????The talks are to be headed by Secretary of State Colin L.
Powell and Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, and by Mexican Foreign Minister
Jorge Castaneda and Interior Secretary Santiago Creel. ????Their
mandate, the presidents said at their shirt-sleeves summit at the Fox
family ranch here in central Mexico, is to create "an orderly framework
for migration that ensures humane treatment [and] legal security, and
dignifies labor conditions." 

????"I believe this is a great advancement on what we had
before," Fox said. 

????The Mexican president, who has said the ultimate goal should
be an open border between the two countries, said, "Certainly, there is
a new attitude, a new, much more positive way of seeing things, in
dealing with migration." 

????And Bush said to his Mexican audience: "I trust your
president. He's the kind of man you can look in the eye and you know
he's shooting straight with you." 
????A senior Mexican official called the summit a "purely
substantive meeting," in which the two presidents delved into specifics
on serious issues. 

????For Mexico, the official said, "the main point from our
perspective is the conceptual breakthrough on immigration, that we now
place this squarely on the U.S.-Mexican agenda. This is a huge change."
?????But the talks here were somewhat overshadowed by news
from the Middle East. On a day when Bush was selling amity south of the
border on his first trip abroad as president, U.S. warplanes struck
Iraqi radar installations near Baghdad. 

?????Asked about the timing of those attacks, Bush defended
his action as a "routine mission" to enforce the "no-fly" zones in the
north and south of Iraq. 

?????Fox declined to be drawn into the debate, saying tersely
during a joint news conference, "I do not have a position or a statement
on that topic." Asked if the bombings detracted from the visit, Fox
said, "I see no reason why we should connect one event with the other
one." 

?????The two leaders said they spent considerable time Friday
discussing energy issues, including California's electricity shortage.
?????And in his public comments after their meeting, Bush
demonstrated that he no longer views the energy crisis as a problem
restricted to California, or even the West. "It is a hemispheric issue,
and it needs to be elevated to the presidential level," he said. 
?????Bush said he and Fox discussed the possibility of
creating "a common policy whereby no one takes advantage of the other."
The U.S. leader said a North American energy policy could help ease
California's crisis in part by making more electricity available from
the Mexican state of Baja California. 

?????"We did talk about power, the generation of power--the
possibility as to whether or not in Baja, for example, more power could
be added to the Western grid," Bush said. "It's an obvious opportunity,
if possible." 

?????But the joint statement made clear that a series of
obstacles must be addressed. Those include Mexican constitutional
barriers to private investment in the energy sector and Mexico's
inability to meet its own energy needs. 

?????Both leaders made clear that the goal of the meeting was
to establish a basis for cooperation during their presidencies rather
than to reach specific agreements. The men's ease with each other was
evident in their joint news conference after the formal talks, a
relatively comfortable first trip abroad for the U.S. president.
?????"I want you to understand that we consider you a friend
of Mexico, a friend of the Mexican people and a friend of mine," Fox
said. 

?????Bush replied in passable Spanish, "It makes me feel that
I am among family." 

?????On the issue of fighting drug trafficking, Bush declined
to specify whether he would seek to exempt Mexico from the annual
process in which the U.S. certifies foreign countries as cooperative.
Mexicans consider the certification process an insulting interference in
their domestic affairs. 

?????But Bush noted that "there is a movement in the country
to review the certification process" and added that he would bring home
to Congress a message of confidence in Fox's commitment to fight
traffickers. 

?????The migration issue is an extremely emotional one for
Mexico, given the annual stream of young Mexicans who cross into the
U.S. each year seeking work. More than 1.5 million Mexicans are arrested
each year trying to cross illegally, and nearly 400 a year die in the
attempt. 

?????Fox has pushed for an integrated agreement on migration
that would include an organized flow of authorized temporary workers
into the United States and an effort to end abuses by migrant-smuggling
syndicates. 

?????Bush appeared to respond to that sentiment, saying, "We
exchanged ideas about safe and orderly migration, a policy that respects
individuals on both sides of the border." ?????Condoleezza
Rice, Bush's national security advisor, said after the meeting that the
two presidents "share the same goals. They believe that people need to
be treated humanely. They believe that people need to be able to have
the fruits of their labor, and they believe that the economic benefits
to both countries need to be recognized." 

?????Bush had departed a rainy Washington before dawn,
arriving in the city of Leon after a 4 1/2-hour flight. After a brief
airport ceremony, Bush and Fox drove to the Fox family's hacienda in San
Cristobal, where Bush met the president's mother, Mercedes Quesada, whom
he kissed on the cheek. 

?????Bush, by then tie-less, presented her with a shawl and a
photograph of him and his wife, First Lady Laura Bush.
?????The two men then went to Fox's nearby weekend home on the
outskirts of San Cristobal, about 210 miles northwest of Mexico City.
Before going inside, Bush and Fox greeted a throng of well-wishers,
including many children. 

?????At the ranch, both men went even more casual, and later
appeared at their joint news conference in shirt sleeves. Many aides
also went without ties, including Powell and Castaneda.
______________________________

UPDATE 1-Bush to Crawford residents: "Hello neighbors"   
18 Feb 2001  
By Steve Holland 

CRAWFORD, Texas, Feb 18 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush had a
simple message for the hardy Texas folk in this tiny town where he has
his ranch: "I love my job ... but I'll always remember where my home
is." 

About 250 of its estimated 700 residents turned out on Saturday night
for the Crawford "inaugural ball" staged for the new president and his
wife, Laura, at the community center, a corrugated iron building on the
edge of town. 

It was the only public sighting of the president since his Marine One
helicopter flew over the countryside on Friday night to deposit Bush at
his 1,600-acre (648-hectare) "Prairie Chapel" ranch for his first
weekend here since he was inaugurated on Jan. 20. 

Bush had some catching up to do and he did it at warp speed, completing
a running, weightlifting, angling triathalon before noon on Sunday. He
followed that up with a couple of hours cutting wood and clearing brush. 

"The president took a three-mile run shortly after 7 a.m., had a quick
breakfast and worked out with weights in the exercise house," said White
House spokesman Gordon Johndroe. "And then he went fishing. That was
before noon." 

Stray dogs yapped at Bush's motorcade as it departed for the inaugural
ball, which was scheduled long before the town knew Bush would be here
this weekend. The first couple entered to the playing of "Hail to the
Chief." 

TUXES AND TACOS 
Some guests wore tuxedos and formal wear, but Bush was in a business
suit, joking to people that he would have worn his tux but had to turn
it in because the rental had run out on it. 

The menu was tacos, rice and beans, and cookies made from Mrs. Bush's
favorite recipe. Each table had black boots as a centerpiece. The Boy
Scouts led the pledge of allegiance to the flag and a high school boy
sang the national anthem. 

Bush's parents, George and Barbara Bush, were not there. But there were
cutouts of the former first couple, and people posed for pictures with
them. 

"Hello neighbors," Bush told the crowd, according to participants who
paid $25 to attend. 

The media was kept out during Bush's visit and shared the front lawn
with a fearsome Longhorn steer named Frito tethered to a spindly tree
and fenced in by a string of Christmas lights. Frito was trucked in to
add that extra Texas touch. 
At least one guest videotaped Bush's appearance and shared it with
reporters. 

"Home is important. It's important to have a home," the president said.
"I'm going to come back as often as I can, for a lot of reasons ... for
one, I want to stay in touch with real Americans." 

Bush, no fan of dancing, managed to do his version of an inaugural waltz
with the first lady for the crowd, but he did not less grass grow under
his feet. He was in and out of the party in about 12 minutes.












From embark at epud.net  Sun Feb 18 23:38:39 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:38:39 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Toward a More Sustainable Economics
References: <E14UfhG-0007a4-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c09a3f$0c42dea0$77acefd8@rowan>

> From: "Charles Brown" <CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us>
>
> Toward a More Sustainable Economics
> ... part of life, of reality. Marshall Sahlins: Lessons
> from the Paleolithic. It has been said that there ...=20
>
www.smartoffice.com/DesignGenius/Toward%20a%20More%20Sustainable%20Economic=
> s.html - 28k - Cached - Similar pages

Wow. Thanks Charles. Thanks for drawing our attention to a very concise
description of the heart of the matter and the real truth. (except for the
Therow part. <G>)

I searched through the Sahlin statements to find one that echoed my
orientations, and found the whole thing worth quoting! ... but I'll merely
draw attention to this:

"By the common understanding, an affluent society is one in which all the
people's material wants are easily satisfied. To assert that the hunters are
affluent is to deny then that the human condition is an ordained tragedy,
with man the prisoner at hard labor of a perpetual disparity between his
unlimited wants and his insufficient means" (Sahlins, 1).

And this is where the economic fallacy comes in. Market economics assumes
that humans want a great deal of material goods, more than they can ever
afford, in a world of limited means. And the only way to narrow the gap
between means and wants is via increased productivity.

Marx once stated, "in poor nations the people are comfortable," whereas, in
rich nations, "they are generally poor" (2). Sahlins summed it up by asking
the question, "Is it so paradoxical to contend that hunters have affluent
societies, their absolute poverty withstanding?" (3).


Yeah. that's it.

Everyone do yourselves a favor and visit that URL. It's fundamentally
informative. It will give you perspective.

Tom

"They counted on being able to punish them into being better, on being able
to inspire them into being better, on being able to educate them into being
better. And after ten thousand years of trying to improve people-- without a
trace of success -- they wouldn't dream of turning their attention
elsewhere."  -Daniel Quinn, My Ishmael






From Borba100 at aol.com  Sun Feb 18 20:22:27 2001
From: Borba100 at aol.com (Borba100 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:22:27 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] BOMBING FOR DOLLARS: TIMING OF ATTACKS ON BAGHDAD BAILS OUT WALL STREET
Message-ID: <6d.f9c9dfb.27c1eb72@aol.com>

URL for his article is http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/choss/bombs.htm
www.tenc.net 
[Emperor's Clothes]

How War and Globalization Support American Business?

As Billions Flow to Oil and Defense Companies - 
Bombing Of Baghdad Staves Off Financial Uncertainty
by Michel Chossudovsky [2-19-2001]
Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa, author of The Globalization of 
Poverty, second edition, Common Courage Press, 2001.

On Friday February 16th, spurred on by the dot-com implosion and the 
climactic downfall of Nortel Networks Corporation, the World's leader in 
fiber optics, the value of high tech stocks plummeted on Wall Street in 
turbulent trading. The NASDAQ stock index declined by more than five percent 
to a record low.

But it could have been much worse. Did the bombing of Baghdad pull Wall 
Street out of danger? In fact it did more than that. It put billions of 
dollars into the deep pockets of Defense contractors and oil companies.

WARNINGS FROM WALL STREET

In the days leading up to the February 16 near-meltdown, stock market 
analysts had warned of a worst-case scenario. High tech stocks were heavily 
overvalued. 

But that day at 1.00pm, a few hours before trading closed on the New York 
Stock Exchange, American and British warplanes bombed Baghdad in what the 
Pentagon described as "a routine mission of self-defense." 

Routine self defense? The US media applauded. And on Wall Street, brokers did 
more than applaud; they gasped with relief. For in a cruel irony, the bombing 
raids had saved the day. As one British financial analyst noted with 
contempt: 

"..the American market didn't collapse. It didn't plummet. Indeed, the fall 
was less than one per cent. This was a routine day - unless you happened to 
live in Baghdad."1 
Meanwhile, with telecom and computer stocks in the doldrums, financial and 
defense analysts had been working hard to rebuild "confidence in the stock 
market": 

"Makers of the nation's warfare technologies along with Wall Street analysts 
and industry consultants spent a week bragging about new opportunities and 
the likelihood of changes to Pentagon policy that would foster growth after 
15 years of strained budgets. What's more, defense and aerospace stocks ended 
on a high note, climbing amid a broad market slump as 24 U.S. and British 
warplanes struck Iraqi military targets using various long-range, 
precision-guided weapons."2 
In the last hours of trading on the 16th, defense stocks spiraled; oil and 
energy stocks boomed following news that Iraq's oil industry might be 
impaired. The value of Exxon, Chevron and Texaco stocks shot up. Harken 
Energy Corporation --in which George W. Bush served as company director and 
corporate consultant before entering politics-- gained 5.4% by the end of 
trading. Harken Energy happens to be a key player in Colombian oil (with a 
multi-billion dollar US military aid package under "Plan Colombia" on hand to 
protect its investments). Harken Energy CEO Mikel Faulkner is a former 
business associate of George W.

FINANCIAL MELTDOWN

The February 16th meltdown was already being predicted at the close of 
trading on the 15th. Business analysts on the evening news said that a major 
"correction" in the value of high tech stocks was "inevitable". The financial 
press had previously hinted that the US defense industry could also take a 
beating if the new Bush Administration were to curtail military procurement. 

A few days earlier, Lockheed Martin (LMT) --America's largest defense 
contractor-- had announced major cuts in its satellite division due to "flat 
demand" in the commercial satellite market. A company spokesman had reassured 
Wall Street that Lockheed "was moving in the right direction" by shifting 
financial resources out of its troubled commercial (that is, civilian) 
undertakings into the lucrative production of advanced weapon systems. 

For weeks, defense contractors had been actively lobbying the new 
Administration. On Tuesday February 12th, President Bush promised to hike 
defense spending based on "a comprehensive review of the military." According 
to The New York Times (12 February 2001), George W. Bush said:

"he planned to break with Pentagon orthodoxy and create 'a new architecture 
for the defense of America and our allies,' investing in new technologies and 
weapons systems rather than making 'marginal improvements' for systems in 
which America's arms industry has invested billions of dollars." 
On the 14th, he confirmed "a $2.6 billion increase in the Pentagon's budget 
as a 'down payment' on new-weapons research and development."3 

And two days later Baghdad was bombed by the US Air Force.

The raids were a signal to Wall Street that Bush's promise "to revitalize the 
nation's defense" should be taken seriously. Had the Bush administration 
decided otherwise, Lockheed Martin's listing on the New York Stock exchange 
might well have experienced the same fate as that of Nortel. In fact, while 
(civilian) high tech stocks (quoted on the NASDAQ) had plummeted, Lockheed 
Martin stocks ended the day up a comfortable 1.6%. 

Meanwhile, the F-22 Raptor high tech fighter jet was already scheduled 
--pending the Administration's final approval-- to be assembled (at an 
estimated cost of $60 billion) at Lockheed Martin Marietta's plant in Georgia:

"Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was an F-22 advocate before joining the 
Bush administration, and Lockheed officials said Thursday [February 15th , 
one day before the raids on Baghdad] they are confident Rumsfeld will support 
the technologically advanced plane." 4 
The message to financial markets was crystal clear: the bear market was 
hitting "civilian" high tech stocks including Nortel, Dell Computers and 
Hewlett Packard; but defense industry listings --including Boeing, General 
Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop-Grumman and Raytheon (the "Big Five" 
defense contractors) -- remained "safe" and "promising." (i.e. "a good place 
to put your money"). Wall Street analysts had concluded --without batting an 
eyelid-- that 

"with the Bush administration's focus on defense, there is optimism the 
industry is on target to outperform the market again this year."5 
The new buzz phrase on Wall Street is that --despite the slow-down of the US 
economy-- defense stocks constitute "a safe-haven shelter from the dot-com 
implosion". More generally, the assumptions underlying Bush's new defense 
budget are considered "good for business": no wonder pension funds and 
institutional investors are busy changing the structure of their portfolios! 

NEW WORLD 'ORDER'

War and globalization go hand in hand. Militarisation is an integral part of 
the neoliberal agenda. The build-up of the defense budget contributes to 
beefing up the "Big Five" US defense contractors, while denying financial 
resources to civilian programs including health, education and social welfare 
not to mention the rebuilding of America's deteriorating urban 
infrastructure. Whereas defense production has spiraled, recession has hit 
the sectors of the US economy which produce "civilian" consumer goods and 
services. The U.S. domestic economy increasingly hinges on the military 
industrial complex and the sale of luxury goods (travel, leisure, luxury 
cars, etc.). And this satisfies the financial establishment irrespective of 
the needs of ordinary people. 

The bombing raids on Baghdad were certainly intended to intimidate countries 
committed to ending the sanctions on Iraq. But more generally, "missile 
diplomacy" is applied to enforce American political and economic domination 
under the guise of what is euphemistically called "the free market." 

"The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist ? 
McDonald?s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the 
F-15."6 
And America's war machine is used in support of the conquest of new economic 
frontiers. In the Middle East, the Balkans and Central Asia, the US military 
is positioning itself directly and through NATO not only to support the 
interests of the Anglo-American oil conglomerates, which are working hand in 
glove with defense contractors in lucrative joint ventures, but to further 
colonize the former Soviet Union and Asian countries. Meanwhile, spiraling 
defense spending pours wealth into the military industrial complex at the 
expense of civilian needs. 

NOTES

Sunday Mail, London, 18 February 2001. 
Reuters, 16 February 2001. About 80 warplanes were involved, of which 24 were 
strike aircraft. See Financial Times, 17 February 2001. 
"Bush Vows To Modernize Military After Pentagon Review Is Completed", The 
Bulletin's Frontrunner, 14 February 2001. 
Dave Hirschman, "F-22's Fate to be Decided Next Month; Not on hold: Bush's 
Defense Review won't delay Judgment on Raptor", The Atlanta Journal and 
Constitution, 16 February 2001. 
The Nightly Business Report, NPR, 19 February 2001. 
Thomas L. Friedman, "A Manifesto for the Fast World," 'New York Times 
Magazine', Mar. 28, 1999.) 
C Copyright by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa, February 2001. All rights 
reserved. Permission is granted to post this text on non-commercial community 
internet sites, provided the essay remains intact and the copyright note is 
displayed. To publish this text in printed and/or other form, contact the 
author at chossudovsky at videotron.ca, fax: 1-514-4256224. 

Send this article to a friend! [Does not work with all email programs...]

Further reading -

Some Other articles by Professor Chossudovsky 

State Terror and the "Free Market" Opening up Kosovo to Foreign Capital at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/chuss/opening.htm

The Trepca Takeover: Part of a Pattern of Criminalazing Kosovo at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/chuss/opening.htm

'German Foreign Minister Calls for Permanent German Troop Occupation of 
Yugoslavia 'at http://emperors-clothes.com/news/occupation.htm

'The IMF & World Bank Just Two of the Instruments for National Destruction ' 
at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/chuss/instru.htm

'The International Monetary Fund And The Yugoslav Elections' at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/1.htm

Yugoslav Opposition Negotiates Surrender of Yugoslavia at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/11.htm

The Nuts and Bolts of a Scam...How the U.S. has Created a Corrupt Opposition 
in Serbia at http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/scam.htm

The UN Appoints an Alleged War Criminal at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/chuss/unandthe.htm

U.S. Instigated Mob Attempts a Coup Against Democracy in Yugoslavia (revised) 
at http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/coup.htm

Washington Votes Massive 'Aid' to Opposition in Yugoslav Runoff at 
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/chuss/wash.htm

Please Assist Yugoslav Journalists' Fund 

Emperor's Clothes is trying to assist a few families of Yugoslav journalists. 
These journalists are among the many journalists who have literally been 
thrown out of work when thugs took over all TV and radio stations and 
newspapers during and after the Oct. 5th coup. These attacks are part of the 
terror in 'democratic' Serbia. We are providing some financial help; we need 
to provide more. 

It's really a privilege to be able to help these brave men and women who are 
trying to report 'the other side' within Yugoslavia and, through Emperor's 
Clothes and other media, to the outside world.

Meanwhile, our own operating costs have increased. (For instance, monthly 
fees for the superb news media search engine Lexis have more than doubled.)

If you can make a contribution either to our general expenses or specifically 
to help the Journalists' Fund, please do. Any amount will help. To use our 
secure server, please go to 
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm#donate. (If you use the secure 
server and wish your contribution to go to the Journalists' Fund, please send 
us a note at emperors1000 at aol.com 

Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 
02461-0321.

Or call 617 916-1705 from 9-5, Eastern U.S. time and ask for Bob. Thanks very 
much!

And please join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/feedback.htm. 
Important articles will be sent to you two or three times a week. If the 
Website should experience technical problems or be hacked, we will post 
articles through this list.

www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
 



From ssandron at hotmail.com  Sun Feb 18 21:30:29 2001
From: ssandron at hotmail.com (Seth Sandronsky)
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 04:30:29 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Politics: Bush rolls back policies favored by organized labor
Message-ID: <F40WK43S3Iouk4RFfJV000022a2@hotmail.com>

Hi Tony,

Meanwhile in America, the attack against the US working class continues as 
the prez targets labor unions.

Seth

Politics: Bush rolls back policies favored by organized labor

The Associated Press
CRAWFORD, Texas (February 17, 2001 3:32 p.m. EST http://www.nandotimes.com) 
- President Bush on Saturday rolled back government policies favored by 
organized labor. The White House said the move would create "fair and open" 
competition for government contracts.
Bush issued four executive orders on separate aspects of labor policy, 
including one to make it easier for union workers to stop their dues from 
being used to pay for political activities. The others deal with 
union-management relations on government contracts and in the government's 
own workplace.
Union officials, informed of Bush's intentions days ago at the AFL-CIO 
meeting in Los Angeles said the orders were needlessly antagonistic. Edward 
C. Sullivan, president of the AFL-CIO's building and construction trades 
department, said Friday his union would seek relief in federal courts.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Bush's actions would make for 
easier competition between unionized and nonunion contractors seeking 
federal projects, a change that could save taxpayers money.
"Government contracting decisions should be neutral, neither requiring nor 
prohibiting project labor agreements," Fleischer said. "Government 
contracting should also be fair and open to ensure that all workers can 
compete for jobs on a level playing field as well as contractors, 
particularly small, minority or women-owned businesses."
Specifically, Bush's orders:
Require federal contractors to post a notice telling workers they have a 
right under a 1988 Supreme Court ruling not to pay portions of their dues 
that sponsor political activities. Unions are a prime source of money and 
grass-roots organizing for Democrats.
Revoke the "project labor agreement," which requires contractors in many 
federally financed projects to be unionized. The provision, employed at the 
discretion of states, is an issue in an expensive proposal to replace the 
Woodrow Wilson Bridge on heavily traveled Interstate 95 between Virginia and 
Maryland.
Dissolve the National Partnership Council, a Clinton organization that 
sought to get government agencies and unions to resolve their differences.
Revoke a Clinton policy of job protection for employees of contractors at 
federal buildings when the project is awarded to another contractor.

Seth

From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 13:32:26 -0600 (CST)
To: CHOMSKY at MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU, crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com,
marxism at lists.panix.com
Subject: [CrashList] Why Iraq Was Bombed on Friday ....or Que opinas tu Dave
Duke?
Reply-To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com

The question is.... Why was Iraq bombed on Friday?     It is an entirely
different question from.... Why was Iraq bombed, Period?     The answer
to that, involves The Middle East, Europe, Russia, and the geopolitical
message of letting the world know once again, who the Chief Terrorist
will continue to be.

But why Friday, and not Thursday or Saturday?     Does it even matter
what day of the week the bombs were dropped?      Who even cares?

Well the answer to that, is that the Republican Right Wing would have
cared.    Precisely because they are at odds with George and family over
a key political issue; US/ Mexican relations.

Pete Wilson rises from his political grave like a half-undead vampire.
The Republican Party is split right down the middle between The Rabid
National Chauvinists, and the Republican Businessmen.     And it was
necessary to bomb Iraq Friday, to keep this division from tearing
usunder.     And most of all, to keep it out of public light.

Here was the problem Friday for Bush..... How to go to Mexico and hug
Fox ala Clinton?      And not get burned by the more rabid sections of
his own Party?     They hate Mexicans, and Bush promising a new day
ahead in US/ Mexican immigration, binational policing cooperation, and
new travel and immigration laws is not something that they are ready to
embrace!     Yet that is the promise way down South beyond Dixie.

The Texas business community is at odds with their Republican cohorts in
the rest of the nation.    Their only regional allies within the
Republican Party are with the Miami/ Cuban oriented Florida Republicans.
But 'free trade' means money, and 80% of the Mexican/ US flow of
products enters or leaves via Texas.      NAFTA is Texas.       And
Texas Republicans are in a new love affair with their senyorita,
Mexico... with Fox at the reign.

It's more than just 'free trade', too.     It's Pemex, oil, and natural
gas.      Texas business interests are the US enterprises that most
shall benefit off any pillage of Mexican natural resources.

Texaco for Mexico!      OK, Cousin Slim?     Well Cousin might not be
totally happy, but he is now worth $8 billion US dollars.      He
probably won't be protesting too hard.

So back to Friday, the day Iraq got bombed......     This was also the
day Dubya went down to Guanajuato to practice his Spanish, and to eat
some food better prepared than the usual Tex-Mex.    Family day for the
Bushes and Foxes!      Hugs, smiles, and hand clasps all around.
All for Mexican TV.

But US TV was another story.      It was just another routine day where
the family Bush slaps Saddam around.      Like Father, like Son.
All the Hard Right Evangelical Nuts, Military Gung Hoers, and Jesse
Helms Wannabes could hardly get bitter with Dubya for being like dad?!
Could they?

One of the benefits of living here on the Great Divide (the Tex-Mx
border), is that one gets two propaganda systems for the price of one!
And what a beauty it is, to see how in little more than 6 months the
Mexican Propaganda System has gone from selling support for
'dictatorship', to selling support for neo-liberal 'democracy'.   Those
Mexicans hardly blinked an eye.     It truly is like our Two Party
System here at home.     And I'm beginning to feel more safe now!

The Mexican side had little to say about the bombs, and lots about the
hugs.     The US side had lots to sayabout bombs, and little about hugs.
And that's why Iraq got bombed on Friday.

It's going to be hard balancing act for Dubya.     His supporters are
even holding Texas state legislative sessions in Spanish!     Can he
hold the Republican Pearly Gates open for the Tex-Mex professional crowd
to swing inside and away from the Democratic Party, or will he get
bashed in by The Traditionalists?
Que opinas tu Dave Duke?    Que viva Mexico?      O que se chingue
Mexico?

Tony Abdo

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com




From rsp at uniserve.com  Mon Feb 19 09:04:33 2001
From: rsp at uniserve.com (Sam Pawlett)
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:04:33 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Not in Our Genes,after all.
Message-ID: <3A9151C4.52AAAA89@uniserve.com>


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [evol-psych] The left can celebrate the latest news on genes,
but not too much
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:02:07 -0000
From: "Ian Pitchford" <ian.pitchford at scientist.com>
Reply-To: "Ian Pitchford" <Ian.Pitchford at scientist.com>
Organization: http://www.human-nature.com/darwin/index.html
To: <evolutionary-psychology at yahoogroups.com>

NEW STATESMAN

Brotherhood of man and roundworm
Ziauddin Sardar Monday 19th February 2001

The left can celebrate the latest news on genes, but not too much. By
Ziauddin
Sardar

Rejoice, my fellow lefties! We were right all along. Human beings, it
turns out, are much more than the products of their genes. Now that
scientists have actually read and analysed the human genome they
completed sequencing last June, biological determinists do not know
whether to laugh or cry. But they are definitely turning red all over.

The simultaneous publication of the results of the Human Genome Project,
by the publicly funded International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium
and the private American company Celera Genomics, contains many
surprises.

The biggest surprise is the actual number of genes in the human
genome.For decades, scientists have been predicting there would be
between 80,000 and 150,000; the real number turns out to be around
30,000. This is hardly more than the tiny plant thale cress with 25,495
genes, the fruit fly with 13,601
and the roundworm with 19,099.

Full text:
http://www.newstatesman.co.uk/200102190009.htm



News in Brain and Behavioural Sciences
http://human-nature.com/nibbs/
To subscribe/unsubscribe/select DIGEST go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evolutionary-psychology
Join the Human Behaviour and Evolution Society
http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/hbesrenew/



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Mon Feb 19 10:07:15 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:07:15 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Society making you sick ?
Message-ID: <sa910c73.038@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

<http://www.msnbc.com/news/532083.asp>

Newsweek - February 26, 2001

MY TURN
Is Our Society Making You Sick?
Americas health lags behind that of more egalitarian nations. 
Economic equality is the medicine we need

By Stephen Bezruchka, M.D

Americans are obsessed with health. Just look at todays magazines, TV 
shows, Web sites, self-help books--and where we put our dollars. As a 
country, we make up about 4 percent of the worlds total population, 
yet we expend almost half of all the money spent on medical care. We 
should be pretty healthy.

YET I HAVE ALWAYS been amazed at how poorly the United States ranks 
in health when compared with other countries. When I began medical 
school in 1970 we stood about 15th in what I call the Health 
Olympics, the ranking of countries by life expectancy or infant 
mortality. Twenty years later we were about 20th, and in recent years 
we have plunged even further to around 25th, behind almost all rich 
countries and a few poor ones. For the richest and most powerful 
country in the worlds history, this is a disgrace.

As a physician obsessed with understanding what makes groups of 
people healthy, Im dumbfounded that our low ranking doesnt raise more 
concern in the medical and public-health communities. Is it because 
experts in these fields dont want to question the role of medical 
care in producing health? Does our focus on diseases--including the 
search for risk factors, cures and specific preventive answers--stop 
Americans from looking at what would really keep us well?

Research during this last decade has shown that the health of a group 
of people is not affected substantially by individual behaviors such 
as smoking, diet and exercise, by genetics or by the use of health 
care. In countries where basic goods are readily available, peoples 
life span depends on the hierarchical structure of their society; 
that is, the size of the gap between rich and poor.

How can hierarchy affect health? Consider the feelings that 
predominate in a hierarchical situation: power, domination, coercion 
(if you are on top); resignation, resentment and submission (if you 
are on the bottom). Compare them with feelings in an egalitarian 
environment: support, friendship, cooperation and sociability. 
Studies with baboons in Kenya and macaque monkeys in captivity, both 
of which feature strong hierarchical relationships, show that 
high-ranking animals are healthier than those lower in the pecking 
order. Human population studies show additional findings. The death 
rate from heart attacks among middle-aged men is four times greater 
in Lithuania than in Sweden, which is much more egalitarian.

We can learn something by looking at countries that do well in the 
Health Olympics. In 1960 Japan stood 23d, but by 1977 it had 
overtaken all the others in the health race. Today, at No. 1, Japan 
has a life expectancy on average three and a half years longer than 
the United States. Twice as many Japanese men as American men smoke, 
yet the deaths attributable to smoking are half of ours. Why? After 
the second world war, the hierarchical structure of Japan was 
reorganized so all citizens shared more equally in the economy. Today 
Japanese CEOs make 15 to 20 times what entry-level workers make, not 
the almost 500-fold difference in this country. During their recent 
economic crisis, CEOs and managers in Japan took cuts in pay rather 
than lay off workers. That the structure of society is key to 
well-being becomes evident when we look at Japanese who emigrate: 
their health declines to the level of the inhabitants of the new 
country.

Did this health-hierarchy relationship always exist--is it part of 
human nature? Archeological records from burial mounds and skeletal 
remains indicate that human populations were relatively healthy 
before the advent of agriculture. The development of farming allowed 
food to be produced in quantities and stored, enabling some to live 
off the efforts of others--a hierarchy. With agriculture, health 
declined, nutrition worsened and workload increased. Why has the 
medical community, as well as the popular press, essentially ignored 
these findings? I suspect that part of the explanation lies in 
Americans "cradle to grave" relationship with the health-care 
industry, which represents one seventh of the U.S. economy.

If equality is good medicine, then what can be done to improve 
Americans well-being? Our primary goal should be to reduce todays 
record gap between rich and poor. Prescriptions for such "structural 
medicine" might include a tax on consumption rather than income, or 
increased support for public transportation, schools and day care, 
all of which would reflect a change in how the population shares in 
the economy. We must put our eyes on a new prize: doing better in the 
Health Olympics. The best prescription for health is not one we will 
get from doctors.

Bezruchka teaches at the University of Washington's School of Public Health.



From aabdo at webtv.net  Mon Feb 19 13:20:12 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:20:12 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Is Society Making You Sick?
Message-ID: <10870-3A917FFC-5029@storefull-231.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Great commentary, Charles. ? ? ? <Is society making you sick?> ?
? Well
of course it is. 

<Does our focus on diseases--including the search for risk factors,
cures and specific preventive answers--stop Americans from looking at
what would really keep us well?> 

Yes. ? Of course. ? ? The answers to these simple questions appear
so rather obvious. ? ? Yet there are those with 'radical
consiousness' that can't seem to see the obvious. 

Now let me ask a question not posed. ? ? Is a sick person a happy
person? ? ? Well once again the answer is obvious! ? ? No, a
sick person is unhappy. ? ? A sick person is a depressed person. 

I raise this point, because so many don't want to see the obvious. ?
? A
sick person is going to suffer from depression. 

A person suffering from a chronic disease state is not going to sing and
dance with joy. ? ? And here is a hidden fact.... ? ? The
majority of people that are depressed and being treated (or not being
treated as the case may be) for depression, are in fact physically sick,
also. ? ? And the majority of depressed people are elderly, because
this is the population where chronic illness runs rampant. ? ? Most
certainly this is the case in capitalist society. 

Most of the 'success' in modern capitalist medicine comes about from
increasing the size of the chronically ill (and chronically depressed)
population, that then can be offered 'treatment' (at a great price). In
other words, capitalist medicine enlarges and creates depression. 

Any low level hospital employee involved in some level of nursing care,
works in a sea of depression. ? ? Strangely enough, most doctors
don't.   That's the reason they can be so absolutely stupid about
treating and recognizing depression, and in understanding related issues
such as pain control. ? ? They pop into a room and out... sometimes
in less than a second. ? ? ? They will want to 'treat', but they
truly often don't understand. 

Is society making people sick, depressed, and psychotic? ? ? Once
again, the answer is yes. ? ? Here, once again, the capitalist
medical doctors can be the biggest fools. ? ? They want to push the
idea that genes, 'predispositions' and 'chemical imbalances' are the
cause of all psychosis and depression, as well as physical disease. 

They are the masters of pushing pills, making cuts on other peoples
bodies, and shocking the head and heart. ? ? ? They collect a big
fee by convincing people that this is in their best interests, AND.....
that there is no other way.

If you want to understand psychosis and depression, go to a medical
journal or a doctor, right?     No, wrong.      Go to a Certified
Nursing Assistant (CNA).      And I say this in all seriousness. 

Who do you think is spending all the time with the person in a psychotic
state, or who helping out the severely depressed?     Well it's not the
capitalist medical doctor, or medical academic.     It's the 'lowly'
nursing personnel.

Here is another hidden fact.     The majority of people undergoing
psychotic episodes are the elderly.     Put them in a hospital, or
nursing home, and see them go.      The capitalist medical doctor is not
treating psychosis, he is creating it!     But he's rarely there to
watch the whole show.     He's too important being the engineer of the
human soul.

Is society making you sick?      Yes.     And it's torturing the
elderly, too.     Making them 'go crazy', and making their lives totally
depressing.      There's a medical doctor heading their 'treatment
team'.

Tony Abdo



 












From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 19 23:26:19 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:26:19 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <000201c09b05$ef32cec0$bc7e20d9@mjones>


Paul Brown and Peter Capella in Geneva
Tuesday February 20, 2001
The Guardian

Impacts of climate change will be far worse than previously thought and beyond
the capacity of mankind to adapt unless greenhouse gas emissions are cut
substantially, 700 scientists say in a report published yesterday.
Loss of food crops, disappearance of fisheries, melting of glaciers which
provide millions of people with summer water supply, and a rise in sea levels
will cause massive economic disruption and migration, it says.

The Arctic, which is already known to be suffering ice loss, could be
completely ice-free in summer and the melting giant icecap on Greenland may
cause faster sea level rise than previously thought.

Africa will be worst hit, forcing people off the land in ever greater numbers,
and creating the possibility of millions of people migrating to survive.
Europe, where rainfall will be plentiful - so much so that it will cause
regular flooding of the type seen this winter in Britain - will increasingly
be seen as the promised land for people in Africa and the Middle East.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report is intended to guide
politicians on problems they face as temperatures rise. Yesterday's
assessments mean the world is heading for disasters on an unprecedented scale.

"Climate change, amongst other issues, threatens basic human needs of food
clean water and a healthy environment," said Robert Watson, co-chairman of the
report.

James MacCarthy, the second co-chairman, said some some temperate countries
might gain because of increased crops and faster tree growth, but others would
lose.

Scientists have documented links between climate change and impacts in over
420 habitats. Already alpine plants in Europe are moving between three and
12ft higher each decade.

Africa was "highly vulnerable", with climate change affecting water resources
and food production, expanding deserts and causing more frequent outbreaks of
diseases such as cholera. Glaciers in the mountain ranges of tropical regions
were also threatened.

Himalayan glaciers, for example, are the main source of water for the Ganges
and Indus on which 500m people depend. If they disappear, so does the summer
water supply. John Prescott, deputy prime minister, who took part in the
failed climate talks at the Hague last November, said every effort must be
made to restart the negotiations and begin cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

"The new report shows that we risk major irreversible changes unless we
significantly cut emissions of greenhouse gases," he said.

"How much more evidence do we need before governments take real action to
tackle climate change?" asked Russell Marsh, WWF climate change campaigner.
"The UK government should take a lead at the G8 summit and use its special
relationship with the US to secure their participation in solutions to the
problem of climate change."






From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 19 23:31:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:31:02 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Opec warns of supply cuts
Message-ID: <000301c09b06$97704400$bc7e20d9@mjones>

Charlotte Denny
Tuesday February 20, 2001
The Guardian

Opec leaders warned yesterday that the oil exporters' cartel was poised to
agree more supply cuts at its next meeting, adding to the turmoil in a market
already alarmed by the weekend air strikes on Iraq.
The cartel's secretary general, Ali Rodriguez said the supply restrictions
could be up to a million barrels a day "in the worst case scenario".

North sea oil prices surged above $27(#18) a barrel, closing up 42 cents at
$27.32 a barrel, as the markets digested Mr Rodriguez's comments and the
impact of the US and British strikes.

"Basically we're up on the back of the Iraqi bombings," said one London trader
at the International Petroleum Exchange (IPE). "At the moment there is not
really that much to worry about, but obviously if it escalates out there we'll
have to relook at that."

The market's big worry is that the raid could provoke a regional oil embargo
but there seems little danger so far of a coordinated response from the Arab
states.

"While we would argue that the actual impact on oil supplies will be minimal,
the news is certainly going to have unsettled the markets," said Lawrence
Eagles, commodities expert with the GNI brokerage.

But hawks within the oil producers' cartel may find it easier to make the case
for deep cuts at their next meeting on March 16th. Opec, which controls 40% of
the 77m barrels of oil used each day, has a target price bank of $22-28 per
barrel for a basket of its crudes.

Its reference price stood at $24.90 on Friday according to the Opec
secretariat, but the cartel fears slowing demand as the northern hemisphere
winter ends could push prices lower.

Asked whether Opec had already decided to announce a further reduction in
output next month, Mr Rodriguez replied: "Not yet, but in any case there is an
inclination, almost a conviction, that we have to cut production because
normally in the second quarter there is a sharp drop in demand and, of course,
prices."

Mr Rodriguez said global oil demand normally falls by 2m barrels per day from
March to June, although Opec's supply cut of 1.5m barrels per day in February
meant the next cut would be smaller.

On the foreign exchange markets, the euro was in the ascendent yesterday,
rising as far as 92.35 cents at one point, nearly 1% up on the day. Forecasts
from the International Monetary Fund over the weekend confirming that Eurozone
growth should outstrip the US this year sharpened the market's appetite for
the single currency.

"People are getting unnerved about the US economy and are still very concerned
about the outlook in Japan," said David Bloom, currency strategist at HSBC
Markets in London. "Given the ECB seems fairly confident about growth, the
euro is benefiting and should continue to go up."

The euro's rally is expected to continue on the back of growing confidence in
the strength of the eurozone economies. Such expectations were reinforced
after the G7 said on Saturday that growth prospects in the single currency
region were favourable due to strong domestic demand, a point repeated
yesterday by the head of the Bank of France, Jean-Claude Trichet.






From cburford at gn.apc.org  Tue Feb 20 00:34:19 2001
From: cburford at gn.apc.org (Chris Burford)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:34:19 -0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <000201c09b05$ef32cec0$bc7e20d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20010220072926.02d0f8e0@pop.gn.apc.org>

This is so very grim, it is inevitable that the terms of debate will shift 
more an more to social control of the environment and the global economy.

Every unexpected weather problem will now be interpreted in terms of this.

Indeed the more humans try to control the environment, the more the efforts 
may be just as likely to add to the problems and require even more 
intervention to stabilise an exponentially destabilising system.

The political battle will be about whether the measures of social control 
are in the interests of finance capital, or of the people of the world.

It's going to be a long battle (longer than our lifetimes), but short in 
terms of geological time.

Chris Burford




At 06:25 20/02/01 +0000, you wrote:


>Paul Brown and Peter Capella in Geneva
>Tuesday February 20, 2001
>The Guardian
>
>Impacts of climate change will be far worse than previously thought and beyond
>the capacity of mankind to adapt unless greenhouse gas emissions are cut
>substantially, 700 scientists say in a report published yesterday.
>Loss of food crops, disappearance of fisheries, melting of glaciers which
>provide millions of people with summer water supply, and a rise in sea levels
>will cause massive economic disruption and migration, it says.
>
>The Arctic, which is already known to be suffering ice loss, could be
>completely ice-free in summer and the melting giant icecap on Greenland may
>cause faster sea level rise than previously thought.
>
>Africa will be worst hit, forcing people off the land in ever greater numbers,
>and creating the possibility of millions of people migrating to survive.
>Europe, where rainfall will be plentiful - so much so that it will cause
>regular flooding of the type seen this winter in Britain - will increasingly
>be seen as the promised land for people in Africa and the Middle East.
>
>The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report is intended to guide
>politicians on problems they face as temperatures rise. Yesterday's
>assessments mean the world is heading for disasters on an unprecedented scale.
>
>"Climate change, amongst other issues, threatens basic human needs of food
>clean water and a healthy environment," said Robert Watson, co-chairman of the
>report.
>
>James MacCarthy, the second co-chairman, said some some temperate countries
>might gain because of increased crops and faster tree growth, but others would
>lose.
>
>Scientists have documented links between climate change and impacts in over
>420 habitats. Already alpine plants in Europe are moving between three and
>12ft higher each decade.
>
>Africa was "highly vulnerable", with climate change affecting water resources
>and food production, expanding deserts and causing more frequent outbreaks of
>diseases such as cholera. Glaciers in the mountain ranges of tropical regions
>were also threatened.
>
>Himalayan glaciers, for example, are the main source of water for the Ganges
>and Indus on which 500m people depend. If they disappear, so does the summer
>water supply. John Prescott, deputy prime minister, who took part in the
>failed climate talks at the Hague last November, said every effort must be
>made to restart the negotiations and begin cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
>
>"The new report shows that we risk major irreversible changes unless we
>significantly cut emissions of greenhouse gases," he said.
>
>"How much more evidence do we need before governments take real action to
>tackle climate change?" asked Russell Marsh, WWF climate change campaigner.
>"The UK government should take a lead at the G8 summit and use its special
>relationship with the US to secure their participation in solutions to the
>problem of climate change."
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Tue Feb 20 00:53:37 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:53:37 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20010220072926.02d0f8e0@pop.gn.apc.org>
Message-ID: <000401c09b12$233b9d80$bc7e20d9@mjones>

Chris Burford
> This is so very grim, it is inevitable that the terms of debate will shift
> more an more to social control of the environment and the global economy.
>
> Every unexpected weather problem will now be interpreted in terms of this.
>
> Indeed the more humans try to control the environment, the more the efforts
> may be just as likely to add to the problems and require even more
> intervention to stabilise an exponentially destabilising system.
>
> The political battle will be about whether the measures of social control
> are in the interests of finance capital, or of the people of the world.
>

It is clear that capitalism cannot survive. Climate change + energy deficits
have become the 'determining last instance' of all historical processes in our
epoch; all our politics ought therefore to be based squarely on this fact.

Unfortunately all but the most catastrophic scenarios fail to say just how bad
life will be for most people, most of the time, in this century. The
progressive collapse of the fundamental systems: energy, water, food supply,
and the onslaught of terrifying epidemic disease, ensure that most states will
collapse and that civil society everywhere will be stressed and will often
fail.

The Left of every hue is evidently afraid of even addressing the issue, the
enormity of which seems to paralyse people and induce a fatalism and even a
kind of nonchalance which is also part of the problem.

It is certain that capitalism will collapse, that hundreds of millions and
undoubtedly, billions, will die. No-one who fails to make these facts the
basis and guiding compass of their politics, has any right even to claim that
they have a politics.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Tue Feb 20 01:06:48 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 08:06:48 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] UK government urges action over global warming
Message-ID: <000501c09b13$fa7f3b20$bc7e20d9@mjones>

Intergovernmental panel on climate change: http://www.ipcc.ch/

By FT.com staff
Published: February 19 2001 17:24GMT | Last Updated: February 19 2001 17:36GMT



The UK government on Monday joined environmental groups in calling for
immediate action to be taken over global warming after a report revealed that
billions of people were at risk from widespread drought, flooding and famine.

The report, released by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change in Geneva, stated a large proportion of the global population would
flee drought-stricken regions while malaria would break out in flooded
regions. Within the next 25 years, 5.4bn people would be living in areas where
water was hard to find. At present, there are 1.7bn people who live in such
conditions.

The report, compiled by a group of 700 scientists, said the "effects of
climate change are expected to be greatest in developing countries in terms of
loss of life and relative effects on investment and the economy".

However, developed countries would not escape the effects of global warning,
it warned. "Coastal settlements are particularly at risk, but urban flooding
could be a problem anywhere that storm drains, water supply and waste
management systems have inadequate capacity," the report said.

John Prescott, the deputy prime minister, urged world leaders to double their
efforts to find a solution to global warming. Mr Prescott said the adverse
affects of global warming were now better understood, and enough was known to
make it clear that action must be taken. Mr Prescott called on the global
community to ratify the 1997 Kyoto Protocol which required developed countries
to scale down their emission levels.

In December, environmental talks collapsed, partly because the US wanted more
allowance for the buying and selling of emissions credits from other
countries.

In January, the international climate change panel predicted that temperatures
could increase by as much as 5.8C during the 100 years.









From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Tue Feb 20 01:10:20 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 08:10:20 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Warming worries for Mt Kilimanjaro
Message-ID: <000601c09b14$79220de0$bc7e20d9@mjones>

American Association for the Advancement of Science: http://www.aaas.org/

By Clive Cookson in San Francisco
Published: February 19 2001 21:35GMT | Last Updated: February 19 2001 21:57GMT



The first victims of global warming will be the glaciers and ice caps on the
highest mountains of Africa and tropical South America, a leading glaciologist
has warned.

Lonnie Thompson, a geology professor at Ohio State University, told the
American Association for the Advancement of Science that tropical glaciers
were retreating at an accelerating pace and most would have disappeared within
15 years.

"These glaciers are much like the canaries once used in coal mines," he said.
"They are an indicator of massive changes taking place and a response to the
changes in climate in the tropics."

Prof Thomson reported that at least one-third of the huge ice field on top of
Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania had melted in the last dozen years and 82 per
cent had disappeared since it was first mapped in 1912. "At this rate all of
the ice will be gone between 2010 and 2020 - and that is probably a
conservative estimate," he said.

In the Peruvian Andes, the Quelccaya ice cap has shrunk by more than 20 per
cent since 1963. The Qori Kalis glacier flowing from the ice cap is retreating
by an astonishing 155 metres per year - 30 times more rapidly than during the
period 1963 to 1978. Melting ice is forming a large new lake in front of the
glacier and bare earth has been exposed for the first time in thousands of
years.

