[Marxism] (no subject)

[Gary MacLennan]

I am sorry I didn't inform you before that I was traveling to Africa for a
program called "Empowering Youth to Fight Racism, HIV/AIDS, Poverty and Lack
of Education, this program is taking place in three major countries in
Africa which is Ghana, South Africa and Nigeria.

 I have found myself in a terrible situation as I'm stranded in Nigeria
because I forgot my lil bag in the Taxi where my money, passport, documents
and other valuable things were kept on my way to the Hotel and am  facing a
hard time here because I have no more money with me and right now am owing
the hotel, the bill of $ 1500 and they want me to pay the bill soon or they
are gonna seize my bag and hand me over to the Hotel Management, I need this
help from you urgently to help me back home, all I need from you  is to lend
me the money to pay the hotel bill and I also need $500 to feed and help
myself back home, this is why am sending you this email, please I need you
to lend me $2,000 to have  my problems here solved. I need this help so much
and in time because I am in a terrible and tight situation.

I will really appreciate any amount you can afford to send me if you can't
afford the $2,000 and I promise to pay you back your money as soon as I
return home. Please let me know asap in order for me to forward you the
details you need to send the money to me. I understand for charges, it could
cost some extra to send money through western union, I promise to return all
charges incurred back to you, this is the only way I can receive money down
here.

Hope to read from you soon.

Please


On 10/21/07, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:
>
> Walter Lippmann wrote:
> > Only some people on the political left who think that China has now
> become
> > capitalist. The Wall Street Journal doesn't think that China is
> capitalist.
> > They, and the capitalist class for whom they speak, have a pretty clear
> idea
> > of what THEY want. And they don't think China is what they want it to
> be.
>
> I would be reluctant to use the WSJ as an authority on class relations
> in China, especially if you are referring to the opinion pages, which
> after all probably view Hillary Clinton as some kind of socialist. In
> any case, the WSJ has made it pretty clear in a series of articles that
> China is a capitalist country. They are online at
> <http://tinyurl.com/2tsytj> under the heading "China's Naked
> Capitalism". Here's a sample:
>
> THE OUTLOOK
>
> How Capitalist Transformation
> Exposes Holes in China's Government
> By JASON DEAN
> December 18, 2006
>
> BEIJING -- China's embrace of market forces in the past three decades
> has reshaped virtually every aspect of its people's lives. Much of the
> impact has been positive. Hundreds of millions have escaped dollar-a-day
> poverty. The average Chinese citizen is wealthier, and enjoys far more
> economic and political freedom, than when overhauls began in 1978.
>
> But the transformation has also wiped out much of a cradle-to-grave
> safety net -- health care, education, pensions -- that ensured basic
> needs were met for most of the population. It has severely damaged large
> parts of the country's environment, and triggered a widening gap between
> rich and poor.
>
> Indeed, while China's government still calls its system socialist, and
> still plays a big role in the economy, what has developed here sometimes
> resembles a sort of naked capitalism, where an unfettered pursuit of
> profit governs almost all facets of life, and a growing share of the
> population is left unprotected.
>
> full: http://tinyurl.com/2t5re4
>
> > It seems that only some on the left are desperate to affix the
> "capitalist"
> > label to the People's Republic of China. And they fight hard for a
> seemingly
> > abstract point, with few apparent practical consequences. But if it's
> not a
> > mere terminological dispute, what IS involved? Well, those who label
> China
> > "capitalist" (an erudite term which in practice means "bad place") tend
> to
> > oppose Chinese foreign policy in general, and to ignore, disregard or
> else
> > to downplay, the aspects of which are favorable, such as its support to
> > Cuba.
>
> You are repeating yourself, Walter. We get it. Countries that Cuba has
> positive relations with should not be criticized. I don't happen to
> agree with this kind of crypto-Stalinist horseshit myself. In 1968,
> Fidel Castro did not say a single word about the massacres in Mexico. We
> can understand why. There are powerful economic and political
> considerations involved for an isolated socialist nation under the gun.
> But there are none for revolutionaries in the US or elsewhere. We have
> an obligation to denounce such massacres and also to develop an analysis
> of Chinese society. For those, of course, who are too lazy or too
> uneducated to pursue such an analysis, the WSJ opinion pages might be
> sufficient.
>
> > My own approach to the world might be called a "Cuba-centric" framework.
>
> As Claude Rains said in "Casablanca," I'm shocked, shocked to learn that.
>
> > Were I to think that there was a left-wing, pro-socialist, pro-working
> class
> > opposition then I would feel more sympathetic toward them.
>
> How would you know they exist or not? You studiously avoid any source of
> information that is not part of the International Cuba Fan Club approved
> reading list. For those who are curious about the socialist movement in
> China, which is far larger than ours in the US I would add, go to
> Stephen Philion's website: http://stephenphilion.efoliomn2.com/. Here's
> an excerpt from one item you will find there--an interview with Chinese
> Economist Han Deqiang on "The Social Costs of Neo-Liberalism in China"
> in the July, 2007 edition of Dollars and Sense.
>
> PHILION: How has the WTO affected large state-owned enterprises?
>
> HAN: State-owned enterprises (SOEs) fall into two categories. The first
> are SOEs, like Shenyang Machine Factory or Luoyang Tractor Company, that
> are subject to competition with private companies. These quickly went
> bankrupt. Monopoly-sector SOEs, such as petroleum producers, are less
> directly affected by China's membership in the WTO.
>
> PHILION: The Chinese leadership seems to be working under the assumption
> that as long as the SOEs that produce the greatest revenues remain
> vital, Chinese socialism can be sustained.
>
> HAN: First of all, China's not socialist now.
>
> PHILION: Yes, right. I mean in their sense of the phrase, so-called
> "socialism with Chinese characteristics."
>
> HAN: Not likely either. It is true that in terms of tax contributions
> and profits, the small and medium-size SOEs are not great, but in the
> absolute numbers they employ, they are considerable. Their influence on
> local employment and finances is pretty substantial. So, in the
> aftermath of the near complete collapse of these small and medium-size
> SOEs, for the central state to rely on large enterprises alone for
> maintaining the subsistence of China's population of 1.3 billion becomes
> extremely difficult.
>
> PHILION: It seems as though the leadership's hope is for local and
> foreign private capital to replace these small and medium-size companies
> as the source of investment and to resolve the unemployment problem in
> the process.
>
> HAN: What I would contend is that for every one job saved by foreign
> capitalist investment, three to four will be lost unless the foreign
> investment produces for foreign export alone. This situation does exist,
> assuredly. Right now 60% of our export is fueled by foreign companies'
> investment. However, the potential for foreign investment to instigate
> future Chinese economic growth is weak. It can only largely resolve a
> segment of the unemployment problem. It can't do much in terms of
> advancing the upgrading or expansion of China's industrial system. And
> its use to resolve the fiscal crisis facing China is even more
> problematic. From '49 on, we built our nation by using state enterprise
> to supplement or replace foreign enterprise's contribution to the
> economy. The idea of doing the opposite is a fantasy.
>
> >
> > That's why my inclination is to be cautious in relation to such
> elements.
>
> Cautious is not the word I would use. Close-minded is more like it.
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
>