Prof Thompson, who is one of the world's leading glaciologists, drilled his
first ice core from Quelccaya in 1976. "I fully expect to be able to be able
to return there in a dozen years or so and see the marks on the rock where our
drill bit punched through the ice," he said. If so, an ice cap that was 154
metres thick at that point will have vanished in less than 40 years.

As well as signalling global climate change, these losses have local
implications, Prof Thompson said. Kilimanjaro may stop attracting thousands of
tourists to Tanzania if it is no longer capped with ice. And the loss of
Quelccaya and similar Andean ice fields - "frozen reservoirs" - threatens
water resources for hydroelectric power, crop irrigation and municipal
supplies.







From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Tue Feb 20 10:53:53 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:53:53 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <sa9268e1.052@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

*Manchester Guardian" (UK)
Guilty until proven innocent

The redefined Terrorism Act targets environmental activists as well as
armed extremists and reverses the burden of proof, says Richard Norton-Taylor

Monday February 19, 2001

 From today there will be hundreds, perhaps even thousands more "terrorist
suspects" in Britain.

As John Wadham, director of Liberty, the civil rights group, has pointed
out, under the new Terrorism Act, protesters and activists, with no
interest in overthrowing the state or harming the general public, could
find themselves falling under the Act's expanded definition of terrorism.

Under the Act it is a criminal offence to possess any "article" or
"information", including photographs, in circumstances which give rise to a
"reasonable suspicion" they would be used for "terrorist" purposes - a
clause which has serious implications, not least for journalists.

The Act reverses the burden of proof - it will be up to the accused to
prove their innocence, in other words, to prove a negative.

That is not all. The definition of terrorism in the bill includes "the use
or threat, for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, or
ideological cause, of action which involves serious violence against any
person or property". This could embrace not only armed extremists but also
environmental activists attacking GM crops.

For the first time, the term "terrorism" will apply to domestic groups
which can be proscribed by the home secretary. It will be an offence to
"provide money or other property" which may be used "for the purposes of
terrorism" and not tell the police when you suspect others of doing so.

It will be a criminal offence to speak at the same meeting as someone from
a proscribed organisation.

This will have the peculiar result of making it a criminal offence to
oppose such an organisation. The meeting could be of no more than three
people, private or public. It could be an informal gathering or a
discussion in a pub.

The Act also introduces a criminal offence of "incitement" - an offence
which could catch, for example, anyone calling for the overthrow of
undemocratic regimes abroad. It would have caught Nelson Mandela and other
ANC leaders who supported armed struggle against the apartheid regime in
South Africa.

The Act gives the police an array of sweeping new powers and in effect sets
up a parallel criminal justice system wide open to abuse and far beyond the
provisions of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. It gives them stop and
search powers on the basis of "expediency" and of "suspicion", not of
committing any offence, but of being connected, or potentially connected,
to the bill's vague description of "terrorism".

The Act, says Wadham, "creates a two-tier system - in which people
suspected of a criminal act for moral or political reasons will have less
rights than someone who commits a similar crime for reasons of lust, greed
or viciousness".

By concentrating on motivation, it includes activity which the vast
majority of the public would not regard as terrorism, while excluding gangs
of racketeers or drug-runners, for example, engaged in serious criminal
activities.





From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Tue Feb 20 11:52:15 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 18:52:15 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] On the other hand...
Message-ID: <000301c09b6e$2baade20$6f8a20d9@mjones>

Mike Davis in his new book on 19th c genocides describes how British
laisser-faire policies guaranteed famines + colonial subjection in India;
imperialism, in this view, worked to consolidate and entrench the
core-periphery divide which is still accelerating today and is still at the
heart of the modern - imperialist- world-system.

Here is quite a different view, by an authoritative *Indian* economist, which
argues that it was the fault of the caste system. This, not the Brits, stopped
Indian take-off in its tracks.

Go figure.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-eh.net-review at eh.net [mailto:owner-eh.net-review at eh.net] On
Behalf Of EH.Net Review
Sent: 20 February 2001 14:21
To: eh.net-review at eh.net
Subject: Wolcott on Roy, _Traditional Industry in the Economy of
Colonial India_


------------ EH.NET BOOK REVIEW --------------
Published by EH.NET (February 2001)

Tirthankar Roy, _Traditional Industry in the Economy of Colonial
India_. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. xi + 252 pp.
$64.95 (cloth), ISBN: 0-521-65012-7.

Reviewed for EH.NET by Susan Wolcott, Department of Economics,
University of Mississippi. <swolcott at bus.olemiss.edu>


This new book by Tirthankar Roy of the Indira Gandhi Institute of
Development Research, Bombay is well worth reading. It is a careful
and extremely well researched discussion of the evolution of five
important craft-based industries during the colonial period: handloom
weaving, on which Roy has written before, gold thread (jari),
brassware, leather, and carpets. Roy addresses himself to India's
failure to grow. Why did industrialization never lead to a sustained
increase in per capita income? He sets out to do two things in this
book. The first is to dispute the contention that the craft
industries were devitalized by the colonial economy, and thus
prevented from becoming the incubators of an indigenous industrial
revolution. His second task is to show that the true root of
stagnation was the too rapid rate of growth of population and an
absence of government involvement in the provision of education and
credit. In the first of these tasks, the book succeeds. The thorough
discussion and careful analysis of the history and organization of
each of these crafts well illustrate the dynamism and inventiveness
of the Indian entrepreneur. But the second task remains for further
research. Roy shows that the laissez faire policy of the British
colonial government did not crush these indigenous craft industries.
But a history of craft industries by itself is not well suited to
answering the question of why modern industry did not establish
itself in India.

It can, however, offer certain hints. But the hints in this case do
not support Roy's contention in an obvious manner. If the histories
had shown that there were attempts to move from small scale craft
production to large scale factory production, but these attempts were
thwarted by a lack of capital, that would have lent support to Roy's
claim that more direct intervention by the government would have
fostered faster growth. That is not the case. In fact, just the
opposite is true. The centralization of the craft industries as they
moved from their rural roots to a more urban existence is a recurrent
theme in Roy's book. All of these crafts moved away from production
for local consumption to production for long distance trade, either
for export to Europe, or intra-India trade via the new railroads. To
some extent, this was just small craft shops moving to the cities for
economies of agglomeration; information sharing is one theme Roy
often stresses. But the urban shift was frequently accompanied by a
large increase in the size of the typical factory, and a move away
from family labor to wage labor. To this reader, large increases in
the scale of individual operations suggest capital constraints were
not a critical issue. (The large scale of modern factory operations
in India during this period support this contention.)

Nor do the histories of these crafts suggest that there was a problem
that a broad program of education would address. Roy makes the
important point that the artisans were quick to adopt modern methods.
Examples include the move to use sheet metal in constructing
brassware, mineral dyes for carpets, and the fly-shuttle in
handloomed silks. Through simplification, entrepreneurs increased
productivity. His examples successfully dispel any notion that the
Indians were technologically stagnant, at least in these areas. But
this makes it difficult to believe that these crafts, at least, would
have seen greater productivity increase with a more educated
workforce.

What the histories do suggest is the importance of caste and regional
ties in the transmission of knowledge and access to credit. Roy's
attention to these details in his histories is one of the chief
reasons for the book's usefulness. It appears that knowledge and
credit were accessible in India, but not to everyone. Leather, the
longest chapter, provides perhaps the most interesting discussion.
Leather manufacture has until very recently been the preserve of the
lowest rungs of Indian society as it involves handling dead animals,
a very polluting activity among Hindus. (Anything involving death is
polluting (dead cows even more so), and anything which is polluting
is avoided by higher caste Hindus.) Originally leather tanning was
done in the village. Members of certain castes would have the right
to the carcass of animals that died by natural causes in return for
removing and disposing of the carcass. These animals provided more
than sufficient leather for the shoes, water bags and straps needed
by villagers. But the development in the late nineteenth century of
large-scale chrome tanning in the US and mineral leather dyes in
Germany created an upsurge in international demand for hides.
Suddenly the carcasses of animals had a significant value. There was
a fairly rapid switch from a small rural craft to large urban
slaughterhouses and tanning factories. Interestingly, these factories
remained chiefly staffed and quite often owned by the same castes
that had performed these functions in the villages. However, although
there had been a quick response to the change in export demand, and
yet another rapid switch in product mix when export demand died down
in the interwar period, the further step of developing chrome tanning
in India was pursued only on a very limited basis. Roy attributes
this to the restricted access to capital of the lower caste Hindus
who had skills in leather working. Capital was available in India,
but not to them.

Another illustrative story is the non-adoption of the fly shuttle in
much of the trade for coarse cotton cloth. But the reason is not that
the workers did not know better. There had been adoption of better
techniques and large-scale manufacture in handloomed silks. The
cotton weavers were unwilling to make even this relatively small
capital investment in what was essentially a use for otherwise
unemployable household labor - women in agricultural off seasons. The
question of why the opportunity cost of women remained virtually zero
is not directly addressed.

These two examples provide a different justification for government
involvement in education and capital markets than what is typically
given in development texts. Roy writes that "the conversion of craft
skills into industrial and innovative capacity required an _induced
social revolution_ in India, the conditions for which were not
created," (emphasis mine, see p. 59). His book does not directly
prove that this was the case. But it does provide hints to this
effect. A discussion that addresses this point directly instead of
obliquely might yield very interesting results.


Susan Wolcott is currently working on an article entitled "The Role
of Caste Relations in the Slow Industrialization of Colonial India:
Evidence from Textile Strikes, 1921-38."

Copyright (c) 2001 by EH.Net. All rights reserved. This work may be
copied for non-profit educational uses if proper credit is given to
the author and the list. For other permission, please contact the
EH.Net Administrator (administrator at eh.net; Telephone: 513-529-2850;
Fax: 513-529-3308). Published by EH.Net (February 2001). All EH.Net
reviews are archived at http://www.eh.net/BookReview

-------------- FOOTER TO EH.NET BOOK REVIEW  --------------





From aabdo at webtv.net  Tue Feb 20 13:03:28 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:03:28 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Asbestos, Quebec
Message-ID: <23262-3A92CD8F-11539@storefull-235.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Asbestos ban 'absolutely necessary'
By ANDR? PICARD
>From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

An immediate worldwide ban on the production and use of asbestos ? of
which Canada is a leading producer ? is "long overdue, fully justified
and absolutely necessary," a leading health-research institute says.

Calling asbestos an "occupational and environmental hazard of
catastrophic proportions" that will ultimately cause millions of deaths,
scientists at the Collegium Ramazzini say there is no justification for
its continued use.

"The profound tragedy of the asbestos epidemic is that all illnesses and
deaths related to asbestos are entirely preventable. Safer substitutes
for asbestos exist and they have been introduced successfully in many
countries," they write in Tuesday's edition of the Canadian Medical
Association Journal.

Asbestos has long been vilified as cancer-causing and there have been
numerous calls for a ban over the years. But the position taken by the
Collegium Ramazzini, based in Modena, Italy, is sure to revive the
debate.

The Collegium is an independent international institute that researches
occupational diseases and hazards. Founded by Dr. Irving J. Selikoff, a
world authority on environmental medicine at Mount Sinai School of
Medicine in New York, it accepts no money from governments, corporations
or unions. Its scientists have testified as expert witnesses for both
industry and plaintiffs, earning it a reputation as unbiased.
Some Canadian scientists, however, are dismissing the call for a ban.

Michel Camus of the health environments and consumer safety branch of
Health Canada said the Collegium's call is unjustified and
irresponsible.

He said the risks of chrysotile, the type of asbestos used nowadays, are
grossly exaggerated and the claim that safe substitutes are available is
unproven.

"A distortion of the evidence might result in a useless ban and possibly
increased risk," Dr. Camus writes in the same issue of the CMA Journal.

Canada is the second-largest producer of asbestos in the world. A large
chunk of the world's supply is mined in a single community, Asbestos,
Que.

Asbestos is a term applied to a number of fibrous materials popular for
their nonflammability, poor heat conduction and fibrousness. It is used
in construction, shipbuilding and for automobile brake pads.

Asbestos is derived from two principal natural substances ?
chrysotile, or white asbestos; and amphibole, which includes brown
asbestos and blue asbestos. (Both forms occur naturally at Asbestos,
Que., but only the chrystolite is now mined.)
All forms of asbestos can cause asbestosis (a debilitating lung
disease), lung cancer and mesothelioma (chest tumours).

Much of the debate in the CMA Journal is about the relative risks of
contracting those diseases from exposure to different types of asbestos.
Dr. Camus argues in the journal that research shows that chrysotile is
15 times safer than amphibole and that the lifetime risk to an asbestos
miner is 1,000 times less with the product now being marketed.

Dr. Joseph LaDou and his colleagues at the Collegium, however, argue
that "indications that chrysotile might be less dangerous than other
forms of asbestos have not been supported."

Further, they say the technology and regulation required to minimize the
risks are attainable in only a few highly industrialized countries.
However, mining is moving increasingly to the developing world.

"The commercial tactics of the asbestos industry are very similar to
those of the tobacco industry," the Collegium argues. 

"The asbestos industry is progressively transferring its commercial
activities and the health hazards to developing countries."

Asbestos has been banned in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands,
Finland, Germany, Italy, Belgium, France, Austria, Poland and Saudi
Arabia.

In a related commentary in the CMA Journal, Dr. Jack Siemiatycki of the
INRS-Institut Armand-Frappier of the University of Quebec, says the call
for a worldwide asbestos ban is the "latest twist in one of the most
extraordinary sagas in the modern history of environmental and
occupational health."

He says thousands of scientific papers have been published but there is
little unanimity about the risks and much controversy remaining about
use of the product and substitutes.

"In my opinion, the call for a ban on asbestos is, for the most part, a
well-motivated, respectable and defensible position. But on balance I do
not have enough confidence in the Collegium's assertions . . . to think
that it is the right thing to do. Nor am I convinced it is wrong," Dr.
Siemiatycki writes.

What is required, he said, is an international panel of experts to try
to resolve the asbestos controversy once and for all, though the
Canadian researcher acknowledges that "constituting such a panel may be
almost as challenging as answering the basic questions."
________________________________
Still a hero in Asbestos after all these years
Trudeau helped strikers battle Duplessis,
asbestos industry and the church in 1949
John Gray
Monday, October 2, 2000

ASBESTOS, QUE. -- There were many in his home province who saw him
through critical and even hostile eyes, but for one small and dwindling
group of Quebeckers, Pierre Trudeau was a hero who could do no wrong.

They are old now, and their memories slide uncertainly into other
memories of half a century ago, when they and Pierre Trudeau were young
and when they took on the world together.

But on the essentials there is no doubt. Pierre Trudeau was one of the
people who came to help when the workers of Asbestos took on the
combined might of the multinational asbestos industry, the Quebec
government and the Roman Catholic Church.

The four-month asbestos strike in 1949 was one of the nastiest in
Quebec's history of nasty strikes, and it was, as Mr. Trudeau wrote
later, "a violent announcement that a new era had begun."

Rosaire Drouin, 74, remembers Mr. Trudeau as part of the large group of
union activists who came to Asbestos and Thetford Mines from Montreal to
help the uncertain union leadership.

Among the others were Jean Marchand, then a leading union militant in
Quebec, and G?rard Pelletier, then a journalist with Le Devoir. Much
later, both men went to Ottawa and became major figures in Mr. Trudeau's
government.

"The whole gang of them. We saw them often during the strike. He did a
lot of good. I have pictures of him and the others somewhere. He was
sort of the ambassador for the union. He explained to us our rights
against Duplessis."
For Mr. Drouin and the others, if there was a demon in the strike, it
was Premier Maurice Duplessis.

It was Mr. Duplessis who controlled the provincial police and who told
the Catholic church to transfer the Archbishop of Montreal, Joseph
Charbonneau, to Vancouver because he was an outspoken champion of the
strike.

Mr. Drouin still remembers the bitterness of the strike, of strikers
throwing rocks at the scabs recruited by Johns Manville, the asbestos
company, and of provincial police beating the strikers.
He describes Mr. Trudeau, who was variously lawyer, economist and
journalist, as "a guy who spoke well. You had to be tough to face
Duplessis."

Gis?le Drouin, 70, heard about Mr. Trudeau from her husband and
others. Still, whatever he did in 1949, it is the later Trudeau -- a
good, elegant man, well-dressed, always with a red rose on his lapel --
she adores. Her favourite prime minister, she says. He had class.

Her husband smiles: "He defended the workers. He was good for Quebec and
Canada. It's a long time since we've seen a good one like that."

At the large pink house at the top of the street, Emile Lalonde, 74, is
helping with the gardening.

He remembers the young visitor to Asbestos as a man who had charisma and
power. He was there when Mr. Trudeau, as prime minister, returned and
visited the mine-mill cafeteria and talked about the old days of the
strike.

Roger Brown, 78, was slowly walking his dog. Oh sure, he remembers Mr.
Trudeau. A good guy and a good prime minister. Better than the ones we
have now. Most people around here have been Liberal since the strike, he
said.

Bertrand Perreault was washing his truck. He liked Mr. Trudeau for
fighting the Duplessis regime, but criticized him for the 1970 War
Measures Act. He went too far, gave too much power to the army.

Roger Carbonneau, 73, is part way through his 25-kilometres-a-day walk.
He doesn't remember Mr. Trudeau all that well, but he did see him a few
times in those days, and remembers him as a guy who was good for the
union and good for the workers.












From embark at epud.net  Tue Feb 20 13:18:20 2001
From: embark at epud.net (embarkadero)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:18:20 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <E14VHvF-0006TS-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <000501c09b7c$75190d80$342b74d8@pavilion>

> From: "Mark Jones" <jones.mark at btconnect.com>
> It is clear that capitalism cannot survive. Climate change + energy
deficits
> have become the 'determining last instance' of all historical processes in
our
> epoch; all our politics ought therefore to be based squarely on this fact.
>
> Unfortunately all but the most catastrophic scenarios fail to say just how
bad
> life will be for most people, most of the time, in this century. The
> progressive collapse of the fundamental systems: energy, water, food
supply,
> and the onslaught of terrifying epidemic disease, ensure that most states
will
> collapse and that civil society everywhere will be stressed and will often
> fail.
>
> The Left of every hue is evidently afraid of even addressing the issue,
the
> enormity of which seems to paralyse people and induce a fatalism and even
a
> kind of nonchalance which is also part of the problem.
>
> It is certain that capitalism will collapse, that hundreds of millions and
> undoubtedly, billions, will die. No-one who fails to make these facts the
> basis and guiding compass of their politics, has any right even to claim
that
> they have a politics.
>
> Mark


Well, I feel like stealing this post and sending it everywhere in cyberspace
because it is so spot-on.

As I whistle through this graveyard in the dark, I do two things: try to
look for positive solutions (localism, bioregionalsim) and ask myself "what
about the Left?". Why exactly IS the Left so afraid to address this issue?
.....the issue with the ultimate and most serious threats to the oppressed.

The arguments I have perceived here on Crashlist are generally a) "only by
destroying capitalism first can we do anything about it." b) "it's not my
problem, I am too busy trying to support the revolution" c) "there is
nothing we can do"  d) "these enviros are a bunch of idiots."

The Left (for want of a better term) has the skills, organizational
understandings and the courage to address the issue in ways world-wide that
no other socio/political/economic entity does. Yet for the most part the
Left is still focused on hair splitting the differences between NATO and
other killers, Bush and other puppets, Wall Street and other tulip bubbles.

Why is the Left's indignation over the bombing of one criminal's assets by
another criminal cartel so acute, when the world is dying from the actions
of neighbors we could all influence? ... simply by, as Mark comments,
"addressing the issue" and educating those within our spheres of influence.

To me it seems so much more appropriate a use of our limited time and
resources.

The news sparking this post awakens us to the fact that we could do the most
to insure a better life for ... say ... the oppressed of the Balkans, the
Near East, or the Indian Subcontinent by insuring their water supplies. It
is not yet an insurmountable task to do so, or to at least mitigate the
abject misery their children will suffer.

We should at least entertain a discussion on the list as to why "we [fail]
to make these facts the
 basis and guiding compass of [our] politics."

tom

"A rapidly growing human population, rising "economic" expectations,
continual decline in natural resources and increasing pollution by
industrialised countries are leading to a crisis of epic proportions. ...
The origin of our dilemma is the economic illusion that humans make basic
commodities. We now know ecosystems make our basic commodities, therefore:
economics is in fact the natural science that deals with the production,
distribution and recycling of ecoproducts." -- John Pozzi

(speaking on the issue raised by:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/UK/Environment/2001-02/satmap170201.shtml/
 )








From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Tue Feb 20 14:22:35 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:22:35 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Russian weekly
Message-ID: <sa9299cb.018@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

Russian weekly Left ru has just opened a section in English at

http://www.left.ru/inter 

It contains

Vasily Tereshchuk's article "On the Events in Ukraine."

http://left.ru/inter/tereshchuk1.html 




From aabdo at webtv.net  Tue Feb 20 16:06:55 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 15:06:55 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Russian Weekly
Message-ID: <15349-3A92F88E-3528@storefull-232.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

The article 'On the Events in Ukraine' highlights the interesting aspect
of the US interventionism there, the apparent campaign to jettison
Kuchma in favor of Yushchenko (or another who would act in a similar
manner of subserviance to US interests). ? ? It is reminiscent of
events in Peru, where the US decided to get rid of Fujimori, and then go
to the 'democratic opposition'. 

This parallel continues in that both Ukraine and Peru currently involve
tape scandals. ? ? In Ukraine, Kuchma was caught on tape recorder
organizing assassinations (a reporter that was later beheaded). ? ?
In Peru, Fujimori's chief thug- Montesinos was using videos to blackmail
important political leaders. ? ? These are now being partially
released in Peru, to help further discredit the old regime connected
with the US, and to try to move toward yet a new regime to be connected
with the US. 

Holy Toledo! ....Alejandro Toledo, that is.... (US 'new' puppet in
Peru).    Yushchenko appears to be the Ukraine equivalent.     Ukrainian
communists are right to be suspicious of the implications behind the
campaign against Kuchma by the 'democratic opposition'. 

from the article, 'On Events in the Ukraine'......
<By now even the president's administration has realized that the tapes
are real, but their main problem is that they also realize that Major
Mel'nichenko served only as a cover for real "tape recorders."? You
see it's very simple.? If you use a tape recorder inside the room you
can record only the voice of the person sitting in this room, but not
the voice of his interlocutor on the other side of the telephone
line.? Yet on these tapes we hear both.? It means that the
presidential telephone line was bugged.? Since 1994 the security of
this line was provided in part by American specialists in protection
from electronic surveillance.>

The 'page' below leads to An April, 2000 interview with Madelyn Albright
in Kiev, Ukraine.     It is off the US State Department web site.    She
also met with both Kuchma and Yushchenko during her visit, both of whom
supported joint US/ Ukrainian NATO coordination, and interventionism.

Tony Abdo









-------------- next part --------------
http://www.secretary.state.gov/www/statements/2000/000414c.html

From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Wed Feb 21 01:18:13 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 08:18:13 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <000501c09b7c$75190d80$342b74d8@pavilion>
Message-ID: <000901c09bde$b80d53a0$778520d9@mjones>

> As I whistle through this graveyard in the dark, I do two things: try to
> look for positive solutions (localism, bioregionalsim) and ask myself "what
> about the Left?". Why exactly IS the Left so afraid to address this issue?
> .....the issue with the ultimate and most serious threats to the oppressed.

Like all of us, I'm interested in the so-called New Social Movements, the
Porto Alegre thing. I was on Pat Bond's excellent e-debate list recently (I've
dropped off because of lack of time); this list is based in S Africa where the
meltdown and probable disappearance of human society is already discernible on
the historical horizon. Of course, people do see what is rushing at them, but
they remain complacent. This is historically-conditioned blind optimism. It
takes the programmatic form of organising fights for social justice. However,
this is obviously a blind alley. The only social justice you will get is the
social justice of the graveyard, where everyone is equally dead.

It seems clear from my own reading of the Porto Alegre runes that social
justice remains everywhere the watchword. Only the case-hardened deep-ecos,
the Arne Naess-ites, have fully embraced *in practice* the utter futility og
searching for social justice in the middle of a holocaust, not only of human
life, but of all life. The world which is waiting for us right round the
corner will look quite different from this. It will be drastically
impoverished of life. The oceans will be empty. The air will be empty. The
rainforests will be a memory. The glaciers will be a memory. The biomes will
be thinned. The atmosphere will be back to the Jurassic. Ecosystems which have
evolved over milennia wil suffer the fate of the snail diversity of Hawaii:
they will just fade away and disappear. There will be no large mammals left
anywhere. No large primates, except us, anywhere in the wild.

We will notice because there also will be no green concrete all over the
midwest and the prairie farms of Latin America, and Europe. Rice production
will collapse across large parts of South and East Asia. In the absence of
petrol-powered monoculture, human beings will begin to starve. They will then
notice that because there is no biodiversity left anywhere, there is no chance
of reverting to simple subsistence agriculture. We will not survive from our
backyards and allotments. The topsoil is gone.

The collapse of energy systems will leave people cold, hungry and immobilised.
Look at Russia, where it's already happening and where the dieoff is
accelerating.

It is hard now for anyone to refute any single one of the propositions which
underlie this terminal scenario. Unfortunately, thougjh, most people still do
not believe in it. The masses in the core-countries live inside Orwellian
bubbles of reality-denial. The rest of the world doesn't count unless it has a
gun in its hands. Only when the bubble bursts will people see the world as it
is, but by then it will be too late. Inevitably, therefore, the future of
humankind will be some variant of this: first, the complete collapse of global
civilisation on a scale far more profound than any example from history, eg
the fall of Rome. Second, the complete collapse of knowledge-bases. No-one
needs libraries when the scientific and technological support-systems have
disappeared. So the libraries will burn, as they did before.

Second, demographic collapse. Pimentel argued the planet can support 2 billion
sustainably. But that assumes a managed transition. There will be no managed
transition. So look around you; if you live in a country of two million, or
fifty million, or three hundred million, then you'll be living in a country of
a few thousand scavengers, or a million or less, or ten million or less. The
population of Elizabethan (16th century) England was less than 3 million.
Today it is 57 million. Work it out for yourselves.

It will take centuries, on past experience, for this Dark Age to end, 500
years at least. But I am not sure that civilisation will ever return, because
we have used up the only available energy-base for an industrial civilisation,
and we have not found anything to replace fossil fuels. Wood burning is not
enough.

And we do now know how humans wil survive under climate change processes which
we now know will continue for centuries, millennia and even millions of years.
That's the true (uncountable) cost of what we've done.

Anyone for picketing the Qatar meeting?

Mark

>
> The arguments I have perceived here on Crashlist are generally a) "only by
> destroying capitalism first can we do anything about it." b) "it's not my
> problem, I am too busy trying to support the revolution" c) "there is
> nothing we can do"  d) "these enviros are a bunch of idiots."
>
> The Left (for want of a better term) has the skills, organizational
> understandings and the courage to address the issue in ways world-wide that
> no other socio/political/economic entity does. Yet for the most part the
> Left is still focused on hair splitting the differences between NATO and
> other killers, Bush and other puppets, Wall Street and other tulip bubbles.
>
> Why is the Left's indignation over the bombing of one criminal's assets by
> another criminal cartel so acute, when the world is dying from the actions
> of neighbors we could all influence? ... simply by, as Mark comments,
> "addressing the issue" and educating those within our spheres of influence.
>
> To me it seems so much more appropriate a use of our limited time and
> resources.
>
> The news sparking this post awakens us to the fact that we could do the most
> to insure a better life for ... say ... the oppressed of the Balkans, the
> Near East, or the Indian Subcontinent by insuring their water supplies. It
> is not yet an insurmountable task to do so, or to at least mitigate the
> abject misery their children will suffer.
>
> We should at least entertain a discussion on the list as to why "we [fail]
> to make these facts the
>  basis and guiding compass of [our] politics."
>
> tom
>
> "A rapidly growing human population, rising "economic" expectations,
> continual decline in natural resources and increasing pollution by
> industrialised countries are leading to a crisis of epic proportions. ...
> The origin of our dilemma is the economic illusion that humans make basic
> commodities. We now know ecosystems make our basic commodities, therefore:
> economics is in fact the natural science that deals with the production,
> distribution and recycling of ecoproducts." -- John Pozzi
>
> (speaking on the issue raised by:
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/UK/Environment/2001-02/satmap170201.shtml/
>  )
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Wed Feb 21 05:16:59 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 07:16:59 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <000901c09bde$b80d53a0$778520d9@mjones>
References: <000501c09b7c$75190d80$342b74d8@pavilion>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010221070954.0134a2c0@pop2.igc.org>

At 08:17 AM 2/21/01 -0000, you wrote:
>
>> As I whistle through this graveyard in the dark, I do two things: try to
>> look for positive solutions (localism, bioregionalsim) and ask myself "what
>> about the Left?". Why exactly IS the Left so afraid to address this issue?
>> .....the issue with the ultimate and most serious threats to the oppressed.

"The Left", however you want to define this amorphous group, is not afraid
to address the issue.  The VAST majority of "the left" is not in possession
of the relevant facts and the relevant analysis.  Had it not been for
stumbling acorss this list, I would still not understand the relationship
between niche construction, the laws of thermodynamics, the incorporation
of natural capital into the equation with dead and live capital, or the
simple math on petroleum production.  This rhetorical assumption of the
left being "afraid" is precisely part of the problem.  It substitutes
name-calling or a softer version of it for analysis and education.


>> The arguments I have perceived here on Crashlist are generally a) "only by
>> destroying capitalism first can we do anything about it." b) "it's not my
>> problem, I am too busy trying to support the revolution" c) "there is
>> nothing we can do"  d) "these enviros are a bunch of idiots."

Again, Tom, this gratuitously confrontational and oversimplified
characterization of "the left" may be a fine outlet for frustration, but it
does nothing to either bring more people to understanding or build
alliances.  I consider myself a leftist, and I have never taken any of
these positions as stated.  This is a caricature.  What are YOUR arguments,
Tom?  What do YOU propose?  It's easy to throw rocks.

>>
>> The Left (for want of a better term) has the skills, organizational
>> understandings and the courage to address the issue in ways world-wide that
>> no other socio/political/economic entity does. Yet for the most part the
>> Left is still focused on hair splitting the differences between NATO and
>> other killers, Bush and other puppets, Wall Street and other tulip bubbles.

Let's break it down.

1.	We can either accept the problem, or we can do the best we can with the
conditions and resources available to combat, ameliorate, and survive the
problem.

2.	The conditions and resources available to accomplish this are material
and social.

3.	If there is a solution or partial solution, it can not be effected
without social action.

4.	The developing crisis is developing endogenously with the system, which
is capitalism.

5.	Since the problem is developing endogenously, restructuring solutions
within that system can not address the roots of the problem.

6.	The people who run this system and benefit from it are not hearing your
appeal to their long-term self interest, and they have no intention of
voluntarily letting the system go.  They will kill or jail or declare war
on everyone of us before they do.

7.	That system has its own dynamics and its own concretely developing
crises, which involve shifting alliances and priorities.  These specific
political conditions are just as real and unavoidable as the state of the
atmosphere and topsoil.

8.	The differences between NATO and other killers, Bush and other puppets,
Wall Street and other tulip bubbles are anything but hairsplitting in this
context.  They are the facts bearing on the real social, economic, and
political terrain that must be traversed for global, militant, effective
action to happen.  Brushing them aside out of impatience is tantamount to
dropping the struggle altogether or opting to sit on the sidelines and jeer
while others do the work.

9.	Once we accept that without political power, we are limited to crying
and complaining, then the question becomes, how do we take political power?

10.	That question is not moral or academic.  It's strategic.  It means we
have to identify specifically WHO will do it, HOW will they do it, WHEN,
WHERE, and WHY to aim our strategic blows--NOT to effect the changes we
both want to see... because we already know that siezure of political power
is a precondition of any solution... but to take that material power.

I agree with Mark.  Social justice is not only a distraction, it is the
chimera of transformation through restructuring... a recurrent
hallucination of liberals.  Until "the left" returns to the gritty business
of siezing political power, we are in deep shit.  But the center of the
system is the US ruling elite, and to attack them, we have to attack their
interests, including NATO and other so-called tulip bubbles.  That center
must have material inputs to maintain its power, and many of those inputs
are in places like the Balkans, the Caribbean, Latin America, the Pacific
Basin, etc.  The fights to pry their fingers off the periphery are integral
to weakening them, in order to make the transfer of power.

Will that be enough?  I don't know.

Will it happen in time?  I don't know.

Can it be avoided?  Absolutely not.

Do we need to engage and educate those who are serious about this
taking-power thing?  You bet!

Are there any guarantees?  NOt in this world.

So what!  Are we going to cry?  Or are we going to fight?

>>
>> Why is the Left's indignation over the bombing of one criminal's assets by
>> another criminal cartel so acute, when the world is dying from the actions
>> of neighbors we could all influence? ... simply by, as Mark comments,
>> "addressing the issue" and educating those within our spheres of influence.
>>
>> To me it seems so much more appropriate a use of our limited time and
>> resources.
>>
>> The news sparking this post awakens us to the fact that we could do the
most
>> to insure a better life for ... say ... the oppressed of the Balkans, the
>> Near East, or the Indian Subcontinent by insuring their water supplies. It
>> is not yet an insurmountable task to do so, or to at least mitigate the
>> abject misery their children will suffer.
>>
>> We should at least entertain a discussion on the list as to why "we [fail]
>> to make these facts the
>>  basis and guiding compass of [our] politics."



"Since Cassius first did whet me against Caesar
I have not slept.
Between the acting of a dreadful thing
And the first motion, all the interim is
Like a phantasma or hideous dream.
The Genius and the mortal instruments
Are then in council; and the state of a man,
Like to a little kingdom, suffers then
The nature of an insurrection"

			-Brutus



From julp at freesurf.ch  Wed Feb 21 08:01:23 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 16:01:23 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>

Tom, even if his characterization of "the left" is off-mark, has asked a good 
question:

>We should at least entertain a discussion on the list as to why "we [fail]
>to make these facts the basis and guiding compass of [our] politics."

I can't help much here.
Our problem is so difficult to face and that denial or terminal pessimism are 
tempting. I am not as convinced as Stan is that the cause is simply lack of 
information (it's of course a factor). As I see it, the information has been around for a 
long time and has been ignored because these are not the issues "the left" is 
generally interested in and also because the messengers could often be 
characterized as right-wing elitists and such. I also fear that most of "the left" 
believes or used to believe in the development of productive forces which is part of 
the problem. (Most of you folks know "the left" better than I do so please correct 
me.) Which brings me to one of the 10 points of Stan with which I disagree:

>4. The developing crisis is developing endogenously with the system, which is
>capitalism. 

I fear we have a bigger problem than just capitalism (yes, I said *just* capitalism!). 
Seizing power won't solve the bigger problem even if it's probably a necessary 
step. The bigger problem is also made of a)the old cycle of pop. growth and 
collapse, except this time it's much worse because of b)technological society and 
depletion of the resources that support it (sadly, some of these resources don't 
support only technological societies but also life).

I also disagree with point 8 but that's not important.

Tom, I'd be glad if you could explain how localism and bioregionalism could work 
on a large scale without going through this annoying taking power business (or at 
least this destroying power business).

Julien




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Wed Feb 21 08:17:03 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:17:03 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>
Message-ID: <000001c09c19$409fbde0$af8820d9@mjones>

> I fear we have a bigger problem than just capitalism (yes, I said
> *just* capitalism!).

I'm inclined to agree with this, and also and for the same reason to take
issue with Stan's defence of the Left. I don't think the arguments assembled
on the CrashList website are new or original. You can find the same kind of
doominess in old Marx himself, in fact. I guess it's just human nature not to
want to face inclement truths. Whatever the reason, people don't get it or
don't want to get it. I remember reading about global warming, melting ice
caps and the impossibility of China industrialising when I was a student in
1969. It just isn't news any more. I remember Susan Sontag saying it way back
then, before she joined the Repugs or whatever. People have a capacity for
self-deception limited only by the desire to be comfortable and homeostatic,
ie, there is no limit.

And given the scale of the problem of ecocide it's not JUST capitalism,
either, as Julien says, it IS a matter of human nature however defined or
socially determined that is. We have evolved to maximise our niche and unless
our species re-evolves pretty damn quick we'll maximise ourselves out of
existence.

Mark




From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Wed Feb 21 08:17:44 2001
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 09:17:44 -0600
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>
Message-ID: <3A93DC10.769A8551@ilstu.edu>


Julien Pierrehumbert wrote:
> 
> Tom, even if his characterization of "the left" is off-mark, has asked a good
> question:
> 
> >We should at least entertain a discussion on the list as to why "we [fail]
> >to make these facts the basis and guiding compass of [our] politics."
> 

I've answered this before, with arguments -- so now I'll only state the
argument dogmatically.

These facts will be incorporated into political practice only within a
mass movement already energized by other issues

That is, any 'movement' that "makes these facts the basis and guiding
compass of [its] politics" will never mobilize sufficient political
weight to be of any significance. Hence anyone seriously interesred in
these facts will _not_ focus on them but work towards building a left
_within_ which these facts cold become important. I would laugh at
someone who wanted to pass out leaflets proclaiming "Smash Commodity
Fetishism." Tom and those who agree with him are equally irrelevant to
any actual politics.

Carrol



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Wed Feb 21 08:23:03 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:23:03 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <sa939707.094@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> sherrynstan at igc.org 02/21/01 07:09AM >>>



So what!  Are we going to cry?  Or are we going to fight?


((((((((((

CB: We are going to fight, comrade !! We will fight !








From julp at freesurf.ch  Wed Feb 21 08:24:13 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 16:24:13 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] On the other hand...
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.21.ntapblod@computer>

>Mike Davis in his new book on 19th c genocides describes how British
>laisser-faire policies guaranteed famines + colonial subjection in India;

The things which guarantee colonial subjection are called armies. The invisible 
hand doesn't. As to famines, there are obviously multiple factors and everyone has 
a different explanation.

>imperialism, in this view, worked to consolidate and entrench the
>core-periphery divide which is still accelerating today and is still at the
>heart of the modern - imperialist- world-system.
>
>Here is quite a different view, by an authoritative *Indian* economist, which
>argues that it was the fault of the caste system. This, not the Brits, stopped
>Indian take-off in its tracks.

It seems to me that colonial subjection, industrialisation, and famines are related 
but different matters. Why are you lumping them together, Mark? The abstract talks 
about growth in per capital incomes... Whatever the level of aggregate per capita 
incomes, not enough food and/or too unequal distribution means famines. It comes 
down to who gets the income. One can imagine industrialisation plus colonial 
subjection and famines. Isn't it precisely what happend?

BTW, he's not an *Indian* economist but an Indian *economist*. Do economists 
have a country? :-)

Julien




From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb 21 08:25:09 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:25:09 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <3A93DC10.769A8551@ilstu.edu>
References: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010221102241.00f9ee04@popserver.panix.com>

>That is, any 'movement' that "makes these facts the basis and guiding
>compass of [its] politics" will never mobilize sufficient political
>weight to be of any significance. Hence anyone seriously interesred in
>these facts will _not_ focus on them but work towards building a left
>_within_ which these facts cold become important. I would laugh at
>someone who wanted to pass out leaflets proclaiming "Smash Commodity
>Fetishism." Tom and those who agree with him are equally irrelevant to
>any actual politics.
>
>Carrol

This is wrong. Marx and Engels wrote about scientific and ecological
problems their entire lives. The question of soil fertility preoccupied
them in particular. That was the central ecological crisis of the 19th
century. Nobody expected the socialist movement to agitate around the
question of restoring soil fertility. Instead, the notion of integrating
town and countryside became a central component of the long-range communist
program. The same exact thing is true today with respect to matters like
global warming, etc. The reason Carroll rails on these questions has to do
with his ambivalence toward the green movement. He has demonstrated a
certain affinity with anti-ecological moods on various email lists, most
recently expressed in a rather dotty salute of McDonalds fast food on
Henwood's list where genuflection to capitalist modernization is
practically a sine qua non for subscription.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From aabdo at webtv.net  Wed Feb 21 08:37:28 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 07:37:28 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Environmental Impact Of the Israeli Occupation
Message-ID: <12341-3A93E0B8-221@storefull-234.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

The Environmental Impact of the Israeli Occupation by Jad Issac

14 March 2000 -- Part of the "Fertile Crescent," historic Palestine is
positioned at the crossroads between Eurasia and Africa. It hosts over
2,500 species of wild plants, 800 of which are rare, and some 140 of
which are limited to particular areas; at least 80 species of wild
mammals, and 380 species of birds are native to Palestine. This rich
biodiversity is supported by tremendous climatic variation within a
small area.
Unfortunately, it is now difficult to recognize the land that was
described by early visitors as "flowing with milk and honey." Barren
hills have replaced once-rolling woodland covered with thickets and
forests, and grasslands have turned into deserts. A fetid trickle of
sewage now runs where the Jordan River once flowed. The water level in
the Dead Sea is so low that it is now divided into two separate seas. In
short, the land is degraded, suffering from years of environmental
mismanagement and neglect that has only worsened during the past 33
years of Israeli occupation.

Jewish Settlements:
Since the June 1967 war, Israel has colonized the Occupied Territories
by building settlements in Gaza (housing 5,000-7,000 settlers) and in
the West Bank (housing 380,000 settlers, 190,000 of them in and around
East Jerusalem). The settlements are commonly positioned on hilltops
overlooking Palestinian communities, and the wastewater from many is
discharged into nearby valleys without treatment, polluting adjacent
Palestinian communities-among them Wadi Qana, Qatanna, Nahhalin,
Al-Khader, Al-Jania, Al-Walajeh, Dura, and Bani Na'im.

Moreover, solid waste generated in Israel is dumped without restriction
in the Occupied Territories. Solid waste from West Jerusalem, for
example, is transferred to the unsanitary West Bank dumping site at Abu
Dis, which overlays the infiltration area of the Eastern Aquifer. 
Similarly, the Jewish settlements of Ariel, Innab, Homesh Alon Morieh,
Qarna Shamron, Kadumim, and many others dump their solid waste in the
West Bank, as do many military camps and communities located inside
Israel.

Relocation of Israeli Industries:
Israel has moved many of its polluting industries from Israel to the
Occupied Territories. For example, Geshuri Industries, a manufacturer of
pesticides and fertilizers originally located in Kfar Saba in Israel,
was closed down by Israeli court order in 1982 for pollution violations. 
In 1987, it relocated to an area adjacent to Tulkarm inside the West
Bank, where its waste has damaged citrus trees, polluted the soil, and
possibly poisoned the groundwater. The Dixon industrial gas factory,
formerly located in Netanya inside Israel, has also moved into the same
area.

Industrial Waste:
The Israeli government has constructed at least seven industrial zones
in the West Bank. Located mainly on hilltops and occupying a total area
of approximately 746 acres, these industries produce industrial
wastewater and solid waste that often pollute adjacent Palestinian
lands.

Information about industries in the Israeli industrial zones-including
the amount and types of goods they produce, the labor they employ, and
the waste they generate-is not available to Palestinians. The wastewater
and solid waste these industries produce, however, provide important
clues about the type and extent of industrial activity. At least 200
factories are located in the West Bank, notably aluminum,
leather-tanning, textile-dyeing, battery, fiberglass, plastic, and other
chemical factories.

Clear evidence that Israeli factories operating in the Occupied
Territories do not follow pollution prevention measures is provided by
the Barqan industrial zone, which houses factories producing aluminum,
fiberglass, plastic, electroplating, and military items. Industrial
wastewater from this zone flows untreated to the nearby valley, damaging
agricultural land belonging to the Palestinian villages of Sarta, Kufr
Al-Deek, and Burqin, and polluting the groundwater with heavy metals. In
the central part of the Gaza Strip, the Israeli settlement of Kfar Darom
releases sewage and chemical waste from its industrial plants to the
Al-Saqa valley.

Illegal Movement of Hazardous Waste:
Despite the fact that Israel is a signatory of the 1992 Basel
Convention, which bans the illegal movement of hazardous waste, it
transfers such waste, generated inside Israel, to the West Bank. The
Palestinian Authority (PA) has discovered several violations: 

In 1998, Israel illegally dumped several truckloads of toxic and
hazardous waste near the eastern border of the Tulkarm municipality and
near the residential area of the 'Azzoun municipality-50 meters from its
well for drinking water;

An Israeli company, Telbar, moved its medical waste disposal site from
Afulla inside Israel to a site close to the Jewish settlement of Yafit
in the Jordan valley;

A paint factory located in the Israeli settlement of Ganim has dumped
its hazardous and toxic wastes in the Palestinian village of Umm Al-Tut.

Moreover, according to a study published by The Center for Development
Work in Ramallah, Israeli companies are flooding the Palestinian market
with internationally banned pesticides. Their Israeli manufacturers are
also using Palestinian land to test new pesticides. 

Military Areas, Bases, and "Nature Reserves":
Israel has declared 290,970 acres of the West Bank (20.2 percent of its
total area), mostly in the Jordan valley, as closed military areas, and
has created an additional 29 closed military areas in Gaza (420 acres).
Moreover, Israel maintains 71 military bases in the West Bank (totaling
some 9,563 acres). 

Although most of these areas have low agricultural value, they
constitute the major grazing areas in the West Bank. Since Palestinian
pastoralists are denied access to these areas, the remaining grazing
areas suffer from severe overgrazing and are under threat of permanent
desertification.
Furthermore, the wildlife and rich biodiversity that characterize these
areas are harmed by the use of heavy military vehicles and tanks.

Israel has also created 48 West Bank "nature reserves" (covering 5.68
percent of the West Bank), mostly on the Eastern Slopes and in the
Jordan valley. Palestinians question the ecological value of these
reserves, which they view as another method used by Israel to deny
Palestinians access to their land.

Deforestation and Uprooting of Trees:
According to a recent study by the PA Ministry of Agriculture, the total
area in the West Bank and Gaza officially designated as forest land
decreased from 300,736 dunums in 1971 to 231,586 dunums in 1999 (one
dunum is 1,000 square meters). More than half of the affected areas are
in Gaza, where 95 percent of the forests have disappeared (from 42,000
dunums in 1971 to 2,000 dunums in 1999).

About 80 percent of this deforestation is attributable to the Israeli
occupation: to the establishment of military bases (two percent), to
settlements (78 percent), and to bypass roads (less than one percent).
Local Palestinians are responsible for deforesting 14 percent of the
land, while the remaining six percent is privately owned.

Moreover, the Israeli army and Jewish settlers have uprooted more than
half-a-million fruit trees, mainly olive trees, on privately owned land.
While the British Mandate government, and later the Jordanian
Administration, first implemented and later accelerated afforestation
programs in the West Bank and Gaza, all afforestation programs ended
with the Israeli occupation.

Desertification:
Approximately 2.18 million dunums (35 percent of the West Bank and Gaza
Strip) are natural grazing areas. Only 47 percent of the total grazing
area is accessible to Palestinian livestock owners, while the remainder
has been confiscated for Israeli settlements, nature reserves and closed
military areas. Overuse of the accessible areas has resulted in
progressive desertification.

Jad Issac is Director-General of the Applied Research Institute in
Jerusalem. 
? ?
by courtesy & ? 2001 Jad Isaac & Center for Policy Analysis on
Palestine

by the same author:
The Palestinian Water Crisis
?
Copyright ? 2001 Media Monitors Network. All rights reserved. 












From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Wed Feb 21 08:38:26 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:38:26 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] more on "Our Pasha"
Message-ID: <000301c09c1c$3b5334e0$af8820d9@mjones>

 Guardian (UK)
21 February 2001
Pavel the just
The Russian official held in America on corruption charges is being
improbably recast as a martyr back in his home country
By Amelia Gentleman

As former presidential aide Pavel Borodin begins his second month of
incarceration inside a New York jail awaiting extradition to Switzerland on
money laundering charges, Russian efforts to secure his release have been
renewed.

Until now the "energetic measures" which Russian foreign minister Igor Ivanov
promised would be taken to secure his "immediate and unconditional release"
have proved futile, and the once-powerful Kremlin insider remains behind bars
- humiliatingly reduced from his past role as head of the Kremlin property
department (responsible for some $600bn [$416bn] worth of assets), to a more
modest position as inmate 55217-053 in a Brooklyn detention centre.

The Duma's international affairs committee yesterday prepared a new appeal to
the American state department, urging officials not to agree to the
extradition request from the Swiss who intend to prosecute Mr Borodin for
bribe-taking and laundering a sum of around $25m [#17m].

Pleading for clemency, the draft document stresses the national importance of
Mr Borodin's current job as State Secretary of the Union of Belarus and
Russia (a nebulous position granted by Vladimir Putin after Mr Borodin was
dismissed from the Kremlin property department last year). The seniority of
his post as coordinator of a future union between the two countries, meant
his arrest and extradition had a serious impact on "Russia's state
interests", the statement concludes.

It seems unlikely that this appeal will succeed where personal appeals from
Mr Putin to Mr Bush have failed. Bernard Bertossa, the Swiss prosecutor in
charge of the case, insisted yesterday that the extradition process would not
be abandoned.

Mr Borodin was detained on January 18 at New York airport, after unwisely
accepting an invitation to one of George Bush's inauguration celebrations in
Washington - despite the existence of an international warrant for his
arrest. The warrant was issued after a probe into alleged multi-million
dollar kickback scams involving government officials who commissioned the
Swiss construction firms, Mabetex and Mercata, to refurbish the Kremlin and
other Russian public buildings in the last year's of Boris Yeltsin's
presidency.

As Mr Borodin gazes wistfully at the Statue of Liberty (just visible from his
cell window), supporters in Moscow are working hard to generate support for
his cause. It has not been an easy task to remodel the official as a
suffering martyr in the eyes of a nation long-embittered by the extravagance
of Yeltsin's circle. Jowly, smug and once fond of boasting about the wealth
of the luxury dachas, limousines, jets and Tsarist palaces in his gift for
the favoured elite, Mr Borodin is a most unlikely popular hero.

But fuelled by nationalist anger at the snub perceived in America's decision
to implement the arrest warrant of a serving Russian official, Mr Borodin's
supporters have worked hard to reclaim him as the wronged victim of
international hostility to Russia.

Their efforts have met with a receptive audience. "We might not approve of
him, but the American's decision to arrest him is deeply insulting to our
country. It's a sign of how weak Russia has become in the eyes of the world,"
a retired soldier from Vladivostok commented.

Even those Moscow newspapers most critical of Mr Borodin in the past have
begun to question whether the case against him will stand up. Citing
documents procured from the Swiss prosecutors, Novaya Gazeta claimed this
week that the Swiss had no proof that Mr Borodin had received any of the
laundered funds.

The most surreal manifestation of the rebranding campaign came last week when
an exhibition of children's drawings opened in Moscow, dedicated to the
plight of "Our Pavel".

Organised - with a healthy sense of the absurd - by activists from the
extreme nationalist Liberal Democratic Party, most of the teachers and school
children who took part were participating in good faith. Crayoned pictures of
a despondent Mr Borodin, weeping because fellow prisoners had stolen his
food, were on display alongside felt tip depictions of Mr Yeltsin, mourning
the loss of his friend. Some children had composed poems lamenting the
arrest, others prepared a care parcel containing vodka and Russian bread to
boost the official's spirits.




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Wed Feb 21 08:46:19 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:46:19 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] On the other hand...
In-Reply-To: <SAK.2001.02.21.ntapblod@computer>
Message-ID: <000401c09c1d$57c9c700$af8820d9@mjones>

> It seems to me that colonial subjection, industrialisation, and
> famines are related
> but different matters. Why are you lumping them together, Mark? The
> abstract talks
> about growth in per capital incomes...

Julien, I recently posted 2 reviews of Mike Davis' book, which you may have
missed, and this was a footnote to that.

>hatever the level of
> aggregate per capita
> incomes, not enough food and/or too unequal distribution means
> famines. It comes
> down to who gets the income. One can imagine industrialisation plus
> colonial
> subjection and famines. Isn't it precisely what happend?
>
> BTW, he's not an *Indian* economist but an Indian *economist*. Do
> economists
> have a country? :-)

Well, I thought it was sufficiently odd to be worth putting before the
assembled wisdom hereabouts.

Mark




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Wed Feb 21 08:53:30 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:53:30 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <000001c09c19$409fbde0$af8820d9@mjones>
References: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010221104625.0134b148@pop2.igc.org>

At 03:16 PM 2/21/01 -0000, you wrote:
>> I fear we have a bigger problem than just capitalism (yes, I said
>> *just* capitalism!).
>
>I'm inclined to agree with this, and also and for the same reason to take
>issue with Stan's defence of the Left. I don't think the arguments assembled
>on the CrashList website are new or original. You can find the same kind of
>doominess in old Marx himself, in fact. I guess it's just human nature not to
>want to face inclement truths. Whatever the reason, people don't get it or
>don't want to get it. I remember reading about global warming, melting ice
>caps and the impossibility of China industrialising when I was a student in
>1969. It just isn't news any more. I remember Susan Sontag saying it way back
>then, before she joined the Repugs or whatever. People have a capacity for
>self-deception limited only by the desire to be comfortable and homeostatic,
>ie, there is no limit.
>
>And given the scale of the problem of ecocide it's not JUST capitalism,
>either, as Julien says, it IS a matter of human nature however defined or
>socially determined that is. We have evolved to maximise our niche and unless
>our species re-evolves pretty damn quick we'll maximise ourselves out of
>existence.
>
>Mark

My question remains.  It's one that's been asked before.  What is to be done?

Stan




"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possible happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman



From aabdo at webtv.net  Wed Feb 21 08:59:58 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 07:59:58 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: Julien Pierrehumbert <julp@freesurf.ch>'s message of Wed, 21
	Feb 2001 16:01:10 +0100
Message-ID: <9860-3A93E5FE-373@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Julien....
<As I see it, the information has been around for a long time and has
been ignored because these are not the issues "the left" is generally
interested in and also because the messengers could often be
characterized as right-wing elitists and such. I also fear that most of
"the left" believes or used to believe in the development of productive
forces which is part of the problem. (Most of you folks know "the left"
better than I do so please correct me.)>

What is there to correct, Julien?     The Left has traditionally been
based on unions, building unions, and yet more unions.     And this
means fighting for jobs, wages, and democracy.     None of this has to
do with anything other than wanting a bigger piece of the pie, and yet
an even bigger pie to piece.

This is what accounts for the absurd near-sightedness of the traditional
Marxist Left that you and Tom continually critique.    And it is a
problem of the present, as well as a problem of the past.     Too much
faith in technology producing a better world is a cornerstone of the
traditional Left.

However, that being said, it is impossible to build a movement for
maintaining and supporting world ecological foundations, without
enlisting and transforming the traditional Marxist Leftists from their
desire to be dinosaurs.     Not an easy task, nor a very pleasant one,
neither.

Still, it is being done in bits and pieces all around the globe.

Tony












From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Wed Feb 21 09:05:07 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 11:05:07 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] On the other hand...
Message-ID: <sa93a0e3.064@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> julp at freesurf.ch 02/21/01 10:23AM >>>
>Mike Davis in his new book on 19th c genocides describes how British
>laisser-faire policies guaranteed famines + colonial subjection in India;

The things which guarantee colonial subjection are called armies. The invisible 
hand doesn't. As to famines, there are obviously multiple factors and everyone has 
a different explanation.

((((((((

CB: The technical name for armies is "the state" , standing bodies of armed men, prisons, guns, and other repressive mechanisms. The invisible hand and laissez-faire policies are expressions of the bourgeoisie, the ruling class in this colonialism, which owns the basic means of production as private property, which ownership is enforced and protected by the state, controlled by the bourgeoisie. The refusal to give starving people food because it is private property and they can't buy it from the owners, is the direct way in which the bourgeoisie and bourgeois private property ( laissez-faire, invisible hand) causes the famine through the enforcement of the state.

(((((((((


>imperialism, in this view, worked to consolidate and entrench the
>core-periphery divide which is still accelerating today and is still at the
>heart of the modern - imperialist- world-system.
>
>Here is quite a different view, by an authoritative *Indian* economist, which
>argues that it was the fault of the caste system. This, not the Brits, stopped
>Indian take-off in its tracks.

It seems to me that colonial subjection, industrialisation, and famines are related 
but different matters. Why are you lumping them together, Mark? The abstract talks 
about growth in per capital incomes... Whatever the level of aggregate per capita 
incomes, not enough food and/or too unequal distribution means famines. It comes 
down to who gets the income. One can imagine industrialisation plus colonial 
subjection and famines. Isn't it precisely what happend?

BTW, he's not an *Indian* economist but an Indian *economist*. Do economists 
have a country? :-)

Julien


_______________________________________________
CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Wed Feb 21 09:08:55 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 16:08:55 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20010221104625.0134b148@pop2.igc.org>
Message-ID: <000501c09c20$7a543780$af8820d9@mjones>

> My question remains.  It's one that's been asked before.  What is
> to be done?

At the risk of seeming facetious, the answer is you have to call a meeting of
like-minded people and form a political organisation. What is required is
someone to organise this meeting. Are you available? I could certainly help
out. Anyone else?

Mark




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Wed Feb 21 09:18:42 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 11:18:42 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20010221102241.00f9ee04@popserver.panix.com>
References: <3A93DC10.769A8551@ilstu.edu>
 <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010221111138.0134c814@pop2.igc.org>

>
>This is wrong. Marx and Engels wrote about scientific and ecological
>problems their entire lives. 

Marx and Engels, last I heard, are both dead.  I like their stuff, but we
need lots and lots of real, living people to even hope for a change.

The question of soil fertility preoccupied
>them in particular. That was the central ecological crisis of the 19th
>century. 

How many people outside of a very narrow academic circle even know this?

Nobody expected the socialist movement to agitate around the
>question of restoring soil fertility. Instead, the notion of integrating
>town and countryside became a central component of the long-range communist
>program. The same exact thing is true today with respect to matters like
>global warming, etc. 

I want to see someone go into a meeting of Local 204, United Food and
Commercial Workers Union, in Raleigh, North Carolina, and explain to them
how the notion of integrating town and countryside became a central
component of the communist program.

I agree that things are very bad.  In many ways we have passed points of no
return.  But no one has shown me, even with erudition that puts my pitiful
self-education firmly in its place, how we skip the steps required for
building militant mass movmements to challenge the existing power
structure, and eventually TAKE political power.  If there's a magic button,
show me where it is, and I'll mash it (as we say down here).  And in every
conversation I now have with my comrades on the left, I beat this drum
ceaselessly.  But if the implication of all this is that it's too late, so
we should just... what?  Rant?... I don't get it.

If we want some kind of cosmic justice, we can watch Star Wars reruns.
Meanwhile, there are no guarantees.  It's the human condition.  Get over it.

Or are we saying abandon the left?  For what?  The armed legions of the
Sierra Club?  I'd rather engage and educate the left than bash them.  And
just because some of you understand these often very technical issues does
not imply that others do as well.  This is an outrageous assumption, deeply
arrogant, a reification of "the left" that ignores the fact that it is
composed of real, often hard-working, beleagured folks who may not have had
time to study, research, read, what all of you have.  I repeat, I was a
very active, very committed person on "the left," and until I made contact
with this list, I never factored niche construction, et al, into my
thinking.  Now I have, and I'm still "left," still committed,
re-prioritized, and I wonder why it's so difficult to believe that others
won't reach the same conclusions, unless we believe that we on this list
have superior intellects to which those "others" can not aspire.

Amazed and confused,

Stan



The reason Carroll rails on these questions has to do
>with his ambivalence toward the green movement. He has demonstrated a
>certain affinity with anti-ecological moods on various email lists, most
>recently expressed in a rather dotty salute of McDonalds fast food on
>Henwood's list where genuflection to capitalist modernization is
>practically a sine qua non for subscription.
>
>Louis Proyect
>Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>


"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possible happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman



From julp at freesurf.ch  Wed Feb 21 09:19:42 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 17:19:42 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.21.dnoktben@computer>

Carrol wrote:

>These facts will be incorporated into political practice only within a
>mass movement already energized by other issues

Yeah, I remember discussing this and I more or less agree. That's why I'm voting 
red and not green (yeah, I know... voting is useless blah blah blah). We're not going 
to picket the malls and tell people to dump their cars to preserve India's water 
sources, right? I just thought that something new might come up. I'm not convinced 
that things can't change and that the following is going to be true forever:

>That is, any 'movement' that "makes these facts the basis and guiding
>compass of [its] politics" will never mobilize sufficient political
>weight to be of any significance. 

Maybe when some of the facts will leave theory to enter reality some will find a 
way...

Julien

BTW, Mr. Proyect, would you stop personal attacks?




From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb 21 09:33:37 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 11:33:37 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <SAK.2001.02.21.dnoktben@computer>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010221113106.00e9ed64@popserver.panix.com>

>Maybe when some of the facts will leave theory to enter reality some will
find a 
>way...
>
>Julien
>
>BTW, Mr. Proyect, would you stop personal attacks?

There is nothing personal at all in my reply to Carroll. I am attacking his
views, not his person.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Wed Feb 21 09:42:22 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 11:42:22 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <000501c09c20$7a543780$af8820d9@mjones>
References: <3.0.1.32.20010221104625.0134b148@pop2.igc.org>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010221113516.0134ba68@pop2.igc.org>

At 04:08 PM 2/21/01 -0000, you wrote:
>> My question remains.  It's one that's been asked before.  What is
>> to be done?
>
>At the risk of seeming facetious, the answer is you have to call a meeting of
>like-minded people and form a political organisation. What is required is
>someone to organise this meeting. Are you available? I could certainly help
>out. Anyone else?
>
>Mark

Seems we are in a meeting, albeit an unstructured one.  I'm available.
Here's a suggestion.  Let's organize a meeting using this medium, email.

Here are some thoughts.

An example (true):  I'm organizing as state-wide meeting in North Carolina
for October, to form a kind of political organization, but just for the
sake of thinking about THIS meeting, let me review the process that makes
the meeting happen.

I am going to have around 100 meetings in 100 days, contacting people who
might know people, who are interested in progressive politics.  In these
meetings, I am listening more than talking, because I am listening for that
person's values, and keeping an eye peeled for danger signals, like
--disruptor, whiner, flim-flam artist, new-age guru, etc.  I also bird-dog
new contacts.

Second round of meetings, with a vetted group from the first round.
Confirm shared values and goals.  Now I am determining if the person has
the individual charactersistics and skills to do what we're looking for
(organizing).  Consciousness, maturity, persistence, willingness to give
and accept criticism, effective communicator, HAS THE TIME... stuff like that.

Third round, the invitation.

Next step, preparation.  We begin with a proposed context (vision
statement) and mission statement, then an agenda proposal, a proposal for
by-laws (in this case), and a proposal for structure.  Begin building
consensus on these proposals.  Everyone weighs in, and one
organizer/facilitator takes the initiative and becomes the clearinghouse.

Next step, prior to the actual meeting, we draft a list of terms and
concepts that will likely be used, and define each of them as precisely as
possible.  We also gather a basic list of pertinent documents which
everyone must read and study, to ensure we are all beginning from roughly
the same place, using roughly the same language.

Finally, coordinate the time and place, and finalize the agenda.  Ensure
that at least one key action step is at the end of the agenda, which leads
directly into whatever activity follows up on the meeting.

I am for the meeting, Mark.  But let's have a process that makes the goal
(an organization) the dog and the meeting the tail.  Never let the tail wag
the dog. (-:

Let's do it.

Stan


"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possible happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman



From aabdo at webtv.net  Wed Feb 21 10:31:32 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 09:31:32 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re; Grim forecast for future of US unions
In-Reply-To: bon moun <sherrynstan@igc.org>'s message of Wed, 21 Feb 2001
	11:11:38 -0500
Message-ID: <9869-3A93FB73-12@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

<I want to see someone go into a meeting of Local 204, United Food and
Commercial Workers Union, in Raleigh, North Carolina, and explain to
them how the notion of integrating town and countryside became a central
component of the communist program.>

You mean LECTURE to them, don't you, Stan?     That's what the elite
paid union OUTSIDE organizers see their task to be.    They need
community organizers from inside their community, not travelling
'professional leaders' on 'International' payroll.     

<I am going to have around 100 meetings in 100 days, contacting people
who might know people, who are interested in progressive politics. In
these meetings, I am listening more than talking, because I am listening
for that person's values, and keeping an eye peeled for danger signals,
like --disruptor, whiner, flim-flam artist, new-age guru, etc. I also
bird-dog new contacts.>

What an elitest!     But you will be 'listening', of course.  

<Second round of meetings, with a vetted group from the first round.
Confirm shared values and goals. Now I am determining if the person has
the individual charactersistics and skills to do what we're looking for
(organizing). 

Consciousness, maturity, persistence, willingness to give and accept
criticism, effective communicator, HAS THE TIME... stuff like that.>

Yawn.     What a prescription for continued disintegration of the trade
unions.     And you will give the whole idea of 'organizing' a bad name
at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars of union workers' dues.

And what vision have you offered anybody to risk life and soul for?
Being under your supervision?

Tony Abdo












From sherrynstan at igc.org  Wed Feb 21 11:02:38 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:02:38 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re; Grim forecast for future of US unions
In-Reply-To: <9869-3A93FB73-12@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
References: <bon moun <sherrynstan@igc.org>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010221125531.0134cdf4@pop2.igc.org>

This is a good example of what happens when we become so preoccupied with
formulating our next riposte that we quit paying attention and making
distinctions.  The union thing is an EXAMPLE, the meetings I am doing are
desinged to put together a network of multi-issue organizers in a very
specific context.

At 11:31 AM 2/21/01 -0600, you wrote:
><I want to see someone go into a meeting of Local 204, United Food and
>Commercial Workers Union, in Raleigh, North Carolina, and explain to
>them how the notion of integrating town and countryside became a central
>component of the communist program.>
>
>You mean LECTURE to them, don't you, Stan?     That's what the elite
>paid union OUTSIDE organizers see their task to be.    They need
>community organizers from inside their community, not travelling
>'professional leaders' on 'International' payroll.  

Your remarks have absolutely nothing to do with my point, which is that the
conversation we are carrying on here is not relating to the level of
consciousness among the masses, and so we should be very careful about
checking in with reality when we want to assess how something might
actually be changed.
   
>
><I am going to have around 100 meetings in 100 days, contacting people
>who might know people, who are interested in progressive politics. In
>these meetings, I am listening more than talking, because I am listening
>for that person's values, and keeping an eye peeled for danger signals,
>like --disruptor, whiner, flim-flam artist, new-age guru, etc. I also
>bird-dog new contacts.>
>
>What an elitest!     But you will be 'listening', of course.  

Yeah, yeah... "elitest"... that's me.  I didn't say I was listening in an
encounter group.  Anyone with any organizing experience should be able to
relate to exactly the problems I am listening for.  I'm listening the same
way a deer listens in the woods... for danger.  I've already been there
with all these archetypes, and I've watched them fuck up one organization
after another.

>
><Second round of meetings, with a vetted group from the first round.
>Confirm shared values and goals. Now I am determining if the person has
>the individual charactersistics and skills to do what we're looking for
>(organizing). 
>
>Consciousness, maturity, persistence, willingness to give and accept
>criticism, effective communicator, HAS THE TIME... stuff like that.>
>
>Yawn.     What a prescription for continued disintegration of the trade
>unions.     And you will give the whole idea of 'organizing' a bad name
>at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars of union workers' dues.
>
>And what vision have you offered anybody to risk life and soul for?
>Being under your supervision?

Instead of yawning, you could have paid attention.  Not a union.  It's a
network of organizers.  Like the one I worked in with over 50 community
groups in Eastern North Carolina, the one I built from 20 to fifty
organizations in North Carolina, and like the one that has 22 organizations
across the South.  Labor people, environmentalists, civil rights people,
consumer advocates, faith-based... though I'm sure it's nothing compared to
your vast experience, Tony.

I, myself, am a member of both UAW Local 1981/NWU and the Screen Actors
Guild, in neither of which I supervise anything.

My point, the second one you completely missed, is that we need a process
to put together a meeting, if the meeting is to develop organization.  Back
off the accelerator, comrade, you're misreading the road signs.

>
>Tony Abdo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>


"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possibly happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman



From furuhashi.1 at osu.edu  Wed Feb 21 11:39:54 2001
From: furuhashi.1 at osu.edu (Yoshie Furuhashi)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:39:54 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Grim forecast for future of US unions
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20010221125531.0134cdf4@pop2.igc.org>
References: <bon moun <sherrynstan@igc.org>
 <3.0.1.32.20010221125531.0134cdf4@pop2.igc.org>
Message-ID: <p0500190bb6b9bb6c3be5@[140.254.115.90]>

Stan says:

>My point...is that we need a process to put together a meeting, if 
>the meeting is to develop organization.

In other words, there is no short cut....

Yoshie



From julp at freesurf.ch  Wed Feb 21 11:57:26 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 19:57:26 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] On the other hand...
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.21.gknsqcaf@computer>

Charles,

>The invisible =
>hand and laissez-faire policies are expressions of the bourgeoisie, the =
>ruling class in this colonialism, which owns the basic means of production =
>as private property, which ownership is enforced and protected by the =
>state, controlled by the bourgeoisie. The refusal to give starving people =
>food because it is private property and they can't buy it from the owners, =
>is the direct way in which the bourgeoisie and bourgeois private property =
>( laissez-faire, invisible hand) causes the famine through the enforcement =
>of the state.

This is a good-looking theory but in this case, as I already said a month ago 
(thread "Famine and Imperialism") and previously, laissez-faire was not what was 
applied. Indians were taxed into poverty and their currency was manipulated. It has 
always mystified me how people still believe 19th century white propaganda. 
Whether lassiez-faire is the way to heaven or to hell, this is not what the imperialists 
were spreading.

Julien




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Wed Feb 21 12:51:52 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 14:51:52 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] (no subject)
Message-ID: <sa93d608.067@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

BioApocalypse:
 
How Secret Experiments May Have Unleashed Cancer Causing Viruses 


By Leonard Horowitz

The American people, along with the rest of the world's population, have been under attack by insidious lethal enemies. Most people cannot perceive or conceive that shadow governors are engaged in hideous biological and chemical experiments on unwitting populations. Minority and ethnic groups especially at risk for toxic exposures, many being done in the name of "public health." 

The recent widescale spraying of malathion and Anvil, two known chemical carcinogens and immune system toxins, to allegedly prevent West Nile Virus attacks within several northeastern American states, is just one example of such "public health policy" based on no rational science. Most people are incapable of realising the scope and depth of such crimes against humanity. Perceiving, rather, their impotence in altering the course of history, and fearing the fight of a crusade, people rationalise their inefficacy or indifference in human terms * "Don't tell me. That's just the way it is. I can't do anything about it anyway, so I'd rather not know."

During the past two decades, at least six internationally known authorities advanced theories that the AIDS virus (HIV-1) was developed by biological weapons researchers, and either accidentally or intentionally transmitted it with the help of the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) and the United Nations World Health Organisation (WHO). A 1969 US military appropriations document obtained through the Freedom of Information Act called for $10 million for the development of AIDS-like viruses by 1975. In fact the National Academy of Sciences / National Research Council had informed the Department of Defense (DOD) that:


[I]t would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.


During the 1960s and early 1970s, these agencies, with help from the World Health Organisation (WHO), the (US) National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the Rockefeller and Alfred P. Sloan Foundations played leading roles in the development of cancer viruses for vaccine research and germ warfare. By 1969, the WHO had provided "prototype virus strains" for more than 592 virus laboratories in more than 35 different countries. That year, four of the most active centres, including the NCI and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), distributed 2,514 strains of viruses, 1888 ampoules of experimental vaccines, and about 100 samples of cell cultures throughout the WHO's viral network. 70,000 virus isolations were reported by 1970, and many, cultured for further study, were breaking out of the laboratories that tested them.

In March of 1970, WHO consultants even reported the likelihood of massive cancer epidemics from such virus outbreaks. Such "biological agents," they noted, "may be used... to achieve the simultaneous infection of key groups of people, and the military consequences might well be of major importance...." However, they warned of the "calculated risk that a virulent mutant might appear and spread rapidly to produce an uncontrollable epidemic on a large scale...."

These consultants also predicted that as a consequence of such biological attacks, "mass illnesses, deaths, and epidemics" would require the WHO and allied agencies to furnish supplies and personnel to deal with the resulting medical emergencies.

The first viruses and retroviruses used for cancer and biological weapons research passed through the NCI. Among the premier labs specifically researching, developing, and testing immune system destroying viruses was the Cell Tumor Biology Laboratory at the NCI. This was headed by Dr. Robert Gallo * the notorious alleged co-discoverer of the AIDS virus. To date it remains uncertain when Gallo discovered HIV. It was reported Gallo's discovery followed the French Pasteur Institute's Luc Montagnier's discovery of LAV, an identical virus, in 1984, but new evidence suggests he may have genetically engineered the virus as early as 1970 along with biological weapons contractors at Litton Bionetics * a subsidiary of the mega-military weapons producer Litton Industries, Inc.

Dr. Gallo's behaviour is, in fact, highly suspicious. As chronicled by bestselling deceased author Randy Shilts in And the Band Played On, and more recently by Eleanor Burkitt in The Gravest Show on Earth, Gallo's collaborative efforts in search of the AIDS virus were deceitful and repugnant. The authors' charged Gallo's ego was largely responsible for delaying international progress in search of the AIDS virus. Following his alleged find, patents were filed on his and the NCI's behalf keeping the French from sharing the royalties associated with the AIDS virus, its culture mediums, cell lines, experimental reagents, and tests associated with its discovery, diagnosis, and treatment. In an unprecedented act of politics and misplaced faith, Gallo was pardoned by President Bill Clinton in 1994 for several counts of misconduct and scientific fraud.

Gallo's Research Anthology


Gallo's early publications document his intimate association with Litton Bionetics * sixth on US Congress's list of major Army biological weapons contractors for 1969. The literature describes a vast number of experiments in which Gallo and co-workers bioengineered simian monkey viruses, which were humanly benign, to cause a variety of cancers. In fact, Gallo's focus was on the principle model used by cancer virus theorists between 1962 and 1972 during the NCI's generously funded, yet largely secret, "Special Virus Cancer Program" * the leukemia-lymphoma-sarcoma complex. Leukemias and lymphomas, which were rare at that time, and Kaposis sarcoma, which was virtually nonexistent, are now the most common cancers associated with HIV infection. 

During the early 1970s, Gallo's teams extracted the nucleic acids from these harmless simian monkey viruses, infused their empty envelopes with cat leukemia RNA, along with chicken sarcoma RNA, to produce mutants that produced a laundry list of diseases as seen in AIDS patients today. In fact, to enable the virus to jump species, Gallo and Litton Bionetics researchers cultured these newly created germs in human white blood cells to alter their envelope characteristics. This altered the viruses' envelop proteins and allowed the germs to attach to and move through human cell membranes, ultimately altering the cellular DNA * the blueprint of life. Most astonishing, in a 1970 publication of the National Academy of Sciences, Gallo and company celebrated these efforts by offering them to NATO's military scientists for further investigation and testing.

HIV-1, HIV-2, and the "Big Bang"

Clearly, the mass of scientific evidence indicates the development of HIV-1, and its progenitor HIV-2, evolved during the early 1970s. Allegations that HIV had been found in tissues of people who died with AIDS-like diseases before that time have been scientifically and wholly debunked. According to Dr. Gerald Myers, chief molecular geneticist at the US government's Los Alamos Laboratory, something major happened in the early 1970s to convert HIV-2, or similar simian viruses, into HIV-1. This could easily have resulted from Gallo and Bionetics experiments in which HIV-2-like viruses were cultured in human WBCs.

During the 1996 National AIDS conference in San Francisco, I asked Dr. Max Essex, Director of Harvard's AIDS Institute, and co-discoverer of HIV-2 in West African women, an important question. "How, other than through vaccines, might HIV-2, a known simian monkey virus laboratory contaminant, not found in monkeys in the wild, come to be circulating in African women?" Vaccines, principally made from monkey serum extracts, and tainted by man-made monkey virus mutants, occurred to me to be the only plausible explanation.

Essex explained he did not know. He only informed me how his monkeys became contaminated. "Other researchers had inoculated them with human tissues [for various non-HIV related experiments] before they got to our lab," he said. In other words, human experiments were again implicated. The question remained * how did African natives come by HIV-2 and HIV-1 infections in the first place?

Gallo's speculation that the AIDS virus, like his earlier leukemia virus discovery, HTLV-1, naturally jumped species from African green monkey to man is far-fetched, if not totally absurd, especially in light of what was done in his and affiliated labs in Bethesda and Northwest Uganda to create human leukemia, sarcoma, and immune system destroying viruses. Clearly, these man-made creations most plausibly emerged from NCI and DOD affiliated laboratories. However, the question of accidental versus genocidal transmission remains.

Early Targeting of Minority America


As many as two-thirds of African Americans recently surveyed believe the AIDS epidemic may be genocide. Upon what evidence are such beliefs based? The targeting of gay and civil rights leaders and groups at home and abroad by the FBI and CIA during and after the McCarthy era is well documented. The gay rights movement was seen by American intelligence officials, such as J. Edgar Hoover, as communist inspired. Black nationalist groups and civil rights leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King were likewise considered communist beneficiaries.

During the late 1960s through the 1980s, the CIA worked to: 1) prevent the coalition of militant black nationalist groups and the beginning of a "true black revolution," and 2) prevent the rise of a black "messiah." 360 disruptive American intelligence operations developed under the Communist Counterintelligence Program (COINTELPRO) Black Nationalist Hate Group's umbrella, including "Operation Chaos" which ran from 1968 until 1974. Dr. Henry Kissinger, as National Security Advisor, played a pivotal role in this program during the Nixon era, personally oversaw major CIA and FBI intelligence operations, and directed the military chiefs of staff to consider these perceived threats to national security and world economic order.

Only days after the DOD requisitioned $10 million from Congress to fund the development of AIDS-like viruses, on July 29, 1969, the House Republican committee, chaired by the Honorable George Bush of Texas, cited the urgent need for population control activities to fend off "a growing Third World crisis." Indeed, there was extreme American displeasure with Black African culture and its growing socialist threat. Africa, particularly the resource wealthy central African nations, would not be allowed to fall under communist control. Thus, the roots of Third World foreign policy was established under Kissinger's anticommunist direction.

During this period, President Nixon appealed for urgent action for population control. African economic, military, and "humanitarian" policies were shaped by Kissinger, Nixon, and later Jimmy Carter to force compliance with American economic and political objectives. Subsequent World Bank, NASA, and even National Academy of Sciences (NAS) activities in Africa expressed the imperialist philosophy. USAID and WHO sponsored immunisation programs in central Africa, likewise, reflected American intelligence interests, and were even used by CIA agents to infiltrate the region. The appointment of Dr. Henry Kissinger in 1968 as National Security Advisor * the most influential position in the Nixon White House * is noteworthy. Kissinger's alternate was Mr. Roy Ash, the President of Litton Industries * among the world's largest military weapons contractors, and parent company of the Army's biological weapons contracting firm Litton Bionetics with whom Dr. Robert Gallo of the NCI worked.

Litton military contracts, during the first Nixon administration, exceeded $5 billion. Litton Bionetics received approximately $2 million a year during this time under one NCI contract entitled, "Investigations of Viral Carcinogenesis in Primates." Another contract called for Bionetics to supply NCI researchers throughout the world with primates for cancer studies. At this same time, Congress supplied the DOD with the same allotment, $2 million a year, for AIDS-like virus development.

Gallo and Bionetics researchers John Landon and Robert Ting directed the NCI effort whose "proposed course" was the continuation of studies wherein "an RNA-dependent DNA polymerase [unique enzyme identical to the one found in human leukemia and AIDS viruses] similar to that associated with RNA tumour viruses... [would be] isolated, purified and concentrated 200-fold, making possible its further characterisation and study in relation to the leukemic process in man... with increased emphasis on monitoring and intensive care of inoculated animals to determine if active infection occurs, effects of infection, and degree of immunosuppression when used." This was, of course, more than six years before Gallo's alleged discovery of HTLV-1, and fourteen years before his alleged discovery of the AIDS virus. "Further studies of human neoplasms at [the] molecular level will continue," the scientists wrote.

And though the researchers added, "inasmuch as tests for the biological activity of candidate human viruses will not be tested in the human species," they clearly intended to develop "another system... for these determinations and, subsequently for the evaluation of vaccines or other measures of [cancer] control" in humans.

Kissinger's Contributions


All of this occurred while Henry Kissinger controlled The Defense Program Review Committee, which considered the funding requests for military expenditures including biological weapons. Upon taking office as advisor for national security, Kissinger ordered Melvin Laird to reassess America's biological weapons capabilities. His subsequent public urging of Nixon's signing of the Geneva Accord, outlawing the use of biological weapons, contradicted his secret appropriations directives which guaranteed the CIA's ability to stockpile biological weapons for covert operations as late as 1975, and likely beyond.

Between 1969 and 1976, Kissinger also directed the powerful 40 Committee that authorised covert actions by the CIA in Central Africa in the vicinity where AIDS and Ebola first broke out. Ebola initially struck a South African woman in 1975, and then several hundred people in southern Sudan and northern Zaire in 1976. AIDS, of course, was initially seen simultaneously in Central Africa and New York City in 1978.
Under Kissinger's National Security Council directives, USAID began focusing vast resources on controlling Third World populations by the late 1960s. A computer search of "USAID" "Population Control," "Vaccines," and "World Health Organisation" literature between 1970 and 1975 revealed 733 "USAID-Population Control" studies. The same search after 1975 found none. The entire field of "Population Control" had vanished from view. The subject heading had been terminated and replaced with the more comforting "maternal and child health."

A review of US Department of State Bulletins revealed that by 1976 Joseph Califano, who had advised Kissinger to appoint Alexander Haig as his White House assistant, took the lead in attacking "rapid population growth" in the Third World. His subsequent policies included the authorisation of USAID funds for Merck, Sharp & Dohme (MSD) * related hepatitis B vaccine studies in central Africa * studies that had actually begun cooperatively with Litton Bionetics researchers during their "investigation of viral carcinogenesis in primates."

The paper trail, in the scientific literature, linking MSD investigators with Gallo and Bionetics researchers who conducted cancer virus and hepatitis B vaccine studies simultaneously in New York City and Central Africa between 1970 and 1974 is lengthy but clear. Through the New York City Blood Bank (NYCBB) and other biological weapons contractors at the New York University Medical Center (NYUMC), as early as 1969, that is, shortly after Kissinger became NSC director, high risk humans were inoculated with the first doses of experimental hepatitis B vaccine. Just as the NCI-Bionetics research team proposed would be their course of action, the new vaccine was composed of live and attenuated viruses that had only been tested on monkeys.
More astonishing, MSD researchers worked in cooperation with Gallo's group at the NCI and Litton Bionetics, and combined, they conducted similar studies in Central Africa under US Army and USAID contracts. A "Drug Development Branch" of the NCI served as a conduit of experimental viruses, vaccines, and drugs between Gallo and company and MSD. Thus, the alleged channel through which HIV-tainted hepatitis B vaccines passed between the NCI, Bionetics, and MSD was operating by 1970.

At that time, besides hepatitis, massive multicomponent vaccine trials were underway in Central and West Africa. Twenty country immunisation programs supported by USAID, the CDC, the WHO and MSD tested for the first time several combined vaccines including measles, smallpox, and others. During this period, plans to prompt Congressional legislation freeing MSD and other vaccine producers from liability and costly litigation from personal injury claims related to immunisation were made. "Propaganda campaigns" were then initiated at home and abroad.

One document, discovered during this author's search of the scientific literature, expressed a view among leading government scientists that race, socioeconomic status, concerns over "national security," and the safety of the white middle class should be the principle motive behind Third World and domestic immunisation practices. "In the United States, the central cities will continue to seethe with immunisable diseases and thereby create a significant risk to other parts of the society until these people ['Spanish-Americans and Negroes'] are regularly included in immunisation practice," Dr. J. D. Millar from the CDC warned.

Other "Special Virus Cancer Program" reports published in 1971 and 1972 by the NCI were serendipitously discovered by the author in the basement of the government documents department at Davis Library, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. These books document that Litton Bionetics supplied all other NCI contractors, including those in New York City, with experimental monkeys, monkey viruses, monkey virus "hybrids" (that is, genetically altered monkey viruses), infected monkey tissues, cell lines, and other reagents needed to facilitate primate cancer studies and the development of vaccines. Only one percent of this entire program's budget went towards assuring biohazard containment. This money was paid to Dow Chemical Company under a separate contract.

Despite Dow's efforts, researchers working in New York City for MSD and the NYUMC, in 1974, reported "more than 70%" of their quarantined caged monkeys had been environmentally contaminated with hepatitis and other viruses. Yet, this did not stop these authorities from developing the first four lots of experimental hepatitis B vaccine that was used on the first human-guinea-pigs between 1970s and 1974 simultaneously in Central Africa and Manhattan.

Thus, all it might have taken was one monkey, infected by NCI researchers at Litton Bionetics's laboratories, with an AIDS-like virus infection, or even its neighbour, to have spread the virus through the first hepatitis B vaccine lots "containing 200,000 human doses," to cause the AIDS pandemic we have today.

The CIA and AIDS


In 1975, following a storm of public outrage over the CIA's involvement in Watergate, the agency was investigated and chastised by the Rockefeller Commission and two Congressional committees.

That year, word had leaked from the Army's "special," that is, secret operations division at Fort Detrick, Maryland that the CIA was illegally storing stockpiles of deadly bacteria, viruses, and other toxins. As a result, a Select Committee To Study Governmental Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities met to investigate. Senator Frank Church presided.

The Church hearings exposed much about the illegal storage of biological weapons (BW) by the CIA, and their intended use in covert operations. Unfortunately, the American news media, focusing on a single neurotoxin purified from shellfish, failed to report the most incriminating facts. The CIA, according to director Bill Colby, planned to use its more lethal biologicals in "covert operations" as directed by the National Security Council, then directed by Henry Kissinger. Ultimately, the investigators and the media shielded Kissinger from the Church Committee's indictments along with other chief decision makers. 

In fact, the CIA's BW operation began as early as 1947 with the agency's metamorphosis from the OSS. Following the war, the CIA exfiltrated more than 900 Nazi scientists to America, including Hitler's chief biological weapons developer Dr. Erich Traub. At that time, Kissinger, then in his late twenties, served as General Alexander Bolling's chief translator. Bolling directed American intelligence at the time and was "Godfather" to the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), the agency that ran the Nazi exfiltration program * Project Paperclip. 

Kissinger's other intelligence assignments by 1948 included overseeing Nazi hunting efforts in more than twenty German towns, and instructing other intelligence officers in Nazi tracking tactics at the European Command Intelligence School in Oberammergau. Thus, I was not surprised to learn that the Defense Department's request for funding a five-year AIDS-like virus development program, beginning in 1970, came when Kissinger oversaw the 40 Committee which authorised the budget and covert activities of the CIA. The AIDS-like viruses were readied by 1975. 

History records that following the American forces withdrawal from Vietnam, Kissinger immediately focused anticommunist undertakings on the resource wealthy region of Central Africa. Zaire and its neighbours Angola and Sudan were specifically targeted. CIA Director William Colby's 1975 Church Committee admission then that his agency's interest in BW was for offensive uses during covert operations at the very time the CIA was secretly operating at full force in this region * ground zero for the AIDS and Ebola outbreaks * is noteworthy.

Nathan Gordon, Chief of the chemistry branch of the Technical Services Division of the CIA gave additional testimony of the agency's possible use of extensive virus stockpiles to assistant intelligence agency scientists in their work on mass immunisation projects, vaccine development, and cancer research. This was precisely the work conducted by NCI contractors including Merck, Sharp & Dohme and Litton Bionetics in Bethesda and Northwest Uganda, and New York collaborators at the New York University Medical Center and the infamous New York Blood Bank * the source of more than 10,000 HIV infections among American hemophiliacs.

Moreover, Church Committee discussions focused on congressional testimony which documented that the CIA had, in fact, been receiving "deadly poison[s]" manufactured by the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) and delivered to Fort Detrick for use in human experiments and covert operations.
Additional 1977 hearings published in the Congressional Record note that "George W. Merck, of the prominent Merck pharmaceutical firm," had been appointed by President Roosevelt, during World War II, Director of the War Research Service charged with overseeing America's biological weapons industry.

The CIA in Africa


Between 1970 and 1975, Kissinger ordered the CIA to begin a major covert military operation against MPLA (communist bloc backed) "rebels" in Angola. Indebted by over $4.5 billion to the International Monetary Fund, Zaire, headed by President Mobutu * paradoxically regarded as one of the world's richest men with "a personal fortune put at $2,939,200,000 [1984 estimate] banked in Switzerland" * was wooed by NATO allies during the 1970s to be a staging area for CIA backed, Portuguese, French, and South African, mercenaries. American corporate investment, notably in copper, aluminium, and diamonds, doubled following a 1970 visit by Mobutu to the United States. Major investors included Rockefeller's Chase-Manhattan Bank. In 1975, however, Mobutu turned against NATO allies. He proclaimed his intention to nationalise foreign owned enterprises, and expelled the American ambassador. He ordered his military to arrest CIA agents, and placed some of them under death sentences.

The following year, in October 1976, the Ebola virus broke-out in fifty-five Zairian villages, first killing people who had received injections. Mobutu then ordered his army to seal off the Bumba Zone with roadblocks and shoot anyone trying to leave.
By the end of 1976, the Zairian leader had reconciled his differences with American intelligence and, thereafter, continued to reap his Western allies' economic and "humanitarian" aid.

About the same time, Mobutu signed an agreement with a West German company named OTRAG (Orbital Transport-und Raketen-Aktiengesellschaft). The company leased 260,000 square kilometres of eastern Zaire for military/industrial purposes. The contract gave OTRAG sovereign rights to territories inhabited by 760,000 people in the region not far from what is now called, "The AIDS Highway."

Believed to be of military and intelligence gathering significance to NATO, OTRAG's principals included several Nazi scientists including Dr. Kurt H. Debus, who worked as director of the Cape Canaveral space program until 1975 before transferring to Zaire. Richard Gompertz, OTRAG's technical director, presided over NASA's Chrysler space division. Lutz Thilo Kayser, OTRAG's founder and manager, when young was quite close to the Nazi rocket industry, often called 'Dadieu's young man,' a reference to Armin Dadieu, his mentor, who served as prominent SS officer and as Goring's special representative for a research program on storing uranium. 

In 1977, at the height of OTRAG's activity in Zaire, Litton Industries, Bionetics's parent, received $5 million for medical electronic equipment from its Hellige division, in Freiburg, West Germany. Much of Litton's NATO and West German sales during this period appear to have been earmarked for OTRAG, which may have been subcontracting at the behest of the DOD through Bionetics.

Concurrently, cooperative efforts were recorded by NATO and WHO officials to coordinate preparations for facing possible epidemics from biological warfare.
These circumstances deserve further investigation especially considering the recent outbreaks of the world's most feared and deadly viruses. Marburg, Ebola, Reston, and AIDS share the dubious distinction of breaking out in or around areas of CIA/NATO, Bionetics, or OTRAG operations.

The CIA and The Hot Zone


The Hot Zone, the alleged "terrifying true story," that remained on the New York Times best-seller list for more than two years, was certainly frightening. Its content, however, when measured against government documents and scientific reports, was barely true. Few realise its author, Richard Preston, received a $20,000 literary grant from the Sloan Foundation to produce this Random House act of counterintelligence.

An investigation into Alfred P. Sloan's background revealed his foundation: (1) supported black educational initiatives consistent with the CIA's COINTELPRO Black Nationalist Hate Group campaign; (2) administered "public management" research and mass-media-public-persuasion experiments completely consistent with the CIA's Project MKULTRA; (3) funded much of the earliest cancer research involving the genetic engineering of mutant viruses; (4) funded population control studies by Planned Parenthood-World Population, New York; (5) funded the Community Blood Council of Greater New York, Inc., the "council of doctors" who established the nefarious New York City Blood Bank; (6) maintained Laurance S. Rockefeller, the director of the Community Blood Council of Greater New York and the president of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, as chairman of the board of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, and a trustee for the Foundation; (7) gave in excess of $20,000 annually to the Council on Foreign Relations; and (8) maintained among its "marketable securities," 16,505 shares of Chase Manhattan Bank stock (in 1967) along with 24,400-53,000 shares issued by Merck & Co., Inc. (at least until 1973).

In addition, Sloan researchers contributed various reagents to the NCI's Dr. Robert Gallo during his early retrovirus research, and Sloan is well known for its links to the AIDS pharmaceutical industry.

Could it be that the individuals and institutions most likely to have created HIV and its relatives are now the ones most capitalising on its effects? Surely the AIDS pandemic is big business. In the words of Alfred P. Sloan, "ignorance of the principles of capitalism and free enterprise is both a danger and an opportunity." Undoubtedly, the millions of HIV/AIDS patients and their families will find it harder than the Sloans to appreciate the opportunity.

__________________________________________________________
Leonard G. Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A., M.P.H. is an internationally known authority in public health education, a Harvard graduate and independent researcher, and one of healthcare's most captivating motivational speakers. This article is based on Dr. Horowitz's book Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola * Nature, Accident or Intentional? (Tetrahedron, Inc., 1998; ISBN:092355012-7; US$29.95). Please direct lecture and book requests to Tetrahedron Publishing Group, P.O. Box 2033, Sandpont, Idaho, USA; (208) 265-2675; (800)336-9266; Fax: (208) 265-2775, or visit web site at http://www.tetrahedron.org. Alternately, Australian readers can obtain Emerging Viruses from Infinity Bookshop, Tel: (02) 9212-2225.

The above article appeared in 
New Dawn No. 64 (January-February 2001 



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Wed Feb 21 11:56:36 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:56:36 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20010221113516.0134ba68@pop2.igc.org>
Message-ID: <000701c09c37$ef209c40$af8820d9@mjones>

> I am for the meeting, Mark.  

Anyone else?

Mark



From david.welch at st-edmund-hall.oxford.ac.uk  Wed Feb 21 14:43:50 2001
From: david.welch at st-edmund-hall.oxford.ac.uk (David Welch)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 21:43:50 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <000701c09c37$ef209c40$af8820d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.05.10102212127440.9692-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk>

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Mark Jones wrote:

> > I am for the meeting, Mark.  
> 
> Anyone else?
> 
The Communist Party Refoundation Mk II? No thanks. 

Perhaps someone should start a sweepstake on long it takes Mark Jones to
get bored and swing back to 'Ken Livingstone is the best anyone can hope
for', one week, one month, who knows?






From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Wed Feb 21 14:54:16 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 16:54:16 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] On the other hand...
Message-ID: <sa93f2b8.083@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> julp at freesurf.ch 02/21/01 01:56PM >>>
Charles,

>The invisible =
>hand and laissez-faire policies are expressions of the bourgeoisie, the =
>ruling class in this colonialism, which owns the basic means of production =
>as private property, which ownership is enforced and protected by the =
>state, controlled by the bourgeoisie. The refusal to give starving people =
>food because it is private property and they can't buy it from the owners, =
>is the direct way in which the bourgeoisie and bourgeois private property =
>( laissez-faire, invisible hand) causes the famine through the enforcement =
>of the state.

This is a good-looking theory but in this case, as I already said a month ago 
(thread "Famine and Imperialism") and previously, laissez-faire was not what was 
applied. Indians were taxed into poverty and their currency was manipulated. It has 
always mystified me how people still believe 19th century white propaganda. 
Whether lassiez-faire is the way to heaven or to hell, this is not what the imperialists 
were spreading.

((((((((((

CB: There is no such thing as the Invisible Hand either. Just put quotes around those two.  Whatever it is called, it was the system of the imperialists.

According to you there has never been laissez-faire in the real world, so what are you defending it for ?




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Wed Feb 21 11:04:35 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:04:35 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <sa93bce3.070@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> sherrynstan at igc.org 02/21/01 11:11AM >>>

>
>This is wrong. Marx and Engels wrote about scientific and ecological
>problems their entire lives. 

Marx and Engels, last I heard, are both dead.  I like their stuff, but we
need lots and lots of real, living people to even hope for a change.

((((((((((

CB:Discoverers of thermodynamics laws, geology , and much of the modern ecological theory are dead too , no ?







From aabdo at webtv.net  Wed Feb 21 19:06:44 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:06:44 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re:Grim forecast for future of US unions
In-Reply-To: bon moun <sherrynstan@igc.org>'s message of Wed, 21 Feb 2001
	12:55:31 -0500
Message-ID: <9870-3A947434-43@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Stan, my response was not meant to bash you personally.     I have
nothing more than your words on this list, to judge who you are, or what
your organizing accomplishments are.

However I do have some experience in the cult of leadership cadre tagged
onto Social Democratic business unionism.      And your attitudes toward
rank and file are cliche standards of the outsiders-coming in, core
organizers, now favored by the national union structure in their
organizing campaigns.     That way control is maintained over local
union structures, and any incipient independece is kept under tight
control from the very beginning.

<Yeah, yeah... "elitest"... that's me. I didn't say I was listening in
an encounter group. Anyone with any organizing experience should be able
to relate to exactly the problems I am listening for. I'm listening the
same way a deer listens in the woods... for danger. I've already been
there with all these archetypes, and I've watched them fuck up one
organization after another.>

Well, have you watched how your archetype fucks up organization after
organization?     My guess is that you, as the US Labor Movement
leadership is now doing, trumpeted your minimal success as something
that must be copied by all, and the only road ahead.

Every body get out of the way as the Macho studs from the established
union structure , the Real Guys, get it done.      Unfortunately, you're
not getting it done.     And the tremendous amount of self-delusion of
the union bureaucracy cannot change that basic fact.

<Instead of yawning, you could have paid attention. Not a union. It's a
network of organizers. Like the one I worked in with over 50 community
groups in Eastern North Carolina, the one I built from 20 to fifty
organizations in North Carolina, and like the one that has 22
organizations across the South. Labor people, environmentalists, civil
rights people, consumer advocates, faith-based... though I'm sure it's
nothing compared to your vast experience, Tony.>

That's all fine and dandy, but just what is it you are organizing?
Nader was a good organizer with all his consumer groups, too.
They're still around.     So?    All their lobbying the Democrat Party
experience counts for next to naught.    But very efficient people.

<My point, the second one you completely missed, is that we need a
process to put together a meeting, if the meeting is to develop
organization.>

This sort of corporate efficiency model applied to Left organizing, is a
total indicator of the business unionist model of organization.     It's
used in building the 'lobbying Left', too.     Local Democratic Party
bodies love it!

<Your remarks have absolutely nothing to do with my point, which is that
the conversation we are carrying on here is not relating to the level of
consciousness among the masses, and so we should be very careful about
checking in with reality when we want to assess how something might
actually be changed.>.....

How absolutely patronizing to the masses, Stan.    I believe that they
can understand larger concepts.     Plus, they can organize around them
also.     I can hear you now..... But not at the Local 204, UFCW
meeting, Tony.

Wrong again.    You should go in there and explain to them about the
need to integrate economic activity of town and countryside.     Large
parts of the world have been left as deserts because the countryside was
exploited by the town.    And I hear that North Carolina is in a pretty
stinky situation, also.     Give it a try, and above all....... listen
like a deer.

Yours in organizing solidarity....

Tony












From embark at epud.net  Wed Feb 21 21:49:20 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 20:49:20 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] The "left" and the "environment"
References: <E14VbhN-00059H-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c09c8b$3af202a0$78acefd8@rowan>

> Anyone for picketing the Qatar meeting?
>
> Mark

Funny, it's not the first time I have been asked that question this week.
<g>


> From: bon moun <sherrynstan at igc.org>

> "The Left", however you want to define this amorphous group, is not afraid
> to address the issue.

I'm sorry, Stan, that using the term "the left" sent up the redbaiting
flare. A careful reading of the preceeding messages to my post will confirm
that Mark used the term in this way. I plead "Not Guilty". I still think
"they" are "afraid",  though. I'm asking why.

> The VAST majority of "the left" is not in possession
> of the relevant facts and the relevant analysis.

I agree with your statement, although I also agree with Mark's rebuttal to
it as well. (cognitive dissonance reigns supreme.)

 >This rhetorical assumption of the
> left being "afraid" is precisely part of the problem.  It substitutes
> name-calling or a softer version of it for analysis and education.

Again, Mark points the "j'accuse"-ing finger at "the Left", so I'm in good
company in this rhetorical gambit, such as it is. I was sincerely NOT doing
name calling, (by now you should know that I can -- and am often overly
quick to --  slide down into that gutter when it suits my purposes. If I
wanted to call names I'd of done it up front. I merely wanted to ask why.
... and I did.


> Again, Tom, this gratuitously confrontational and oversimplified
> characterization of "the left" may be a fine outlet for frustration, but
it
> does nothing to either bring more people to understanding or build
> alliances.  I consider myself a leftist, and I have never taken any of
> these positions as stated.  This is a caricature.  What are YOUR
arguments,
> Tom?  What do YOU propose?  It's easy to throw rocks.

Yes, and apparently easier to overlook earlier proposals. I have laid my
cards upon the table before and trotted out a variety of proposals regarding
this issue. They remain unrecognized and largely uncommented upon by
Crashlist. It's as if we wake up every day with a new blank slate and there
is no memory of who has proposed what.  My latest proposal: ....  everyone
go look up the latest works on "bioregionalism" for some sign posts to a way
out. Simple. Doesn't even require impossible political mobilization.

I do, however stand by my "caricature" of the prevailing excuses by the
majority of "the Left" of Crashlist and sister sites. You, yourself, in this
post have resorted to my identified excuse #1. A casual reading of the
archives can confirm this about others. If the shoe fits

... if it doesn't .... don't worry.

> Let's break it down.
>
> 1. We can either accept the problem, or we can do the best we can with the
> conditions and resources available to combat, ameliorate, and survive the
> problem.
>
> 2. The conditions and resources available to accomplish this are material
> and social.

Nah. Not in the way I read the standard delimitation of material and social
I am projecting on to your thoughts. If you add a component called
"natural", I'll be in your corner. If I'm wrong, tell me how I'm wrong.


> 3. If there is a solution or partial solution, it can not be effected
> without social action.
>
> 4. The developing crisis is developing endogenously with the system, which
> is capitalism.

Nah. That's like saying all these glaciers melting are melting just from the
heat on Wall Street. It's bigger than capitalism. If capitalism were gone
tomorrow, and the heat it generates was removed, 6 billion politically
neutral innocents would still be killing the planet. Capitalism is just a
single shark swimming in a cruel sea.

> 5. Since the problem is developing endogenously, restructuring solutions
> within that system can not address the roots of the problem.
>
> 6. The people who run this system and benefit from it are not hearing your
> appeal to their long-term self interest, and they have no intention of
> voluntarily letting the system go.  They will kill or jail or declare war
> on everyone of us before they do.

Unless they can figure a way to make a profit from doing otherwise. <g>
(sorry, couldn't resist.)

[snip of 7, 8 & 9 which are very good points, btw]

> 10. That question is not moral or academic.  It's strategic.  It means we
> have to identify specifically WHO will do it, HOW will they do it, WHEN,
> WHERE, and WHY to aim our strategic blows--NOT to effect the changes we
> both want to see... because we already know that siezure of political
power
> is a precondition of any solution... but to take that material power.
>

yep. so ....  why are so many of " the Left" focused on those largely
irrelevent issues I identified instead of beginning to specify who, how,
when, where, and why? That's my question, and I think Mark's.

Is the Left afraid to tackle the bigger issue of [who, how, when, where, and
why]? It seems so. Far easier to  lose oneself in the debate over who is the
bigger butthead, Chomsky or Marcuse; now THATs really some relevent
discussion toward averting the disaster!


> Will that be enough?  I don't know.

Try to know

>
> Will it happen in time?  I don't know.

Try to find out.

> Can it be avoided?  Absolutely not.

yes. absolutely true. Nestor says he's going to fight on anyway. So am I.

> Do we need to engage and educate those who are serious about this
> taking-power thing?  You bet!

Yayyyyyyyyy! That's a discussion I am hoping for!

Julien writes:
> Tom, I'd be glad if you could explain how localism and bioregionalism
could work
> on a large scale without going through this annoying taking power business
(or at
> least this destroying power business).
>
> Julien

Let's see. Suppose you woke up and there was no oil.
Now, that means there is no global economy, no global communication, no
world-wide or even nationwide anything. You'd be living solely in your
"locality". You'd have to make do with what is there, since you can't expect
Indonesia to send you any more commodities. The largest entity you would be
able to take advantage of organizing would be your "bioregion", (with any
luck ... let's be optimistic.) Those who understand localism and
bioregionalism will have a head start, non? If they just happen to be
Marxists, well ......

The point is: the annoying "taking power business" is actually a "losing
power business " (no petroleum pun intended .. well, maybe a little bit <g>)
Remember that old arab adage: "To prevail, go sit at home on your porch,
eventually your enemy's casket will pass your door." The madman with the
machete has terminal cancer.

There will have to be localist/bioregionalists in every watershed for it to
be "large scale", Julien. "Large scale" is actually going away for about
1500 years, starting with the current dieoff in Russia according to Mark,
and the current dieoff in Afghanistan according to me. (and let's not forget
the current dieoff in Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia, Mississippi ....) Billions will
die, read Mark's post, and the other gloom and doom recognitions on this
thread. "Large Scale" may be a pipe dream.

Carrol:
>Tom and those who agree with him are equally irrelevant to
> any actual politics.

Boy, Carrol, true-er words were never spoken!  Any dispassionate observation
of the situation will reveal this. My personal political influence extends
about to a few tree spikes and maybe a whale or two having a few more weeks
of life.  Not much relevance at all. (although they still haven't buried
much nuke waste in Nevada, hee hee.) The influence of "those who agree with"
me is even less, since that number is a very very small one indeed.

Oh well, I never thought it was a rose garden.

Tom

"The Earth is not dying - she is being killed.
 And those who are killing her have names
and addresses."      -Utah Phillips




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Wed Feb 21 08:57:14 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:57:14 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <sa939f0a.048@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

>> jones.mark at btconnect.com 

And given the scale of the problem of ecocide it's not JUST capitalism,
either, as Julien says, it IS a matter of human nature however defined or
socially determined that is. We have evolved to maximise our niche and unless
our species re-evolves pretty damn quick we'll maximise ourselves out of
existence.

((((((((((

CB: Human nature cannot just be defined however. We have not evolved such that we maximise our niche by instinct, but rather we maximize it based on a specific historical tradition. Maximization is not in our genes. So, it is a historical tradition not an instinct that must be undone, nor is that historical tradition universal in the species. Being clear on this difference is critical in making successful the effort to change the world and save it from ecological catastrophe.




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Thu Feb 22 04:45:00 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 06:45:00 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] The "left" and the "environment"
In-Reply-To: <000f01c09c8b$3af202a0$78acefd8@rowan>
References: <E14VbhN-00059H-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010222063752.0134e098@pop2.igc.org>

>Nah. Not in the way I read the standard delimitation of material and social
>I am projecting on to your thoughts. If you add a component called
>"natural", I'll be in your corner. If I'm wrong, tell me how I'm wrong.

When you say "natural," I'm assuming you are referring to material.  As
opposed to super-natural.  The point being the material world, including
whatever you wish to further categorize as natural, absent conscious social
action, is incapable of critical intervention to "correct" anything.

> 4. The developing crisis is developing endogenously with the system, which
>> is capitalism.
>
>Nah. That's like saying all these glaciers melting are melting just from the
>heat on Wall Street. It's bigger than capitalism. If capitalism were gone
>tomorrow, and the heat it generates was removed, 6 billion politically
>neutral innocents would still be killing the planet. Capitalism is just a
>single shark swimming in a cruel sea.

This is where you are categorically wrong.  The reason you are wrong is you
do not understand what I am saying when I say capitalism.  The Wall Street
comment demonstrates that.  "Capitalism" is liguistic shorthand for a
thoroughgoing and complex set of realities, for which there are a few very
simple key mechanisms in operation... sorry at the klutzy prose here.  It's
early.  I don't have the time or space here to become didactic about
historical materialsm, again.  People's actions are impelled by a
combination of material and social circumstances.  The social system, not
just the economic, that we live in, worldwide, is capitalism.  It has its
own inherent motive forces that are inescapable based on things like
commodity production, property relations, etc.  When a Haitian peasant
scours the deforested hillsides in search of ever smaller trees to make
charcoal to cook on, and sell, he is not a  capitalist... but the
circumstance is brought about by capitalism.  Capitalism overshoots.
Economically, environmentally, in all ways.  That is its nature.  It can't
help it.  And we can't escape it without despotic inroads against those at
the top.

>
>> 5. Since the problem is developing endogenously, restructuring solutions
>> within that system can not address the roots of the problem.
>>
>> 6. The people who run this system and benefit from it are not hearing your
>> appeal to their long-term self interest, and they have no intention of
>> voluntarily letting the system go.  They will kill or jail or declare war
>> on everyone of us before they do.
>
>Unless they can figure a way to make a profit from doing otherwise. <g>
>(sorry, couldn't resist.)
>
>[snip of 7, 8 & 9 which are very good points, btw]
>
>> 10. That question is not moral or academic.  It's strategic.  It means we
>> have to identify specifically WHO will do it, HOW will they do it, WHEN,
>> WHERE, and WHY to aim our strategic blows--NOT to effect the changes we
>> both want to see... because we already know that siezure of political
>power
>> is a precondition of any solution... but to take that material power.
>>
>
>yep. so ....  why are so many of " the Left" focused on those largely
>irrelevent issues I identified instead of beginning to specify who, how,
>when, where, and why? That's my question, and I think Mark's.

I'm still confused by what's called "the left."  But even when we clarify,
I can only speak for myself.  I don't think issues are irrelevant just
because someone on this list proclaims them so.  I have worked with other
people on electoral reform, against the swine industry, for the right to
organize a union among public workers, and on and on.  I don't apologize
because these activities didn't begin the revolution.  I had never come in
contact with the information I have found through this list anywhere else.
Was I expected to just understand it?  So based on my own experience, I am
now engaging others on the left, whose work I will not denigrate so
cavalierly as some here in their armchairs (yes, it pisses me off), to
bring consciousness up.

>
>Is the Left afraid to tackle the bigger issue of [who, how, when, where, and
>why]? It seems so. Far easier to  lose oneself in the debate over who is the
>bigger butthead, Chomsky or Marcuse; now THATs really some relevent
>discussion toward averting the disaster!

Agreed.  But I don't know many people outside of net denizens who do a lot
of that.  Not a single activist I know spends much time doing this.  Most
of them are too busy.  Don't confuse this list with "the left."  It's
valuable, as I have indicated, but it's not reflective (in and of itself)
of any larger reality I know.



"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possibly happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman



From jenifer_dixon at mindspring.com  Thu Feb 22 07:46:38 2001
From: jenifer_dixon at mindspring.com (Jenifer Dixon)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:46:38 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Why Iraq Was Bombed on Friday ....or Que opinas tu Dave Duke?
References: <3354-3A90234A-3501@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <002101c09cdf$c0a2aae0$4d50f7a5@a1x7m5>

Tony,

    An angle that I found interesting about the Mexican story is the fact
that Mexico has energy shortages. znd that
Bush, of course,  wants to help them deregulate, sell them more overpriced
services from the deregulated Tex group, AES, Dynergy,etc.  That would be as
a trade off for more slave labor  from dsouth of the borderr.  Would you
have any info on this?
Or information on Fox's business interests?
Jenifer
GlobalSpin

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Abdo" <aabdo at webtv.net>
To: <CHOMSKY at MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>; <crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com>;
<marxism at lists.panix.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 2:32 PM
Subject: [CrashList] Why Iraq Was Bombed on Friday ....or Que opinas tu Dave
Duke?


> The question is.... Why was Iraq bombed on Friday?     It is an entirely
> different question from.... Why was Iraq bombed, Period?     The answer
> to that, involves The Middle East, Europe, Russia, and the geopolitical
> message of letting the world know once again, who the Chief Terrorist
> will continue to be.
>
> But why Friday, and not Thursday or Saturday?     Does it even matter
> what day of the week the bombs were dropped?      Who even cares?
>
> Well the answer to that, is that the Republican Right Wing would have
> cared.    Precisely because they are at odds with George and family over
> a key political issue; US/ Mexican relations.
>
> Pete Wilson rises from his political grave like a half-undead vampire.
> The Republican Party is split right down the middle between The Rabid
> National Chauvinists, and the Republican Businessmen.     And it was
> necessary to bomb Iraq Friday, to keep this division from tearing
> usunder.     And most of all, to keep it out of public light.
>
> Here was the problem Friday for Bush..... How to go to Mexico and hug
> Fox ala Clinton?      And not get burned by the more rabid sections of
> his own Party?     They hate Mexicans, and Bush promising a new day
> ahead in US/ Mexican immigration, binational policing cooperation, and
> new travel and immigration laws is not something that they are ready to
> embrace!     Yet that is the promise way down South beyond Dixie.
>
> The Texas business community is at odds with their Republican cohorts in
> the rest of the nation.    Their only regional allies within the
> Republican Party are with the Miami/ Cuban oriented Florida Republicans.
> But 'free trade' means money, and 80% of the Mexican/ US flow of
> products enters or leaves via Texas.      NAFTA is Texas.       And
> Texas Republicans are in a new love affair with their senyorita,
> Mexico... with Fox at the reign.
>
> It's more than just 'free trade', too.     It's Pemex, oil, and natural
> gas.      Texas business interests are the US enterprises that most
> shall benefit off any pillage of Mexican natural resources.
>
> Texaco for Mexico!      OK, Cousin Slim?     Well Cousin might not be
> totally happy, but he is now worth $8 billion US dollars.      He
> probably won't be protesting too hard.
>
> So back to Friday, the day Iraq got bombed......     This was also the
> day Dubya went down to Guanajuato to practice his Spanish, and to eat
> some food better prepared than the usual Tex-Mex.    Family day for the
> Bushes and Foxes!      Hugs, smiles, and hand clasps all around.
> All for Mexican TV.
>
> But US TV was another story.      It was just another routine day where
> the family Bush slaps Saddam around.      Like Father, like Son.
> All the Hard Right Evangelical Nuts, Military Gung Hoers, and Jesse
> Helms Wannabes could hardly get bitter with Dubya for being like dad?!
> Could they?
>
> One of the benefits of living here on the Great Divide (the Tex-Mx
> border), is that one gets two propaganda systems for the price of one!
> And what a beauty it is, to see how in little more than 6 months the
> Mexican Propaganda System has gone from selling support for
> 'dictatorship', to selling support for neo-liberal 'democracy'.   Those
> Mexicans hardly blinked an eye.     It truly is like our Two Party
> System here at home.     And I'm beginning to feel more safe now!
>
> The Mexican side had little to say about the bombs, and lots about the
> hugs.     The US side had lots to sayabout bombs, and little about hugs.
> And that's why Iraq got bombed on Friday.
>
> It's going to be hard balancing act for Dubya.     His supporters are
> even holding Texas state legislative sessions in Spanish!     Can he
> hold the Republican Pearly Gates open for the Tex-Mex professional crowd
> to swing inside and away from the Democratic Party, or will he get
> bashed in by The Traditionalists?
> Que opinas tu Dave Duke?    Que viva Mexico?      O que se chingue
> Mexico?
>
> Tony Abdo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base




From AlAdisa at aol.com  Thu Feb 22 08:14:48 2001
From: AlAdisa at aol.com (AlAdisa at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 10:14:48 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Why Iraq Was Bombed on Friday ....or Que opinas tu Dave Duke?
Message-ID: <6b.10334b9f.27c686db@aol.com>

"Wag the DOG!!!!!!"



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Wed Feb 21 10:58:58 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:58:58 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re; Grim forecast / we can do it
Message-ID: <sa93bb92.041@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>





>> jones.mark at btconnect.com 

And given the scale of the problem of ecocide it's not JUST capitalism,
either, as Julien says, it IS a matter of human nature however defined or
socially determined that is. We have evolved to maximise our niche and unless
our species re-evolves pretty damn quick we'll maximise ourselves out of
existence.

((((((((((

CB: Human nature cannot just be defined however. We have not evolved such that we maximise our niche by instinct, but rather we maximize it based on a specific historical tradition. Maximization is not in our genes. So, it is a historical tradition not an instinct that must be undone, nor is that historical tradition universal in the species. Being clear on this difference is critical in making successful the effort to change the world and save it from ecological catastrophe.




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb 22 06:28:13 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:28:13 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <sa939f0a.048@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>
Message-ID: <000201c09cd3$3062fcc0$d89d20d9@mjones>

>
> CB: Human nature cannot just be defined however. We have not
> evolved such that we maximise our niche by instinct, but rather we
> maximize it based on a specific historical tradition. Maximization
> is not in our genes. So, it is a historical tradition not an
> instinct that must be undone, nor is that historical tradition
> universal in the species. Being clear on this difference is
> critical in making successful the effort to change the world and
> save it from ecological catastrophe.

You're right, and this is the only hope we have. However, it seems clear that
niche-maximising and competitive strategies are very deeply embedded.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb 22 06:28:15 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:28:15 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] The "left" and the "environment"
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20010222063752.0134e098@pop2.igc.org>
Message-ID: <000301c09cd3$3283b9e0$d89d20d9@mjones>

> This is where you are categorically wrong.  The reason you are wrong is you
> do not understand what I am saying when I say capitalism.  The Wall Street
> comment demonstrates that.  "Capitalism" is liguistic shorthand for a
> thoroughgoing and complex set of realities, for which there are a few very
> simple key mechanisms in operation... sorry at the klutzy prose here.  It's
> early.  I don't have the time or space here to become didactic about
> historical materialsm, again.  People's actions are impelled by a
> combination of material and social circumstances.  The social system, not
> just the economic, that we live in, worldwide, is capitalism.  It has its
> own inherent motive forces that are inescapable based on things like
> commodity production, property relations, etc.  When a Haitian peasant
> scours the deforested hillsides in search of ever smaller trees to make
> charcoal to cook on, and sell, he is not a  capitalist... but the
> circumstance is brought about by capitalism.  Capitalism overshoots.
> Economically, environmentally, in all ways.  That is its nature.  It can't
> help it.  And we can't escape it without despotic inroads against those at
> the top.
>

I agree with this, too. However the point about saying 'it's not just
capitalism' is that we will have to transition to a human lifeworld which is
not just anti-capitalist but which overcomes and transcends the whole
prehistory of urban societies of accumulation and production.



> Agreed.  But I don't know many people outside of net denizens who do a lot
> of that.  Not a single activist I know spends much time doing this.

But this is not a reason to base your politics on anything other than the core
truths which ought to define our practice. You say you are involved in various
activist contexts, but they are presumably not about the central issues we are
addressing here, except perhaps indirectly. So what is the point of this
activism? Isn't it just trying to get in front of a crowd of people who are
rushing up a blind alley, or off a cliff?

Mark




From bantam at dingoblue.net.au  Thu Feb 22 09:54:56 2001
From: bantam at dingoblue.net.au (Rob Schaap)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 03:54:56 +1100
Subject: [CrashList] Pinko humanism is the best greenism there is
References: <000201c09cd3$3062fcc0$d89d20d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <3A954507.29AD35D7@dingoblue.net.au>

Wrote Charles:

> > CB: Human nature cannot just be defined however. We have not
> > evolved such that we maximise our niche by instinct, but rather we
> > maximize it based on a specific historical tradition. Maximization
> > is not in our genes. So, it is a historical tradition not an
> > instinct that must be undone, nor is that historical tradition
> > universal in the species. Being clear on this difference is
> > critical in making successful the effort to change the world and
> > save it from ecological catastrophe.

Responded Mark:

> You're right, and this is the only hope we have. However, it seems 
>clear that niche-maximising and competitive strategies are very deeply >embedded.

I'm not so sure, actually.  I think we get carried away, sadly in the manner
of Althussarians, on the extent to which homo economicus is manifest in yer
average prole.  S/he behaves as s/he has to where the system's structure
enforces its daily necessity (looking for the cheapest mince; crawling over a
neighbour for a badly needed job and such - whatever), but that ain't us in
our free time at all, is it?  And certainly not when the poo hits the fan.

Every time we have a decent bushfire down this way - and we get a few - you
see people donning sticky, hot, luminescent yellow clobber on a 43-degree day
and running straight at a firefront the size and shape of Manhattan - often
hopelessly underequipped and often many miles from where their own little
cache of goodies and loved ones safely reside.  When we KNOW shit's coming
down, we are a species to wonder at - beyond the reach of a whole corps of
economics lecturers - we team up, put our lives on the line, cop a beating,
and love each other for a full week afterwards.  Wouldn't know a prisoner's
dilemma or an optimal utility function if it smacked us in the face.

We got ESSENCE, for-shrieking-into-a-gale, and half a millenium of capitalism
might be good enough to blind us to our interests - clueless as to the myriad
potentials that reside within us - but it can't budge the particular protein
soup which constitutes us all.  I'm with Singer - this 'nature=right-wing
politics and nurture=left-wing politics' just gives the other side waay too
much ground!  

We bloody evolved as GROUPS, because we're the gawdamned best at communication
and empathy that there is - and the most potent at mass-endeavour this side of
the insects!  We didn't compete in the great species-forming carnage that is
evolution as individual, tasty, clumsy, slow, soft, gooey organisms - we
out-competed because these tasty, clumsy, slow, soft, gooey organisms
naturally organised themselves into an organism so bloody powerful that
nothing could stand in its way ... except itself.  

I'll admit the complication with being a self-conscious, abstraction-capable,
linguistically-abled social force is that our own culture becomes a material
and significant component of the environment within and through which we
evolve, but half a millenium of capitalism, much less a quarter of a century
of neoliberalism, ain't even a drop in the pool, folks.  

You can watch that grainy old footage of the Somme and despair at what man has
made of man - or you can watch it and stand awestruck at what combined power
we're capable of exerting when we think we know what has to be done.  Even,
manifestly, when we happen to be wrong about that ...

We gotta believe it's particularly urgent, fundamentally crucial, highly
socially valued, and manifestly possible, though.  That lot, and a popularly
recognised institutional medium through which to exert our combined power. 
Seems to me, the basis for our efforts should take account of each and every
one of those.  As we're talking about unprecedented human carnage and an
urgency which obscenely infests our front pages on a weekly basis these days -
well, all thin silver linings and whopping great dark clouds, sure, but it's
gotta be a promising start, no?  I see the last entry on the list as the
hardest nut to crack, but the birth of institutions is often to be found in
social necessity, I think.  So I'd suggest we not start there - else we'd be
headed on a path of disintegrating abstract squabbles and alienating
power-plays ... but then I've said my piece on that stuff already ...

'Night all,
Rob.



From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Thu Feb 22 11:16:37 2001
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:16:37 -0600
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer> <3.0.1.32.20010221102241.00f9ee04@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <3A955704.FB2FF13C@ilstu.edu>


Louis Proyect wrote:
> 
> >That is, any 'movement' that "makes these facts the basis and guiding
> >compass of [its] politics" will never mobilize sufficient political
> >weight to be of any significance. Hence anyone seriously interesred in
> >these facts will _not_ focus on them but work towards building a left
> >_within_ which these facts cold become important. I would laugh at
> >someone who wanted to pass out leaflets proclaiming "Smash Commodity
> >Fetishism." Tom and those who agree with him are equally irrelevant to
> >any actual politics.
> >
> >Carrol
> 
> This is wrong. Marx and Engels wrote about scientific and ecological
> problems their entire lives. The question of soil fertility preoccupied
> them in particular.

Of course -- and Marx also wrote extensively about commodity feteshism.
And we need more writing and analysis about both global warming and
commodity fetishism. But if you think either can be at the forefront of
the agitation and organizing that go into building a mass movement, then
you are living in a dream world.

The academy has one real defect that only political practice  and
constant retheorizing of that practice can correct and recorrect -- the
belief that truth translates directly into practice. You and Mark _must_
somehow break free from your academic ivory towers where you commune
with pure truth and steadily forget all you ever learned of politics.
Such truth is a necessary but not in any way a sufficient condition of
political action.

I as well as you and Mark have felt the powerful seduction of pursuing
the truth for its own sake; who among us does not envy Marx those years
in the British Museum; 

Carrol



From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb 22 11:32:37 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:32:37 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <3A955704.FB2FF13C@ilstu.edu>
References: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>
 <3.0.1.32.20010221102241.00f9ee04@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010222133006.00fab2fc@popserver.panix.com>

Carrol:
>Of course -- and Marx also wrote extensively about commodity feteshism.
>And we need more writing and analysis about both global warming and
>commodity fetishism. But if you think either can be at the forefront of
>the agitation and organizing that go into building a mass movement, then
>you are living in a dream world.

I agree. But the goal is to arm the mass movement with an understanding of
the broader theoretical framework. This is especially true with respect to
the new protest movements inspired by Seattle. Most of these activists are
beginning to think in terms of the structural contradictions of capitalism,
but probably lack the deeper understanding of what's driving ecological
despoliation. They tend to have reformist illusions. By grounding
ecological thought in Marxist economics, you help to create an ideological
pole of attraction for communists. I must mention, by the way, that Michael
Perelman is working on a very important new book that integrates ecological
thought, an analysis of imperialism and Marxist value theory.



Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb 22 11:59:09 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:59:09 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Dana Meadows
In-Reply-To: <3A955704.FB2FF13C@ilstu.edu>
References: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>
 <3.0.1.32.20010221102241.00f9ee04@popserver.panix.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010222135639.010afb3c@popserver.panix.com>

NY Times, February 22, 2001 

Donella Meadows, 59, Author, and Advocate for Environment

By WOLFGANG SAXON

Dr. Donella Hager Meadows, an author, educator and advocate for the
environment, died Tuesday at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon,
N.H. She was 59 and lived in Hartland Four Corners, N.H.

The cause was bacterial meningitis, said Prof. Jack E. Shepherd Jr., a
friend and colleague at Dartmouth, where she was an adjunct professor of
environmental sciences.

Dr. Meadows, known as Dana, was a MacArthur Fellow and the lead author of
"The Limits of Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on the
Predicament of Mankind," published in 1972. The book delivered a simple
message: either civilization or growth must end.

The book stated that continued population and industrial growth would
exhaust the world's minerals and steep the planet in lethal levels of
pollution.

If trends continued unchanged, the authors said, the limits of growth would
be reached within 100 years. They urged "deliberate checks" on economic and
population growth.

Their thesis was sharply disputed at the time, but the book sold nine
million copies and was translated into 28 languages. It was produced by an
interdisciplinary team at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and
financed by the Club of Rome, an international research organization that
studies "the complex of problems troubling men of all nations," like
poverty, alienated youth and monetary disruptions.

In 1992, she and her co-authors, Jorgen Randers and Dr. Dennis L. Meadows,
her former husband, published an update, "Beyond the Limits: Confronting
Global Collapse, Envisioning a Sustainable Future."

Based partly on new computer simulations, the book warned that unless human
activity changed, humans would "overshoot" the carrying capacity of the
planet in decades.

Both books remain in print, as does a selection from "The Global Citizen,"
the weekly syndicated column she wrote.

Dana Meadows was born in Elgin, Ill., and graduated from Carleton College
in Minnesota in 1963. She received a doctorate in biophysics from Harvard
University in 1968.

She was a researcher in the Department of Nutrition at M.I.T. when "The
Limits of Growth" report was written. 

She later taught and researched at centers in Hawaii, Austria and Norway.
In 1972, she joined an interdisciplinary program at Dartmouth, the Resource
Policy Center, rising to associate professor. 

She and her former husband founded the International Network of Research
Information Centers, in which they organized training programs and
workshops in resource management in Europe, Central America, Africa, Asia
and the United States. In 1994, the John D. and Catherine MacArthur
Foundation, known for its "genius grants," selected her for a fellowship
and awarded her $320,000 over five years.

Dr. Meadows is survived by her parents, Phebe Quist of Tahlequah, Okla.,
and Don Hager of Palatine, Ill.; and a brother, Jason Hager of Waterford,
Wis. Her former husband lives in Durham, N.H. 


Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Thu Feb 22 12:08:40 2001
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:08:40 -0600
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <SAK.2001.02.21.lmrabdqd@computer>
	 <3.0.1.32.20010221102241.00f9ee04@popserver.panix.com> <3A955704.FB2FF13C@ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <3A956328.3AD82401@ilstu.edu>

Sorry, the preceding post was incomplete and I had not planned on
sending it for a day or two. I would have only added to it, however, not
changed anything already written. In due time I will repost it in
complete form.

Carrol



From julp at freesurf.ch  Thu Feb 22 13:02:41 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:02:41 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] On the other hand...
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.22.qttgjirt@computer>

>According to you there has never been laissez-faire in the real world, so what
>are you defending it for ?

My electronic dictionary says:

laissez faire
1. The doctrine that government should not interfere in commercial affairs

Sounds good enough for me. That existed in the real world, notably between Britain 
and white countries.
But is this how you would qualify colonial exploitation in which surplus (or not-so-
surplus, as the famines seem to indicate) is extracted in a manner similar to the one 
of feudal lords? True, Indian tariffs were low and at one point brought down to zero, 
but what's the significance of that when 20% of India's exports pay the tribute, 30% 
pay for interests and services, and another 50% pay for British imports, a good 
portion of which the government is responsible for. Note that the UK's share of 
world exports was 15% but her share of India's imports was 75% while her share of 
China's imports was 20%... sounds like laissez faire? (Of course, these are all very 
rough figures. I'm for example averaging across time without trying to adjust for 
exchange rate variations and inflation.)

I'm not defending laissez-faire, just fighting [censored] propaganda. What for? I 
don't want to manipulate anyone. I guess I never grew up and am still influenced by 
chivalrious ideals.
But tell me: where do you got the idea that I was defending laissez-faire? Did you 
imagine that because I was not badmouthing it?
If you really want to badmouth laissez faire, why don't you put the responsibility for 
the holocaust on it? You know, Hitler got in power because of those economic 
problems caused by laissez faire blah blah blah.

Juliem




From julp at freesurf.ch  Thu Feb 22 13:15:27 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:15:27 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] The "left" and the "environment"
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.22.ipifbdpr@computer>

Tom,

>Let's see. Suppose you woke up and there was no oil.
>Now, that means there is no global economy, no global communication, no
>world-wide or even nationwide anything. You'd be living solely in your
>"locality".

So we apparently agree. I was talking about the pre-crash situation and you're 
talking about the post-crash situation. You expect "nature" to do that annoying 
destroying power business I alluded to. I thought you were talking about what one 
could do now, before the crash, hence the misunderstanding. Am I right in 
supposing that bioregionalism can't do more than marginal things *now*?

>Those who understand localism and
>bioregionalism will have a head start, non?

As well as those who have the survival kit and skills some people are busy talking 
about. But oil won't disapear from one day to the next. The decline to negligible oil 
extraction will last decades, if not a century. The consequences will be radically 
different, don't you think so?

>There will have to be localist/bioregionalists in every watershed for it to
>be "large scale", Julien.

Of course, that's how I understood it.

>"Large scale" is actually going away for about
>1500 years

Not convinced. There has been empires built without fossil fuels. And IMO the 
social structures of today could well continue to be large scale even if you took 
away their oil and that billions died.

>Billions will
>die, read Mark's post, and the other gloom and doom recognitions on this
>thread.

I'm sorry but I still think that some of that is fishy. For example under the thread "why 
we are fucked" we find a Youngquist paper explaining that nothing is likely to 
replace petroleum, which is indeed sensible. But to go from that to saying that 
there's no good energy sources around and that wind energy is no good 
because... I'm not making this up... it's ugly, makes noise, and kills birds?!? It 
doesn't even address all the types of energy which are not intended to be 
converted to electricity (of course, since they won't replace petroleum) like solar 
heating. I do think that some people are making too much out of too little.
That said, I do admit that billions may very well die, but that's hardly certain. Well, of 
course they'll die, but not necessarily this way... you know what I mean.

Julien




From aabdo at webtv.net  Thu Feb 22 15:38:54 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:38:54 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: Why Iraq Was Bombed on Friday ....or Que opinas tu Dave Duke?
In-Reply-To: "Jenifer Dixon" <jenifer_dixon@mindspring.com>'s message of Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:57:17 -0500
Message-ID: <9860-3A9594FE-2907@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Gosh.  I have to profess a woeful ignorance about Fox's contacts and
business deals.     The whole early Fox era of gaining prominence as a
PAN bigwig, and gaining the governorship of Guanajuato, is data I'd like
to find time to research in detail.      When and how did he get US and
Zedillo's sponsorship?     Very interesting questions, and ones that the
Mexican Left will probably be delving into often in the coming years.

I do know that he has used the Guanajuato state government structure to
finance a lot of expensive and disproportionate highway construction in
his area of regional power.     In this matter alone, he represents no
change at all from past PRI practice.

A key to understanding the binational relations between Mexico and the
US, is to learn and understand more about the trade and cultural
relations between Texas and Northern Mexico.    As a brief
generalization, it is safe to say that Democratic Party contact and
influence on Mexico grows between San Antonio/ South Texas Border
areas... into more historical relations with Mexico based on common
racial heritage.

While Republican Party influence is more recent, and flows out of Dallas
and Houston Anglo business community relations with the super elite
Mexican capitalist class.      And not only in Northern Mexico, but
throughout Mexico as a whole.     In fact this Texas Anglo aristocracy
is extensively involved in commercial contacts in Guatemala with the
elite class there, too.     But these details are often dry and hard to
come by, except in little bits and pieces. 

Nobody has been paying much attention........ for so long a time.
And much of the info is hidden in the shade.

Tony
_______________________________  

An angle that I found interesting about the Mexican story is the fact
that Mexico has energy shortages. znd that 
Bush, of course, wants to help them deregulate, sell them more
overpriced services from the deregulated Tex group, AES, Dynergy,etc.
That would be as a trade off for more slave labor from dsouth of the
borderr. Would you have any info on this? 

Or information on Fox's business interests? Jenifer 
GlobalSpin












From aabdo at webtv.net  Thu Feb 22 15:00:29 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:00:29 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Zedillo Reward for Theft- A Seat on Union Pacific Board of
 Directors
In-Reply-To: "Jenifer Dixon" <jenifer_dixon@mindspring.com>'s message of Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:57:17 -0500
Message-ID: <9859-3A958BFD-3143@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

What this Reuters news item leaves unsaid, is that Zedillo presided over
the privatization of a national treasure, and asset, the Mexican state
run railroad system.    Once extensively used by Mexico's poor for basic
transportation at an affordable price, line after line is being
abandoned, or already has been.     Most lines that don't turn an
immediate lucrative profit, are being run down into total disrepair.

The intercity bus lines are the dangerous, costly, and ecologically
destructive alternative that many find themselves unable to afford to
use.     Federal transportation policies there, also have led to
increased monopilization and profiteering.

Plus, the switch to highway intercity transportaion has led to another
misuse of Mexican federal funds.... those used to produce tollroads for
trucking and transportation companies along traditional routes left in a
dangerous state of disrepair, causing fatal accidents by the thousands.
But rich cronies get richer, by feeding off of federal highway
construction contracts.     And a patronage system is left behind, of
tollroad employees, and tolls levied.

Zedillo's hand picked 'opposition' candidate, Vicente Fox, is widely
thought to be headed for instituting a similar nationalization of Pemex,
the state owned oil and natural gas company.      What Board of
Directors seat awaits him at what US company 6 years from now?

The legacy of Mexico's modern privatization to benefit US
multinationals.... from Salinas Gortari to Ernesto Zedillo, to today's,
Vicente Fox. 

Tony Abdo
______________________________

Union Pacific names Mexico's Zedillo to board   
22 Feb 2001 16:23  

OMAHA, Neb., Feb 22 (Reuters) - Union Pacific Railroad's parent said on
Thursday former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de Leon was
elected to its board of directors. 

Union Pacific Corp.  said its railroad unit, the largest in North
America, is the largest rail transportation link with Mexico, with
operations at the six border gateways. Last year, its Mexican revenues
rose 19 percent to a record $850 million, and in January they increased
6 percent. 
Union Pacific also owns 26 percent of Ferrocarril Mexicano, one of two
major railroads within Mexico. 

Zedillo, 49, becomes the company's 14th board member. He was Mexico's
president from 1994 to 2000. 

"(Zedillo's) vast knowledge of economic and trade issues will help to
guide our growth strategy across our entire rail network in the years
ahead," Union Pacific Corp. Chairman and Chief Executive Dick Davidson
said in a statement.












From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb 22 12:57:03 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:57:03 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Jared Diamond/WWF
Message-ID: <000001c09d09$87bdc000$f87b20d9@mjones>

A Channel 4 (british tv) news report has just shown footage of a World
Wildlife Fund-sponsored company raping mangrove forest in Papua New Guinea.
Jared Diamond is somehow involved; in between trying to grab the camera, while
exiting swiftly at a local airport, he is heard to say 'So what? Much worse
things happen.' and the like.

Probably I'm a fucking old idiot, as my wife says, and no doubt I am. I don't
know why I find this news so disturbing. After all, I'm as down on Jared 'Guns
germs and Steel' Diamond (who turns out to be a fifty+ year-old with a
sinister baldy haircut) as anyone can be, and I never gave a penny to WWF, not
consciously anyway. Maybe it's the pictures of cheerful young Papuan New
Guineans drowning their homeland for twenty bucks each, that's pissed me off.
I dunno.

I think it would be a good idea to close the CrashList and go get drunk
forever.

Mark (God Bless you all) Jones




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb 22 13:21:17 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 20:21:17 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Pinko humanism is the best greenism there is
In-Reply-To: <3A954507.29AD35D7@dingoblue.net.au>
Message-ID: <000101c09d0c$eaadc900$f87b20d9@mjones>

> that ain't us in
> our free time at all, is it?  And certainly not when the poo hits the fan.

Rob, I've never really understood why a clever chap like you,  goes in for
this demotic and mostly incomprehensible pseudo-aussie dialect-babble. Most
Australians under 30 are right here in London, in any case. We socialise a bit
and I can tell you, they don't talk this way. They live in Earls Court and
work in every pub inside the North Circular. Some of them (they are from
Melbourne) live right next door to me. We go to Epping Forest and pick
mushrooms with them. They tell us intelligently about their travels and I am
very envious. One chap from NSW just came back from Glasgow and in between
describing Hogmanay there (he got drunk, fell asleep in the street, and some
mischievous Scot stole his [size 12] boots but not his mobile, passport or
credit cards; so he had to walk back in the snow to his digs, barefoot thru
broken new year's eve glass, but somehow, triumphant)-- he told us about 6
weeks spent examining the remains of the Byzantine empire in modern Turkey.
He's on this list, btw, like a few other Aussies. His mailbox overflows every
few weeks; that means he's somewhere especially out of the way and I am even
more envious than usual. (I can't fly on planes any more, evidently, so altho
I feel pretty good, I'm constantly just catching up with people; recently I
was in Wales, however. When civilisation finally nosedives I plan to go back).

> When we KNOW shit's coming
> down, we are a species to wonder at - beyond the reach of a whole corps of
> economics lecturers - we team up, put our lives on the line, cop a beating,
> and love each other for a full week afterwards.

Unfortunately, this is either untrue or irrelevant. Yoi simply ignore what is
staring you right in the face: the whole vast agglomeration of dead labour,
ie, infrastructure, whose servants our masters are, and we and they are in
thrall to that.

Mark




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Thu Feb 22 09:38:45 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 11:38:45 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <sa94fa45.088@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> jones.mark at btconnect.com 02/22/01 08:27AM >>>

>
> CB: Human nature cannot just be defined however. We have not
> evolved such that we maximise our niche by instinct, but rather we
> maximize it based on a specific historical tradition. Maximization
> is not in our genes. So, it is a historical tradition not an
> instinct that must be undone, nor is that historical tradition
> universal in the species. Being clear on this difference is
> critical in making successful the effort to change the world and
> save it from ecological catastrophe.

You're right, and this is the only hope we have. However, it seems clear that
niche-maximising and competitive strategies are very deeply embedded.

Mark


(((((((((((

CB: I don't see niche maximization as a good description of European feudalism.   Was it latent then ?




From mstainsby at tao.ca  Fri Feb 23 05:47:46 2001
From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 04:47:46 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <3.0.1.32.20010221104625.0134b148@pop2.igc.org> <3.0.1.32.20010221113516.0134ba68@pop2.igc.org>
Message-ID: <051e01c09d96$e0ad8fa0$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>

please keep me up to date on this cyber-conference...I seem to have deleted the
planning meetings.
Macdonald
> >At the risk of seeming facetious, the answer is you have to call a meeting of
> >like-minded people and form a political organisation. What is required is
> >someone to organise this meeting. Are you available? I could certainly help
> >out. Anyone else?
> >
> >Mark
>
> Seems we are in a meeting, albeit an unstructured one.  I'm available.
> Here's a suggestion.  Let's organize a meeting using this medium, email.
>





From julp at freesurf.ch  Fri Feb 23 08:24:32 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 16:24:32 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.23.thhkkigm@computer>

>CB: I don't see niche maximization as a good description of European feudalism.   
>Was it latent then ?

I think we could all use historical demomgraphic figures. Does someone know a 
good book (or something of the sort) about this? I remember browsing one years 
ago, and on the charts most of the time the line was going up, up, up. But this might 
well have been crappy stuff.
One thing is quite obvious: if you compare the beginning with the end of feudalism, 
forests were cut down and population increased in most places. Plus, they were 
"ethnic" wars in some places during which a population colonized more land (not to 
mention immigration to the Americas).
Anyway, what makes you say that, Charles? Excuse the stupid question, but how 
was feudalism radically different from the XIXth century in this respect except for the 
geographical discoveries and technological advances? During feudalism, people 
did try to improve productivity and they did try to invade foreign lands. Marx talked 
about primary accumulation, right? (See, Tom? I'm not saying primitive 
accumulation. Is that OK with you?)

Julien




From bantam at dingoblue.net.au  Fri Feb 23 10:01:44 2001
From: bantam at dingoblue.net.au (Rob Schaap)
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 04:01:44 +1100
Subject: [CrashList] Pinko humanism is the best greenism there is
References: <000101c09d0c$eaadc900$f87b20d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <3A969822.C69F08A8@dingoblue.net.au>

Good evening, Mark.

> Rob, I've never really understood why a clever chap like you,  goes  >in for this demotic and mostly incomprehensible pseudo-aussie dialect->babble. Most Australians under 30 are right here in London, in any    >case. We socialise a bit and I can tell you, they don't talk this way.

Well, only some people think me clever.  Alas, everyone who knows me thinks me
vulgar (if that's what you mean by 'demotic').  And poo hits fans in both the
US and the UK to my certain knowledge (indeed, when last I was in England I
remember someone - Ian St John? - calling a nasty incident after a match when
a spectator struck a manager - Brian Clough?.  'That's the first time I've
ever seen the fan hit the shit!' he gleefully announced).  Perhaps a little of
my Dutch penchant for body functions has melded with the colloquialisms I
picked up when I was learning English in Australia years before your young
Antipodean chums were even impure thoughts.  I don't know.  Anyway, I talk to
myself in my head as I compose my posts, so I tend to write like I talk.  Does
it really matter?

>They live in Earls Court and work in every pub inside the North      
>Circular. Some of them (they are from Melbourne) live right next door >to me. 

Well, I did most of my Australian apprenticeship in Tasmania.  An altogether
different milieu, as I'm sure your neighbours will enthusiastically confirm
(ignore their tales of rampant in-breeding and foul weather - they're just
stories we put out to keep mainlanders off our patch).  Do like Melbourne a
lot, though - a real cosmopolitan crucible.

>We go to Epping Forest and pick mushrooms with them. They tell us    
>intelligently about their travels and I am very envious. 

Do demotic colloquialisms imply a lack of intelligence, then?  Now I'm just cross.

> He's on this list, btw, like a few other Aussies. 

We've lots of computers here and not a few good red-green types, so that's
good to hear.  As they're not me, I imagine they wouldn't write quite like I
do.  Probably no bad thing, I admit, but so what?

>Unfortunately, this is either untrue or irrelevant. 

Don't know whether to go for the vulgar liar option or the vulgar irrelevancy
tag.  Thanks for giving me a choice, though.

>Yoi simply ignore what is staring you right in the face: the whole    >vast
agglomeration of dead labour, ie, infrastructure, whose servants >our masters
are, and we and they are in thrall to that.

We're not so different from other people, are we, Mark?  I take a more
autonomist approach than you, ye Cambrian Cassandra, and this might be just as
well, as a glimmer of productive hope might then be discerned.  

I'll go some of the way with your dark pronouncement, but I'll follow the
autonomists in concluding the thought.  Negri has it that, "in a rotten
society,  we are all rotten: that is precisely why we are struggling for a
different  society. To struggle against a rotten society is to struggle
against ourselves.  There is no innocent subject here, no room for puritanism
or authoritarianism."  (Pinched that from a Holloway critique just posted over
at Aut-op-sy, by the way)

Sure, emancipation from alienation and despoliation needs some hard thinking
and organised practice (perhaps Negri does play a bit fast and loose with the
actual pragmatics of transformation), but if we decide at the outset that we
(or, worse, 'they') are incapable of slipping the odd ideological leash when
palpable crisis shows itself, then we're, well, fucked.

Biliously yours,
Rob.



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Fri Feb 23 09:24:18 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:24:18 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <sa964862.081@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> julp at freesurf.ch 02/23/01 10:24AM >>>
>CB: I don't see niche maximization as a good description of European feudalism.   
>Was it latent then ?

I think we could all use historical demomgraphic figures. Does someone know a 
good book (or something of the sort) about this? I remember browsing one years 
ago, and on the charts most of the time the line was going up, up, up. But this might 
well have been crappy stuff.
One thing is quite obvious: if you compare the beginning with the end of feudalism, 
forests were cut down and population increased in most places. Plus, they were 
"ethnic" wars in some places during which a population colonized more land (not to 
mention immigration to the Americas).
Anyway, what makes you say that, Charles? Excuse the stupid question, but how 
was feudalism radically different from the XIXth century in this respect except for the 
geographical discoveries and technological advances?

(((((((((((

CB: As Marx and Engels noted , European capitalism is characterized by an explosion of production as contrasted specifically with European feudalism. There is a qualitative change, a quantitaive leap in production and niche maximization with the advent of capitalism.


((((((((((((((




 During feudalism, people 
did try to improve productivity and they did try to invade foreign lands. Marx talked 
about primary accumulation, right? (See, Tom? I'm not saying primitive 
accumulation. Is that OK with you?)

((((((((

CB: If feudalism had not been overthrown, I doubt that we would be worried about running out of fossil fuels or global warming today.




From julp at freesurf.ch  Fri Feb 23 11:21:44 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 19:21:44 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.23.geoltasb@computer>

>CB: As Marx and Engels noted , European capitalism is characterized by an 
>explosion of production as contrasted specifically with European feudalism. 
>There is a qualitative change, a quantitaive leap in production and niche 
>maximization with the advent of capitalism.

Definitely, but you got geographical discoveries and technical innovations to 
explain that.
Or maybe you think that the advent of this extraordinary social organisation named 
capitalism enabled Europe to conquer the world? Have you been reading the 
Goldstone thing that Mark posted or some other author challenging white 
supremacist propaganda or did you bypass that kind of stuff completely?

BTW, just a question Charles... when did capitalism began and feudalism end in 
England according to you? I ask so that I can understand what you are really 
talking about and confront it with the historical record.

>CB: If feudalism had not been overthrown, I doubt that we would be worried about 
>running out of fossil fuels or global warming today.

Maybe we would not be worrying about it yet. It's not capitalism as such but the 
consumption of fossil fuels that create those problems. The rate of sustainable 
consumption of fossil fuel is very low and can easily be exceeded by a european 
feudal economy or any other pre-capitalist one. All it takes is some technical 
innovations and the availability of these fuels.

Julien




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Fri Feb 23 11:37:31 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 13:37:31 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <sa96679b.098@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> julp at freesurf.ch 02/23/01 01:21PM >>>
>CB: As Marx and Engels noted , European capitalism is characterized by an 
>explosion of production as contrasted specifically with European feudalism. 
>There is a qualitative change, a quantitaive leap in production and niche 
>maximization with the advent of capitalism.

Definitely, but you got geographical discoveries and technical innovations to 
explain that.
Or maybe you think that the advent of this extraordinary social organisation named 
capitalism enabled Europe to conquer the world? Have you been reading the 
Goldstone thing that Mark posted or some other author challenging white 
supremacist propaganda or did you bypass that kind of stuff completely?

((((((((((

CB: There are many, many discussions of this issue in this left cluster of lists. No need to read Goldstone in particular. See _Capital_ on The Socalled Primitive Accumulation, et al.

Point here is not the historical cause , but the FACT that there was a change from feudalism to capitalism such that the latter poses an ecological threat that the former did not.

((((((((((((((



BTW, just a question Charles... when did capitalism began and feudalism end in 
England according to you? I ask so that I can understand what you are really 
talking about and confront it with the historical record.

((((((((((((((

CB: Sometime between 1450 and 1550. There have been many posts and references on this on the Marxism and PEN-L lists.

((((((((



>CB: If feudalism had not been overthrown, I doubt that we would be worried about 
>running out of fossil fuels or global warming today.

Maybe we would not be worrying about it yet. It's not capitalism as such but the 
consumption of fossil fuels that create those problems. 

The rate of sustainable 
consumption of fossil fuel is very low and can easily be exceeded by a european 
feudal economy or any other pre-capitalist one. All it takes is some technical 
innovations and the availability of these fuels.

(((((((((

CB: One of the main differences between capitalism and feudalism is a leap in the rate of technical innovations.  The idea is that feudalism would not have made the technical innovations made under capitalism for many centuries , if ever.  Your analysis obliterates a definitive distinction between capitalism and feudalism.




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Fri Feb 23 12:07:52 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 14:07:52 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <SAK.2001.02.23.geoltasb@computer>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010223140037.01352784@pop2.igc.org>

>>CB: If feudalism had not been overthrown, I doubt that we would be
worried about 
>>running out of fossil fuels or global warming today.
>
>Maybe we would not be worrying about it yet. It's not capitalism as such
but the 
>consumption of fossil fuels that create those problems. 

Are you seriously claiming that the level of fossil fuel consumption we
presently have could have ever developed on this scale outside of... apart
from... in spite of... an historically specific mode of production?  It
occurs to me that this kind of hairsplitting is a very flimsy attempt to
get the capitalist mode of production off the hook... the one consistent
theme we hear from you.  You can't separate the problem from its context,
now or in the past.  We are all acknowledging that the physical problem
associated specifically with the use of fossil fuels can be described
apolitically as a  physical phenomenon.  I think we are all acknowledging
that it's a very serious problem.  But to continually try to tease out an
escape for the capitalist system is either dishonest, disingenuous, or denial.

The rate of sustainable 
>consumption of fossil fuel is very low and can easily be exceeded by a
european 
>feudal economy or any other pre-capitalist one.

Then why wasn't it?  Why didn't those feudal barons have tenant-tended deep
drilling equipment factories on each of their feifdoms?

 All it takes is some technical 
>innovations and the availability of these fuels.

Then why doesn't someone just do it?  This is so simple, I can't believe it
isn't a decree.  This is not a facetious question, but a point.  The reason
no one does it is because Shell and Oxy and BP and their minions in various
governments damn well don't want to, and neither you nor I have to power to
stop them right now.

Sometimes, I swear, things can get very unreal hereabouts.


"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possibly happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman


"Yes, most journalists today are worthless scum who write solely because
they can't get government subsidies paying them to drink themselves to
death (sadly, most journalism majors started down that dark path because
they were too inept for medicine, too inarticulate for law, and too
arrogant and lazy for food service, he said with self-loathing)." 

		Paul T. Riddell




From julp at freesurf.ch  Fri Feb 23 13:00:18 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:00:18 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.23.rbdrfidf@computer>

Stan,

>Are you seriously claiming that the level of fossil fuel consumption we
>presently have could have ever developed on this scale outside of... apart
>from... in spite of... an historically specific mode of production?

Of course this is not what I was suggesting. What I am suggesting is that several 
historically specific modes of production can be imagined in which the level of 
fossil fuel consumption is unsustainable. A lower consumption level than the one 
we have today is still unsustainable.
I don't remember your position on the USSR and such countries if you ever stated it 
here, but this is a system which seems to me very different from capitalism as we 
know it and its creation did nothing to solve the fossil fuels and other ecological 
problems. I'm not trying to say that anti-capitalism or even communism aims at 
creating another USSR, but to say that simply overthrowing capitalism won't be 
enough because it is only part of the problem.

>But to continually try to tease out an
>escape for the capitalist system is either dishonest, disingenuous, or denial.

This is not what I'm trying to do. I don't care about capitalism. You can blame it for 
every evil if you like for propaganda purposes. Since this is not the goal of this list 
as far as I know, I'm simply trying to sort out real from imaginated causes for our 
problems.

>Then why wasn't it?  Why didn't those feudal barons have tenant-tended deep
>drilling equipment factories on each of their feifdoms?

Those feudal barons had no oil under their feet. They did not have the technical 
capability for deep drilling. But why could no feudal baron have this capability?
BTW, despite this "tenant and feudal barons" cliche they were corporations before 
1450, as well as urban proletarian revolts, finance, international trade, etc.

>Then why doesn't someone just do it?  This is so simple, I can't believe it
>isn't a decree.  This is not a facetious question, but a point.  The reason
>no one does it is because Shell and Oxy and BP and their minions in various
>governments damn well don't want to, and neither you nor I have to power to
>stop them right now.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean at all.
 
 
Charles,

>Point here is not the historical cause , but the FACT that there was a change from 
>feudalism to capitalism such that the latter poses an ecological threat that the 
>former did not.

This is a nice FACT. But you then choose your dates in an inconsistent manner. 
What ecological threat was there in 1550 that wasn't there in 1450 (except maybe a 
higher population)?
Anyway, I could also say that now that we had the Reform and especially the 
Quacker movement, there is an ecological threat which didn't exist before. Is that 
also a FACT?

>CB: Sometime between 1450 and 1550. There have been many posts and
>references on this on the Marxism and PEN-L lists.

That's a too broad reference for me to read, sorry.
What changed between 1450 and 1550? The only really significant change I know 
about is the one impersonated by Colombus, Cortez, et al. That's hardly social 
change. Was Cortez a capitalist??? I'm not well taught about English history so I 
may be missing something.

>CB: One of the main differences between capitalism and feudalism is a leap in the 
>rate of technical innovations.  The idea is that feudalism would not have made the 
>technical innovations made under capitalism for many centuries , if ever.  Your 
>analysis obliterates a definitive distinction between capitalism and feudalism.

I don't know what is said on Pen-L and other lists but to say that there was a leap in 
the rate of technological innovations beyond anything known on Earth before in 
England or Europe around 1500 looks like white supremacist stuff to me. This 
seems around 200 years too early. What were those stunning innovations? Naval 
artillery was important, but is enough to create a change from "feudalism" to 
"capitalism"?

Julien




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Fri Feb 23 13:30:30 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:30:30 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <SAK.2001.02.23.rbdrfidf@computer>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010223152313.01352028@pop2.igc.org>

At 08:59 PM 2/23/01 +0100, you wrote:
>Stan,
>
>>Are you seriously claiming that the level of fossil fuel consumption we
>>presently have could have ever developed on this scale outside of... apart
>>from... in spite of... an historically specific mode of production?
>
>Of course this is not what I was suggesting. What I am suggesting is that
several 
>historically specific modes of production can be imagined in which the
level of 
>fossil fuel consumption is unsustainable. 

Perhaps I am confused about why anyone would bother imagining modes of
production that never existed.

A lower consumption level than the one 
>we have today is still unsustainable.
>I don't remember your position on the USSR and such countries if you ever
stated it 
>here, but this is a system which seems to me very different from
capitalism as we 
>know it and its creation did nothing to solve the fossil fuels and other
ecological 
>problems. I'm not trying to say that anti-capitalism or even communism
aims at 
>creating another USSR, but to say that simply overthrowing capitalism
won't be 
>enough because it is only part of the problem.

The USSR was employing methods created by captialism for its economic
development.  It was competing for its survival in a captialist milieu.
The USSR never originated any instruments or relations of production that
had not already been developed within captialism.  The level of industrial
development that brought us to our current state is directly and
inextricably connected to the development of capitalism.

>
>>But to continually try to tease out an
>>escape for the capitalist system is either dishonest, disingenuous, or
denial.
>
>This is not what I'm trying to do. I don't care about capitalism. You can
blame it for 
>every evil if you like for propaganda purposes. 

Redbaiting is not only unnecessary, it is a distortion in this case.
Identification of a system within which the conditions, which we are
decrying here, exist is neither propaganda nor a moral pronouncement.
Anyone who knows me knows I don't go in a whole lot for "good and evil."
The very fact that you say you don't care about capitalism indicates to me
that you don't get it.  This environmental problem does not exist in a
vacuum.  And it is insoluble without consciously directed, coordinated
social action.  The problem with capitalism is not that it's evil.  It's
that it's in very essential ways undirected and uncoordinated.  There is
quite simply no chance of gaining the kind of comprehensive control
necessary to confront the problem being discussed here without social(ist)
planning.  That's not saying social(ist) planning is inherently
environmentally sound.  It's saying that without social(ist) planning there
is quite simply no way to effect a solution at all.

Since this is not the goal of this list 
>as far as I know, I'm simply trying to sort out real from imaginated
causes for our 
>problems.
>

Then why do you continually discard any reason that can be interpreted as
systemic?  Is the social order imaginary?  Last I saw, the police and the
army were carrying real, not imaginary, guns.

>>Then why wasn't it?  Why didn't those feudal barons have tenant-tended deep
>>drilling equipment factories on each of their feifdoms?
>
>Those feudal barons had no oil under their feet. They did not have the
technical 
>capability for deep drilling. But why could no feudal baron have this
capability?
>BTW, despite this "tenant and feudal barons" cliche they were corporations
before 
>1450, as well as urban proletarian revolts, finance, international trade,
etc.

But who held political power?  This is a key point, then and now.  It's not
an abstraction.  Who held then and holds now the legal monopoly on deadly
force?  And which class does this political establishment represent?


"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possibly happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb 23 13:31:32 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:31:32 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <051e01c09d96$e0ad8fa0$395a7318@rct1.bc.wave.home.com>
Message-ID: <000101c09dd7$79d67080$6f7820d9@mjones>

> please keep me up to date on this cyber-conference...I seem to have
> deleted the
> planning meetings.
> Macdonald

As this is by far the wittiest rejoinder of your I have ever seen, Mac, I hope
the wit was intentional.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb 23 04:13:54 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:13:54 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Pinko humanism is the best greenism there is
In-Reply-To: <000101c09d0c$eaadc900$f87b20d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <000001c09d89$920ed5a0$138320d9@mjones>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
> [mailto:crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com]On Behalf Of Mark Jones
> Sent: 22 February 2001 20:21
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> Subject: RE: [CrashList] Pinko humanism is the best greenism there is
>
>
> > that ain't us in
> > our free time at all, is it?  And certainly not when the poo hits the fan.
>
> Rob, I've never really understood why a clever chap like you,

This was unessarily cruel and I apologise to Rob and to the List.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Thu Feb 22 13:23:07 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 20:23:07 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <3A955704.FB2FF13C@ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <000201c09d0d$2c618c60$f87b20d9@mjones>

>You and Mark _must_
> somehow break free from your academic ivory towers where you commune
> with pure truth and steadily forget all you ever learned of politics.
> Such truth is a necessary but not in any way a sufficient condition of
> political action.
>
> I as well as you and Mark have felt the powerful seduction of pursuing
> the truth for its own sake; who among us does not envy Marx those years
> in the British Museum;

Carrol, you too are fantasising. Neither Lou nor I are in ivory towers. We are
entirely outside the loop.





From julp at freesurf.ch  Fri Feb 23 14:14:45 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 22:14:45 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.23.oghbmdcs@computer>

Stan,

>Perhaps I am confused about why anyone would bother imagining modes of
>production that never existed.

I guess that those strange people would do it for reasons similar to the ones of 
folks like Einstein when they undertook tought experiments.

>Redbaiting is not only unnecessary, it is a distortion in this case.

So I am redbaiting?!? Are you a bit paranoid sometimes?

>The very fact that you say you don't care about capitalism indicates to me
>that you don't get it. ...

Misunderstanding. That's my approximative english. I meant that I do not have any 
interest in defending capitalism.

>The problem with capitalism is not that it's evil.  It's
>that it's in very essential ways undirected and uncoordinated.  There is
>quite simply no chance of gaining the kind of comprehensive control
>necessary to confront the problem being discussed here without social(ist)
>planning.

Maybe we have slightly different ideas of what social planning might mean in 
practice, but I agree.

>Then why do you continually discard any reason that can be interpreted as
>systemic?  Is the social order imaginary?  Last I saw, the police and the
>army were carrying real, not imaginary, guns.

I don't understand where you're getting at. I discard not any systemic reason, but 
any systemic reason which is not backed by a good argument. And mere historical 
coincidence is not a good argument.

>But who held political power?  This is a key point, then and now.  It's not
>an abstraction.  Who held then and holds now the legal monopoly on deadly
>force?  And which class does this political establishment represent?

Yes, this is the key issue.
Before 1450, in some places and times, bourgeois power did exist, but not on a 
scale large enough to survive for several centuries. But I don't see how bourgeois 
power did exist after 1550 in England. So much for historical hairsplitting.
Now, to the real issue: How does bourgeois power correlate with ecological 
problems? I do not see any reason for which only bourgeois power would yield 
exploitation of fossil fuels and other problems. Historically, there has been 
numerous cases of societies without bourgeois power exploiting fossil fuels. OK, 
the techniques are techniques created by a bourgeois-dominated society. But why 
couldn't these techniques outlive it? The techniques would be applied in another 
social context as they already have been in the past, but the ecological problems 
remain whatever the social context.
Also, other environementally damaging and unsustainable techniques than 
exploitation of fossil fuels were created by other types of societies than the 
bourgeois-dominated ones. Not to mention the demographical problem.

If any kind of society wants to stop to use fossil fuels, it has to find a way to sustain 
itself without it. Even if capitalism was destroyed, there is no way that we can do that 
now. We could concievably enter a long path to that goal, but even without 
capitalism this road would not be an easy one but a road that many would refuse to 
endure when it is so easy to carry on as if there was no problem.

Julien




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Fri Feb 23 13:33:08 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:33:08 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <sa9682b4.069@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> julp at freesurf.ch 02/23/01 02:59PM >>>
Stan,

>Are you seriously claiming that the level of fossil fuel consumption we
>presently have could have ever developed on this scale outside of... apart
>from... in spite of... an historically specific mode of production?

Of course this is not what I was suggesting. What I am suggesting is that several 
historically specific modes of production can be imagined in which the level of 
fossil fuel consumption is unsustainable. 

(((((((((((

CB: Imagined ? Historic feudalism is/was a fact.  The fact is that feudalism didn't have a technical developmental regime that would extract as powerfully as that  of capitalism. There is no need for any imagining.

((((((((



A lower consumption level than the one 
we have today is still unsustainable.
I don't remember your position on the USSR and such countries if you ever stated it 
here, but this is a system which seems to me very different from capitalism as we 
know it and its creation did nothing to solve the fossil fuels and other ecological 
problems. I'm not trying to say that anti-capitalism or even communism aims at 
creating another USSR, but to say that simply overthrowing capitalism won't be 
enough because it is only part of the problem.

(((((((((((

CB: What you have not clearly acknowledged is that overthrowing capitalism is a necessary precondition for avoiding catastrophe. Even if not sufficient , it is necessary. 

The USSR existed in world still dominated by capitalism. To even survive, it had to produce at the same pace as capitalism, which demonstrated that it would destroy the SU right from the beginning. Socialism's need to grow as fast as capitalism exists only in a world that still has capitalism and imperialism in it. 

(((((((((((



>But to continually try to tease out an
>escape for the capitalist system is either dishonest, disingenuous, or denial.

This is not what I'm trying to do. I don't care about capitalism. You can blame it for 
every evil if you like for propaganda purposes. Since this is not the goal of this list 
as far as I know, I'm simply trying to sort out real from imaginated causes for our 
problems.


((((((((((

CB: The logic of capitalist evergrowing production is the cause of our ecological problems. Your blurring the clarity of that fact does not help to get to real causes of our problems.

((((((



>Then why wasn't it?  Why didn't those feudal barons have tenant-tended deep
>drilling equipment factories on each of their feifdoms?

Those feudal barons had no oil under their feet. They did not have the technical 
capability for deep drilling. But why could no feudal baron have this capability?

((((((((((((

CB: Because feudalism didn't have a fundamental M-C-M'/competition dynamic giving rise to constantly revolutionizing the instruments of  production, giving rise to the discovery of fossil fuels and may technological uses for it, evergrowing uses for it.

((((((((



BTW, despite this "tenant and feudal barons" cliche they were corporations before 
1450, as well as urban proletarian revolts, finance, international trade, etc.

>Then why doesn't someone just do it?  This is so simple, I can't believe it
>isn't a decree.  This is not a facetious question, but a point.  The reason
>no one does it is because Shell and Oxy and BP and their minions in various
>governments damn well don't want to, and neither you nor I have to power to
>stop them right now.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean at all.
 
 
Charles,

>Point here is not the historical cause , but the FACT that there was a change from 
>feudalism to capitalism such that the latter poses an ecological threat that the 
>former did not.

This is a nice FACT. But you then choose your dates in an inconsistent manner. 
What ecological threat was there in 1550 that wasn't there in 1450 (except maybe a 
higher population)?

((((((((((

CB: Are you pretending that you cannot see that the technological innovations  and scale of production of capitalism had not accumulated to cause ecological threats until the 20th century ? That they had not accumulated so at the beginning of the new mode of production at its beginning ? 

(((((((


Anyway, I could also say that now that we had the Reform and especially the 
Quacker movement, there is an ecological threat which didn't exist before. Is that 
also a FACT?

(((((((((

CB: I don't know what you mean "Reform and especially Quacker movement". It is a fact that there is an ecological threat which didn't exist before,sort of. But,as I said above, the accumulation of technology and scale of total production has made things much bigger now. The answer to your poser is obvious, and I have given you the obvious answer.

((((((((



>CB: Sometime between 1450 and 1550. There have been many posts and
>references on this on the Marxism and PEN-L lists.

That's a too broad reference for me to read, sorry.

((((((((((

CB: Why does the broadness of reference prevent you from reading, sorry ?

((((((((((




What changed between 1450 and 1550? 

((((((((


CB: Read _Capital_ Vol. 1, chapters on "The Socalled Primitive Accumulation"

(((((((




The only really significant change I know 
about is the one impersonated by Colombus, Cortez, et al. That's hardly social 
change. Was Cortez a capitalist??? I'm not well taught about English history so I 
may be missing something.

>CB: One of the main differences between capitalism and feudalism is a leap in the 
>rate of technical innovations.  The idea is that feudalism would not have made the 
>technical innovations made under capitalism for many centuries , if ever.  Your 
>analysis obliterates a definitive distinction between capitalism and feudalism.

I don't know what is said on Pen-L and other lists but to say that there was a leap in 
the rate of technological innovations beyond anything known on Earth before in 
England or Europe around 1500 looks like white supremacist stuff to me. 

((((((((((((

CB: Did Europe or did it not , using technological innovations and military means, conquer most of the rest of the world between 1500 and the present ?  If it had not , would we even have a concept such as "white supremacy" ?  White supremacy conquered most of the globe, starting about 1500. 

The other continents and areas have had periods of technological superiority to Europe through most of the rest of human history. Why shouldn't Europe or Northwest Asia become top dog at some point in history ?

(((((((



This 
seems around 200 years too early. What were those stunning innovations? Naval 
artillery was important, but is enough to create a change from "feudalism" to 
"capitalism"?

((((((((((

CB: The revolution in the mode of production which was the transition from feudalism to capitalism was essentially in the relations of production, and the mode of accumulation of surplus product. This change in the mode to M-C-M'/captialist competition included a dynamic of constant innovation of the instruments and means of production. The leaps in technical innovations themselves were not at the point of transition of the mode, though there were some as with navigation. The technological leaps did come with the accumulation of innovations and growth of science.



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb 23 13:30:05 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:30:05 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Pinko humanism is the best greenism there is
In-Reply-To: <3A969822.C69F08A8@dingoblue.net.au>
Message-ID: <000001c09dd7$459fbd80$6f7820d9@mjones>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com
> [mailto:crashlist-admin at lists.wwpublish.com]On Behalf Of Rob Schaap
> Sent: 23 February 2001 17:04
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> Subject: Re: [CrashList] Pinko humanism is the best greenism there is
>
>
> Good evening, Mark.

I already wrote to the list and to Rob apologising for my own evil ill-temper.
As luck would have it, the message hasn't turned up. So I apologise again,
very willingly, for my stupidity. Rob is one of the nicest and cleverest
people I know on the Net and his presence is greatly valued here.

Mark




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Fri Feb 23 13:58:14 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:58:14 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20010223140037.01352784@pop2.igc.org>
Message-ID: <000201c09ddb$32737540$6f7820d9@mjones>

> The rate of sustainable
> >consumption of fossil fuel is very low and can easily be exceeded by a
> european
> >feudal economy or any other pre-capitalist one.
>
> Then why wasn't it?  Why didn't those feudal barons have tenant-tended deep
> drilling equipment factories on each of their feifdoms?
>
>  All it takes is some technical
> >innovations and the availability of these fuels.

Indeed. There is no sustainable rate of fossil fuel consumption, because once
that genie is out of the bottle, there are no longer any Malthusian brakes on
population growth. Under capitalism, take off into 'sustained economic growth'
as Rostow amusingly called it, launched humankind into a classic exponential
growth followed by die-off trajectory. As has been pointed out by many
writers, including me,  if the large scale exploitation of fossil fuels had
not begun, the 18th century would never have become the 19th and we still
would have serfdom, etc.

By the end of the 18th century, Western European societies had entered a
Malthusian impasse. Resource-depletion, energy-famines and raw materials
shortages constricted economic growth. Population increase led to social
tensions in Great Britain and in France to outright revolution, as
malnourished urban populations turned on the elites. Social disorder went hand
in hand with libertarian and subversive currents in literature and philosophy.
The elites themselves were riven with conflict and unable to sustain hegemony.

Such concatenations of events were commonplace in all historical societies and
cultures.

And everywhere without exception, the outcome had always been the same: the
Malthusian trap led to civilisational collapse and to the liquidation of
surplus population, as a result of war, disease, famine, revolution or a
combination of factors.

Nothing suggested what was to come. The French Enlightenment itself was no
harbinger of the breakout to sustained growth. Far from being the exceptional
event in human culture which its propagandists portrayed it as, the Age of
Reason was foreshadowed in other times and places and many of its achievements
were surpassed in civilisations which later foundered or fell into unyielding
stagnation. Thus the classical Kantian synthesis on which the Enlightenment's
schemes of moral and scientific order were based, had its roots in a Greek
antiquity whose own Enlightenment was derivative, for the Hellenic world
imported its key cultural qualia from India, Persia, Egypt and elsewhere. In
any case the moral order of rights and values which the Enlightenment
proclaimed as the fount of modernity and progress, turned out to have much
epistemic contradiction at its heart. The contents of mytho-cultural ensembles
were systematically worked over, to be discarded or assimilated by the new
synthesis, but this process itself was a familiar one in the reinvention of
Creation Myths in all cultures and times. Less was new in the Enlightenment
than it supposed and the tasks of mythogenesis remained as onerous and as
vital to the priesthood of the Enlightenment as to all others.

Even science did not after all depend on reason alone; it turned out that in
making sense of the results of observation, acts of faith were (and are) still
called for. As Immanuel Wallerstein points out, "the deliberate construction
of Newtonian-Cartesian science" was exactly that: a fabrication meant to serve
the goals of a reconstituted hegemony:

" Science was very sure of itself in this struggle. This is well illustrated
by two famous declarations of the Marquis de Laplace. One was his bon mot in
replying to Napoleon's query about the absence of God in his physics "Sire, I
have not found any need for that hypothesis" (cited in Koyri 1957, 276). The
other was his unyielding statement about how much science could know:

"The present state of the system of nature is evidently a resultant of what it
was in the preceding instant, and if we conceive of an Intelligence who, for a
given moment, embraces all the relations of beings in the Universe, It will be
able to determine for any instant of the past or future their respective
positions, motions, and generally their affections (cited in Hahn 1967, 15).

"Triumphant science was not prepared to admit any doubts or to share the stage
with anyone else. " [Wallerstein, "Social Science and the Quest for a Just
Society", American Journal of Sociology, CII, 5, March 1997]

But it was not the so-called Scientific Revolution which broke the European
system free of the Malthusian trap; science was the beneficiary of the
Industrial Revolution, not its maker. The common assumption that science
created industry is just another bit of retrospective myth-making.

In any case, there was in reality, little in the Newtonian system or in its
Kantian theoretical justification, which cannot be found in earlier
anticipations within mathematics and the physical sciences: even the calculus
had its well-known precursors. The great Paradigm Shift was little more than
an ex post facto justification and glorification of events which in themselves
were highly contingent, the results of the fortuitous and unprecedented series
of accidents which birthed the industrial era. The fact that a folklore grew
up about science-based production is neither here nor there; false appearances
aside there was no smooth continuous process which led from Greenwich
clockmaking or from Newton's alchemy, to the industrial science which first
emerged in the interstices of production before seizing hold of it in earnest
only after 1870, and not in England or in France, but in Bismarckian Germany.
Had industrialism not taken hold, the false tale of continuity within science
from the late seventeenth to the late nineteenth centuries, would never have
become the dominant narrative of European development, and the Kant-Newton
golden age would have seemed to posterity an epoch without real precursors or
direct successors; the Enlightenment, in a word, would have been seen as
leading nowhere, as having no forces of internal renewal and growth, any more
than the ferment of Periclean Athens led anywhere directly. The connection
between Newtonian triumphalism and capitalist industry is itself almost
entirely fortuitous. This strikes at the heart of key Euro-American myths
about both the origins and the destiny of the "Western model".

To explain the hugely-significant break-out from the Malthusian trap we are
thus left with a mere concatenation of possibly fortunate accidents, once the
theoretical apparatus of the capitalist enlightenment has been dismantled, and
it is the job of historians above all (more than philosophers or social
theorists) to investigate and account for this contingent process of
origination; for beyond the empirical facts of the case, in reality there are
no larger truths lurking, no a priori factors or axioms available to explain
the fortuitous, unexpected and completely unpredictable rise of this
backwater, Europe, to be world hegemon. There can be no appeal to the
superiority European markets, financial systems, to the history of innovation,
or to the alleged benefits arising from the existence of a plurality of small
competing states. All of these supposed causes also existed elsewhere and
usually in better supply. Nor can the accumulation logic of capitalism itself
be argued as a cause of take-off.

This logic is inscribed in capitalism's historical origins as effect, not
cause, and these origins arose in a different way, without benefit of the
immanent certitude of capital's 'iron laws'. The hard materiality of
capitalist civilisation, as it unfolded in its quirky particularity and
empirical specificity, is what Marx recognised as the rational kernel hidden
within the shell of Hegel's mystifications. This recognition struck at the
heart of bourgeois rationalisation. The very arbitrariness of its facticity
echoed in the arbitrary misuse of its power, in the shadow it threw over all
pre-existing civilisations, in the crisis-ridden chaos of capitalist
accumulation in which the seething reality of plunder, exploitation and the
merciless pumping out of surplus labour was concealed behind tatty veils of
decency and moral order, so thin and squalid as to barely count even as the
hypocritical observance of polite form. The doomed Other was obliged not
merely to sit out the black comedy of their own extirpation in mute silence,
but even to participate in the bacchanalia by assuming the guide of deceitful,
sly Native which was no more than a mocking parody of their swaggering
European masters.

For those with eyes to see, it was always clear that there was nothing special
about Europe, and the rise of industrial capitalism only confirms this once
its real history is known. The vile truth about the Enlightenment is that the
universal republic of laws and liberties it proclaimed was nothing but a
screen for a dehumanising racism which in the name of Democracy and Reason
permitted Euro-American capitalism to wade in the blood of hundreds of
millions of 'others' for more than two centuries, and still it is not called
to account.

As Marx was first to point out, the manner of capitalism's emergence effaced
its own origins, wiping them from existence just as the slow induration of its
forms, hardening like a carapace around the precapitalist world, throttling
it, wiped them from memory too, depriving its denizens of the possibility of
even thinking that world except though the lens of nostalgia or the sublime
posturing of David-like heroic portraiture (this sense of a shared lacuna, of
the world we have lost, is the collective Western mind's guilty conscience,
the nightmare of the dead generations that weighs on the brains of the living,
and the insistent instinct for the sacred which lies behind every liberatory
project).

What was effaced were precisely those precapitalist cultures and peoples which
presumed to continue without the 'aid' of Progress and Enlightenment: starting
in its own backyard, then continuing as it took breath and gathered confidence
with blood-soaked imperialisms which engulfed the world, it has ended with the
sanguinary recapitulation of the colonial theme under the guise of
globalisation and behind the banners of supranational institutes of power:
Nato, the WTO, the World Bank, the IMF, Nafta, Mercosur, Seato, Cento, which
are of course nothing but the character-masks of world capitalism in its most
toxic incarnation: Night-watchman, chamber of commerce, charity, moneylender,
etc.: each year, millions are immolated before its shibboleths.

The escape from the Malthusian trap launched the world system on a trajectory
which could only reproduce the trap at ever-higher levels of intensity, until
the stake is no longer a temporary setback, or the collapse of a specific
culture, or a blip in a secular demographic uptick: the stake has become the
survival of the human species, and more even than that. Here is where a deeper
ontic structure may be discerned behind the surface scatter, in which
capitalism itself becomes only an aspect or an attribute of the evolutionary
process, doomed to reproduce its own preconditions while attempting to escape
from their fatal consequences. That is the singular lesson of the break-out
which began in England after 1750. It depended on a model of energetics and of
industrial production which is still basic to capitalism. This model is
unsustainable.


Mark




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Fri Feb 23 15:09:41 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:09:41 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <SAK.2001.02.23.oghbmdcs@computer>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010223170115.0134e274@pop2.igc.org>

>So I am redbaiting?!? Are you a bit paranoid sometimes?

Automatically assuming that a critique is developed of a system for
propaganda purposes is quintessential caricature-constructed redbaiting.
Do I need to explain this further?


>>The very fact that you say you don't care about capitalism indicates to me
>>that you don't get it. ...
>
>Misunderstanding. That's my approximative english. I meant that I do not
have any 
>interest in defending capitalism.

But you also seem to have no interest in how ***inextricable*** capitalism
as the EXISTING SOCIAL ORDER is from the very problem we have under review.

>
>>The problem with capitalism is not that it's evil.  It's
>>that it's in very essential ways undirected and uncoordinated.  There is
>>quite simply no chance of gaining the kind of comprehensive control
>>necessary to confront the problem being discussed here without social(ist)
>>planning.
>
>Maybe we have slightly different ideas of what social planning might mean in 
>practice, but I agree.

Not likely that we have different ideas, when in the absence of a clear
picture of what things will look like if and when we replace the old system
(as opposed to devolving directly into anarchy and barbarism), I wouldn't
presume to begin designing measures at this point.  We quite probably have
very similar ideas about some of the goals, however, as they relate to
reversing our current evolutionary direction.


>>Then why do you continually discard any reason that can be interpreted as
>>systemic?  Is the social order imaginary?  Last I saw, the police and the
>>army were carrying real, not imaginary, guns.
>
>I don't understand where you're getting at. I discard not any systemic
reason, but 
>any systemic reason which is not backed by a good argument. And mere
historical 
>coincidence is not a good argument.

Julien, there is no such thing as "historical coincidence."  Methods of
production and social systems did not accidentally evolve alongside one
another.  They are part and parcel of the same reality.

>
>>But who held political power?  This is a key point, then and now.  It's not
>>an abstraction.  Who held then and holds now the legal monopoly on deadly
>>force?  And which class does this political establishment represent?
>
>Yes, this is the key issue.
>Before 1450, in some places and times, bourgeois power did exist, but not
on a 
>scale large enough to survive for several centuries. But I don't see how
bourgeois 
>power did exist after 1550 in England. So much for historical hairsplitting.

Huh?  I am absolutely sure that you have written something which you did
not intend here.  You have just said that bourgeois power did not exist
aftet 1550.  Re-look.  This is obviously a typo.


>Now, to the real issue: How does bourgeois power correlate with ecological 
>problems? I do not see any reason for which only bourgeois power would yield 
>exploitation of fossil fuels and other problems. 

NO one said that only bourgeois power yields exploitation of fossil fuels
or that capitalism is the only system with "problems."  Our point is that
bourgeois power exists NOW, and that this class NOW stands in the way of
effecting the very changes we need for the survival of civilization.  This
is not a question of comparative morality.  It's practical.

Historically, there has been 
>numerous cases of societies without bourgeois power exploiting fossil
fuels. OK, 
>the techniques are techniques created by a bourgeois-dominated society.
But why 
>couldn't these techniques outlive it? The techniques would be applied in
another 
>social context as they already have been in the past, but the ecological
problems 
>remain whatever the social context.

No one's arguing with you about this.  Socialist states directed their
economies along a path of development mapped out by capitalism--for a lot
of reasons--and along a path that was utterly dependent on fossil fuels.
No one's arguing that the very techniques we now apply are wrong-headed,
and ultimately destructive.  No one is arguing for a return to the Soviet
development model.  What we are saying is that while socialism in itself is
no guarantee of a reversal of continued petroleum dependent development,
the continued existence of the current system is an ABSOLUTE guarantee that
we can never do what's necessary for that reversal.

>Also, other environementally damaging and unsustainable techniques than 
>exploitation of fossil fuels were created by other types of societies than
the 
>bourgeois-dominated ones. Not to mention the demographical problem.

Which demographical problem?  And how do pre-capitalist techniques,
whichever ones you are referring to, change the fact that the current
"techniques" are privately owned and secured by the states which those
owners control?

Capitalism=private ownership and control of the means of production
Socialism=social ownership and control of the means of production

>
>If any kind of society wants to stop to use fossil fuels, it has to find a
way to sustain 
>itself without it. Even if capitalism was destroyed, there is no way that
we can do that 
>now. 

Maybe I'm missing the entire point.  Is it that nothing can be done, so we
can all just grieve together over email?  Sorry, but if it's the end, I
think Sherry and I should just hole up with some good marijuana, a
collection of exotic films, and a lifetime supply of Nacho Cheese flavored
Doritos.  You guys are history.

We could concievably enter a long path to that goal, but even without 
>capitalism this road would not be an easy one but a road that many would
refuse to 
>endure when it is so easy to carry on as if there was no problem.

Weeeelllll... I can't say about this.  When the oil is gone, there won't be
much choice, will there?  

But for right now, I think I have good reason to continue to work toward
smashing imperialism.  Even if it's utterly hopeless, because I've known a
few capitalists, and by and large, they are disagreeable people, and it
gives me some personal satisfaction to afflict them in every way possible.
If by some miracle, we win in my lifetime, we will begin seriously to make
a plan for the bioregionalist, advanced organic, socialist reorganization
of society.  If not, we'll all be dead anyway at some point, so we won't
have to experience the horrors of our failure for too awfully long.  I
figure I have around 25-30 years, barring special disorders or accidents or
a pissed-off CIA agent.

Yours,

Stan


"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possibly happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman




From julp at freesurf.ch  Sat Feb 24 11:03:15 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:03:15 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] capitalism and our ecological footprint (was: grim forecast ...)
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.24.fegpjomh@computer>

Here's an answer to Stan. Charles will have to wait a bit longer.

>But you also seem to have no interest in how ***inextricable*** capitalism
>as the EXISTING SOCIAL ORDER is from the very problem we have under 
>review.

I'm not sure what you mean with "inextricable". IMO capitalism can be reformed, but 
it would be way better to destroy it. Anyway, I don't think that destroying capitalism 
will somehow solve our population and lifestyle problem even if destroying 
capitalism would make it easier to solve it. I hope that's clear enough. Now, if you 
want to rephrase that inextricability thing so that I understand what's wrong with the 
position I stated, please go ahead.

>Julien, there is no such thing as "historical coincidence."  Methods of
>production and social systems did not accidentally evolve alongside one
>another.  They are part and parcel of the same reality.

They are part of the same reality, but I don't believe in destiny. There is such things 
as coincidences.

>You have just said that bourgeois power did not exist
>aftet 1550.  Re-look.  This is obviously a typo.

I meant *immediately* after 1550.

>Our point is that
>bourgeois power exists NOW, and that this class NOW stands in the way of
>effecting the very changes we need for the survival of civilization.  This
>is not a question of comparative morality.  It's practical.

Again, I agree with that. I don't understand what's this morality business, though.

>Which demographical problem?

The one which humans used to have to confront before industrialisation. People 
had too many kids and ended up overexploiting their environment because of that  
and at some point, many died or went away.

>  And how do pre-capitalist techniques,
>whichever ones you are referring to, change the fact that the current
>"techniques" are privately owned and secured by the states which those
>owners control?

The pre-capitalist techniques I'm talking about range from wood-cutting to mining to 
irrigation.
Most of the techniques of today are not privately owned. This intellectual property 
fundamentalism is relatively recent. Most of the stuff is legally in the public domain 
and it's scientists and workers who have the know how to put them into practice.
What's privately owned is the means of production. So what? They are publically-
owned means of production, and they are much part of the problem as the 
privately-owned ones. The problem is the system. Even if workers owned 100% of 
the means of production, the benefit would only be marginal as long as they 
continued to obey the rules and to pursue personal gains.

>Capitalism=private ownership and control of the means of production
>Socialism=social ownership and control of the means of production

This sounds like a good definition. I wish everyone went along with it. Apparently 
Marx did not, which creates us unending problems like Charles claiming that 
capitalism began around 1500, this date having nothing to do with a change of the 
control of the means of production nor with a change in who controls the state as far 
as I know.

>Maybe I'm missing the entire point.  Is it that nothing can be done ...

Did I say nothing can be done? I said that, even with socialism, we can't drop out of 
fossil fuels now. Fortunately, fossil fuels won't suddenly disapear in a few years, so 
we have time. It will be much easier if many die and less are born. It would also be 
easier if more sustainable techniques are developed. Anyway, the necessary 
changes in behaviour would be very hard to swallow for most people.

>When the oil is gone, there won't be
>much choice, will there?  

Yes, but between the production peak and that there is a very long time... And what 
happens during that period will determine how the world will look like when the oil 
will be gone. During the decline there is a choice: Among other things you can fight 
your neighbour for the oil you need to keep on living like before or you can cut on 
consumption.

>But for right now, I think I have good reason to continue to work toward
>smashing imperialism.

Absolutely. Go ahead! The bastards could manage to survive a dieoff otherwise.

Julien




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sat Feb 24 11:55:40 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:55:40 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] (Port) Social Forum Newsletter FORUM EXPRESSO
Message-ID: <066cd4055181821MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

Cdes. and Friends,

I am attaching below some interesting news from the World Social Forum. I am 
also including the directions to sub to the FORUM EXPRESSO, the newsletter of 
the FSM (Foro Social Mundial). Those interested, please find them at the bottom 
of the present mail.

There is also information on how to reach the FSM website. 

------- Forwarded message follows -------
To:             	"Lista de Geografia" <listageografia at yahoogroups.com>
From:           	"Ricardo Ogusku" <ricardo.ogusku at br2001.com.br>
Date sent:      	Sat, 24 Feb 2001 06:00:19 -0300
Send reply to:  	listageografia at yahoogroups.com
Subject:        	[listageografia] Fw: [expresso] FORUM EXPRESSO - Sexta, 23/2/01

[ Double-click this line for list subscription options ] 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Antonio Martins" <redacao at forumsocialmundial.org.br>
To: <expresso-fsm at intl.egroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 9:06 PM
Subject: [expresso] FORUM EXPRESSO - Sexta, 23/2/01


F?RUM EXPRESSO
Sexta, 23/2/2001 - ANO II - N? 1
.................................

FSM-2001: SITE TRAZ O QUE A "GRANDE" IMPRENSA N?O QUIS VER:
Quem quer a transforma??o social, e se animou com o vento renovador que o
F?rum Social Mundial soprou sobre o pensamento de esquerda, ter? a partir de
agora mais motivos para permanecer mobilizado. Come?aram a  ser postos no ar, 
na
p?gina de internet do FSM  (www.forumsocialmundial.org.br), os documentos que
resgatam os debates ocorridos no FSM-2001. S?o confer?ncias, declara??es
lan?adas pelas centenas de organiza??es presentes, relatos, avalia??es.

O material soma-se ?s reportagens feitas, durante o pr?prio F?rum, por  uma
equipe de jornalistas volunt?rios e por profissionais de diversas ag?ncias de
informa??o independentes. Unidos em torno do que chamaram de Ciranda
Internacional de Informa??o Independente (CIIIn), eles fizeram o que talvez 
seja
a ?nica cobertura de conte?do do encontro.  Ao contr?rio de quase toda a m?dia,
n?o concentraram sua cobertura nas "estrelas" da esquerda, nem nos fatos
folcl?ricos. Focaram o que Porto Alegre trouxe de novo e relevante: o esfor?o
incomum, realizado por movimentos e intelectuais com tradi??es muito distintas
entre si, para procurar alternativas ao neoliberalismo. V?em este trabalho como
primeiro passo para um objetivo maior. Querem construir, ao longo de 2001, um
site que ofere?a informa??o constante sobre as mobiliza??es que est?o 
desafiando
a "Nova Ordem", registre e alimente o debate sobre um novo projeto 
transformador
e permita aos participantes do FSM-2002 come?ar muito antes do encontro do
pr?ximo ano a troca de id?ias.

MOVIMENTOS SOCIAIS CONVOCAM NOVA S?RIE DE PROTESTOS
Um texto revelador inaugura a se??o do site destinada ? publica??o de
documentos. Trata-se do "Apelo de Porto Alegre para novas mobiliza??es". Foi
redigido a partir de uma das novidades mais importantes do FSM-2001: a
articula??o de movimentos sociais envolvidos em distintas causas, em todos os
continentes. Assinado por mais de 150 organiza??es (da A??o da Cidadania contra
a Fome, brasileira, ao Centro Felix Varela, cubano; da Coaliza??o Coreana para
Alternativas Econ?micas ao Instituto Transnacional, de Amsterdan), o manifesto
tra?a um panorama que merece ser lido, sobre o desmonte dos direitos sociais e
da prote??o ao ambiente. Ainda mais importante, por?m, ? o fato de propor um
aut?ntico calend?rio internacional de mobiliza??es, que se estende por todo o
ano.

 A leitura do documento sugere que a vida dos novos "senhores do mundo" pode
tornar-se um inferno, este ano. ? que os protestos contra a "Nova Ordem" que
come?aram em Seattle, h? pouco mais de um ano, podem se estender em 2001 a pelo
menos dez novas cidades do planeta, onde ir?o se reunir institui??es como o 
FMI,
o Banco Mundial, a Organiza??o Mundial do Com?rcio, o G-8 e a C?pula das
Am?ricas (neste caso, para tentar desencadear a cria??o da ALCA).

BERNARD CASSEN ABRE S?RIE DE AVALIA??ES SOBRE O F?RUM
A se??o do site que traz as primeiras avalia??es sobre o evento ?  aberta
por um artigo de Bernard Cassen, diretor do jornal franc?s Le Monde
Diplomatique. O texto intitula-se "A virada de Porto Alegre", e Cassen tra?a um
paralelo entre Davos e Porto Alegre. "De um lado do Atl?ntico, no alto de uma
montanha su??a, banqueiros e especuladores de todo tipo, presidentes de
transnacionais e pol?ticos interessados em dar-lhes for?a -- ou simplesmente em
cortej?-los -- simbolizaram
 com arrog?ncia a submiss?o das sociedades ao diktat do lucro. Do outro,
est?o precisamente estas sociedades, representadas por seus sindicatos,
associa??es, ONGs e representantes eleitos pelo sufr?gio universal,
interessados em dizer que um outro mundo ? inteiramente poss?vel".

Cassen arrisca um vatic?nio. Para ele, "a simples exist?ncia do FSM retira
toda legitimidade de Davos, que aparecer? daqui para a frente como uma
simples reuni?o de interesses corporativistas".

FREI BETTO, FRAN?OIS HOUTART, PETER MARCUSE, MARTA HANNECKER...
Um conjunto de textos, que ser? incorporado ao site ao longo dos pr?ximos
dias, traz a vers?o escrita das exposi??es feitas, durante o F?rum, por
parte dos conferencistas. Vale a pena ler, por exemplo, a defesa que Eduardo
Suplicy faz dos programas de renda b?sica, apontados por ele como alternativa
consistente para combater a exclus?o; o artigo do belga Fran?ois Houtart (um 
dos
animadores do Centro Tricontinental, junto com Samir Amin) sobre o car?ter
contradit?rio das ONGs e a possibilidade de somar os velhos aos "novos"
movimentos sociais; o resumo esquem?tico da chilena Marta
 Hannecker sobre a convers?o neoliberal do capitalismo e os caminhos para
reelaborar um programa de mudan?as; a proposta do arquiteto norte-americano
Peter Marcuse (filho do fil?sofo Herbert Marcuse) para uma articula??o
internacional dos pensadores e movimentos sociais que trabalham em favor de
metr?poles menos desumanas.

UMA REDE INTERNACIONAL DE JORNALISTAS
Enquanto o conjunto das confer?ncias n?o est? dispon?vel, merecem uma visita as
reportagens escritas, durante o pr?prio evento, por jornalistas que se ligaram
ao site do F?rum Social Mundial.  Interessada em assegurar uma cobertura t?o
ampla quanto poss?vel, e quase sem recursos financeiros, a equipe do site lan?ou
m?o de duas iniciativas. Recorreu aos muitos profissionais volunt?rios que se
ofereceram, em Porto Alegre e em outras cidades, para trabalhar no encontro. E
constituiu a Ciranda Internacional da Informa??o Independente, um pool de
publica??es alternativas que enviaram correspondentes a Porto Alegre.

A Ciranda funcionou segundo os princ?pios do copyleft, que tem feito sucesso no
mundo da inform?tica, como alternativa a imp?rios como o da Microsoft. Cada
publica??o participante concordou em ceder o copyright sobre as mat?rias que
produziu para todas as demais. Adquiriu, em contrapartida, o direito de publicar
todos os outros textos. Envolveram-se, entre outros, as publica??es brasileiras
Carta Maior, Correio da Cidadania e Linha Aberta; a Ag?ncia Latino-Americana de
 Informa??o (ALAI); a International Press Service (IPS); o grupo franc?s Le
Penelopes, que batalha por um jornalismo que resgate tamb?m a vis?o feminista do
mundo; o correspondente no Brasil do jornal alem?o TaZ.

Est?o avan?adas as articula??es para que a rede prepare, desde j?, uma
cobertura muito mais ampla sobre o F?rum Social Mundial 2002.

 ..................................
FORUM EXPRESSO ? o boletim de atualiza??o do site do Forum Social Mundial.
Interessados em receb?-lo regularmente devem enviar email em branco para
expresso-fsm-subscribe at egroups.com. Para deixar de receber, escreva para
expresso-fsm-unsubscribe at egroups.com.

Para assinar o Forum Expresso, basta visitar www.forumsocialmundial.org.br e
digitar seu endere?o eletr?nico na janela apropriada. Se voc? n?o deseja mais
receber o boletim, envie um e-mail para: expresso-fsm-unsubscribe at egroups.com.
N?o ? preciso registrar nada,nem no t?tulo nem no corpo da mensagem



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://us.click.yahoo.com/kWP7PD/pYNCAA/4ihDAA/IrJVlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

**********************************************
Para enviar mensagens para toda lista, escreva para:  
listageografia at eGroups.com Para informa??es "administrativas"-sair, mudar de
endere?o, etc:  pazera at zaz.com.br Arquivo autom?tico da lista (ordem
cronol?gica): http://br.egroups.com/messages/listageografia


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 


------- End of forwarded message -------

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sat Feb 24 06:57:02 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:57:02 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] The world becomes less wonderful
Message-ID: <000001c09e69$85326140$709e20d9@mjones>


The latest evidence puts the threat of climate change beyond doubt, says
Vanessa Houlder
Published: February 23 2001 19:50GMT | Last Updated: February 23 2001 19:56GMT



In The Snows of Kilimanjaro, Ernest Hemingway's hero has a vision of the
ice-capped summit "as wide as all the world, great, high, and unbelievably
white in the sun". The description will soon be unrecognisable. The ice field
on top of the Tanzanian mountain will have disappeared by 2020, it was
predicted this week. A third of the ice has melted over the last 12 years
alone.

According to Lonnie Thompson, professor of geological sciences at Ohio State
University, all tropical glaciers are retreating at an accelerating pace. They
are, he says, "an indicator of massive changes taking place".

Prof Thompson's study, coupled with the recent findings of the United
Nations-sponsored International Panel on Climate Change, marks a turning point
in the controversy over the existence of man-made global warming.

The IPCC's view that "there is new and stronger evidence that most of the
warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities"
is now accepted by all but a very small group of sceptics.

The IPCC, a body of climate scientists who advise the world's politicians on
global warming, has found widespread evidence of climate change, ranging from
the thawing of permafrost, longer growing seasons in certain latitudes,
decline of some plant and animal populations, earlier flowering of trees and
egg-laying in birds.

But the changes that have already happened pale in comparison with those that
could take place this century. In the 20th century, the planet heated up by
about 0.60C. This century, the IPCC predicts, temperatures will rise
1.40C-5.80C , the fastest rate of change for 10,000 years.

The IPCC's latest report, written by 426 authors and reviewed by 440
government and expert reviewers, predicts spreading deserts and a decline in
agricultural production in Africa, floods and droughts in Latin America, storm
surges and coastal erosion off the eastern seaboard of the US and water
shortages in Australia and New Zealand.

Europe will suffer widespread flooding and a decline in many traditional
holiday resorts because of heat waves and unreliable snow conditions. In
southern Europe more droughts could reduce agricultural productivity.

Much of Asia will suffer a decline in agricultural productivity, while sea
level rises and an increase in the intensity of tropical cyclones could
displace tens of millions of people in low-lying coastal areas. The small
island states, which are particularly vulnerable to increases in sea levels
and storms, will suffer the worst effects of all.

But if the scientific evidence is increasingly clear-cut, the political
response remains uncertain. "How much more evidence do we need before
governments take real action to tackle climate change?" says Russell Marsh of
WWF, the conservation group. Negotiations to complete the 1997 Kyoto Protocol
on cutting greenhouse gas emissions seem likely to remain stalled unless
countries can agree to make a genuine commitment to reducing the use of fossil
fuels. Yet the attitude of many politicians, especially in energy-hungry
countries such as the US, is that the cost of taking action to curb global
warming exceeds the electoral gains.

The countries that need to put the most effort into curbing global warming are
not, by and large, those that have the most to lose from it. "The impact of
future changes in climate extreme are expected to fall disproportionately on
the poor," says the IPCC.

A modest increase in temperatures might even benefit the developed world: crop
and timber yields would be higher, deaths from cold weather would be reduced,
as would energy demand.

But if temperatures rise by more than a few degrees Centigrade there would be
no advantages for anybody. The IPCC now believes that its 1995 prediction of a
10C-3.50C rise this century is an underestimate, largely because scientists
exaggerated likely future emissions of sulphur dioxide, an air pollutant that
offsets warming. The revised forecast predicts that temperatures could rise by
up to 5.80C.

The possibility of a steep and prolonged increase in temperatures raises the
possibility of what the IPCC scientists call "large-scale and possibly
irreversible impacts". Examples include: large reductions in the Greenland and
western Antarctic ice sheets; significant slowing of the thermohaline ocean
circulation that transports warm water to the North Atlantic; and a huge
release of greenhouse gases from melting permafrost and dying forests.

The consequences could be catastrophic. The disintegration of the ice sheets
could raise global sea levels by up to 6m over the next 1,000 years. A slowing
of the ocean circulation could have a significant cooling effect on parts of
Europe. And the release of greenhouse gases from permafrost and forests could
amplify climate change, creating a runaway effect.

The likelihood of these changes is "probably very low", the IPCC says, but
adds: "Their likelihood is expected to increase with the rate, magnitude and
duration of climate change."

In spite of all the remaining uncertainties, the central message is clear: a
warmer planet is likely to have implications for everybody.

"No country can afford to ignore the coming transformation of its natural and
human environment," says Michael Zammit Cutajar, a senior UN official.
Moreover, global warming will inflict the most harm in the parts of the world
that are the poorest, the least prepared - and the least responsible for
causing it.


 FT.com




From embark at epud.net  Sat Feb 24 21:14:44 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 20:14:44 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <E14WjtK-0004Kn-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <001401c09ee2$ea3ae660$1cacefd8@rowan>

Can you all suspend paranoia, fear of redbaiting or Swiss-baiting (Julien)
while I try to make some honest observations?

You asked me for a proposal. Here is one-----> I suppose the easiest analogy
is to say you MUST fight a two front war, Stan. You must attack what
variously (and interchangably) is described as [Bourgeois
Capitalism/Imperialism/Global Capitalism/Capitalism] WHILE you fight to
defend the biosphere. Stan, you require we "win" some battle with "them"
*before* you turn your attention to the apocalypse.  There is no time, you
only have the 25-30 years you allow yourself for inflicting damage upon
"them" ---  and that strategy is flawed in ways I wish to discuss "some
other time", okay?

Here's a reason, a reality that is too often avoided: We are "them". We are
ALL (every one of us reading this) to some degree "capitalists." We are ALL
part of the damned and evil system, and we're all bourgeois, and we are all
contributing to the rape of the planet, when we don't have to. To the extent
that we are part of that system, ... to at LEAST that extent ... must we
immediately change our behavior. Not in some miraculous future when we
"win". Plus, the effect of all of us changing our behavior within the
capitalist system fights the war on two fronts.

(If you ask me how we change that behavior, I again say "attitude". If you
ask me what have EYE done to advance the cause, I can assert that indeed I
walk my talk on this issue, and also have reduced my footprint in the
natural world as much as I can and still remain an activist. I don't always
blow my own horn.)

Tom

PS the rest is addenda, less important:

First, I have re-thought something I recently posted to you, Stan. I now say
that if all we do on Crashlist is educate some of "the left" (forgive me) to
the environmental components of the apocalypse, we will have done much. You
are correct to call for education.

On personal "argument": Is it possible to believe that someone like Julien
or me could be suggesting
a change in your strategy and not be opposed to your efforts at the same
time? Is there no place for genuine disagreement or critical discussion
without   "Automatically assuming that a critique is developed of a system
forpropaganda purposes is quintessential caricature-constructed
redbaiting."? -- If not, then you are requiring a priori total agreement or
... nothing. No one is
asking you to put aside your goals, Stan, just to work smarter. I indeed
support your goals. Howabout a little support of OUR goals too? (Or mine,
one is never sure of Julien's. <g>)



> Message: 14
> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:01:15 -0500
> To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
> From: bon moun <sherrynstan at igc.org>
> Subject: RE: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
> Reply-To: crashlist at lists.wwpublish.com
>
>
> >So I am redbaiting?!? Are you a bit paranoid sometimes?
>
> Automatically assuming that a critique is developed of a system for
> propaganda purposes is quintessential caricature-constructed redbaiting.
> Do I need to explain this further?
>
>
> >>The very fact that you say you don't care about capitalism indicates to
me
> >>that you don't get it. ...
> >
> >Misunderstanding. That's my approximative english. I meant that I do not
> have any
> >interest in defending capitalism.
>
> But you also seem to have no interest in how ***inextricable*** capitalism
> as the EXISTING SOCIAL ORDER is from the very problem we have under
review.
>
> >
> >>The problem with capitalism is not that it's evil.  It's
> >>that it's in very essential ways undirected and uncoordinated.  There is
> >>quite simply no chance of gaining the kind of comprehensive control
> >>necessary to confront the problem being discussed here without
social(ist)
> >>planning.
> >
> >Maybe we have slightly different ideas of what social planning might mean
in
> >practice, but I agree.
>
> Not likely that we have different ideas, when in the absence of a clear
> picture of what things will look like if and when we replace the old syste
m
> (as opposed to devolving directly into anarchy and barbarism), I wouldn't
> presume to begin designing measures at this point.  We quite probably have
> very similar ideas about some of the goals, however, as they relate to
> reversing our current evolutionary direction.
>
>
> >>Then why do you continually discard any reason that can be interpreted
as
> >>systemic?  Is the social order imaginary?  Last I saw, the police and
the
> >>army were carrying real, not imaginary, guns.
> >
> >I don't understand where you're getting at. I discard not any systemic
> reason, but
> >any systemic reason which is not backed by a good argument. And mere
> historical
> >coincidence is not a good argument.
>
> Julien, there is no such thing as "historical coincidence."  Methods of
> production and social systems did not accidentally evolve alongside one
> another.  They are part and parcel of the same reality.
>
> >
> >>But who held political power?  This is a key point, then and now.  It's
not
> >>an abstraction.  Who held then and holds now the legal monopoly on
deadly
> >>force?  And which class does this political establishment represent?
> >
> >Yes, this is the key issue.
> >Before 1450, in some places and times, bourgeois power did exist, but not
> on a
> >scale large enough to survive for several centuries. But I don't see how
> bourgeois
> >power did exist after 1550 in England. So much for historical
hairsplitting.
>
> Huh?  I am absolutely sure that you have written something which you did
> not intend here.  You have just said that bourgeois power did not exist
> aftet 1550.  Re-look.  This is obviously a typo.
>
>
> >Now, to the real issue: How does bourgeois power correlate with
ecological
> >problems? I do not see any reason for which only bourgeois power would
yield
> >exploitation of fossil fuels and other problems.
>
> NO one said that only bourgeois power yields exploitation of fossil fuels
> or that capitalism is the only system with "problems."  Our point is that
> bourgeois power exists NOW, and that this class NOW stands in the way of
> effecting the very changes we need for the survival of civilization.  This
> is not a question of comparative morality.  It's practical.
>
> Historically, there has been
> >numerous cases of societies without bourgeois power exploiting fossil
> fuels. OK,
> >the techniques are techniques created by a bourgeois-dominated society.
> But why
> >couldn't these techniques outlive it? The techniques would be applied in
> another
> >social context as they already have been in the past, but the ecological
> problems
> >remain whatever the social context.
>
> No one's arguing with you about this.  Socialist states directed their
> economies along a path of development mapped out by capitalism--for a lot
> of reasons--and along a path that was utterly dependent on fossil fuels.
> No one's arguing that the very techniques we now apply are wrong-headed,
> and ultimately destructive.  No one is arguing for a return to the Soviet
> development model.  What we are saying is that while socialism in itself
is
> no guarantee of a reversal of continued petroleum dependent development,
> the continued existence of the current system is an ABSOLUTE guarantee
that
> we can never do what's necessary for that reversal.
>
> >Also, other environementally damaging and unsustainable techniques than
> >exploitation of fossil fuels were created by other types of societies
than
> the
> >bourgeois-dominated ones. Not to mention the demographical problem.
>
> Which demographical problem?  And how do pre-capitalist techniques,
> whichever ones you are referring to, change the fact that the current
> "techniques" are privately owned and secured by the states which those
> owners control?
>
> Capitalism=private ownership and control of the means of production
> Socialism=social ownership and control of the means of production
>
> >
> >If any kind of society wants to stop to use fossil fuels, it has to find
a
> way to sustain
> >itself without it. Even if capitalism was destroyed, there is no way that
> we can do that
> >now.
>
> Maybe I'm missing the entire point.  Is it that nothing can be done, so we
> can all just grieve together over email?  Sorry, but if it's the end, I
> think Sherry and I should just hole up with some good marijuana, a
> collection of exotic films, and a lifetime supply of Nacho Cheese flavored
> Doritos.  You guys are history.
>
> We could concievably enter a long path to that goal, but even without
> >capitalism this road would not be an easy one but a road that many would
> refuse to
> >endure when it is so easy to carry on as if there was no problem.
>
> Weeeelllll... I can't say about this.  When the oil is gone, there won't
be
> much choice, will there?
>
> But for right now, I think I have good reason to continue to work toward
> smashing imperialism.  Even if it's utterly hopeless, because I've known a
> few capitalists, and by and large, they are disagreeable people, and it
> gives me some personal satisfaction to afflict them in every way possible.
> If by some miracle, we win in my lifetime, we will begin seriously to make
> a plan for the bioregionalist, advanced organic, socialist reorganization
> of society.  If not, we'll all be dead anyway at some point, so we won't
> have to experience the horrors of our failure for too awfully long.  I
> figure I have around 25-30 years, barring special disorders or accidents
or
> a pissed-off CIA agent.
>
> Yours,
>
> Stan
>
>
> "...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
> They are simple not because they explain so little but because they
explain
> so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
> everything that could possibly happen, but because it remains valid no
> matter what happens."
>
> Alan Freeman





From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Sat Feb 24 20:50:46 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:50:46 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] The world becomes less wonderful
In-Reply-To: <000001c09e69$85326140$709e20d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <0beb84650031921MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a [CrashList] The world becomes less wonderful, 
el 24 Feb 01, a las 13:56, Mark Jones dijo:

>"How much more evidence do we need before
> governments take real action to tackle climate change?" says Russell Marsh of
> WWF, the conservation group. Negotiations to complete the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on
> cutting greenhouse gas emissions seem likely to remain stalled unless countries
> can agree to make a genuine commitment to reducing the use of fossil fuels. Yet
> the attitude of many politicians, especially in energy-hungry countries such as
> the US, is that the cost of taking action to curb global warming exceeds the
> electoral gains.

No amount of evidence will have "the governments" take real action, in fact, 
something WWF, the reactionary group, will never acknowledge or even discover. 
What menaces Nature and climatic equilibria is NOT amenable to legal 
constriction. Its name is ominous, it is known as "tendency of the rate of 
profit to fall". This kind of natural phenomenon (natural in the sense that, 
though it is human-made, it operates in abstract, at our back so to say) is 
built in with capitalism.  Or we get rid of capitalism, dear friends, or we 
shall be either scorched or fried. Hobson's choice? 

While most scientists can easily see that no civilization (mode of production) 
has bought an insurance against ecologic disaster (there are examples, the Maya 
being one of the most important ones), they fail to see that the very mode of 
production they work for is prone to the same fatal end, only that on a global 
scale.

Rome, at least, had great historians of its decadence and fall. could it be 
that our times will have no such historian, due to lack of people to write the 
story down?

Soothing.

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From furuhashi.1 at osu.edu  Sun Feb 25 00:29:24 2001
From: furuhashi.1 at osu.edu (Yoshie Furuhashi)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 02:29:24 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] America Gets Candid About What Colombia Needs
Message-ID: <p05001900b6be6258535d@[140.254.114.52]>

New York Times 25 February 2001

FACING FACTS

America Gets Candid About What Colombia Needs

By CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS

WASHINGTON -- For nearly a year now, American officials have been 
trying to tell voters why they should care about Colombia.  But this 
month, one architect of that campaign, the recently retired Gen. 
Barry R. McCaffrey, dramatically changed the argument.  He warned 
that the whole of Colombia was dying.  If Americans stood idle, he 
said, they would be like the neighbors of Kitty Genovese, the 1964 
murder victim in New York whose screams went unanswered.

"This isn't North Korea, for cripe's sake," General McCaffrey said at 
a conference in Miami attended by dozens of current and former 
officials who have helped draw up Colombia policy.  "We like these 
people.  They live next door to us.  And they're in trouble."

Eight months ago, when Congress approved a $1.3 billion package of 
mostly military aid, it was presented as another effort to stem the 
flow of drugs.  Now, it is morphing into a rescue operation for a 
failing state.

American officials recognized early on that any effort to stop the 
drug trade in Colombia would also have to deal with the reasons drug 
lords there have so much power: the country's government is weak, its 
army has a terrible reputation for human rights abuses, leftist 
guerrillas who have long controlled much of the countryside have cast 
their lot with the drug trade in order to finance their rebellion, 
and right-wing militias fighting the leftists also get money from the 
drug trade.  Still, the Clinton administration, in which General 
McCaffrey was drug czar, thought it could mobilize Americans around a 
drug-focused strategy for managing the crisis, rather than an 
all-encompassing approach.

Now, as President Bush prepares to meet Colombia's president, Andr?s 
Pastrana, in Washington on Tuesday, Colombia's problems are only 
getting worse.  So Americans can expect to hear more about how 
complex the problems are - about how solving Colombia's drug problem 
may involve rebuilding the nation.

That argument evokes a problem that has bedeviled American policy 
ever since the Vietnam War: How can any administration approach a 
difficult and potentially engulfing problem overseas in a way that 
gets Americans behind long-term, full-hearted support?

In this case, President Bush is trying to sell an investment that the 
General Accounting Office says will not show results for years.  Will 
it also embroil American policy makers - and perhaps American 
advisers or combat soldiers - in a war that Mr. Pastrana now concedes 
is unwinnable?  And, perhaps most critically, will the need to tailor 
such a program around American distaste for overseas involvements 
hamstring it from the start?

Whatever the answers to those questions, the effort is under way, and 
the new administration is at least being candid about the scope of 
the problem.

In his news conference last week, President Bush said American 
military support should be limited to training Colombian forces.  "I 
share the concern of those who are worried that at some point in time 
the United States might become militarily engaged," he said.  On the 
same day, American officials acknowledged that guerrillas had fired 
on a State Department helicopter last Sunday as it carried American 
contract workers trying to rescue Colombian policemen.

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell is preparing to make the case not 
only for a sustained project in Colombia but for vastly increasing 
aid to its neighbors, officials say.  This is needed, the logic goes, 
because as military pressure builds in Colombia, the war could spill 
over and destabilize the region.

"This is very scary," said Max Manwaring, a professor of military 
strategy at the United States Army War College.  "Because of our own 
internal political problems and fear of regenerating another Vietnam 
we've just concentrated on the drug thing and hoped the other 
problems would go away."

In fact, Colombia today is threatened not only by the many actors in 
its wars.  Its society is also fractured by class, geography, weak 
civic institutions and a historic tolerance for frightening levels of 
violence.

The problems are interwoven, leaving strategists stumped over where 
to begin.  Colombians can't affect the drug flow until they pacify 
the country.  They can't get a peace deal with the guerrillas until 
they have a development strategy.  They can't undertake public works 
in a war zone.  Mr. Pastrana has submitted a $7.5 billion strategy to 
tackle it all, but resources are scant and his authority is in doubt.

All this in a country located between Venezuela's oil fields and the 
Panama Canal.  Given those interests, almost no one argues that 
Americans can look away.

For years the drug war served to unite domestic concerns and foreign 
policy aims.  But now a broader strategy is required, said 
Representative Mark Souder, the Indiana Republican who is chairman of 
the Committee on Government Reform.  "Everyone realizes that the 
whole region is in crisis," he said.  "But the best way to avoid 
Vietnam is to deal with it early."

As the United States moves into the breach, elemental questions 
remain.  What is the basic plan?  Is it a peace strategy with a 
military component?  A counterinsurgency drive?  A bulwark to salvage 
the Pastrana administration?  A Marshall Plan for South America?

And what will define its success?  At the recent conference in Miami, 
current and former American officials promoted starkly different 
objectives, from breaking the back of the main rebel group to merely 
cutting Colombia's drug exports.

The Clinton administration's salesmanship of its Colombia plan got 
off to a dismal start.  Colombia's neighbors voiced fears of a 
spillover war and regional arms race; European officials resented not 
having been in on the planning.

Gen. Charles E. Wilhelm, the former commander of the United States 
Southern Command, says the Bush administration must do better.  "If 
you lose the information struggle, how will you fare as you seek to 
implement a strategy that is controversial at best?" he said.

Pentagon advocates of the plan are trying first to avoid comparisons 
to Vietnam or El Salvador.  They wince when news media discuss the 
tactical mix in Colombia: American advisers, well-armed guerrillas, 
aerial defoliants and human rights violations.

They insist they are assisting Pastrana's strategy, not imposing 
their own.  They say no American soldiers will be in combat.  They 
claim to have the private support of Colombia's neighbors even though 
leaders of such countries express public misgivings.  And they are 
financing human rights groups in Colombia.

AT the same time, they are settling in for a long struggle.  A 
Pentagon assessment to be issued next month urges the administration 
to move beyond the "U.S. fixation on narcotics trafficking" and focus 
on "reinforcing democratic governance and working collectively to 
solve subregional problems."

A bipartisan task force led by Senator Bob Graham of Florida and 
Brent Scowcroft, the former national security adviser, recently said 
the main challenge will be to help Americans see beyond drugs to 
Colombia's core problems.  It called for long-term help in reforming 
the judiciary, attacking corruption and addressing poverty, education 
and health care.

It may be a tough sales job for an administration that took office 
insisting that America's military is best equipped for fighting wars 
- not fixing broken countries.

But Mr. Manwaring says Americans have few choices left.  "We've got 
to go back to the term of nation building," he said.  "Nobody wants 
to use it.  Because that term is verboten.  But that's what it is."



From sherrynstan at igc.org  Sun Feb 25 07:06:37 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 09:06:37 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
In-Reply-To: <001401c09ee2$ea3ae660$1cacefd8@rowan>
References: <E14WjtK-0004Kn-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010225085915.01353c10@pop2.igc.org>

At 08:24 PM 2/24/01 -0800, you wrote:
>Can you all suspend paranoia, fear of redbaiting or Swiss-baiting (Julien)
>while I try to make some honest observations?
>
>You asked me for a proposal. Here is one-----> I suppose the easiest analogy
>is to say you MUST fight a two front war, Stan. You must attack what
>variously (and interchangably) is described as [Bourgeois
>Capitalism/Imperialism/Global Capitalism/Capitalism] WHILE you fight to
>defend the biosphere. Stan, you require we "win" some battle with "them"
>*before* you turn your attention to the apocalypse.  

I have categorically NEVER stated this.  My argument with Julien and others
has been that the solution can not be found in restructuring capitalism.
Not the same thing.  I currently know and work with a fair number of
environmentalists of various stripes, and consider this part of the
base-building and alliance building that is necessary for efforts on "both
fronts."

There is no time, you
>only have the 25-30 years you allow yourself for inflicting damage upon
>"them" ---  and that strategy is flawed in ways I wish to discuss "some
>other time", okay?
>
>Here's a reason, a reality that is too often avoided: We are "them". We are
>ALL (every one of us reading this) to some degree "capitalists." We are ALL
>part of the damned and evil system, and we're all bourgeois, and we are all
>contributing to the rape of the planet, when we don't have to. To the extent
>that we are part of that system, ... to at LEAST that extent ... must we
>immediately change our behavior. Not in some miraculous future when we
>"win". Plus, the effect of all of us changing our behavior within the
>capitalist system fights the war on two fronts.

Forgive me, but this is nonsense.  This reminds me of the diversion of the
struggle for black liberation in my own country during the Cold War, when
racism was redefined as some kind of personal pathology, and the struggle
was de-linked from the anti-colonial struggle.  Changing individual
behavior?  

>
>(If you ask me how we change that behavior, I again say "attitude". If you
>ask me what have EYE done to advance the cause, I can assert that indeed I
>walk my talk on this issue, and also have reduced my footprint in the
>natural world as much as I can and still remain an activist. I don't always
>blow my own horn.)
>
>Tom

Okay, I recycle and I don't flush every time.  I don't put pesticides on
the grass behind my house.  The net effect in the face of the structural
problem?

>
>PS the rest is addenda, less important:
>
>First, I have re-thought something I recently posted to you, Stan. I now say
>that if all we do on Crashlist is educate some of "the left" (forgive me) to
>the environmental components of the apocalypse, we will have done much. You
>are correct to call for education.
>
>On personal "argument": Is it possible to believe that someone like Julien
>or me could be suggesting
>a change in your strategy and not be opposed to your efforts at the same
>time? Is there no place for genuine disagreement or critical discussion
>without   "Automatically assuming that a critique is developed of a system
>forpropaganda purposes is quintessential caricature-constructed
>redbaiting."? -- If not, then you are requiring a priori total agreement or
>... nothing. 

I have done no such thing.  You have confused the intent of my statement,
and this comment was in response to what was clearly redbaiting.  Defending
oneself from redbaiting is NOT requiring a priori anything.  It's demanding
that one's arguments be confronted on their own merits, and not dismissed
as being motivated by a desire for sectarian propaganda.

No one is
>asking you to put aside your goals, Stan, just to work smarter. I indeed
>support your goals. Howabout a little support of OUR goals too? (Or mine,
>one is never sure of Julien's. <g>)

I'm amazed that someone still beleives I do not share the same goals.  Have
I ever once stated that I did not beleive there is a tremendous crisis and
that it necessitates a tremendous response as quickly as humanly possible?

We Reds do not get irritated with disagreements, contrary to popular
belief.  What frustrates the hell out of us is being repeatedly
misrepresented.

Stan


"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possibly happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman




From bantam at dingoblue.net.au  Sun Feb 25 09:00:54 2001
From: bantam at dingoblue.net.au (Rob Schaap)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 03:00:54 +1100
Subject: [CrashList] capitalism and our ecological footprint (was: grim forecast ...)
References: <SAK.2001.02.24.fegpjomh@computer>
Message-ID: <3A992CE7.3621576F@dingoblue.net.au>

G'day Julien,
 
> I'm not sure what you mean with "inextricable". IMO capitalism can be >reformed, but it would be way better to destroy it. 

I agree with this, capitalism is always reforming itself, and the workers have
often had a lot to do with that.  It's probably instititutionally harder now
than ever, but there's plenty of genuinely antagonised resistance out there to
its systemic destruction of the institutions and relations that make up its
own legitimacy.  This could go anywhere.  I suspect it's one of those
watershed moments.

> They are part of the same reality, but I don't believe in destiny.   >There is such things as coincidences.

I agree with this, too.
 
>>But for right now, I think I have good reason to continue to work   
>>toward smashing imperialism.

All imperialism is lousy.  People who have control over people they don't
know, whose fortunes don't imply many direct consequences for the controllers
themselves, especially where those controlled live far away, well, it's a bad
idea.  If those controllers are driven by the accumulation imperative, it's an
even worse idea.  And if those controllers join forces to ensure the control,
but compete with each other like rutting alpha males in the process of that
control, then we're talking disaster in the making.  Does anyone remember an
old black'n'white flick in which two blokes are fighting on the railway
tracks, both see a train coming, but neither can stop fighting, so the train
flattens 'em?  'Laissez-faire' imperialism is set to emulate that, I think -
if they've gutted nation states and undermined the possibility of
transnational non-finance-directed institutions so much that there's no-one
there to break up the fight for a crucial moment or two, anyway.  

Of course, a micro-economist would see that another way.  A big die-off - even
in the event that the firm's own current workers and markets being among the
dead - is hardly of mortal import.  The firm - afforded the status of natural
entity by law and custom, but with none of the  natural needs, interests,
compunction or inclinations to which real entities are heir - will go on in a
world of brand new commercial opportunities.  That's why economists can't
help.  To them, if they stayed true to their professional logic, the last cod
is simply the one most worth hunting down ...

Yours in idle speculation,
Rob



From embark at epud.net  Sun Feb 25 09:54:02 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:54:02 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <E14WjtK-0004Kn-00@lists.wwpublish.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c09f4d$10eadee0$16acefd8@rowan>

I wrote:
>>Stan, you require we "win" some battle with "them"
>>*before* you turn your attention to the apocalypse.

STAN
>I have categorically NEVER stated this.

TOM
Read your words, Stan:

"Even if it's utterly hopeless, because I've known a
few capitalists, and by and large, they are disagreeable people, and it
gives me some personal satisfaction to afflict them in every way possible.
If by some miracle, we win in my lifetime, we will begin seriously to make
a plan for the bioregionalist, advanced organic, socialist reorganization
of society.  If not, ..."

If you meant something different, at least acknowledge that one could read
your words to mean you DID categorically state it.

STAN
>My argument with Julien and others
has been that the solution can not be found in restructuring capitalism.
Not the same thing.  I currently know and work with a fair number of
environmentalists of various stripes, and consider this part of the
base-building and alliance building that is necessary for efforts on "both
fronts."

TOM:
Apparently you haven't been listening to them if you think that their
efforts can be reduced to "recycling and not flushing everytime". Now THAT's
the same ... er ..."enviro-baiting" stuff you castigate others for doing to
Reds.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you assert that the solution can't be
found by restructuring capitalism, but I seemed to have missed the point
where you  a) ever considered any form of restructuring, even if only to
reject it  b) explained how restructuring is impossible.  This goes back to
the old "put up or shut up" argument, so I will now shut up, myself.

STAN
"Forgive me, but this is nonsense.  This reminds me of the diversion of the
struggle for black liberation in my own country during the Cold War, when
racism was redefined as some kind of personal pathology, and the struggle
was de-linked from the anti-colonial struggle.  Changing individual
behavior? "

TOM:
Just because you don't LIKE the idea of an individual pathology is not
adequate reason to dismiss it as A component of the problem.  It ain't
nonsense. But I have been down the pathway of trying to explain that to
made-up minds before, to no avail. You are comfortable with invoking
individual pathology as a symptom and component of capitalist behavior; it
is self evident that there are individual racists who can be taught
differently; it is equally self evident that we all grab the handles of
capitalism every day -- as *individuals* who could make other decisions.
Isn't there some historical quote about how hearts and minds must be won
from individuals, not "classes"?

You call it nonsense because you haven't investigated it, and I assume you
won't. You are just "labeling". Let's agree to disagree ... right after I
note that anyone who has the memory of the taste of Cheese Flavored Doritos
has SOME individual pathological linkage to capitalism. <smile>

STAN
"Okay, I recycle and I don't flush every time.  I don't put pesticides on
the grass behind my house.  The net effect in the face of the structural
problem?"

TOM
Insulting, belittling, deliberately disingenuous and unnecessarily
argumentative.

STAN
"I have done no such thing....

TOM:
You just did.

STAN:
You have confused the intent of my statement,
and this comment was in response to what was clearly redbaiting.  Defending
oneself from redbaiting is NOT requiring a priori anything.  It's demanding
that one's arguments be confronted on their own merits, and not dismissed
as being motivated by a desire for sectarian propaganda."

TOM
Yeah. Of course we agree upon that. I wish that all viewpoints valued that
insight.

STAN
"I'm amazed that someone still beleives I do not share the same goals.  Have
I ever once stated that I did not beleive there is a tremendous crisis and
that it necessitates a tremendous response as quickly as humanly possible?

TOM:
Well you are correct there, Stan, as far as you are willing to allow it to
go. You simply don't define "tremendous response" broadly enough, nor
perceive how quick "quickly as possible" must be; and you require the
vanquishment of capitalism before you get started on the broader area.
(Unless you can explain your words I quoted above in some way that leads to
another conclusion. I'm not trying to irritate you unnecessarily.<g>)

 It's okay, ... you are certainly not alone in your understanding. Until you
"get it" about the parameters of the response necessary (which -- as Julien
tried to invoke -- includes *some* capitalists doing *some* things *only
they* can do within the next 30 years) the CIA will probably not disappear
you.

STAN
We Reds do not get irritated with disagreements, contrary to popular
belief.  What frustrates the hell out of us is being repeatedly
misrepresented.

TOM
Yes, I *do* sympathize. The only thing worse than being misrepresented is
being deliberately misunderstood.

I think this is my last word on this for awhile. (the crowd cheers!) I'll go
back to merely posting URLs. This thread goes nowhere.

Best to you,

tom

"If everywhere the survival of "just one more" species continues to be held
in balance with some local economic advantage, we'll have more and more of
what we already had. Conservation of biodiversity is in the interests of
everyone." -- Julien Pierrehumbert










From embark at epud.net  Sun Feb 25 11:08:06 2001
From: embark at epud.net (Embarkadero)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 10:08:06 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Nonsense:  was  - Grim forecast, warns climate report
Message-ID: <000d01c09f57$69130840$3dacefd8@rowan>

I said I was going to quit posting this thread, but I had another analogy to
try on you, Stan. (be tolerant, please.)

You wrote:

""Forgive me, but this is nonsense.  This reminds me of the diversion of the
struggle for black liberation in my own country during the Cold War, when
racism was redefined as some kind of personal pathology, and the struggle
was de-linked from the anti-colonial struggle.  Changing individual
behavior? "

In Marxist thought there is identified this quality called "class
consciousness". An *individual* has it, or acquires it, or is identified as
not possessing it.  It is my understanding that Marx and Lenin both
described processes by which one acquires "class consciousness." And it is
my understanding that this results in an individual changing her/his
behavior. The Reds on the list have accused me of avoiding class
consciousness, so I assume they believe it exists.

Is it so hard to conceive of something similar called "environmental
consciousness?"  Could you accept that this might possibly change individual
behavior ... as an individual reacts to the capitalism within which s/he is
immersed?

That's what I'm calling for, and what I believe possible. If I confused
anyone by labeling that change as merely  "a change in attitude", Mea Culpa.

thanks for considering it for the 10 seconds it took you to read it, anyway.

tom

PS Yeah, I know. I am about to be inundated with 100 comments of how "class
consciousness" is something altogether different and I haven't proven the
existence of "environmental consciousness" as a corollary, and I just don't
get it and I'm a fuckin' redbaiter for even bringing it up in this context.
Flame away, y'all.




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Sun Feb 25 11:49:28 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 13:49:28 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <E14WjtK-0004Kn-00@lists.wwpublish.com> <000f01c09f4d$10eadee0$16acefd8@rowan>
Message-ID: <000601c09f5b$87797c20$cb82f7a5@oemcomputer>

Mygod! This is getting tedious.

> I wrote:
> >>Stan, you require we "win" some battle with "them"
> >>*before* you turn your attention to the apocalypse.
>
> STAN
> >I have categorically NEVER stated this.
>
> TOM
> Read your words, Stan:
>
> "Even if it's utterly hopeless, because I've known a
> few capitalists, and by and large, they are disagreeable people, and it
> gives me some personal satisfaction to afflict them in every way possible.
> If by some miracle, we win in my lifetime, we will begin seriously to make
> a plan for the bioregionalist, advanced organic, socialist reorganization
> of society.  If not, ..."
>
> If you meant something different, at least acknowledge that one could read
> your words to mean you DID categorically state it.

Please go back and look at the original context of this remark.  This is in
response to the implication that NOTHING can be done.  It was meant as
humor.  And the reorganization of society on a massive scale does not
preclude taking action in the meantime.  And I have categorically NEVER
stated that it does.  Not even here.

>
> STAN
> >My argument with Julien and others
> has been that the solution can not be found in restructuring capitalism.
> Not the same thing.  I currently know and work with a fair number of
> environmentalists of various stripes, and consider this part of the
> base-building and alliance building that is necessary for efforts on "both
> fronts."
>
> TOM:
> Apparently you haven't been listening to them if you think that their
> efforts can be reduced to "recycling and not flushing everytime". Now
THAT's
> the same ... er ..."enviro-baiting" stuff you castigate others for doing
to
> Reds.
>

Was the argument that this remark responded to--and if too sharply, I gladly
apologize--or was it not, that this impending apocalypse should be addressed
through individual responsibility and motivated by guilt?

> Not to put too fine a point on it, but you assert that the solution can't
be
> found by restructuring capitalism, but I seemed to have missed the point
> where you  a) ever considered any form of restructuring, even if only to
> reject it

IN fact, as a Leninist, I have to say that without the existence of a
genuine revolutionary conjuncture, there is no possiblity of anything except
restructuring.  That said, the questions then become, for me, can anything
short of revolution deal with the magnitude of what we are discussing here?
Will such a conjuncture happen, where and how?  Are we consciously preparing
to take advantage of it if it does?  I organize around restructuring all the
time, and have pointed that out several times, only to be castigagted by the
ultra-left for not being revolutionary enough.

b) explained how restructuring is impossible.  This goes back to
> the old "put up or shut up" argument, so I will now shut up, myself.
>
Who said restructuring is impossible?  Capitalism has restructured again and
again.  The question remains, can restructuring capitalism--which will go
down the toilet with everything else when all is said and done--provide us
with the focus, political will, and conscious exercise of power necessary to
salvage anything and secure some kind of decent future?  I have neard no
evidence yet to suggest it can.

> STAN
> "Forgive me, but this is nonsense.  This reminds me of the diversion of
the
> struggle for black liberation in my own country during the Cold War, when
> racism was redefined as some kind of personal pathology, and the struggle
> was de-linked from the anti-colonial struggle.  Changing individual
> behavior? "
>
> TOM:
> Just because you don't LIKE the idea of an individual pathology is not
> adequate reason to dismiss it as A component of the problem.

A interacting and reproductive reflection of the problem is more accurate.

It ain't
> nonsense. But I have been down the pathway of trying to explain that to
> made-up minds before, to no avail.

Nonsense again!  The fact that I am on this list is the result of a quantum
shift in my own thinking.

 You are comfortable with invoking
> individual pathology as a symptom and component of capitalist behavior;

It's not that simple, and this arbitrary division of nature-nurture,
social-individual, et al, is precisely part of the problem here.  You are
trying to reduce what I have said to fit in with the categories of your own
narrative, as the PMs would say.

 it
> is self evident that there are individual racists who can be taught
> differently; it is equally self evident that we all grab the handles of
> capitalism every day -- as *individuals* who could make other decisions.
> Isn't there some historical quote about how hearts and minds must be won
> from individuals, not "classes"?

I suppose there is.  Don't know.  But most attitudes are not fomred through
persuasion.  They are formed by experience, including the experience of
being subjected to dominant class categories, definitions, and paradigms,
and including class experience.  The class experience of the petty
bourgeoisie, for example, like many people I know in Chapel Hill, an
academic community, is to assume that because THEY can choose which handles
to grab and not grab that everyone else has that choice.  A Haitian peasant
can KNOW that burning charcoal to cook is destroying her environment.  But
at this point in time, her choice is to not eat or to burn charcoal.

>
> STAN
> "I have done no such thing....
>
> TOM:
> You just did.
>
> STAN:
> You have confused the intent of my statement,
> and this comment was in response to what was clearly redbaiting.
Defending
> oneself from redbaiting is NOT requiring a priori anything.  It's
demanding
> that one's arguments be confronted on their own merits, and not dismissed
> as being motivated by a desire for sectarian propaganda."
>
> TOM
> Yeah. Of course we agree upon that. I wish that all viewpoints valued that
> insight.
>
> STAN
> "I'm amazed that someone still beleives I do not share the same goals.
Have
> I ever once stated that I did not beleive there is a tremendous crisis and
> that it necessitates a tremendous response as quickly as humanly possible?
>
> TOM:
> Well you are correct there, Stan, as far as you are willing to allow it to
> go. You simply don't define "tremendous response" broadly enough, nor
> perceive how quick "quickly as possible" must be; and you require the
> vanquishment of capitalism before you get started on the broader area.

It's not linear.  And this is again putting words in my mouth.  I am saying
that the challenge before us is of revolutionary proportions.  And I am
saying that simply coming up with policy fantasies without figuring out how
we get there from here, and without taking a real account of where the power
is, is peurile.

> (Unless you can explain your words I quoted above in some way that leads
to
> another conclusion. I'm not trying to irritate you unnecessarily.<g>)
>
>  It's okay, ... you are certainly not alone in your understanding. Until
you
> "get it" about the parameters of the response necessary (which -- as
Julien
> tried to invoke -- includes *some* capitalists doing *some* things *only
> they* can do within the next 30 years) the CIA will probably not disappear
> you.
>

What capitalists?  What things?  Be concrete.  Name ten CEOs who we can
appeal to, and tell me what we will appeal to them for, and then explain to
me what leverage we have if they refuse.  Get specific, and I'm there.

> STAN
> We Reds do not get irritated with disagreements, contrary to popular
> belief.  What frustrates the hell out of us is being repeatedly
> misrepresented.
>
> TOM
> Yes, I *do* sympathize. The only thing worse than being misrepresented is
> being deliberately misunderstood.
>
> I think this is my last word on this for awhile. (the crowd cheers!) I'll
go
> back to merely posting URLs. This thread goes nowhere.
>
> Best to you,
>
> tom

Ditto

Stan




From sherrynstan at igc.org  Sun Feb 25 12:11:08 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 14:11:08 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Nonsense:  was  - Grim forecast, warns climate report
References: <000d01c09f57$69130840$3dacefd8@rowan>
Message-ID: <001501c09f5e$8e61f320$cb82f7a5@oemcomputer>

> Is it so hard to conceive of something similar called "environmental
> consciousness?"  Could you accept that this might possibly change
individual
> behavior ... as an individual reacts to the capitalism within which s/he
is
> immersed?
>

It's possible to conceive of something simply called consciousness that
encompasses all this.  I think many of us are now aspiring to that.  But it
is a cumulative process that is, to say the least, unevenly developed from
person to person, society to soicety.

Class consciosusness and any other level of consciousness that transcends
one's immediate circumstances is facilitated through the acquisition of
efficacious interpretive tools.  These "tools" require study and discipline
and practice, and so individuals must me motivated in one way or
another--usually by the experiences of their own lives--to seek and master
these means of interpretation that elevate consciousness.  That motivation,
at some level, is always related to some kind of self-interest, which in
turn depends on how and with whom an individual identifies.  Class
consciousness is but a step toward socialist consciousness, in my
experience.  I now find myself identifying at some level with life itself,
based on some of what I've learned right here.  But that hasn't displaced my
interpretation of class dynamics, even though it has led me to believe that
the socialist project--to which I remain committed--has made mistakes, must
accommodate and integrate material reality in a much broader way, and at the
same time has become much more urgent.

You can change my mind, as I might yours, if we are prepared to accommodate
new information.  The vast majority--firghtened and confused quite often, as
well as stupid and avaricious quite often--cling to whatever form of denial
most comforts them, and let go of it only in the face of trauma.  It is this
vast majority upon whom our fates rest, and those who would act as guides
for the development of that conscousness can not relinquish their connection
with those masses, or they will simply be lonely voices wailing at the
breeze.

Cheers.

Stan




From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Sun Feb 25 13:32:12 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 15:32:12 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] America Gets Candid About What Colombia Needs
Message-ID: <sa99257c.068@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>


>>> furuhashi.1 at osu.edu 02/25/01 02:29AM >>>
New York Times 25 February 2001

FACING FACTS

America Gets Candid About What Colombia Needs

By CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS

WASHINGTON -- For nearly a year now, American officials have been
trying to tell voters why they should care about Colombia.  But this
month, one architect of that campaign, the recently retired Gen.
Barry R. McCaffrey, dramatically changed the argument.  He warned
that the whole of Colombia was dying.  If Americans stood idle, he
said, they would be like the neighbors of Kitty Genovese, the 1964
murder victim in New York whose screams went unanswered.

"This isn't North Korea, for cripe's sake," General McCaffrey said at
a conference in Miami attended by dozens of current and former
officials who have helped draw up Colombia policy.  "We like these
people.  They live next door to us.  And they're in trouble."

(((((((((((((

CB: Sounds like The White Man's Burden , 2001 version. The White Man's Burden , that paternalist , liberal creed. 









From zapata at sezampro.yu  Sun Feb 25 15:59:09 2001
From: zapata at sezampro.yu (Andrej Grubacic)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 23:59:09 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] INTERPRETING BALKAN FAIRYTALES"Serbia's October Revolution"
References: <sa99257c.068@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>
Message-ID: <005901c09f7d$f11cd1a0$4e74fac3@andrej>

----

 ________________________________________________
      A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
            http://www.ainfos.ca/
 ________________________________________________

I am sending this article to a-infos on  request from the author.

INTERPRETING BALKAN FAIRYTALES
"Serbia's October Revolution"

Was the storming of Belgrade by enraged citizens of Serbia in October of
last year really a piece of showmanship comparable with the script in
Eisenstein's film October? Some independent writers in the Belgrade press
and the Belgrade anarchists are sceptical about some of the more theatrical
scenes portrayed in the media, with crowds leaping up the steps of the
Federal Parliament and flames flaring from the television studio RTS on
October 5 2000 while the NEWS cameras whirled.

What the Belgrade anarchists are cautioning is that people should
distinguish between those features of the Serbian October revolt which were
orchestrated and those that were spontaneous. And if stage management
occurred who was behind it?

My main contact in Belgrade, Vladimir Markovic, called what happened on the
final day the Agit-Prop Revolution". He urged us to consider the stagecraft
and media management used to arouse in the public mind the idea that
something world shattering was happening - something like a 'revolution'. On
reflection, he and other Belgrade anarchists feel the events of October 5th,
with the change of rulers of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, though
necessary and overdue were less significant than the media images suggest.

BELGRADE ANARCHIST INSIGHTS

The Belgrade anarchists do not just base their doubts about the degree of
political change in Yugoslavia after October on their own anarchist dogma.
They are employing practical reasoning and straightforward observation of
the groups, parties and individuals acting in Serb society.

They are keenly aware of the entrenched nature of the economy which has
evolved since the West imposed sanctions in 1992. And because they have
insights into the developments in the regime which go beyond the websites
and newsprint, they know what to expect from opposition leaders like the
Federal President, Vojislav Kostunica and Zoran Djindic the boss of the DOS
(Democratic Opposition of Serbia) coalition. More importantly for
anarchists, they have grave misgivings about 'Otpor' (Resistance) in which
many anarchists outside Serbia have had high hopes.

The British anarchist paper Freedom ran in October a front page report
stating: "The biggest catalyst for change ... has been the movement known as
Otpor (Resistance), a leaderless (and for that matter anarchistic)
organisation, with no formal membership." Ratibor Trivunac disputed this in
his Summary of the General Strike in Serbia in October last year. When I
spoke to Vladimir Markovic, Ratibor's friend and another Belgrade anarchist,
he confirmed Ratibor's criticisms and gave me an outline of the nature of
Otpor.

Otpor was founded in 1998 and was made up mainly of students. It claims to
be a 'leaderless movement'. Markovic admits that as an organisation in the
universities Otpor was a useful campaigning group to begin with, and it
still has decent people among its members. But Markovic claims the
organisation does have senior figures in it who lead the organisation, and
that this leadership is composed of about ten key individuals.

These star figures, it is suggested, work closely with both elements within
the party system of the new regime and co-operate with foreign agencies. I
wasn't given hard facts, the local anarchists in Belgrade are in the main
working on hunches here. Their claim that the US authorities are linked to
the Otpor leaders can only be speculation. What they do argue persuasively
is that here is an organisation which seems to be well funded, and had no
trouble mounting expensive protests during the era of Milosevic and his
Socialist Party of Serbia. Markovic argues that eventually Otpor got backing
from people inside the Milosevic establishment, from media people and from
people in the opposition parties.

Inside Otpor Markovic says the Council of Otpor operates. He says this is
made up of professors from the universities and members of the Academy of
Arts and Sciences. The novelist and politician, Dobrica Cosic, has links
with this Council of Otpor. Cosic was President of Yugoslavia in 1992 and
1993. He has long been a promoter of the idea of the culture of Serb
nationalism.

Misha Glenny, in his book The Fall of Yugoslavia (1992) claimed "Cosic and
some like-minded academics from the Serbian Academy of Sciences had been
behind a notorious document called the Memorandum - in 1986 - (t)his bitter
attack on the Kosovo policy of the then Communist authorities anticipated
the atmosphere of national intolerance which was about to smother reason in
Yugoslavia."

Curiously both Misha Glenny, the BBC journalist, and Vladimir Markovic, the
Belgrade anarchist, identify the intellectuals at the Academy as being the
chief culprits culturally creating the conditions of new Serb nationalism.
Misha Glenny argues "The Memorandum (of 1986) both prepared the ideological
ground for Milosevic by focusing public opinion yet more tightly on the
Kosovo issue and indicated to this ambitious apparatchik that here was a
real base among intellectuals for a nationalist assault .. "

Some anarchists, like most Marxists, are intellectual snobs who focus
readily on the politician's dirty hands but who avert their eyes from the
vanities of the ideas merchant who creates the cultural conditions in which
the politician works. Vladimir Markovic was one of those anarchists who
wanted to stress the danger of what George Orwell called The Dictatorship of
Theorists

Here we have the image of the intellectuals at the Serbian Academy of Arts
and Sciences and theologians in the Serb Orthodox Church sowing, while
politicians like Milosevic merely reaped. Markovic maintains that the Serb
intellectuals were the dogmatic nationalists, and the politicians practical
people at once more utilitarian and pragmatic. But it was these practical
men who ended up with dirt on their hands. Meanwhile the illustrious
theorists, like Dobrica Cosic, at the Academy and in the church go on to sow
more seeds.



ETHNIC NATIONALISM TO CULTURAL RACISM : A MAGGOT BECOMES A BLUEBOTTLE

The Balkans, with its legacy from the Ottomans and the Hapsburgs, is often
seen as a bridge between East and West. This seems to be important to
understanding what is going on in the new governments of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia and the Serb Republic and, importantly, in Otpor.

The theorists of Otpor, according to my informants in the Belgrade
anarchists, have developed their ideas rooted in ancient attitudes and
hatreds of all things they see as being 'Eastern'. These ideologues are
stirring up the concept of a culture clash in Serbia between two
traditions - one eastern, the other western.Vladimir Markovic calls this
Cultural Racism; the dichotomy is thus defined:
An alien Asian, oriental culture which was introduced by the Turks in the
14th century and continued by Tito in the 20th century. Crudely classified
as 'Oriental Despotism', an era of Turks, Sultans and Communist Commissars,
belonging to a history which the Serbs should shed, together with the music
and way of life that goes with it, like dead skin.

The Otpor idea is that Serbian 'real' culture is Western, European and of
the Enlightenment, but curiously it also embraces the Serbian Orthodox
Church as part of this tradition. This approach proposes the spirit of
individual enterprise and liberal values in contrast to Muslim and Middle
Eastern ideas and values. This, according to Markovic, is a Western
Enlightenment vision at once intolerant, totalitarian and ignorant.

Let us consider the sinister sequence of events which started in 1986 with
the Memorandum; in April 1987 Slobodan Milosevic made his dramatic speech at
Kosovo Polje which one Kosovo Serb, Miroslav Soljevic later said "enthroned
him as a Tsar"; on May 8th 1989 Milosevic assumed the presidency of Serbia,
but timed the ceremony to coincide with the 600th anniversary of the Battle
of Kosovo, which took place on June 28th at Gazimestan on the battlefield in
front of all Yugoslavia's top politicians and an audience of one million.

The Memorandum was put together by academics at the Serbian Academy of Arts
and Sciences, some then in the Serbian Communist Party (now re-named the
Socialist Party of Serbia); today some of these same people, like Dobrica
Cosic, are now influentially linked to Otpor and the Democratic Opposition
of Serbia (DOS). In an essay written last June, entitled 'The Serbian
opposition during and after the NATO bombing', Vladimir Ilic warns us about
the efforts of the then opposition to the Milosevic regime to recruit 'elite
' figures from the University, Writers' Union, Academy of Arts and Sciences.
He says "These institutions were the ideological strongholds of ethnic
nationalism in Serbia and gave a big contribution to the creation of the
phenomenon that is most frequently coupled to Milosevic's name.".

What the Belgrade anarchists and other critics are now arguing is that, with
the fall of Milosevic regime and development of the new system dominated by
the Democratic Opposition of Serbia, Serb politics is undergoing
metamorphosis. This is the kind of change which occurs when the maggot
becomes a bluebottle. Thus Serbian intellectuals at the Academy of Arts and
the Universities, who previously influenced the Serbian Socialist system of
Milosevic, are now admired by the elements in the new regime of Kostunica
and Djindic, and among the supporters of Otpor (Resistance).

Markovic illustrated this by describing an Otpor demo last year in Nis in
southern Serbia. At that demo the organisers invoked the epic poem The
Mountain Wreath, declaring:

Have done with minarets and mosques!
Let flare the Serbian Christmas-log;
Paint gaily too the eggs for Easter-tide;
Observe with care the Lent and Autumn Fasts,
And for the rest - do what is dear to thee!
It continues in a warlike tone:
Though broad enough Cetinje Plain,
No single seeing eye, no tongue of Turk,
Escap'd to tell his tale another day!
We put them all unto the sword,
All those who would not be baptiz'd; .
We put to fire the Turkish houses,
That there might be nor stick nor trace
Of these true servants of the Devil!

Now however suitable this kind of literary epic may be in seminars at the
Academy, one wonders if it is seemly that it should be profiled at a
political function in Nis. Least of all at a gathering of Otpor, who some
claim has libertarian and anarchistic credentials, and many credit with
contributing to the popular overthrow of Milosevic and the Socialist Party
of Serbia (SPS),. Time Judah writes in his book 'The SERBS - History, Myth &
the Destruction of Yugoslavia' " . it is essential to understand that many
Bosnian Serbs went to war in 1992 elated and in the spirit of . The Mountain
Wreath."
THE NATURE OF SERBIAN ANARCHISM

Under the Tito regime the ethnic elites in Yugoslavia sought to restrain the
nationalism of their various regions. In June 1968 there was uproar at
Belgrade University as it followed in the trail of events in Paris, Prague
and other places that summer. The Belgrade student strikes focused on
conditions at first, but quickly became political. Authoritarianism,
unemployment and the Vietnam war were denounced, but there was no sign of
Serb nationalism. Much of the inspiration came from the philosophy faculty
of Mihailo Markovic and others associated with Praxis, the liberal Marxist
journal.

Initially Tito declared his backing for the students. He went on TV and
protested that the nation's bureaucracy had obstructed the common aims he
shared with the students. Two weeks after the students surrendered the
University, Tito demanded the sacking of Markovic and others in the
philosophy department on grounds that they were corrupting the country's
youth.
Some of today's anarchists in Belgrade trace their history back to those
events in 1968. By the 1970s Zoran Djindic, now leader of the governing
coalition in Serbia - the DOS - became an anarchist and remained so for
about 10 years. Today younger people are in evidence among the Belgrade
anarchists.

Some of these young anarchists and anarcho-syndicalists are wary of the
students in Otpor and the whole university scene. Ratibor Trivunac claims:
"Otpor is a nationalistic, neo-liberal organisation which is led by a few
organisers . , they are also funded by western countries."

Even in 1991, Misha Glenny describes how the politicians were using the
students: " . I bumped into Zoran Djindic organising his student battalions.
Djindic was in his element - a leading and respectable D.S. (Democratic
Party) parliamentarian, he had never been able to discard his Marcusian
memories gained as a disciple of the Frankfurt School." Even the political
writings of the anarchist academic, Noam Chomsky, had been selectively
published under the Milosevic regime to justify its own case against the
west. In such publications Chomsky was not identified as a libertarian
socialist.
These Belgrade anarchists now look to the workers' movement and some of the
trade unions as a focus of resistance to the new DOS regime of Djindic and
Kostunica. To them the General Strike and the spontaneous actions of workers
in the coal mines, at Cacak and in Belgrade, were crucial to the final
overthrow of Milosevic. They see the more photogenic scenes outside the
Federal Parliament on October 5th, 2000 as largely froth.

The Belgrade anarchists are seeking a meeting with Branislav Canak,
President of 'NEZAVISNOST' - United Branch Trade Unions (UGS). This union
federation has 157,000 members based in engineering, education, public
utilities, transport, agriculture and mining. Canak himself voiced his
backing for the demonstrations in Seattle against global capitalism.
The fairytales which the Belgrade anarchists are challenging are: the
'anarchistic' credentials of Otpor; the 'revolutionary' status of the new
regime and the nature of its transformation, which they would liken to
metamorphosis; and the 'radical' role of the intellectuals in Serbian
society. The Balkan experience ought to warn us all against absurd
generalisations and cookbook critiques drafted in a rush on far-flung
campuses to prop-up some grand theory of global politics.

BRIAN BAMFORD
Northern Editor of Freedom UK


********
       ****** The A-Infos News Service ******
      News about and of interest to anarchists
                       ******
COMMANDS: lists at ainfos.ca
REPLIES: a-infos-d at ainfos.ca
HELP: a-infos-org at ainfos.ca
WWW: http://www.ainfos.ca/
INFO: http://www.ainfos.ca/org







From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Sun Feb 25 11:38:24 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 18:38:24 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] fwd: Tom
Message-ID: <000301c09f5a$0097df40$e48120d9@mjones>

>From Tom Warren:

>Here's my latest activity, goin' on in my town:

>www.pielc.uoregon.edu

>I get to worship Julia Butterfly!

[I'd worship her too. Mark]



From bantam at dingoblue.net.au  Mon Feb 26 05:55:26 2001
From: bantam at dingoblue.net.au (Rob Schaap)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:55:26 +1100
Subject: [CrashList] capitalism and our ecological footprint (was: grim forecast ...)
References: <SAK.2001.02.24.fegpjomh@computer> <3A992CE7.3621576F@dingoblue.net.au>
Message-ID: <3A9A52F2.3EADE7F9@dingoblue.net.au>

G'day all,

I see Moldova has gone over to the commies in a big way (70 seats out of
110-odd).  And rather ostentatiously unreconstructed ones at that - plenty of
Marxist-Leninist iconography, and a public policy involving the
renationalisation of the wine and electricity sectors.  Is this significant
for the region, Mark?  Is this just a localised yelp at some particularly
nasty enclosures, or a symptom of a widespread rejection, not only of the
'restructurists', but also the newer pseudo-lefty pro-market nationalist
goosesteppers we've been seeing in Russia?

Cheers,
Rob.



From julp at freesurf.ch  Mon Feb 26 08:53:15 2001
From: julp at freesurf.ch (Julien Pierrehumbert)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:53:15 +0100
Subject: [CrashList] stunning anecdotal data on US excesses
Message-ID: <SAK.2001.02.26.smlisbcr@computer>

I found this on prudentbear.com the other day:

>Between 1964 and 1997 (most recent available data from the US Census Bureau), 
>the amount of total retail space per person in the U.S. has jumped almost 300% to 
>19 square feet per person.  Now, several research firms put the number at over 20 
>square feet.  By the way, Europe has about one and a half square feet per person.

And I guess most of these stores have air conditionning...
BTW, the USA have imported a record amount of oil last year.




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Mon Feb 26 16:43:08 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 20:43:08 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=28Spanish=29_BBC:_Colombian_paramilitaries_target_Hugo_Ch=E1vez?=
Message-ID: <006ef0843231a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

A BBC interview, in Spanish: Carlos Casta?o, head of the Colombian 
paramilitaries, targets Hugo Ch?vez.  At the same time, it should be noted that 
Ch?vez has recently appointed Jos? Vicente Rangel, former Minister of Foreign 
Relations and an old member of the Venezuelan guerrilla of Douglas Bravo, as 
the Minister of Defence. The lines seem to be becoming clear...

------- Forwarded message follows -------
From:           	Gorojovsky <Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar>
To:             	@INTRAPIN.PML
Subject:        	(Fwd) Hugo Ch?vez: blanco de los paramilitares	colombianos
Send reply to:  	gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar
Date sent:      	Mon, 26 Feb 2001 20:30:20 -0300

Importante noticia: los paramilitares colombianos atacan a Ch?vez.

------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent:      	Mon, 26 Feb 2001 04:28:50 -0300
Subject:        	Hugo Ch?vez: blanco de los paramilitares
 colombianos
From:           	NAC&POP <nacypop at ciudad.com.ar>
BCC to:         	

Mi?rcoles, 21.02.2001.

Hugo Ch?vez: blanco de los paramilitares colombianos

En entrevista exclusiva con la BBC, el jefe de los grupos paramilitares de
derecha de Colombia, Carlos Casta?o, acus? al presidente de Venezuela, Hugo
Ch?vez, de ayudar a los guerrilleros de izquierda colombianos.

En varias ocasiones, el gobierno de Venezuela ha rechazado tajantemente ese tipo
de acusaciones, indicando que cualquier incursi?n en territorio venezolano
recibir? una respuesta en?rgica, sea cual sea el grupo armado.

La periodista Beatriz G?mez, de la BBC, convers? con Carlos Casta?o:

Se?or Casta?o, Ud. ha afirmado que el conflicto colombiano ya no es
exclusivamente colombiano. ?Por qu? raz?n hace esta afirmaci?n?

Consideramos que, desde la llegada a la presidencia de Venezuela del Sr.
Hugo Ch?vez, la configuraci?n del conflicto colombiano cambi? de plano.
Hasta entonces, la guerrilla consideraba ya una utop?a la posibilidad de tomar
el poder o fragmentar la naci?n colombiana.

Con la llegada de Ch?vez al poder, queda reconocido un estatuto de
beligerancia a la guerrilla de las FARC. Esta subversi?n entonces considera
posible, si no tomarse el poder, al menos fragmentar la naci?n colombiana.

Y es indudable que la hermana rep?blica de Venezuela, liderada por el
presidente Ch?vez ahora, tiene una intenci?n expansionista. De eso no nos
queda la menor duda. Y esto hace que el conflicto colombiano ya no sea
exclusivamente dom?stico y amerite la atenci?n de la comunidad internacional
para la soluci?n de nuestros problemas.

Esa afirmaci?n que Ud. hace de que Venezuela es un cuasi aliado de la
guerrilla de las FARC, ?qu? implica en el sentido militar? ?Ud. convierte
e= n un objetivo militar al gobierno de Venezuela? ?Piensa trasladar el
escenari= o de operaciones a Venezuela? ?Qu? piensa hacer?


Es responsabilidad del presidente Ch?vez acabar, de una vez por todas, su
actitud c?mplice con la subversi?n colombiana

De ninguna manera. Nosotros hemos respetado la soberan?a de las rep?blicas
vecinas. Lo que s? estamos haciendo es un llamado al presidente Ch?vez a qu= e
reconsidere su actitud tolerante y c?mplice con las FARC porque esto, de alguna
manera, tensiona las relaciones binacionales.

Las Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia somos una fuerza irregular, que no
depende del Estado.

Somos completamente aut?nomos, independientes y, en la medida en que el
presidente Ch?vez contin?e permitiendo que la guerrilla colombiana entre a
territorio venezolano, nosotros nos vemos obligados a perseguirla en ese
territorio.

Creo que es responsabilidad del presidente Ch?vez hacer respetar su
soberan?a nacional y acabar, de una vez por todas, su actitud c?mplice con
la subversi?n colombiana.

Sr. Casta?o, pero Ud. tambi?n est? actuando cerca de las fronteras de
Panam? y Ecuador.

Hugo Ch?vez, blanco de las acusaciones de los paramilitares colombianos.
Desde luego. Tenemos tropas en la serran?a de Dari?n, que es un l?mite
natural entre Colombia y Panam?, pero no penetramos al territorio de Panam?
excepto cuando tratamos de alcanzar a la subversi?n, cuando ?sta huye hacia ese
territorio.

Igual sucede con Venezuela. No hemos incursionado a ning?n territorio
venezolano en ning?n momento. Hemos respetado la soberan?a venezolana. Con
Ecuador sucede exactamente igual.

Pero quiero subrayar que la responsabilidad de que el conflicto colombiano
se extienda a otras naciones es la actitud tolerante, en algunos casos, o
c?mplice en otros, como el caso venezolano.

?Qu? hechos concretos tiene Ud. para afirmar algo tan delicado contra el
gobierno de Venezuela?

Puedo asegurarlo sin temor a equivocarme y tengo pruebas que evidencian, si= n
lugar a dudas, lo que estoy afirmando.

Hay frentes completos de las FARC que est?n en la zona de Arauca, lim?trofe con
Venezuela, con fusiles que son propiedad del ej?rcito venezolano.

Hay frentes completos de las FARC que est?n en la zona de Arauca, lim?trofe con
Venezuela, con fusiles que son propiedad del ej?rcito venezolano

Son fusiles FAL, que eran la dotaci?n de este ej?rcito hasta que
recientemente cambiaron a otro armamento diferente.

Ese armamento est? siendo suministrado a las FARC, no s? si por pol?tica
de Estado venezolana o debido a una actitud independiente de alg?n sector de las
Fuerzas Armadas.

Hace 15 d?as, est?bamos enfrentando a unas tropas de las FARC en el
municipio de Tib?, en la zona de La Gabarra, lim?trofe con Venezuela.

Las tropas de las FARC incursionaron en territorio venezolano y helic?ptero= s
venezolanos bombardearon y ametrallaron a las tropas de las Autodefensas Unidas
de Colombia, mientras fueron abiertamente tolerantes con la guerrilla de las
FARC.

Casos como ese evidencian lo que se est? presentando. Casos como el
secuestro por las FARC del Sr. Richard Boulton, presidente de la
multinacional venezolana Servivensa, en Valencia, situada en territorio
venezolano, y llevado a territorio colombiano muestran que la guerrilla
colombiana est? actuando con la tolerancia de algunos miembros de las
Fuerzas Armadas de Venezuela.

El hecho de que Ud. plantee que hace operaciones "en caliente", persiguiend= o a
guerrilleros colombianos en territorios de los pa?ses vecinos, ?no cree que lo
que hace es agravar la situaci?n y regionalizar el conflicto colombiano?=20

Yo acepto que es un error que se presente ese tipo de situaci?n y es
lamentable.

El conflicto colombiano ya no es solamente local... afecta a la regi?n
completa

Afortunadamente, se ha presentado un caso excepcional, en Panam?, cuando
penetramos hace cerca de dos meses porque la guerrilla escap? hacia
territorio paname?o y no fue repelida por las tropas de la Guardia Nacional de
Panam?.

Hay que aceptar que el conflicto colombiano ya no es solamente local. Es un
conflicto que afecta a la regi?n completa.

Este conflicto se ha convertido en una amenaza para la seguridad, para la
estabilidad regional de los pa?ses andinos.

Creo que la comunidad internacional ha tardado mucho en poner los ojos en
Colombia y a?n podr?a solucionarse esta grave situaci?n, sin la necesidad
de que el conflicto trascienda fronteras.

Sr. Casta?o, se plantea que Ud. fue durante un tiempo el brazo militar de los
narcotraficantes y que financia parte de sus actividades de guerra con dinero
del narcotr?fico. Sin embargo Ud. dice que apoya el Plan Colombia, ?c?mo se
explica esta contradicci?n?

Me produce indignaci?n que se me tilde - y al ej?rcito que comando de
Autodefensas - como brazo de narcotraficantes del pasado. Jam?s lo hemos
sido.

Jam?s hemos defendido ni estamos defendiendo intereses del narcotr?fico.

En algunas regiones le cobramos un impuesto a los cocaleros, pero eso no no= s
hace narcotraficantes ni participantes de esa sucia actividad

Somos enemigos del narcotr?fico y lo calificamos como el mayor generador de
violencia en Colombia, que potencia el conflicto y lo mantiene. Es por eso que
este conflicto sobrevive a la desaparici?n de la Guerra Fr?a.

Creemos que, en estos momentos, el Plan Colombia es important?simo tanto en el
componente militar norteamericano - y social, en parte - como en el componente
netamente social, por parte de la Uni?n Europea.

Es entendible que si la guerrilla sostiene que las negociaciones de paz hay que
hacerlas de la mitad de la guerra y se est?n preparando para eso, el gobierno
colombiano, la naci?n colombiana, nuestro Estado tienen que prepararse tambi?n
para fortalecer sus fuerzas armadas leg?timas, institucionales, mediante
armamentos, tecnolog?a electr?nica y a?rea.

La guerrilla pretende que el Estado no se prepare para enfrentarla, cuando
sigue diciendo que piensa tomar el poder.

El narcotr?fico ha fortalecido las arcas de la subversi?n durante muchos
a?os y yo he aceptado que en algunas regiones donde la econom?a es la coca
le cobramos un impuesto a los cocaleros porque es la ?nica forma de
financiarnos.

Pero eso no nos hace de ninguna manera narcotraficantes ni participantes de esa
sucia actividad.

Sr. Casta?o, tambi?n las FARC reconocen que cobran un impuesto a los
cultivadores de coca y que con eso financian parte de sus actividades. ?Cu?l es
la diferencia?

La diferencia es que las FARC tiene laboratorios de coca?na y para el
procesamiento de otros alcaloides. Exportan coca?na y la cambian por
armamentos.

En la Autodefensa no existe ni un solo caso as?.

El d?a que la Autodefensa llegue a actuar del lado de los narcotraficantes,
tendr? que asumir su responsabilidad ante la comunidad internacional, de forma
independiente del movimiento Y hemos sido claros: el d?a que alg?n frente de la
Autodefensa - que es una organizaci?n antisubversiva nacional civil, que act?a
como una confederaci?n - llegue a actuar del lado de los narcotraficantes,
tendr? que asumir su responsabilidad ante la comunidad internacional, de forma
independiente del movimiento.

Sin embargo, como est? abiertamente reconocido y como acaba de reconocer el
nuevo Secretario de Estado norteamericano, el Dr. Colin Powell, las FARC son una
organizaci?n narcotraficante, la mayor organizaci?n narcotraficante del mundo.

Es triste reconocer esto y yo soy un hombre que quiero a mi pa?s y no quiero
hacerle da?o. Pero quiero que el mundo entienda la verdad: el conflicto
colombiano y el narcotr?fico se retroalimentan.

La mejor manera de acabar con el conflicto colombiano es atacando
mundialmente el comercio de la coca?na.

Sr. Casta?o, las FARC han afirmado que lo que est? en juego en estas
conversaciones de paz en Colombia es el poder pol?tico. ?Ud. aspira
personalmente a despachar desde el palacio presidencial?

Me ha tocado actuar irregularmente en respuesta a una guerrilla que nos
ataca irregularmente

No, de ninguna manera. He sido un colombiano que me ha tocado actuar
irregularmente en respuesta a una guerrilla que nos ataca irregularmente.

No soy un hombre lo suficientemente profesional para conducir los destinos
de este pa?s, pero s? anhelo sinceramente, una vez que termine la guerra,
poder aportar todo el conocimiento que tengo del campo colombiano, todas la= s
ganas que tengo de trabajar por Colombia, desde cualquier espacio donde se
pueda, contribuir con la paz, con la instauraci?n de un estado social de derecho
en este pa?s.

Algunos sectores consideran que Ud. es uno de los m?ximos responsables de l= a
barbarie que vive Colombia...

Las caracter?sticas del conflicto colombiano fueron determinadas, desde sus
or?genes, por la guerrilla

No, de ninguna manera. Esa es una apreciaci?n equivocada. Las
caracter?sticas del conflicto colombiano fueron determinadas, desde sus
or?genes, por la guerrilla. No por nosotros.

Nosotros nunca hemos inventado un arma, una estrategia. Nos defendemos
utilizando los mismos m?todos que utiliza nuestro enemigo para agredirnos.

No somos responsables de todas las acciones sanguinarias que se nos imputan= .

Pero tambi?n se asegura que Ud. se ha fortalecido utilizando m?todos como
masacres, torturas, asesinatos y utilizando adem?s la intimidaci?n...

Yo soy un hombre sensible y soy un hombre cuerdo.

Una masacre no la ordenar?a una mente sensata. Tiene que existir una mente
enferma, descompuesta, para ordenar que se dispare indiscriminadamente contra un
grupo de personas.

Lo que sucede en la Autodefensa es que enfrentamos una guerrilla que
permanece como civil, se camufla dentro de los civiles, se esconde dentro de los
civiles.

Entonces, donde encontremos el enemigo, a?n si est? de civil, es objetivo
militar y actuamos militarmente contra ?l.

Pero no actuamos nunca contra personas inocentes. Jam?s ser?amos capaces de
hacerlo.

En muchos pa?ses del mundo, en muchos conflictos actuales y del pasado,
personas que han asumido la justicia por su propia mano y que en un momento dado
han contado con apoyo de la sociedad han terminado siendo acusados por esos
cr?menes. ?No teme que a Ud. le pase lo mismo?

En este momento no temo por mi futuro. Temo por el futuro de Colombia.

Estoy dispuesto a comparecer ante un tribunal internacional, siempre y
cuando de la mano m?a vayan los comandantes de las FARC y del ELN

Alguien ten?a que hacer lo que estamos haciendo nosotros: enfrentar
irregularmente a esta subversi?n.

Nosotros no estamos haciendo justicia por nuestra propia mano. Nosotros nos
estamos defendiendo cuando el Estado no nos defiende.

Si un Estado no cumple con su deber constitucional de defender la vida y
honra de sus ciudadanos, entendemos que los ciudadanos podemos recurrir a
nuestra leg?tima defensa directamente.

Creo que en el futuro deben castigarse todos los cr?menes que se hayan
cometido en Colombia.

Estoy dispuesto a comparecer ante un tribunal internacional, siempre y
cuando de la mano m?a vayan los comandantes de las FARC y los comandantes del
ELN, que llevan 40 a?os sembrando ruina, miseria, dolor y muerte en Colombia.

Ud. sabe muy bien que al final del conflicto podr?a ser de verdad juzgado por
cr?menes de guerra, ?est? dispuesto a eso?

Desde luego que estoy dispuesto a responder ante la justicia.

Yo soy un defensor y acato la justicia. Es por falta de justicia que existe la
anarqu?a que reina hoy en Colombia.

Lo que no considero justo es que nosotros como Autodefensa - que somos la
respuesta en efecto a una guerrilla, que estamos defendiendo intereses
sanos, que respetamos el estado de instituci?n - pretendamos ser juzgados,
mientras que la guerrilla terrorista y narcotraficante pretenda aspirar a
tomarse el poder en Colombia.

------- End of forwarded message -------

N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Mon Feb 26 16:42:52 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 20:42:52 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] capitalism and our ecological footprint (was: grim forecast ...)
In-Reply-To: <3A9A52F2.3EADE7F9@dingoblue.net.au>
Message-ID: <008c45242231a21MAIL2@mail2.arnet.com.ar>

En relaci?n a Re: [CrashList] capitalism and our ecological foo, 
el 26 Feb 01, a las 23:57, Rob Schaap dijo:

> G'day all,
> 
> I see Moldova has gone over to the commies in a big way (70 seats out of
> 110-odd).  And rather ostentatiously unreconstructed ones at that - plenty of
> Marxist-Leninist iconography, and a public policy involving the
> renationalisation of the wine and electricity sectors.  

Maybe the NEP should have not been abandoned the way it was.

Don't know the remaining measures, but nationalization of the wine industry 
reminds one of the monopolies on goods that the Soviets could trade 
internationally during the NEP. Not exactly a socialist program, simply a 
reasonable way to cope with the conditions of world market.

Well, that is what I can imagine here. Anyone more knowledgeable on Moldova?



N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From aabdo at webtv.net  Mon Feb 26 19:22:44 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:22:44 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Re: BBC: Colombian paramilitaries target Hugo
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ch=E1vez?=
In-Reply-To: "Gorojovsky" <Gorojovsky@arnet.com.ar>'s message of Mon, 26 Feb 2001 20:39:18 -0300
Message-ID: <16742-3A9B0F74-13@storefull-236.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

The lines are definitely becoming clear.     What more is to be said
when Carlos Castanyo, a mass murderer who is defintely a war criminal
who should be hauled before the Hague Tribunal (or some tribunal) and
tried, operates as official spokesperson for the US State Department.
It is not even most minimally camoflaged.

Here he is, suppporting Plan Colombia's US interventionism, making
references to 'Dr. Colin Powell' (as he calls his fellow thug), and
philosophying about why Colombia is now a regional affair that involves
Venezuela.      No need for exploding cigars here, Carlos will do the
job.     And ALL..... before Studio BBC.

His glib protestations of being the leader of an independent autonomous
political force, free of connections with the Colombian government,
would be comical farce.....    Except that their utterly worthless value
as duplicity, is in itself meant as murderous threat.

Even the most cartoonish portrait of Adolf Hitler, pales beside this
sinister reality of Carlos, The Assassin.       He is a real credit to
Bill Clinton  and The Democratic Party, the people that constructed this
monster for Dubya to use.

What next for Carlos?      Will he receive the Time-Life *Man of The
Year* award?     He certainly isn't currently headed for sharing a cell
with Noriega any time soon.

Tony Abdo
______________________________
Nestor-
<A BBC interview, in Spanish: Carlos Casta?o, head of the Colombian
paramilitaries, targets Hugo Ch?vez. At the same time, it should be
noted that Ch?vez has recently appointed Jos? Vicente Rangel, former
Minister of Foreign Relations and an old member of the Venezuelan
guerrilla of Douglas Bravo, as the Minister of Defence. The lines seem
to be becoming clear...>












From sherrynstan at igc.org  Mon Feb 26 19:57:09 2001
From: sherrynstan at igc.org (bon moun)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 21:57:09 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Re: BBC: Colombian paramilitaries target Hugo 
 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ch=E1vez?=
In-Reply-To: <16742-3A9B0F74-13@storefull-236.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
References: <"Gorojovsky" <Gorojovsky@arnet.com.ar>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010226214942.013516cc@pop2.igc.org>

At 08:22 PM 2/26/01 -0600, you wrote:
>The lines are definitely becoming clear.     What more is to be said
>when Carlos Castanyo, a mass murderer who is defintely a war criminal
>who should be hauled before the Hague Tribunal (or some tribunal) and
>tried, operates as official spokesperson for the US State Department.
>It is not even most minimally camoflaged.

In fact, the CIA and the US Dept of Defense integrated Castano's and the
Colombian Army's Intelligence and Operations staffs in 1991.    And the
petroleum connection here is crystal clear.  Castano might as well be on
Oxydental Petroleum's payroll, and the US is very concerned that a leftie
sounding populist like Chavez with massive popular support at home and the
loyalty of his own armed forces is also presiding over a major source of US
petroleum imports.


"...all truly great scientific abstractions are both universal and simple.
They are simple not because they explain so little but because they explain
so much.  Generality does not arise because an abstraction represents
everything that could possibly happen, but because it remains valid no
matter what happens."

		Alan Freeman




From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Mon Feb 26 08:36:26 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:36:26 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] capitalism and our ecological footprint (was: grim forecast ...)
In-Reply-To: <3A9A52F2.3EADE7F9@dingoblue.net.au>
Message-ID: <000401c0a009$baa1f560$0d7b20d9@mjones>

> I see Moldova has gone over to the commies in a big way (70 seats out of
> 110-odd).  And rather ostentatiously unreconstructed ones at that -
> plenty of
> Marxist-Leninist iconography, and a public policy involving the
> renationalisation of the wine and electricity sectors.  Is this significant
> for the region, Mark?  Is this just a localised yelp at some particularly
> nasty enclosures, or a symptom of a widespread rejection, not only of the
> 'restructurists', but also the newer pseudo-lefty pro-market nationalist
> goosesteppers we've been seeing in Russia?

When I lived in Moscow I used to get Moldavian wines delivered to our door.
There were some good vintages, I remember. Definitely worth nationalising.

Mark




From rsp at uniserve.com  Tue Feb 27 10:41:19 2001
From: rsp at uniserve.com (Sam Pawlett)
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:41:19 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] [Fwd: [evol-psych] Organgutan numbers plummeting worldwide; species may
 vanish in ten years]
Message-ID: <3A9BF48B.E0AB9E59@uniserve.com>


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [evol-psych] Organgutan numbers plummeting worldwide; species
may vanish in ten years
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 06:49:27 -0000
From: "Ian Pitchford" <ian.pitchford at scientist.com>
Reply-To: "Ian Pitchford" <Ian.Pitchford at scientist.com>
Organization: http://www.human-nature.com/darwin/index.html
To: <evolutionary-psychology at yahoogroups.com>

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 26 FEBRUARY 2001
Wildlife Conservation Society
http://www.wcs.org/

Organgutan numbers plummeting worldwide; species may vanish in ten
years, study
says

NEW YORK -- The orangutan - the only great ape found in Asia - may
vanish fromthe wild within a decade, unless illegal logging of its
habitat and poaching can be greatly reduced, according to research
funded by the Bronx Zoo-based
Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS).

The study, which appears in the current issue of the journal Oryx,
documentsthe tremendous decline in orangutans throughout their range.
The Leuser Ecosystem in northern Sumatra, Indonesia, which supported
12,000 orangutans in1993 -- the largest population in the world -- lost
nearly half its
animals over a seven year period. In 1998 and 1999, losses occurred at
around 1,000animals per year.

"The alarming decline in Leuser's orangutan numbers implies that the
world'slargest natural orangutan population will be extinct in a decade
or so, unlessthe current trend is stopped," said the study's lead
author, Dr. Carel
vanSchaik, a WCS research associate from Duke University who has
studied wild orangutans for more than 20 years.

Ironically, the Leuser Ecosystem includes Sumatra's largest protected
area,Leuser National Park, where rampant logging is backed by the
Indonesian
military and police. "All remaining forests that are accessible by road
or river are subject to a seemingly unstoppable pandemic of illegal
logging,regardless of their protection status," van Schaik said.

Van Schaik found that orangutan densities decreased more than 60 percent
in areas that have been selectively logged, due mostly to a decline in
trees that produce fruit - a critical food source for orangutans - as
well as the
loss of canopy trees they use for travel. The rampant illegal logging
that inevitably follows selective cutting in Leuser and other areas, has
caused
densities to drop as much as 90 percent. Many areas are subsequently
turned into massive agricultural estates, and therefore do not
regenerate into
forest.

"Unfortunately, selective logging is rarely followed by the 30-to-40
year rest period prescribed by law. Instead, timber removal continues,
illegally
now, until just about all of the timber-sized trees of commercially
valuable species are gone," van Schaik said. The situation in Borneo,
the only other island where orangutans are found, is no better. Up to
one third of Borneo's
orangutans died during the wave of forest fires that swept through the
area in 1997-98. And a similar rash of illegal logging continues to
affect the region -- all fueled by the state of political instability
throughout Indonesia.

To alleviate this desperate situation, WCS is calling for a moratorium
on logging in old-growth forests until the political situation has
stabilized, as well as renewed commitment to national parks.
Conservation groups have pledged their support of government initiatives
to improve protection, and work with
local communities and governments to stop illegal logging.

"The documented, long-term decline in orangutan numbers is both
depressing and a call to action. We applaud the U.S. Government for its
leadership in providing 1.5 million dollars in emergency aid for
orangutan conservation in
the coming fiscal year, and for the establishment of a fund, under the
Great Apes Conservation Act of 2000, which will provide financial
assistance in years
to come. But tough changes in natural resource management, and
protection of remaining habitat, are equally as critical to ensuring a
future for the orangutan," said Josh Ginsberg, WCS director for Asia
Programs.

Leuser orangutans differ from their Bornean counterparts in having
higher densities, and a tendency toward more social behavior. Van Schaik
has documented routine use of at least two kinds of feeding tools to
extract honey
from tree holes and seeds from a woody fruit protected by stinging
hairs. The geographical distribution of this tool use implies that it is
handed down to generations, similar to what occurs among certain
chimpanzee populations. Conservation efforts should therefore strive to
preserve multiple populations
in both Sumatra and Borneo or this culture will be lost.

"The study of wild orangutans provides us with a unique window on the
kinds of conditions that favored origins of human culture. Losing the
wild orangutan would forever close that window. If we act now, we can
still save enough populations from oblivion, but we cannot afford to
waste any time," van Schaik
said.

http://www.eurekalert.org/news.pub.page2.html



News in Brain and Behavioural Sciences
http://human-nature.com/nibbs/
To subscribe/unsubscribe/select DIGEST go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evolutionary-psychology
Join the Human Behaviour and Evolution Society
http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/hbesrenew/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



From aabdo at webtv.net  Tue Feb 27 11:35:05 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 10:35:05 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Zapatista March
Message-ID: <5769-3A9BF359-300@storefull-238.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Under a New Moon, Resurgent Zapatistas Launch Risky 12 State Trek to
Mexico City for Indian Rights 

Mexico Barbaro #1094
February 25, 2001
By John Ross 

Reported from Chiapas, Mexico City, and the U.S. 

The Denver Colorado cafe was packed to the rafters on a snowy Saturday
night, all eyes glued to the video screen where raw footage of the New
Year's eve takeover of a Chiapas military base by Zapatista rebels was
being displayed. Cheers erupted as the unarmed but ski-masked Indians
pushed aside the automatic weapons of the troops and declared the camp
closed. 

Denver's Human Being Company is a bastion of solidarity for the
insurgents. Its founder, Kerry Appel, wholesales organic fair trade
coffee he buys from rebel farmers in Chiapas and markets under the
"Zapatista" label. For his efforts, Appel has twice been deported from
Mexico by hostile immigration authorities. 

Notwithstanding the dangers, he is packing for another trip south to
accompany the Zapatista Army of National Liberation on its historic 3000
kilometer "March of Indian Dignity" which left San Cristobal de las
Casas in the Mayan highlands of Chiapas February 25th under a new moon
and is programmed to arrive in Mexico City on the 11th of March under a
full one. 

>From a British Columbia Catholic church to an El Paso farm workers'
meeting hall, Austin Texas to Hollywood California, resurgent interest
in the Zapatista movement is cresting if a recent author's tour of the
North American West is any measure. The EZLN's role in shaping recent
Mexican history is now examined at prestigious academic forums, and
supporters flock to bookstore presentations - three new Zapatista titles
have already been released this year. 

The current surge of fascination with the Zapatistas signals an amazing
bounce-back for a rebel band that less than a 100 days ago had
disappeared from public view and whose continued existence was being
questioned after five months of stony silence from its leaders. Despite
ranks riddled by desertion and no material gain to show for seven years
of feisty resistance in the jungles and highlands of Chiapas, the EZLN
has recaptured public imagination both in and outside of Mexico. 

The catalyst for this sea change has been Mexico's new president Vicente
Fox who from the first paragraphs of his December 1st inaugural address
extended an olive branch to the long-embattled rebels. Although Fox has
yet to completely meet the three conditions the EZLN has demanded in
exchange for returning to peace talks with the government, he has sent a
much-debated Indian Rights & Culture law onto congress. The ostensible
reason for the Zapatistas' two week trek up to Mexico City is to lobby
that august body for passage of this landmark legislation. 

Despite what promises to be a strong international presence, the
Zapatista "march of indigenous dignity" is a profoundly Indian affair
not historically distinct from the civil rights movement in the U.S.
during the 1960s, whose objectives are to achieve first class
citizenship for Mexico's 10,000,000 Indian peoples, long the victims of
a vicious - if largely unspoken - racism. 

The Indian Rights law pending before congress would grant the nation's
57 distinct indigenous cultures limited autonomy over political,
judicial, cultural, agrarian, and environmental facets of their
communities and regions. 

Indeed, key to the Zapatistas' resiliency in the popular imagination is
the movement's links to a half millennium of Indian resistance to
European ethno-centricism. 

"This is a march of those who are the color of the earth" the rebels'
colorful spokesperson Subcomandante Marcos declared to 10,000 supporters
cramming the cathedral plaza of San Cristobal de las Casas on the eve of
the Zapatistas' February 24th departure. The EZLN's 1994 uprising
touched a universal nerve of white guilt at the plight of the nation's
first peoples that mobilized Mexican civil society and spread the
rebels' influence throughout the country and the world. 

As the conscious vanguard of indigenous militancy, the EZLN whose ethnic
base includes five Chiapas Mayan subgroups, will follow a deeply Indian
route on their march up to the capital. From Chiapas, the Zapatista
delegation - 23 members of the rebels' general command plus its mestizo
spokesperson Marcos - will travel into Oaxaca, a state in which 16
distinct "etnias" (Indian cultures) account for nearly half the general
population, before entering the Nahua (descendants of the Aztecs)
heartland in Puebla, Veracruz, Tlaxcala, Hidalgo, Queretero, and
Guanajuato states. 

The EZLN leadership then heads for the Michoacan sierra, the home
grounds of the 300,000-strong Purepecha nation where the Zapatistas will
sit in session with the National Indigenous Congress (CNI), a formation
that includes representatives from most of Mexico's 57 indigenous
peoples, and one that the EZLN was instrumental in assembling five years
ago. 

Before setting foot in Mexico City, the travelers will pass through
Morelos and Guerrero states to pay homage to their namesake, the
revolutionary martyr Emiliano Zapata, a Nahua farmer himself who fought
for the land of his village. The rebels will follow Zapata's old trail
through the Indian outskirts of Milpa Alta and Xochimilco before finally
touching down in Mexico City, the "Gran Tenochtitlan" of the Aztec
empire. 

Despite highly publicized efforts by the Fox administration to smooth
the way, the rebels' route is fraught with dangers. Just getting out of
Chiapas, where ranchers and members of the no longer ruling
Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) are viscerally irate at the
turn-around in Zapatista fortunes, could be sticky. 

Several business federations have called for the arrest of the EZLN
leaders once they leave Chiapas, pleading with President Fox that the
caravan will be bad for business. One business leader, Raul Picard of
the National Transition Chamber (CANACINTRA), even calculates that
interest rates will leap from 16% to 28% should a Zapatista be injured
or killed during the march. 

Leaders of Fox's conservative National Action Party (PAN) in both houses
of congress are stridently opposed to the insurgents' appearance in
their sacrosanct chambers unless the rebels' take off their masks. The
PANista governor of Queretero through whose state the Zapatistas intend
to pass, calls the Indians "cowards" and "traitors" who deserve
execution rather than accolades. 

A homophobic PAN congressman in Morelos labels Subcomandante Marcos a
"faggot" and challenges him to a fist fight - Saloman Salgado who
subsequently resigned from Fox's party, suggested that snipers will halt
the advance of the Zapatistas' march. 

All along the route, the risk of provocation is latent. Four
non-EZLN-affiliated armed groups operate in the territories which the
Chiapas rebels will traverse and some like the seriously split Popular
Revolutionary Army (EPR) are not friendly. 

Although President Fox has promised a police and military escort, the
EZLN asked the International Red Cross to help ferry the comandantes up
to Mexico City. When the IRC claimed that participation in a political
event was beyond its mandate, Subcomandante Marcos accused foreign
secretary Jorge Caste?eda, a former leftist, of forcing the
International Red Cross from the march and setting the rebel leadership
up for ambush. 

Even if they arrive unscathed in the capital, the EZLN march is a big
gamble - they must draw crowds equal or surpassing the number of
supporters who have turned out for three previous forays up to the
capital, or risk being ignored by Congress. Even if the turn-out is
considerable, it is doubtful that the Mexican Congress, long insulated
from accountability by political impunity, will respond to the public
outcry for passage of the Indian Rights bill. 

For Vicente Fox, the Zapatista march is an equally serious gamble. "I am
risking my political capital" the new president frankly told reporters
on the eve of the march for indigenous dignity. After having lavished
his attentions on the Chiapas rebels during the first hundred days of
his presidency, Fox's credibility hangs in the balance. Defeat of the
Indian Rights bill in Congress would torpedo any chance of an immediate
peace, a promise the President has repeatedly made to the Mexican
people. 

Gunfire, arrest, or a no vote in Congress are not the only hazards
facing the EZLN. The shadow of co-optation also creases their path. One
example: the nation's two-headed television monopoly, TV Azteca and
Televisa, long at war over ratings, have declared "peace" to stage a
much hyped "Concert for Paz in Chiapas" in Mexico City's biggest soccer
stadium. Apparently, the commercial opportunities presented by the
Zapatista march have encouraged the battling TV giants to overcome their
adversion towards the EZLN - Televisa and TV Azteca have spent the past
seven years vying to outdo each other in insulting the rebels. 

>From the first day of the uprising, Televisa has labeled the Zapatistas
"foreigners" and TV Azteca created hand puppets to mock Marcos and
ex-San Cristobal de las Casas bishop Samuel Ruiz. A TV Azteca helicopter
blew the roof off the local school during an unauthorized landing at the
EZLN's most public outpost of La Realidad, deep in the Lacandon jungle,
and its crews have long been banned from rebel territory. Now the two
monopoly networks are waging a "sign up for peace" campaign that seems
designed to portray the EZLN as intransigent. 

"I'm not the Ricky Martin of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation"
Subcomandante Marcos recently told an interviewer, confirming his
boycott of the "concert for peace." What the networks will do with an
estimated four million pesos in profits from the event, is unspecified.
But co-optation is not limited to Televisa and TV Azteca. Ironically,
although the EZLN has long been in the forefront of the battle against
globalization, the globalization of the event threatens the integrity of
the march for indigenous dignity. 

Renewed international attention is bringing many luminaries to Mexico -
Nobel laureate Jose Saramago, Spanish troubadour Joaquin Sabina, former
French first lady Danielle Mitterand, and U.S. novelist Susan Sontag are
reportedly booking passage and several thousand international solidarity
workers, including 400 plus foreigners expelled from Mexico for pro-EZLN
activities under former president Ernesto Zedillo, are expected to
accompany the Indians to the capital. 

Among the most noticeable: several hundred Italians, members of the
white overall-clad "White Monkeys" who were forcibly removed from the
country in 1998. 
Combined with the lionizing of Marcos as an international pop idol, the
inevitable media carnival surrounding the Zapatistas could smother the
very Indian nature of this historic march. 
********************************************** 

John Ross, author of The War Against Oblivion - Zapatista Chronicles
1994-2000, the season by season saga of the Indian rebellion, will
accompany the March for Indigenous Dignity through central Mexico.












From jones.mark at btconnect.com  Tue Feb 27 16:07:56 2001
From: jones.mark at btconnect.com (Mark Jones)
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 23:07:56 +0000
Subject: [CrashList] Gelbspan: US scuttles Kyoto
Message-ID: <001601c0a111$f8c749e0$d09320d9@mjones>

U.S. Scuttles Latest Chance to Avert Global Warming Catastrophe


Given the U.S. performance at the latest round of global warming negotiations
at the Hague, it's hard to see how George W. Bush could do any worse than the
Clinton-Gore administration. The U.S. has isolated itself not only from its
European allies, but also from developing countries and even a growing number
of corporations. America has given new meaning to the term "outlaw nation."

It's not as though the danger signs were hidden from U.S. negotiators. Within
the past year, drought-driven wildfires consumed more than six million acres
in the West. The nine-foot-deep ice pack at the North Pole melted into a
mile-wide lake. And more than 2,000 scientists reported to the UN that warming
later in this century exceed their previous estimates of 6: F and will more
likely approach a catastrophic 11: F.

Nonetheless, the U.S. insisted that it meet its paltry obligation under the
Kyoto Protocol (emissions reductions of seven percent below 1990 levels)
simply by planting trees

[whole article at:
http://www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/commentary/0102warming.html




From aabdo at webtv.net  Tue Feb 27 19:49:10 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:49:10 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Sins of Omission- A Mexican Story as Told by Fox
Message-ID: <967-3A9C6726-1250@storefull-235.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Sins of Omission- A Sermon from The Fox in Charge of Ending Corruption
in the Chicken Coop

You chickens are to blame here for the corruption we feel.    By way of
sins of omission, you have failed to stop the 'mordida'.     So many of
you have not a cluck to say when a robbery occurs.

How can we do business when your feathers are all about the place?
Raise up your beaks in protest ala Condorito (a brave bird).....   If
teeth come your way, demand an explanation.     Adopt an attitude of
Zero Tolerance... this is YOUR cage!

I have appointed a friend, Francisco  Barrio Terrazas, to lead our
struggle.    As former Governor of Chihuahua.. he knows your pain.
When one of you chicks disappears, as happens so often in Ciudad Juarez-
Chihuahua, feel assured that all will be done to insure public safety.

If there is corruption and stumps in your neck of the woods, feel
assured that 'Frank' will not leave you hungry, as so many were in the
Highlands of Chihuahua, even today.

If drug traffic is a problem in your neighborhood, our friend can help
*eliminate* the problem.       Just give him a call, or call directly to
the Ciudad Juarez municipal authorities.

Corruption is a 'social cancer', and together we can stop it.
Afterwards you shall all be, once again..... Pollo Feliz.    I leave you
in good hands.      Rest in peace.

Tony Abdo
_______________________________
Martes 27 de Febrero del 2001 
Actitud de "Cero Tolerancia" Para Limpiar a M?xico, Pide Fox a la
Sociedad 
El Ejecutivo Presidi? la Firma del Acuerdo Nacional Para la
Transparencia y el Combate a la Corrupci?n
ALBERTO ROCHA

El Presidente Vicente Fox afirm? que no es f?cil luchar contra la
corrupci?n, por lo que convoc? a la sociedad mexicana a formar un
solo frente contra este c?ncer social que penetra en todos lados y que
destruye todo. Pidi? a los mexicanos adoptar una actitud de "cero
tolerancia" para limpiar a M?xico de la oscura sombra de la
corrupci?n y no tolerar la "mordida" ni la impunidad.

En el "Sal?n Adolfo L?pez Mateos" de Los Pinos el titular del
Ejecutivo Federal firm? el Acuerdo Nacional para la Transparencia y el
Combate a la Corrupci?n, donde el titular de la Secodam, Francisco
Barrio Terrazas, asever? que si bien la mayor?a de los mexicanos no
es responsable de promover la corrupci?n, hay que reconocer que "la
mayor?a es culpable, por lo menos, de pecados de omisi?n".

En su discurso, el Presidente de la Rep?blica puntualiz?,
categ?rico, que esta lucha empezar? desde la administraci?n porque
"ning?n gobierno es viable si no limpia sus estructuras de la
corrupci?n". Acompa?ado de integrantes de su gabinete y
representantes de partidos pol?ticos, universidades y de organismos
empresariales y sociales -con la notoria ausencia de miembros del PRD-,
refiri? que en esta lucha no hay de otra: "O la atacamos o nos consume
como un c?ncer social que penetra en todos lados y que destruye todo".

Destac? su deseo de tener un Estado al servicio del hombre y de sus
necesidades, "y por eso no aceptamos un gobierno que inspire miedo por
arbitrario, por discrecional, porque no rinde cuentas, porque oculta los
hechos, porque no transparenta el ejercicio del gasto y porque no ve
cara a cara a los ciudadanos".

Se?al? que su gobierno tiene que rendir cuentas puntuales y claras,
y anunci? que pr?ximamente todos los mexicanos podr?n consultar
por internet o en las dependencias p?blicas en qu? se gasta cada
peso que los ciudadanos aportan al gobierno. Reiter? sus instrucciones
al gabinete, y en especial al secretario de la Secodam, para que
trimestralmente se eval?en los avances y se den a conocer las
desviaciones, si las hubiera.

Por su parte, Barrio Terrazas pidi?, a gobierno y organizaciones
sociales, comprometernos en la construcci?n de una nueva
infraestructura ?tica y de transparencia p?blica para el pa?s.
Luego de firmar el acuerdo, especific? las seis vertientes que tiene
la lucha contra la corrupci?n:

1) Adecuar a las necesidades actuales el marco jur?dico que regula el
quehacer p?blico, haci?ndolo m?s sencillo, comprensible, preciso y
cumplible;

2) profundizar en la reforma de las instituciones gubernamentales;

3) profesionalizar los recursos humanos de la administraci?n p?blica
federal;

4) aprovechar el uso de las tecnolog?as de la informaci?n; 

5) ampliar y fortalecer la participaci?n ciudadana; 

6) sancionar las conductas de quienes, en los asuntos p?blicos,
transgreden el orden jur?dico.

Barrio Terrazas mencion? que en primer lugar el prop?sito es
combatir la corrupci?n en las dependencias y entidades p?blicas
as? como en la sociedad, al mismo tiempo que habr? transparencia de
todos los actos y decisiones de gobierno, lo que significa rendir
cuentas, informar y hablar con la verdad.

Por la tarde, Fox Quesada encabez? la presentaci?n de la campa?a
"Por los buenos mexicanos" y "El plan de trabajo" que hizo el Consejo
Nacional de la Publicidad, en el "Sal?n Manuel Avila Camacho" de Los
Pinos. Los publicistas, encabezados por Carlos Fern?ndez Gonz?lez,
entregaron al Primer Mandatario el documento "Los principios de ?tica
de la publicidad".

Fox Quesada destac? la labor de este grupo de mexicanos porque las
tareas que realizan son representativas de la ?tica que debe estar en
el origen de todas las acciones, tanto del gobierno como de los
empresarios.

Los convoc?, en estricto respeto a la libertad de expresi?n, a que
contin?en colaborando con unidad, patriotismo y responsabilidad, al
se?alar que la publicidad mexicana est? a la altura de las mejores
del mundo en t?rminos de creatividad y realizaci?n.

Luego subray? que en este esfuerzo de integraci?n social y de
creaci?n de una nueva actitud, que nos permita afrontar los retos del
futuro, la publicidad, la informaci?n, la comunicaci?n, juegan un
papel fundamental. Para concluir, expres? que la publicidad es un
componente relevante de la comunicaci?n y, como tal, debe contribuir a
lograr los objetivos del gobierno: consolidar la democracia, el respeto
y apoyo por los que menos tienen, por los excluidos del desarrollo;
cuidar del ambiente, a la vez que promover el respeto a la ley, el
Estado de Derecho y la tranquilidad de cada familia en el pa?s.












From aabdo at webtv.net  Tue Feb 27 21:25:12 2001
From: aabdo at webtv.net (Tony Abdo)
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 20:25:12 -0800
Subject: [CrashList] Benefits vs The Problems of Globalization
Message-ID: <970-3A9C7DA8-684@storefull-235.iap.bryant.webtv.net>

Mexican government officials say that the 'benefits' of globalization
outweigh the problems.     Which is kind of to say, that they want
Wal-Mart to open these new stores in the Southern States of Mexico???

One of the things that Wal-Mart does in the US and Canada is to pass on
the burdens of their presence to the local taxpayer, who is supposed to
pay for the roads, traffic congestion, and pollution cleanup burden of
these monster outlets.      Not to mention the social costs of downtown
blight that follows.

But this problem is magnified even more in Mexico, which often times
lacks basic infrastructure to begin with.    When I read that Mexico is
to get another 65 Walmart outlets, all I can envision is piles and piles
of garbage lying in the streets and floating in the wind..      And in
Mexico, the garbage often is never picked up off the streets.

Add this, to water drainage problems from inadequate engineering of
roads.     When it rains in Mexico, cars often become boats floating
past clogged outlets (if they exist at all) plugged with cast away
garbage.     Potholes follow, that are never repaired for lack of
municipal funds.     And cars fall part even faster, as they negociate
roads with constant impediments and pits.

All of this is better than the South of Mexco, where hunger runs
rampant.     Still, not a pretty picture..... **that** of yet more
'Walmexes' draining pesos North.      And growing piles and piles of
trash.      Bonfires of plastic, paper, and chemical trash.   

Tony
__________________________
MEXICO CITY, Feb 27 (Reuters) - Mexican retail chain Wal-Mart de Mexico
SA de CV (Walmex)  will invest 4.5 billion pesos ($464 million) over the
next 18 months to open 62 new outlets, a company official said on
Tuesday. 

The company official, who asked not to be identified, said Walmex
shareholders approved the investment plan on Tuesday and also gave the
green light to a 0.45 peso ($0.046) per share cash dividend payable on
March 15. 

Walmex, majority owned by U.S. retail behemoth Wal-Mart Stores ,
currently counts 500 retail outlets and restaurants under seven
different names in Mexico. 
Walmex on Tuesday reported a jump in 2000 operating profit to 3.915
billion pesos from 3.330 billion in the previous year. The retailer was
expected to provide a fourth-quarter breakdown of its earnings later on
Tuesday. 
($1=9.681 pesos)
------------------------------------------------
Mexico sees room for improvement on globalization   
26 Feb 2001 18:28  
By Richard Jacobsen 

CANCUN, Mexico, Feb 26 (Reuters) - Mexico's economy minister said at a
World Economic Forum on Monday that the benefits of free trade had to be
spread more widely, while anti-globalization forces gathered to protest
what they say are the ravages of unfettered capitalism. 

Although demonstrators converged on Cancun to protest against the
current world economic order, there were no initial disturbances like
those that rocked free-trade forums in Seattle and Prague. 

The forum, known for its annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, bringing
together presidents and titans of industry, was holding a two-day confab
on Mexico's economic and political outlook following President Vicente
Fox's election last year, which ended 71 years of single-party rule. 
In opening sessions, Mexican officials detailed how the country had
generally benefited since joining the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) with Canada and the United States in 1994. 

But they acknowledged that not all were satisfied with the state of the
country, which has become an export powerhouse while at least 40 percent
of the nation's 98 million people live in poverty. 

Mexican Economy Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez said on Monday that the gap
between rich and poor decried by anti-globalization forces was evident
between Mexico's regions, and that the government was working to close
the gap. 
He noted that northern Mexico had benefited from NAFTA because of its
proximity to the United States and that it had grown at a 5.9 percent
annual rate over the past 10 years. Southern states, including
strife-torn Chiapas, grew by just 0.4 percent annually during that
period. 

"We've got to extend the benefits of the free trade agreement to small
and medium-sized businesses," he said. "We cannot continue having a
relationship of big Mexican, American or Canadian companies." 

GLOBALIZATION WORTH THE HEADACHES 
Guillermo Ortiz, governor of Banco de Mexico, the country's central
bank, noted that after Mexico's deep recession in 1995, which followed a
botched currency devaluation that sent international capital flooding
out of the country, the economy has grown at an average rate of 5
percent a year with diminishing inflation. 

"The benefits of globalization are much greater than the problems that
have come with it," said Ortiz. 

While Ortiz and other officials spoke at the forum, activists held a
parallel "Alternative Social Forum" in a park across town where they
planned to debate globalization's impact on Latin America's poor. 

Protesters said they planned to make their views heard by the forum
attendees staying in Cancun's hotel strip. The attendees also included
some U.S. legislators, international business executives and economists. 

But there were no immediate signs of disturbances on Cancun's
sun-scorched streets. Several lines of federal police kept protesters
well away from the forum's sea-front hotel. 

In a bid to integrate opponents' views, organizers have included in the
forum program representatives from nongovernmental groups and even a
panel to discuss globalization's effect on Mexican cultural identity. 












From bantam at dingoblue.net.au  Wed Feb 28 07:04:11 2001
From: bantam at dingoblue.net.au (Rob Schaap)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 01:04:11 +1100
Subject: [CrashList] Where Malthus & Marx might meet to advantage
References: <001601c0a111$f8c749e0$d09320d9@mjones>
Message-ID: <3A9D0617.AABCDF14@dingoblue.net.au>

G'day all,

Crashlist has been arguing, often unproductively, over Marx and Malthus since
its inception.  I have found - in notes I use for lectures on Innis, McLuhan
and Mumford - some terrific stuff that combines the logic Marx used to get at
capitalism's guts (of which the dimension of time is at the root) with a sorta
Malthusian natural-limits approach. Alienation from time and big-T Time in a
dialectical dance of death!  The Gods and Hubris!  Mark's doom-laden big
picture meets Tom's bioregional vignettes!  Anyway, enough sales-pitching. 
Hope you find these excerpts as temptingly intriguing as I do.  And apologies
if this ain't new to you.

The author is Andri Stahel and the piece is called 'Time Contradictions of
Capitalism'.  Hope the consequence is a list full of Malthusian Marxists
getting it on with Marxist Malthusians.

_________________________________________________________________

At this point, I will argue that the idea of a second contradiction can be
identified more easily in the works of Polanyi than those of Marx. We can see
this in Polanyi?s major book where he discusses the utopian character of the
idea of a self-adjusting market: ?Such an institution could not exist for any
length of time without annihilating the human and natural substance of
society.?[22] Marx, on the other hand, by following the path of classical
political economy in his economic writings, distanced himself from a deeper
understanding of the human/ nature contradiction inherent to the capitalistic
system.[23] 

   James O?Connor explicitly acknowledged his indebtedness to Polanyi?s work,
?who remains a shining light in a heaven filled with dying stars
and black holes
?[24] I believe that Polanyi?s analysis of three fictitious
commodities is particularly revealing in relation to the contradictions I am
discussing, especially when he shows that:

      labor, land and money are essential elements of industry; they also must
be organized in markets; in fact these markets form an
absolutely vital part of the economic system. But labor, land and money are
obviously not commodities.
Labor is only another name for a human activity
which goes with life itself, which in its turn is not produced for sale but
for entirely different reasons, nor can that activity be detached from the
rest of life, be stored or mobilized; land is only another name for nature,
which is not produced by man; actual money, finally, is merely a token of
purchasing power which, as a rule, is not produced at all, but comes into
being through the mechanism of banking or state finance.?[25] 

   Here Polanyi implicitly throws an important light on our discussion.
Discussing three fictitious commodities that are not produced
capitalistically, he says that they belong to another temporal domain than
that of capital; and that they are not (nor can they be) produced and
controlled according to capital?s own temporal logic and needs. We can hear
his words echoed by O?Connor when he states that:

      the point of departure of ?ecological Marxism? is the contradiction
between capitalist production relations and productive forces and conditions
of production. Neither human laborpower nor external nature nor infrastructure
including their space/time dimensions are produced capitalistically, although
capital treats these conditions of production as if they are commodities or
commodity capital.[26]

...

Therefore, compared to ?dead? planets, which are more or less close to a
thermodynamic equilibrium state, the Earth is characterized by the
high improbability of the constitution of its atmosphere, oceans and
terrestrial ecosystems, where highly reactive chemical elements and living
forms (as prey and predators) co-exist in a dynamic ?far from equilibrium?
balance. 

   The constitution of modern economics has as its focus human mechanical
production time, ignoring the more general systemic one. The very example of
the beaver and the deer, by which Smith introduced his labor value theory and
constituted the British political economy tradition in opposition to the
French Physiocrats, could, according to our discussion here, be read the other
way around to contradict what Smith wanted to prove. Whilst the Physiocrats
saw in the working of nature the only true source of a surplus value (produit
net), Smith argued that value had to be necessarily given by the labor
required to hunt the animals and bring them to the market. We can see that
Smith considered only the market value (exchange value) of a commodity, and
ignored the fact that the animals had to be ?produced? by the systemic time
dialectics of the ecosystem in which they evolved and, ultimately, by an
evolutionary history which goes back to the origins of our universe, a process
which, as Prigogine showed, is neither repeatable nor predetermined.[36] Once
extinct, there is no human production process which can produce new value in
terms of beavers. Thus, value had to be produced by nature initially, whether
we consider it as God?s gift, as the Physiocrats did, or whether we consider
it in terms of the unique and irreversible history of the evolution of
dissipative structures in terms of ?far from equilibrium? thermodynamics. 

   Smith clearly reasoned in terms of a mechanical time and by doing so he
changed the focus of economic theory from natural time to human
production time. It is this same reasoning that is behind the modern prejudice
that sees pre-industrial societies as deprived and their economies as
subsistence economies, in sharp contrast with, for example, the first
impressions gained by the Europeans who described the exuberance and natural
richness of pre-colonial America and Africa, as well as modern anthropological
research which shows the relatively little time spent by those societies in
order to assure their subsistence.[37] With their social and cultural
structure inserted in the overall systemic time dialectics (although, as
Ponting?s analysis shows, not without contradictions), these societies based
their economic structure on ?mining? the wealth created by the free (or
directed)[38] systemic time of the natural processes, as Smith?s hunters did.
As a result of the colonization of these areas, the
systemic dynamics were disrupted and replaced by the mechanical time logic of
capital. It is this process of capitalization of nature and
capitalization of society brought by the colonization process and later on by
economic development, and not the contrary (a lack of sufficient
economic development) that really deprived these societies and regions,
opening the door to modern manifestations of famine and misery which can be
found in contemporary Africa, Asia and the Americas.

   As Vandana Shiva showed, the very idea of development placed those
societies within the hegemonic temporal framework of capitalist
societies, by representing them as immature and incomplete, therefore
requiring a process of development, seen as a series of linear steps, in order
to attain maturity. This development, centered on the pursuit of economic
growth and an accelerated process of modernization, meant the displacement of
the previous spatio-temporal order in favor of a market-oriented and
mechanical time-based organization and appropriation of natural and
socio-cultural space. We can see this process happening with the introduction
of modern agricultural techniques, the ?green revolution,? displacing
local-based, subsistence-oriented multiple and diversified traditional
farming; or in the rapid industrialization process of these countries, with
the constitution of a growing labor market, rapid urbanization, professional
and technical schools (to provide skilled labor), and so on. The first thing
immigrants who have been displaced by the export-oriented ?green revolution?
in the countryside learn in the growing urban centers, in technical schools or
in their new job (if they get one), is to organize their life according to the
clock-time discipline, leaving behind the communal and natural cycles-based
time practice they were used to.[39] 

...

The essential openness, novelty and autonomy of systemic time dialectics means
that nature cannot be reduced to scientific forecasting or to technological
control. Nor can human beings be reduced to skinnerian behaviorism and thereby
fully controlled and molded by technocracy and centralized powers. Human
essential systemic autonomy will always manifest itself as resistance, whether
in more ?rational? or ?irrational? forms, frustrating the centralized social
control projects. Ignoring this reality may result, as Martin O?Connor argued,
in the controlled order ending up in catastrophe.[66] This tragic result of
the enlightenment control project should make us aware, more than ever, of
Jung?s warning about the unconscious and unwilling results of conscious
projects. As he argued:

      Our intellect has created a new world that dominates nature and has
settled it with monstrous machines. These machines are so unquestionably
useful that we cannot even imagine the possibility to getting rid of them or
escaping from the subservience to which they have lead us. Man cannot resist
the adventurous cry of his scientific and inventive mind, or cease he to
congratulate himself for his conquests. But at the same time, his genius
displays a mysterious tendency to create more and more dangerous things, which
increasingly represent more efficient instruments for his collective suicide.[67]

   Based on a mechanical time concept and practice, which is at the heart of a
society centered on the commodity form, in modern industrial
market society humankind forgot that it belongs to and is dependent on the
more general systemic time dialectics, of which the economic
sub-system is but a part. We have lost our sense of proportion, of quality and
of relatedness, which, as Illich pointed out, also means the loss of our sense
of ethics and beauty.[68] Nevertheless as a result of our hubris, such a loss
of proportion may, as traditional myths always warned, end up in tragedy.
________________________________________________________________

If you've read this far, you get this special prize: The entire essay can be
found at http://www.cruzio.com/~cns/Occasional/paper10.html



From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb 28 11:37:34 2001
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 13:37:34 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] William Cronon on drilling in Alaska
In-Reply-To: <970-3A9C7DA8-684@storefull-235.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010228133502.00ee7de0@popserver.panix.com>

NY Times, February 28, 2001

Neither Barren Nor Remote

By WILLIAM CRONON

MADISON, Wis. - Oil or wilderness? This is the question at the center of
the new energy bill that Senator Frank Murkowski of Alaska has just
introduced, following through on President Bush's campaign promise to open
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.

When Americans encounter the word "wilderness," a number of images come to
mind. A dramatic mountain landscape of icy peaks and sublime vistas. A
place remote from human settlements, untouched by human hands. A land
worthy of protection precisely because it is so isolated. Unfortunately,
these images obscure some of the most important qualities of the Alaskan
lands that the Bush administration seeks to develop.

For one thing, the part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge whose fate
is now being debated is flat, boggy terrain of the kind most of us probably
associate more with mosquitoes than with sublimity. It doesn't exactly
conform to the scenic conventions of an Ansel Adams photograph. For
another, those who wish to drill in the refuge say it is so far away, so
isolated from places where most Americans live, that almost no one will
ever go there. For them, its remoteness is one reason we should exploit it
for oil.

But perceiving the Arctic Refuge as "empty" or "remote" is just plain
wrong. In fact, far from being pristine, uninhabited wilderness, the refuge
is sacred ground to the Gwich'in people, who have long inhabited this
landscape.

Today numbering 7,000 people in 15 villages, the Gwich'in are the
northernmost of Athabascan-speaking Indians. Their lives have traced the
path of the caribou for thousands of years, so much so that they say every
caribou carries some human heart in it, and every human heart some caribou.

The narrow coastal plain that the Bush administration would open to
drilling is where the 129,000 animals in the Porcupine Caribou herd give
birth to their calves - a region where the Gwich'in have long chosen not to
hunt, calling it "vadzaih googii vi dehk'it gwanlii" - the sacred place
where life begins.

Just as the refuge is not untouched by human beings, thinking of it as
remote and disconnected from the places where most Americans live is
equally wrong. Migratory birds in all but one state of the union - Hawaii -
spend important parts of their lives in this northern breeding ground.

We often forget how far the birds around us migrate over the course of an
ordinary year. See a semipalmated sandpiper in New York, a red-throated
loon in Minnesota, a snow goose in California, and you may well be
witnessing a part of the Arctic refuge.

Among the 180 bird species that use the refuge is the tundra swan, once
more familiarly known as the whistling swan. After raising their young,
these birds migrate thousands of miles across the continent to their winter
homes along the Atlantic Coast from North Carolina to Maryland. From the
perspective of a tundra swan, Washington, D. C., and the homeland of the
Gwich'in are part of a single ecosystem.

If migrating birds remind us that the neighborhoods where we live are in
fact linked to the refuge, then we should also remember that how we live is
what puts the refuge at risk. The ways we drive our cars, heat our homes
and otherwise consume oil are the biggest single threat it faces.

The United States Geological Survey estimates that the refuge might contain
between 4 billion and 12 billion barrels of oil, with a mean estimate of 7
billion (though much of this could never be pumped out economically).
Measured against our current rate of consumption of roughly 18 million
barrels a day, it would be gone in about a year if it had to meet our full
demand.

>From the perspective of history, it's worth contemplating the rather
astonishing fact that we're capable of consuming 7 billion barrels of oil
in a year. Such a supply would have provided all of America's needs from
the first discovery of oil in Pennsylvania in 1859 until about 1924: the
first 65 years of the modern petroleum economy.

The debate over the refuge, in other words, is as much about our dependency
on petroleum as it is about the fate of distant caribou and other wild
creatures.

The refuge contains oil, yes. But it also contains the largest, most
diverse example on our public lands of an Arctic ecosystem in its full
magnificence, with native people living in, using and cherishing that
ecosystem as they have for millennia. The fact that it does not completely
conform to our preconceptions of wilderness should not prevent us from
seeing that its value cannot simply be measured in barrels or dollars.
Deciding not to drill there is a way of recognizing how much the life of
that faraway land is tied to our own.

William Cronon is an environmental historian at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison. 


Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org




From Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar  Wed Feb 28 15:55:48 2001
From: Gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar (Gorojovsky)
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 19:55:48 -0300
Subject: [CrashList] (Sp) Unexpected results of plunder: people stop buying at supermarkets
Message-ID: <043814855221c21MAIL1@mail1.arnet.com.ar>

An interesting survey has been carried on by the consultant Equis, an agency of 
the CTA (the pro-social democrat federation of unions). Among other results, 
there is this one which would be funny if it were not tragic. The survey shows 
that people are stopping their purchases at the supermarkets (even though they 
have lower prices, as general, than grocery stores) because at the grocery 
stores they can obtain more coins, which are most valuable for those living on 
u$s 1 or u$s 2 a day (20% of Arg population).

BUENOS AIRES, 28(PSI).- EL CONSUMO SEGUIR? ESTANCADO 
EN LOS PR?XIMOS SEIS MESES. 

Pese a los pron?sticos de reactivaci?n de la administraci?n de 
Fernando de la R?a, la mayor?a de los habitantes de la Capital 
Federal y el conurbano bonaerense no tiene previsto incrementar 
sus gastos durante los pr?ximos meses, seg?n revel? una encuesta. 
El titular de la consultora ?Equis?, Artemio L?pez, afirm? que 82 por 
ciento de las familias en Capital Federal y el Gran Buenos Aires no 
realizar?n gastos innecesarios y pronostic?, por tanto, que el 
consumo ?seguir? estancado?.

?El mercado absolutamente no se mueve y la perspectiva no es buena 
e incluso la situaci?n de los hogares del Gran Buenos Aires, en 
t?rminos de consumo, ingresos y sobre todo perspectivas 
ocupacionales, no son buenas?, se?al? L?pez.

Seg?n el consultor, m?s de 82 por ciento de la poblaci?n considera 
que el consumo ?va a estar muy restringido para su hogar? en los 
pr?ximos meses y que ?la situaci?n econ?mica para su familia se 
encuentra estancada, cuando no ha empeorado en el ?ltimo a?o?, dijo 
en di?logo con la prensa. Agreg? que tambi?n llama la atenci?n que 
s?lo un 8 por ciento de los encuestados tiene capacidad de ahorro, 
mientras que ?el resto o bien no  llega a fin de mes o llega con lo 
justo para poder subsistir?. 

El t?cnico manifest? que 92 por ciento, sobre casi un millar de 
consultas realizadas en el ?rea metropolitana, adelantaron que no 
adquirir? ni alquilar? departamentos y que no piensa comprar 
electrodom?sticos o automotores en los pr?ximos meses.

Seg?n L?pez este comportamiento tiene que ver con que la mitad de 
los trabajadores que viven en el Gran Buenos Aires cuentan hoy con 
un sueldo de hasta 400 pesos mensuales, con lo cual indic? que ?con 
esta perspectiva salarial la situaci?n del consumo est? muy 
restringida.

?La crisis de ingresos ?dijo- est? induciendo un comportamiento 
relativamente paradojal, puesto que cuando el ingreso cae, el 
supermercado atrae el 80 por ciento de las compras familiares, pero 
cuando sigue cayendo, el consumo vuelve al almac?n para poder hacer 
las compras diarias?.

Record? adem?s que m?s de dos millones de personas disponen de un 
peso o menos por d?a para poder subsistir y otros 7,5 millones de 
argentinos ?se arreglan con dos pesos por d?a, representando esto el 
20 por ciento de la poblaci?n del pa?s?.

Por tanto, L?pez afirm? que ante estas conductas ?los almacenes de 
barrio y los peque?os y medianos locales de venta de comestibles 
tienen una funci?n que es la de volver a instalarse como necesaria, a 
medida que sigue profundiz?ndose la crisis de ingresos?.

El consultor asegur? que la actitud del consumo que utiliza estos 
locales ?no es tanto pedir fiado, sino la disponibilidad de utilizar las 
monedas para poder comprar en este momento?.

La encuesta realizada por Equis revela adem?s que s?lo un 21 por 
ciento de las familias considera que la situaci?n mejor? tras la 
obtenci?n del blindaje financiero, mientras que casi un 60 por ciento 
de los consultados, en los hogares de menores recursos, expresaron 
que la situaci?n econ?mica actual ?es negativa?.

Del total de consultados, el 44 por ciento dijo que no se endeuda y 
restringe gastos b?sicos y el 26 por ciento no toma compromisos 
financieros ni restringe gastos pero no logra ahorrar, una meta que 
alcanza s?lo el 8 por ciento. En tanto, apenas el 20 por ciento se 
encuentra dispuesto a tomar deuda, obligado a esa circunstancia 
para hacer frente a gastos diarios que no podr?an solventar de otra 
manera.

En cuanto a la opini?n sobre el rumbo de la econom?a por el accionar 
del gobierno aliancista, el 58 por ciento de los hogares de menores 
recursos dijo que la situaci?n actual es negativa, mientras que s?lo el 
21 por ciento de las familias calcula que mejorar? tras el blindaje.- 


N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar



From CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us  Wed Feb 28 08:31:34 2001
From: CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:31:34 -0500
Subject: [CrashList] Police Brutality and Misconduct
Message-ID: <sa9cd386.044@mail.ci.detroit.mi.us>

---------------------------------------------------------------
This is a Press Release/Statement from the Black Radical Congress
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[NOTE: The statement below is an extended backgrounder
version of the BRC's Anti-Police Brutality & Misconduct
Petition. A shorter version of this petition, intended 
for the gathering of signatures, can be downloaded from 
our web site at: <http://www.blackradicalcongress.org>]

Black Radical Congress

For Immediate Release

February 28, 2001

Contact: 
Karega Hart, khart1574 at igc.org 
Sundiata Keita Cha-Jua, schajua at aol.com 

CONTEMPORARY POLICE BRUTALITY AND MISCONDUCT:
A CONTINUATION OF THE LEGACY OF RACIAL VIOLENCE

"Our lives, our homes, our liberties each day are made 
less secure because of unrestrained and unpunished 
police brutality."
--National Negro Congress, 
  Petition Against Police Brutality, 1938. 


Introduction

In the late sixties, Jamil Al-Amin (a.k.a. H. Rap Brown)
declared, "Violence is as American as cherry pie." Al-Amin's
statement underscores the essential role of violence in
maintaining systems of racial oppression in the United
States. Racist violence was fundamental to the creation 
of the United States. Moreover, force and violence are 
not options but necessary to the maintenance of racial
oppression. Racist violence is the scaffolding upon which
capitalist exploitation and white supremacy are erected.

Racist violence has both structural and physical components
and it operates in both the public and private spheres.
Structural violence refers to the "impersonal" violence
inflicted upon people of color and the poor by profit-
oriented enterprises and institutions. It involves the
indirect violence caused by institutional policies and
programs that produce, maintain, and rationalize poverty,
inadequate health care, and substandard housing.

Public racist violence refers to structural and physical
violence initiated, perpetuated, and justified by the
government. Private racist violence describes the racially
motivated physical and structural violence of private
citizens and persons.

People of color have been the victims of systematic public
and spontaneous private violence since the slave trade and
the colonial conquest of the Americas. Privately initiated
racist violence has taken the form of genocidal invasions,
rapacious slaving raids, savage slave whipping, and repressive 
white capping, lynching, race riots, and hate crimes. Although 
private violence is crucial to the maintenance of racial 
oppression, it has always supplemented State-sponsored
(government) racist violence.

Over the last 500 years people of color, especially African
Americans, have endured a pattern of State-sanctioned
violence, and civil and human rights abuse. To enforce
capitalist exploitation and racial oppression the government
and its police, courts, prisons, and military have beaten,
framed, murdered and executed private persons, and brutally
repressed struggles for freedom, justice, and self-
determination. It has initiated wars of conquest, launched
man-hunts for fugitive slaves, suppressed slave revolts,
brutalized demonstrators, and assassinated political
dissidents.

Police brutality and misconduct are merely the major
contemporary forms of State-sponsored racist violence.
Police brutality describes "instances of serious physical 
or psychological harm to civilians." Contemporary police
brutality consists of deadly force, the use of excessive
force, and it includes unjustified shooting, fatal choking,
and physical assault by law enforcement officers. Police
misconduct is inclusive of planting evidence, making untrue
statements, filing untrue written reports, condoning untrue
statements and/or reports by keeping silent, threatening
suspects, arrestees, and witnesses, engaging in illegal
activities, and committing perjury.

This statement summarizes the United States' atrocious
record of racial repression, specifically State-sponsored
violence. It has a dual purpose: first to demonstrate the
role of government in initiating and sustaining racially
motivated suppression and savagery; and second, to provide 
a rationale for making police brutality and misconduct
federal crimes.


A History of U.S. Racial Repression and Violence

Historically, racist violence, legal and extralegal, and
whether State-sponsored or private, has been used to impose
racial oppression and preserve white power and privilege.
Racist violence has served five primary purposes:

1. To force people of color into indentured, slave, peonage,
   or low wage situations;

2. To steal land, minerals, and other resources;

3. To maintain social control and to repress rebellions;

4. To restrict or eliminate competition in employment,
   business, politics, and social life; and

5. To unite "whites" across ethnic/national, class, and
   gender lines.

Domination of people of color necessitated the incorporation
and justification of racially motivated and differentiated
violence in the society's law, custom, and popular culture.

Federal, state, and municipal law sanctioned the slave trade, 
genocidal wars of conquest, slavery, and the brutalities
inherent labor exploitation and racial oppression. Genocide
and other forms of government sponsored or sanctioned violence 
have been inflicted upon Native Americans since the country's 
beginning. Latino/a people have been the victims of government 
sponsored or sanctioned violence since the U.S. unleashed 
a colonial war of aggression against the Mexicano people 
in the middle of the 19th century. Chinese (and later other
Asian Americans) have been assaulted by government sponsored
or sanctioned violence since the middle of the 19th century.

Moreover, all branches of government have engaged in
violence against workers across color and gender lines or
abdicated their equal protection responsibilities during
labor disputes.

State-sponsored and state-sanctioned violence has characterized 
the Black experience since Africans' forced migration to these 
shores. The Atlantic Slave Trade (1444-1850) represented the 
first moment of capitalist globalism. The slave trade was
the first international industry; it was a business 
venture of European nation-states.

Orderly commodity exchange cloaked the coercion and disorder
undergirding the Atlantic Slave Trade. Raids and kidnapping
were the life-blood of the slave "trade." About two-thirds
of the nearly 12 million Africans enslaved in the Americas
were captured through rapacious raids and kidnapping. During
the four centuries the slave trade operated, 100 million
Africans may have died from the predatory commercial wars
launched by European royalty, the papacy, and emerging
European and American capitalists.

British colonial and American governments systematically
suppressed Africans' human rights. Colonial governments
enacted special "slave codes" that legalized physical abuse
-- whipping -- and authored practices that condoned maiming,
rape, and murder. After the revolution, individual states
preserved and refined antiblack laws, with the support of
the federal government.

For its part, the new national government enshrined African
American slavery into the U.S. Constitution (Article I, sec.
2) and authorized law enforcement agents to assist in the
capture and return of fugitive slaves (Article 4, sec. 2 
and the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793).

Racist violence reached its apogee after Emancipation.
Lynching, the major form of violence used against African
Americans, from 1882-1910, resulted from the encouragement
of law enforcement agents or their abdicating their equal
protection responsibilities. Between 1882 and 1930
approximately 3,000 Blacks (mostly male) were lynched.*
During the First Nadir (1877-1917), organized gang rape 
of Black women by white racist mobs and organizations 
like the Ku Klux Klan was a special form of terrorism
reserved for Blacks.

After 1930, extralegal race riots and legal executions
replaced lynching as means of social control. All white or
predominately white juries and government officials merely
extended societal racial discrimination to executions. More
than half (53%) of the 4,220 persons executed between 1930
and 1996 were Black. Despite the history of white men
sexually assaulting Black women, 405 or 90 percent of the
455 men executed for rape between 1930 and 1976 were Black.
In 1972 the death penalty was outlawed partly because of its
racist and class discriminatory implementation (Furman v.
Georgia, 408 U.S. 238). Since its return in 1976, executions
have adhered their previous racist and class biased patterns. 
Thus, people of color have comprised 45 percent or 308 of
the 679 executions in the U.S. Two hundred and forty-seven
or 36 percent of those executed have been Black. Currently,
Blacks on death row are nearly three times their percentage
in the overall population (36% to 13%).

The government also bears the responsibility for the actions
and non-actions of police officers during race riots and
rebellions. Abdication of responsibility coupled with acts
of outright brutality and misconduct by law enforcement
officers enabled hundreds race riots (violent clashes
between private white and Black citizens) throughout the
nation's history. Police brutality or misconduct has been
the "trigger incident" that sparked almost every modern
rebellion from the 1935 "Harlem Riot" to the 1992 LA
Conflagration. For instance, after the beating of Lino
Riveria, a Puerto Rican youth by New York City police in
1935, three Blacks were killed, 57 people were injured 
and $2 million dollars worth of property was destroyed in
Harlem. A patrolman's attack on Marquette Frye sparked 
an uprising in the Watts in 1965. The conflict resulted 
in hundreds of injures, 34 deaths, and the damage or
destruction of $35 million worth of property. The savage
police beating of Arthur McDuffie, a 33-year-old Black
insurance executive triggered the 1980 Miami Rebellion.

The 1992 LA Rebellion was a response to the March 3, 1991
brutalizing of Rodney G. King by three LA police officers.
Twenty-three other law enforcement officers watched as King
was beaten kicked and shocked by officers wielding batons
and stun guns.

In contemporary America, police brutality is the preferred
form of social control. Several local, state, and federal
commissions, particularly the 1967 National Advisory
Commission on Civil Disorders (the Kerner Commission) have
pointed out the immensity of this problem. The police are 
as the Black Panther Party declared in the 1960s (1955-1975)
"an occupying army of repression."

Police brutality has been a persistent problem faced by
African Americans. The failure of government to protect
Black people from lawless law enforcement officers forced
Blacks to act in their own interests. During the 1930s, the
National Negro Congress organized massive rallies against
this form of terror. In Washington, D.C., over the span a
few months, the NNC collected 24,000 signatures protesting
abuse by the D.C. police department. The Black Panther 
Party was created to stem the tide of police abuse. In the
1970s the Congress of Afrikan Peoples sponsored the "Stop 
Killer Cops" Campaigns.

Extralegal violence by law enforcement officers has been a
primary concern of the Congressional Black Caucus since its
formation. The CBC has periodically held public hearing
about police outrages across the country over the last
thirty years. Yet, extra-legal violence persists as recent
police killings of Richard L. Holtz (Fort Lee, New Jersey);
Tyisha Miller (Riverside, California); and Amadou Diallo
(New York City) attest.

Finally, Police administrators have ignored or been lax in
using internal department policies and procedures to punish
officers who have displayed a pattern of brutality and/or
misconduct. Internal department policies are often weak and
internal investigations are generally conducted poorly. A
Justice department survey found that nearly 22 percent of
police admit that fellow officers sometimes or often use
"more force than necessary". Moreover, 61 percent claimed
officers do not report instances of "serious criminal
violations of abuse of authority" by other officers.
Civilian review boards are generally under-funded 
and lack the legal authority to compel police officers'
participation, nor can they enforce findings. To date,
private Civil suits have yet to demonstrate the capacity 
to reform individual or police departmental behavior 
because they do not address the policies and procedures 
of departments. Although the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994 authorized the Civil Rights Division
of the Department of Justice to bring "civil actions" against 
police departments that evidence a pattern of abuse (Section
210402. Data on Use of Excessive Force), they also have not
deterred the continuation of police brutality and misconduct.

Moreover, neither the offending officer nor the department
is held financially liable for judgements. Finally, criminal
prosecutions for police brutality or misconduct rarely occur
because few state prosecutors are willing to aggressively
pursue abusive officers. This pattern is also true for
federal prosecutors, although to a lesser extent.


Conclusion

We believe that existing local, county, state, and federal
policies and laws have been ineffective in ending the
persistent and pervasive practices of police brutality 
and misconduct.

Moreover, we believe that because police officers operate
under "color of law" that civil and human rights violations
committed by officers undermine respect for law and government. 
Furthermore, we believe the logical consequence of police
violence and misconduct is a society ruled by the force 
of arms, not law. Thus, every act of police brutality 
and misconduct; every frame-up, every act of illegal
surveillance, every "justified" murder erases an 
article from the Bill of Rights and takes us 
another step closer to a police state.

Thus, we the undersigned citizens of the United States
petition the United States Congress to make police brutality
and misconduct federal crimes. We believe that police
brutality and misconduct should be federal crimes for 
the following reasons:

-- Whereas police brutality and misconduct are perhaps the
   most serious and recurring violations of U.S. citizens'
   civil rights; and

-- Whereas police brutality and misconduct are perhaps the
   most serious and recurring violations of citizens' and
   permanent residents' human rights; and

-- Whereas police brutality and misconduct are pervasive
   across the nation at all levels of law enforcement,
   municipal, county, state, and federal; and

-- Whereas race and ethnicity or nationality have been
   demonstrated to be major factors in the occurrence of 
   police brutality and misconduct; and

-- Whereas socioeconomic class has been demonstrated to be 
   a major factor in the occurrence of police brutality and
   misconduct; and

-- Whereas gender and its intersection with class and race/
   nationality plays a major factor in racial profiling; 
   Black and Brown men traditionally have been the primary
   targets of racial profiling. However, Black women have
   increasingly become targets of racial profiling, especially
   in airports and Black women also compose one of the fastest-
   growing segments of new incarcerations; and

-- Whereas existing remedies at the municipal, state, and
   federal levels of government have proven ineffective in
   curtailing the unwarranted use of excessive force and
   subsequent cover up of such abuses; and

-- Whereas police brutality and misconduct are serious
   offenses that threatens domestic peace and tranquillity, 
   we call upon the Congress of the United States to pass
   legislation making brutality and misconduct by law
   enforcement agents federal crimes, subject to 
   prosecutions in federal court.


*In 1919, the NAACP reported 3,386 incidents of lynching
between 1882-1918. In a controversial 1992 revision,
sociologists Stewart E. Tolnay and E.M. Beck, argue that
duplication of reporting produced an over count. They claim
only 2,805 lynchings (nearly 2500 of which were Blacks) can
be documented between 1882 and 1930, in ten southern states.
See NAACP, Thirty Years of Lynching in the United States:
1889-1918 (New York: Arno Press, 1919), p. 29 and Stewart E.
Tolnay and E.M. Beck, Festival of Violence: An Analysis of
Southern Lynching, 1882-1930 (Urbana and Chicago: University
of Illinois)

[NOTE: The statement above is an extended backgrounder
version of the BRC's Anti-Police Brutality & Misconduct
Petition. A shorter version of this petition, intended 
for the gathering of signatures, can be downloaded from 
our web site at: <http://www.blackradicalcongress.org>]



-30-

Black Radical Congress
National Office
Columbia University Station
P.O. Box 250791
New York, NY 10025-1509
Phone: (212) 969-0348
Email: blackradicalcongress at email.com 
Web: http://www.blackradicalcongress.org